Is there alliteration in this excerpt from "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner"? "The fair breeze blew, the white foam flew, the furrow followed...

Yes, there is a good deal of alliteration in this passage from "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner." Alliteration means to use the same consonant at the beginning of a word more than once in a poetic line. Here the letter "f" is used repeatedly: fair, foam, flew, furrow, followed, free and first. Coleridge also uses the letter "b:" "breeze," "blew" and "burst," and the letter "s:" "silent" and "sea." The motion of the "b" and "f" words, such as flew, blew and burst, contrasts with the stillness of the "s" words. 

Coleridge was trying to capture the flavor of a ballad from an earlier time in this fanciful tale of the supernatural. Medieval poets often relied on alliteration, so Coleridge is claiming an identity with them in this poem. The alliteration also underscores the excitement of the sailors at being the first humans ever to enter that sea. 

From chapter 4 in To Kill a Mockingbird, what do the items found in the Radley's tree symbolize?

Scout is the first to find two pieces of gum, wrapped in tin foil, and sticking out of the knothole of the Radley's tree. The fact that there are two pieces means that one is for her and one is for Jem. This first gift appeals to children's appetites, it's fun, and is one of many ways used to start up conversations with new friends. The gum is a token of friendship specifically given to two children who entertain Boo as he watches them from his house. If the children accept the gum, it is as if they are accepting Boo and rejecting the stories that anything from the Radley's property will cause instant death. When Jem finds out where Scout got the gum, for example, he tells her to spit it out immediately and go wash her mouth out. He also says, "Don't you know you're not supposed to even touch the trees over there? You'll get killed if you do!" (33). Since Scout didn't die from the gum, though, Jem is not hesitant to accept the next gift is discovered later.

Jem is the one who takes the next gift out of the Radley's knothole. When they get home, they unwrap the foil to discover a purple velvet box with two very polished Indian-head pennies inside. One is from the year 1900 and the other from 1906. Jem says the following:

"Well, Indian-heads--well, they come from the Indians. They're real strong magic, they make you have good luck. . . like long life 'n' good health, 'n' passin' six-week tests. . . these are real valuable to somebody" (35).

The above passage tells what Jem thinks the pennies symbolize--health and luck; but they are also another symbol of friendship. Since there are two pennies, then one is Jem and one for Scout. This shows that the gift giver wants to be friends with both of them, not just one. The years on the pennies might mean something special to Boo, too, and he wants to share that with the children. For Boo, a person who is shy and never talks with anyone other than family, this is a big step. He's putting himself out there to make friends and the gifts symbolize his genuine efforts and kindness.

What causes Brutus to undertake the decision to kill Caesar in Julius Caesar?

Brutus has to decide whether or not he should kill Caesar because he is asked by Cassius to join the conspiracy.

Brutus is a senator of Rome, but he is also from an old and very important family. For this reason, Cassius wants him to join the conspiracy to assassinate Julius Caesar. His name will lend legitimacy to their operations.

Cassius explains to Brutus that he is just as important as Caesar, and that it is their own fault if they subject themselves to Caesar’s control.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.
Brutus and Caesar: what should be in that 'Caesar'?
Why should that name be sounded more than yours?
Write them together, yours is as fair a name … (Act 1, Scene 2)

Apparently this argument is convincing to Brutus, because he admits that he worries about Caesar’s ambition and agrees to have the conspirators over to his house.

Before they arrive, Brutus has to talk himself into killing Caesar. Caesar is very important to him, and the two of them are close because Caesar is like a father to Brutus. Yet he worries that Caesar is too ambitious, and that he will keep grabbing more and more power for himself.

It must be by his death: and for my part,
I know no personal cause to spurn at him,
But for the general. He would be crown'd:
How that might change his nature, there's the question.
It is the bright day that brings forth the adder;
And that craves wary walking.  (Act 2, Scene 1)

Brutus compares Caesar to a baby snake hiding in its shell.  As long as the snakeling is in the shell, it is not dangerous.  However, the minute it comes out it becomes deadly.  Brutus feels that Caesar has done nothing wrong yet, but that he is so ambitious that before long he will become a tyrant. The only thing to do is to stop him before he gets very far.

Religion as relates to US Constitution: was it directly confirmed or ruled not within the scope of the laws and government?

It is hard to answer this question in an objective way as the Constitution does not explicitly do either of these things. There is a great deal of controversy about what, exactly, the Constitution (or, to be more precise, the First Amendment) says about religion.

On the one hand, we can clearly say that the Constitution does not ever “directly confirm” religion.  The Constitution says very little on the subject of religion.  In the Constitution proper, there is only one mention, which comes in Article VI.  This passage states that

no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

In the amendments to the Constitution, religion is only mentioned twice, both times in the First Amendment.  There are two important clauses in this amendment that have to do with religion.  First, the establishment clause says that  

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

What this literally means is that the government cannot create an official state religion.  Many people think that this clause means that religion is “ruled not within the scope of the laws and government.”  They think that it means that the government cannot prefer one religion over another and that it cannot prefer religion over a lack of religion (atheism or secularism).  However, there are people who think this is wrong.  In this link, we can see that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently said that the government should be free to promote religion so long as it does not favor one religion over another.

Second, the free exercise clause says that

Congress shall make no law … prohibiting the free exercise thereof (of religion).

This means that the government cannot make laws that infringe on people’s rights to practice religion.  You could say that this means that religion is “ruled not within the scope of the laws and government” because it says that the government cannot make laws reducing religious freedom.

Clearly, then, the Constitution does not “directly confirm” religion.  However, it is not possible to say objectively whether the Constitution rules that religions is “not within the scope of the laws and government.”

Should Nick trust Gatsby?

Nick should not trust Gatsby. There are several reasons for Nick not to trust Gatsby. These develop and emerge throughout the novel.

The first is simply that Gatsby hides his past. If someone keeps secrets, there are always questions about what happened/what he did in the past.

Next, Gatsby has an affair with a married woman. Regardless of how much he loves or desires Daisy, he's still involved in breaking an oath and a social code.

Gatsby deals with criminals, suggesting that what he is hiding is illegal too.

I would suggest that Gatsby's incredibly expensive parties are also a reason to not trust him. He is not hosting a lot of friends. He's not even holding these parties because he's running for office, and needs the approval of the guests. He just has some deep and badly defined need to be approved of. That suggests there is some gap deep in his character.

What happens to the inhabitants of the city in "The Masque of the Red Death"?

The inhabitants of the city all die of the Red Death plague.

When the Red Death falls upon Prince Prospero’s city, many people die.  The Red Death is dangerous and deadly.  It wipes through the population so quickly that Prospero doesn’t bother to help his people.  He just flees, locking himself and his thousand closest friends in a fortress.

But the Prince Prospero was happy and dauntless and sagacious. 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.

As you can see, half of the people in the kingdom had died by this time, and the rest were well on their way.  The Red Death killed by liquidating its host.  It was highly contagious and there was no way to escape it.

Prospero and his people thought they were safe inside their castle.  They felt that if they barricaded themselves away and did not let any infected people in, they would not be infected.  This was a plan that did not succeed.  Even though they survived six months this way, the Red Death still found them.

And now was acknowledged the presence of the Red Death. He had come like a thief in the night. And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall.

When Prospero first saw Death, he does not believe it.  He is convinced that the imposter is just playing with them, dressed in a morbid costume.  He tries to fight back, but it’s pointless.  He dies, and so do all of his guests.  They die instantly, unlike the other victims.

What do Okeke's friends believe has caused Nnaemeka's behavior?

Okeke's friends believe that "other worldly" forces have caused Nnaemeka's behavior.

When Okeke's friends hear of Nnaemeka's desire to marry someone Nene, they demonstrate a profound difficulty to understand why he has done what he has done.  One of Okeke's friends argues that the Bible predicted this very scenario when children disobey their parents:  “What did Our Lord say?' asked another gentleman. 'Sons shall rise against their Fathers; it is there in the Holy Book.”  For this one of Okeke's friends, the only way to explain Nnaemeka's behavior is through the Bible.  At the same time, another friend suggested that Okeke might be "sick."  This friend argues that seeking the help of alternative medicine is the only to cure what ails Okeke's son:  “What is he then? The boy’s mind is diseased and only a good herbalist can bring him back to his right senses. The medicine he requires is Amalile, the same that women apply with success to recapture their husbands’ straying affection.”  In both situations, Okeke's friends cannot fathom why Nnaemeka would want to marry Nene. The only possible explanations they can offer is "other worldly" ones.  

Such beliefs reflect the extent of the traditionalism that Nnaemeka and Nene fight against in their decision to be married.  This idea demonstrates how marriage might not be necessarily seen as solely a "private affair" in many parts of the world. 

I have to write an essay on how poor information for the public can lead to poor choices. I approached it using the accountability model, saying...

It looks like you are well on your way to a great essay! In structuring your essay, here are some basic pointers:

• Your essay should start with an introductory paragraph that familiarizes your readers with your topic and the basic questions you are dealing with—in your case, whether more information available to voters leads to better governance, and what the accountability model is. The last sentence of your introductory paragraph, with very few exceptions, should be a thesis statement—a clear and concise sentence that summarizes what you are arguing. It might be something along the lines of “I will argue that more information for voters leads to better government for reasons x, y, and z.”
  


• In the body of your essay, let’s say the next 3-7 paragraphs, you will want to unpack the evidence of why your position is correct. Why should readers believe you and not someone arguing the opposite point of view? A good way to thinking about organizing this portion might be to devote 1-2 pararaphs on each of the reasons why your argument is correct that you listed in your thesis statement.


• End with a paragraph of conclusion that both clearly restates your argument, and explains the broader significance of what you are saying. This paragraph is a great place to answer the question ”So what?” or why your readers should care about anything you just wrote!
  

Good luck!

Atoms with the same number of protons and different number of neutrons are called __________.

Atoms with the same number of protons and different numbers of neutrons are called isotopes. The isotopes of an element have different masses because of their different numbers of neutrons. 

Potassium has three naturally occuring isotopes. Potassium-39 has 20 neutrons, potassium-40 has 21 neutrons and potassium-41 has 22 neutrons. All potassium atoms have 19 protons, the same as its atomic number. The average mass of an element takes into account the masses of the isotopes and their relative abundance.

Heavier isotopes of elements tend to have an unstable nucleus and undergo radioactive decay. For example, carbon-14 is radioactive and is used to date fossils. Other radioactive isotopes are used to diagnose and treat disease, to generate electrical power, and as tracers because their radiation can be detected. 

What are some sample questions on multiculturalism for a life history research project?

Multiculturalism refers to the legal or ideological promotion of cultural, religious, and ethnic diversity within one region or state, and life history is defined as a style of research that examines a specific individual's life. There are a lot of approaches to performing life history research regarding multiculturalism, depending on the context. Examples of multiculturalism-related life history research could include:

"How have you seen an increase in diversity and tolerance in society during your lifetime?"

"Did you grow up in an area where ethnic and religious groups coexisted? Do you live in a similar area now?"

"How have you seen conflict and coexistence between groups you belong to and different groups in the same area?"

"Has there ever been a time in your life where you felt excluded due to membership in a group, and if yes, have those circumstances improved for you?"

How and why is a social group represented in a particular way?

A social group, within social sciences, is defined as two or more people who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and have a collective sense of unity. In general, a social group is represented as a group of people who have similar interests and beliefs. 

There are three types of social groups: primary, secondary and reference groups. 

Primary groups are characterized by close-knit and intimate relationships. They often consist of the nuclear family structure, but can also exist as any other group formation that provides love, security, and companionship.

Secondary groups are characterized by impersonal relationships, and can vary in size. Secondary groups are found in the workplace or in school settings, where people come together to collaborate for group projects. Other examples of secondary social groupings are found in college courses or on sports teams. Lastly, all secondary social groupings are temporary, as they eventually come to an end. 

Reference groups are characterized by the groups we look up to. It is not required to actually be a part of a reference group (though you can be), so much as they are used for a standard or guidelines to follow. Examples of this are looking to the media for fashion advice or following a sports team closely to adapt their winning strategies. 

Social groups are represented differently because each social group has different values, beliefs, and forms of interaction. For example, a secondary social group like a group project represents itself much differently than a primary social group like the nuclear family would, because each interact for different purposes, and they both have different values and beliefs.

What were the achievements of the National Assembly ?

The National Assembly of France (1789-1791) was very important because it ended the system of feudalism in France and introduced the country to representative government. The establishment of a representative government with three separate branches was instituted by the National Assembly. The Assembly also created the Declaration of the Rights of Man which offered similar protections as the American Bill of Rights. These protections included freedom of speech, trial by jury, and freedom of religion. The spirit of the assembly was that all citizens are equal before the law and should be allowed to participate in government.

The National Assembly ended the unfair system of taxation in which the clergy and nobility were exempt from paying their fair share. Now everybody would participate in the duty of taxation. This brought an end to some of the privileges of the nobility and functionally ended a feudal system that had been in place for centuries. The actions of the Assembly also curtailed the powerful economic, political, and social influence of the church in France.

What are five social and economic effects of overpopulation?

While arguments about social, economic and environmental effects of overpopulation are wide spread, it is also important to note that they have been overwhelmingly deemed problematic not only in obscuring inequality as the more fundamental cause of the supposed effects of overpopulation but also (by explicitly or de facto) locating/placing responsibility on the poor! The seminal proponents of overpopulation as a key causal factor was first and foremost Thomas Malthus—later to be followed by Garrett Hardin, and most prominent today, Paul and Anne Ehrlich.

They (along with other research conducted around the world) would attribute the following five social and economic effects to overpopulation:

1) overpopulation causes lower life expectancy

2) overpopulation causes depletion of natural resources 

3) overpopulation causes disease and epidemics

4) overpopulation causes increased crime and conflict as resources become more scarce

5) overpopulation causes standard of living and unemployment to rise

One set of evidence used in order to debunk this logic is known as the demographic transition model—whereby overpopulation (and the fluctuation of population rates writ large) can be seen as itself an effect of socially equitable economic growth. 

What information is the astronomer presenting at the beginning of the poem?

It is unclear what specific information is being presented by the astronomer at the beginning of the poem, but the reader can gain a better idea via the context that Walt Whitman provides.  Firstly, the astronomer is "learn'd," meaning educated.  This is a person who is either a teacher or a speaker, giving some sort of presentation regarding the cosmos.  We are told that he "lectured with/ much applause in the lecture room" (5-6), which suggests that he is a popular speaker, able to draw a large crowd.  Further, during the lecture, the narrator observes nearly all manner of data,

When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me;/When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide,/and measure them; (2-4)

The lecture is filled with many visual aids; one can assume that the charts and diagrams display the astronomer's findings.  The fact that mathematical functions such as addition and division are used in conjunction with the charts and diagrams suggests a great amount of research, and also suggests that the astronomer is explaining the steps in his method as he lectures. 

Listening to the astronomer lecture on about the charts, numbers, and statistics makes the narrator feel "tired and sick" (7) until s/he finds comfort by going outside into the night and looking up "in perfect silence at the stars" (10).  The view of the night sky, in all its natural splendor, renews the narrator.  This allows the reader to make the educated guess that the astronomer was lecturing on some new findings regarding the distant cosmos itself, in an effort to further explain the workings of the galaxy. For the narrator, this explanation is unwelcome because it takes away the wonder and amazement of the universe.

Many scholars argue that Hamlet’s tragic flaw is his tendency toward inaction—his inability to act. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Yes, indeed. If Hamlet had acted immediately and decisively as he had promised the ghost to do, none of the tragic outcomes later would have occurred. His procrastination is what led to the deaths of so many innocents, including his own tragic demise.

When Hamlet is confronted by his father's ghost and learns about its untimely and horrific death, he is truly distraught and passionately promises:

Haste me to know't, that I, with wings as swift
As meditation or the thoughts of love,
May sweep to my revenge. 

When he is informed of the heinous nature of his father's death he once again asserts:

O, fie! Hold, hold, my heart;
And you, my sinews, grow not instant old,
But bear me stiffly up.

The words imply that Hamlet is ready to act and that his heart should not give in but give him the strength to perform his revenge. Truly the words of one who wants to take charge. This, however, is not so. Even though he is all fire and brimstone in the moment, it becomes clear later that Hamlet is not a man of action. He informs Horatio that he will adopt an 'antic disposition' which suggests that he will assume some form of odd behaviour to mislead and trick those whom he wishes to punish. Some commentators call it feigned madness. This is an obvious indication that he wishes to have time to plot his revenge.

It is also evident that Hamlet resents the duty that has now been imposed upon him:

The time is out of joint: O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!

He states here that he was born at the wrong time and curses the malevolent forces which have now made this atrocious task his destiny. Hamlet is obviously not a ruthless killer, but one who holds high moral values. He prefers to think things through and plan his actions and would therefore not be able to act impulsively.

This incapacity to act troubles Hamlet deeply and he is quite critical of himself, and at one point he even considers suicide, but even that is not an option, for just as murder is a crime, so is the act of taking ones own life. He however, still delays. He is faced with a dilemma and he struggles to deal with the duty imposed upon him. He really does not know how to proceed. In the process, his procrastination worsens the situation until he finally decides to act by staging a play to entrap the wily Claudius.

Hamlet had an opportunity to kill Claudius when he was vulnerable, but he couldn't, using the fact that Claudius was at prayer as an excuse not to commit the deed.

Now might I do it pat, now he is praying;
And now I'll do't. And so he goes to heaven;
And so am I revenged. That would be scann'd:
A villain kills my father; and for that,
I, his sole son, do this same villain send
To heaven...

He believed that it would be inappropriate to send Claudius to heaven when his father had not been given an opportunity to redeem his soul, since he was asleep when he was murdered. He later in this soliloquy promised that if he should find Claudius in a situation where he is committing some kind of sin, he would then kill him so that he (Claudius) may burn in the fires of hell.

If he had avenged his father's assassination at that point, none of the other tragedies would have unfolded. 

 

How does Montresor persuade Fortunato to come to his house?

Montresor takes a long time to fashion an elaborate lie that will entice Fortunato into the catacombs beneath his palazzo, where he can murder him. In the first paragraph, Montresor says

At length I would be avenged; this was a point definitely, settled—but the very definitiveness with which it was resolved precluded the idea of risk.

He wants his plan to be foolproof. When he encounters Fortunato celebrating on the streets during the carnival season, Montresor tells him his finely honed falsehood.

I said to him—“My dear Fortunato, you are luckily met. How remarkably well you are looking to-day. But I have received a pipe of what passes for Amontillado, and I have my doubts.”

“How?” said he. “Amontillado, A pipe? Impossible! And in the middle of the carnival!”

“I have my doubts,” I replied; “and I was silly enough to pay the full Amontillado price without consulting you in the matter. You were not to be found, and I was fearful of losing a bargain.....As you are engaged, I am on my way to Luchesi. If any one has a critical turn it is he. He will tell me—”

A pipe contains 126 gallons. Neither of these men would want the equivalent of 500 quart bottles of Amontillado sherry for personal consumption. They are not even sherry drinkers. The word "bargain" is what captures Fortunato's interest. He knows Montresor only bought the wine for resale. Many first-time readers of the story assume Fortunato wants to taste the delicious wine and show off his connoisseurship. This is not at all true. He is interested in the "bargain." He is a rich man. He could buy up the whole cargo of big oak barrels of fine Spanish sherry and make a small fortune. The wine only improves with age, so he could take his time about bottling and selling it by the case, probably to those British and Austrian millionaires Montresor mentions in his introduction. 

Fortunato doesn't need to taste Montresor's wine at all. He could go to the harbor and find a newly arrived Spanish ship with ease. There would be a whole shipload of Amontillado to sample, and he could make the deal on board. But Montresor has foreseen that possibility. He inserts the name Luchesi so that, if Fortunato declined to come to his palazzo immediately, Montresor could continue on his way on the pretext of consulting another connoisseur, and possible buyer, about his Amontillado. Fortunato can't let that happen. He must accompany Montresor to his home to keep him from talking to Luchesi. Otherwise, Fortunato would be competing with Luchesi in buying up the imaginary cargo of imaginary wine.

It was essential for Montresor to get Fortunato to his palazzo right away. Otherwise, if there was any delay at all, Fortunato could find out there was no Spanish ship, no Amontillado. Montresor would not only lose the chance to kill Fortunato, but he would arouse his suspicions. That would make it infinitely harder to entrap him at some time in the future. Montresor does not actually say that he has bought a pipe of Amontillado from a Spanish ship. He says:

"But I have received a pipe of what passes for Amontillado, and I have my doubts.”

The cunning Montresor has left himself a loophole. If necessary, he could make up some barely plausible lie, such as that he bought the pipe from a Venetian who had had it in his cellar for some time. But he doesn't have to do that. Fortunato imagines a Spanish ship full of big barrels of gourmet sherry which he can buy at a bargain price and sell at a great profit. He does not question Montresor any further because he does not want his gullible, trusting friend to suspect that he would be interested in buying any of the wine himself. He can go to Montresor's palazzo, taste the wine, make sure it is genuine, then get away and find this Spanish ship. No doubt he already plans to tell Montresor the wine is only ordinary sherry, just to eliminate him as a buyer. Montresor could only be so anxious to get an expert to sample his wine that night  if he intended to buy more while it was still being offered as a bargain. If it really is just ordinary sherry, Fortunato can forget about it. If it is genuine, he can buy up the whole cargo.

Montresor knows Fortunato thoroughly. He has had plenty of experience with this man. He knows what his shrewd, unscrupulous friendly enemy is thinking and planning. Fortunato has swallowed the whole cunning lie hook, line and sinker. He wants to rush to Montresor's palazzo as quickly as they can get there.

“Let us go, nevertheless. The cold is merely nothing. Amontillado! You have been imposed upon. And as for Luchesi, he cannot distinguish Sherry from Amontillado.”

Thus speaking, Fortunato possessed himself of my arm; and putting on a mask of black silk and drawing a roquelaire closely about my person, I suffered him to hurry me to my palazzo.

Do you think the labor movement is a social movement? Why or why not?

The history of the American labor movement is most definitely a component of the larger social movements of the last two centuries. While the obvious genesis of the labor movement was the extremes to which laborers were routinely subjected in most industries, with unsafe working conditions, brutally-long hours, the exploitation of children as sources of cheap labor, and low pay with few if any benefits such as health care all common characteristics of the state of American industry, the movement's philosophical underpinning were much broader than attempting solely to improve those unsatisfactory conditions. There is no question that Luddite movements existed in which industrialization was deemed hostile to the interests of laborers, but most leaders of the American labor movement recognized the value to even the most humble of humanity of labor-saving machines. One of the earliest and most influential leaders of the American labor movement, Samuel Gompers, who founded the American Federation of Labor (the AFL, which would later merge with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, and become known as the AFL-CIO), in an insightful letter to an overtly hostile, anti-organized-labor member of the judiciary, Judge Peter Grosscup, addressed not only the legitimate right of workers to agitate against unsafe and inhumane working conditions, but the broader social implications of the direction in which macroeconomic conditions were heading. In a prescient indictment of the increasing consolidation of wealth in too-few hands, an issue of great interest to many on the political left today, Gompers wrote the following to Grosscup:

"What shall the workers do? Sit idly by and see the vast resources of nature and the human mind be utilized and monopolized for the benefit of the comparative few? No. The laborers must learn to think and act, and soon, too, that only by the power of organization, and common concert of action, can either their manhood be maintained, their rights to life (work to sustain it) be recognized, and liberty and rights secured."

"You evidently have observed the growth of corporate wealth and influence. You recognize that wealth, in order to become more highly productive, is concentrated into fewer hands, and controlled by representatives and directors, and yet you sing the old siren song that the workingman should depend entirely upon his own 'individual effort'."

Beyond Gompers' and others' concern about the broader direction of the nation and the role of labor in its future, prominent members of the labor movement routinely interacted with and supported social movements centered on other issues, such as women's and civil rights. Eugene V. Debs was an early and important leader of the Socialist movement whose views on a whole range of topics leaned, obviously, hard to the left, and who is recognized as one of the most important figures of the American labor movement during the late-19th and early-20th centuries. One of the country's most important civil rights figures, Martin Luther King, Jr., didn't confine himself to the interests of blacks alone. The Reverend King was well-known for his social advocacy on broad array of issues including those affecting the rights of workers. In a speech before the Illinois AFL-CIO on October 7, 1965, King stated the following:

"The labor movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress. Out of its bold struggles, economic and social reform gave birth to unemployment insurance, old-age pensions, government relief for the destitute, and, above all, new wage levels that meant not mere survival but a tolerable life."

King, as did many others, recognized that the success of the civil rights movement was intricately interwoven into the broader social movements of the time, including the labor movement. These disparate movements, including, as noted, the struggle for voting rights among women (a struggle that obviously predated King's period of advocacy), all moved together towards a common goal of better conditions and equal rights for all. That is not to say that there weren't schisms between the various movements, as there were sometimes very serious disagreements regarding strategies and concerns about the influences in the labor movement of far-left radicals like Debs. That the labor movement was and remains a component of a larger social movement, however, is beyond question.

What are the differences between an absolute monarchy and a representative government?

In an absolute monarchy, in theory at least, the monarch or king rules by his own will. He is answerable to no one except God and natural law, and the people do not have a right to overthrow him or replace him if he displeases them. Louis XIV of France, considered the best example of an absolutist monarch, allegedly said "L'etat c'est moi (I am the state)" and this statement, probably apocryphal, pretty neatly sums up absolutist theory. He was the physical embodiment of France, and in theory, everything he did was justified by virtue of the fact that he ruled by divine right. 

A representative government is more or less the opposite in theory of an absolute government. In a representative government, the people choose, through their vote, officials to make decisions for them. They govern based on the will of the people, and if they do not represent them appropriately, they can be removed from office. Where the monarch is utterly sovereign in an absolutist system, the people are sovereign in a representative government. This means that the powers of government are limited, usually by a written constitution that is itself the product of representatives of the people. Perhaps the best example of a representative government is that of the United States of America. 

What are some reasons that Mark Twain wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and what is the purpose of the book?

As far as the reason for writing the book is concerned, Samuel Clemens (aka Mark Twain) makes it clear in the preface of the first edition where he says:

"Although my book is intended mainly for the entertainment of boys and girls, part of my plan has been to pleasantly remind adults of what they once were themselves, and what they felt and thought."

The book is definitely an entertaining read and has enthralled young and old through the ages. It effectively succeeds in bringing back thoughts about what one had been like and up to, as youngsters. Readers can also identify with what the characters do, depending of course, on his or her own history and background.

In its purpose, the book seeks to explore the romance and intrigue of growing up, and acts as a sort of semi - bildungsroman, by tracing the lives of the protagonists and exposing the lessons they learn as they head towards adulthood and maturity. The characters are faced with many situations in which they are entirely reliant on their own intellect and ability to overcome some or other conundrum. In the story, they succeed admirably. The purpose then, is to also teach, especially young readers, that they can overcome adversity in whichever form it may present itself - such as for example, Tom and Becky's escape from the cave.

In this, therefore, the story is not a mere narration applicable to Americans only, but it has universal significance and appeal.

Furthermore, the narration also displays Twain's subtle criticism of the habits, beliefs and general demeanour of Americans at the time. He takes a particular stab at religion where he satirizes for example, one character's memorisation of Bible verse, in order to obtain a reward.

He once recited three thousand verses without stopping; but the strain upon his mental faculties was too great, and he was little better than an idiot from that day forth—a grievous misfortune for the school, ...

In other examples, he criticizes the gullible nature of humans, who naively support causes without thinking clearly and rationally, almost like sheep being led down the garden path. One is where Tom, for example, persuades his friends to paint a fence for him, with the promise of reward.

He had had a nice, good, idle time all the while—plenty of company—and the fence had three coats of whitewash on it! If he hadn't run out of whitewash he would have bankrupted every boy in the village.

Another pertinent example of this is when adults in the town petition for Injun Joe's release. It was thought that he had already killed five citizens of the village:

"... but what of that? If he had been Satan himself there would have been plenty of weaklings ready to scribble their names to a pardon petition, and drip a tear on it from their permanently impaired and leaky waterworks."

The novel also ha a semi-autobiographical nature, especially in its setting. The story is set in an area in which Samuel Clemens grew up. The author grew up in Hannibal, Missouri, which was a quiet town overlooking the Mississippi River. The town is renamed St. Petersburg and is where all the characters live. The Jackson's Island of Tom Sawyer is an existing landmark situated south of the town, close to the Illinois side of the river.

The cave that was Injun Joe's hideout, still exists, as do the houses whic Widow Douglas and Aunt Polly supposedly resided in. Twain's town was surrounded by large forests which he himself knew as a child and in which his characters Tom Sawyer and Joe Harper often play, "Indians and Chiefs." All of this adds to the realism of the narrative.

In Inside Out and Back Again, what evidence is there that Ha's life is coming back again?

In Inside Out and Back Again, Ha's life comes back when she learns the true meaning of how to live a life that is "not the same, but not bad at all."

The premise of the question rightly presumes that a part of Ha's life ended when she left Saigon.  The world in Saigon represented so much of her identity.  From the papaya tree to her mother's stories to her academic achievement, Ha's sense of identity was tied to her life in Saigon.  In having to leave because of war, Ha loses a significant part of her life.

Ha must learn to establish herself in the midst of adversity.  As a result of perseverance, Ha's life returns.  For example, she realizes that in Alabama, her lack of language skills puts her at a disadvantage.  When she was in Saigon, Ha loved to talk.  With her move to Alabama, she lost some of that and, with it, part of her life disappeared because she was relegated to silence. However, in her tutoring sessions with Mrs. Washington, Ha gains greater confidence with her English.  Ha's growing comfort with the language is evidence of how her life, or identity, is returning.  She shouts back against her tormentor, Pink Boy.  She communicates and makes friends with Steven and Pam.  Ha knows that life is different for her in Alabama.  Yet, Ha is able to make a life for herself in America.  She no longer accepts what she used to believe that life in war time Saigon is better than peace in America.  In establishing herself in America, Ha gains her life back because she embraces the internal toughness needed to triumph over adversity.

An essential component to reclaiming Ha's life lies in absorbing two lessons from her mother.  The first is what she realizes after her mother prepares the Americanized version of papaya.  Ha tastes the food and realizes that it's "not the same" as what she knew in Saigon, but it's also "not bad at all."  Ha realizes that her mother's lesson is a way for her to get her life back.  She might not be the girl in Saigon.  However, she can be a wiser and more mature one in Alabama. The second lesson she learns from her mother that helps her get her life back again is in how the Tet New Year means that "luck starts over."  Ha recognizes that she does not have to live a life full of past regrets.  She can get her life back because she can live for today and tomorrow.   It is for this reason that Ha closes the narrative with her beliefs on the "fly kick:"  “This year I hope I truly learn to fly-kick not to kick anyone so much as to fly.”   She previously wanted to learn the martial arts move to defend herself. Now, she appropriates the language of the move to show growth and maturation.  This is evidence of how Ha's life is coming back again.

What is the summary of Chapter Three of Where Men Win Glory?

The devastation of Kabul did not happen under Soviet rule; instead, it occurred long after, when warring mujahideen factions fought for preeminence. Before departing, the Soviets had installed Mohammed Najibullah, a Pashtun, as the puppet leader of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA). The Soviets provided crucial military and financial support to prop up Najibullah's brutal dictatorship. 

Seeking to break the Soviet influence, the CIA, in concert with the ISI (Pakistan's intelligence service), threw their support behind the efforts of some ten thousand mujahideen to overthrow Jalalabad, a critical stronghold of Najibullah's brutal DRA regime. During this time, an emerging mujahideen leader, Osama bin Laden, led his own fighters to battle. Yet the March 5, 1989 offensive failed miserably, due in part to infighting among the mujahideen factions.

The local citizens had always placed their hopes in their mujahideen leaders; after all, the government had never had much of an interest in preserving the welfare of Afghans. Citizen and mujahideen alike relied on the opium drug trade to survive. Despite this, the hapless people never enjoyed any sort of security; the fierce mujahideen fought for control over contested territories, the opium trade, and a weapons cache happily supplied by the CIA, Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Due to continual infighting, bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia.

Progress in breaking Najibullah's stranglehold over Afghanistan did not come about until April 1991, when a contingent led by Jalaluddin Haqqani defeated Najibullah's troops at Khost City. Also, with the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union later that year, the DRA found itself adrift without financial and military aid. Sensing an opportunity, a DRA turncoat, Abdul Rashid Dostum, appropriated DRA military hardware and troops to join forces with a powerful mujahideen commander, Ahmad Shah Massoud, in the fight for Kabul.

Najibullah appealed for American aid in combating the fundamentalists, but The United States was reluctant to become embroiled in a conflict that clearly held no benefit for American interests. Without crucial aid, Kabul was left open for the taking. In the end, two mujahideen leaders, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Ahmad Shah Massoud, fought for control of the city. Bin Laden and other leaders tried to broker a peaceful accord between the two commanders but to no avail. Hekmatyar and Massoud fought relentlessly to annihilate the other, plunging Afghanistan into a vicious civil war that was to see the devastation of almost 40% of Kabul's infrastructure. The local citizens found themselves caught in the middle; by the end of 1993, ten thousand civilians were dead.

The remaining people turned to local militia leaders to protect them against Hekmatyar and Massoud. Afghanistan was now a fractured country consisting of fiefdoms ruled by warring mujahideen. It was from this poisonous cauldron of destabilized anarchy that new warriors were birthed to later carry out terrorist attacks against the United States.

On February 26, 1993, a fifteen hundred pound bomb blew a hole in the World Trade Center building, injuring more than a thousand people and killing six. The bomb was built by Ramzi Yousef, under the guidance of one Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the principal architect of the later September 11, 2001, attacks on the same buildings. Ironically, Yousef had learned how to build bombs from a CIA manual while training at a camp at Khost, Afghanistan, in 1991 or 1992.

How does "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift show quantification and dehumanization?

Quantification and dehumanization go hand-in-hand in "A Modest Proposal." Swift views children and even parents (who he calls "breeders") solely in terms of a cost/benefit analysis. He calculates, for example, how much it costs to nurse a child "just dropt from its dam" in its first year of life, and suggests that his scheme represents a way to make these children, which he deems a burden on Irish society, "contribute to the feeding, and partly to the cloathing" of thousands of people. His "proposal," of course, is to take hundreds of thousands of Irish children and use them for food. A "good fat child," he assures the reader, will fetch a price of at least ten shillings, turning these "burdens" into sources of wealth.

So Swift (satirically, it must be remembered) dehumanizes the Irish by referring to them in exclusively economic terms. Indeed, this is part of the power of the essay, and, in a word, Swift's point. He wants to show the reader that enlightened, coldly rational schemes, while well-meaning, need to keep the humanity of man in mind. When we think of people solely as statistics, we lose sight of them as human beings, a point Swift makes clear by carrying the commodification of human beings to an absurd conclusion. So, in short, Swift dehumanizes the Irish through quantification.

In your opinion, why did Desiree avoid the main road leading to the Valmondes’ and turn to the Bayou? Why did she choose the attire she did? What...

In Kate Chopin's short story "Desiree's Baby," Desiree Aubigny walks into the bayou with her infant son after being accused of being black and rejected by her plantation-owner husband, Armand.

Although Desiree's adoptive mother, Madame Valmonde, writes and offers her a new home, Desiree instead wanders into the marshlands and consequentially drowns with her child. Desiree chooses death over a new life away from Armand because she views Armand's rejection as a rejection from society. We learn at the beginning of the story that Desiree is an orphan, born without an identity. As a motherless child, she means nothing in the high society of plantation life until Armand falls for her: 

Armand looked into her eyes and did not care. He was reminded that she was nameless. What did it matter about a name when he could give her one of the oldest and proudest in Louisiana?

Armand, as a male and a prosperous plantation owner, gives Desiree an identity by marrying her. Her name now carries prestige because of this marriage, so when she gives birth to a child of darker complexion and is angrily cast out by her husband, she no longer has a place in society. She believes she might as well die, because her reputation––marred by what society views as her inferior race––is also dead. Shedding her white gown symbolizes Desiree's role as a social outcast.

Who seems most devastated by Juliet’s death?

In Shakespeare's play Romeo and Juliet, Juliet actually dies twice, once faked and once by her own hand. After taking the vial of potion given to her by Friar Laurence in Act IV, Juliet appears dead to those who discover her, including the Nurse, Lady Capulet, Lord Capulet and Paris. In most performances of the play this is a very powerful scene as all four characters express their grief at the same time and you can hear one voice on top of the next. 

Since she has been closest to Juliet for most of the girl's life the Nurse is quite distraught after finding Juliet's limp body. In Scene 5, she says,

O woe, O woeful, woeful, woeful day!
Most lamentable day, most woeful day
That ever, ever I did yet behold!
O day, O day, O day, O hateful day!
Never was seen so black a day as this!
O woeful day, O woeful day!

Lord Capulet has lost his only child and his despair is particularly poignant since he had been planning a "day of joy" for his daughter in the aftermath of the death of her cousin Tyblalt. He says,

Despised, distressèd, hated, martyred, killed!
Uncomfortable time, why cam’st thou now
To murder, murder our solemnity?
O child! O child! My soul and not my child!
Dead art thou! Alack, my child is dead,
And with my child my joys are burièd.

In similar fashion, Lady Capulet expresses much of the same grief as her husband. She says,

Accursed, unhappy, wretched, hateful day!
Most miserable hour that e’er time saw
In lasting labor of his pilgrimage!
But one, poor one, one poor and loving child,
But one thing to rejoice and solace in,
And cruel death hath catched it from my sight!

Paris too joins the mournful chorus. Juliet, after all, had been betrothed to him, and even though he did not really know her well, we feel his grief is heartfelt, especially after he risks his life to apprehend Romeo at Juliet's tomb in the final scene. He says,

Beguiled, divorcèd, wrongèd, spited, slain!
Most detestable death, by thee beguiled,
By cruel, cruel thee quite overthrown!
O love! O life! Not life, but love in death!

Even though her family is plunged into depression over Juliet's supposed death, the character who takes it the hardest is certainly Romeo. As soon as Balthasar tells him of the bad news from Verona, Romeo begins plotting his suicide: "Well, Juliet, I will lie with thee tonight." For Romeo, suicide is the ultimate declaration of his love for Juliet. Unfortunately for Romeo he fails to recognize the signs that his love is simply under the influence of a strong narcotic and still lives. He says,

Thou art not conquered. Beauty’s ensign yet
Is crimson in thy lips and in thy cheeks,
And death’s pale flag is not advancèd there.

Finally, both the Prince and Lord Montague express their sympathy over Juliet's death. The Prince understands death all too well because he has lost two relatives in Mercutio and Paris during the violence of the feud. Lord Montague even suggests he can do more:

But I can give thee more,
For I will ray her statue in pure gold,
That whiles Verona by that name is known,
There shall no figure at such rate be set
As that of true and faithful Juliet.

How would you describe the city of Omelas?

Omelas is a Dystopian society masquerading as a Utopian society. Although Omelas only has one noticeable flaw, it is such an egregious flaw that the qualitative and quantitative happiness that the majority of the people experience is stained with an inexcusable sin. The people of Omelas can go on and on, pontificating about how the suffering of one justifies the wonderful happiness of all the others. But, this is a kind of bliss based on ignorance and in this case ignorance does not mean without knowledge; it means that they knowingly "ignore" the suffering of that one, unfortunate child. 

They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas. Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. Some of them understand why, and some do not, but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery. 

Some people choose to leave Omelas rather than live in a society who's happiness depends upon the suffering of one person. The "Ones Who Walk Away" might go to a less joyous place, but they do so for ethical reasons. They leave in protest of this child's suffering. Omelas is a city full of morally irresponsible citizens. Consider this story as an allegory for the richest people in America living it up while the poorest portion suffers. Consider it as a global allegory. Some industrialized countries thrive while some developing countries are faced with political, economic, and sociological struggle. In either allegory or scenario, those who thrive and choose to ignore the less fortunate are the people who would stay in Omelas. 

What is the climax of the story "War"?

The climax of "War" comes at the point that the bulky woman, bundled in her coat as she weeps that her son has been taken to the front to fight for the country in the war, suddenly turns to the old man and asks him, "Then...is your son really dead?"

In Luigi Pirandello's short story "War," the author captures the sentiment of the greatest tragedy of war: the terrible loss of beloved sons that parents experience.
This story begins while passengers waiting for the train at Fabriano to join the main line with Sulmonia in the morning watch as a bulky woman and her husband board. She has been crying as their son has been deployed to the front. Her husband explains that the young man is their only son. But, another passenger tells the couple, that parents cry who have more than one son, as well; it is all the worse for having more than one. Another traveler tells them, 

If Country is a natural necessity like bread of which each of us must eat in order not to die of hunger, somebody must go to defend it

He explains that people should not weep because their sons are defending the country. Further, he relates that before his son died, the young soldier wrote him that he was dying satisfied because he was leaving life in the "best way he could have wished." So, the father declares, this is why he does not even wear mourning clothes. Then, the other passengers congratulate him for his stoicism.

Hearing this man's words, the weeping mother seems to awaken as if from a dream. She feels now that it is not the others who cannot understand her when she has declared parents belong to their children, but she who has not been able to rise up as have the other parents who accept the deaths of their sons for the security of their country. So, turning to the man who has spoken so stoically and proudly of his son, she asks the old man, "then...is your son really dead?"

When the passengers hear this question, everyone stares at her. The old man is stunned; then, he seems to comprehend that his brave son is, indeed, gone. As his face contracts horribly, he quickly grabs his handkerchief and he weeps uncontrollably with "harrowing, heart-breaking, uncontrollable sobs."

In the novel Journey to the Center of the Earth, is the theme related to power and corruption? What would be a good theme statement?

You can't really say that Verne's "Journey to the Center of the Earth" shows a theme related to power and corruption—the nearest the novel gets to that would be Professor Lindenbrock's scientific obsession to prove his theory true. Lindenbrock risks his own personal safety, as well as that of his nephew Alex and their guide, Hans, in their journey and exploration.

Professor Lindenbrock could be more accurately said to exemplify the hubris of modern science—that is, the belief that through science, man can solve all problems and mysteries. The rebuttal to that notion is nature itself, which constantly proves more difficult to control and more mysterious than scientists imagine. The theme of scientific hubris in the face of the might of nature is certainly an underlying theme of the book. The "Jurrassic Park" novels could be said to be the contemporary cousins to "Journey to the Center of the Earth," and in them, themes of power and corruption are definitely explored.

What's weird about the Usher family tree?

Poe's "The Fall of the House of Usher" recounts the story of its narrator's visit to the secluded estate of his boyhood friend Roderick Usher.  While describing his initial knowledge of the estate, the narrator states:

I had learned, too, the very remarkable fact, that the stem of the Usher race, all time-honoured as it was, had put forth, at no period, any enduring branch; in other words, that the entire family lay in the direct line of descent, and had always, with very trifling and very temporary variation, so lain.

In the passage above, the narrator indicates that what is unusual about the "Usher race" is that their family tree does not proliferate into a multitude of family lines, "any enduring branch." Instead, Poe's narrator emphasizes that the Usher family tree is a straight line, a "direct line of decent" with little to no "variation."

The implication is that the Ushers--not unlike the European royalty of prior centuries--are the product of generations of incest.  The narrator buttresses this reading in his comparison of Roderick and his sister throughout the text, casting Madeline as the Gothic double of the more prominent Roderick.

In Julius Caesar, Caesar says, "Remember that you call me on today: Be near me, that I may remember you," to which Trybonius replies, "Caesar, I...

Caesar is being gracious and condescending with everyone. He obviously has the highest opinion of himself. He knows that when he gets to the Capitol he will be the center of attention. He is delighted to have all these important Romans calling on him to serve as escorts. He does wish to talk to Trebonius, but he is such a busy man, not unlike our American President, that he may get so involved with other matters he will forget about Trebonius. So he does what many busy men do in our day: he makes it incumbent on the other person to remember and remind him. This is understandable, but it is also somewhat insulting. Caesar is implying, in effect, that Trebonius is so relatively unimportant that he could easily forget about him. Trebonius might get lost in the crowd Caesar expects to be clamoring for his attention. Trebonius feels stung by Caesar's patronizing and condescending manner, and this only strengthens his desire to take part in the blood-letting that is scheduled to take place when Caesar arrives at the Capitol.

Caesar loves the power and popularity he is enjoying. This is the greatest moment of his illustrious career. He likes being surrounded by flatterers and petitioners. When he tells Trebonius to "be near" him, he is adding to the number of men who will be crowded around him. He may have already told a number of other men to "be near" him, so that he will be sure of having a large retinue. In modern times some men will ask others to call them on the phone just so that their phone will keep ringing all the time, making them look and feel important. Caesar is a cunning man. He knows how to manipulate other men. Unfortunately for him, he thinks everyone holds the same high opinion of him that he has of himself. 

His supreme hubris does not come out until just before he is stabbed to death. He shows his egotism and ambition when he compares himself to the North Star.

I could be well moved, if I were as you;
If I could pray to move, prayers would move me;
But I am constant as the northern star,
Of whose true-fix'd and resting quality
There is no fellow in the firmament.
The skies are painted with unnumber'd sparks;
They are all fire and every one doth shine;
But there's but one in all doth hold his place.
So in the world, 'tis furnish'd well with men,
And men are flesh and blood, and apprehensive;
Yet in the number I do know but one
That unassailable holds on his rank,
Unshaked of motion; and that I am he,
Let me a little show it, even in this;
That I was constant Cimber should be banish'd,
And constant do remain to keep him so.    
Act 3, Scene 1

Right after this speech he is encircled and stabbed to death.

What is an example of a soliloquy in "Anne of Green Gables"?

A soliloquy is most often understood in the context of a play when one of the characters expresses him or herself privately (aside) so that the audience has an insight into something the other characters are unaware of. In Anne of Green Gables, Anne talks a lot—something that Matthew, who will now share guardianship of Anne with his sister Marilla, is not used to. Anne talks regardless of who is listening, and although she includes short questions such as "haven't we?"... "isn't it?" ... "ain't I?" she never waits for a response and continues soliloquizing.  

Anne has a vivid imagination and likes to embellish her surroundings by using sophisticated words and even poetic language to make everything seem so much nicer than it really is. The reader learns much about Anne through her long speeches and graphic descriptions. In chapter two, Anne has been waiting at the train station for Matthew, who has just collected her. Having declined Matthew's offer to carry her bag, she launches into a speech about her bag, how she is excited to "belong" to someone, and her life in the "asylum" (the name for the orphanage) where there is "so little scope for the imagination." 

The usually quiet Matthew is barely involved in the conversation at all, and on the way home, Anne continues to talk. She wishes for a white dress, and although she has only the unflattering aslylum dress to wear, she imagines it is "pale blue silk." She comments that "when you ARE imagining you might as well imagine something worth while" and proceeds to mention everything about her train ride. She only stops because she has been wondering "what DOES make the roads red?" Matthew doesn't know and Anne continues to talk but does register that she is talking too much, and when Matthew admits that he is enjoying listening to her talk on and on, Anne is delighted. 

What substances can react with magnesium?

Magnesium is a somewhat reactive metal in the alkaline earth family. It forms forms a 2+ ion. It reacts with non-metals such as hydrogen, nitrogen and halogens to form ionic compounds. It also reacts with acids and water. Here are some examples of reactions of magnesium:

Magnesium burns brightly in the presence of oxygen to produce MgO:

`2Mg + O_2 -> 2MgO`

This reaction produces the bright sparks seen in fireworks.

Magnesium reacts with hydrochloric acid to produce hydrogen gas:

`Mg + 2HCl -> H_2_(g) + MgCl_2_(aq)`

Magnesium reacts with water to produce magnesium hydroxide and hydrogen:

`Mg +2H_2O -> Mg(OH)_2 + H_2`

Magnesium reacts with halogens such as chlorine to produce salts:

`Mg + Cl_2 -> MgCl_2`

Magnesium is also used in alloys with other metals to provide lightweight strength and corrosion resistance.

Where would the power of judicial review be found if it's not in the Constitution?

The concept of judicial review is not specifically stated in the Constitution. Therefore, we can’t find specific wording about it in that document. The concept of judicial review developed from the Marbury v Madison case in 1803. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled it had the right to determine whether or not laws were unconstitutional.

Some of the basis for this concept comes from a law passed by Congress. The Judiciary Act of 1789 created our court system. In the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Supreme Court would have the power to review certain decisions made by other courts. This, to some degree, opened the door to the idea that courts could have the power of judicial review.

John Marshall also was a Federalist. He very likely interpreted the Constitution in a loose manner. This allowed him to support the concept of judicial review. Federalists tended to view the Constitution in a loose manner, giving them the power to interpret the meaning of the Constitution.

What are the benefits of taking an online course? I am a college student, but I'm looking to take my calculus I course next summer online,...

There are a number of benefits to online courses as compared to in-class courses. The biggest, obviously, is the flexible hours. One can access the content anytime of the day or night, as per his/her own convenience. The student is not bound by class hours. Online courses also allow one to pursue jobs and/or other interests. Online courses are also typically cheaper than in-class courses. They also teach the important skill of time management, something which is very useful when one is in a full-time job. 

There are also downsides to online courses. Even though hours are flexible, one still has to work and spend sufficient amount of time on learning, especially for a tough course like calculus. In-class courses also offer the possibility of working in groups. You may want to check if group study is possible with your online courses. Group study is really useful for tough subjects. Also, some people study better in a classroom environment and in the company of other students. It also helps keep some students motivated.

Good luck with calculus.

Hope this helps.

How does the point of view create a suspenseful mood in "Lamb to the Slaughter" ?

This is a very good question. The story is told entirely from Mary Maloney's point of view. The reader identifies with her because we are held in her point of view from beginning to end. Early in the story we understand her emotions. She is in love, she feels content, and she is six months pregnant. We wish her well. After she commits her murder she has to call the police. Since we are held in her point of view, we cannot know what the police are going to do or what they are going to think. When she goes to the grocery store to establish an alibi, she is still improvising. She knows she has to go back home and pretend to find her husband's body, then call the police and pretend to be in panic and shock, and then to put on an act of innocence and mourning while police swarm all over her house and one or two of them ask her questions. She doesn't know what kinds of questions they might ask. She doesn't know what they might suspect--or even what they might know about Patrick that she doesn't know.

It is because we are held in her point of view that we share her suspense. She is trying to get by with murder, but she doesn't know whether or not she is going to succeed. She knows that it is very hard to get by with murder, and she knows that spouses are often prime suspects. She has to keep her cool. She has never played this role before. That is why so many murderers get caught. They overact. They don't know how to play the part. Mary knows she must be bereaved but not too bereaved. How do women act when their husbands are murdered? Maybe they simply act as if they are in a state of shock and do not show much emotion?

It is a very nice touch that Mary wants to go on about her daily routine, which at this time of day involves cooking a leg of lamb. It seems natural for some people to be in a state of denial and to want life to go on just as it had been going on before. She could play that role rather than acting as if she were totally overwhelmed and incapacitated. After all, she is a cop's wife. She knows her husband faces danger every day. He would expect her to be tough. These cops who have invaded her home are all Patrick's buddies. She would be expected to show them some hospitality in spite of her suffering. She is never entirely safe. She never knows what is going to happen next. In making the radical decision to murder her husband, she was entering into a strange new world.

A parallel example is Rodion Raskolnikov in Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment. He intends to murder one woman. Another woman shows up unexpectedly and he has to murder her too. Then he can't get out of the murdered women's apartment because a group of people has collected outside in the hallway. When he does manage to get away, he has to worry about the police investigation. He is under a strain throughout the novel, and the reader, held in Raskolnikov's point of view, suffers the strain along with him.

Briefly explain the importance of the scene with the handkerchief as it is depicted in Othello.

There is more than one scene in which the napkin is important. The handkerchief has become symbolic of Othello's commitment and love to Desdemona and plays an important part in Iago's scheme to convince Othello of his wife and Cassio's deceit. Othello specifically mentions its significance in Act 3, scene 4:

... That handkerchief
Did an Egyptian to my mother give;
She was a charmer, and could almost read
The thoughts of people: she told her, while
she kept it,
'Twould make her amiable and subdue my father
Entirely to her love, but if she lost it
Or made gift of it, my father's eye
Should hold her loathed and his spirits should hunt
After new fancies: she, dying, gave it me;
And bid me, when my fate would have me wive,
To give it her. I did so: and take heed on't;
Make it a darling like your precious eye;
To lose't or give't away were such perdition
As nothing else could match.

Othello makes this statement after having asked Desdemona for the handkerchief to get rid of a 'salty and sorry rheum' which bothered him. When she extends a napkin to him, he asks for the one he gave her. He does this because Iago had worked him up to such an extent that he believed Desdemona and Cassio were having an affair and had told him that he had seen Cassio wipe his beard with the napkin. Furthermore, Iago had come in possession of the handkerchief when, on another occasion, Othello had been so worked up that he developed a headache and when Desdemona handed him her napkin, he pushed it away and it fell. Desdemona was more concerned about his condition than the napkin and left it.

Emilia picked up the napkin at the time:

I am glad I have found this napkin:
This was her first remembrance from the Moor:
My wayward husband hath a hundred times
Woo'd me to steal it; but she so loves the token,
For he conjured her she should ever keep it,
That she reserves it evermore about her
To kiss and talk to. I'll have the work ta'en out,
And give't Iago: what he will do with it
Heaven knows, not I;
I nothing but to please his fantasy.

Emilia gives Iago the napkin and does not realise what damning effect this act to please her husband would have afterwards. Iago plants the handkerchief in Cassio's room where he later discovers it. 

Iago has so influenced Othello through innuendo, suggestion and word-play, that the poor general is practically convinced that he has been made a cuckold by his wife and his erstwhile lieutenant. He had cleverly made the general suspicious by saying that 'I like not that' when the two of them came upon Cassio departing from Desdemona in a suspiciously furtive manner. When Othello enquired what he meant, he, at first, refused to say but later 'confessed' his suspicion at Othello's insistence. He told the general to be wary of 'the green-eyed monster' and that Desdemona had 'betrayed her father' suggesting that she might do the same to him.  

He later also conveys an occasion when he slept next to Cassio and the then lieutenant acted as if he were lying next to Desdemona, in the process kissing him passionately and expressing regret that she was with the Moor. Othello is not completely convinced and threatens Iago that if he is sullying her name without providing evidence, he will feel his terrible wrath. Iago deliberately asks the general if, as evidence, he wishes to see his wife perform a sexual act, knowing that Othello will be shocked. He then makes reference to having seen Cassio use the handkerchief and promises to provide Othello proof of the affair.

Iago later sets up a meeting with Cassio instructing the general to hide away so that he can surreptitiously eavesdrop. Iago manipulates the conversation with Cassio in such a way that Othello believes that Cassio is referring to Desdemona, when he is, in fact, talking about Bianca. The final, overpowering and most convincing event is when Bianca enters the scene and confronts Cassio about the handkerchief:

Let the devil and his dam haunt you! What did you
mean by that same handkerchief you gave me even now?
I was a fine fool to take it. I must take out the
work?--A likely piece of work, that you should find
it in your chamber, and not know who left it there!
This is some minx's token, and I must take out the
work? There; give it your hobby-horse: wheresoever
you had it, I'll take out no work on't.

Bianca is upset that Cassio had dared to ask her to some work on the napkin, which, she believes, is obviously the property of some or other flirt. This adds salt to Othello's already deep and open wound, that his precious gift should be treated as a piece of garbage. He sees this as undeniable evidence of Desdemona and Cassio's deceit.  

To make sure that Othello has gotten the message, Iago asks him later if he had seen the handkerchief and he assures him that it is indeed the object of Othello's affection. The general is absolutely overwhelmed and, encouraged by the malevolent Iago, suggests various ways in which he will murder his wife. He eventually decides to kill her in the very same bed in which she supposedly exercised her lust. The two men become co-conspirators and Iago promises to kill Cassio. Othello is pleased by his suggestion.

This series of events results in the tragic deaths of Desdemona, Emilia, Othello and Roderigo, with Cassio seriously wounded. The insidious master manipulator, Iago, is arrested to be dealt with later. Lodovico instructs:

... To you, lord governor,
Remains the censure of this hellish villain;
The time, the place, the torture: O, enforce it! 

In "The Tell-Tale Heart" by Edgar Allen Poe, why has the author chosen to have his narrator hear a beating heart (as opposed to a voice, for...

In Poe's short story "The Tell-Tale Heart," the narrator murders an elderly man and disposes of his body under his floor. When three policemen knock at his door, he lets them in, confident that they will not be able to connect him to the crime. However, he soon begins to hear a sound that gets louder and louder. He thinks the policemen must hear it, too. Ultimately he breaks down and confesses, and we learn he thinks the sound is the beating of the man's "hideous heart." 

The heart is a symbol in this story, and it works on at least four levels. We associate a heartbeat with life, so the beating is a reminder to the narrator that he has stolen the life of the elderly man. A heart is also the symbolic seat of the emotions. The narrator has been "heartless" in murdering a man who has done him no wrong and toward whom he actually feels no personal animosity. It is only the man's eye that the narrator despises. So there is irony in having a symbol of emotion be the thing that gives the heartless murderer away. Third, the heart is also the symbol of the conscience. We often say, "I knew in my heart it was wrong." The narrator has no conscience; after he murders the man, he does not feel guilty and is even happy to let the police in; he even "placed my own seat upon the very spot beneath which reposed the corpse of the victim." Since the narrator has no active, beating conscience in his own chest, the heart of the murdered man rises up to protest what the murderer has done. As much as the narrator has tried to bury his emotions and his conscience, he cannot keep them quiet, and they eventually accuse him of his dastardly deed. Finally, the heart is the symbolic location of good or evil inside a person. We say a person has "a good heart" or "a wicked heart." Ironically, while the narrator labels the murdered man's heart as "hideous," we know it is the narrator who has a "hideous heart."

Poe uses the heart as a symbol of life, emotion, conscience, and evil in this story, often with a twist of irony.

I have to write two summary ideas about Hoot. How should I word them?

When you have to summarize a novel or story, think in terms of the main components of a story: characters, setting, conflict, plot, and theme. 

Characters are the people who populate the story. You could summarize Hoot by saying that the main characters (protagonists) are Roy Eberhardt, a teenage boy who lives in Florida; Curly Brannit, a construction site foreman; and Officer Delinko, a patrolman in Coconut Cove. The antagonists (those who oppose the protagonists) for each of those characters are Dana Matherson, a bully; Chuck Muckle, the Vice President of Mother Paula's All-American Pancake House; and Mullet Fingers, a teenage runaway who interferes with construction at the Mother Paula's site.

The setting refers to the time and place. The story takes place in Coconut Cove, Florida, in the early 2000s. 

The conflict of the story centers around what the main characters want and need. Roy wants to keep from being beaten up by Dana Matherson and to find out about the running boy; eventually he wants to help the running boy, Mullet Fingers, save the burrowing owls. Curly Brannit wants to clear the land for the new Mother Paula's pancake house and to remain employed. Officer Delinko wants to become a detective; he wants to impress his supervisors at the police department by arresting the perpetrator who is interfering with clearing the land for the new Mother Paula's restaurant.

The plot is closely related to the conflict; it follows the events of the story as the main characters pursue their goals or try to solve their problems. It culminates with a climax, or high point of the action, that sets up a resolution to the conflict. In Hoot, the plot revolves mostly around Mullet Fingers and his efforts to stop the clearing of the land. His continued escapades—pulling up survey markers, putting alligators in the portable latrines, spray-painting the windows of the police car, letting snakes loose on the property, removing the seats of the heavy equipment, and finally burying himself in an owl burrow—drive the action, pull Roy into the effort to save the owls, and cause problems for Curly and Officer Delinko. The climax occurs when Roy, Mullet Fingers, and Beatrice band together to stop the groundbreaking.

The theme refers to a universal truth a reader can draw from the story. There can be several themes in a work; just be sure you can support any theme you suggest with evidence from the story. In Hoot, one theme is that people, even young people, can bring positive change to their communities by getting involved and fighting against injustice.

You could pick any two of these story components to focus on in giving a summary of Hoot, but telling about a book's conflict, plot, and theme will provide the best overview of the work.

What ironic incident can be found in Chapter 12 of To Kill A Mockingbird?

I think you are talking about the time that Calpurnia takes Jem and Scout to her all black church.  Atticus has been called to the state legislature and is gone from home, so Calpurnia decides the children will go with her to church services.  As they enter the church, a parishioner, Lulu, criticizes Calpurnia for bringing the white children with her to church.  Scout and Jem are welcomed into the church by other members and Reverend Sykes, but it is a different worship service than they are used to.  There is only one hymnal, and Zeebo, Calpurnia’s son, reads from it.  There is also a collection taken up for Helen Robinson who is unable to find work now that Tom has been arrested.

It is an ironic episode because the black community has always been discriminated against in Maycomb.  They are segregated in their own communities and churches.  So, for some members of the church, Calpurnia bringing Scout and Jem into their church is not appreciated.  Lulu and other church members are discriminating against Scout and Jem in this instance.  It is a pretty normal reaction by the black parishioners who have been kept separate all their lives from the white community.  However, the Christian religion preaches to accept everyone, so it is ironic that Lulu and others hesitate in accepting the children.

What do the male characters learn from their investigation in A Jury of Her Peers?

In Susan Glaspell's A Jury of Her Peers the men are searching for evidence that Mrs. Wright has killed her husband. They search the house, both inside and out, searching for a motive. Considering the time period, they completely ignore certain areas such as the kitchen, because they feel that is where the women belong. By ignoring the kitchen, which is the most likely room (in that time period) to find evidence, they completely miss a few items that would help them show that Mrs. Wright had a clear motive.

The men of the story don't find any substantial evidence, mostly because they search the bedroom where the murder happened, and outside. Their biggest obstacle is that they don't seem able to get into the mind of a woman and understand her motives. The main thing they do is mock the women who are there to bring Mrs. Wright some items she needs in jail.

This should give you a good start...good luck!

In to Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus tells the children that "You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of...

At the beginning of the novel, Atticus teaches Scout a lesson on perspective. He advises that she metaphorically "climb into the skin of people and walk around in it" to understand their perspective. This is an important lesson throughout the novel that is essential to the moral development of Scout. As the novel progresses, Scout attempts to view situations from other people's perspectives. When Jem is acting moody the week after he retrieved his pants from the Radley yard, Scout attempts to "climb into his skin and walk around in it" by imagining how she would feel if she had gone alone into Boo's yard.

After Dill runs away from his home and explains his situation to Scout, she begins to try to understand what life would be like if Atticus and Calpurnia did not wish to have her around. This scene portrays Scout continuing to develop her perspective. Scout continues to mature and learns an important lesson following the mob scene. Atticus explains that the reason Walter Cunningham made his gang leave was because he was able to "walk in Atticus' shoes." Scout learns another valuable lesson in perspective when Atticus elaborates on how mob mentality influenced Walter.

Throughout the trial, Scout's moral development is evident when she analyzes the character of Mayella Ewell. Scout states that she feels that Mayella is the loneliest person in Maycomb, even lonelier than Boo Radley. Her ability to compare Mayella to Boo portrays her developing perspective.

In the last chapter of the novel, Scout stands on Boo Radley's porch and looks out at their neighborhood. She begins to reflect on past events and "stands in Boo's skin" to understand how he views the world. This scene is the apex of Scout's moral development in the novel. She is finally able to appreciate Boo Radley as her normal neighbor by understanding his point of view.

What was the cause and the effect of the Battle of Fallen Timbers?

The cause of the Battle of Fallen Timbers was American expansion into the Ohio Valley after the Revolutionary War. After the war, this region, long desired by the Americans, passed into American hands with the Treaty of Paris. But the Native peoples who lived there deeply resented American settlement on their land, and they received some encouragement to resist it from the British Army, stationed in outposts in Canada. President George Washington sent two successive expeditions into the region, and both were defeated soundly. The long-awaited victory of American troops at Fallen Timbers concluded a third campaign led by General Anthony Wayne. The effects of this victory were drastic, especially for the Native peoples of the region. The Ohio Valley Indians were left with little alternative but to give up most of  their lands in the region. They did so in the Treaty of Greenville in 1795. The treaty also had the effect of limiting British influence in the region.

What oxymorons are there in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Act 3 scene 5?

Act 3, scene 5 of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet shows the two lovers waking up early on the morning that Romeo must head to Mantua or be killed. It is also when Juliet's mother and father inform her that she will marry Paris on Thursday, which is just a couple of days away. In order to find oxymorons in this scene, one must not look for words used exactly next to each other such as Romeo applies earlier in Act 1, scene 1, "O brawling love, O loving hate" (I.i.169). It's much more difficult to find oxymorons in this scene because they may be buried in extended metaphors and brief analogies. One example of an oxymoron in a metaphor is shown in the following passage:

Juliet: O, now be gone! More light and light it grows.

Romeo: More light and light, more dark and dark our woes (III.v.35-36).

Thus, Juliet starts one part of the extended oxymoron and Romeo finishes it. Romeo expresses their feelings well because with the morning's light, he needs to get out of town and dark feelings of loneliness and missing each other will begin.

Another oxymoron that Juliet uses is about her mother coming to see her. The day is so young, it still seems as if it could be nighttime. Juliet says, "Is she not down so late, or up so early?" (III.v.66). Here the use of down and up create an oxymoron as well as the words late and early. The words that create the oxymoron are not immediately juxtaposed, but close enough for the audience to catch the image that it is intended to create.

Finally, there are oxymorons scattered throughout the argument that Capulet has with Juliet over marrying Paris. Capulet says Juliet is unworthy for the worthy Paris (III.v.144-145). Then when he asks why Juliet is not grateful to him, she says, ". . . thankful even for hate that is meant love" (III.v.148). This confuses her father as Juliet uses hate and love in one sentence. Opposites are flying all over the place! Capulet barks back, "Thank me no thankings, nor proud me no prouds" (III.v.152). It would be quite comical just for the way the language is used if it weren't centered around such a sad and terrible subject.

To what extent do you consider Okonkwo's downfall to have been brought about by his own pride and fears?

While Okonkwo does end up taking his own life, the question of his personal responsibility for this particular fate is a complex and interesting one.

Achebe’s protagonist certainly possesses some character flaws that lead to a variety of setbacks and punishments and drive his son away, but to answer the question of Okonkwo’s responsibility for his downfall, we have to look at the specific nature of that downfall.

To inform an answer to this question, we might pause to consider what may have happened to Okonkwo if the British had never come to Umuofia and the Igbo region. His chances of losing Nwoye seem vastly increased when the Christians come offering an alternative life for the boy. And Okonkwo's ultimate act of murder seems to be almost entirely generated by the circumstances created by the British arrival (as missionaries and as government/municipal agents, too).

If we can find some reason to think that Okonkwo’s fate would have been different if the British never came, then we need to qualify any responsibility we place on Okonkwo individually for his downfall. In other words, if Okonkwo’s downfall is partially the result of a British occupation, Okonkwo’s downfall is not solely of his own making.

Again, Okonkwo has flaws. He is incapable of showing any emotion but fear. Internally he is deeply afraid of showing weakness lest he appear to be weak like his father, Unoka. Okonkwo is also quick to anger. All of these traits eventuate into transgressions as Okonkwo kills Ikemefuna (when he does not need to), breaks the peace of the Week of Peace, and drives his son Nwoye away from the family.

In this last example we have perhaps the best rationale for arguing that Okonkwo is responsible for his downfall, because the loss of Nwoye is part of the general loss of cultural integrity that Okonkwo (violently) resists and that essentially defines his doom.

Were Okonkwo a different man, he could have nurtured Nwoye at least enough to keep him in the family. But, having driven his son away, protagonist Okonkwo speeds on the dissolution of his community. It is this very dissolution that he wants to fight against.

Okonkwo nearly recognizes this notion after his last encounter with Nwoye, gazing into the fire and brooding on what has come to pass.

“Suppose when he died all his male children decided to follow Nwoye’s steps and abandon their ancestors? Okonkwo felt a cold shudder run through him at the terrible prospect, like the prospect of annihilation.”

The beginnings of this annihilation can be attributed in no small part to Okonkwo's emotional limitations and his insistence on shaping Nwoye into a certain kind of man.

Nwoye is driven away, in large part, because Okonkwo’s “whole life was dominated by fear, the fear of failure and weakness,” and so he could not be kind or gentle or forgiving with a son who needed exactly these things.

Yet, without the significant presence of the British and the alternative life they offered to Okonkwo’s son, there seems good reason to presume that Okonkwo’s fate could have been different.

His fear and his pride do certainly contribute to the breaking apart of his family unit. His unyielding nature causes him to contribute to the dissolution of his community identity and community integrity in this way.

In the end, though, we also have to wonder if his pride and fear were entirely unfounded and absolutely negative and therefore should be seen only as weaknesses in his character. They are weaknesses, in some contexts and instances, but they are strengths in others. If the British effectively created a context where these traits became weaknesses, should we blame Okonkwo solely for his downfall?

The narrator asks, “Had Goodman Brown fallen asleep in the forest and only dreamed a wild dream of a witch meeting?" What do you think? Why? What...

I'll answer the first question of the two that are being asked.  

Personally, yes, I believe that events of the story really happened to Goodman Brown.  I do not believe that he experienced a dream.  I will admit, there are parts of the story that seem like a dream.  For example, when the devil's staff turns into a serpent and then Goodie Cloyse and the staff disappear is quite strange.  

So saying, he threw it down at her feet, where, perhaps, it assumed life, being one of the rods which its owner had formerly lent to the Egyptian magi. Of this fact, however, Goodman Brown could not take cognizance. He had cast up his eyes in astonishment, and, looking down again, beheld neither Goody Cloyse nor the serpentine staff, but his fellow-traveler alone, who waited for him as calmly as if nothing had happened.

The part of the story when Goodman Brown grabs the staff and quickly moves through the forest seems like a dream too.  

And, maddened with despair, so that he laughed loud and long, did Goodman Brown grasp his staff and set forth again, at such a rate that he seemed to fly along the forest path rather than to walk or run.

I've had dreams of flying, so it does sound like something that isn't real.  But I have also been driving myself somewhere, arrived, and then been surprised at how quickly I got there.  At times, the details of the drive are often fuzzy too.  That sounds terrible of me, but it does show that waking moments of reality can feel dreamlike as well.  

As a reader though, I'm not willing to accept parts of the story as a dream and other parts as reality.  It's either all a dream or all reality for Goodman Brown, and I lean toward the events being all reality.  

A large part of my feelings on this are coming from my own faith based background.  I believe in heaven and hell and that the devil has real world power.  Many religions throughout the world believe in similar supernatural forces being able to affect waking reality.  The staff to serpent "trick" in the story is a direct reference to the story of Moses and his work to free the Israelites from their Egyptian captors.  I completely understand reading the entire story and interpreting it as if Goodman Brown dreamed the entire thing.  In fact, I think it is easier to justify and understand the events of the story, if you believe they are all part of a dream.  I just don't interpret it that way myself.  

What formula would you use to calculate the weight of an astronaut?

The weight of any object would be `W = mg` on earth, where W is weight, m is mass and g is acceleration due to gravity of earth. But, if you are trying to measure the weight of an astronaut in space, the case would be something different. 

If the astronaut is nowhere near earth, he/she would not experience any weight at all. So, `W = 0` in that case. Thus, no formulas are needed. 

If the astronaut is in the International Space Station for example, he would still feel weightless. Even though the ISS is really close to earth, it is in constant free fall, just like the moon. So, although the earth's gravity affects the ISS, anyone inside would feel as if they were constantly falling, causing this apparent lack of gravity and weight. Again, `W = 0 ` here. 

On the other hand, you can use the formula `F= G(Mm)/r^2` in a case where you consider the astronaut to be a point particle with mass  and the earth as another point particle with mass M. For this scenario, the "weight" i.e. the force of attraction felt by the astronaut due to the earth and vice versa is given by . 

I hope this answers your question. 

I have provided links for further reading. 

Regards. 

Why does Ambrose Bierce use a Southern man as his protagonist in "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge"?

Bierce chooses a Southern protagonist to prevent readers from arriving at snap judgments about him.  The story was written in 1890, twenty five years after the end of the American Civil War.  It is likely that anyone reading the story at that time would have strong feelings about the war and its outcome.  Because Peyton Farquhar is a Southerner and "a well-to-do planter," a slave owner "devoted to the Southern cause," he might be viewed as a villain by many readers.  

However, on some level, readers are encouraged to respect his dedication to his cause: although he did not join the army, he wanted to contribute in a meaningful way to the war effort, and this motivated his decision to attempt to burn down the Owl Creek Bridge.  He was "a civilian who was at heart a soldier," something most people would likely respect; though he "without too much qualification assented to at least part of the frankly villainous dictum that all is fair in love and war."  He is, in many ways, someone to be respected for his dedication to his principles, but, at the same time, he is somewhat savage in his adherence to such a barbaric adage. 

We cannot simply write Farquhar off as either a hero or a villain, and this adds depth to the character and the story.  

What literary techniques are used by Oscar Wilde in The Picture of Dorian Gray in order to get his message across to his readers?

In The Picture of Dorian Gray, Wilde uses a number of literary devices to emphasize some of the book's key themes.

First of all, Wilde uses a number of symbols to reinforce a key theme. The yellow book, for example, which Dorian receives from Lord Henry in Chapter Ten, functions as a representation of Dorian's downward spiral into hedonism and corruption. The significance of this book is summed up in the text: "Things of which he had never dreamed were gradually revealed." Similarly, in Chapter 16, the opium dens act as potent symbols of Dorian's corrupted soul. Secondly, Wilde uses another technique called foreshadowing to emphasize the importance of future events. In the first chapter, for instance, changes in the natural environment of Basil's studio foreshadow the importance of Dorian's introduction to Lord Henry.

Secondly, Wilde uses another technique called foreshadowing to emphasize the importance of future events. In the first chapter, for instance, changes in the natural environment of Basil's studio foreshadow the importance of Dorian's introduction to Lord Henry: 

The wind shook some blossoms from the trees, and the heavy lilac-blooms, with their clustering stars, moved to and fro in the languid air.

Later, in Chapter Six, James Vane's constant references to Sybil's safety suggest that something sinister will befall her. In the same way, James's repeated threat, that he will kill Dorian if he hurts Sybil, foreshadows his attempt on Dorian's life in Chapter 16. Foreshadowing, therefore, builds suspense ahead of some of the novel's most important plot twists.

In the play How I Learned To Drive by Paula Vogel, who is Cousin Bobby, and how does he fit into the family tree?

In the play How I Learned To Drive, Cousin Bobby, also know as B.B. for "Blue Balls," is the protagonist Li'l Bit's cousin. He has no lines in the play and is essentially a flat, static character. The reader does not know much about him other than the fact that Uncle Peck gave him a a fishing lesson when he was young, similar to the way he would give Li'l Bit driving lessons, so we can infer that he was molested as well.

We can also assume that Cousin Bobby comes from Lil Bits' mother's side of the family. First, like the rest of Li'l Bit's side of the family, he is nicknamed after genitalia: "Blue Balls." Next, because Uncle Peck has access to him, he must be from the mother's side.

There is no way, however, to determine who exactly his parents are as it is never explicitly stated, but we can infer that Aunt Mary is not his mother as this would mean that he was molested by his own father, and this is never suggested. We can, on the other hand, assume that he is the child of one of Lucy's sisters or cousins, probably a single mother since Bobby's uncle is the one to give him fishing lessons.