The Declaration of Independence states that all people have certain rights. What are they?

The Declaration of Independence was drafted because the Second Continental Congress believed we could no longer peacefully resolve our differences with Great Britain. Many colonists believed the British government was abusing its powers. There is an entire section in the Declaration of Independence that is devoted to the complaints we had about the King of England. Thus, we declared our independence from Great Britain.

The Declaration of Independence stated that all people have unalienable rights. These rights can’t be taken away or given up. These rights include the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration of Independence went on to state that the job of the government is to protect the rights of the people. When the government fails to do this, the people must replace the government with one that will protect their rights.

The Declaration of Independence has served as a model for other countries that wanted to be independent of the rule of governments that they believed had abused their power.

What does the ball symbolize?

Like the necklace, the fancy ball Monsieur and Madame Loisel attend represents wealth, luxury and social status. In the beginning of Guy de Maupassant's short story "The Necklace" Madame Loisel dreams of being rich and living in extravagant surroundings. She is obsessed by material comforts. De Maupassant writes early on in the story:

She would dream of silent chambers, draped with Oriental tapestries and lighted by tall bronze floor lamps, and of two handsome butlers in knee breeches, who, drowsy from the heavy warmth cast by the central stove, dozed in large overstuffed armchairs.

Her husband, sensing his wife's yearnings, gets tickets to the ball which is held at the "Ministerial Mansion." Of course, she needs a new dress and some jewelry to complete her fabricated transformation into an upper class woman so she can fit in. These material trappings, the necklace, the dress, the ball, represent for her everything she has dreamed of. De Maupassant says she is the most popular woman at the ball. He writes:

She danced madly, wildly, drunk with pleasure, giving no thought to anything in the triumph of her beauty, the pride of her success, in a kind of happy cloud composed of all the adulation, of all the admiring glances, of all the awakened longings, of a sense of complete victory that is so sweet to a woman’s heart. 

Her triumph ends in despair as she on leaves the ball. In her haste to flee the party so others wouldn't see the "shabbiness" of her coat she somehow loses the necklace and the rest of her life is plunged into poverty. Ironically, the necklace is false, just like her dreams of status and luxury.

In Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, is there any moral to the first section of Marlow's tale?

There's a lot going on in Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, and much of what the author has to say includes some kind of moral judgment. However, I believe that the first section of Marlow's tale, like much of the rest of it, primarily addresses morality by displaying the corruption of colonialist enterprises. More specifically, Conrad emphasizes the fact that colonialism is not actually a rational and orderly process aimed at bringing civilization to savage peoples, but is rather an exercise in pointless insanity.

The first instance that displays the insanity behind colonialism occurs early on. Marlow says that, en route to his port of call, his transport vessel comes across a man of war firing into the thick coastal jungle. Apparently, this exercise is more or less pointless, and Marlow notes that "there she was, incomprehensible, firing into a continent" (30). Later on, when Marlow gets to the first station on his trip, he observes the apparently pointless attempt to destroy the face of a cliff. "The cliff was not in the way or anything," Marlow says, "but this objectless blasting was all the work going on" (34). 

In short, one of the main points of this first section is Marlow's attempt to reveal the pointless insanity inherent in colonialist enterprises. It's apparent that the colonial powers are not actually making "progress" in the jungles of Africa, but are rather blundering around, killing and destroying and enslaving. They may do so in the name of civilization, progress, and business, but Marlow shows that colonialism advances none of these things, and is actually rather ineffectual. Thus, the primary moral of this first section is its condemnation of the insane meaninglessness of colonialism, and it's hardly surprising that Marlow comes to believe the Belgian Congo is now governed by "a flabby, pretending, weak-eyed devil of a rapacious and pitiless folly" (36). 

In The Outsiders, what does Cherry say is the real separation between the Socs and the greasers?

Cherry and Ponyboy discuss the separation between the Socs and the greasers at the start of chapter 3 of The Outsiders. This discussion comes after Cherry has already told Ponyboy that things are not only bad for the greasers, but for the Socs as well. She goes on to tell him that sometimes when talking to friends she will “realize I don’t mean half of what I’m saying” (Hinton 38). She confides in him why she believes the two groups are separated from one another. She tells Ponyboy the real separation occurs because the greasers have a different set of values from the Socs. The greasers are “more emotional” and the Socs are “sophisticated-cool to the point of not feeling anything” (Hinton 38). She describes Soc life as “always going and going and going, and never asking where" (Hinton 38). Ponyboy builds on this idea when he tells Cherry, “It’s not money, it's feeling—you don’t feel anything and we feel too violently” (Hinton 38). This dialogue between the two shows the real reason behind why the Socs and the greasers are separated from one another.

Hope this helps!

If you have 11.0 g of Ca(OH)2 dissolved in 173 mL, what is the % concentration (W/V)?

The % concentration in term of w/v or weight by volume can be determined by dividing the amount of solute by volume of solvent and taking its percentage. In this case, the solute is calcium hydroxide or Ca(OH)2 and has a weight (or mass) of 11 gm. The volume of the solvent is given as 173 ml.

Therefore, the concentration = mass of solute / volume of solvent   x 100 %

= 11 gm/ 173 ml  x 100% = 6.36% (w/v)

Thus, the given solution has a concentration of 6.36% (w/v).

We can similarly calculate the w/w concentration of the solution, by assuming the density of solvent (typically water) as 1 gm/ml.

% concentration  (w/w) = mass of solute / mass of solvent  x 100

= 11 gm / 173 gm x 100 = 6.36% (w/w)

Hope this helps.

If you were in the narrator's position in "Shooting an Elephant," would you give up your job? Why or why not?

On first glance, it appears that the narrator should give up his job. As an English policeman in Colonial Burma, he is hated by the people he polices and experiences their discontent on a daily basis. He is deliberately tripped up while playing football, for example, and booed and jeered by Burmese priests. Furthermore, he does not agree with imperialism, having "seen the dirty work of the Empire at close quarters. By this, Orwell refers to the brutal and violent treatment of the Burmese when they do not follow British rules:

The wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey cowed faces of the long-term convicts…all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt.

On the other hand, however, Orwell admits to being "young and ill-educated" at this time. He knows that there is nothing than he can do to change this situation and that he cannot speak out against the regime:

I had to think out my problems in this utter silence imposed on every Englishman in the East.

Giving up this job, however, is arguably the best course of action. While imperialism cannot be beaten by one man, history shows that it was already in demise and about to be supplanted by a number of "younger empires."

Why does Snug, who plays the lion's part, make a fuss about proclaiming his true identity in A Midsummer Night's Dream?

In Act 1 Scene 2 of A Midsummer Night’s Dream a group of tradesmen from Athens decide to put on a play for Duke Theseus to celebrate his wedding. The play they choose is Pyramus and Thisbe, a story of a couple who is in love but whose parents don’t want them to marry. They decide to run away together but when Thisbe gets to the meeting place, a lion frightens her away. When Pyramus arrives he thinks Thisbe has been killed by the lion and kills himself. Thisbe finds Pyramus’ body and kills herself.

As they plan the play, the actor Bottom wants to play every part. When he insists that he play the lion, he promises to play a terrifying lion. The director, Quince, tells him “An you should do it too terribly, you would fright the duchess and the ladies, that they would shriek; and that were enough to hang us all.” He is worried that if the lion is too scary it will frighten the women in the audience and the duke will punish them for that.

Clearly this threat of hanging hits home with Snug, the man playing the lion. In Act 5, Scene 1 when the play takes place, Snug takes great care to explain to the ladies in the audience that he is in fact not a real lion, that he is Snug, and that if he really were a lion this would be a bad place to try to cause trouble. This way, no one is frightened by the lion and the duke is not angered and will not punish them for the play.

What is evidence from the party scene that Romeo and Juliet have a strong, intense, and immediate connection?

Our first indication that Romeo and Juliet have a strong, intense and immediate connection lies in the fact that Shakespeare constructs the first words that pass between them on meeting in the structure of a sonnet, a poetic form traditionally associated with love poetry, so we know straight away Romeo and Juliet are destined to be lovers. Their first fourteen lines of conversation comprise the rhythm (the iambic pentameter customary in Shakespeare's plays anyway) and rhyme pattern (abab cdcd {cbcb, in fact} efef gg) of an English, or Shakespearean sonnet, a form famously popularised by Shakespeare himself.

Romeo's apology for his bold approach in seizing Juliet's hand takes up the first quatrain and her reassuring reply takes up the second. This allocation of equal quatrains and a line apiece - her Saints do not move, though grant for prayers' sake and his Then move not, while my prayer's effect I take - in the final, decisive couplet of the sonnet indicates that there will be equal strength of feeling and partnership between them; they are well matched.

The intense physical attraction between them is quickly shown: despite his reservations about his unworthiest hand in touching her so soon, he is already prepared to kiss her too: My lips, two blushing pilgrims, ready stand / To smooth that rough touch with a tender kiss. She is immediately receptive, chiding him that he denigrates his hand too much. When, thus encouraged, he pushes his luck and prays to be allowed to kiss her, although she seems initially coy and teases him that lips are for use in prayer, she soon assures him that if she is, by his comparison, a statue of a saint who can grant for prayers' sake that such Saints do not move: she will stay put and be kissed.

However, the attraction is not merely physical: Shakespeare shows by Juliet's picking up Romeo's religious jargon that this is a couple with an immediate intellectual connection. Romeo's metaphorical image of Juliet as a statue of a saint in this holy shrine and his lips as two blushing pilgrims is one she instantly understands. He implies that he adores her, worships her, that she is exceptionally good, special, superior to him if touching her would be to profane her -  a desecration. Her addressing him immediately as Good pilgrim is a continuation of this religious jargon, extending the metaphor, showing that the couple has an innate understanding from the outset of their relationship; they are on the same wavelength!

Juliet, in fact, develops Romeo's image of her as a statue of a saint to encourage both their physical and intellectual attraction to one another. Far from being offended at what he fears is a rough touch of his hand, she flirtatiously points out that pilgrims, including those who are holy palmers from their travels to the holy land, customarily lay reverent hands upon the statues of saints in shrines: this is mannerly devotion, the proper way, she teases him, to worship and pray. She plays up to his idea of her as a saint by suggesting the touching of hands, palm to palm, is a gesture of prayer, not improper, therefore entirely appropriate if she accepts this physical advance. When he hints that statues have sculpted lips as well as hands and therefore, by the same token, if saints have hands that pilgrims' hands do touch, she might let lips do what hands do, she acknowledges that saints have the power to grant for prayers' sake the wishes of a pilgrim; she will answer his prayer, lest his faith in her turn to despair.

In summary, Shakespeare's deployment of sonnet structure and the religious jargon which humorously extends the initial holy shrine metaphor combine to illustrate the strong physical attraction, intellectual parity and mutual understanding which are the basis on which Romeo's and Juliet's relationship is founded.  

`x^2 - y^2 = 7, x = 4`Set up an integral for the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by the given curve about the specified...

The shell has the radius `5 - y` , the cricumference is `2pi*(5 - y)` and the height is `4 - x` , hence, the volume can be evaluated, using the method of cylindrical shells, such that:

`V = 2pi*int_(y_1)^(y_2) (5 - y)*(4 - x) dy`

`V = 2pi*int_(y_1)^(y_2) (5 - y)*(4 - sqrt(7+y^2)) dy`

You need to find the endpoints, using the equation `sqrt(7+y^2) = 4 => 7+y^2 = 16 => y^2=9 => y_1=-3, y_2=3`

`V = 2pi*int_(-3)^(3) (20 - 5sqrt(7+y^2) - 4y + y*sqrt(7+y^2)) dy`

`V = 2pi*(int_(-3)^(3) 20dy - 5int_(-3)^(3)sqrt(7+y^2) dy - 4int_(-3)^(3) ydy + int_(-3)^(3) y*sqrt(7+y^2) dy)`

`V = 2pi*(20y - (5/2)*sqrt(y^2+7) - (35/2)sinh^(-1) (y/sqrt7) - 2y + (2/3)sqrt((7+y^2)^3))|_(-3)^(3)`

`V = 2pi*(60 - 10- (35/2)sinh^(-1) (3/sqrt7) - 6 + (2/3)64 + 60 - 10 + (35/2)sinh^(-1) (-3/sqrt7) - 6 - 128/3)`

`V = 2pi*(88 - (35/2)sinh^(-1) (3/sqrt7) + (35/2)sinh^(-1) (-3/sqrt7))`

Hence, evaluating the volume, using the method of cylindrical shells, yields `V = 2pi*(88 - (35/2)sinh^(-1) (3/sqrt7) + (35/2)sinh^(-1) (-3/sqrt7)).`

Compare and Contrast settler colonialism to Economic Imperialism in the period 1750-1900.

Settler colonialism is the practice of establishing colonies in other countries with settlers---people who plan to live there indefinitely and establish a new society. At its best, settler colonialism is just a form of large-scale immigration. At its worst, it can overlap heavily with imperialism and attempts to force out local populations, or even lead to genocide.

Economic imperialism is the use of economic institutions, particularly multinational corporations, as instruments for conquering and colonizing other countries.

For the period 1750 to 1900 in particular, the British Empire was a particularly prominent example of both types of colonialism, and it's worthwhile to compare the outcomes in each case.

Emigration from Britain to the United States was largely settler colonialism: British citizens who wanted to build a new life away from Britain set up colonies in North America that would eventually become the United States and Canada. By the period in question, the east coast of the US was already largely settled, and new colonization was spreading westward to fill the continent. Once the United States officially became its own country in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence, we could consider the settlers spreading out west to be American settlers rather than British settlers, though the harmful effect on indigenous Native American populations was largely the same. Warfare and forced resettlement killed hundreds of thousands of natives. Disease killed almost 100 million.

Meanwhile, the British Empire was also engaging in economic imperialism in India and Africa, where private corporations like the East India Company and East Africa Company actually held large territories---many larger than Great Britain itself!---and ruled over them as if they were countries themselves. But these were a particularly terrible kind of country, ruthless dictatorships operated on an entirely for-profit basis that functioned primarily to extract natural resources and sell them far away in Europe. Imagine if Exxon or Walmart ruled an entire country, and you may have some sense of what life was like under the East India Company.

Eventually these multinational corporations grew so powerful that the British Crown decided they could not tolerate it anymore, and broke them up in order to make the colonies into official British territories. A few decades after that, most of them became independent countries.

In both cases, a wealthy and powerful country exploits other, poorer countries. In both cases, indigenous populations suffer and many die. However, the starkly different effects of settler colonialism on the one hand versus economic imperialism can still be seen to this day. Countries that were colonized by British settlers are now among the most prosperous countries in the world today: The US, Canada, Australia. Countries that had economic imperialism imposed upon them by the British Empire are now among the poorest countries in the world today: India, Kenya, Zimbabwe. Settler colonialism can have a happy ending---economic imperialism almost never does.

How has the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution affected the government?

Ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America was the culmination of a long -- the birth of the women's suffrage movement was in 1848, but the struggle for equality predated that development by hundreds of years -- effort on the part of women for the right to vote in elections. The main sentence in this two-sentence amendment reads as follows:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex."

The effects of the 19th Amendment have been profound. For the first time in the nation's history, the female perspective was overtly reflected in the outcome of elections. While certain women had enjoyed considerable influence over the decisions of men within the confines of homes, they had been institutionally treated as second-class citizens by virtue of their lack of the power assured them with ratification of this amendment. 

The full effects of the 19th Amendment were not immediately felt by the female electorate. Even today, many women feel that passage of an "Equal Rights Amendment" is necessary to ensure full equality, including in the workplace, where women continue to earn less than men in comparable positions. There is no doubt, however, that women enjoy far more influence over the course of this nation's history because of the 19th Amendment than would otherwise have been the case. And that influence is felt in the liberal-leanings of the majority of female voters, especially on issues like reproductive (abortion) rights, tax credits for child care, availability of child care for women who would otherwise not have such assistance (particularly true in the case of female members of the Armed Forces), and in numerous other ways. Broadly, the distinctions between the genders on many, especially domestic issues are reflected in voter patterns, with women tending to vote for social welfare programs in greater numbers and women being more inclined to support increased government involvement in Americans' day-to-day lives. [See: Rutgers University Center for American Women and Politics, Gender Gap in Voting, http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/voters/gender_gap]

Women make up just over half of the nation's population. Including their perspectives in elections through their direct participation could not help but fundamentally transform the nature of elective politics in the United States. With a woman on the verge of being the first to be the nominee for president of the United States from one of the two major political parties, the effects of the 19th Amendment's ratification are more apparent than ever, but the full effect is yet to be determined.

What were the terms of the 1844 Treaty of Annexation?

The Republic of Texas won independence from Mexico in 1836, but it did not immediately join the United States. President John Tyler sought to change this, so he opened statehood negotiations with the Texas government. On April 12, 1844, they signed the Treaty of Annexation. Once Mexico learned of the treaty, they cut off all diplomatic ties with the United States. Nevertheless, this attempt at annexation was voted down by the Senate (likely due to the question of whether or not Texas would be a slave or a free state), although the United States successfully annexed Texas in 1845.

Under the terms of the Treaty of Annexation, Texas would assimilate into the United States as quickly as possible. All Texan territory would become subject to the U.S. government, and the United States would assume all of Texas' debts. Finally, most of the Texan government would remain intact during the transitional period, although the president, vice-president, and all executive department heads would step down.

What is the author's message in Cummings' poem "next to god of course america i"? ...

This poem is an excellent example of Cummings’ irony. As the last line indicates, the “speaker” is actually a political speaker, jamming together many empty clichés (“land of the pilgrims”, “dawn’s early,” etc.) to “sell” his/her political loyalty and pro-war stance. The way Cummings uses a convoluted syntax and grammar and missing punctuation (“the dawn’s early,” “they did not stop to think they died instead,” etc.) makes his point so clearly—these empty speeches are void of real meaning, void of honesty, empty of actual content. Linguists refer to this language as “utterances without speech act,” meaning that words can be put together without content, without a “message-receiver” intent. The poem descends to anti-war, anti-heroism rhetoric (“these happy heroic dead”). The whole poem must be understood as an ironic statement about the rhetoric that disguises war and patriotism as some heroic moment in a soldier’s life. You might enjoy also Cummings’ novel “The Enormous Room,” which continues this theme.

"Young people should learn English": agree or disagree?

First, let’s clarify the question a little:

1. 
   

   Are you referring to “as a second language”?

   
   


2. 
   

   Are you referring to a formal understanding of the grammar, of the “rules” of the language, or are you referring to a working knowledge, for understanding what is being said and a modest vocabulary for expressing oneself?

   
   


3. 
   

   Are you assuming a business environment, a multi-national exchange and communication?

   
   

Since languages are learned best by young people, it is a good idea to be comfortable with English, since the language seems to have become a universal means of discourse in the 21st century, and any activity a young person grows into will use English. Today, mass media such as television actually makes learning English, especially colloquial or informal English, easier. In America, the tendency is to learn a foreign language in a formal academic setting, usually in high school or college: there is less emphasis on learning two language when young, unless a child grows up in a multicultural environment.

What is the theme of "Raymond's Run"? [Please cite textual evidence from the story to support the theme identified.]

One theme of "Raymond's Run" is that disabled people should not be demeaned or underestimated. 

In this delightful short story about an independent girl and her endearing brother Raymond, the reader is provided an important insight into those who are considered mentally disabled. Throughout most of the narrative Squeaky feels that she must be concerned about her brother Raymond's physical safety; for instance, when she runs down Broadway, she keeps Raymond on the inside of her and watches that he does not chase the pigeons that could disturb the older people sitting outside. She is also protective of him since he is often the target of insults and ridicule:

But now, if anybody has anything to say to Raymond, anything to say about his big head, they have to come by me. 

On one run, Squeaky encounters some girls with whom she is familiar. One of them, named Rosie, who usually says derogatory things about Raymond asks him,“What grade you in now, Raymond?”  But, Squeaky does not allow them to demean Raymond and retorts,

“You got anything to say to my brother, you say it to me, Mary Louise Williams of Raggedy Town, Baltimore.”
“What are you, his mother?” sasses Rosie.
“That’s right, Fatso. And the next word out of anybody and I’ll be their mother too.”

While Squeaky is very protective and does not allow anyone to insult her brother, she is not, however, beyond learning something about Raymond herself. When she participates in the track meet on May Day, and, as she races down the designated path, she notices that Raymond is running with her on the outside of the fence, running in his own unique way. Nevertheless, he is keeping up with her fairly well.

And on the other side of the fence is Raymond with his arms down to his side and the palms tucked up behind him, running in his very own style, and it’s the first time I ever saw that and I almost stop to watch my brother Raymond on his first run.

After she wins the race, Squeaky is not so concerned about her own winning; she reflects,

And I’m smiling to beat the band cause if I’ve lost this race, or if me and Gretchen tied, or even if I’ve won, I can always retire as a runner and begin a whole new career as a coach with Raymond as my champion.

Raymond has found a new place in her heart as Squeaky realizes that she has underestimated her brother, who now has talents she has not been aware of, talents that he can develop without protection from her. She need [subjunctive mood of this verb] only stop insults and watch for his safety while he leads the charge down the track. 

What is the compromise Atticus makes with Scout when she asks if she has to obey Jem now, too?

In chapter 14, Jem tells Scout to stop antagonizing her aunt Alexandra because it just causes more contention in the house. Jem even says that he will spank her if she does it again. This drives Scout to the point of physically lashing out at Jem and Atticus goes in to break it up. He asks who started it and Scout says the following:

"Jem did. He was tryin' to tell me what to do. I don't have to mind him now, do I?" (138).

Poor Scout. She has to obey so many people in her life: Calpurnia, Atticus, Aunt Alexandra, and now Jem! Life is pretty crazy since the trial of Tom Robinson is just around the corner. Jem was trying to help Scout not cause any other trouble, but he lacks the parental experience and authority to do it correctly. Atticus, being the compassionate and wise father that he is has the best response for Scout:

"Let's leave it at this: you mind Jem whenever he can make you. Fair enough?"(138).

Could it get any more ambiguous than that? Does it seem that Atticus is saying that if Jem can physically make her obey, then she will have to? Or, is he simply distracting Scout so it can be called up for discussion at another time? Either way, it leaves the situation up to Jem and Scout to resolve on their own when the time comes. Ultimately though, the compromise is that Atticus won't actually say Scout must mind Jem unless Jem can figure out a way make her mind. 

What are some problems the colonial empire caused Britain?

When Great Britain established its empire, it received many benefits from the empire. These benefits included economic, political, and social ones. However, there were times when having a colonial empire caused problems for Great Britain. I will focus my answer on the problems with the American colonies although many of these issues could apply to their colonies elsewhere.

After controlling the colonies for a period of time, the colonists became upset with some of the policies and laws that were passed. The colonists felt the tax laws were unfair and illegal because the colonists didn’t have representatives in Parliament who could vote for or vote against the tax laws. The colonists also felt the British were restricting their freedom by passing the Proclamation of 1763 and allowing searches of the colonists to deter smuggling. When the colonists refused to obey some of these laws, this caused problems for the Great Britain.

Eventually, events became more violent. The British needed more soldiers in the colonies to enforce the policies that were passed and, at times, to keep order. The presence of these troops and the colonists’ refusal to follow laws led to conflict. Fighting broke out, drawing Great Britain into costly conflicts.

While there were benefits of having colonies, there were also drawbacks at times.

"Roger's arm was conditioned by a civilization that knew nothing of him and was in ruins." What does this quote from Lord of the Flies mean?

Roger is a boy who has natural bullying tendencies. Having been relieved of his duty of tending the signal fire in chapter 4, he heads down to the beach. Instead of just having fun in the water or on the sand, he immediately heads for the sandcastles some of the littluns have made and plows through them. Next, he follows a little boy, Henry, without being observed, and from behind a tree throws little stones at him, deliberately missing. He makes sure to keep the stones about three yards away from Henry. It's as if Henry is still protected by parents, teachers, and officers of the law, even though there is not a single adult on the island to keep him safe. Roger has been so conditioned by the authority figures in his life before coming to the island that he still does what they would tell him to do--even though they are not now physically present.

When Golding says that the civilization that had conditioned Roger "knew nothing of him," he means that no one in the civilized world, particularly Great Britain, where Roger came from, knows where the boys are. In fact, Roger's own parents, teachers, and even the policemen from where he lived may all have died. Piggy tells Ralph in chapter 1, "Didn't you hear what the pilot said? About the atom bomb? They're all dead. ... Nobody don't know we're here. Your dad don't know, nobody don't know." The civilization outside the island from which the boys have been evacuated lies in a state of destruction due to the nuclear war taking place. 

With the boys alone, isolated from their civilization that is wracked by war, they must develop their own civilization, and the remnants of the conditioning from their old life will play a role in how that new society looks and whether it survives.

How old is Juliet?

Juliet in Romeo and Juliet is the tender age of 13 during the play.  In the first scene of the play, Nurse tells us Juliet’s age is almost fourteen.  Juliet’s father, Lord Capulet, also tells Paris that she “hath not seen the change of fourteen years.”  This is a shocking age for many modern readers of the play because we are not used to such young people getting married and falling so desperately in love like Romeo and Juliet do.  However, back in the Elizabethan times when Shakespeare wrote the play, people did marry earlier than they do now.  Boys were allowed to marry at 14, girls at 12.  Marriages were often arranged between families like we see with Juliet and Paris before Juliet meets Romeo. 

The age of Romeo (16?) and Juliet also demonstrates the intensity of young love and how passionate it can be.  Their inexperience causes them to do drastic things, like kill themselves, something a more mature person might not do.  Even though the idea of marrying at 13 is a little shocking to us today, it was not unusual during the time of Shakespeare.  However, Shakespeare's choice of “star-struck” young lovers as the main protagonists also adds to the tragedy of the play.

Is the subject of The Iliad the wrath of Achilles?

As the previous answer notes, The Iliad contains much more than just the wrath of Achilles, including the stories of individual Greek warrior-kings--Agamemnon, Menelaus, Nestor, Odysseus, Diomedes, the two Ajaxes--and their Trojan counterparts, chiefly Hector, but including Paris and Agenor and other Trojan warriors.  But the central element of the poem is Achilles' decision to withdraw from the battle and the consequences of that decision.  A recent translation of The Iliad emphasizes the disastrous nature of Achilles' anger at Agamemnon:

Wrath, goddess, sing of Achilles Peleus's son's/calamitous wrath, which hit the Achaians with countless ills--many the valiant souls it saw off down to Hades. . . . (Peter Green trans., I:1-3)

As translator, Green focuses on the many Greek warriors whose deaths are directly related to Achilles' withdrawal from the fight because, when Achilles withdraws his and his Myrmidons support, that void is then filled by Hector and other Trojan warriors.  During Achilles' absence, for example,  Hector and the Trojans push the Greeks back to their last defensive position, threatening the Greeks' ships.

When we are immersed in the poem--which refers to numerous events outside the scope of The Iliad--we forget that we are reading about a two-month period (roughly) in a ten-year war that has consumed an entire generation of Greek and Trojan warriors.  Within that ten-year period, the Greeks--because Troy itself is so well protected--have been raiding and pillaging all the smaller towns surrounding Troy, and Achilles' wrath is directly related to an attack on one of these towns in which he captures a young woman, Briseis, who becomes the cause of Achilles' anger when Agamemnon, in a stupid power play to show his ability to take something even from Achilles, takes Briseis as compensation for having to give up another captive woman, Chryseis.

The centrality of Achilles' wrath at Agamemnon and its resolution becomes clear in Book 19 when, after the death of his friend Patroclus, Achilles' wrath shifts from Agamemnon:

'Son of Atreus [Agamemnon], was it really the best thing for both of us,/ . . . should rage on in heart-rending strife because of a girl? . . . Fewer Achaians then would have bitten the boundless earth/at the enemy's hands. (Green, trans. 19:56-62)

Of course, Achilles is more interested in killing Patroclus' killer, Hector, than he is saving other Greek warriors, but the undeniable fact is that when Achilles rejoins the war--and especially after he kills Hector, the leading Trojan warrior--the Trojans' are living on expensively borrowed time as Achilles goes through Trojan warriors like a scythe through dry wheat.

In sum, then, it is correct to say that The Iliad is not only about the wrath of Achilles, but Achilles, his pride, his skills as a warrior, and his anger are at the center of the poem.

What are two important actions of Scout Finch in "To Kill a Mockingbird"?

One of the main themes in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird deals with the moral development of children. At the beginning of the novel, Scout is a six-year-old with a quick temper. Fighting is Scout's natural response to adversity. She beats up Walter Cunningham Jr., Dill, and Francis for various reasons. Atticus continually encourages her to take a calm approach and walk away when provoked. One important action that Scout takes is when she chooses not to fight Cecil Jacobs after he makes hateful remarks about Atticus. Scout says,

"I drew a bead on him, remembered what Atticus had said, then dropped my fists and walked away, "Scout's a cow---ward!" ringing in my ears. It was the first time I ever walked away from a fight. Somehow, if I fought Cecil I would let Atticus down. Atticus so rarely asked Jem and me to do something for him, I could take being called a coward for him. I felt extremely noble for having remembered, and remained noble for three weeks." (Lee 102)

Scout's mature response to this adverse situation portrays her moral development.

Another important action that Scout takes throughout the novel happens in Chapter 15. When Atticus is surrounded by the Old Sarum bunch outside of Tom Robinson's jail cell, Scout runs from her hiding place into the middle of the circle. Scout is unaware of the precarious situation she has entered and begins to look for a familiar face in the crowd. After spotting Mr. Cunningham, Scout attempts to have a conversation with him. Eventually, Mr. Cunningham gives her his attention and tells his men to go home. Scout saved the day! Atticus tells Scout that she made Walter Cunningham rethink what he was about to do. By intervening, Scout saved Atticus and Tom Robinson from possible harm.

Who is to blame for the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet?

The most obvious culprit is the long-standing feud between the Montagues and the Capulets; thus, ignorance, spite, and a lack of forgiveness lead to the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. However, we can also blame circumstance: if Friar Laurence's messenger had reached Romeo in time, he would have known that Juliet was merely asleep, and not dead in the chamber. Thus, luck and faulty communication are also responsible for the final outcome. 

We could also argue that Tybalt is to blame for instigating the duel which leads to his and Mercutio's deaths. If he had not been so hot-headed and prone to violence, a better outcome may have been achieved. Romeo, too, would also have to shoulder the blame for slaying Tybalt (and Paris).

Last, we could argue that Friar Laurence's behavior—that is, secretly marrying the couple, and encouraging Juliet to fake her own death—was irresponsible, and that he could have thought of a safer way by which to reconcile the two families.

Structural defense policy has to do with A. plan for deployment of troops in times of war B. the development of a collective security arrangement...

The best way to answer this question is to say that structural defense policy has to do with budgeting for the military.  This means that Option C is the best answer.

Structural defense policy can be defined as policy that has to do with what the military spends its money on.  Structural defense policy has to do with things like deciding which weapons systems or platforms to keep spending money on.  It has to do with deciding what bases to keep open and what bases to close.  In other words, it has to do with the structure of the military.  It has to do with deciding what the “bones” of the military will look like.  With this in mind, Option C is really the only possibility. 

The temperature of a brass cylinder of mass 100g was raised to 100 degree Celsius and transferred to a thin aluminum can of negligible heat...

The amount of heat lost by brass cylinder is transferred to paraffin. The amount of heat loss by the brass cylinder is given as

= mass x heat capacity x change in temperature

= 100 x 380 x (100 - 20) joules

The amount of heat gained by paraffin is given as

= mass x heat capacity x change in temperature

= 150 x heat capacity x (20 - 11)

Since amount of heat is constant, 

100 x 380 x (100 - 20) = 150 x heat capacity x (20 - 11)

Solving this, we get the heat capacity of paraffin as 2251.8 J/kg/K. 

In this solution, heat loss to aluminum is neglected since heat capacity of the aluminum can is negligible. Any other heat loss has also been neglected.

Hope this helps.

What question would you ask in a post–Room 101 interview with Winston Smith?

I love the idea of a post–Room 101 interview with Winston—the book’s actual ending is haunting, of course, but I think that exploring what happens after Winston’s conversion is a great way to solidify things, if only in your own mind.

After offering Winston a drink (water, alcohol, whatever seems appropriate after what the guy’s been through), I’d ask him to tell me something about Julia. While their reunion was actually covered in “1984” to some extent, and while Orwell revealed that they don’t have feelings for each other anymore, Winston may still have something to say about his former lover/partner in thought- and sex-crime. Perhaps he’ll go on a rant about how traitors like that are a threat to the Party. Maybe he’ll shrug and say that he’s aware of her existence, but feels nothing for her. Or he could just stare blankly at O’Brien as if he (Winston) has no idea who Julia is anymore. Or maybe something else could happen!

What does Ebenezer Dorset do in the story?

Ebenezer Dorset, the father of the kidnapped boy who calls himself Red Chief, takes a few actions in the story. Some of them we must assume because we see the result of the action but aren't actually told of it when it happens. Since Sam is the narrator, we see and know only what he sees and knows.

Dorset receives the letter Sam sends that demands ransom. Upon receiving it, he scribbles back a note in a "crabbed hand" that makes a counter proposition. He states he will take Red Chief off the hands of the kidnappers if they pay him $250 and bring the child that night after dark. He sends a boy on a bicycle to put the note into the place Sam had instructed him to put the ransom money.

When Sam and Bill come to return Red Chief, Dorset comes to the door. He accepts the money from Sam into his outstretched hand. He peels his son off the leg of Bill and warns him that he should flee quickly because he can only hold the boy about ten minutes since he is not as strong as he used to be. 

How does Percy Jackson show he is a hero in chapter 17? I need three examples please.

After Percy, Annabeth, and Grover arrive in Los Angeles, they go to the beach, and Percy steps into the water.  He really doesn’t seem to have a plan, but he walks in until he’s up over his head, and then he forces himself to inhale water.  He seems to be hoping for some assistance from his father or some inspiration about how he and his friends can proceed on this quest.  He finds that “[he] could breathe normally.”  He meets with a Nereid who gives him the three pearls, a gift that will be very helpful in the Underworld.  Percy’s willingness to take his life into his own hands, risking personal peril, in order to help the quest is quite heroic.

Once the friends walk away from the beach, they are attacked by a gang of kids; Percy attempts to stand up to them, uncapping Riptide, and this is pretty heroic.  Though they are outnumbered, Percy doesn’t immediately run away, and this takes a lot of guts (especially because he knows that Riptide won’t work on regular mortals).

However, Percy, Annabeth, and Grover eventually run down the street to get away, going into the only store that looks open: Crusty’s Water Bed Palace.  Once there, Crusty traps them, binding them with magic to water beds with the intention of stretching them until they are six feet tall.  He reveals himself to be Procrustes, “‘The Stretcher’ […]: the giant who’d tried to kill Theseus with excess hospitality on his way to Athens.”  Percy cleverly turns the tide on Crusty, binding him to a bed and then cutting off his head so that he can free his friends.  This use of intelligence and quick-thinking is heroic.

Explain how Pope’s The Rape of the Lock does not fit the Juvenalian mode of satire.

“The Rape of the Lock” is a better example of Horatian satire than it is of Juvenalian satire. Juvenalian satire is a harsher form of satire, which treats a subject with contempt and often condemns a behavior prevalent in society.  Writers who write Juvenalian satire are indignant about something that is happening in their society, and they want the reader to react this way, also.  Horatian satire, on the other hand, pokes fun at a subject without an outright condemnation.  It is witty without being judgmental, expecting the reader to recognize the folly being satirized without condemning or attacking. 

In “The Rape of the Lock,” the author is poking fun at many different subjects:  vanity, pride, and ego are among these subjects.  The author does not poke fun in a bitter, condemning way, but instead chooses a trivial subject and contrasts it with a serious subject, making the trivial seem important.  A good example of this is the fact that Pope is talking about cutting off a lock of someone’s hair, but he raises this to the seriousness of all out war.  “Just then, Clarissa drew with tempting grace/A two-edged weapon from her shining case/So ladies in romance assist their knight/Present the spear and arm him for the fight” (lines 127-130).  In contrast to a Juvenalian satire, such as “A Modest Proposal,” this satire is gentle and humorous rather than sarcastic. 

This gentle humor is also present when the author presents a tongue in cheek look at Belinda getting dressed.  The everyday act of getting dressed is portrayed as a religious act.  “The inferior priestess, at her altar’s side/ Trembling begins the sacred rites of Pride” (128-129).  The author is making fun of how seriously women take putting on clothes and makeup, but he is doing it in a humorous way, designed to make women laugh at themselves.  The satire present in "The Rape of the Lock” is definitely not Juvenalian because it is respectful while still making the reader laugh.

I have to create a mask that represents Romeo and Juliet. What are some colors or designs that represent a depressed character who is in love?

It might be helpful to look at Romeo's first speech about Rosaline if you are looking to create a mask about a forlorn and in love character. There are a few lines that you can take and translate into a creative project:

ROMEO:

"Love is a smoke raise with the fume of sighs" (I.i.176)

"Being vex'd a sea nourish'd with lovers' tears" (I.i.178)

"A choking gall and a preserving sweet" (I.i.179)

These lines are all melodramatic, but they are filled with ideas for the creation of a mask. Romeo describes love as "smoke," specifically choking the face. You could draw smoke clouding the mask's vision. Depression often clouds someone's perception, and this can be personified with smoke. In terms of color, Romeo describes great seas and massive fires, so you could use primaries (like red and blue) to create a violent and conflicted mood. 

What does Ponyboy say he would rather have than pity?

In Chapter 11, Ponyboy is looking through one of Sodapop's old yearbooks and comes across a picture of Bob Sheldon. Ponyboy looks at Bob's picture and begins to wonder what kind of person he was. Ponyboy starts to look at Bob from a different perspective and questions whether he was a genuine person. Ponyboy then thinks about Bob's parents and wonders if they hate the Greasers. He then mentions that he hopes Bob's parents hated the Greasers instead of having pity for them. Ponyboy then comments,

"I'd rather have anybody's hate than their pity" (Hinton 18).

The reason Ponyboy would rather have someone's hate than their pity is because he is a prideful individual. As a Greaser, Ponyboy has a reputation as a tough, intimidating person. Despite the fact that he is poor and doesn't share all of the advantages that the Socs have, he is still a proud person and doesn't want anyone's pity. 

what is the evaluation of the house on mango street?

In The House on Mango Street, Sandra Cisnerosdepicts the female bildungsroman genre differently than her predecessors such as Bronte, Browning, and Franklin. Published far more recently than the previous authors, Sandra Cisneros is more able to openly discuss other pertinent feminine themes such as domestic abuse, suicide, prostitution, and rape; additionally, Cisneros provides a text that directly addresses the female coming-of-age story from not only a female, but an ethnic perspective.

Even without historical context, it has been throughout history that ethnic minorities have suffered at the hands of racism and stereotypical responses. For Esperanza, her unwillingness to accept the house on Mango street stems from the shame she feels for her impoverished lifestyle influenced by socioeconomic factors that have existed as long as humanity. To emphasize cultural differences, the narrator writes, “At school they say my name funny as if the syllables were made out of tin and hurts the roof of your mouth. But in Spanish my name is made out of a softer something, like silver…” (10). Esperanza expresses the desire to change her name finding fault in her heritage through others’ mispronunciation. She further stresses this difference by describing Meme’s sheepdog as having “two names, one in English, one in Spanish” (21).

In a chapter that most directly addresses racial tension “Those Who Don’t”, Esperanza writes, “Those who don’t know any better come into our neighborhood scared. They think we’re dangerous. They think we will attack them with shiny knives. They are stupid people who are lost and got here by mistake” (28). Esperanza explains that her mother thinks she could have been someone, but that she lived in this city her whole life (90). Women throughout the novel are depicted as victims of circumstances, and otherwise incapable of transcending their current station in life—examples include Esperanza’s mother, Rafaela, Sally, and Ruthie. These women are also portrayed not only as victims, but prisoners of fate, one which Esperanza seeks to escape. Esperanza’s last words allude to her desire to not only leave Mango street, but to use any future successful accomplishments to come back for the ones she left behind, “for the ones who cannot out” (110).

`tan(u + v)` Find the exact value of the trigonometric expression given that sin(u) = 5/13 and cos(v) = -3/5 (both u and v are in quadrant II.)

Given `sin(u)=5/13,cos(v)=-3/5`

Angles u and v are in quadrant 2.

A right triangle can be drawn in quadrant 2. Since `sin(u)=5/13`    we know that the side opposite angle u is 5 and the hypotenuse of the triangle is 13. Using the pythagorean theorem the third side of the triangle is 12.

A second triangle can be drawn in quadrant 2. Since `cos(v)=-3/5` we know that the side adjacent angle v is 3 and the hypotenuse of the triangle is 5. Using the pythagorean theorem the third side of the triangle is 4.

`tan(u+v)=(tan(u)+tan(v))/(1-tan(u)tan(v))`

`tan(u+v)=((-5/12)+(-4/3))/(1-(-5/12)(-4/3))=((-5+(-16))/12)/(1-(20/36))=(-21/12)/(16/36)=-63/16` 

How do you summarize Chapter 3 of The Twenty-One Balloons by William Pene du Bois?

Chapter 3 opens with Professor Sherman arriving in San Francisco via the US President's train. The whole city of San Francisco celebrates his return, and the mayor whisks him away to the auditorium of the Western American Explorers' Club in San Francisco, where he can relay his adventure travel story. The rest of the chapter details his preparations for his journey.

Two important details about his preparations concern his balloon and basket design. He explains that, having been an arithmetic teacher for 40 years, he grew tired of being around people because of all the pranks his pupils played. Therefore, he thought of taking a balloon trip to stay far away from people for hopefully "one full year" (p. 40). Since he wanted to be up in the air for as close to a year as possible, he knew he needed to design a very large balloon. He studied the designs of other balloonists, such as of the French balloonist Giffard, and designed a balloon that was "ten times the size of a standard balloon" and made with "four alternating thicknesses of rubber and silk" (p. 40). He also used the idea of French balloonist Nadar to design a basket house rather than a standard basket. He also made plans for stocking and replenishing provisions. After his balloon was built by the Higgins Balloon Factory, he took it for a trial run then set sail from San Francisco on August 15th.

How can we apply figures of speech in our life?

A figure of speech is a way of expressing yourself so that what you are saying is not literal, meaning not using words that reflect reality. Metaphors and similes are figures of speech, and I will give you some examples of each. Then we can look at ways to use them in your life.

A metaphor is saying something is something else, in a way that makes the reader or listener understand that the quality of the something else reflects some "truth."  For example, if I say, "He is a rock," I am not saying that the person is literally a rock. I might be saying that this is a strong person I can count on.  Or I might be saying this is someone who just stands there saying nothing, like a rock.  I might say, "Her smile is sunshine."  We know that a smile cannot be sunshine. But what we take from that is that the person has a warm and glowing smile, just like the sun.  If we say "It's raining cats and dogs," we know that there are no cats and dogs dropping from the skies, but that it is raining really hard. These are all metaphors.

A simile is an expression in which you say something is like something else, usually using the word "like" or "as," a comparison.  So I might say "Her smile is like sunshine."  Or I could say, "He is like a rock."  The reader or listener will get the impression of sunshine or the quality of a rock from my simile.  I could say,"I am as happy as a lark."  That tells the reader that I am so happy I could be singing like a lark. 

You can see now that our language is filled with figures of speech, and you have probably been using many, using them frequently, without even realizing it.  When you explain something in terms of something else, whether in a metaphor or a simile, you are using figures of speech.  You might want to describe a friend or a classmate in terms of something else, for example, as a flower or an animal like a fox. These might convey an image of colorful beauty or slyness. You might describe your feelings this way, perhaps saying, "I am as hungry as a wolf."  When you are writing, you can use figures of speech in a way that gives your readers a wonderful picture of some kind. When I read or hear these figures of speech, they always give me an image in my mind. We want our readers and listeners to have images in their minds that make our meaning clearer, and that also makes for a more enjoyable experience. 

How can Marxism be applied to gender stratification?

Marxist Feminism, or Materialist Feminism, is a theoretical framework which analyzes gender stratification through Marxist theory. Traditionally, Karl Marx's body of work, and later Marxist texts, have applied to socioeconomic stratification in terms of the relationship between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Marxist Feminism proposes that women are similarly exploited by men in the way that the proletariat are exploited by the bourgeoisie. This theoretical framework largely applies to capitalist society but there are applications for other socioeconomic structures. 

I find that a helpful way of understanding how women's work may be exploited, or different forms of labor may be gendered is to consider stereotypical beliefs held about what kind of work is appropriate. Think for a moment about the "traditional" or "1950's" family model, where a mother works in the home and a father works outside of the home. Here, women are expected to fill many roles under the umbrella of "homemaker-" tutor, nurse, personal chef, housekeeper, laundress, administrator, and hostess. All the while, they receive no pay aside from the salary their husbands are expected to bring home. Men have traditionally not had the same obligations in parenting or homemaking as their wifely counterparts.

Consider the ways women are systemically kept from achieving to the same degree as their male peers. Women are often discouraged from seeking higher education or may not be taken seriously in their profession, especially in STEM fields. Further, in the United States, the wage gap persists at an average of 75%. This means that for men and women who perform the same work, women earn an average of just 75% of what a man earns. The gap is even larger for women of color, with women of Latin or Hispanic descent earning only 55% of what a man earns for doing the same kinds of work. Such a large pay gap systemically prevents women from achieving the same kind of economic security, health status, and personal agency their male peers attain. In a Marxist Feminist framework, this wage gap is not just chocked up to women not performing up to standard or differences in gendered behavior- it is exploitation of women, especially women of color, to maintain positions of power for men.

What disaster happened in the town in And of Clay Are We Created?

The story “And of Clay are We Created” is fictional but is based on a true story about a volcano eruption in Colombia in 1985. Sheets of ice surrounded the sides of the volcano, and when the volcano erupted, it melted the ice, causing rock and mudslides to bury villages below the volcano.  Over 20,000 people were killed in the catastrophe.

In the story, the volcano erupted, announcing “the end of the world, and walls of snow broke loose, rolling in an avalanche of clay, stones, and water that descended on the villages and buried them beneath unfathomable meters of telluric vomit.” Everything in the villages disappeared and “the houses, plazas, churches, white cotton plantations, dark coffee forests, [and] cattle pastures” were all gone.  The avalanche trapped people and animals in the sloppy mud and “desert of mire” that cascaded down the mountain. 

It is this natural disaster that brings the story’s reporter, Rolf Carle, to the scene, where he meets the trapped and dying Azucena.

How did Eliezer's relationship with Moishe the Beadle influence him, both before and after Moishe was deported and returned?

In the novel Night by Elie Wiesel, Eliezer's relationship with Moishe the Beadle initially influences him to learn. When we first meet Eliezer, he is almost 13 years old and he is committed to finding someone to teach him Kabbalah, the art and practice of Jewish Mysticism. The study of Kabbalah is normally reserved for men who are at least 30 years of age, something Eliezer's father reminds him of when he asks him to find a teacher. Moishe is the one who ultimately opens the door for Eliezer into this forbidden world.

"And Moishe the Beadle, the poorest of the poor of Sighet, spoke to me for hours on end about the Kabbalah's revelations and its mysteries. Thus began my initiation" (Wiesel, 5).

After Moishe was deported from Sighet along with the other foreigners, Eliezer continued to study on his own. Months later, Moishe returned, but he was much changed. Where before he would sing and bring joy to the townspeople, now he brought only sorrow and warnings of atrocities sure to come. Unfortunately, no one believed Moishe's story, including Eliezer. Still, something of what Moishe said must have stuck with him because he begged his father to sell all of their possessions and move the family to Palestine. Even though he couldn't bring himself to accept what Moishe was telling him, a part of him knew that they were in danger. Eliezer's relationship with Moishe was one of respect and admiration. Even when the rest of Sighet believed him to be crazy, Eliezer felt compassion and pity for his once teacher.

I have to type up a report about prey and predator populations but that isn't the problem. The problem is I cant write the report in first person...

Scientific reports are often confined to the third person perspective. Sometimes the style of writing is even further restricted to just the 'past tense' and the 'passive voice'. Writing in the third-person past tense gets easier with practise, but here are a few tips.

Just write!

Having something on the page is better than nothing, and you can always fix the tense later. For example, just write dot points of the method.

This might be:

I went to the library and looked up the populations of big cats over the last 200 years. 
The electronic records only went back 50 years, so I had to look in some historical records as well.
I recorded all the information for lions and jaguars.

The above paragraph is neither third person, but it is in past tense. Now we just have to change the tense:

Population statistics for lions and jaguars were recorded from electronic and historical records.

Other transformations include:

"I found that" becomes "It was found"
"I poured 200mL of water into the beaker" becomes "200mL of water was poured into the 500mL beaker"

Check for third person (no I, we, etc.), check for past tense (no 'will investigate' or 'investigating').

The purpose of writing in the third person is to demonstrate the factual nature of the information. A single person, for example, shouldn't change the nature of the data.

What are some fatal flaws in Happy Loman from Death of a Salesman?

The first fatal flaw of Happy Loman is that he is the son that most closely resembles his father, Willy. 

Happy is over-confident, unrealistic, shallow, and completely clueless about who he is. The reader wonders what is Happy's real role in the play, as his presence neither adds nor takes away from the plot. That is perhaps the entire purpose of Happy: He merely is. He just exists. He is a part of nothing. 

Happy (not happy)

There are good reasons for all of the descriptors above. First, Willy never really dotes on Happy the way that he does with Biff. To Willy, Biff (his first born) was the apple of his eye. Being the "runner-up" of the family, Happy overworks himself trying to please his dad. Since nothing that Happy does pleases Willy, Happy has basically decided that nothing that he (Happy) does, will satisfy him either. This is why, even though Happy has been able to hold a job, get a promotion, and move to his own apartment, he cannot make any significant connection with anyone. He is a lonely man. 

Another, very disturbing flaw in Happy is his blindness to the facts. Like Willy, he tries to live life in a formulaic way: Being happy = get the job, get the girl, get the money.

Still, none of these things ever make him sit and contemplate life, or what he has made of it. Happy is simply a living being that has not learned how to truly live. The worst part is that he sees nothing wrong with the way that he has done things. He even perpetuates Willy Loman's ridiculous dream and it is Happy who ends his part in the play by sticking to the idea of starting over in business again the way Willy did. Hence, Happy will continue the vicious cycle created the day that Willy Loman decided to follow the steps of  Dave Singleton, and left everything behind in pursuit of a shallow dream.