How old was the narrator when she arrived by train?

In Maya Angelou's I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, the author and her brother, Bailey, arrive in the "musty little town" of Stamps, Arkansas, at the ages of three and four respectively.

They're sent by their parents on a train from Long Beach, California, with wrist tags stating their full names, guardian's name and destination. Their guardian is to be their grandmother on their father's side, Annie Henderson, who owns a general store in Stamps. Maya and Bailey's parents "decided to put an end to their calamitous marriage," and as a result, the children are temporarily sent to live with their grandmother.

Maya, who was called Marguerite at the time, states that their train tickets were "pinned to my brother's inside coat pocket." A train porter was tasked with looking after them, but leaves them to travel on alone after departing in Arizona. However, once the siblings reach the South, other black passengers on the train take pity on them and make sure they're well fed with "cold fried chicken and potato salad."

Describe the narrator's attitude at the beginning of "The Scarlet Ibis."

The narrator, Brother, has returned to his childhood home to reminisce and take responsibility for Doodle’s death.  His attitude is reflective and sentimental as he recounts the circumstances surrounding how Doodle died.  Brother is older now and has had time to understand and come to a conclusion as to how his pride affected his relationship with Doodle.  Brother wanted a “normal” brother, and Doodle was physically handicapped.  Brother sets out to make Doodle normal by pushing him to walk, run, and play with him like an ordinary person.  He was embarrassed by Doodle and could not accept Doodle for who he really was.  The unrealistic expectations Brother had for Doodle eventually led to Doodle’s death. 

Brother feels guilty for what happened, and as his recollections travel to the time of the story, he slowly starts to reconcile his guilt over Doodle’s death.  He understands that it was his pride that led to the tragic outcome of the story.

How does Charles Dickens show the importance of family in a Christmas carol?

The theme of family is a significant one in "A Christmas Carol," and the author's overall message is that in order to live a happy life you must take care of and embrace your family. You must have a happy home-life. 

Toward the beginning of the story Scrooge's adult nephew, Fred, invites him over for Christmas dinner and Scrooge does everything but shove him out the door.

“I want nothing from you; I ask nothing of you; why cannot we be friends?”

“Good afternoon,” said Scrooge.

“I am sorry, with all my heart, to find you so resolute. We have never had any quarrel, to which I have been a party. But I have made the trial in homage to Christmas, and I’ll keep my Christmas humour to the last. So A Merry Christmas, uncle!”

“Good afternoon!” said Scrooge. (Stave One)

It is obvious they are not close, but it is also obvious that this is Scrooge's fault and not Fred's. Scrooge could be a part of Fred's family and have a closer relationship with him if he were to only reciprocate some interest and care. 

The first spirit takes Scrooge back in time to a boarding school Scrooge was attending. The particular memory shows him having to stay, alone, over the Christmas holiday at school because his father does not want him to return home. This tells us that his father does not really value time with his family either and maybe this is where Scrooge later learned to treat Fred the way he does. In this same scene, however, his sister arrives to collect him and bring him home. She convinced their father to let Scrooge return for good. It is clear in this scene how much he loves Fan and how close they are, but we also learn that she ends up dying young and Fred is her only child. So, this is all very sad because Scrooge was only close to one family member, his sister, and after she died he didn't end up making any other close bonds with family. In this way Dickens is trying to explain how lonely and miserable Scrooge is as a result of having no close family ties.

The Cratchits are VERY close. They are a large family, but they are a loving family. They struggle together but also find the joy in everything they can. Although they have every reason to be much more miserable that Scrooge, they are joyful and grateful for what they have, including one another. This is the most pronounced in Tiny Tim, whom they love and adore and who love and adores all of them. In the Cratchits, Dickens provides the ideal family. This is a family everyone would ant to have and eventually Scrooge becomes a sort of adopted family member. He is able to become happy by joining this happy family.

In the end Scrooge also makes amends with Fred and becomes closer to him as well. So, Dickens allows Scrooge to become an active and positive member of two families by the end of the story, Fred's and the Cratchits, emphasizing the message that family is what makes one happy.

Who is Guy Pehrsson in Will Weaver's Red Earth, White Earth?

Guy Pehrsson is the main character or protagonist in Will Weaver's 1986 novel Red Earth, White Earth. Described in the story's prologue, Pehrsson is "thirty, tall, fair-haired, with wide, bony shoulders." Guy is a successful businessman residing in the affluent San Francisco Bay area when he is summoned home by an ominous, somewhat cryptique letter from his grandfather, whom Guy had believed was physically incapable of sending any such form of communication due to the elderly man's failing health. "Home," in Weaver's story about the clash of civilizations within the American Midwest, specifically, the socially-dysfunctional Native American reserves and the white majority population that grew in size, wealth and power while exploiting the indigenous populations' rightful assets.

Red Earth, White Earth could be considered a little formulaic, but Weaver’s novel is written for “young adults,” and exposes that readership to the cultural and social wounds that permeate Native American populations and the emotional tolls taken by those who flee their tribal or ancestral homelands for greener—read, “whiter”—pastures. As one could expect of a novel with such a theme, Guy, who had, indeed, fled the depressing, dysfunctional environment of the reservation for the affluence of Silicon Valley, is reawakened to his heritage by this summons home from his grandfather. Guy becomes involved in the dispute that has been brewing between the Native American population and the vested interests that seek to further exploit the economically-destitute tribes. Not content to present his protagonist as simply self-exiled from his ancestral home, Weaver makes sure the reader is fully aware of just how morally-exhausted Guy has become during his exile. As Guy drives his Mercedes car across the West and Midwest, he is depicted as the personification of white, affluent, narcissistic excess--“a quarter gram of cocaine, and three speeding tickets later”—but he is Native American, and cannot escape his heritage. Weaver’s story is about a coming home that serves to temper those excesses and remind one of the importance of a soul. Guy’s reunion with childhood friend and Native lawyer Tom Little Wolf and his involvement in the land dispute with the white farmers and developers who covet yet more native land provides the basis for this emotional return to one’s roots and to the new-found respect Guy develops for his heritage.

What are the characteristics of stereotypes and reference groups?

In order to understand what some characteristics of stereotypes and reference groups are, one must first define what each one is. A stereotype can be defined generally as a generalized belief that a person holds about another person, or group of people. A reference group on the other hand can generally be defined as any group, or groups, a person belongs to that "set a standard for guiding behavior and attitudes." 

Characteristics of stereotypes include assumptions made about a person because of their belonging to a particular group. An important characteristic of these assumptions is that they may be positive, or negative, or in some cases both, depending on how the stereotype is viewed. Another characteristic of stereotypes is that they can be implicit or explicit. This means that they can be acknowledge by the person cognitively (explicit), or they may occur subconsciously without the person realizing the stereotype exists (implicit). 

Characteristics of reference groups include both in groups and out groups. In groups are groups that a person is a member of that help to form their beliefs and values. Generally, people are happy to be members of these in groups. This differs from out groups, which represent groups a person is not part of that may hold different beliefs and values then their own. In groups and out groups can engage in various interactions in society. Sometimes these interactions can be friendly, but other times interactions between groups can be negative and/or aggressive.

Hope this helps! 

How would you describe the nurse in Romeo and Juliet?

Certainly, the nurse is genuinely devoted to Juliet.  Early on, when Juliet's mother approaches her regarding the County Paris's suit, the nurse recounts Juliet's early years, remembering exactly when Juliet was weaned, when she could stand on her own, and so forth.  The nurse is more loving -- much more loving -- to Juliet than her own mother is.  

Further, she helps to arrange Juliet's secret marriage to Romeo, seeming to care most for the girl's happiness.  She even helpfully carries the ladder to place against the house so that Romeo can climb up to Juliet's bedroom on the night of their wedding!  The next morning, the nurse comes to warn Juliet that her mother is awake and on her way to Juliet's bedroom.  She is sincere, loyal, warm, loving, and even sort of funny with her bawdy jokes and puns.

She seems to lose Juliet's favor when she agrees with her parents that Juliet should marry the County Paris.  Once she sees, I think, how strongly in favor of the match her parents are, weighed against Juliet's first marriage to a young man who her parents hate and who has been banished from Verona, she speaks her mind truthfully to Juliet -- a sign, I believe, of her continued loyalty.  She just wants her to be happy, and she doesn't see how that is possible with a marriage to the hated and exiled Romeo.  Ultimately, she seems to look out for Juliet as best she can, even when her opinion differs from her charge's.

What part of the Anne Frank's diary suggest that human beings continue to be petty-minded even in the most trying circumstances?

Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl clearly shows how even in the most horrific circumstances, humans can still argue about silly and unimportant things. Naturally, being stuck together with 7 other people in a tiny apartment for years at a time without being allowed to go outside would bring out the worst in people.

The truth of this is clear from the seemingly ceaseless bickering and grudges held by the different members of the Secret Annex. When Mrs. Frank receives extra sugar from Mr. Kugler on her birthday, Mrs. van Daan is angry that she got no sugar on her own birthday (page 167). Dussel treats the van Daans to unexplained, moody silences for no apparent reason (page 146). The Franks and the van Daans separate more and more of their food items from the communal stash over accusations of unequal sharing and disagreements over proper cooking (page 166). At one point Anne asks, "Are most people so stingy and selfish? I've gained some insight into human nature since I came here, which is good, but I've had enough for the present" (pg 167). 

Still, even though Anne participates in her share of quarrels and bickering, she also often reflects on the ungratefulness that this suggests about her, and the other members of the Secret Annex:

"Why am I often so miserable  about what goes on here? Shouldn't I be happy, contented, glad, except when I'm thinking about Hanneli [one of Ann'e Jewish friends] and those suffering along with her? I'm selfish and cowardly" (page 154).

If Anne feels this way, she is likely not the only one. Despite the petty-mindedness displayed in the diary, there was likely much gratitude as well, even if it was buried under the surface. 

What is Hamlet's flaw , which he himself indirectly mentions at the end of this monologue "to be or not to be " ?

Hamlet's "To Be, or Not To Be" soliloquy is interesting for several reasons, among which is its revelation of Hamlet's inner character.  Unlike earlier soliloquies,  this one is more rational, calm, and logical.  He systematically picks apart the debate between killing oneself or enduring the many pains of life.  

Ultimately, Hamlet chooses to live rather than to risk the afterlife, which, no matter what one's faith, is a vast mystery.  Hamlet's sums it up when he says "Thus conscience does make cowards of us all."  The meaning here leads to the revelation of his flaw.  Hamlet is a thinker.  He thinks too much, and in doing so, he talks himself out of any substantial action as expressed in his words, "Thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied over with the pale cast of thought..." (III,i). The fire of swift action, in this case, turns pale with the realization of the outcome.  

Sadly for him, Hamlet is a man of thought, not a man of action.  It is this tendency that renders him incapable of following through with his revenge plan.

What would the USA be like today if the cotton Gin wasn't invented?

The United States would probably be very similar today if the cotton gin wasn’t invented. There are a few reasons for this. Some people believe that if the cotton gin wasn’t invented, slavery would have ended. However, it is quite possible that an invention similar to the cotton gin would have been developed at some time in the future. Americans have always been very involved in developing new ideas that advance society. Inventions like the lights bulb, mechanical reaper, and the steel-tipped plow are examples. There is no reason to believe that wouldn’t have happened with cotton growing.

Another reason for saying things wouldn’t be that different is that attitudes of white southerners probably would have remained the same toward American-Americans. Attitudes are hard to change. It takes many years to change attitudes. Even when slavery ended, many southerners worked very hard to limit the freedoms and rights African-Americans had gained. The Ku Klux Klan developed to threaten and intimidate African Americans. Poll taxes and literacy tests were established to keep African-Americans from voting. Many white southerners believed their race was superior, and they weren’t going to let that attitude go without resistance. When attempts to end racial segregation moved to the North in the 1960s and 1970s, white northerners displayed a similar reaction to white southerners. They fought school desegregation cases and moved to suburbs that were mostly, if not all, white. It is very difficult to change attitudes that have existed for centuries.

As a result, the United States would probably be the same today if the cotton gin hadn’t been invented.

What are two examples of dramatic irony in Part 2: The Sieve and the Sand of Fahrenheit 451?

In literature, dramatic irony is when the audience is aware of something that the characters in the story are not. The audience understands situations and resolutions before the characters do, which often creates a sense of excitement. There are several instances throughout Part 2: The Sieve and the Sand of the novel Fahrenheit 451 that apply dramatic irony to various situations. At the beginning of Part 2, Montag is searching for meaning in life and believes that books contain many answers. He needs help understanding texts and believes he has a very rare book. Montag remembers meeting Faber, the retired English professor, and believes that Faber can help him decipher the texts. Montag calls Faber and asks him how many copies of the Bible, Shakespeare, and Plato are in existence. Faber thinks that he is being recorded, and that Montag is trying to trap him by getting him to admit that he has knowledge of illegal books. The audience is aware that Montag is truly seeking answers and help, while Faber thinks that he is being set up.

Another example of dramatic irony from Part 2 happens when Montag returns home from Faber's house, and Mildred's friends are over. Montag is furious after hearing their ridiculous conversation and is contemplating reading to them and chastising their superficial existence. Mildred is unaware that Montag has the "green bullet" in his ear and is communicating with Faber. Faber asks Montag, "What good is this, what'll you prove?" Montag says, "Scare hell out of them, that's what, scare the living daylights out!" Mildred says, "Now, Guy, just who are you talking to?" (Bradbury 95). The audience knows that Montag is talking to Faber and is about to scare Mildred and her friends. Mildred and her friends have no idea that Montag is talking to Faber and do not expect him to scare them.

Does Nick trust Gatsby in chapter 4?

There are moments in chapter 4 where Nick's feelings towards Gatsby are certainly put to the test. This would include his questioning of Gatsby's veracity, in light of the many rumors about Gatsby's character that were shared by some of the guests at the party, as well as the very extravagant picture that Gatsby paints of himself on their ride into New York city. Then, as if there are not already enough reasons to doubt Gatsby's "story", meeting the very shady Meyer Wolfsheim, a business associate of Gatsby who sat with them at lunch, would appear to seal the idea in Nick's mind that he should not trust his enigmatic neighbor. Yet, we cannot ignore the fact that the chapter ends with Nick agreeing to help Gatsby, in his plan to reunite with Daisy at Nick's cottage. Does Nick actually buy Gatsby's "story" or does he look beyond the possible lies and see something deeper, profounder and more amenable to his own romantic spirit? We need to examine Nick's motivations and character more closely, within the context of the story, in order to answer this question.

Nick Carraway initially came out to the East coast in search of something that he didn't have back home in the Midwest. This could be seen as a need to fulfill a "dream" of becoming independent and making his own mark in the business world. He starts out optimistically enough, learning about the trade while on the job and getting his own place on Long Island, where he soon becomes a regular commuter and resident of West Egg. He then begins to meet several people, some who are themselves transplants from the Midwest, living their lives in the prescribed societal order of the day, such as the Buchanans and their ilk, representing Old Money and established wealth in East Egg; the newly rich whose domiciles were restricted to West Egg; and the aspiring but poorer folk, who so desperately wanted to become members of the upper class that they would attend every party thrown by Gatsby in order to rub elbows with the rich. Nick, himself a product of the upper class, was less of a social climber and more of an observer of this scene. He certainly witnessed and heard many disturbing things about the relationship between Daisy and Tom; among them Tom's philandering ways and Daisy's heartbreak, yet her unwillingness to leave her marriage; the behavior of many of the guests at Gatsby's party who were willing to enjoy his benevolent hospitality but who spoke disparagingly of him behind his back; the fact that few of the guests even knew who Gatsby actually was but were willing to attend his parties and avail themselves of his many generous amenities. All of this was noted by Nick, yet he reserved his judgement of Gatsby until after he had met him and learned something about his past, not from Gatsby himself but from Jordan.

It is later that same day, when he and Jordan meet for tea, that she discloses to Nick what Gatsby had told her the night of the party. How he and Daisy had once been in love and how he had decided to buy the house across the bay from hers, in the hope that she would come to one of his parties so they could meet again. When Gatsby learns that Nick is Daisy's cousin, how he hopes that a reunion between himself and Daisy might still happen, if Nick would agree to invite Daisy for tea so that he could casually "drop by" and the once extinguished flame could be reignited again. At this point, Nick could have decided that Gatsby was merely using him to get to Daisy and he could have rejected the plan, but he doesn't. If Nick merely had a pragmatic personality he would have scoffed at this idea but apparently he has a bit of the romantic nature within himself, which enables him to appreciate Gatsby's undying love for Daisy and his very strong and real desire to win her back. Also, Jordan's words that "Daisy ought to have something in her life" also sway Nick to want to help his cousin, too. By his acceptance to go along with Gatsby's plan, Nick shows that in spite of the "roughneck" Gatsby may be and the objectionable means by which he has gained such tremendous wealth, there is still something admirable in Gatsby's singular pursuit of his love for Daisy, which Nick cannot deny. While he may not always trust Gatsby's judgement Nick does trust Gatsby's love for Daisy and this solidifies his acceptance of Gatsby as a friend, the only one he will have that summer before Gatsby is killed and Nick decides to move back home. This suggests that Nick, at this time, feels that Gatsby is more trustworthy than the rest and this will be borne out later on in the novel, when Nick says to Gatsby, "You're worth the whole damn bunch put together."

Please discuss E. J. Pratt's poem "From Stone to Steel".

E. J. (Edwin John Dove) Pratt (February 4, 1882 – April 26, 1964) was an important Canadian poet. He was born in Newfoundland, where his father was a Methodist minister. Pratt himself studied for the ministry, and then continued more advanced studies at Victoria College of University of Toronto, and pursued an academic career, first in the psychology and then in the English Department at Victoria College. Although he is better known for his narrative poems, "From Stone to Steel" shows his characteristic interest in human nature in relation to psychology, religion, and evolution.

Pratt wrote "From Stone to Steel" in 1932. It consists of five four-line stanzas written in iambic tetrameter rhymed ABAB. The meter and rhyme scheme are quite regular. The poem refers to human evolution in terms of the apparent distance between the Java man (now more commonly known as "homo erectus") and modern man, or "Geneva man" (referring to the urbane and cosmopolitan city of Geneva in Switzerland). The poem argues that the million-year old fossil of the Java man probably had the same emotions and interior life as modern man, and that both ancient and modern man participate in a raw emotional life (or sin) and also moments of spiritual redemption, as symbolized by Gethsemane where Jesus and his disciples prayed on the night before the Crucifixion.

Compare and contrast the protagonist's isolation from the world and people around them in "Death by Landscape" and "To Room Nineteen."

The isolation of Lois and Susan compares in terms of betrayal being the cause; in terms of the doubts (e.g., about their children) and questions (e.g., whose fault) that are raised; in terms of inability to reconcile life aspects. The isolation of Lois and Susan contrasts more significantly and includes contrasts in age during events and at the beginning of isolation; in emotionalism and "intelligence"; in the roles of emotion and reason ("intelligence"); in the presence of despondency or absurdity in present life; and in the depth and effect of psychological instability.

Lois's and Susan's ages contrast during the stories narrative period. Lois's tragic story--while told as a frame story set at Lois's retirement from family life--occurs when she is young, telling of events between when she was nine and thirteen. Lucy comes to camp when Lois is ten and steps "sideways" to disappear when she is thirteen. Susan's story, told as a frame story retrospective ("This is the story ... about a failure in intelligence .... They were older when they married...") begins when she is in her late twenty's and ends when she is "fortyish." Lois's isolation begins while she is a child, contrasting with Susan's isolation, which begins when she is a wife and mother.

The chronological structure of Lois's and Susan's stories contrasts. Lois's story inside the frame is told in flashback, which isolates her throughout the story because her adult isolation is born in her childhood. This contrasts with Susan's story, which, within the third-person retrospective frame, is told in continuing chronological order. This dramatizes the beginning moments of Susan's isolation, beginning with Matthew's first confession of infidelity. Lois's isolation begins in the past and bleeds into the present, while Susan's isolation begins in the present and is carried into the future.

Lois's story and tragedy is founded in emotionalism in contrast with Susan's story and tragedy being founded in "intelligence," that is in reasoning, not feeling. Lois's emotion isolates her because she is too overcome with weeping to insist that Cappie understand the truth about the absence of anger in her last moments with Lucy. Susan's intelligence isolates her because she rejects and denies her emotions while questioning the truth and meaningfulness of her love, her marriage and her children. One is isolated because of emotionality, the other because of intelligence, or reasoning.

Ironically, Lois is snagged into isolation by Lucy's and Caddie's faulty reasoning, while Susan is snagged into isolation by hers and Matthew's disruptive emotions. Lucy reasoned that going back to Chicago would be bad and that it was not dangerous to venture too near the cliff edge (suggesting her disappearance was an accidental fall: "like a cry of surprise, cut off too soon"), and Caddie reasoned that there had to be a comprehensible cause that Lois could provide to Lucy's disappearance. Susan couldn't accept the reasonableness of or cope with her erupting emotions, and Matthew couldn't contain his lustful emotions.

Lois is isolated because she feel despondence in her present life ("present" since she was thirteen). Contrastingly, Susan is isolated because she experiences the turmoil of the "absurd" in her present life (present, extending into her future). Lois and Susan compare because both feel further isolation because both question the reality of their children's births. The adult Lois of the frame says that she "can hardly remember, now, having her two boys in the hospital, nursing them as babies," and Susan feels that "her children were not her own."

Both women further compare because both are unable to reconcile aspects of their lives. Although they fail to reconcile different aspects, they compare in that Lois is unable to reconcile the mystery of the landscapes ("something, or someone, looking back out"), while Susan is unable to reconcile the meaning of Matthew's actions (are they meaningful or absurd?).

Lois and Susan contrast in the depths of their isolation because Lois felt Lucy lived on ("She is here. She is entirely alive."), while contrastingly Susan felt her life to be a desert. In comparison, both women have the same unanswered question prying at the corners of their minds: Who is at fault? In comparison, both women are betrayed by a loved one. Contrastingly, Lois is betrayed by Lucy, whether through foolhardiness or despair, and Susan is betrayed by Matthew through his fits of adultery.  

Lois contrasts with Susan in that Lois suffers from the isolating, unremitting distraction of her tragedy and the projection of hope onto empty reality in landscape paintings, but Susan falls into the isolation of choking insanity, with the devil stranger tracking her and "the reflection of the madwoman" and her "meaningless tinkling laughter." In further contrast, Lois's isolation ends with Lucy alive with her, but Susan's isolation ends with tightly closed windows, a turned valve and escaping gas in a closed, isolated, room.

Which quote from the story “The Open Window” marks a suspenseful and humorous point in the story?

The best quote in the story for providing suspense and humor at the same time is the passage that describes how Vera behaves when she sees the three returning hunters approaching the open window. She is twice described as being very "self-possessed," and her behavior has been perfectly proper and sedate up to the point where her aunt says, "Here they are at last!"

Framton shivered slightly and turned towards the niece with a look intended to convey sympathetic comprehension. The child was staring out through the open window with a dazed horror in her eyes. In a chill shock of nameless fear Framton swung round in his seat and looked in the same direction.

We can imagine the dramatic change in the facial expression of this very self-possessed young lady when she pretends to be horrified at the appearance of three familiar men who were supposed to have died three years ago. Vera is an actress as well as a story-teller. A lot of adolescent girls enjoy communicating by making faces. She is by far the best character in the story. She looks innocent, but she is mischievous and has a wicked sense of humor.

At this point we do not really know she is faking her "dazed horror." We are still in the same position as Framton Nuttel. But we learn very quickly that the whole story was a practical joke. 

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

Why doesn't Caesar trust Cassius in Julius Caesar?

Caesar does not like Cassius because he is too lean, thinks too much, reads too much, does not like plays, and never smiles sincerely.

Caesar may not have known that there was a conspiracy to kill him, but he did not like Cassius.  He explained to Antony why he was suspicious of him.

Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights:
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous. (Act 1, Scene 2)

Cassius looks lean and hungry, but this is a metaphor for ambition. When Caesar says that Cassius does not sleep at night and thinks too much, it is not hard to infer that he means that Cassius might be planning something.  Caesar may or may not know what it is, but he does not trust Cassius.

Caesar has a few other reasons for not liking Cassius.

He reads much;
He is a great observer and he looks
Quite through the deeds of men: he loves no plays,
As thou dost, Antony; he hears no music;
Seldom he smiles, and smiles in such a sort
As if he mock'd himself and scorn'd his spirit
That could be moved to smile at any thing. (Act 1, Scene 2)

In addition to thinking too much, Cassius reads too much and watches people carefully.  He also does not like plays and never smiles unless he is being mocking.  The reference to plays and the smile means that Cassius is serious and committed.  Again, he is too ambitious.

Indeed, Cassius is determined.  He is the leader of the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar, and he is very careful to make sure that he hangs out with Caesar still and does nothing suspicious.  It does not work.  Caesar is too good at judging character.  The two men are on the opposite sides of the political fence, and Caesar needs to be suspicious of everyone.

What were the social and political consequences of the Vietnam War?

The Vietnam War was a very unpopular foreign venture that dramatically changed the political and social landscape of the United States. Some basic political changes that resulted as a result of the war was the introduction of an all-volunteer military and the lowering of the voting age to 18. The government abolished the draft for the practical reason that it would be easier to commit troops to foreign lands if they had volunteered for service versus making citizens serve. The draft was never really popular in the history of the United States, and this disdain reached new heights during the war in Indochina. Lowering the draft age from 21 to 18 was done through a Constitutional amendment (26th) because many believed if 20-year-olds could die for their country, they should have some say in who its leaders would be.

The war also brought a great distrust of the government and its leaders. This is especially true of the Democratic Party that escalated the war. The party lost the White House in 1968 and would only hold the presidency for four years in the next quarter of a century. This war undermined promising social programs instituted by Presidents Kennedy and Johnson and dramatically hurt the U.S. economy. It can also be stated that the Vietnam War slowed the momentum of the Civil Rights and Women's Rights movements.

The Vietnam War also brought a wave of counter-culture activity amongst the youth. Hippies, as they were called, resisted government, political, and parental influences and sometimes lived in communes together. Many turned to illicit drug usage. College campuses were disrupted by organized protests and sit-ins and started to lean even further to the left politically. Also, the War brought over 125,000 new immigrants to the United States in the form of Vietnamese political refugees. Finally, the war was the first "televised" conflict in the history of the United States, if not the entire world. The public was updated with video images from the front line, on an almost nightly basis. In this way, many people were disillusioned about warfare and could better understand its brutal consequences.

What are three examples of appearance versus reality in Shakespeare's Othello?

First, let's define what we mean by "appearance vs. reality." It's first important to understand how Iago functions in the text as the main source of drama. Thus, an example of his personality will be our first example. The following two examples will talk about appearance vs. reality via examples in the text when characters are deceived (by Iago) as to how events occurred and whether or not they actually occurred at all. As Othello is a play based on misunderstanding, noting two moments of misunderstanding will help understand how the play's characters are deceived and how this play is thus called a tragedy.

Our first example is that Iago appears to be loyal to Othello, but in reality he is deceiving them. Iago states explicitly:

"the Moor is of a free and open nature/ That thinks men honest that but seem to be so; and will as tenderly be led by th' nose/ As asses are" (2.1.391-4)

Them are fightin' words! Iago just called Othello an ass. Not very friendly.

A second example is when Othello thinks that Cassio and Desdemona hooked up because Cassio has Desdemona's handkerchief. Othello loses his cool and passes out right after saying:

 "Lie with her! lie on her! We say lie on her, when 
  they belie her. Lie with her! that's fulsome. 
  —Handkerchief—confessions—handkerchief!—To

confess, and be hanged for his labor;-first to be

hanged, and then to confess.—I tremble at it. 

Nature would not invest herself in such shadowing 
passion without some instruction. It is not words 
that shake me thus. Pish! Noses, ears, and lips. 
 —Is't possible?—Confess—handkerchief!—O devil!" (4.1.35-43)

Now, Desdemona didn't cheat on him. Iago had his wife Emilia swipe Desdemona's scarf after she drops it on the ground by mistake. Sneaky, sneaky.

A third example is when Othello treats Desdemona like a whore because of what he believes she did with Cassio. He says:

" She says enough; yet she's a simple bawd 

That cannot say as much. This is a subtle whore,

A closet lock and key of villainous secrets 

And yet she'll kneel and pray; I have seen her do't." (4.2.20-3)

Othello is enraged at what he perceives to be Desdemona's behavior. 

What were the working conditions like at the tavern in the book Lyddie?

Lyddie does not enjoy working at the tavern because the mistress is mean to her.

When Lyddie’s mother leaves the farm, Lyddie and her little brother Charlie try to keep it going.  Her mother, staying at Lyddie’s uncles, lets Lyddie know that she is going to lease out the land to pay off debts.  She leases her children too.  Mrs. Worthen arranges for Lyddie to work at Cutler’s tavern and Charlie at a mill.

Lyddie is not thrilled with the idea of working at the Tavern.  Before she even steps foot in it, she feels like she is enslaved. It does not help that Mrs. Cutler treats her horribly from the moment she first lays eyes on her.

"Well, I've no time to bother with you now," the woman said. "Go into the kitchen and ask Triphena to tell you where you can wash. We keep a clean place here." (Ch. 3)

At first, Lyddie does not get a warm welcome from Triphena either.  She is “as busy as the mistress and not eager to involve herself with a dirty new servant.”

Mrs. Cutler is miserly and suspicious.

The mistress was large in body and seemed to be everywhere on watch. How could a woman so obviously rich in this world's goods be so mean in the use of them? Her eyes were narrow and close and always on the sharp for the least bit of spilt flour or the odd crumb on the lip. (Ch. 3)

The tavern owner watches her constantly, but Lyddie works hard and is determined to stay out of trouble.  She sleeps in a “hot and airless” windowless passage and has to go to bed late and get up early so none of the guests will see her. 

When Lyddie is put in charge of the fire, she sleeps on the hearth for fear that it might go out while she is up in her windowless room.  This causes the cook Triphena to feel sorry for her and they form a friendship.

Most of Lyddie’s chores are difficult.  She has to churn butter and help with the syrup and sugar making.  She never gets enough time off even to visit her brother.  When she does leave while her mistress is away, at Triphena's suggestion, she is fired when she gets back.

What is the lifespan of the Ghost of Christmas Present in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens?

In Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by his deceased partner, Jacob Marley, and by three spirits. We find out near the end of the book that all three visitations took place in the span of one night. When the Ghost of Christmas Present is about to leave, Scrooge notices how much the spirit has aged since he first arrived and asks him about his lifespan. The Ghost of Christmas Present says,

"'My life upon this globe is very brief," replied the Ghost. "It ends tonight.'" (Dickens 85)

He goes on to say that his life will be over at midnight. Earlier in the stave, the Ghost of Christmas Present tells Scrooge that he has "more than eighteen hundred" brothers, and he is very young. This possibly hints at the idea that he and his brothers are only here for a very short time to impart a lesson such as the one he is giving Scrooge.

What is an internal and external conflict for John Proctor?

I think that most of the conflicts surrounding John Proctor are internal. One internal conflict of John's is his guilt.  John is a respected and well liked member of the Salem community.  People look up to him and believe that he is a good man.  While John probably agrees with most of that about himself, he is conflicted with guilt about his sexual relationship with Abigail Williams.  John tries to be a Godly and religious man, but he he knows that he has committed a great sin against God and his wife. 

Another internal conflict of John's occurs at the very end of the play. Should he confess to a lie and live?  Or should he die as honorable of a man as he can?  It's an incredible scene, and in the end John chooses death in order to preserve his goodness.  

Elizabeth, supporting herself against collapse, grips the bars. of the window, and with a cry: He have his goodness now. God forbid I take it from him!

External conflicts are a bit more difficult with John and this play.  He's never really in any kind of battle against a person.  At least not in the kind where punches are thrown or the kind in which a reader would be able to declare a winner.  John has an external conflict with Abigail.  She still clearly desires to continue their affair, but John is committed to never cheating again.  

Proctor: Abby, I may think of you softly from time to time. But I will cut off my hand before I'll ever reach for you again. Wipe it out of mind. We never touched, Abby.

John also has an external conflict with Judge Danforth.  In the final act of the play, Danforth is pushing John hard to name the people that he saw communing with the devil.  Proctor does not want to confess to any more lies, so he doesn't give Danforth any names.  The scene continues to intensify as Danforth all but forces John to physically sign a document of confession.  Danforth wants to hang the document for all the world to see, and John doesn't want that.  He doesn't want his good name tainted for all of Salem to see, so John eventually tears the paper up, which prevents Danforth from "winning."  

His breast heaving, his eyes staring, Proctor tears the paper and crumples it, and he is weeping in fury, but erect.

A car accelerates from 0 km/h to 100 km/h in 5 seconds. It can decelerate at 5 m/s, if the driver applies the brakes fully. What is the...

Acceleration is defined as the rate of change of velocity. That is, 

acceleration, a = dv/dt

Here, the velocity of the car increases from 0 km/h to 100 km/h in 5 seconds. Let us first convert the velocity to m/s units, using the knowledge that 1 km is equal to 1000 m and 1 hour has 3600 seconds.

Thus, 0 km/h = 0 m/s

and , 100 km/h = (100 x 1000) m/(1 x 3600) s = 27.8 m/s

Thus, the acceleration of the car is:

a = (27.8 - 0)(m/s) / 5 s = 5.6 m/s^2

Thus the car has an acceleration of 5.6 m/s^2.

If the car can decelerate at 5 m/s^2, then it would need

t = (v - u)/a = (0 - 27.8) / 5 = 5.56 sec to stop completely.

Hope this helps. 

Why does Annie have Helen feel the different expressions on her face?

Touch is one of the few senses that Helen has left after a childhood illness deprived her of sight and hearing. Annie is teaching her the names for concrete objects, such as “doll” or “fork.” These are relatively simple things to convey, but how to teach an abstract concept, such as “happy” or “sad”? The facial expressions Annie uses can give Helen some idea of what another person is feeling; Helen can compare her own expressions to another’s. This will be a doorway into understanding the deeper concept, which cannot be taught to someone with limited language. The facial expressions will have to represent the deeper feeling until Helen progresses in her communication skills. This might be confusing, since some expressions can mean more than one thing. For example, “confused” and “angry” can look similar as facial expressions. The finer delineations will have to wait.

In Chapter 25 of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, how does Jem show that he is becoming more compassionate and empathetic?

In the beginning of Chapter 25, Scout is playing with a 'roly-poly.' Scout begins poking the small creature and decides that she will smash it. Just before Scout smashes the 'roly-poly,' Jem intervenes and tells Scout not to smash the bug. Scout protests and asks why she couldn't smash it. Jem tells Scout that the 'roly poly' doesn't bother anybody, and she should leave it alone. Scout chastizes Jem and says, "Reckon you're at the stage now where you don't kill flies and mosquitoes now, I reckon." (Lee 320) Scout thinks the Jem is becoming more like a girl every day. In reality, Jem is maturing and becoming more compassionate. Jem shows empathy and compassion for the 'roly poly' by stopping Scout from smashing it. One of the main themes throughout the novel deals with protecting innocent beings. The 'roly poly,' is similar to the mockingbird, which doesn't harm anybody or anything. It would be wrong to kill something that does bother anything. Jem's actions show that he is maturing and recognizes that it would be wrong to harm something that doesn't deserve to be injured.

Compare and contrast the political philosophies of Hobbes and Locke.

The political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes is best seen in his work Leviathan, written amid the chaos of the English Civil War. Locke, on the other hand, laid out his political philosophy in his Two Treatises on Government, published in 1689, just after the Glorious Revolution, but written a few years earlier. Both of these authors argue that government is based on a social contract in which the people, desiring security for their property and their persons, give up some of their liberties in return for the protection afforded by government. This is not an insignificant similarity--neither author views government as based on divine right or on a paternalist family model advocated by many supporters of absolute monarchy. 

Where they differ, however, is on the type of government that would be created. Hobbes argues that to provide the order that keeps life from being "solitary, nasty, brutish, and short," government must be vested in a sovereign with absolute powers, and this government must be permanent and secure in its powers. "[N]one of his subjects," Hobbes wrote of the sovereign, "by any pretence of forfeiture, can be freed from his Subjection." The alternative was to be left in the eternal state of war, one man against every other man, that characterized the state of nature in Hobbes' mind. It is important to remember that Hobbes wrote, as mentioned above, during the English Civil War, a time of war, near-anarchy, and violence.

Locke, on the other hand, argued that the people having, out of the state of nature, agreed of their own free will to establish a government that protected their rights (he emphasized property in particular), they could and should "resume their original liberty" if that government violated the rights it was supposed to protect. So Locke essentially advocated a right of revolution that would be cited by the American Revolutionaries in particular. He also claimed that the best government was a "commonwealth" in which the people were represented, since no arbitrary government could really represent the people. For more information, see the links below. Locke's arguments about the social contract are in the Second Treatise on Government.

What motivates you to use wireless technology at work or home?

Using wireless networks at work has a number of advantages.  It increases mobility as the employees are not forced to sit in front of a computer screen to be productive.  This improves communication, collaboration and efficiency as employees can access the internet at any spot within the workspace.  It allows a number of applications of technology to run a lot smoother.  These applications would include sending and receiving e-mails, web conferencing, video conferencing or conducting meetings.  Using a wireless network enables companies to easily add users than through the traditional wired networks.

At home, using a wireless network offers many of the same advantages.  If you have a job in which you need to be "on-call" at all times, receiving emails and messages on a smartphone or tablet is convenient and allows for easy communication with subordinates or management.  Wireless has benefits for applications that are for entertainment purposes including playing games, listening to music, or checking the social network.  

In what ways does the United States still operate under the threat of nuclear war regarding foreign policies and procedures?

The United States continues to operate under the threat of nuclear war. This is reflected in some of our policies and procedures.

The United States has been very concerned that countries that we don’t trust might develop nuclear weapons. Up until very recently, we imposed sanctions on Iran to discourage them from developing nuclear weapons. For example, these sanctions prohibited our banks from working with Iran. Other countries didn’t buy oil from Iran. The recent agreement lifted these sanctions. In return, Iran has agreed to limit its nuclear program and is willing to allow international inspections to verify that this is occurring.

We also are very concerned about the development of nuclear weapons in North Korea. We monitor developments in North Korea very closely because we are concerned what might happen if North Korea is able to develop nuclear weapons. We have tried to develop new agreements with North Korea, but no significant recent progress has been made.

We continue to deal with nuclear weapons with our foreign policy today.

 

Analyze how different factors affect the yield of making margarine.

Margarine is a product that was the answer to a substitute for butter, first discovered in France, by Hippolyte Meges-Mouries in response to a challenge by Emperor Napoleon III.  The original margarine was made from beef fat.  Margarine today is composed of vegetable oils and water.  Fats that are liquid at room temperature undergo a hydrogenation process that adds hydrogen to the carbon double bonds in the oil.  As the double bonds are broken, hydrogen atoms bond to the carbon atoms.  The final result is a product that is higher in melting point than the original oil.  This adding of hydrogen to the oil is called "saturated fat." 

Sometimes, the hydrogenation process is incomplete, limiting the amount of saturation that actually occurs.  Some of the carbon to carbon double bonds remains in the margarine.  This is called "trans fats," and has been the subject of study as it relates to coronary artery hardening. 

As limiting factors go, the amount of hydrogenation would be the chief determining factor on the amount of margarine produced.  The balance between the amount of fat used and water used would also have an effect on the final amount of margarine yield.  The type of metal used as a catalyst for the hydrogenation would also be a critical factor.  Nickel is traditionally used, but palladium has been substituted as well.

Connect "Grass" by Carl Sandburg to "Abandoned Farmhouse" by Ted Kooser. The connection may be a conflict or a theme, a speaker or a...

A common theme that connects Sandburg's "Grass" and Kooser's "Abandoned Farmhouse" is that facts prevail despite absence or death. When voices are silenced, factual evidence or historical facts often render unique stories about the human condition.

In "Grass," the verdure envelops the land where millions of soldiers have met their doom. Yet, the historical facts pertaining to Austerlitz, Waterloo, Ypres, Gettysburg, and Verdun prevail despite the absence of fallen soldiers to tell their story. In "Abandoned Farmhouse," the inhabitants have long since vacated their property, but their stories are told in the personal artifacts they have left behind.

As we read through Grass, we notice that the fields of war have hidden the evidence of past conflict: there are no bodies in sight, no weapons of warfare are evident, and all traces of spilled blood have been washed away by the elements. Yet, the stories of these fields of war are told to succeeding generations of interested tourists by conductors on tour buses.

Two years, ten years, and passengers ask the conductor:            What place is this? Where are we now?

Historical facts may render imperfect portraits of the past, but they are often the only link to man's history. In "Abandoned Farmhouse," we note the same absence of human presence. However, the past inhabitants have left evidence of their lives in their scattered belongings. From these, we know that a man lived at the farmhouse with his wife and child before the premises were vacated. The poem tells us that the husband was a "big man" due to the "size of his shoes" and a "tall man" according to the length of his bed.

A woman had lived with him, as the bedroom was "papered with lilacs and the kitchen shelves covered with oilcloth." There was a child, because of the presence of a "sandbox made from a tractor tire" and the toys strewn in the yard. The poet pronounces ominously that "Something went wrong." Evidence tells us that the man was a poor farmer: the fields were cluttered with boulders, the barn was leaky, and the yard was choked with weeds. The woman, though industrious, from the "jars of plum preserves and canned tomatoes sealed in the cellar hole," was said to have "left in a nervous haste." The poet continues to reinforce the hastiness of the departure by describing the toys strewn in the yard like "branches after a storm."

The word "storm" hints at conflict and strife. Was the family in financial trouble? Certainly, "money was scarce," the poet tells us; the windows were barricaded with rags to keep out the cold and there were jars of preserved produce that testified to valiant efforts to stave off hunger. The facts tell us that the inhabitants left in a hurry and that they left because life at the farmhouse had become untenable. All evidence points to financial hardship, but the finer details of human neuroses and dysfunction can only be guessed at or inferred.

So it is with the fields of war. We will always rely on historical documents and correspondences to testify to the larger conflict between opposing forces and even archaeological evidence to support our interpretations of history, but minute details may never be fully known. Nevertheless, however imperfectly, history often speaks for those whose voices have been silenced forever.

How is the old woman facing difficulties in life?

Phoenix Jackson is very old and poor. The cane she uses to walk is made from an umbrella. The "worn path" represents the actual path she must take each time she goes into town to get medicine for her grandson. Phoenix is nearly blind and she uses the cane to help her find her way. Given her age and physical limitations, the journey is difficult in and of itself. Phoenix is so old that she was too old to attend school at the end of the Civil War. When she confronts the hunter, he says "you must be a hundred years old, and scared of nothing."

Phoenix is poor but resourceful. She manages to steal a fallen nickel from the hunter and solicits another nickel from the nurse. She has no education and therefore she has limited ways of getting money. It must also be noted that Phoenix has to deal with racism in her life. This is not overt in the story but the way the hunter treats her suggests racist motivations. Both he and the nurse call her "Granny" and "Grandma" which are subtle indications of condescension. So, she is an old, poor, black woman living in the South. Despite her limitations, she survives. Welty gives her the name "Phoenix" because she seems to rise again and again in spite of her difficulties.

Is Romeo fortune's fool? Can you please use evidence from Act III, Scene 1, lines 114-142.

Act III, Scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet is called the turning point in the play because it propels the plot toward the ultimate tragedy of the young lovers' double suicide. Fate, or the idea that certain things in life are already determined for us, is an integral aspect of the play. From the outset in the Prologue, Shakespeare tell us that Romeo and Juliet are "star-crossed lovers", meaning that fate, or fortune, will intervene in their lives. 

Later in Act I, Scene 4, Romeo again invokes the shadow of fate when, in an aside, he says,

I fear too early, for my mind misgives
Some consequence yet hanging in the stars
Shall bitterly begin his fearful date
With this night’s revels, and expire the term
Of a despisèd life closed in my breast
By some vile forfeit of untimely death.

At this point Romeo is well aware that his course in life and his mortality are being manipulated and he is at the whim of fate, well before he even lays eyes upon Juliet.

In the opening of Act III, Benvolio warns Mercutio that they should get off the street because it's a hot day and tempers may boil over if they meet the Capulets. Mercutio ignores Benvolio and, not surprisingly, is soon fighting Tybalt over a supposed slight against Romeo. Tybalt has actually come to fight Romeo, but since he has recently married Tybalt's cousin in a secret ceremony, Romeo backs down, giving vague responses to Tybalt's challenge. Romeo says in lines 63-66,

Tybalt, the reason that I have to love thee
Doth much excuse the appertaining rage
To such a greeting. Villain am I none.
Therefore farewell. I see thou knowest me not.

Mercutio cannot accept Romeo's acquiescence, so he draws on Tybalt and the two fight. An excellent portrayal of this duel can be found in Zeffirelli's 1968 movie version of the play. The fight is not meant to go to the death, but Romeo, worried about the Prince's edict from earlier, tries to part the two and Mercutio is mortally wounded under Romeo's arm. In line 114 Romeo admits his culpability in the wounding of his friend and says, 

My very friend, hath got this mortal hurt
In my behalf. My reputation stained
With Tybalt’s slander—Tybalt, that an hour
Hath been my cousin! O sweet Juliet,
Thy beauty hath made me effeminate
And in my temper softened valor’s steel.

And even though Romeo must know that further violence could jeopardize his life and his marriage to Juliet, he invokes fate when he vows to avenge Mercutio's death and pursue Tybalt. He says, in lines 124-125,

This day’s black fate on more days doth depend.
This but begins the woe others must end.

After Romeo kills Tybalt, he is brought back to his senses and realizes he has once again been manipulated by fate. As Benvolio urges him to flee, Romeo says, "O, I am Fortune’s fool!" And indeed he is. His actions bring banishment and finally his death.

According to Thoreau, “government is at best, but an expedient.” What does Thoreau mean by the word “expedient”? Provide at least two...

In "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau says that "[g]overnment is at best but an expedient" to make the point the systems of government are only present as a convenience and not as a true body by which to achieve justice for the people.  The word "expedient" is defined as a practical convenience, which may have immoral or improper elements, so Thoreau uses this word to characterize systems of government, particularly the American government.  For example, Thoreau says that the system of voting and going with "majority rule" is a convenient (or expedient) manner to choose elected officials; however, since in this system significant numbers of citizens are not represented by such elected officials, the system really cannot be defined as a democracy because the officials do not represent the voice of "the people"--they only represent the "majority."  The present day electoral system is not much different, theoretically speaking:  candidates are elected based on a "majority rule" system, leaving many voices unrepresented.  In this case, Thoreau argues that "[i]ts [the government's] obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of expediency."

What is the meaning of "War is Kind"?

Stephen Crane's "War is Kind" is an ironic--even satiric at times--meditation in free verse upon the cruelties, waste, and senselessness of war.

Replete with verbal irony [saying one thing, but meaning another], Crane's poem points to the absurdity of thinking that there is any real glory in the death of hundreds and thousands of young men in the prime of their lives:

Great is the Battle-God, great, and his Kingdom...
A field where a thousand corpses lie....

These men were born to drill and die,
Point for them the virtue of slaughter

The element of irony is also present in this poem as Crane ridicules the platitudes of the military by using them in conjunction with cruel images of war. 

• There is glory in war for men "born to drill and die"


• There is a Battle-God whose "Kingdom" includes a thousand corpses


• There is beauty in war: "Swift blazing flag/Eagle with crest of red and gold" flies for "the virtue of slaughter"


• There is a "splendid shroud" for killed soldiers

Certainly, Crane ridicules the phrases and names that glorify something as murderous and destructive as war. And, with irony, Crane points out the following:

• War is anything but kind; it is horrific.


• There is nothing heroic about dying


• It is a waste of life to die in battle,


• There is nothing "splendid" about a shroud.

Indeed, Stephen Crane's poem is extremely effective in its biting irony. 

How do the woman of the missionary circle behave in ways that contradict their Christian values?

Aunt Alexandra and her missionary circle of friends represent hypocrisy in their Christian beliefs.  The missionary circle has met to raise money for a minister who is traveling to Africa to spread Christianity to a “heathen” African tribe.  What makes this act so hypocritical is the lack of empathy and concern these women have for the black community just down the road in Maycomb.  They do not see that the poor black community is in need of help during the Depression of the 1930’s.  They are willing to send money to help Africans, but will not help their own members of the community.  Many of the women probably employ black maids or other service workers; however, their own prejudices run so deep that they cannot see that their actions are hypocritical and against basic Christian values.  The idea that the black tribe in Africa needs “saving” is also an example of how these “Christian” women think they are better than everyone else. 

What's a cheap, decent and quality microphone I can use to record on my computer?

There are many reasons you would want to use a microphone to record on your computer. Maybe you record podcasts. I've summarized a few microphone options you could purchase that would be compatible with a computer. Many of these options come from an article on Lifehacker (Alan Henry, "How to Choose the Best Microphone for Your PC"), and I've provided the link to that article below. 

If you have light needs on your computer, you could go with a webcam that has a built-in microphone. A good webcam with a built-in microphone is the Logitech HD Pro Webcam C920 ($100). It is on the upper end of the affordable microphones, but it will last longer than the very cheap microphones.

If you're a gamer, you may want a microphone that is better than the microphone on your computer. The V-Moda BoomPro microphone is cheap (only $30) and is clear and reliable. 

If you're thinking about recording audio for a specific task, like a podcast, you may want to get the Blue Yeti. The Blue Yeti is a $100 microphone that is effective and easy to use.

You will also want to figure out what computer program is best with your microphone. If you're recording for a podcast, you will want to find a program that is specifically good for cutting and editing audio. 

What is one purpose of the simile in the section of "Song of Myself" that begins "The spotted hawk swoops by..."?

A simile means that two things are being compared to one another using the word "like" or the word "as." For instance, I could say the house is "solid as a rock" or "solid like a rock," and you would know that the house is not actually a rock, but is very sturdy. In this poem, Whitman uses simile in the line, "I depart as air."

So then, what purpose is achieved by the poet comparing himself to air? How does this simile contribute to the purpose of the poem? Perhaps, just as he claims to be alive in the dirt and grass, and able to shout ("yawp") over the rooftops of the entire world, this simile is just another way of describing how he feels that his soul is infinite, intertwined with the rest of the world and all of nature.

A 15g bullet strikes and becomes embedded in a 1.25kg block of wood placed on a horizontal surface just in front of the gun. If the coefficient of...

Using the law of conservation of momentum, total momentum, before and after the impact stays the same. That is

MbVb + MwVw = (Mb + Mw)V

where, Mb and Mw are the masses of the bullet and wood block; Vb and Vw are velocities of bullet and wood block and V is the velocity of combined system (after bullet gets embedded in the block).

The friction force can be calculated as:

F = `mu` (Mb + Mw)g

and the work done by friction force is calculated as:

W = `mu` (Mb + Mw)g x distance 

This work done by friction force opposes the motion of bullet + block system (and is balanced by its kinetic energy),

Hence, `1/2` (Mb + Mw) `V^2`  = `mu` (Mb + Mw) g x distance 

or, `V^2`  = 2`mu` g x distance = 2 x 0.3 x 9.81 x 10

or, Initial velocity of the wood + bullet system, V = 7.67 m/s

and using this value in the first equation, we get

0.015 x Vb + 1.25 x 0 = (0.015 + 1.25) x 7.67

thus, Vb = 646.84 m/s

Hence the muzzle velocity of bullet is 646.84 m/s.

Hope this helps.

Who was the first person to discover America?

For many years, Christopher Columbus was considered the first person to discover North America.  However, it was Leif Erikson, a Viking, who was the first documented European explorer to reach North America.  Of course, there had been native people who had lived in North America for centuries before Leif Erikson arrived in around 1000 AD.  Leif Erikson built a settlement in what is now Newfoundland.  Today, there is still evidence of that settlement.  There are even remains of houses.  Erikson was impressed with the natural resources he found in North America.  There was plenty of timber, and there were also grapes.  The timber was used to build houses.  Poor relations with the native people caused the Vikings who had settled there to eventually leave.

What was the motivation to take over the Congo?

Leopold II, the King of Belgium, took over the Congo, then known as the Congo Free State, in 1885 as the head of a group of private investors. Leopold was drawn to the region in part because he had contracted with the explorer Sir Henry Stanley, the first European to explore the Congo. In the 1870s, Leopold began to fund expeditions to open up stations along the Congo to European trade, and Belgian traders began to establish ties with local rulers. Leopold was eager to reap a huge profit from trading with locals for ivory, palm oil, and especially rubber. Worldwide demand for rubber was high, and there were immense profits to be made by harvesting rubber. The plant was difficult to collect, and Leopold began to turn to forced labor and genocide to get the rubber.

Under Leopold's rule, treatment of the Congolese became brutal. Local workers were forced to meet high quotas for the collection of rubber, and they were beaten if they did not meet these requirements. At times, their relatives were taken hostage with the threat that they would not be released until the workers had met their quotas. Leopold's private army brutalized locals and even cut off the hands of local people, including children, in an attempt to repress the Congolese. Eventually, Leopold's brutality, which led to the deaths of millions, was exposed, in part by the Congo Reform Association, and in 1908, he was forced to hand over control of the Congo Free State to the Belgian parliament. At this point, the country became known as the Belgian Congo, and Leopold died in 1909 in disgrace.

After the lady saved Maniac from Mars Bar, what does he feel like doing?

Maniac probably wants to talk to the lady or thank her.

Mars Bar and Maniac get off on the wrong foot.  Maniac is not afraid of Mars Bar, because he does not know the neighborhood well.  Also, color means nothing to him.  He does not care who is black or white.  Mars Bar is unable to intimidate him, and that frustrates Mars Bar.

When Maniac takes a bite out of the candy bar Mars Bar offers him, it is a total surprise to Mars Bar but Maniac doesn’t know what he did wrong.

As usual, when Mars Bar got confused, he got mad. He thumped Maniac in the chest. "You think you bad or somethin'?"

Maniac, who was now twice as confused as Mars Bar, blinked. "Huh!"

"You think you come down here and be bad! That what you think!" Mars Bar was practically shouting now. (Ch. 10)

A lady sweeping her front yard finally stops things, by telling Maniac to go back where he belongs.  The trouble is, Maniac doesn’t belong anywhere.  He ran away from his foster home with his aunt and uncle after his parents died.

Maniac does not know what to do when the lady saves him.

Maniac just stood there a minute. There was something he felt like doing, and maybe he would have, but the lady turned and went back inside her house and shut the door. So he walked away. (Ch. 10)

While it does not actually say what Maniac wanted to do, we can make an inference.  Maniac is socially awkward.  He makes friends easily, but does not follow conventions.  He likely wanted to thank her, or get to know her better, but he did not do anything.  He might have also wanted to talk to her, to explain that he did in fact belong.

Maniac doesn’t want to go back to Amanda because Mars Bar damaged the book he borrowed.  He is afraid of what she will say.  He takes off running, and later Amanda beats up Mars Bar when Maniac admits he is the one who hurt her book.

Why did Shakespeare use difficult language to write his plays, such as Twelfth Night?

I would argue that Shakespeare's language was not as difficult for his audiences as it is for us. He was writing in what is sometimes called Early Modern English, retaining words, spelling, grammatical forms and pronunciations we don't use today. The language we call Modern English--what is easily recognizable to us today--didn't standardize until around 1700, almost a century after Shakespeare's death.

That said, Shakespeare wrote for his present day audience, not posterity, so he used current slang to maximize laughs and make jokes. Since slang changes rapidly--we might easily be confused by 1960s, 1970s or even 1980s slang--Shakespeare can be difficult.

Also, Shakespeare is read today because his language is so densely packed with vivid imagery, metaphor, and punning. The very richness of his mind can make him a challenge to follow: he was putting complex thoughts and emotions  about death, love, guilt, ambition, hypocrisy and loyalty, to name just a few, into images. Further, Shakespeare, like many famous English authors, including even the ex-Beatle John Lennon, loved punning. This means using words that have more than one meaning in such a way that either meaning could "work." Because the meanings--especially the slang meanings--of many words have changed since Shakespeare's time, the puns can be difficult for us to understand. For example, in Twelfth Night, Act 1, Feste says he has "two points" to make. Points can mean points, as in points in an argument, but also, in those days, referred to the strings or laces which held up a person's pants, so Maria has fun with that, saying that if one "point" in his argument doesn't hold, the other will keep Feste's "gaskins" (pants) up but if both break or fail, his pants will fall down. A contemporary audience would have gotten the joke: we struggle because the language has changed. 

How does acid rain dissolve limestone?

Limestone can be simply thought of as calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Acid rain contains sulfurous acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid. When these acids reach the Earth's surface, through acid rain, they react with the limestone and dissolve it. The following chemical reactions take place:

`CaCO_3 + H_2SO_4 -> CaSO_4 + H_2CO_3`

`CaCO_3 + 2HNO_3 -> Ca(NO_3)_2 + H_2CO_3`

etc. In all such cases, the limestone reacts with the hydrogen ion and forms the carbonic acid, which breaks down to yield carbon dioxide and water.

`H_2CO_3 -> H_2O + CO_2`

This causes the breakdown and dissolution of limestone. An example is the dissolution of limestone that makes up the famous monument, Taj Mahal, in India. 

The acid rain is due to human activities, especially the use of fossil fuels, manure handling, etc. 

Hope this helps. 

Why is the world running on technology?

Technology has made many changes to our lives and has eased our day-to-day work in a number of ways. Some of the technological advances of note are in the sectors of transportation, energy, communication, healthcare, etc. Earlier people used horses and other animals to travel long distances. Technology has made it feasible to travel long distances quickly via airplanes, cars, etc. We have even reached the moon using rockets. Various forms of energy are easily available to us and many of our devices run on electricity. We have come a long way in terms of communication facilities, especially with the combination of smartphones and the internet. Our life expectancy has increased significantly and we have successfully developed cures for a large number of medical conditions and diseases. 

Given the advantages and spread of technology in all walks of our life, we can safely say that the world is running on technology and we are mostly benefiting from it. 

Hope this helps. 

Where do the boys have to go to get away from their pursuers?

The first time Max and Freak are pursued begins in Chapter 6 titled "Close Encounter of the Turd Kind." Max and Freak have been reunited recently, and they go to the fireworks to celebrate the Fourth of July together. Once there, they run into a bunch of "punks," as Max puts it - Tony D. (Blade) and his gang. Freak insults Tony D. by calling him a cretin, and that upsets him. Just in time, though, a police car comes, scaring the gang away. 

Later in the evening though, in Chapter 7 titled "Walking High Above the World," Tony D. and his gang return, wanting to physically harm them. However, Max and Freak have an advantage. Max has placed Freak on his shoulders, and he is able to use him for directions - like a personal GPS. Freak instructs him to escape by running into the "H20," or the pond. The pond is very deep and muddy, but due to Max's size, he is able to cross it. On the other hand, when Tony D. jumped in the pond, he sunk into the mud and only his head was above water. Once the gang frees themselves from the pond, the cops arrive. 

How does working on the ranch affect Lennie in Of Mice and Men?

Along with George, Lennie is one of the main characters in John Steinbeck's depression era novella Of Mice and Men. Lennie is mentally challenged and depends on George to lead him through life. He and George are hoping to "get a stake together" so they can purchase their own farm. For Lennie the dream of the farm means he can "tend rabbits."

Working on the ranch is at first a blessing for the two men. Lennie is, as George puts it, "a hell of a good worker" and is right at home wrestling grain bags and "bucking barley." Not only do they have steady jobs but they also meet the old swamper Candy who, because he lost his hand in a ranch accident, has enough money to help the men purchase their dream farm.

Unfortunately for Lennie this story is a tragedy and working on the ranch leads directly to his death at the end of the story. In usual Steinbeck fashion he provides plenty of foreshadowing to indicate things will not work out for Lennie. Lennie had always gotten in trouble in the past and during the men's last job in Weed Lennie and George had to hide in order to avoid being captured by men looking for them because Lennie had touched a girl's dress. George warns Lennie to "hide in the brush" if he gets in trouble again.

Even the simple minded Lennie recognizes the danger on this ranch and, after meeting Curley and Curley's wife, he doesn't want to stay. He says,

“I don’t like this place, George. This ain’t no good place. I wanna get outa here.” 

The best thing that happens to Lennie is meeting Candy who immediately becomes his friend and figures out how Lennie can make money "tending rabbits." The reader gets the feeling that all could indeed be perfect if George, Lennie and Candy could really go off and live on that "little piece 'a land."

Ultimately, however, Lennie falls into a familiar pattern and winds up accidentally strangling Curley's wife in the barn. Because George fears Lennie will be tortured, or simply won't understand the punishment, he takes Carlson's Luger and kills his friend in an act of mercy. Thus, in the long run, the ranch affects Lennie in the most negative of ways.

What would be an example today of how the "profound and rapid changes" Gaudium et Spes discusses recoil upon humans in their individual and...

Perhaps the greatest change is the ubiquity and intrusiveness of the internet. Although the Council might welcome the way in which this technology offers the possibility of lifting people out of poverty and creating seamless global communications, they would probably have been very concerned about several of the effects of technology, especially mobile phones.

First, the Council would be concerned that phones can decrease authentic and loving ways of interacting with other people. When we see people sitting together but checking their mobile phones rather than being completely focused on their friends or loved ones or families eating dinner separately each isolated in a technological bubble, we see technology become an obstacle to authentic human relationships. While the Council would have viewed positively the way social media enables us to keep in touch with distant friends, they would have been concerned about the way we may substitute generic broadcasts and updates for actually meeting our friends in person and giving them our full attention.

Next, while the promise of technology was to give everyone the opportunity to have access to knowledge and the tools for creating a fulfilling life free of economic want, within wealthy countries, the effect of technology has been to increase economic inequality, causing an even greater divide between the technologically privileged and an underclass lacking access to and skill with technology. As poverty and inequality were a major concern of Vatican II, the Council would have been quite concerned about the growth of economic inequality.

Finally, while the internet promises to give us access to the entire world, and the ability to learn about and interact with people from across the globe, it often becomes a way to stay within in bubble of people of our own socioeconomic and political views, rather than a tool for the sort of global and universal sympathies recommended by the Council. 

A parable is a story that teaches a moral lesson. What is the lesson of Fahrenheit 451?

Arguably, the moral lesson of Fahrenheit 451 is that censorship not only stifles learning and creativity, it also makes people miserable. We see this in Part One through the relationship between Montag and Clarisse. She is a non-conformist and creative individual who makes Montag realize that his happiness is little more than an illusion. She does this (unknowingly) by encouraging him to question the world and its rules. The result of this reflective practice is transformative on Montag:

He felt his body divide itself into a hotness and a coldness, a softness and a hardness, a trembling and a not trembling, the two halves grinding one upon the other.

Similarly, we see the relationship between censorship and unhappiness through the character of Mildred. She busies herself with the television and her seashell radio but, deep down, she is miserable, as we see through her suicide attempt in Part One. Furthermore, her reluctance to accept the overdose demonstrates her unwillingness to deal with her emotions. Through Mildred, Bradbury suggests that censorship can never bring true contentment and happiness: at the end of the novel, for instance, Mildred realizes her emptiness as she meets her demise in a hotel room:

She was her own face reflected there…and it was such a wildly empty face, all by itself in the room, touching nothing, starved and eating of itself.

What does Thoreau mean in "Civil Disobedience" when he says, "Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and...

In this quotation from "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau questions the benefit of the "majority rule" system of government and asks whether or not the human conscience can be the barometer by which we as a people decide on matters of law and justice.  Thoreau believes that citizens should not be required by a matter of legal course to submit themselves to the whims of elected legislators who claim to have their best interests at heart.  He believes that the majority rule system allows for the voices of many underrepresented citizens to go unheard and that a true, better government would rule through acts of conscience, not through acts based on the ideas of the majority.  He goes on in the essay to address the institution of slavery that is supported by a majority rule system and argues that the human conscience would (or should) rule that such a system of slavery is morally denigrating to slaves and slave owners.  Thoreau challenges people to look at the ethical underpinnings of our system of government to decide whether or not a majority rule system really supports and calls for justice.

`tan(2x) - 2cos(x) = 0` Find the exact solutions of the equation in the interval [0, 2pi).

`tan(2x)-2cos(x)=0, 0<=x<=2pi`

`tan(2x)-2cos(x)=0`

`sin(2x)/cos(2x)-2cos(x)=0`

`sin(2x)-2cos(2x)cos(x)=0`

`2sin(x)cos(x)-2cos(2x)cos(x)=0`

`2cos(x)(sin(x)-cos(2x))=0`

using the identity`cos(2x)=1-2sin^2(x),`

`2cos(x)(sin(x)-(1-2sin^2(x)))=0`

`2cos(x)(sin(x)-1+2sin^2(x))=0`

solving each part separately,

`cos(x)=0`

General solutions are,

`x=pi/2+2pin , x=(3pi)/2+2pin`

Solutions for the range `0<=x<=2pi`  are,

`x=pi/2 , x=(3pi)/2`

`2sin^2(x)+sin(x)-1=0`

Let sin(x)=y

`2y^2+y-1=0`

solve using the quadratic formula,

`y=(-1+-sqrt(1^2-4*2*(-1)))/(2*2)`

`y=-1,1/2`

substitute back y=sin(x)

`sin(x)=-1 , sin(x)=1/2`

For sin(x)=-1

General solutions are,

`x=(3pi)/2+2pin`

Solutions for the range `0<=x<=2pi`  are,

`x=(3pi)/2`

For sin(x)=1/2

General solutions are,

`x=pi/6+2pin , x=(5pi)/6+2pin`

solutions for the range `0<=x<=2pi`  are,

`x=pi/6 , (5pi)/6`

Combine all the solutions,

`x=pi/2 , (3pi)/2 , pi/6 , (5pi)/6`

In Tuck Everlasting, Winnie has a conflict within herself when she returns home. What is it?

I think by "returns home" you are referring to after the constable brings Winnie back from the Tuck household.  

Winnie's conflict is what to do about Mae Tuck.  To protect Winnie from the man in the yellow suit, Mae Tuck attacked the stranger.  She clubbed him over the head with the stock of the shotgun. 

With a dull cracking sound, the stock of the shotgun smashed into the back of his skull. He dropped like a tree, his face surprised, his eyes wide open. And at that very moment, riding through the pine trees just in time to see it all, came the Treegap constable.

Unfortunately, the constable witnessed the entire thing, but didn't see that the man in the yellow suit was blackmailing the Tuck family.  The constable is forced to arrest Mae and take her to jail.  The other problem is that the man in the yellow suit dies.  The constable now believes that he has witnessed a murder, which means Mae is likely to be hanged. 

Winnie's is conflicted with what to do.  She wants desperately to help the Tuck family rescue Mae.  She wants to do something important, but she also knows that any actions that she takes will be definitely against the law and will get her into trouble.  

Jesse squinted at her, and then he said, "Yep—you know, it might work. It might just make the difference. But I don't know as Pa's going to want you taking any risk. I mean, what'll they say to you after, when they find out?"

"I don't know," said Winnie, "but it doesn't matter. Tell your father I want to help. I have to help. If it wasn't for me, there wouldn't have been any trouble in the first place. Tell him I have to."

Despite the risk to herself, Winnie decides to help the Tuck family break out of jail. 

How did the weakness of the Articles of Confederation affect relations with other nations?

The Articles of Confederation diffused governmental power greatly, essentially making the federal government ineffective in many areas, including the power to tax the states and foreign relations. It emphasized the power of the states over the federal government, and thus weakened the federal government in large part. Because the Articles did not give the federal government enough authority, it had great difficulty negotiating and enforcing foreign relations.

The Articles gave the power of foreign relations to the federal government, and established a Department of Foreign Affairs in 1871; however, the Articles did not specifically ban the states from conducting their own relations with foreign countries. This proved to be a problem early on, when Georgia attempted to pursue its own foreign policy with Spanish Florida. Georgia tried to gain land by occupying disputed territories, and also threatened to wage war against Spanish Florida if Spain did not attempt to stop Native American attacks and stop harboring escaped slaves from Georgia. Spain also demanded that the U.S. stop using the Mississippi river, and U.S. claims to use land west of the Allegheny mountains. Because the Articles required 2/3rds of the states to ratify any treaty negotiated by Congress/U.S. diplomats, and because the Southern states opposed the compromise negotiated in the treaty, the U.S. was unable to ratify a treaty with Spain over the matter. Negotiations had to be suspended until the Constitution created a stronger federal government with the power to negotiate and enforce such treaties. Many states also began implementing tariffs on Great Britain, or banning British ships from doing trade in their states altogether. The states refused to allow the federal government control to regulate trade because of their fear of an overly controlling central government. As a result, the U.S. could not implement navigation acts to control trade with Great Britain, and Britain dominated the U.S. in the area of trade.

The Longchamps Affair illustrated the inability of the federal government to negotiate foreign affairs. A former soldier and a French citizen, Longchamps was accused of assaulting the French Minister to the U.S. France demanded that the U.S. extradite Longchamps for trial in France. Pennsylvania, the state where the incident occurred, refused to extradite Longchamps, insisting that Pennsylvania had jurisdiction over the matter, because there was no treaty between the U.S. and France concerning these types of incidents. Thus, an issue that should have been dealt with by the federal government was commandeered by the state of Pennsylvania, causing difficulties with the French government as a result. 

Because of the weakness of the federal government, the U.S. was unable to defend its interests abroad. This caused many issues with pirates, who attacked American ships, which had no protection abroad. Additionally, Algiers declared war on the U.S. in 1785, capturing two U.S. ships and holding the crews for ransom. Congress, due to its inability to force states to pay taxes to the federal government, could not afford the ransom the Algerians demanded. The U.S. could not create a treaty for peace with Algiers, nor raise the money to free the prisoners, until 1796, after the Constitution was established. 

The Articles gave Congress the power to negotiate treaties, but not to enforce them. Thus, there were issues with the enforcement of the Treaty of Paris (1873), which ended the Revolutionary War. The treaty specified that the British must remove all military personnel from U.S. soil. The British did not do so, as a result of disputes, and Congress had no power to enforce the measure. The inability to make the British leave caused problems with the Native Americans, who saw the new government as weak and ineffective. Also, the treaty allowed British creditors to sue U.S. citizens for debts compiled before the Revolutionary War. Obviously, this second measure was very unpopular in the U.S., and many states refused to enforce it. The U.S. also did not return confiscated land and property to British loyalists after the war. As a result of this refusal, the British continued to occupy some military forts in the U.S.

The problems caused with foreign relations were a direct result of the Articles of Confederation not granting enough power to the federal government. The Constitution corrected these oversights.

Would Brutus, from the Tragedy of Julius Caesar, be considered as a villain or a hero?

Although Brutus does play a pivotal role in Caesar's assassination, he is not really considered to be a villain because his motivations are not selfish or full of malice. Instead, Brutus is considered to be one of classic literature's tragic heroes.

Brutus is a well respected and he is a genuinely honorable man. He is honest, and wants only the best for Rome. While he is close friends with Julius Caesar, he is alarmed by Caesar's behavior and Brutus is afraid that his good friend has become corrupt and will be soon ruling Rome as a Dictator. As a result of these concerns, Brutus becomes involved in the plot to assassinate Caesar, believing that Caesar's death will benefit Rome. It is not that he wants his good friend dead. It is that he wants Rome to be saved from a Dictator and a tyrant.

Unfortunately, the men with whom he collaborates are not as honorable or as honest as Brutus. He does not realize this. This is apparent in Act II, Scene I where Brutus refuses to take an oath of loyalty to his fellow conspirators. He refuses because he feels that if everyone involved is truly honest, they should all be able to see this on one another's faces and that an oath is not necessary. This exemplifies his naiveté as a politician, and even as a man. He is betrayed later by some of these conspirators, much to his surprise. 

Brutus is a tragic hero because he is brought down by his own tragic flaws: naiveté and idealism.

What did The Jungle reveal about the meat-packing industry?

The Jungle revealed the unsanitary conditions in the meatpacking industry. Although Sinclair wrote the novel to expose the brutal exploitation of poor immigrant workers, the public reacted most strongly to its depictions of filth in Chicago's meat-packing plants. Audiences were particularly horrified at Sinclair's description of workers falling into rendering vats and becoming part of the ground meat sold to the public as "pure beef lard." 

Though Sinclair hoped his novel would raise outrage over working conditions and treatment of the poor, readers were more concerned with sanitation. As Sinclair would say, he aimed for people's hearts and hit their stomachs. 

The public outcry over conditions in the meat-packing industry led to government inspections of meat-packing facilities and the passage of both the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Eventually, reaction to the novel would lead to the formation of the Food and Drug Administration. 

What did Mr. Burke give to Jesse that belonged to Leslie?

This is an important question to consider. After Leslie's passing, or anyone's passing, divvying up that person's belongings can be a very meaningful and cathartic activity. We can pay special attention to scenes like these and understand more deeply the bonds that existed between the person who died and those who meant the most to her.

Let's look in Chapter 13, called "Building the Bridge." Jess is talking with Bill and Judy (the Burkes, who are Leslie's parents.) Here's what he has received so far:

They gave Jesse all of Leslie's books and her paint set with three pads of real watercolor paper. "She would want you to have them," Bill said.

Then, Jess gets one more thing right before the Burkes leave:

"Well," Bill said. "If there's anything we've left, that you want, please help yourself."

"Could I have some of the lumber on the back porch?" Jess asked.

"Yes, of course. Anything you see." Bill hesitated, then continued. "I meant to give you P. T.," he said. "But" - he looked at Jess and his eyes were those of a pleading little boy - "but I can't seem to give him up."

"It's OK. Leslie would want you to keep him."

So we've learned that Jess got Leslie's books, her paint set, her pads of watercolor paper, and some lumber from her back porch. But not P. T., the beloved dog. 

Although the books and art supplies make sense as a gift of remembrance of Leslie, that lumber deserves a bit of consideration. Why would Jess want it? How will he use it to honor Leslie's memory? If we read a bit further, and we if think about the title of the chapter, too, we see that he uses the lumber to build a bridge back to Terabithia. Then he invites his sister May Belle to play with him there. The lumber is a significant gift, then, because Jess uses it to keep on doing what Leslie inspired him to do: be creative, play, be imaginative, find the joy in life, and connect with other people.

List questions Vera asks Framton about the "people round here" and about her aunt.

Vera only asks Framton one direct question about his knowledge of the people in the area and one direct question about her aunt.

"Do you know many of the people round here?" asked the niece, when she judged that they had had sufficient silent communion.

The girl is fishing for information. There would be no point in asking Framton her other question if he said he did know some people "round here." 

"Hardly a soul," said Framton. "My sister was staying here, at the rectory, you know, some four years ago, and she gave me letters of introduction to some of the people here."

What he means by "Hardly a soul" is that he has met a few people because of the letters of introduction. This is a good example of how a fiction writer will convey information to the reader through dialogue, which is usually more interesting than straight prose exposition. When Vera is satisfied that Framton knows nothing about the people in the area and that his sister probably doesn't know about anything that could have happened there in recent years, she asks her other question.

"Then you know practically nothing about my aunt?" pursued the self-possessed young lady.

        "Only her name and address," admitted the caller.

The author has to establish that Framton is a perfect victim for the practical joke she intends to play. When she refers to the open window, it is not exactly a question.

"You may wonder why we keep that window wide open on an October afternoon," said the niece, indicating a large French window that opened on to a lawn.

This gives the girl her opportunity to tell her story about how the three hunters got sucked into a bog exactly three years ago and how her aunt, who had a mental breakdown, has been expecting them to return every evening since the tragedy occurred. Vera has to tell her story quickly because she has no idea when her aunt will put in an appearance.

Perhaps we should suspect that the girl has some ulterior motive for asking Framton her two direct questions when they first meet. But we do not realize, until after Framton flees in terror, that this innocent fifteen-year-old girl had been setting Framton up for a scare when the three hunters, supposedly dead for three years, return towards the open window in the gathering dusk and her giddy aunt says exactly what Vera knows she was going to say.

"Here they are at last!" she cried. "Just in time for tea, and don't they look as if they were muddy up to the eyes!"

If allegory brings such a message to the story, then why is it hardly ever used?

Allegory is not often a writer's first choice for at least a few reasons. It is difficult to write a sustained allegory, and allegories run the risk of a message being misunderstood or missed completely. 

An allegory does not simply bring a message to a story; it is the story. In a true allegory, the characters, the events, and the setting have meaning, and they must all operate consistently within the framework of the literal level of the story.  You cannot have an allegory if one character represents one thing and another character is just his literal self.  Everything in the story must combine to work at the literal level and at the allegorical level. In Animal Farm (Orwell), for example, the animals must all stay "in character" as animals and yet convey the message of the allegory. So, you can see that this can be an exhausting and difficult endeavor.  Many writers who have powerful messages to share can share them without all of this hard work!

Allegories can be misunderstood or the reader might be completely unaware there is a message. I can provide an example of this.  The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is an allegory. I read this when I was perhaps ten or eleven years old, which is probably not atypical.  Being a Jewish child, I had not a clue that this was a Christian allegory, and I would guess there are plenty of Christian children who read it who did not know this either. It was not until many years later that I came to realize that this was an allegory, at which point I did read it again and enjoyed the story at that level, too. However, the fact remains that there are probably many people who have no idea of the allegorical nature of the story.  C. S. Lewis wrote many other books on Christian theology, possibly because he was unable to communicate his messages through his allegories. 

As I am writing this, one other thought occurs to me, which is that allegories seem like a somewhat old-fashioned means of writing.  I would guess that many more allegories were written in days past than in days present.  I don't know if writers are too impatient or readers are too impatient, perhaps both, but messages seem to be conveyed more through other means today.

Imagine yourself sustaining an allegory over a few hundred pages. It is so difficult to do.  And then imagine that your readers do not even understand that you have written an allegory in the first place. I suspect the modern writer uses other ways of getting a message across!