Explain why lines 66 thru 72 could foreshadow Lancelot's arrival and the lady's actions in the second half of the poem. What yearning do you...

In Alfred, Lord Tennyson's poem "The Lady of Shalott," the title character lives secluded in a tower and spends all her time weaving. If she stops weaving, a curse will fall on her, so she "weaveth steadily." She often sings as she weaves, and she has placed a mirror behind her loom that shows her what is happening through her window, which is behind her. She "delights" to weave what she sees in the mirror, suggesting that she does not particularly chafe at her bondage. Lines 66 - 68 describe a funeral procession with music that proceeds to Camelot, and that doesn't seem to have any unusual effect on her. But in lines 69 - 70, by moonlight, she observes "two young lovers lately wed." No doubt seeing the doting couple drives home to the lady her solitude and stirs in her a desire to have a romantic relationship with a man. Although she has seen many sights of social interaction, this is the "final straw" that allows her to recognize her dissatisfaction with her lot. In the previous stanza, line 62, we learned that "she hath no loyal knight and true," and that fact added to her awakening desire for love from a man foreshadows the arrival of Sir Lancelot in line 74. Knowing that she is "half sick of shadows," that she is ready to live life to the fullest, including falling in love and getting married, we are prepared for her response to Sir Lancelot. "Half sick" is an understatement; she is more than ready to risk everything for a chance at love. When she hears Lancelot singing and sees his beautiful reflection in her mirror, "she left the web, she left the loom/ She made three paces thro' the room." This activates the curse that is upon her, and later that day, she dies just as she floats into Camelot, where she is viewed sympathetically by Sir Lancelot, who has no way of knowing that he was the catalyst to her demise.

For egg drop challenges, what is the best technique or style in creating your parachute design to prevent the cracking of the egg upon collision?...

Your focus should be less on the parachute and more on what container the egg will be in. In my experience, students who spend their time creating a good container do better than those that spend their time creating a good parachute. It is possible for an egg to survive a free fall with no parachute as long as it is in a good container. In order for the egg to survive, you want to minimize the force that the egg experiences when it hits the ground.

According to Newton's 2nd law, Force = mass x acceleration. Since the mass of the egg will be constant, in order to minimize the force, you need to minimize its acceleration. When you think of acceleration in its true scientific form, which is the rate of change of velocity (acceleration = change in velocity / change in time), it begins to make more sense. You want to increase the amount of time the egg has to stop as the container reaches the ground. This is exactly the same reason air bags in cars are successful; they increase the amount of time your body has to come to a stop, thus decreasing the acceleration and the amount of force your body experiences.

In order to accomplish this with your egg, think about air bags. They inflate to large sizes to the point that there is no space between the back of the seat, the person, and the air bag. In the same way, you want your egg to not be able to freely move in the container. The air bag provides a way for your body to continue moving safely even when the car has stopped. The same goes for your egg. Think about how you can provide it a way to continue moving even once the container has stopped. This will provide more time for it to slow to a stop, which will reduce the acceleration and thus the force the egg experiences. 

Once you have a good container, go ahead a build a parachute for good measure. Good luck and have fun!

Why do you think Hans's letters were so brief in The Book Thief by Markus Zusak?

Hans Hubermann's letters in The Book Thief by Markus Zusak were brief for two reasons. The first is that Hans was not a well-educated man. When Liesel is first learning to read, Hans is committed to helping her, but knows his own limitations in this regard. He himself finds reading and writing challenging. A second, and more significant, reason Hans writes short letters during his time in the second World War is that he does not want to worry or frighten his wife and foster daughter. When he is called to serve in the military for the second time, he is given an assignment that is an obvious punishment for his sympathetic actions towards Jews. He is assigned to a clean up crew of sorts. These men go into areas during air raids to put out fires, search for survivors, and so forth. Hans would not want to share his day to day activities with Liesel or Rosa because his day to day activities are mostly horrific.

Grim says "poor kevin" and gives a "long sorrowful look". How do you think grim's name and these two actions foreshadow what's to come in the story?

You are smart to recognize Grim’s words and actions as foreshadowing. Foreshadowing, of course, is a mention in a novel of what could happen later. When Grim talks about “poor Kevin” and gives a “long sorrowful look,” it foreshadows Kevin’s ultimate death from his birth defects. (Further, Gram also calls Kevin “poor baby.” This continues the foreshadowing.) Max recognizes that there is something wrong with Kevin. Kevin was always the kid at daycare who wore “shiny braces on his crooked legs,” but who also referred to himself as Robot Man. In this instance, however, Max emphatically defends his friend who is both adventurous and imaginative. Max is proud of Kevin, especially when they team up as the dual character of “Freak the Mighty.” Fortunately (or unfortunately), Grim and Gram can see the harsh reality: Kevin is a severely crippled child who will probably not live very long. Sure enough, Kevin’s heart is “too big for his body,” and Kevin eventually dies. Max remains so proud of Kevin that Max ends up writing all of their adventures down so that we can read about them.

Why did the United States want control over Japan?

The United States had an interest in having control over Japan after World War II ended. The United States had an interest in Japan in the 1800s also.

After World War II ended, Japan was destroyed as a result of the devastation caused by the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We knew the Soviet Union was interested in spreading communism after World War II ended, and Japan would be a prime place to spread it because of all the devastation and destruction that existed in Japan. Additionally, the Japanese economy was in ruins. The United States wanted to control Japan so we could help rebuild the country and its economy. We felt rebuilding Japan and its economy would help to keep Japan from becoming a communist nation.

In the 1850s, the United States wanted to trade with Japan. We wanted this trade to help our industries grow and to get products that we wanted from Japan. Japan reluctantly agreed to trade with us after our navy showed up in Japan.

The United States wanted to have control over Japan, mainly to keep it from becoming communist, but also to be able to trade with them.

In Arsenic and Old Lace, when does Act II take place?

The play Arsenic and Old Lace takes place on a September day in "present time," which, when it was written, was 1939. The play opens in the afternoon. Act II of the play takes place "later that night."

In Act I during the afternoon, Mortimer discovers a dead body in the window seat in the house of his two aunts. He thinks at first that his brother, Teddy (who thinks he is President Theodore Roosevelt), is the one who killed the man. He soon discovers that his two elderly aunts killed the man. They have been murdering men for awhile. Teddy thinks that he is digging the Panama Canal in the cellar. That is where the aunts secretly bury the bodies.

Near the end of Act I, Mortimer's brother, Jonathan, arrives with his doctor. The two aunts are uneasy about Jonathan's presence. He has had facial surgery and they do not recognize him. Jonathan's presence in the house is sinister.

Act II takes place near the middle of the play. When it begins, all of the main characters have been introduced. It is already clear that the two aunts are murderers. All of Act II takes place in the same evening over a relatively short period of time.

When Act II begins, Jonathan and his doctor are telling the story of what the last several years for them have been like. They are sitting in the living room in the early evening of the same day the play began. Abby hints that Jonathan should leave for the night, but he makes it clear that he wants to stay in the house. Soon it is revealed that Jonathan and his doctor are looking to bury a body of their own. They decide to bury it in the basement "Panama Canal."

Who is the main character in The Misfits?

Asking who the main character is in The Misfits is a lot like asking who the main character of the X-Men is.  You can't really do it, because the X-Men are nothing without the full group, and the stories all focus on the group.  The Misfits is the same way.  There are four people that make up a group, and the story is about their group.  The four members of the group call themselves the Gang of Five even though there are only four members.  It's a sort of inside joke to them; plus they figure that there is likely another social outcast like them that will need to join the group in the future.  

The four members of the gang are Joe, Bobby, Addie, and Skeezie.  In addition to them Mr. Kiley, the school principal, makes frequent appearances as does Mr. Kellerman.  He is Bobby's boss at the tie store.  There are two main characters that function as antagonists to the group.  They are Kevin Hennessey and Dushawn Carter.  

What are the differences and similarities between mRNA and tRNA?

We have a Science tutor online right now to help you!

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

How could seeds alter the carrying capacity of an ecosystem?

Carrying capacity may be defined as the maximum population that a given ecosystem can support. Depending on whether the seeds are brought into the ecosystem or taken out of the ecosystem, the carrying capacity of an ecosystem can be positively or negatively affected. 

Seeds are generally dispersed by a number of agents, including wind, water, animals, insects, etc. If the seeds are brought into the ecosystem, there is a chance of new plants growing which will provide oxygen and food to more organisms. This will likely increase the carrying capacity of the ecosystem. On the other hand, if the seeds produced by the plants (within the ecosystem) are dispersed out of the ecosystem, then potential new plants are lost and the carrying capacity of the ecosystem decreases. 

Hope this helps. 

In Orwell's Animal Farm, propaganda is used often to keep the animals (the non-pigs) in check. What are a few examples that illustrate this through...

Old Major's last words are as follows: "And, above all, no animal must ever tyrannise over his own kind....No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal" (21-22). After the pigs gain control of Animal Farm, these basic principles of Animalism are out the window, especially the idea of equality.

In order to keep the peace and remain in control of the other animals, without raising any red flags about the changes they continued to institute, the pigs offered up many different explanations for why things were the way they were. However, these "explanations" were more correctly propaganda, with Squealer as the mouthpiece for Napoleon.

Once Snowball was run off the farm by Napoleon's trained assassins (the dogs), the animals' society became more of a dictatorship ruled by Napoleon than an experiment in Socialism. Napoleon first appointed "a special committee of pigs, presided over by himself," (58). His first order of business was to cancel the Sunday-morning debates.

This change upset the animals, but they didn't possess the skills necessary to protest, and the few (young porkers) who uttered disapproval were immediately silenced by the dogs: "Suddenly the dogs sitting round Napoleon let out deep, menacing growls, and the pigs fell silent and sat down again," (59). Following this early change, Squealer was dispatched to keep the peace.

His feigned clarification included details about the extra hours Napoleon was putting in and the enormous amount of responsibility he had taken on as leader. He assured the animals that Napoleon still believed all animals were equal before laying down the guilt (propaganda) and scaring the animals into submission. "But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?" he asks (59).

Other examples of the propaganda (lies) spread by Squealer include the declaration that Snowball was a traitor, and that the windmill had been Napoleon's own idea, even though he had seemed opposed to it when Snowball presented it. "Squealer spoke so persuasively, and the three dogs who happened to be with him growled so threateningly, that they accepted his explanation without further questions" (62).

As the commandments gradually changed on the wall of the big barn to allow the pigs to behave in ways that had been prohibited under the original list, some animals took notice. "And Squealer, who happened to be passing at this moment, attended by two or three dogs, was able to put the whole matter in its proper perspective" (69-70).

His simplification of the changes advanced the ideas that the pigs needed their rest, required brain food, were the only ones capable of doing academic things, and held the cohesion of the farm sacred above all other things. None of these things were actually true. Instead, the pigs were merely making themselves more comfortable, staying better fed, pretending to make important decisions, and destroying the unity that once held them all together. And no matter what went wrong on the farm, Snowball was always to blame.

Squealer's persuasive approach was effective because of the way he delivered any news, skipping from side to side and whisking his tail as he did so. His movements held the animals' attention, while his entourage threatened them into believing him, and his perfectly-timed question, "Surely, you don't want Jones to come back?" scared them into fearing that if they didn't take him at his word, they'd be doomed.

Of course, in the end, they are doomed. The final scene illustrates the fact that despite the promises and propaganda spouted by Squealer, power has gone to the pigs' heads. They are indistinguishable from the humans, and ultimately the animals' fate is worse under their leadership than it had ever been under Jones's.

What was the author's purpose for writing "The Most Dangerous Game"?

It's difficult to accurately say what purpose Richard Connell had in mind when he wrote his famous short story, "The Most Dangerous Game." There are three potential answers.

First, he may have been interested in writing a suspenseful tale of adventure that would be a popular success. His story of a big game hunter who accidentally finds himself on the island of a maniacal murderer offers plenty of suspense as the reader doesn't know the outcome of the deadly hunt until the very last line. The story also takes the reader to an exotic locale and provides exciting adventure scenes, as when Rainsford devises the "Malay mancatcher" and the "Burmese tiger pit." Connell also portrays a very unique character in the form of the devious and sophisticated General Zaroff.

Secondly, Connell may have wished to write a story that would be considered literary, with elements of foreshadowing and two characters with multi-faceted personality traits. Connell uses his writing skills to foreshadow the eventual showdown between two hunters when Rainsford and Whitney are discussing the island they are passing with the ominous label, "Ship-Trap" island. They also foreshadow the hunt in their argument over the feelings of the animals they track. Rainsford becomes a dynamic character as he changes his outlook on hunting after being a "beast at bay" in the hands of the diabolical General. Zaroff, too, is a fascinating character, as he combines a sophisticated mentality, including elements of high culture (he reads Marcus Aurelius), with a sociopathic zeal in committing the murder of men he deems socially and culturally below him.

Third, Connell may have sought to produce an anti-hunting treatise. The story makes the reader consider if big game hunting simply for sport is ethical. Obviously, the practices of Zaroff are abominable, but Connell may be suggesting, especially with the character of Whitney, that all pleasure hunting is unscrupulous. Whitney pleads the case of the animal experiencing fear and pain in the process of providing entertainment for man. He has misgivings over killing a rare or exotic animal for no good reason.

We are assured that if the first two purposes mentioned mirror Connell's actual purpose, the story was a definite success. It was not only suspenseful, but also widely popular when first published in 1924. It is also a story that has been extensively anthologized in high school textbooks for many years as an example of excellence in the short story genre. The truth of the last potential purpose of the story must be left to the opinion of the reader.

THE SUM OF THE DIGITS OF A 2-DIGIT NUMBER IS 10. THE NUMBER OBTAINED BY INTERCHANGING THE DIGITS EXCEEDS THE ORIGINAL NUMBER BY 36.FIND THE...

Firstly we have rewrite the word problem into Mathematical form: 

Let's assume :

x = the 10's digits

y = units

Then the original number: 

10x + y = two digit number

Now lets write down what's given in the problem: 

x + y = 10  

Re-written as: y= 10 -x (equation 1)

We are also told the number obtained by interchanging the two digits exceeds the number by 36:

interchanged = original + 36

10y + x = 10x + y + 36

9y = 9x + 36

y = x + 4

Now equate the above equation to equation 1 

10 - x = x +4

2x = 6

x = 3

Now find y:

x+ y =10

y= 10 - 3

y = 7

Now we are required to find the original number. From above the equation of the original number is: 

10x + y = 10(3) + 7 =37

The original number is 37

In Zindel's The Pigman, what is the real reason John is writing his part of the story?

On the page preceding chapter one, there is an interesting type of prologue entitled "The Oath." John and Lorraine announce here that the story they are writing is true and a "memorial epic" for Mr. Pignati. It seems that by this oath that they want to honor the sweet old man they grew to love and to explain a few details about what they witnessed as far as death is concerned. For John, he probably wants to honor Mr. Pignati as well as show how Norton Kelly indirectly caused the poor man to die. For example, in chapter 5, which is one from John's perspective, he says that Norton is to blame.

". . . if Lorraine felt like saying one of us murdered Mr. Pignati, she should have blamed Norton. He' the one who finally caused all the trouble" (31).

Chapter 13 is when John and Lorraine invite friends over for a party but things get out of hand. Norton shows up unexpectedly and John catches him stealing an oscilloscope. Norton punches John and runs away, but he's not finished. John explains the next horrifying events as follows:

". . . there was Norton holding a large white pig, which he brought down suddenly on a table edge, knocking its head off. He looked inside and then threw it against the wall where it blasted to pieces. Several other broken pigs were lying all over the floor" (155-156).

Mr. Pignati comes home to see his pig collection in pieces and his home vandalized. John believes this is the moment that killed Mr. Pignati, even though he dies the next day at the zoo. John would rather blame the old man's death on Norton who smashed most of the pig collection; and, by writing parts of the story, he would be able to get his truth about it out into the open.

In truth, though, the destruction of the pigs was only the first breaking point. Mr. Pignati is also very disappointed in John and Lorraine for having the party at his house while he was in the hospital. The final thing that destroys Mr. Pignati's heart, though, is that Bobo the baboon dies at the zoo.

`(5pi)/12` Find the exact values of the sine, cosine, and tangent of the angle.

`(5pi)/12=pi/4+pi/6`

`sin(u+v)=sin(u)cos(v)+cos(u)sin(v)`

`sin(pi/4+pi/6)=sin(pi/4)cos(pi/6)+cos(pi/4)sin(pi/6)`

`sin(pi/4+pi/6)=(sqrt2/2)(sqrt3/2)+(sqrt2/2)(1/2)=sqrt2/4(sqrt3+1)`

`cos(u+v)=cos(u)cos(v)-sin(u)sin(v)`

`cos(pi/4+pi/6)=cos(pi/4)cos(pi/6)-sin(pi/4)sin(pi/6)`

`cos(pi/4+pi/6)=(sqrt2/2)(sqrt3/2)-(sqrt2/2)(1/2)=sqrt2/4(sqrt3-1)`

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

`tan(pi/4+pi/6)=(tan(pi/4)+tan(pi/6))/(1-tan(pi/4)tan(pi/6))=(1+(sqrt3/3))/(1-(1)(sqrt3/3))=((3+sqrt3)/3)/((3-sqrt3)/3)=(3+sqrt3)/(3-sqrt3)`

After rationalizing the denominator the answer is `2+sqrt3.`

In Frankenstein, what happens when Victor, at age fifteen, sees an oak tree destroyed by lightning and hears an explanation? What does Victor then...

Victor sees a spectacular proof of the power of the nature when he witnesses lightning strike a tree with "curiosity and delight." He says, 

I beheld a stream of fire issue from an old and beautiful oak [...]; and so soon as the dazzling light vanished, the oak had disappeared, and nothing remained but a blasted stump [....]. It was not splintered by the shock, but entirely reduced to thin ribbands of wood. I never beheld anything so utterly destroyed.

In witnessing the extreme power of the natural world, Victor loses interest in the supernatural. Any interest that he once had in alchemy or searches for the philosopher's stone or the elixir of life dissolves when he sees what is possible with the intensity and dominance of electricity, a natural power that has the force to obliterate a very large and solid oak (a tree known for its own strength).

Victor says that, although he lost interest in the writers who focused on the supernatural and the occult, "by some fatality [he] did not feel inclined to commence the study of any modern system [of science]." Instead, he turned to the study of mathematics and languages (Greek, English, and German) until his parents determined to send him to the university at Ingolstadt when he turned seventeen. It was at the university that Victor began his study of modern science.

In "The cask of Amontillado," who is Montresor telling the story to and what evidence is there to prove this?

While the person to whom Montresor narrates the story of his revenge is never specified, several clues indicate he is telling it to his priest. First, he addresses the person as "You, who so well know the nature of my soul." The term "soul" rather than "me" would indicate he addresses a spiritual advisor. Given that Montresor is an adult when he walls up Fortunato, he must very old now: "For the half of a century no mortal has disturbed them [Fortunato's remains]." In other words, fifty years have gone by since Montresor did his evil deed, so we might assume he is on his deathbed and confessing his misdeeds. We can draw the conclusion that he is Catholic since the story takes place in Venice, a Catholic city. That he feels guilt, which would lead him to confess, is suggested by his saying "my heart grew sick" as he finishes his task of the walling up his enemy. He explains that this heartsickness was due to "the dampness of the catacombs" but we as readers might suspect a guilty conscience has motivated Montresor to break his long silence. 

What is one way that Shakespeare's "Sonnet 18" differs from his "Sonnet 130?"

The main way that those two Shakespearean sonnets differ is in their treatment of the written about woman.  Both sonnets are explanations of love by the speaker.  That's how they are similar.  The main overall message is one of love.  

The difference is in how the speaker talks about the object of his love.  In Sonnet 18, the speaker initially tries to compare his lover to a summer's day.  He then quickly decides that is lame, because his lover is way more amazing than summer and summer days in a bunch of ways.  Basically, Sonnet 18 is incredibly complimenting toward the woman.  

Sonnet 130 is not at all complimenting to the woman.  The speaker goes on for 12 lines about how ugly she is.  

My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red than her lips' red;
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.

He talks about how her voice is awful to listen to and how her breath stinks crazy bad too.  The only reason it is a love poem at all is because of the final couplet.  

And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare
   As any she belied with false compare. 

The final lines basically say that none of the previous stuff matters.  He still loves her deeply.  In other words, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  

In summary, Sonnet 18 basically says "I love you because you are awesome."  Sonnet 130 basically says, "I love you even though you aren't awesome." 

How were Gilgamesh and Enkidu different from one another?

While Gilgamesh and Enkidu have many common characteristics, such as their extreme physical prowess, Enkidu in many ways serves as the antithesis of the great King Gilgamesh. Both their similarities and differences are by design, as Enkidu was created specifically to arrest the great arrogance of King Gilgamesh.

Gilgamesh is a man of noble bearing, a warrior king who was born and raised in a great urban center of the ancient world. He is cultured and educated and possesses authority derived from the traditions of a political system. Enkidu on the other hand is a wild man, formed of earth and saliva, raised by animals, or at first completely unaware of the ways of human society. He lacks the education and cultural knowledge of Gilgamesh, and his authority is entirely the product of his own strength.

Why does Jem ask Scout not to do anything to antagonize Aunt Alexandra? (This is referencing the time when Scout asked what "rape" was.)

Chapter 14 of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird starts out with Scout hearing someone say obscurely, "They c'n go loose and rape up the countryside for all of 'em who run this county care" (135). She remembers that she had asked Calpurnia what the word rape means, but Cal told her to ask her father. So when she hears this comment, she decides to ask him. Atticus doesn't seem to catch on to what Scout is saying and has her explain as Aunt Alexandra listens in. Before Scout can get an answer, Aunt Alexandra shifts the dramatic focus off of the question at hand to the apparently unfathomable fact that the kids visited a colored church with Calpurnia. 

Then Scout forgets about her first question about rape and mentions that Calpurnia had also invited the kids to visit her home sometime. Scout asks Atticus if that would be possible and Aunt Alexandra says, "You may not" (136). Scout says, "I didn't ask you" and Atticus makes her apologize to her aunt. The adults get into an argument and Scout goes off to the bathroom to regroup. This is where Jem gets involved and asks her, "Scout, try not to antagonize Aunty, here?" (137).

Jem explains that the trial is weighing heavily on Atticus's mind, but that's all he can really explain from his twelve year-old perspective. What he means to tell her is Atticus doesn't need Scout to get Aunt Alexandra all screaming and arguing with him about the way the kids are being raised because he's bearing the weight of the community on his shoulders as it is with the Tom Robinson case. Rather than articulate this properly, though, Jem tells Scout that he'll spank her if she antagonizes Aunty again. Scout never gets the exact definition of rape explained to her, either. She partly figures it out later while watching the trial.

If there had been no typhoon when the Mongols faced the Samurai, would the Samurai still have won? Or would the Mongols win?

Unlikely.

While the typhoons no doubt contributed to the defense of the shogunate against the Mongol hordes, Japan was very likely safe regardless. In fact, the Mongols had attacked multiple times before and also failed.

Indeed, Japan had never been successfully invaded in thousands of years. The first successful occupation of Japan by a foreign power in recorded history was by the United States in 1945, and it required nuclear weapons (the only nuclear weapons ever used in combat, in fact) and aircraft carriers.

The islands of Japan themselves, particularly the main island Honshu, are essentially a natural fortress. Instead of walls and a moat, they have mountain plateaus and the Sea of Japan. This has made Japan basically invulnerable to foreign invasion for millennia.

As a result, Japanese culture has grown and developed isolated from other societies at a level matched by almost no other culture. This is reflected in their language, which other than the borrowing of kanji from Chinese, has no other known languages in its family.

What is happening in the first four lines of the story "The Pit and the Pendulum"? Describe the dramatic tension that this opening creates.

In the first four lines of "The Pit and the Pendulum," the narrator indicates his wavering consciousness. Further, the narrator seems to also exhibit a character that is hallucinatory; so, there is dramatic tension created in the narrative because the lines between reality and what is in the mind of the narrator become blurred. 

These first lines of Poe's story set the moribund and horrific tone for the narrative. There is also a sense of utter despair with the phrase "sick unto death with that long agony." And, this despair is accompanied by the hallucinatory character of the narrator--

I felt that my senses were leaving me....the sound of the inquisitorial voices seemed merged in one dreamy indeterminate hum--

all of which suggest the narrator's unstable consciousness. Certainly, he is isolated and in a desperate situation. But, the reader must perceive this situation through the vortex of the narrator's agonized mind.

Explain why Socrates is qualified for the death penalty.

Athenian legal procedures were divided into two parts. The first part involved the jury voting on the guilt of the accused and the second part determining the penalty if the accused was found guilty.

Plato's Apology only gives us a reconstruction of Socrates' defense. It is unlikely to have been an accurate transcription, but rather Plato's understanding of the philosophical assumptions behind Socrates' choices. We do not have preserved the case made by the accusers. 

The crime of which Socrates was accused was asebeia, or impiety. This meant refusal to honor the gods of the city or doing something to offend those gods. The problem with impiety was that the Greeks believed that if the gods were offended with one inhabitant of the polis, they might take revenge on the entire city (as one can see in Oedipus Rex). Therefore, when Socrates was found guilty of impiety, he was given the choice of exile or death, so that his presence would not offend the gods. Socrates chose the death penalty over exile, a choice that was considered very unusual in the period. Plato's Phaedo and Crito explain some of the reasons for this choice. 

I need help with this question: “...Salem folk believed that the virgin forest was the Devil’s last preserve...” How is the forest used to...

The forest as it is described in The Crucible is the meeting place where the girls, under the direction of Tituba, conjure spirits and dance. The implications is that the forest has spaces hidden from view so that the girls can do these things in secret. But also, being outdoors and closer to nature, the forest represents the wild and untamed aspects of human nature. Reverend Parris refers to his daughter and niece "dancing like heathens" in the forest; heathen is a word for one who does not worship God, and the word "heathen" is derived from "heath dweller" which means one who lives close to nature, and is thereby seen as not following the dominant religious faith. This is an attitude that comes from the the age of superstition that characterized the witch hunts in Europe and America; it has to do with city dwellers being more sophisticated than urban dwellers, since city dwellers are more likely to be literate, and able to read the Bible, etc. 

The forest is generally a symbol that is associated with a primordial archetype like that described by Jung; it represents darkness and possible evil. Different archetypes are connected to different qualities within human thought and emotions; the forest is connected to the "shadow self" and its similarity to untamed nature and animalistic instincts. There is a connection to sex as well, and its expression being linked to our animalistic selves; and elsewhere in the play John Proctor refers to his affair with Abigail as similar to what "beasts" do.

What are five facts about Lorraine Hansberry and her career and adult life?

We have a History tutor online right now to help you!

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

Who asked Scrooge for a charitable contribution?

After Scrooge had reached been thoroughly annoyed by his nephew's cheerful attitude and Christmas spirit, he was visited by two "portly gentlemen."  They were in his office to ask for charitable donations for the poor.  The two men explained that during this festive time of year, it was important to remember the poor with generosity.  They told Scrooge that the poor were in great need.  Scrooge asked the men if there were still prisons for the poor criminals to stay in.  One of the men said that yes, there were.  Scrooge asked if there were still work houses.  One man said that he wished there were not any.  They continued their conversation, asking Scrooge how much money he wanted to donate to the poor.  Scrooge told them that he did not want to give any money to the poor.  He told them that if poor people died that they would "decrease the surplus population."  The men then left.

What are some quotes that show how the conch lost its power in the middle of the novel or later in the book Lord of the Flies?

The conch loses its power when Jack and the hunters break off, leaving civilization for savagery.

The conch is symbolic.  When the boys first gather together, it is because Ralph blew the conch.  From that point on, it holds a sort of mystical quality.  Since it had the power to bring them together, they think that it can keep them together.  This is why they choose Ralph as leader, even though Jack is a more natural choice.  Ralph’s qualifications begin and end with holding and conch.

They boys use the conch to take turns when speaking, acknowledging its power and granting it further power.  The conch becomes symbolic of civilization, and control.  Whoever has the conch controls the conversation.

“…I’ll give the conch to the next person to speak. He can hold it when he’s speaking.”

“But–”

“Look–”

“And he won’t be interrupted: Except by me.” (Ch. 2)

However, not everyone on the island wants to be civilized.  From the beginning, Jack and his choir exhibit signs of savagery.  They are assigned as hunters, which means that they will kill.  Soon there are war dances, war chants, and even war paint.  As the hunters splinter off from the main group, their behavior gets more and more primitive.  Soon there are the hunters and the others.  Ralph no longer has the control he once had, and neither does the conch.

“I got the conch,” said Piggy indignantly. “You let me speak!”

“The conch doesn’t count on top of the mountain,” said Jack, “so you shut up.”

“I got the conch in my hand.” (Ch. 2)

Eventually, the conch has essentially no power, because there is no one left to follow Ralph.  His attempt to keep the boys civilized has failed.  Jack’s way is more enticing.  No one follows Ralph’s summons except the littlest kids.

Jack seems to exist outside the control of the conch, because he threatens Ralph’s authority.  When Jack talks, even if he doesn’t have it, the boys listen.  Jack’s way of ruling is much less democratic.

“Conch! Conch!” shouted Jack. “We don’t need the conch any more.  We know who ought to say things. What good did Simon do speaking, or Bill, or Walter? It’s time some people knew they’ve got to keep quiet and leave deciding things to the rest of us.” (Ch. 6)

Jack continues asserting that the conch doesn’t count.  He establishes himself on the opposite end of the island, on an outcropping of rock, and tells Ralph that the conch “doesn’t count at this end of the island” (Ch. 9).  Ralph maintains that it counts everywhere, but he is outnumbered.  By Chapter 10, the conch is described as “fragile.”

It is no coincidence that Piggy’s death coincides with the death of the conch.  Piggy has been the voice of reason.  He thinks like an adult, making him a link to civilization and society.  His death eliminates the last vestiges.

The rock struck Piggy a glancing blow from chin to knee; the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist. (Ch. 10)

The conch is gone.  There is no order.  The conch’s power existed in the boys giving it power, and as its power diminished, so too did their control over one another diminish.  Soon, they were reduced to a savagery and disorder.

The conch’s symbolism is rampant throughout the book.  As the boys show less and less regard for Ralph, who represents order, they show less and less response to the conch.  By the time it is destroyed, Ralph has no power at all.

What are the advantages of Art?

The “advantages” of Art – over pragmatic or constructive activities in the “real world” – are two-fold: for the artist, a means of self-expression, of releasing abstract emotions or ideas; for the consumer (the theatre or music patron or the patron at an art museum) Art is an ineffable connection with not only the artist but also with the realm of human senses outside the immediate “scientific” or “engineering” area of human conduct. “Value” is , in art, not necessarily connected with the profit motive of the free enterprise system. If the arts, whether visual, musical, or performance, acknowledge the existence of human value beyond mere survival, its advantage becomes obvious. The human condition is a complex set of needs, desires, and emotions, and the Arts serve those appetites.

In A Christmas Carol, where did the first spirit take Scrooge?

As you read Chapter 2, “The First of the Three Spirits,” in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, you travel with the Ghost of Christmas Past and Scrooge  to his childhood boarding school. Scrooge was the solitary student left at the school while all of the other students, who ignored his welfare, left for Christmas break. In the next scene, the Spirit of Christmas Past shows Scrooge the time when his kind, younger sister comes to bid him to come home. The spirit reminds Scrooge that his sister died, leaving one child, the nephew, whom Scrooge treated poorly just that day.

Their next stop was the warehouse where Scrooge apprenticed under Mr. Fezziwig. They watch a party scene in which Fezziwig and his wife throw a party for family, friends, service providers, and their employees. Scrooge fondly remembers his fellow apprentice, Dick, and learns a lesson in gratitude and sharing one’s wealth.

Finally, the Ghost takes Scrooge to the home of his former fiancé. She is a mature woman with a loving husband and a daughter of her own. Scrooge endures a sense of loss and begs the Spirit to take him away.

In Monster, what is a lesson Steve learns from the other inmates, and how will this help him in the future?

Towards the end of the novel, two inmates are discussing their legal proceedings. One of the inmates comments that he has no other choice but to lie while he is on the witness stand because telling the truth will result in a ten-year sentence. The other inmate comments that once you're in the system, there is no time "to get all holy," and you need to focus on getting out any way possible. When the other inmate responds by asking what the truth is, Steve says, "The truth is truth. It's what you know to be right" (Myers 225). The other inmate then says the truth is something he gave up while he was on the street. Once you're in the system, it is all about survival. Steve learns his idea of the truth will not help him get out of the system. Steve realizes he will have to lie on the witness stand to make it out of jail. Steve must do everything in his power to avoid being found guilty. When Steve testifies, he alters his story and is found not guilty.

Do you think there really was a raven in the speaker's chambers? Why or why not? What is your explanation for what happened on that "midnight...

That is an interesting question.  I've never imagined questioning whether or not the bird was actually a real bird.  I have always thought it was a real bird that actually flew into the speaker's room and sat on the bust.  I think it was a real bird, because I have no reason to doubt that a raven could have flown into his house.  Just this year, I have had two different birds fly into my classroom and land on my upper cabinets.  All learning pretty much ceases as a classroom of 25 seventh graders try to shoo a bird out that has no intention of leaving.  If a bird can enter my classroom, I have no reason to doubt a raven could enter the speaker's chamber.  

As for the raven "speaking," I think the speaker was hearing what he wanted to hear from the raven.  I have pets at home.  I'm not going to lie, the dog and I have conversations depending on the type of bark that comes out of her mouth.  I know I'm not the only person to have ever done such a thing, so I don't feel overly odd.  I have no reason to doubt that in the speaker's tired state (after all, he was "nearly napping"), he imagined the bird's caw as a human word.  From there, the speaker is simply having a conversation with the bird, but the speaker is filling in all of the meaningful dialogue of the raven.  It's no different than listening to my four year old carry on conversations with his Lego guys.  He is mentally performing both sides of the conversation, but I only hear his version.  The speaker in the poem is hearing all sorts of meanings and implications from the raven's caw, and he is carrying on a conversation that coincides with it.  It is sad that the one sided conversation does drive the speaker into a deeper depression over the lost Lenore though. 

What does Jordan's story reveal about Daisy in Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby?

Jordan's tale reveals Daisy's superficiality and her great desire for material objects and the high value that she places on wealth and social class. 

In Chapter Four, Jordan relates to Nick that in 1917 she was walking past Daisy's house and Daisy called out to her from her white roadster, where she was sitting with a lieutenant with whom Jordan was not acquainted. He was a man who was looking at Daisy "in a way that every young girl wants to be looked at sometime...because it looked romantic..." 
The next year, Jordan, who was busy playing in golf tournaments, heard a "wild rumor" that Daisy's mother caught her packing her bag one winter night to go to New York, where she planned to bid goodbye to this lieutenant. Her mother prevented this departure, and Daisy did not speak to her mother for some time. "After that she didn't play around with the soldiers any more...."

But the next year, Daisy had a debut, and in February she was "presumably engaged to a man from New Orleans." In June she married Tom Buchanan "with more pomp and circumstance than Louisville ever knew before." He came to Louisville for the wedding with a hundred people and rented an entire floor of the best hotel. The day before the wedding Tom gave Daisy a string of pearls worth three hundred and fifty thousand dollars. [This necklace would be worth approximately $4 million nowadays.]

Oddly enough, Jordan arrived thirty minutes before the bridal dinner, only to discover a drunken Daisy. Pulling the expensive pearl necklace out of a wastebasket, she tells Jordan to take the pearls back to

"...whomever they belong. Tell'em all Daisy's change' her mine. Say 'Daisy's change' her mine!"

Then she began to cry. But, after Jordan and her mother's maid locked the door and put her into a cold bath, it was only thirty minutes later and "the incident was forgotten." So, Daisy and Tom were married at five o'clock that evening and then started on a three months' trip to the South Seas. When they returned, Jordan remarks that she had never seen a woman "so mad about her husband." Whenever they were together, she says, Daisy looked at Tom with "unfathomable delight," and she adds that in Chicago the Buchanans moved with a "fast crowd" who were "young and rich and wild."

Clearly, Daisy became in love with being rich. She quickly sacrificed her real feelings--in only thirty minutes--for the ecstasy of wealth and all that accompanies it. She is a superficial woman who values materialism over true feelings.

[All quotes are from Chapter Four of The Great Gatsby]

What are examples of dramatic irony in chapters 8, 9, or 10 of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

Dramatic irony occurs when, due to the unfolding action, a reader or audience gains more understanding of a character's situation than the character currently has. Harper Lee especially creates dramatic irony in Chapter 8 of To Kill a Mockingbird through Scout's and Jem's limited understanding of what Arthur (Boo) Radley giving Scout the blanket signifies.

After the fire is put in out in Chapter 8, Jem is the first to realize that the mysterious woolen blanket Scout is wearing wrapped around her shoulders must have been given to her by Arthur Radley. However, despite his realization, Jem is still unable to see Arthur as the caring, albeit reclusive, man the reader is beginning to see him as. Jem does not yet see him as caring; however, he is beginning to see him as harmless but still insane, as we see in Jem's ramblings about Arthur to Atticus:

'... Mr. Nathan put cement in that tree, Atticus, an' he did it to stop us findin' things—he's crazy, I reckon, like they say, but Atticus, I swear to God he ain't ever harmed us, he ain't ever hurt us.' (Ch. 8)

In contrast, the reader has reasons to doubt Arthur's insanity due to the kind things the reliable character Miss Maudie has to say about him earlier in Chapter 5. Therefore, in contrast to Jem, the reader is beginning to see Arthur not as someone who simply won't harm the children, as Jem sees, but as one who genuinely cares for the children and wants to express his sentiment in any quiet way he can.

In contrast to Jem, Scout, being the youngest, is very slow to understand who gave her the blanket. Plus, she understands even less about what the the gift of the blanket signifies than Jem does; in contrast to Jem, Scout still sees Arthur as someone to be terrified of. Scout's unawareness is revealed when, after her father says, "Someday, maybe, Scout can thank him for covering her up," Scout blankly replies, "Thank who?" (Ch. 8). Furthermore, her continued terror of Arthur is revealed when, after Jem explains Boo Radley put the blanket around her, she describes that her "stomach turned to water and [she] nearly threw up when Jem held out the blanket and crept toward [her]." However, unlike Scout, the reader, at this point in the story, knows that the children have no reason to fear Arthur Radley.

Since the reader understands far more about Arthur Radley by Chapter 8 than either Jem or Scout, we know that author Lee uses the incident concerning the blanket to build dramatic irony.

How do the soldiers view Creon in Antigone throughout the play?

To answer this question, it is helpful to look at the scene between Creon and the Sentry. When Creon tells a Sentry that his "very voice distresses" him, the Sentry responds:

SENTRY: Are you sure it is my voice, and not your conscience?

This aggressive response back to Creon is very telling of the soldiers' perspective on Creon and his actions. The soldiers are critical of their new leader and are openly vocal about their dissent. In this example, Creon responds to the Sentry that he "talks too much," but the Sentry responds:

SENTRY: Maybe; but I've done nothing... How dreadful it is when the right judge judges wrong! 

While there are also messengers and a chorus within the play, these characters cannot necessarily represent the soldier perspective. In classical Greek drama, one character often represents the voice of many. In this example, the sentry represents the perspective of the soldiers, and so it can rightly be assumed that the soldiers are not approving of Creon or his decisions. 

What is the essence of the negative signals Da-duh signaled at the beginning of the story?

The second we are introduced to Da-duh by the granddaughter, we learn that Da-duh is in charge and the matriarch of the family. Da-duh’s daughter and granddaughters approach her apprehensively fearing her hypercritical nature. Da-duh immediately judges them and sizes them up before ever really talking to them. 

We see Da-duh’s influence on her own daughter when the daughter’s hand tightens around the hand of Da-duh’s granddaughter, and she approaches Da-duh very formally.  The granddaughter notices that her mother has “suddenly with a word been reduced to my status.”  Da-duh also sums up the other granddaughter when she says she will be lucky in life because she is of “lighter skin.”  Da-duh’s impression of her other granddaughter (the narrator) is that she has a “fierce” look about her, something we learn is characteristic of Da-duh as well. Da-duh’s lack of a loving greeting and her judgmental nature gives off a negative and powerful presence.

Da-duh’s physical description also gives us insight into her negative aura.  The granddaughter describes her face as, “stark and fleshless as a death mask . . . only the framework of bone beneath the ruined skin and deep wells at the temple and jaw. But her eyes were alive, unnervingly so for one so old.”

Da-duh's negativity shows she is a formidable figure not only in appearance but also in her attitude.  Her family fears her and shows her the respect she demands. She is not a loving mother (despite having 14 children), and she is critical of those around her who don’t live her way of life in Barbados. It is only the granddaughter who challenges Da-duh’s power in the story.

What is Crooks's "dignity" and "pride" ?

Crooks’s dignity and pride is centered on his room, his private space. This is the only part of his world that he controls, and he does not appreciate it when Lennie enters uninvited, followed by Candy. This is the only place where he is able to be free of a white man’s contempt. His handicap and his race have delegated him to a space separate from the rest of the ranch hands. Therefore, he guards it with a certain amount of force. He reluctantly allows Lennie to remain, once he sees that Lennie does not see him as just a “black man.” Candy too, as another marginalized person, also gains admittance to Crooks’s sanctuary.

When Curley’s wife enters, however, his dignity is struck down, which is doubly humiliating since it occurs on his own ground. He thus has no place to retreat where he can be merely himself. He orders Curley’s wife out, as well as Lennie and Candy. The chance for a relationship based on equality has been ruined.

How many surgeries has August had in Wonder?

August Pullman, the protagonist of Wonder, written by R.J. Palacio, was born with significant facial abnormalities. Even though he is only ten years old, he has had twenty-seven surgeries to try and correct his craniofacial structure. Because August has required so many surgeries, he has been homeschooled for most of his life. Now that he is about to enter the fifth grade, and he wont need another surgery for some time, he is preparing to attend mainstream school for the very first time. August is worried that beginning mainstream school will entice his classmates to tease him and call him mean names. Even though he's had so much surgery, his face still does not look entirely "normal," and he fears it will prevent other kids from getting to know the real August.

How was Hamlet's conscience the main reason for delay when it came to killing Claudius?

In Act III, Scene 3, Hamlet has the chance to kill Claudius when he is all alone. However, Hamlet hesitates because Claudius is praying. He reasons that to kill Claudius in this way would only send him to Heaven. This is not the kind of revenge he has in mind. He notes that Claudius killed his own father in a much less devout state. The old King Hamlet was full of food and had his sins still on his soul ("his crimes broad blown"). Hamlet thinks it is more fitting to kill Claudius during a sinful moment. This seems to be a question of how his revenge will best be carried out. But it is a hesitation of Hamlet's conscience. It doesn't seem moral or fitting to kill Claudius during the act of praying. 

In the scene prior to this, Hamlet used the players to act out a scene in which a king is poisoned. Hamlet does this to get some reaction from Claudius because it mirrors his crime. Hamlet wants to see the guilt on Claudius's face. It is not enough to just kill Claudius. The death must be dramatized (pun intended). Ideally, he wants Claudius to be aware of his sin, mired in it, when he dies. It would only help the "state of Denmark" if that guilt is made public as well. Hamlet wants to wait for Claudius to be in particular inner (mental) and outer (public) states before he kills him. For Hamlet, ideally, Claudius will be spiritually and publicly guilty when he is killed. For Hamlet, this is about revenge as well as righting a spiritual imbalance left when his father was killed. 

In approximately 3 paragraphs summarize the events that took place in Julius Caesar up to Act 3 Scene 2

Brutus gives a speech to the people explaining that even though he loved Caesar, he had to kill him in order to save Rome from his ambition. He then asks if anyone disagrees, and when no one voices an opinion he decides that the people have accepted is explanation.

Antony joins Brutus onstage with Caesar’s body. Brutus accepts him as part of the new government and the crowd cheers. They seem to agree with Brutus. Antony gives his famous speech about burying Caesar rather than praising him. He then, however, goes on to say many good things about the ruler, including stories of his victories in war and his refusals of the crown. Antony begins to cry. He refuses to read Caesar’s will, claiming it would cause problems for Brutus and Cassius. The people begin to accuse the two men of treason, and it becomes clear that Antony is playing them.

Antony changes his tone towards outright criticism. He shows the crowd the wounds in Caesar’s body, reminds them that he loved Brutus, and focuses on the horror of the stabbing. He says he will not convince the people to mutiny, because he doesn’t have the speaking skills. They do mutiny, however, and the scene ends with the news that Brutus and Cassius have fled Rome.

What are the turning points in A Doll's House?

In literature, a "turning point" is when the plot crisis leads to a moment of decision that turns the plot direction and that makes the upcoming climax inevitable. There can be minor turning points during the rising action and complication and for secondary characters where things can take a "turn for the worst," but the central "turning point" drives the upcoming plot climax. 

... opposing forces interlock in a decisive action upon which the plot will turn (i.e., the turning point of the plot) ... the point at which the end becomes inevitable ... the climax [is] the point of maximum intensity and the crisis [is] the turning point in the action; ... the climax and the turning point do not always occur together. (Mary Fonseca, Santa Monica College)

Two types of turning points can be seen in A Doll's House: 

• a) the turning points in each character's storyline.


• b) the turning points that are pivotal to the play and its timeline, as a whole

Let's start with the secondary characters. 

In A Doll's House each character, except for Torvald, has a chance to make a decision for their own sake, whether the decision is one to make their lives better, or not. 

Dr. Rank

Even though Dr. Rank's personal turning points do not affect the action of the play, as he is a symbolic character,  his turning points are important to his own life story.

When he finds out that he has tuberculosis of the spine, the diagnosis leads him to decide to do two important things: a) declare his love for Nora and, b) stop visiting the Helmers, which he has done for quite some time. His final good-bye comes in the form of two cards with crosses on them, which are used to announce his impending death. These are his turning points because the two very difficult decisions he had to make, in light of the tragedy coming his way, altered the directions his and Nora's lives were to take. 

Mrs. Linde and Krogstad

Mrs. Linde, Nora's lifelong friend, and the mischievous Krogstad have mutual turning points. Right in the midst of blackmailing Nora by using their common secret as bait to make her convince Helmer not to fire him, Krogstad finds his old flame, Christine Linde, after so many years.

After a deep discussion about how each of them ended up going their own way, Christine proposes that they get together again and make up for their past.

In a move that surprises many, Krogstad immediately agrees, showing a much softer side of his personality that nobody ever predicts would appear. 

This is a turning point for both characters because their decision (together) to move away from their current lives changes the direction their lives go as they start over a new life together. 

Mrs Linde. I want to be a mother to someone, and your children need a mother. We two need each other. Nils, I have faith in your real character--I can dare anything together with you.

Krogstad [grasps her hands]. Thanks, thanks, Christine! Now I shall find a way to clear myself in the eyes of the world.

The big turning points

Moving on to the main characters, Nora and Helmer, the turning points become more poignant as they are pivotal to the turning plot of the play. 

In Nora's life, there is a flashback to a turning point that led her to where she is now. 

• 1. The death of her father left her with no choice but to find aid elsewhere after Helmer gets very ill


• 2. She makes the decision of seeking help from Krogstand, who loans her money; this is something very much against social norm and that may lead Nora to fall in disgrace if it is ever found out. 

• 3. Nora's life takes a turn as a result of saving Helmer's life and binding herself in a pledge to repay all the money to Krogstad. 

This particular flashback turning point, asking for money from Krogstad, is what causes the central problem in the plot of the play. Being bound to Krogstad's payments, Nora hides it all from Helmer so he will find out about her actions, actions which would ruin her if known.

Nora's solution is to be a pleasing wife to Helmer with the hope that, if he ever found out, he would see that she is a good wife, anyway. Her biggest hope, her "miracle", would be that Helmer would see beyond the social norms and understand the sacrifice that Nora does for him.

Turning point 2: 

Nora decides against asking Dr. Rank for money

While Dr. Rank could have lent, or even given, Nora all the money that she needed, she decided against asking for it, setting up a deepening of the complication in the plot of the play. This is an interesting aspect Nora's character. It shows that she holds deep respect for the people that she loves. had she decided to take advantage of Rank's love, there would have been no crisis. 

Turning point 3:

Nora allows Helmer to read the letter

Nora allows the inevitable by remaining quiet as Helmer reads the letter from Krogstad. Remember that Nora had a hope that a "miracle" would happen, and that Helmer would see beyond her mistake. Unfortunately, the worst outcome occurs. Helmer is horrible to Nora, insults her, demeans her, and thinks absolutely nothing of the fact that his wife entered into a very dangerous pact just to save his (Helmer's) life. This leads to the final and most telling turning point, the one that precedes the climax of the plot and introduces the upcoming resolution.

Turning point 4:

Nora decides to leave Helmer and her children and moves on in what we consider a path to find herself again. 

Nora sees that nothing good came out of her sacrifices. She sees that her husband is unable to move past it. Moreover, she realizes that she is the "doll" of her husband, as she was the doll of her own father. Fed up with this, and completely disappointed at everything, Nora makes the even more controversial sacrifice of moving away from it all, and closes the door behind her back. 

What are the denotations for the word 'fear'?

The denotation of a word is its direct, literal meaning. In this case, to find the denotations for the word “fear,” all you would have to do is look the word up in the dictionary. Fear can be a noun or a verb. As a noun, it can refer to the emotion of dread or the thing that causes that dread. For example, one could say “She has a fear of lettuce,” or “Lettuce is an irrational fear.”  In the first sentence the subject is experiencing the fear; in the second, the fear is a characteristic of the lettuce itself. As a verb, the word means “to be scared,” as in, “She fears the greenness of lettuce.”  The word can also be more general, meaning to experience a vague negative apprehension: “She fears for the future.”

Check out an online dictionary for even more denotations – by looking at all the subtly different ways we use such a simple word as “fear,” you can really get an appreciation for the versatility and nuance in language.

Explain examples of where leadership of the Joad Family shifts to different people. Why do these shifts occur? How does the family unit itself...

In the beginning of the novel, the grandparents of the Joad family are present, yet their leadership is being transferred onto the next generation. Grandpa eventually refuses to go with the family to California and he intends to stay on the homestead, hanging on to the past. He is forced to go, yet he soon dies within days of their departure. Grandma is now in the background, and it is Ma and Pa who assume leadership. Pa admits to feeling that he has been a failure as the head of the family, and there is some evidence to back this up. His past decisions, combined with events out of his control, lead to the loss of the family homestead. Uncle John also has faded into the background, seemingly just along for the ride. When Tom leaves the family, it is Ma who has stepped into the role of leadership, followed meekly by Pa. By the end of the novel, she has become sole leader, and everyone looks to her for the decision-making. This is symbolic of the end of a patriarchal society, in which the father is the sole breadwinner and leader. More and more leadership falls on the woman (wife and mother), often when the father is no longer present. It is the maternal instinct that focuses on, no matter what, keeping the family together.

Why does Jerry cry in "Through the Tunnel"?

Jerry cries from fear, embarrassment, frustration, and humiliation. 

At the beach, Jerry gets permission from his mother to swim away from her over by the rocks, a good distance from her. There he sees native boys, who are older than he, jumping and diving. "To be with them, of them, was a craving that filled his whole body." 
Like many young boys, there is an admiration for older ones, and Jerry is at the age of this desire. When he dives and the bigger boys make way for him, Jerry feels accepted. But, when the skills become more challenging, Jerry cannot compete with them and becomes fearful; for instance, when one of the boys dive into the water and disappears for a long time and surface on the far side of a barrier of rock, having held their breaths for a very long time and Jerry fears that he will drown:

...after waiting for the sleek brown head to appear, let out a yell of warning; they looked at him idly and turned their eyes back toward the water.

He counts faster as though to bring the boy to the surface. Then, the others dive in the water after their friend. In his immaturity and frustration, Jerry acts like a clown in order to recapture their attention. However, this action brings Jerry only embarrassment as the older boys turn their backs on him and swim to shore. As the boys gather up their clothes and run along the shoreline, in his humiliation, Jerry realizes that they are hurrying to get away from him. "He cried openly, fists in his eyes."

The emotional stress of his earlier fear that the boys would drown, and embarrassment of being able to only act the clown rather than the skilled diver bring the tears to his eyes, and he cries in his fears, embarrassment, frustration, and humiliation.  

Main elements of nationalism

Nationalism typically refers to the feeling one has about their nation and their sense of belonging on the basis of a shared, unifying language, worldview, and set of customs. The term may also refer to action motivated by this feeling of love, respect, or a desire to protect or promote one's own nation. Nations differ from states in two regards.

1. A nation is unified by a shared identity.


2. A state, which may also be a nation, has political power over a territory and those who live there. States are not necessarily unified by a shared ethnic or national identity.

Historically, nationalism has inspired and rallied many to work in favor of their nation. Napoleon very effectively used nationalism and the French values of equality, brotherhood, and freedom to unify France after the Revolution. Nationalism can also have the effect of unifying a nation for their own betterment at the expense of another group- as with the Nazi party of Germany during the first half of the twentieth century.

Quite generally, nationalism is dependent upon a shared identity and love for this identity. More of the variation occurs in the practice of nationalism and may involve the oppression or suppression of other group identities, propaganda, and ritual which reinforces a nationalist identity.

Why do you think the image of Marley appears to Scrooge in A Christmas Carol?

Marley appeared to Scrooge because he wanted to help him make more of his life.

Jacob Marley was Scrooge’s business partner.  He died seven years before the book opens, on Christmas Eve.  Scrooge did not have many friends and was not the most hospitable person.  However, Marley was a good friend to Scrooge.  Both of them had similar attitudes toward making money.

When he died, Marley became a ghost.  Marley first appeared in the knocker to get Scrooge off-balance.  He wanted Scrooge a little shaken.  When he sees Scrooge he explains why he became a ghost.  He said it was because he had not been a better man during his lifetime.

“It is required of every man,” the Ghost returned, “that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellowmen, and travel far and wide; and if that spirit goes not forth in life, it is condemned to do so after death. …” (Stave One)

The ghost of Marley tells Scrooge that he has to witness the inequities of the world without being able to change them.  He has been watching Scrooge, and somehow arranged a special chance for him.  He explains to Scrooge that he is fettered because of his greed during his life, and Scrooge has continued to add to his chains.

“Or would you know,” pursued the Ghost, “the weight and length of the strong coil you bear yourself? It was full as heavy and as long as this, seven Christmas Eves ago. You have laboured on it, since. It is a ponderous chain!” (Stave One)

It is because of this that Marley arranges for the three ghosts to visit Scrooge.  He does not give Scrooge many details, except that Scrooge has a “chance and hope” of escaping his fate.  Scrooge is not thrilled with the idea of being haunted by three Spirits.  Marley tells him that for his own sake, he needs to remember their visit.

Scrooge does go along with the ghosts, and their lessons are so strong that they actually work.  When Scrooge sees his past, present, and future and how he influences others, he emerges a changed man.  He realizes that Jacob Marley was right—mankind is everyone’s business, and it is his responsibility to help the less fortunate.

In Cry, the Beloved Country, how is the destruction of the tribal way of life a major part of the problem in South Africa?

In this novel, the destruction of tribal life creates a large problem in South America. The tight tribal communities, the loss of respect for the chief, and the lost traditions and rituals are completely damaging, especially when nothing else is there to replace it. When the tribes were broken up by the arrival of the white people, they were not accepted by the white people. The white people have disrupted the way of life for the tribes, but do not work to help them fit in to the new ways of living. Once the tribes were broken, those people had nowhere safe to turn and they lived in fear of the world around them. Many problems in South Africa, highlighted in the novel, focus on the distance between the native people and the new inhabitants. Two groups of people that do not respect each other have a hard time creating a safe place that can grow and survive in a healthy manner.