What is the plot overview of the essay "Nature" by Ralph Waldo Emerson? Just explain the main plot and what it talks about.

Emerson discusses the harmony and unity between man and nature throughout this essay.  He believes that the world is divided into two parts:  the self (the soul) and the outside world (which he refers to as "nature").  He discusses the relationship between the two parts and explains that there can be perfection between the two parts.  If this perfection exists, then the self can communicate with the outside world, which he terms "community."  This is a very spiritual essay, and the following link goes into a lot more detail for you.

The essay is divided into eight parts/chapters: Nature, Commodity, Beauty, Language, Discipline, Idealism, Spirit and Prospects.

In Act 4 of The Crucible, why does John Proctor decide to confess but refuse to sign a written confession?

Proctor feels compelled to retract his confession because he admits that people more innocent and closer to God are going to be hung.  Particularly, Rebecca Nurse, who is an icon of virtue in the community.  She is scheduled to die with Proctor. 

Also, there is a practice that when someone confesses to witchcraft, their land is confiscated and sold at a discounted price.  So if Proctor goes ahead with his confession, being pressured by Danforth and Parris to sign his name to a written confession to be hung on the church door, he will lose his property and soil his name, not only for him, but for his sons.

Proctor cries, "It is my name," he will only have one in his life, therefore, in order to bring dignity and honor to the Proctor name John must retract his confession.  He can't bear the thought of living with a name that has been disrespected.  Since he confessed to the adultery with Abigail, Proctor feels like he is right with God.  He does not want to risk his immortal soul at this point.  His wife, Elizabeth, agrees.  

How did the Roman Empire rise to power?

The Roman Empire came, sadly, out of the slow decay of the Roman Republic.  The transformation was subtle and long-term; the key reason appears to be that the Roman Constitution was designed for the governance of Rome and her environs, and was undermined over time as Rome began to conquer overseas territories. The office of "Tribune of the People" became the key office in exploiting the spoils of foreign countries; factions vying for that office became corrupt in its attainment and execution. Because of the infighting and political stagnation, eventually one man consolidated enough power to become Emperor. Considering the United States in the world today and its disregard for its founding documents and focus on the all-powerful Office of the President, one can't help be struck with the similarities, and how history repeats itself, and if, in fact, the American Republic founded only a few hundred years ago is now the American Empire.  See a more detailed history of the Late Roman Republic at the link:

How does Miller dramatize ideological conflict in The Crucible?

Miller mainly relies upon the characters of John Proctor, Rev. Parris, and the judges to illustrate the ideological conflict present in the town of Salem.  Unfortunately, the conflict has not truly died in America. 

Rev. Parris, the judges, and many of the townspeople are concerned entirely with the exterior.  Rev. Parris wants the church to appear to be good.  He wants his daughter and niece to appear to be good Christian girls so that they can advance his reputation. Likewise, the sole reason that the judges do not reverse their decisions when they undeniably know that Abigail and the girls have been faking is because they will fall from grace and authority in the public's eyes. Finally, the Putnams care nothing about eradicating the devil from their "beloved" community; they simply use the witch scare to promote their own prominence in the village by obtaining more property and power.

John Proctor sees life and religion in a completely different manner.  He knows that "as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." While John has hurt his outer appearance through his affair with Abigail, especially in his wife's eyes, he eventually shows that one must be more concerned about what he truly believes and act accordingly.  For example, he does not go to church because he cannot stomach Rev. Parris's hypocrisy. He also will not lie at the end theplay to save his life andregain his standing in the community because he knows that it is morally wrong and that it would harm what Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey stand for.

This struggle between the two factions in Salem represents for Miller the struggle that still exists today between those who want absolute power over the people and those who simply want to be able to think for themselves and not be so concerned about how others perceive them.

How successful was the League of Nations in the 1930's?

The League of Nations, organized to prevent warfare, was beyond unsuccessful; it was a catastrophic failure. Japan invaded Manchuria in 1933 and it issued condemnations. That same year Germany withdrew from the League. Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935, and withdrew in 1937. In 1939, the League expelled the Soviet Union.  Strangely, it continued to exist throughout WWII and finally dissolved in 1946 after the creation of the United Nations.

In "Hamlet" how does this soliloquy show his mental stability and tragic flaw of hesitation?Act 2 Scene 2

Hamlet starts off by expressing wonder that an actor can present himself as so emotional and sincere over nothing at all-over just an act. He states of the actor,

"It is not monstrous that this player here, but in a fiction...could force...tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect, a broken voice...and all for nothing!"

and yet, he himself, who has actual reason to be passionate and upset,, who has "the motive and the cue for passion" that he does, can't elicit that same conviction within himself.  He, if expressing his true feelings about his situation, could "drown the stage with tears...and amaze indeed" if he were on stage.  But instead, here he sits, "a dull and muddy-mettled rascal" who can "say nothing" not even for

"a king upon whose property and most dear life a damn'd defeat was made."

He wonders if he is a coward, because all he does is "unpack his heart with words and fall acursing."  He lectures himself, saying, "About, brain!", meaning, take some action, turn about, do something, anything!  At the end of the soliloquy he resolves to use the play to catch the king; if the king reacts, he'll know that he has "grounds more relative" than a ghost who "may be the devil [who]...abuses me to damn me."

His flaw of hesitation is revealed here through the fact that he knows he is hesitating; in fact, he rants against himself for it.  He feels he is a coward for not acting.  But still, he can't get over the fact that maybe, just maybe, the ghost was not a "good" ghost; maybe the ghost is the devil, using Hamlet's hatred of Claudius to invent a reason to kill him.  He's so hung up on this-but hating himself for being hung up-that he comforts himself by deciding to use the play as a way to determine the king's guilt.  His mental state is anguished, searching for a solution and middle-ground between action and proof.  He goes back and forth, hating himself for hesitating, yet justifying his hesitation.  It is a tormented soliloquy that show's Hamlet's torn frame of mind.

What is the summary of "The Princess and the Puma"?

In this tale, there is a very wealthy rancher that owns a lot of different property.  He is referred to as "the king", and has one daughter, Josefa, or "the princess".  There is a ranch-hand, Ripley Givens, who decides one day to leave his post and ride the distance to go and propose to her.  He stops to make camp at night on the way, and while eating, he hears the cry of a puma.  Worried, he gets up and follows the noise.  He sees Josefa kneeling to get a drink at a stream, with a puma ready to pounce on her.  So, he gives a shout of warning and jumps in-between the puma and Josefa, with his gun drawn.  The puma lands on him; Josefa had shot him.  Givens is horribly embarrassed, and so to cover his humiliation he makes up a story about the puma having been his pet.  He calls the puma "Bill" and says that he had raised him from a pup and that everyone loved him.  Josefa apologizes and allows him to ride her home.  Once home, she tells her father that she has shot down the infamous "Mexican lion they call the ‘Gotch-eared Devil’... I knew him by the slice gone from his left ear."  So, she was not fooled by Givens' story at all.  It's a funny story, and I highly recommend reading it if you haven't already.

What does Huck mean by that statement?Huck makes a statement concerning the Widow Douglas: "And she took snuff too. Of Course, that was all right,...

Snuff is chewing tobacco that one sniffs though the nose. Huck is observing that the Widow Douglas is a hypocrite because she will not allow Huck to smoke tobacco. Of course, Huck doesn't use those words, but he essentially has observed the situation correctly.

How does the subject matter create tension in "The Tell-Tale Heart"?

The subject matter creates tension in "The Tell-Tale Heart" through the way in which there is an increase in intensity and tension leading up to the murder, and then, just when the narrator feels he has committed the perfect crime and he will get away with it, he begins to hear the sound of the old man's heart, which increases in volume until the narrator can no longer bear it and has to confess to his crime. Note how the sound of the man's heartbeat begins, according to the description of the narrator:

The ringing became more distinct:--it continued and became more distinct: I talked more freely to get rid of the feeling: but it continued and gained definitiveness--until, at length, I found that the noise was not within my ears.

The way in which the word "distinct" is repeated to convey the increasing intensity of the mysterious sound that the narrator hears is used to create massive tension because it suggests the madness of the narrator, and yet at the same time how he is not actually mad, because the sound of his victim's beating heart that he imagines he hears could be viewed as his own conscience, which he thinks he is able to ignore through his actions, showing itself and mastering the narrator after all. Tension is thus shown through the ultimate question of whether the narrator is able to commit an act without his conscience torturing him in any way. The sound of the heart indicates that there is no such thing as a conscience-free individual, and the confession he makes at the end of the story shows that every evil crime has an impact on the conscience of the person committing that crime.

What is "mock utopia" and how much is it true for "Gulliver's Travels"?tell me in details please

A "mock utopia" refers to the idea that a society might appear to be idyllic or might want to appear idyllic, but there is no such thing as a perfect society.  "Mock" means "pretend" or "fake" and "utopia" refers to a perfect place. In Gulliver's Travels, Jonathan Swift points out the flaws in all society. The Lilliputians are ridiculous and small-minded.  They have silly ways of choosing leaders and they fight a long-standing war for a ludicrous and long-forgotten reason.  The Brobdingnagian king is shocked and repulsed by English laws and ways as Gulliver explains them to him showing the reader that Swift thinks the English laws and ways are bad. 

On the floating island of Laputa, Swift points out the flaws of a society that dwells so heavily on science without thought to serving mankind.  Even the land of nearly perfect Houyhyhnhnms, Swift shows that they are not willing to accept those they feel are beneath them, the Yahoos and Gulliver. 

While Gulliver spends most of Book 4 telling about the good points of the land where the Houhyhnhnms dwell.  They don't lie, they don't value worthless trinkets like diamonds, they resolve differences with calmness and reason. They also expel Gulliver from this nearly perfect society which displays to the reader that even this society is flawed.

What kind of neighborhood has the poet chosen to describe in Eliot's "The Winter Evening Settles Down"? How can one tell?

Eliot is offering his view of modern civilization. Note the many ugly references to grim and emptiness:  "withered leaves," "grimy scraps," "broken blinds and chimney pots," "stale smells of beer," and "dingy shades." Setting the poem in winter, furthermore, suggests despair and loneliness despite the urban location. 

Following World War I, the world view of many poets like Eliot was that modern society was in a state of decline and decay. He has chosen to write about a city in such a condition with images of cigarettes, pollution, and beer to suggest urban squalor without any sense of hope.

How do Lord Capulet's views change about marriage from Act 1 to Act 3?

In the first scene Capulet addresses Paris (who is asking to marry Juliet for the umpteenth time) and seems just to be trying to get rid of him and get him off his case:

But saying o'er what I have said before:
My child is yet a stranger in the world,
She hath not seen the change of fourteen years;
Let two more summers wither in their pride
Ere we may think her ripe to be a bride.

Juliet, he says, is too young to marry. And later in the same scene, his crux argument is this:

But woo her, gentle Paris, get her heart;
My will to her consent is but a part.
An she agree, within her scope of choice
Lies my consent and fair according voice.

In short, it's Juliet's choice: and Capulet's "consent" goes with Juliet's choice. But do we believe him? Well, by Act 3, once Tybalt has died (and, it might be said, the Capulet family significantly weakened), Capulet is telling Paris

I think she will be rul'd
In all respects by me; nay more, I doubt it not...
She shall be married to this noble earl.

Suddenly, Juliet is to marry Paris. And when she disagrees, Capulet loses it:

An you be mine, I'll give you to my friend,
An you be not, hang, beg, starve, die in the streets.

Capulet started by arguing it was Juliet's choice. He finishes up making a very firm decision himself. Has he changed his mind? Or has he just shown his true colours? Who knows - though my bet is on the latter.

List three main ideas of the cell theory

Concerning the third principle of cell theory (all cells are made from other cells) there is a related theory about the origins of organelles. 

Because mitochandria have seperate DNA from the rest of the cell, it is believed that they were once seperate organisms and were ingested by larger cells. Organelles such as mitochrondria and chloroplast then became mutually beneficial to their host cells and became a permanent structure within the cell. This theory is called The Endosymbiotic Theory. 

In "Breaking Dawn", does Reneesme turn in to a complete vampire?

She turns out to be half vampire, half human.  So she has some really cool aspects of being a vampire, like super-strength, and a special ability, the ability to give information to people just by touching them.  But, she is half Bella (before Bella was turned into a vampire), so she also has human attributes.

This is a pretty unique phenomenon, but she is not the only one.  Towards the end of "Breaking Dawn" we discover that there have been other vampire/human hybrid.  Usually however, the human mothers, because of the pain involved in pregnancy and delivery, have died.  So Bella was incredibly lucky to have survived the creating of Reneesme, and to live to see her grow.

Why is it significant that the events of Chapter 23 of Jane Eyre take place in Midsummer Eve?

Charlotte Bronte knew full well the implications of placing the initial proposal of marriage of Rochester to Jane on Midsummer's Eve (June 20th.)  The festival of Midsummer was related to pre-Christian fertility rites (Britannica), and was a time for rejoicing and enjoying the sunny outdoors of northern countries.  On this night Jane and Rochester symbolically walk in the sunset orchard and laurel avenue, and sit under a great horse-chestnut tree, and come to the dramatic conclusion that they love each other and will marry.  This buccolic scene of two people coming together in nature fits neatly with the ancient meaning of that time of year.

The choice of time of year was also practical -- in late June in England the nights are warm, and since it is the summer solstice the evenings and twilights are at their longest, with the sun not setting until quite late in the evening.  This gave Rochester and Jane a good long time in the garden together, in comfortable conditions in the beautiful fading light.  However, at that time of year sudden thunderstorms are possible, which chase Rochester and Jane indoors (and bode ill for the future of their relationship.)

Sources: Midsummer’s Eve." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 08 Jan. 2009 <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/381655/Midsummers-Eve>. ,Gutenberg Etext of Jane Eyre http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1260/1260-h/1260-h.htm

In "Shooting an Elephant", what is Orwell's opinion of the Burmese?Of the British Raj? What conflict in him do these attitudes create?

Orwell is very conflicted by his position in this story.  He is stuck in a position of an authority he does not support.  He had "already made up his mind that imperialism was an evil thing and the sooner [he] chucked up [his] job and got out of it the better."  His biggest problem was that he supported the Burmese.  He hated seeing the "dirty work of Empire at close quarters."  He saw "the wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lockups..."  He felt guilt for what the British were doing to the Burmese, but he worked for them and had to do his job.

The worst part about his position is that the people he really truly supported (the Burmese) made his job very difficult.  He sees the British Raj as "an unbreakable tyranny, as something clamped down upon the will of prostrate peoples." Yet, the way that the Burmese and the Buddist priests treated him made him want to violently fight back.   These priests were the worst and made his daily work difficult and frustrating.  That would laugh and jeer at him and even throw things at him.  Little did they know how he really felt, but they made his situation worse for taking their frustrations out on someone who sympathized with them.

What is a prostar?

There are nine different stages that a star must pass through before being “born.”  The first stage is when a nebula collects and makes a mass of gas and dust then it begins to contract under its own gravity.  The second stage in the birth of a star is the protostar.  During the protostar stage the young star has begun to collapse on itself, but not collapsed enough to go through the nuclear fusion that is required for it to move on to stage 3.  During the protostar stage the star is protected and must get up to 15,000,000 centigrade degrees.  After that happens the process moves to stage 3.

What are the key notes to know in the short story "An Episode of War" by Stephen Crane?

This story begins with a Lieutenant rationing out coffee at his camp.  As he's doing this, a shot rings out and his men see that the Lieutenant has been shot in his arm. 

Sluggishly and in a dream-like state, the Lieutenant makes his way to the hospital.  On his way, he has several encounters with others.  At one point, an officer took his own handkerchief and helped cover up the Lieutenant's wound.  The Lieutenant didn't really know how to react to that.  He's never been wounded, but he fights with the proper etiquette of a wounded soldier.  Then as he makes it to the hospital, the surgeon takes him back to a tent.  Again, the Lieutenant doesn't know how to behave "like a wounded soldier" and he refuses to have his arm amputated.  The surgeon continues to lead him to the back and performs the surgery anyway. 

At the end, he once again faces his family not knowing how to behave as a wounded soldier would.  He is ashamed and represents all who must live with the results of what war creates.

What does the light symbolize, how does Scrooge try to "extinguish" it, and does he succeed?

The light came from the head of the Ghost of Christmas Past:

But the strangest thing about it was, that from the crown of its head there sprung a bright clear jet of light, by which all this was visible; and which was doubtless the occasion of its using, in its duller moments, a great extinguisher for a cap, which it now held under its arm.

For some reason, the light began to upset Scrooge and he asked the spirit to cover his head.

"What!" exclaimed the Ghost, "Would you so soon put out, with worldly hands, the light I give? Is it not enough that you are one of those whose passions made this cap, and force me through whole trains of years to wear it low upon my brow!"

Scrooge reverently disclaimed all intention to offend or any knowledge of having willfully bonneted the Spirit at any period of his life. He then made bold to inquire what business brought him there.

The spirit is saying that his head should never be covered. It is the light of the spirit of Christmas, and he says that the it is the passions (or perhaps negative attitudes) of people like Scrooge who created the hat in the first place.

Near the end of Stave Two, Scrooge is very upset because the ghost has shown him his past love and the way that her life turned out and the way that she and her family pitied him. He became overwhelmed and begged the spirit to take him back. As he was begging, he saw that the light was “burning high and bright.” He fought to cover the light.

In the struggle, if that can be called a struggle in which the Ghost with no visible resistance on its own part was undisturbed by any effort of its adversary, Scrooge observed that its light was burning high and bright; and dimly connecting that with its influence over him, he seized the extinguisher-cap, and by a sudden action pressed it down upon its head.

The Spirit dropped beneath it, so that the extinguisher covered its whole form; but though Scrooge pressed it down with all his force, he could not hide the light, which streamed from under it, in an unbroken flood upon the ground.

He was conscious of being exhausted, and overcome by an irresistible drowsiness; and, further, of being in his own bedroom. He gave the cap a parting squeeze, in which his hand relaxed; and had barely time to reel to bed, before he sank into a heavy sleep.

What is the relevance of the writer's context in this story?

"There Will Come Soft Rains," a short story by Ray Bradbury is a futuristic tale about technology and artificial intelligence becoming integrated into the everyday household in the form of a smart house.  A self-sufficient, self-cooking, self-cleaning house that manages a family's life within its walls.  However, this technological advancement is set against the backdrop of total destruction.

"Humans have created a bomb that destroys them all and a house that is incapable of being destroyed by the bomb. But fire, a force of nature, is able to destroy the house. In the end, the earth, though damaged, still exists. By describing this continuity, Bradbury points out his belief: that the earth was around long before humankind and it will be around long after."

While the smart house continues to serve the now dead family, beyond its walls, there is destruction, death and the after effects of nuclear annhilation.  Mankind has used his knowledge and ability to advance science so far, that he has created the instruments of his own destruction.

Ray Bradbury makes a chilling prophecy in this story about the potential that we face in the future.  We can, literally, advance so far with our technology that we make ourselves obsolete. 

While the house struggles to survive, it is eventually destroyed by fires that it cannot extinguish fast enough.  It is fascinating, however, to think that while the people were destroyed, left as shadows, or powder burns, images on the side of the house, the smart house, of course did not know that they were gone, it continued to react as if they were in the house.  And, sadly, the living being in the house, the dog, who returns, starving, is denied food.

Bradbury, a master at bringing to our attention the flaws of imperfect mankind that simmer just below the surface and could rise up and swallow us up at any time.  He reflects on a time when it appeared that the world would end, when massive bombs were used in war.  He imagines that possibility again in this story. 

"Bradbury wrote "There Will Come Soft Rains" in the early 1950s. The memory of World War II was fresh in peoples' minds, particularly the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, in August, 1945, which brought the war to an end."          

In "To Kill a Mockingbird", What are 2 quotes about Scout's confusion over being a girl?

1.  "I kept aloof from their more foolhardy schemes for a while, and on the pain of being called a g-irl, I spent most of the remaining twilights that summer sitting with Miss Maudie Atkinson."  Here we see that Scout hated being called a girl, hated it so much that she avoided Jem and Dill altogether just to escape that "pain". 

2.  Just before this quote, Dill had asked her to marry him because she was "the only girl he would ever love", but then he neglected her, so she beat him up, twice.  Again, we see that she enjoyed the attention of being a girl (she was proposed to because of it), but when she was rejected, she acted like a boy and beat him.  A girl would have verbally accosted the rejector, or thrown an emotional tantrum-not get in an all-out fist fight with the guy.  :)

3.  When Jem tells her to "shut your trap or go home-I declare to the Lord you're gettin' more like a girl every day!", Scout's reaction is, "With that, I had no option but to join them."  She felt like she had to prove she wasn't a girl, by "shutting her trap" and going along with a ridiculous plan to look in Boo's window.  She attempts to shed her "girliness" to hang with the guys.

In The Kite Runner, why do Amir and Hassan have a strained relationship? Can their troubles be attributed to religious differences, as Amir seems...

"Amir is a privileged Pastun, Hassan one of the despised minority Hazaras.  Amir is guilty of "the petty cruelties that privilege invites, the risk of these escalating into betrayals with far-reaching consequences, and the way loving devotion can become masochistic submission" is evident in the way Hassan serves Amir.  Their relationship is further strained because Hassan is a servant.  He and Amir are "friends" and play together but there are many evidences that Amir abuses this friendship and "plays" with Hassan's devotion to him.  The friendship is put into further strain when Amir observes Hassan being raped and does nothing to stop it and later does not tell anyone what he has seen.  The guilt that Amir suffers from creates an insurmountable wall between the two boys.

Against what values of American society does "Song of Myself" by Walt Whitman "beat the gong of revolt"?Whitman's epic poem Song of Myself, which...

First of all, it revolted against the common conceptions about the equality of black people.  In his poem, Whitman describes helping a runaway slave, giving him shelter and rest (see section 10); he even sat next to him at the same table.  This flew in the face of accepted social-and some felt moral-conventions, and the notions of equality.  He also describes the working black man with positive terms, describing their hard-working nature, their closeness to nature, and their earthiness that kept them real.  To make black people the subject of any positive descriptor was risky, and a bold statement about Whitman's belief in equality for all men.  This theme of equality even prevails in revolting against class-stereotyping.  Whitman praises and exalts the poorer working classes, and for the many "elite" classes, such exultation in grungy, poor, manual labor was quite different and repugnant.

Also, until Whitman, most of the poetry followed set rules regarding rhythm, rhyme, meter, and verse.  Whitman revloted against all of that, and wrote free-style, in whatever form he wanted.

A major theme of the poem also was trusting oneself above all other things:  religion, morals, conscience, "creeds", and other society-induced sets of rules.    This revolted against the intense religious sentiment, and strict moral codes of the time period.  But to Whitman, the self was all.  He truly followed Emerson's creed that "no law can be sacred to me but that of my nature."

What is Systems Theory?

Systems theory is an interdisciplinary theory that can be applied in many fields, such as science, mathematics, and business.  It is the theory or philosophy that governs the operation of a particular system.  In terms of science, it might be the laws that make up the function of human cells - the cellular system.  In math, it could be the rules that govern the solving of an equation - algebraic system.  In business, it may be the system of rules that govern how to manage an office.

The idea behind systems theory is that it seeks to explain how things work.  Look at management as a career - if you are going to explain to someone how to be an effective manager, you first need to examine the system of management - what does it require?  how is is successful?  where can it fail? etc.  Only by first doing this can you then explain it to someone else.

Here is a quote from the pioneer on Systems Theory, Ludwig von Bertalanffy.

There exist models, principles, and laws that apply to generalized systems or their subclasses, irrespective of their particular kind, the nature of their component elements, and the relation or 'forces' between them. It seems legitimate to ask for a theory, not of systems of a more or less special kind, but of universal principles applying to systems in general.
In this way we postulate a new discipline called General System Theory. Its subject matter is the formulation and derivation of those principles which are valid for 'systems' in general.

What do you gain/lose for each literary point of view and how does the reader's perception of the story change?

It really depends on the story itself.  For example, if "The Lottery" was written from a first person narrative, then the surprise purpose of the lottery would be revealed immediately at the story's beginning through the fear and anxiety of the narrator.  Because it is written in limited omniscience, the suspense is able to build.

First person narratives usually allow the reader to connect more quickly to the narrator, and thus the narrative he/she is telling.  Be careful though! With this narration, you run the risk of being lied to, or having events and/or other characters misconstrued.

Third person limited is where the narrator is not usually a character in the book, although some authors have crafted in this way.  This narrator knows the scene as a whole and can describe each character fairly objectively.  They usually only delve deeply in the motivations and thoughts of one or a few main characters though.  This can be more beneficial than the omniscient narrator because you don't need to follow the thoughts and processes of minor characters.

Third person omniscient is when the narrator knows, sees, and usually reveals all.   This narrator can tell the reader the thoughts, intents, actions and consequences of not only the main characters, but also the not-so-important ones.  This narration helps to get a great and reliable overview of each person in the story, but it is hard to convey any mystery or suspense with this narration.

What is the rising action and inciting incident in the book "Animal Farm"?

The rising action occurs in Chapter 1 when Old Major gives his speech which will later be turned into the philosophy of Animalism. The animals prepare for rebellion and it comes much sooner than they had thought. The inciting incident occurs when Jones gets drunk and forgets to feed the animals. They break into the barn and help themselves to food. Jones and his men arrive with whips to get control of the animals but they drive off the humans and then gather all the tools men use to control them
( whips, nose rings, chains, etc) and burn them. They rename the farm "Animal Farm" and decide to rule themselves.

Why do you think the consistency of a product mix is important for an organisation?i need the definition of consistency, its importance, problems...

The product mix refers to the total number of product lines a company has to offer. Consistency, in reference to a product mix, refers to how closely related the offered product lines are to each other. The consistency is measured in terms of use, production and distribution.

Consistency of product mix is advantageous for positioning the company in a specific market or as a niche producer or distributor. This consistency,many a times, ensures that the company's name becomes synonymous with the product. For example, for a long time, Microsoft was a major player in operating systems and productivity softwares. Another example of a great product mix was Nokia that sold a wide variety of mobile phones across the world. 

The problem with consistency in product mix is with venturing into a new domain. For example, Microsoft's foray into portable music players with Zune failed because it is considered a major player in softwares, but not hardware. 

Hope this helps.

In Stargirl, who does Stargirl change for herself? Leo or Mica High?

Stargirl changed for Leo.  She really liked him and she wanted him to be happy.  She began using Susan, dressing like everyone, talking like everyone, she tried to change who and what she was for Leo.  She knew that being accepted by "them" was important to him, so she tried.  However, as always happens when we commit drastic changes for anyone other than ourselves, something happens to bring us back to who we really are.  When Susan arrived home from the speech competition expecting to be welcomed with open arms, and no one was there but Dori, Susan realized she could never be what "they" wanted her to be so she returned to Stargirl. 

As Archie tells Leo on page 178,

"She did it for you, you know."

"What?"

"Gave up her self, for a while there.  She loved you that much.  What an incredibly lucky kid you were."

What does the speaker envy in "Sonnet 29"?

It isn't a single thing, it is many things. Consider these lines:

And look upon myself and curse my fate,Wishing me like to one more rich in hope,Featured like him, like him with friends possess'd,Desiring this man's art and that man's scope,With what I most enjoy contented least;

He wishes to be better looking ("featured like him"), that he had more friends, that he had another's skill or intelligence. In short, he envies anything good he sees in others.

What is the tone of Hughes's poems "Mother to Son" and "The Negro Mother"?

They both have a feeling of endurance and fortitude.  Both poems are from the viewpoint of a mother, or of a strong black woman who has gone through a lot of trials.  In "The Negro Mother" those trials are stated outright:

"I am the child they stole from the sand...
I am the woman who worked in the field...
I am the one who labored as a slave,
Beaten and mistreated for the work that I gave--
Children sold away from me, husband sold, too.
No safety, no love, no respect was I due."

Yet, despite this, and many other trials that she lists off throughout the course of the poem, there is a message that if you endure, work hard, and have hope, it will all turn out well.  She states, "God put a dream like steel in my soul," and "I had to keep on! No stopping for me--" and "I nourished the dream that nothing could smother" and " Believe in the right, let none push you back."  So although the poem lists many depressing circumstances, there is a feeling of hope and strength.

In "Mother to Son" she lists her trials metaphorically, as a hard staircase that she's had to climb that

"had tacks in it, /And splinters,/ And boards all torn up, /And places with no carpet on the floor,"

but that she has kept climbing them, even when it's been hard.  And she counsels her son to "don't  you turn back."  So the same message and feeling of strength and fortitude is felt in that poem too.

In The Great Gatsby, what preparations does Gatsby make for his reunion with Daisy?

Gatsby's preparations begin with buying his house where he did.  He knew that Daisy lived across the bay. He held the extravagant parties at his house hoping Daisy would come to one of them, but she didn't.  Next, he befriended Nick and then asked him to invite Daisy to tea so he, Jay, could "drop in".  Once Nick had the date set up, Jay inspected his own house, turning on the lights in every room to light up the house with light which "...fell unreal on the shrubbery...".  The day of the date, Jay sent a man to Nick's house to mow Nick's lawn.  Jay sent a "greenhouse" of flowers to Nick's house with "...numerous receptacles to contain it."  Jay, himself, dressed for the occasion in what was probably a carefully chosen ensemble of a white wool flannel suit, a silver shirt, and a gold tie.  Clearly, Jay wanted everything to be perfect.  He put a great deal of planning into this occasion so that he could impress Daisy.  He lost her five years prior because of his poverty, now he hopes to return to that time five years ago and change the course of events by being rich this time.

Who is Bassanio more bound to: Antonio or Portia?

Bond/bound/binding - all key words and key concepts in "The Merchant of Venice". And by comparing Bassanio's double bond, to Portia and Antonio, you draw out the unusual financial/emotional natures of these transactions. What Shakespeare seems to be saying is that you cannot separate the two.

I'll show you what I mean. Firstly, Bassanio is bound to Antonio because Antonio has entered into a legal bond with Shylock in order to get the money for Bassanio to go off to Belmont:

SHYLOCK
Three thousand ducats for three months and Antonio bound.

Yet there is also a strong emotional connection between the two. Antonio is "sad", we find out in the first scene, and many critics have argued that it is because he is in love with Bassanio (with whom the other characters then leave him at the end of the scene somewhat conspicuously!). This "bond" is much more than just money.

Then, in Belmont, Bassanio enters into an emotional, but also a legal bond: marriage, sealed by a ring (which becomes the symbol of the bond):

BASSANIO
But when this ring
Parts from this finger, then parts life from hence:
O, then be bold to say Bassanio's dead!

Marraige is supposed to be primarily emotional, and secondarily legal. Antonio's bond with Bassanio is supposed to be primarily legal and secondarily emotional. But it doesn't work like that:

BASSANIO
Antonio, I am married to a wife
Which is as dear to me as life itself;
But life itself, my wife, and all the world,
Are not with me esteem'd above thy life:
I would lose all, ay, sacrifice them all
Here to this devil, to deliver you.

PORTIA
Your wife would give you little thanks for that,
If she were by, to hear you make the offer.

Bassanio, as he does throughout, uses the language of value. He "esteem"s his own life, his wife, and the world not as highly as he does Antonio's life. So his bond - supposedly just legal - crosses over into his marital life, and reveals that his "legal" bond is esteemed more highly than his wife. This is ... to say the least, problematic, as Portia points out.

So Antonio seems to be the character Bassanio is most bound to. Though it should be Portia. And this uneasy menage-a-trois is not really resolved, even as the play comes to its close.

What do the boys see at the end of Chapter 7 of Lord of the Flies and how do they react?

The boys see the hanging corpse of the dead parachutist. This is significant in that it is (or was) a man who to them represents a beast. They have, particularly in this chapter, become more like beasts themselves in the torture of Robert when they are playing the hunting 'game'. As they see the corpse at night, this adds to its mystery and fuels their belief in The Beast. Ignoring Ralph's suggestion to explore the area in the daytime has drawn them still further into primitive belief which runs alongside their descent into savagery.

How would you compare and contrast Jim and Pap in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?

Let's start with an obvious similarity for comparison: both are men. Beyond that fact, the contrasts outnumber any comparisons that might be made. For instance, while Jim is kind, compassionate, and able-minded, Pap is a lousy drunk who abuses Huck when he grows intoxicated. And while both men could be considered "father figures" for Huck, Jim is actually the one who shows the boy what true, honorable manhood looks like. Pap, on the other hand, gives Huck a dose of reality -- he proves that not all men are industrious, well-meaning people like Jim.

A more obvious physical contrast between the two characters is that of race: Pap is caucasian, while Jim is an African-American. Ironically, in a time that looked down upon "negroes" as inferior and ignorant, Jim proves to be both intelligent and strong.

What are two paradoxes from act 1 scenes 4 and 5 in Macbeth?

Macbeth's behavior in these scenes, as in the play as a whole, is a gigantic paradox in that he apparently feels genuine loyalty to Duncan while simultaneously he begins to plot not only his death but that of Malcolm as well. From the moment the prophecy is stated by the witches Macbeth acts as if in a trance, propelled by a supernatural force that turns him against his better judgment as well as his moral conscience. A second, more specific paradox can be seen in the interaction that occurs between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth in I.5. He has already been contemplating the steps necessary to fulfill the prophecy; yet without Lady Macbeth's urgings it is entirely possible that he would have dropped the whole matter simply because there is that spark of humanity within him that Lady Macbeth lacks (though she, too, is not completely evil because she is struck by the resemblance between Duncan and her father without which she would presumably have killed him herself). So it is paradoxical that it is Lady Macbeth who drives Macbeth into the vortex of violence that is his (and her) undoing, yet the seeds of the crime are within Macbeth himself--or at least the supernatural power that has taken possession of him.

In "To Kill a Mockingbird" when Jem takes Scout to school the first day, what "order" does he give her?

These are the exact instructions that Jem gives to Scout at the beginning of chapter two:

"during school hours I was not to bother him, I was not to approach him with requests to enact a chapter of Tarzan and the Ant Men, to embarrass him with references to his private life, or tag along behind him at recess and noon.  I was to stick with the first grade and he would stick with the fifth.  In short, I was to leave him alone."

These instructions seem pretty typical of an older sibling who doesn't want his younger sibling to embarrass him to death at school; school is a cruel place where kids make fun of each other for any little thing.  Scout, with her unusual bluntness, tactless curiosity, and close relationship to Jem-who was quite a bit older, was primed to go in there and do something that was sure to get Jem made fun of.  Sure enough, at recess, she is about to lay into Walter Cunningham when Jem has to intervene.  So, Jem's instructions were born from a desire to keep his dignitiy in tact at school, and a good understanding of Scout's personality.

In "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge," why does the scout suggest that Farquhar burn the bridge?

This scene is a subtle one in Part II of the story, which is a flashback. When the scout, dressed like a Confederate soldier, stops at the Farquhar plantation, Peyton asks for news about the front lines of the war. The scout tells him that the Northern forces have secured Owl Creek bridge (a railroad trestle) and built a stockade, suggesting that the site will be a staging area for further invasion into Southern territory. The scout continues, giving Peyton this important information:

The commandant has issued an order, which is posted everywhere, declaring that any civilian caught interfering with the railroad, its bridges, tunnels or trains will be summarily hanged. I saw the order.

This is clearly a warning. It is Peyton who continues the conversation, believing that he is speaking to a friend and ally in the war. He asks about how well the bridge is guarded. Only two guards, he is told. He then asks, with a smile, what could be accomplished if one of the bridge's guards were evaded and the other overpowered; clearly, Peyton is thinking about sabotaging the bridge, despite what he has just been told about the penalty for such an action. 

At this point, the scout pauses and thinks before answering. Having made a decision, he tells Peyton the bridge would burn easily. Why does he answer in this way? He could have told Peyton at the beginning of their conversation that the bridge was well guarded, and then he could have told him that nothing could be done to destroy it. In other words, the scout could have dissuaded Peyton for taking any action; instead, his words serve to draw Peyton into the act of sabotage that results in his being caught and hanged. Again, why?

This was a time of war. Peyton was not a soldier, but as a potential saboteur, he was the enemy. By giving him information, the scout was determining whether Peyton was a danger or not. When it became clear that Peyton was a threat, the scout effectively sets him up for failure. No doubt the Northern soldiers were prepared, waiting for Peyton's attempt to burn the bridge. When he was caught, he was indeed hanged, with both military ceremony and precision. His punishment would then serve as an example to other civilians who might consider trying to commit acts of sabotage against the invading Northern forces.

How does the government influence oligopolistic behavior? or Describe how the ice cream industry fits the oligopoly model.The federal trade...

Since government by nature becomes more oligarchic if not checked, it encourages the same in business.  However, businesses that engage in oligarchies across an industry, otherwise described as "collusion,"  stifle innovation and competition, which leads to a closed, coercive market, which is what you're describing.  In theory, that's what government is supposed to guard against, and maintain a "level playing field" through antitrust laws.

To what extent can we read "The Fall of the House of Usher" as a parody?Is this story a sincere expression of horror, or is Poe simply mocking...

The story that the narrator reads to Roderick is entitled "Mad Trist," a parody of a Medieval romance, where a knight meets a hermit who disappears and changes his form into a dragon.  The story is a parody of the story that we the readers are reading, and comes just at the climax of the narration. Certain noises are described in the story while its being read, and as each description is finished, Roderick and the narrator hear the noise--a case where "life imitates art."  During the reading of the story, Madeline, who had been prematurely buried, reappears, and finally dies as she embraces her brother Roderick, who dies as well. Immediately after, the narrator states that Roderick dies as "a victim to the terrors he had anticipated" suggesting that he called into being his own demise. The parody suggested within the story "Mad Trist" serves to not only to mock events in the narration, but increase the horror, as what is written comes to pass. See more at the link:

Explain about the theories concerning the elusiveness of the obvious, which are advanced by Dupin, and explain about theories of the obvious.

Dupin is not telling Prefect G- that the answer to a problem is always obvious. What he is saying is that people often make problems more complicated than they actually are. The truth is often very simple, and it becomes "obvious" once it is discovered.

A good example would be the Ptolemaic model of the solar system which was the only accepted model for centuries. It was based on the assumption that the earth was stationary and that everything else revolved around it. This theory required elaborate and mysterious explanations of the movements of the planets, because they sometimes seems to turn around and go backwards in their orbits. Once Copernicus explained that the sun was the center of the solar system and the earth was only one of the planets that revolved around it, the truth became simple and obvious.

The same was the case when Charles Darwin explained the origin of species through natural selection. Monsieur G- is a good example of the stubbornness of much of humanity, as shown in the following quotes:

"Perhaps it is the very simplicity of the thing which puts you at fault," said my friend.

"What nonsense you DO talk!" replied the Prefect, laughing heartily.

Monsieur G- might be said to represent all the authorities who hold back human progress because the truth threatens their positions of power and hence threatens their pocketbooks. The Prefect acts amused, but he is not. In a pseudo-good-natured manner he insults Dupin's intelligence--even though he has really come to Dupin for help. Dupin waits for G- to leave before explaining to his friend how he found the letter; he knows that G- would never believe it as hidden in plain sight because he would not want to believe it. He would attribute Dupin's solution of the mystery to chance or luck. As Milton puts it:

Truth . . . never comes into the world but like a bastard, to the ignominy of him that brought her forth.                                                        John Milton

What does Ismene mean when she says,"Remember we are women, we're not born to contend with men."?How does this statement relate to Antigone's...

Ismene is warning Antigone that her intended actions, to bury her brother will put her in direct conflict with King Creon's orders to leave the body to be ravaged by dogs and vultures.

While Antigone argues that her actions, or her holy crime, to bury her brother Polyneices, is worthy because she is trying to satisfy the wishes of the gods, particularly Hades who is the god of burial rites for the dead. 

The implication is that Antigone will honor and obey the gods before she will submit to the rule of a mere mortal man, even if he is the King.  Even though Antigone knows that burying her brother is a crime, it has a higher purpose, therefore it is a jusfiable crime.

"Antigone invokes the name of Zeus several times in the play as she defends her burial of Polyneices. Greek custom and tradition dictated that the women in the immediate family of the deceased should carry out the burial rituals, which meant that Antigone and Ismene were responsible for the burial of both of their brothers."

"When Creon orders Polyneices left unburied, Antigone felt she was acting according to the "unwritten laws" of Zeus by burying him. To her, all dead should have the honor of burial, no matter what they did in life, and she felt she was justified in fulfilling this custom and obeying the law of Zeus."  

What evidence is there to suggest that the social environment is hostile in "Of Mice and Men"? What effect does this have on itinerant...

The setting of "Of Mice and Men" is the time of the Great Depression in which so many men were out of work, a time in which there was tremendous competition for jobs. At this time, if anyone were the least questionable in reliability, capability, etc. he was immediately eliminated and someone else was hired as there was a superfluity of applicants for every job.  And, because of this scrutiny of each applicant, men watched one another lest they lose their jobs.  This competition for work caused suspicion and hostility.

In "Of Mice and Men," George and Lennie and the others represent these displaced men in search of employment.  As a consequence of these people being estranged and insecure, the distrust and dislike among the itinerant workers is high.

Knowledgeable of the scrutiny that itinerant workers are under, George has Lennie stay with him outside of the ranch where they have been hired.  When Lennie asks why they are not going to the ranch that has supper, George replies, "Tonight I'm gonna lay right here and look up.  I like it."  George wishes to stay beyond the boundaries of all the conflicts of being in a ranch house with strangers; he wishes to enjoy a last peaceful night. Added to this, if they arrive in time to go out and work, there are fewer chances of any conflict developing before they can prove themselves as good workers.  Also, George has one more opportunity to instruct Lennie on how to behave around the other men; a fortunate opportunity as it turns out since Lennie has forgotten some of George's "rules." 

In 1984, why do all three superpowers forbid their citizens from associating with foreigners?I read through to chapter and i am still not finding...

The main reason all three superpowers don't want their citizens intermingling is that the war is a farce.  The superpowers all use the war as an excuse to keep their citizens and countries under the proverbial thumb.  It is also a reason to keep working so hard and producing the items they need to operate and survive...even if it produces a surplus that needs to be destroyed.  Otherwise, the people of all three countries, if able to speak with one another, would realize that they don't need to work as hard as they are in order for everyone to have enough (food, supplies, clothing, etc.) to live.  Part of the way the governments get what they do out of their people is by using propaganda and other brainwashing techniques to "hate" whatever country they're supposedly at war with at the time.  If everyone made friends with everyone else, this "tool" of persuasion would be absent from their little box of tricks.

How and where do Julia and Winston meet?

Winston and Julia have noticed each other for a long time.  He watches her and secretly hates her and all she stands for as a loyal Party member during the Two Minutes' Hate.  She watches him and tags him as someone who is not loyal.  Both admit to the other later what he/she thought of each other, which should have made them more careful.

Their first actual encounter came after the Two Minutes' Hate when Julia "runs" into Winston and falls down.  When he helps her up during the seemingly innocent connection, he realizes she has slipped a note into his hand.  When he is able to open it in private, he reads, "I love you".

Later, they plan to meet in a secret place--the wooded area in the park--away from microphones and cameras where they are intimate for the first time.  They continue planning clandestine meetings until they are able to secure an apartment where they escape the Party (or so it seems) to enjoy each other and life as the Proles do.

In Act 3 of "The Crucible", what accusation does Mary make about Proctor after she rejoins the other girls in their hysterical behavior?

In Act III, Mary Warren, in an effort to divert attention away from the accusation made against her, because she has changed her story about seeing spirits, turns and identifies John Proctor as the man who has forced her to sign her name in the Devil's book. 

"Mary Warren, You're the Devil's man!" (Miller)

Mary says this pointing at John Proctor.  She then says:

"Mary: He come at me by night and every day to sign, to sign to-" (Miller)

"My name, he want my name, I'll murder you, he says, if my wife hangs, We must go and overthrow the court, he says" (Miller)

"He wake me every night, his eyes were like coals and his fingers claw my neck, and I sign, I sign" (Miller)

She makes it clear to the court that she will no longer do as Proctor has forced her, she will now return to God.  She rushes at Abigail Williams and hugs her, claiming that she will hurt her no more.

John Proctor is taken to jail, accused of conspiring with the Devil, he will hang for witchcraft.

What is "One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts" about?

This story is about Mr. Johnson and his daily route.  Although he doesn't always take the same route, he goes out into the city and plays the Good Samaritan wherever he goes.  This story takes place in the 1950's in New York City.  Mr. Johnson helps everyone he comes into contact with.  He helps a mother who is loading up her stuff to move away by watching her child.  He helps a homeless man by giving him enough money for a good meal plus a tip.  He accidentally keeps a woman from getting to work on time, so he pays her the day's wages and sets her up with a man.  Mr. Johnson suggests they both go to Coney Island together as a vacation day.  (He pays the man's wages as well).

When Mr. Johnson gets home, we meet his wife.  She seems to the the alter ego to her husband.  While he's out helping others, she seems to be griping and disrupting everyone else's day. However, it makes the reader wonder if all that Mr. Johnson says is true. Perhaps he's not always that good.

In "Of Mice and Men", how was slim like a judge? How did this pass verdict on the dog?

Slim is called "the prince of the ranch". Because of his personality and good judgment, the men respect him. They probably contrast Slim's easy going acceptance of people in contrast to Curley, the bosses son, who is always up tight and looking for a fight. Slim also stands up to Curley, which the men respect. Since he is probably the most respected man on the ranch, his decisions are final. When Candy turns to Slim for help in saving his old dog, Slim simply says that Candy can have the pick of the litter from his dog. By offering Candy a new puppy, Slim is saying it's time to get rid of the old dog. His verdict is the final one, and Candy then allows Carlson to take out his dog and "out it out of its misery."

How Racial discrimination was formed?

Racial discrimination has existed since the time that more than one culture interacted with one another.  By examining any of the ancient civilizations, it can be seen how one race would discriminate against another.  For example, the Ancient Egyptians (not by any means the first culture of Earth, but a good example, none the less) discriminated against the Middle Eastern people from regions we now know as the "Middle East", or Israel, Iran, Iraq, etc.  During the time of the Ancient Egyptian rule, the people of the Middle East were finding themselves invaded by the expanding Egyptian rule.  As the Egyptians invaded and found this culture based on Judaism, they found it lower than their own and enslaved them.  The Egyptians took the Jews they captured back to Egypt and these people were forced into a slavery form.

To look at another form of racial discrimination, we can look at the various groups of any of the ancient countries in general.  THe other user choose to use Asia, specifically China, so I will look at the European heirarchy.  In the early days of Europe, it is well known and understood there was a class system that had the monarchies at the top, followed by the nobles, then the peasantry, and lastly the servants.  While some may argue this is not a racial discrimination, in a since it is.  During these times, a peasant may well have had yellow skin and orange eyes when compared to a noble.  The class systems were very stiffly defined and it was extremely difficult for upward mobility, although not fully impossible.  This is a good time to point out that racial discrimination is not nearly as concrete as we would believe.  In any and every culture, a person of the discriminated race would be fully able to gain a status percieved as above them simply by doing something unique.  Look at people such as Fredrick Douglass or MOses even.  These people were part of the minority but still rose to gain respect.

Racial discrimination is an aspect of human culture.  It seems to be as natural as breathing to humans that we should deem one ethnic group or race as being above or below another.  As saddening as it is, it can be found back into the earliest days.

*all this information came from history texts I have from my history major in education. One is the HIstory of Africa and the other is a book on World Civilization.

In The Kite Runner, how does Baba and Amir's relationship change when they move to the United States?

Amir and his father became much closer after fleeing Afghanistan. They had lived through terrible danger together and had survived to make a new life in a land that was equally foreign to both of them. Once a wealthy man, Baba had to work tirelessly in the new country, performing menial labor to eke out a living and make it possible for Amir to go to college. He was a very proud man, but he did so without pity or complaint. On weekends, Amir and Baba worked together at the flea market, selling whatever they could find, to make a few dollars more. Adversity drew them closer every day, as did joy. Baba understood and respected Amir's love for Soraya and helped him in his quest to win her hand. Their marriage was a source of great happinessfor Baba.

Their relationship changed, as well, because Amir was no longer a confused boy burning with guilt and resentment. He was a young man mature enough to appreciate the sacrifices his father made for him and to understand why he made them. When Baba became ill, Amir treated him with gentleness and concern. He loved his father and expressed it without hesitation. Amir had grown up. He recognized Baba lived with courage every day in fighting his illness, the same courage he had displayed in Afghanistan, risking his life to save a woman's honor. By the time Baba's life grew to a close, he and his son had developed the bond they had been unable to forge during Amir's childhood.

From the details provided, briefly describe the character of the murder victim.

Mr Hale tells the County Attorney the reason for his visit to the Wrights’ house the previous day. He wanted to persuade John Wright to have a telephone installed. From what he says we find out that the house is isolated—the word ‘lonesome’ is repeated frequently—and John liked ‘peace and quiet’. As Hale continues he says: ‘I didn’t know as what his wife wanted made much difference to John—‘. This suggests that John was not concerned for his wife’s happiness and from this we could say he is selfish.

Martha Hale comments that the rocking chair doesn’t look as if it belongs to Minnie Foster (John’s wife). The chair is described as shoddy and broken. This implies that Minnie is significantly changed from her former self and this begs the question: ‘what has caused her to become this way?’.

The discussion about poor housekeeping and Martha’s comments about work on a farm suggests that Minnie has been left to do much of the work in the house. We find out here that Minnie and John live on a farm. We might reasonably assume then that John is a farmer.

When the county attorney asks if Martha and Minnie are friends she tells him that she does not think the Wrights’ home ‘a very cheerful place’. She says that John Wright didn’t have ‘the home making instinct’ and that the house would not be ‘any cheerfuler for John Wright’s bein’ in it’. This leads us to believe that John was not particularly happy and thus not pleasant company. We see this idea of John being poor company repeated later when Martha tells Mrs Peters that Minnie was childless and that it must be lonely with Wright out at work all day and then ‘no company when he did come in’.

We find out that John is ‘close’ (or mean). The clothes Minnie has asked for are shabby and worn. There is a further reference to John’s meanness when Martha points out the broken cooker. John allows his wife to cook on a stove which the other women agree would be difficult (‘How’d you like to cook on this?’)

The idea of having been disturbed or having left things undone (or badly done in the case of the quilting) is repeated throughout the narrative. Minnie has been affected by something. If we infer from Martha’s statement: ‘I knew John Wright’ that John was responsible for damaging the bird cage and indeed breaking the bird’s neck, we can also suppose that he was an aggressive or violent man.

The outsider’s view of John Wright is given by Mrs Peters who says: ‘They say he was a good man’ and then by Martha who agrees and adds: ‘He didn’t drink and kept his word as well as most, I guess, and paid his debts. But he was a hard man Mrs Peters’.

So now we have a list of characteristics for John Wright (the murdered man):

• On one level he was a law abiding farmer who—to all outward appearances—conducted himself properly.


• On another level and behind closed doors he was selfish, mean with his conversation and with his money and he had the tendency to be cruel and violent.

References

‘A Jury of her Peers’ in O’Brien, E.J. (Ed) The Best Short Stories of 1917, Small Maynard and Co.

In The Odyssey, what "laws" of behavior and attitude does Polyphemus violate in his treatments with the Greeks?

When Odysseus and his men arrive, Polyphemus is supposed to follow the "hospitality" rule.  He is supposed to offer them food and drink, and then ask questions later.  The reason for this is that the stranger(s) could be a god or goddess. However, instead, he grabs several of Odysseus' men and eats them.  He says that he doesn't have to follow any rules.  His father is Poseidon, and he can do whatever it is he wants.  His race is in a position where they don't have to work that hard to get what they need.  Everything is pretty much given to them.  So his attitude is selfish and he answers only to himself. Any other person who would act this way would be cursed by the gods.  But since he is the son of Poseidon, he gets away with it.

In "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn", describe Jim's dislike of King Solomon

King Solomon, widely regarded for his incredible wisdom, doesn't hold much esteem in Jim's eyes.  Huck claims that Solomon "was the wisest man" but Jim disagrees stating that the king "had some er de dad-fetchedes' ways I ever see", meaning, the strangest ways.  Jim's reasoning on the story about Solmon threatening to cut the baby in two to see who its real mother was actually makes sense. His first beef with it is that it's a waste of a baby:  "What use is half a chile (child)?  I wouldn't give a dern for a million un um." Secondly, Jim figures that since Solomon has a huge harem of wives, he probably  has "bout five million chillen runnin' around" and so doesn't really care about one potentially being sliced in half since he's got plenty to spare.  Huck think's Jim's reasoning is "the most down on Solomon of any nigger I ever see".  But, Jim's reasons, although unique, do make perfect sense, if you think about it.

In "The Crucible" how does Danforth explain the importance of the victims testifying in a trial for witchcraft?

Danforth summarizes how in a normal case of crime, you have actual witnesses to the crime, eye-witness testimonies of what was done.  For example, multiple people can get up and testify that "Yes, I saw that man rob the store".  However, in the case of witchcraft, no one is witness to the crime except for "the witch and the victim."  Because a witch certainly isn't going to "accuse herself" of the crime, "we must rely upon her victims" to testify against her.  Danforth claims that the girls are all victims who are testifying against the witches.  For this reason, they should be believed, because no one else was witness to the crime.

So, the victim's testimony is the only testimony that counts, because she is the only one that was there when the crime occurred, the only one who "saw" and "felt" the witch's power.

Describe Jack's violent reactions in Lord of the Flies.

Compared in the end of "Lord of the Flies" to an ape and a savage, Jack represents the complete unleashing of man's base, primal nature.  As such his reactions to situations become increasingly more violent as the narrative continues.  These actions are  motivated by his jealousy of Ralph and Piggy, whose behavior is adult/civilized as well as by his fear, of which he is ashamed.  

Capitalizing upon the fear of the others, however, Jack is able to manipulate the boys such as SamnEric whom he intimidates into following him. In fact, it is this fear that leads to the violence and savage behavior that unleashes the "beast" in their souls.

In Chapter 7 Jack's increasing cruelty emerges after the boys pretend to kill the pig and hurt Robert instead and Jack suggests using a littl'un next time when they practice.  Later, when Jack hides behind the paint, his violent nature emerges:  He boldly steals the fire and dances naked in front of Ralph.  Having usurped authority, Jack becomes more savage, beating one of the boys in Chapter 10.  When Piggy accuses Jack of stealing his glasses, Jack rushes at him with his spear. Then, when Ralph, enraged, calls Jack and his boys "painted fools," Jack fights Ralph.  Piggy tries to restore order, but is struck by a rock and falls to his death; Jack threatens Ralph with the same end, hurling his spear at Ralph.

In the final chapter, his savage nature has full reign as Jack orders a fire to flush out Ralph, not reasoning that this fire will destroy the entire island.  As Shakespeare wrote, "Violent delights oft have violent ends." 

In Act II of "A Midsummer Night's Dream", why are Demetrius, Helena, Lysander, and Hermia in the forest?

Lysander tells Hermia, in Act 1, Scene 1, that they're going to run off together to his aunt's house to get married. But to do so, they're going to go through the woods:

A good persuasion; therefore, hear me, Hermia.
I have a widow aunt, a dowager
Of great revenue, and she hath no child:
From Athens is her house remote seven leagues;
And she respects me as her only son.
There, gentle Hermia, may I marry thee;
And to that place the sharp Athenian law
Cannot pursue us. If thou lovest me then,
Steal forth thy father's house tomorrow night;
And in the wood, a league without the town,
Where I did meet thee once with Helena
To do observance to a morn of May,
There will I stay for thee.

They tell Helena of their plans to run away, and that they're going to meet in the woods. And she tells the audience that she's going to tell Demetrius (who she loves, and who is in love with Hermia - and indeed, has got her father's word that he can marry Hermia) that Hermia is running away to the woods:

I will go tell him of fair Hermia's flight;
Then to the wood will he tomorrow night
Pursue her; and for this intelligence
If I have thanks, it is a dear expense.

Demetrius goes. And Helena follows him.

So to recap - Hermia and Lysander are escaping to the woods to elope together. Demetrius is chasing Hermia, and Helena is chasing him.

Hope it helps!

How does the story "My Son, the Fanatic" go on?

Part of where the story acquires its greatness is that the location of the story's resolution lies with the reader.  The supposed worst in the reader has been awakened in the realization that Ali has become a fundamentalist.  For a large part of the story, Kurieshi constructs it so that the reader is sympathetic to Parvez and his fears about his son.  When Ali rebukes his father for his behaviors and then rebukes Bettina for her attempt at reconciliation, the reader strongly identifies with Parvez.  We, as the reader, are with the father throughout, as Ali has been constructed in a fairly monolithic and one- dimensional manner.  As Parvez approaches his son's room, we, as the reader, are still with him as some level of confrontation is required.  However, it is Kurieshi's genius to shift advocacy in the most forceful of manners when we see Parvez beating his son.  At this point, most reasonable readers would say that Parvez has crossed some demarcation and there is little in way of support that can be offered.  When we are confronted with this reality, it is in this moment of reflection where the story "goes on."  The reader must take the dynamic that is present between both father and son and leave the story assessing their own views.  When Ali asks his father, cut and bleeding from the abuse, "Now, who's the fanatic," there is a moment where we, as the reader, have to assess our own views on terrorism and its perceptions of it.  This is how the story goes on, for it continues in the mind of the reader.  There are a multiplicity of paths that Parvez and Ali can pursue, but I don't think those are as important as the path the reader takes upon reading the story.  In the end, this is where the story "goes on;" where we, as the reader, choose to take the lessons from it.