Why did Oates dedicate the short story to Bob Dylan?"Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?" by Joyce Carol Oates

Joyce Carol Oates's short story was published in a
collection entitled, Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?: Stories of
Young America, a title which indicates Oates's ongoing interest in
adolescence, especially the psychological and social turmoil characteristic of this
period of teen angst.  Arnold Friend's manipulative stream of conversation mimics the
enjambed lines of Bob Dylan's lyrics, especially those from his song "It's All Over Now
Baby Blue" that Ms. Oates herself said inspired her,

readability="7">

The vagabond who's rapping at your
door

is standing in the clothes that you wore
before

In other ways, such as
the tone and mood, Oates's short story also speaks to the song culture that was Dylan's,
which had much influence on teens.  For instance, Connie listens to the
music

that
made everything so good:  the music was always in the background like music at a church
service, it was something to depend
upon.

And, it is music that
lures Connie, just as many teens of Dylan's era were lured by his lyrics and music,
although Ms. Oates does not perceive Dylan's  as subversive or dangerous. Interestingly,
however, in order to deceive Connie, Arnold Friend mimics Dylan
in

the
singsong way he talked, slightly mocking, kidding, but serious and a little
melancholy.

In fact, at one
point, Oates writes of Arnold Friend, "He had the voice of the man on the radio now." 
And, his efforts to seduce Connie are all imitative of singers on the radio, suggesting
Oates's ideas about the powerful influence of music upon
adolescents.

In Guns, Germs and Steel, how does Diamond respond to the idea that Europeans may be more intelligent than New Guineans?

In the Prologue, Diamond makes three major arguments on
this topic.

First, he says that New Guineans may seem dumb
when they come to towns because they are not used to the things that are in "civilized"
towns.  This does not mean they really are dumb, just that they are not accustomed to
the setting.

The next two arguments center around the idea
that New Guineans are actually smarter.

Second, he says
that more intelligence is (and has been for a long time) needed to survive in the New
Guinean wilderness than in European countries.  Therefore, New Guineans are likely to
have evolved to be more intelligent than
Europeans.

Finally, Diamond argues that New Guinean
lifestyles mean they are more likely to be intelligent.  Europeans and Americans spend
all their time being passively entertained by TVs and such while New Guineans actually
have to use their brains.

So, Diamond counters the idea
that Europeans are more intelligent by A) saying New Guineans only appear dumb in modern
settings and B) that there are reasons to believe that New Guineans would actually be
smarter than Europeans.

What did Ophelia's brother and father tell her about Hamlet in Shakespeare's Hamlet?Please give examples and analysis.

Laertes and Ophelia have this first discussion in Act I,
scene iii. Laertes is getting ready to leave and gives Ophelia some brotherly advice in
these words:

readability="14">

For Hamlet, and the trifling of his favours,

Hold it a fashion, and a toy in blood;
A violet in the youth of
primy nature,
Forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting;
The
perfume and suppliance of a minute; (10)
No more.

Laertes is saying that
Hamlet views Ophelia as just one of his many women. He is also
showing that this is natural for a man of Hamlet's age and status. To him, Ophelia is
just a toy.

Polonius tells Ophelia that the advances and
offers that Hamlet has made for her love and affection are
false:

Think
yourself a baby,
That you have ta'en these tenders for true pay,

Which are not
sterling.

He notes how
immature and ignorant Ophelia is. Furthermore, by the end of their discussion, he
commands her not to accept any of Hamlet's advances from this point
forward.

These man go to the trouble and effort to warn
Ophelia because they know Hamlet and are worried that the difference in their social
classes will make a relationship difficult. They are also concerned that his drastic
emotions would affect her. These are two protective men.

To what extent do the female characters in Pride and Prejudice carry responsibilities for their actions and events?

The female characters of Jane Austen's Pride and
Prejudice are representatives Austen's own rebellious feelings against the
social norms to which women are often attached as if they were not worthy to think and
act for themselves.

The Bennet sisters are thought to be
unruly by the likes of Lady Catherine, Miss Bingley, and Mrs. Hurst only because they do
not seem to demonstrate the extreme rules of decorum that are customary of ladies of
higher upbringing. However, the real problem of the Bennet sisters is not that they are
not well-brought up, but that they are allowed to think for
themselves.

This is moreevident in Elizabeth and Lydia than
in the rest of the Bennet sisters. Yet, both sisters make contrastingly different
choices as far as how they would take responsibility for their
actions.

Elizabeth's main issue isspeaking out her mind
before thinking straight. She is prone to generalizations and she emits judgement about
things that she believes are true. In the end, when she realizes that Darcy was not a
proud man, nor Wickham a victim, she takes the massive step of telling each man how she
was in the wrong. Elizabeth takes her freedom of expression to both make the mistake and
then ask for forgiveness about it.

Lydia's problem is that
she is a bad influence to Kitty, that she is boy-crazy, unreasonable, and immature. She
does not care about decorum at all and is not ashamed of her eloping with Wickham at the
young age of 15, and unmarried. When Wickham is forced to marry her, Lydia is blind
enough not to realize that her marriage is simply a patch to cover a potential scandal.
She is even proud of the fact that she is to be known as "Mrs. Wickham", and that she
has privileges over her sisters for being the first one married. In other words, Lydia
has no notion of responsibility, and she is a flat character in that she never changes
in the story. In fact, as time passes by, her lack of common sense becomes more and more
evident.

Therefore, the two most controversial Bennet
sisters have their way in that they can think and act independently, but only one of
them seems to have matured enough to recognize right from wrong and accept
responsibility for her actions.
                                                                                                                  

How did Jon Krakauer find all this information for him to write Into the Wild?

Non-fiction of such excellence is only possible through a
considerable amount of hard work and effort. The research that it takes to investigate
such a story occupies many hours and involves much diligence on the author's part. You
might like to consider the "Acknowledgments" section of the book at the very end,
following the final chapter, where Jon Krakauer notes down a series of people that shows
the extent of his research and the involvement of others in his work. Note how the first
paragraph of this section of the novel makes the debt that Krakauer owes to the family
of Chris McCandless evident:

readability="14">

Writing this book would have been impossible
without considerable assistance from the McCandless family. I am deeply indebted to Walt
McCandless, Billie McCandless, Carine McCandless, Sam McCandless, and Shelly McCandless
Garcia. They gave me full access to Chris's papers, letters, and photographs and talked
with me at great length.

This
of course shows one of the major sources of research for this work, but at the same time
we can also infer that considerable time was spent interviewing other characters that
appear in this book and also researching the flora and fauna and literature that is so
important for this tale.

Discuss the story "Misery" and the characters of Iona and the horse by Anton Chekhove.

Grief strikes all men at some time in their lives.  The
stages of grief are similar for everyone; however, some people hold their feelings
inside. There are those who need to share their feelings.  This is true of the
protagonist in the story “Misery” by Anton Chekhov.  Iona Potapov wants and needs to
talk to someone. Chekhov addresses the indifference that man can show to one
another. 

The setting of the story is winter in Russia.  It
is extremely cold with snow falling. The narration is third person point of view with an
omniscient limited narrator.

Iona is elderly. He has
recently suffered a grievous loss.  After a brief illness, his son has died.  Iona is
beside himself with sorrow. There is no one to talk with about this tragedy, and no one
with which to share his misery.  Iona "thirsts for
speech."

He has been sitting in his sleigh with his little,
white horse. As the story progresses, he does gain several fares.  None of which are
interested in talking to the driver as each hurries to his
destination. 

• The first is an officer.  He does
  show some interest in the story of the death of the driver’s
  son.

readability="11">

      'H’m! What did he die
of?’

        Iona turns his whole body round to his fare,
and says

      ‘Who can tell! I must have been from
fever…He lay      three days in the hospital and then he died…God’s
will.’

That is the end of the
discussion.  Iona is left with nothing to satisfy his longing to share his
story.

• The second fare is three young men. One
  of them is a hunchback.  He is particularly sarcastic and bitter about life.  The
  sustenance he receives from them is “We all have to
  die.”

• The third encounter is a house
  porter.  He tells the driver to go on and leave him
  alone.

After this encounter, Iona gives up and
returns to the yard for the evening. 

Iona sits in the cab
room.  He thirsts for human conversation.  His son has been dead for a week.  He has
been unable to talk to anyone about it.  He has a daughter who lives in the country, yet
he has not been able to see her either. There is a young cabby in the room; however, he
is thirsty and too sleepy to have any interest in the old
man.

Finally, Iona decides to go outside and see about his
horse.  When he sees her, she is munching on hay.  He begins to talk to her.  It as
though she understands that he must talk about his son’s death. Iona is reduced to
experiencing some relief in the warm, animal companionship of his
horse.

The old man feels some release that the horse
listens, eats, and breathes on him as he talks to her.  Having lost faith in man, he is
warmed by his old friend, the horse, with whom he shares his life. Psychologically, his
sorrow cannot be contained any longer.  He rushes to talk to anyone or anything.  He
finds comfort being able to communicate even with an
animal. 

The horse symbolizes what man will not give Iona:
attention, reflection, and love.  This the horse willingly gives to the old man.  Sadly,
humanity turns away from the old man who needs the attention.  The animal does
not. 

What are 3 examples in Othello which show parental love vs. parental control?

Clearly, the main example of parental love vs. parental
control in this play is going to concern the relationship between Brabantio and
Desdemona, his daughter who secretly marries Othello behind his back. You will therefore
want to focus upon Act I scenes 1, 2 and 3, where Iago hatches his plan to create
problems for Othello with his new father-in-law. Consider Brabantio's rather distracted
response to realising that his daughter is not in his
house:

It is
too true an evil, gone she is,

And what's to come of my
despised time

Is nought but
bitterness...

O unhappy girl!
--

With the Moor, say'st thou? - Who would be a
father?

We can see the
tension between parental love and parental control here given Brabantio's sadness for
both himself and his daughter. This is something that continues to be demonstrated in
Act I scene 2, when Brabantio enters, accusing Othello of having "enchanted" Desdemona
and of being a "foul thief." In Act I scene 3, he protests to the Duke that his daughter
is considered "dead" to him:

readability="18">

She is abused, stolen from me and
corrupted

By spells and medicines bought of
mountebanks,

For nature so preposterously to
err

Being not deficient, blind, or lame of
sense,

Sans witchcraft could
not.

Clearly the strong words
regarding how Brabantio believes his daughter is "dead" because of her elopement
continues this tension between parental love and control.

Word for word, what are three references to Henry David Thoreau in John Krakauer's book Into the Wild?

Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer’s 1996
book about Christopher McCandless’s journey into the Alaskan wilderness (a journey that
ended in his death), contains numerous references to Henry David Thoreau. Some of these
references are actually long epigraphs from Thoreau’s own writings.  In the 2007 Anchor
Press paperback edition of the book, references to Thoreau appear on the following
pages: 28, 29, 39, 47, 66, 117, 123, 133, 162, 167, 172, and
183.

I can’t quote at great length, but here a number of
brief quotations:

readability="20">

McCandless could endeavor to explain that he
answered to statutes of a higher order – that as a latter-day adherent of Henry David
Thoreau, he took as gospel the essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” and thus
considered it his moral responsibility to flout the laws of the state. (p.
28)

……………………………………….

Then, in
gesture that would have done both Thoreau and Tolstoy proud, he arranged all his paper
currency in a pile on the sand – a pathetic little stack of ones and fives and twenties
– and put a match to it. (p.
29)

……………………………………….

Shortly
after the moose episode McCandless began to read Thoreau’s Walden.
(p.
167)

……………………………………….

How do Shakespeare and Robert Frost present choices in Macbeth and "The Road not Taken"?I would like to point out that presentation of choices is...

readability="4.7093023255814">

src="http://d2hej51cni6o0x.cloudfront.net/images/user_icons/Educator_Female_Small.png"
class="profilePic" alt="wannam's profile pic"/>
src="http://d2hej51cni6o0x.cloudfront.net/images/core/educator-indicator_thumb.png"
class="premium-indicator"/>

Both Macbeth and
The Road Not Taken deal with the consequences of choices. Lady Macbeth walks around
talking in her sleep. She cannot be rid of the choice she has made. We see her monologue
of "out, out damned spot" as a prime example of her guilt. The Road Not Taken is far
more general than Macbeth, but it is also far shorter. Frost talks about the
consequences of choices in his final lines "I took the road less traveled by and that
has made all the difference." Macbeth seems to have a darker view of these consequences
than The Road Not Taken. However, in Macbeth, the characters are dealing with specific,
dark choices. Frost is dealing with a more general concept on how to make choices and
the choice of which path we will follow in life. Macbeth spells out the consequences and
the choices that lead to them. Frost hints at similar themes but does not give
specifics. I think the two key points on this topic are that both Macbeth and Frost
discuss the consequences of choices, but Macbeth leads the reader down a much darker
road while Frost is more optimistic and uplifting.

class="message-footer">

data-id="349404" data-method="/api/2.0/qa/rateAnswer">
like

id="upvoteCount-rateAnswer-349404">1


data-method="/api/2.0/qa/rateAnswer">
dislike
itemprop="downvoteCount"
id="downvoteCount-rateAnswer-349404">0

What is a diffference between the short story and Sarah Teasdale's poem "There Will Come Soft Rains"?

Both the Ray Bradbury short story and the Sara Teasdale
poem are entitled, “There Will Come Soft Rains”.  However, there is a stark contrast
between the selections. In the Bradbury short story, human life is annihilated, while
technology endures. The setting for the short story is a typical family home. The
technological gadgets in the house continue to function as if the householders were
present. The existence or non-existence of humans has no effect on the routines of the
robotic servants within the home. Technology becomes the focus of the
selection.

 On the other hand, in the Sara Teasdale poem,
nature is focus. The environment in this selection is populated by animals, such as
robins, swallows and frogs. As the animals interact with the natural environment, they
are unaware of human interactions with one another. In fact, according to the Teasdale
poem, if humankind vanished entirely, either by or natural disaster or a man-made
catastrophe, nature “would scarcely know that we were gone.” Teasdale marvels at the
natural perfection found in the ecological cycle of life.

Help with standard deviations, means, distributionsI am confused about comparing data by looking at the mean and standard deviation. Example shows...

Group A

The mean 100 out of
120 with SD=5 means that in general the variabilities of data in the population is 100 +
or - 5. Thus, data in this population range from 95 -
105.

Group B

The mean 85 out
of 120 means that in general the variabilities of data in the population is 85 + or -
10. Thus, data in this population range from 75 - 95

In
group A, from the question we know that there is a person score 90 out of 120. It means
that there is a score that not in the range 95 - 105. This data is an outlier. Data with
an outlier cannot have a normal distribution.

There is not
enough information to make a decision about distribution in group B. However, if assumed
that the case of this person is turn into group B. We can see that the 90 out of 120 is
in the range of 95 - 105. Thus, data in group B has a normal
distribution.

If a person reach 90 out of 120 in group A,
it means that this person did worse on the test, because his/her score falled into lower
than the lowest average, which is 95. However, if this person is in group B, he/she did
fair on the test because his/hert grade is in the mid of range 95 -
105.

I hope this answer can help
you.

What three people helped Malcolm into becoming a militant person in The Autobiography of Malcolm X?

We should probably clarify the use of the word "militant"
in the question.  Fundamentally, Malcolm X has to be seen as a leader that advocated
resistance and actively defending oneself in the face of unrivaled brutality from both
institutional means and social means of exclusion.  In this light, one of the most
important people that helped him embrace such a position was, simply put, racist White
people in American society that he encountered.  Malcolm's most basic position is one
where he takes the form of defiance, what one might consider, militancy because he is
exposed to a sense of discrimination and injustice around him.  The Klansmen who killed
his father would be one group of people that convinced Malcolm at the earliest of ages
that violence against Black people was a reality in being.  Another individual/ group of
people who helped to move Malcolm towards a position of active dissent within the system
was the insurance company who would not pay out the settlement to Malcolm's mother,
arguing that Earl Little's death was a suicide, thereby they were not obliged to pay. 
The teachers and individuals on a personal level helped to form Malcolm's opinion that
if he was not going to fight for himself no one else would was confirmed by Mr.
Ostrowski, a teacher who told Malcolm that a lawyer was "not a realistic job for a
nigger."  Rather, Malcolm should be a "carpenter."  In this, Malcolm understands that
the need for active advocacy of one's self and needs must be driven internally, as the
outward social order will not advocate for people of color unless it is to lock them in
a socially stratified role.  These individuals, at an early age, caused Malcolm to
embrace the condition of active defiance that marks his adult
life.

What are some good quotes from The Outsiders that explain that the gang is family?Any good quotes talking about the gang being like family,...

Several of the main characters in The
Outsiders consider their greaser buddies as family, particularly Ponyboy and
Johnny. Following the death of his parents, Pony relies more and more on his friends
since he has problems dealing with older brother Darry. Johnny's home life is terrible;
his parents fight and argue all the time, and Johnny is both physically and mentally
abused by them. He feels much more at home with Pony, Dally and
Two-Bit.

Speaking of his greaser friends, Pony tells us
that

We're
almost as close as brothers; when you grow up in a tight-knit neighborhood like ours you
get to know each other real
well.

As for
Johnny,

He was
the gang's pet, everyone's kid brother... If it hadn't been for the gang, Johnny would
never have known what love and affection
are.

And just before Johnny
and Pony are attacked by the Socs in the park, Pony tries to calm his
friend.

"...
you got the whole gang."

Not
long before Johnny died, Pony tried to cheer both of them up at the hospital. Pony saw
that Johnny was dying, and he knew that the gang wouldn't be the
same.

    
"You'll be okay," I said with fake cheerfullness. "You gotta be. We couldn't get along
without you."
     The truth of that last statement hit me. We couldn't get
along without him. We needed Johnny as much as he needed the
gang. 

Why did Paul wear the rose to his office

Paul does not wear a rose to his office,even though the
second job that he gets in the story is that of a clerk. The only time where Paul wears
any flowers in his lapel during the story is when he goes to the teachers' board with
his High School headmaster to discuss his bad
behavior.

During that specific instance, he wears a red
carnation. He wears this to show flippancy and carelessness, not to mention, superiority
towards his teachers. The problem in this particular instance is that the teachers are
sick of Paul, and the feeling is reciprocated.

The red
carnation is considered offensive by the teachers, since a meeting with the headmaster
is far from an occasion to get "dressed up" for. Hence, Paul challenges "the system" by
wearing his red carnation to a possible expulsion meeting.

What do the proles consider a "serious piece of news" in 1984?I belive this is in chapter eight, in book one.

In Part One, Chapter Eight of “1984,” as Winston is
walking past a pub where the proles frequented, he sees a group of men gathered close
together.  One is holding a newspaper and they are all concentrating hard on it. 
Winston can tell by the expression on their faces that this was “serious piece of news”
that they were reading.  The group broke up, but two of the men almost came to blows
over what they were reading. It was the results of the
Lottery.

To many of the proles, the Lottery was the sole
reason for living.

In The Crucible, what does this quote spoken by Reverend Hale mean?"I dare not take a life without there be proof so immaculate no slighest qualm...

This particular quote of Hale represents his fundamental
belief in what he does as representing "God's work."  It also reflects the fundamental
flaw in his character.  Hale is convinced that if there "be proof so immaculate," he
finds it acceptable to take a life.  Where his thinking is flawed, and something that
comes out later in the Third Act, is that death is something irreversible.  Signing the
"72 death warrants" that he already has, he begins to recognize that what the court is
accepting as truth and fact, as incontrovertible evidence, might not meet his standard
of "proof so immaculate."  When Miller writes in the Act I stage directions that the
citizens of Salem held a lighted candle that served to represent a beacon for all, Hale
embodies some of these qualities with this belief and unquestionable faith in the "proof
so immaculate."  The quote means that Hale has no problem executing his duty if this
basis of evidence is strong enough to compel him to do
so.

Yet, it is within these lines that Hale's character is
seen.  Hale is wondering if the evidence given by the girls meets this idea of "proof so
immaculate."  In the second half of the statement, the idea of not having "qualms" is
raised if the evidence accepted is not as strong as one could believe.  When Hale speaks
these words to Danforth, it is clear that he is "drawing a line in the sand," indicating
to the judge that he has no problem doing what he must do, provided that the evidence
collected represents this.  It is here where Hale begins to start showing some of the
first real moments of Hale's doubt in what is happening in
Salem.

What are some examples of "fashion" in Much Ado about Nothing? Hi, I have to write an essay on the key theme of Fashion and clothes in Much Ado...

In Act III, scene iv of Much Ado About
Nothing, Hero and Maragaret have a conversation about
clothes:

MARGARET

Troth,
I think your other rabato were
better.

HERO

No,
pray thee, good Meg, I'll wear
this.

MARGARET

By
my troth, 's not so good; and I warrant your
cousin will
say
so.

HERO

My
cousin's a fool, and thou art another: I'll wear
none but
this.

MARGARET

I
like the new tire within excellently, if the hair
were a
thought browner; and your gown's a most rare
fashion, i'
faith. I saw the Duchess of Milan's
gown that they praise
so.

HERO

O,
that exceeds, they
say.

MARGARET

By
my troth, 's but a night-gown in respect of
yours: cloth o'
gold, and cuts, and laced with
silver, set with pearls,
down sleeves, side sleeves,
and skirts, round underborne
with a bluish tinsel:
but for a fine, quaint, graceful and
excellent
fashion, yours is worth ten on
't.

HERO

God
give me joy to wear it! for my heart is
exceeding
heavy.

MARGARET

'Twill
be heavier soon by the weight of a
man.

HERO

Fie
upon thee! art not ashamed?

A
"rabato" is a "collar," and a "tire" is a "headdress."  When Hero says, "that exceeds,
they say," she means that [the gown] "is amazing."  So, the conversation is but a filler
on fashion while Beatrice is fetched, but it reveals the class distinctions between
engaged upper-class Hero (who can afford expensive gowns and hair) and unmarried,
lower-class Margaret (whose nightgown is "quaint" by comparison).  Margaret ends the
conversation by making a dirty joke, so clothes are used to attract a husband as
well.

Earlier in the play, "masks" were the focal point of
the party.  During such masquerade balls, expensive and elaborate costumes were worn by
men and women as part of pagan revelry.  Here, Don Pedro woos Hero for Claudio, and
Benedick and Beatrice argue in disguise.  So, clothing is not only used to show one's
gender, status, and wealth, but also one's inner feelings and secret motivations.  Don
John, a bastard, for example, would most likely wear black to show his melancholy, while
Hero, a virgin, would wear white.  As an example, Beatrice says this of
Benedick:

readability="0">

Very easily possible: he
wears his faith but as
the
fashion of his hat; it ever changes with
the
next
block.

Giving
outward clues of inward motivations is a kind of "pathetic fallacy" or an "objective
correlative."  What we see outside mirrors what one feels
inside.

How does Oedipus develop and change throughout Oedipus Rex?

It depends how you read the play, of course. It's a great
play, this one, and so it sort of pushes back at simple questions. I'll show you what I
mean.

At the start of the play, Oedipus has it great. He's
King of Thebes, and he's 'determined' (interesting word for him to choose) that he's
going to rid the city of the plague that is killing its people. An oracle tells the
Thebans that a murderer is in the city and has to be rooted out and removed - then the
plague will go away. And Oedipus is determined to find the murderer and kick him out.
Oedipus is single-minded, some might say obsessive, but - you know what? - he's a good
king. That's what you want, right?

And even though,
throughout the play, Tieresias, Jocasta, and various other characters tell Oedipus to
stop, to turn back, to focus on something else, to stop searching for the murderer, he
won't. He downright refuses to stop looking.

And when, at
the end, he realises that the murderer is - in fact - him: Oedipus himself, who has,
unknowingly, murdered his father - he still doesn't change. Still single-minded, still
determined, he blinds himself and then kicks himself out of Thebes. He's sort of
impressive and scary at the same time (the Greek 'deinos' means both terrible an
dwonderful - and it's a good word for Oedipus).

So in that
sense, he doesn't develop or change. He's like a bulldozer plowing through the play,
smashing apart resistance until he finally comes to smash apart
himself.

In another sense, he changes profoundly. At the
start of the play he's the son of (he thinks) the King and Queen of Corinth, married to
the beautiful Jocasta, his wife (with whom he has children). By the end of it, he's the
son of the King of Thebes, Laius, whom he murdered, and both husband and son of Jocasta
(who he married without knowing she was his mother). So if you're talking about his
familial roles, well... he changes pretty totally. But personally, I'd say one of the
interesting things about the play is that he doesn't really change at all personally.
And the man looking for the murderer does indeed get his wish, and find that murderer
out by the end. It's just a shame that the person he ends up catching with the blood on
their hands is himself.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus said "you never really know a man until you stand in his shoes and walk around in them."What events leads the...

Scout finds that Atticus' advice comes true often in
To Kill a Mockingbird. The most obvious example comes in the form
of Boo Radley, the most feared man in all of Maycomb. Instead of being a bloodthirsty
killer of animals and neighborhood pets, Scout and Jem slowly come to discover that Boo
is a kind--albeit always invisible--neighbor. In the end, after she leads Boo home after
he has saved her life, Scout stands on the Radley porch as if in Boo's own shoes, gazing
at the neighborhood as if she is seeing it through Boo's
eyes.

Another example comes in the form of Dolphus Raymond.
Raymond is believed to be a drunkard and a "sinful man," but when Scout finally sits
down and has a talk with him, she discovers that he is a friendly, sober man--whose
boots Scout greatly admires. Mr. Cunningham is yet another example. Scout is able to
witness his alteration in a few fleeting minutes, changing him from the leader of a
would-be lynch party to an apologetic father. Scout also has problems understanding why
Bob Ewell is so hateful toward Atticus, but he tells her to see it from Bob's point of
view: After Atticus had shamed him on the witness stand, Bob had little choice but to
try and reclaim his dignity in any way possible.

What could be the genre of A Streetcar Named Desire, other than a tragedy?

I think that Williams' work can be seen as a tragedy in a
couple of ways.  The first would be that Bradley's interpretation of Hegel reveals the
concept of a "tragic collision."  This vision of tragedy is one whereby the individual
is poised between equally desirable, but ultimately incompatible courses of action. 
Blanche would be placed in this "tragic collision."  She is poised between these
polarities.  On one hand, Blanche sees one aspect of her being as the allure of her
past, of Belle Reve, and of what society used to be.  On the other side of this is the
condition in which Blanche seeks appreciation and to be accepted.  Implicit in this is a
rejection of the past and an embrace of the present or future, something that Blanche,
herself, cannot accept or comprehend.  Tragedy is evident in this collision, in which
Blanche becomes a heroine of tragedy.  This same paradigm can be applied to Stella, who
has to fundamentally choose between Stanley and Blanche.  The choice is a brutal and
agonizing one because the acceptance of one means the rejection of the other.  In these
ways, tragedy is an apt classification of Williams' work.

What are the similarities between the Maria Hertogh and Anti-National Service riots?

The major similarity between these two riots is that both
expressed the desire of the people of Singapore to have more control of their government
and society.  The people wanted to throw off the control of the Europeans in the years
after WWII.

On the face of them, the riots have little in
common.  The Hertogh riots had to do with religion while the National Service riots had
to do with politics.  However, in a sense, they were both about who should run
Singapore.  Both riots can be seen as demands for local control.  The Hertogh riots can
be seen as a demand for more respect for local religions and for local people (rather
than British courts) to be able to be in charge of justice.  Similarly, the National
Service riots can be seen as a demand that the British should not be able to force
service from their subjects.

In both cases, the riots
center around the issue of who should control Singapore.  They can both be seen as
demands for local control and an end to colonialism.

What are the main ideas in Dantes Inferno.

Dante Alighieri's epic poem “The Divine Comedy” is written
in three parts, Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradisio. These reflect the three possible
destinations to where the soul might be transported after death according to medieval
Roman Catholicism. Dante, as narrator of the poem, is guided through nine levels of Hell
by the Roman poet Virgil, and then through Purgatory, and finally to Paradise. The nine
levels of Hell illustrate the divisions of sins in medieval Roman Catholicism. The poem
illustrates the soul’s journey from sin to God.

What traits do Rainsford and General Zaroff have in common? And what differences do they have in The Most Dangerous Game?

One trait Rainsford and General Zaroff have in common in
the short story is their passion for hunting and their extensive knowledge in hunting.
They both have traveled around the world hunting the most desired and exotic game and
both have been doing it for a long time. Rainsford even wrote a book on hunting. Another
trait they possessed in common, in the beginning of the short story, was their
callousness toward hunting. They both regarded prey animals as having no feelings or
emotions when it came to the hunt. They felt nothing for the animals they
hunted.

An obvious difference the two characters possess is
their level of sanity. They differ in the lengths at which they will go to achieve the
thrill of the hunt. Rainsford is content to hunt animals, while General Zaroff has grown
bored with it. He has rationalized in his mind that it is okay to hunt humans. He has no
boundaries when it comes to hunting, whereas Rainsford still
does.

What are the parts to the Mechanical Hound Fahrenheit 451? e.x. 8 legs, needle. etc.

The beast is made of brass, copper, and steel. It has
eight insect legs and rubber-padded paws on each leg. He has sensitive capillary
hairs in his nostrils to heighten his ability to smell. When he catches his prey, a
four-inch hollow steel needle comes out of his nose and injects a massive dose of
morphine or procaine, which anthesizes the prey, and then they throw it in the furnace.
  It has green-blue neon llights as eyes and  growls, which is a combination of
electrical sizzle, a frying sound, a scraping of metal, and a turning of rusty cogs.  It
doesn't like or dislike, it just functions.  It runs on storage batteries and
electricity. It has calculators that can be set to any combination of amino acids,
suulpher, butterfat, and alkaline, and can target any person with that
combination.

What is the time frame for the novel Swiss Family Robinson?

The book, “Swiss Family Robinson,” probably takes place
around the turn of the 19th century.  There has been several versions of the novel that
depict it taking place at many different times and places, but the original work
appeared in 1812.  Johann Rudolph Wyss published the book then, but it is not known for
certain that he actually wrote it, since in the second edition he gave the credit to his
father, and the original manuscript was in his father’s
handwriting.

The most famous film version of the book is
probably the one made by the Disney Corporation, and the way it was depicted was about
the same time period as the book. However, who can forget the famous television show,
“Lost in Space,” that was inspired by the book also.  In fact, the family in the series
was named “Robinson.”

What in Andrew Marvell's poetry establishes him as a metaphysical poet?

One example of Marvell's metaphysical approach is "To His
Coy Mistress". This poem expresses the metaphysical conceit which
is an attitude that comes across through a debate or argument.

In this poem, Marvell is essentially coming onto a woman
who has no speaking voice in the poem. He uses great hyperbole and a forward tone with
the intention of getting this woman that he is interested in to stop playing
hard-to-get. She has been coy, and he is trying to point out that there has been time
enough for that game, and now it is time to engage in a highly physical relationship.
Having been written in 1681, this is truly some forward and aggressive writing about
love.

So how does this fit the metaphysical poet
definition? As the great argument begins it's construction, Marvell presents the thesis
in the first stanza that if there was time, he would

readability="12">

"Love you ten years before the Flood,

And you should, if you please,
refuse

Till the conversion of the
Jews."

Marvell is essentially
say that their courtship could go on forever, if they only had the
time.

But the next stanza, presents the antithesis: the
fact that life is limited and they only have so much time to
love.

"Thy
beauty shall no more be found

Nor in thy marble vault shall
sound

My echoing song; then worms shall
try

That long preserved
virginity,

And your quaint honor turned to
dust,

And into ashes all my
lust."

He is almost mocking
her. He lets her know that she will die a virgin if she doesn't accept his request here
pretty soon.

The final stanza marks the synthesis of the
two ideas already presented. This stanza likewise makes the great suggestion that they
take into account that time has been long enough for a flirting period, and now, it is
time to let the sporting begin. Marvell wants to Mistress to understand that a physical
relationship has to start at some point.

The structure of
the argument is what defines this as metaphysical: thesis, antithesis, and then
synthesis. Furthermore, the confidence in the argument that is marked by the hyperbole
further defines this as metaphysical.

Hope this
helps.

Do you believe at the end chapters 1-6 in Book the Third of A Tale of Two Cities that Darnay is finally safe from the revolution?

No.  Keeping in mind that Dickens's novel, A
Tale of Two Cities, is a narrative of parallels and doubles, the trial of
Darnay in Paris parallels that of his trial in England.  For, just as Stryver has played
to the crowd in creating doubt regarding the identity of Charles Darnay as the man who
passed treasonous papers, so, too, does Darnay play to the sympathies crowd of French as
he aligns himself with the prisoner of the Bastille, Manette, and as the loyal friend
who returns to save a citizen's life.  Of course, both these instances illustrate the
corruption of the justice systems before and after the revolution, pointing to the
underlying problem as that in human nature, a problem that will
continue. 

Therefore, because of the fickleness of human
nature, as well as the vengeful force of Madame Defarge, who has knitted the name
of Evremonde and all relatives into her death cloth, Charles Darnay will surely answer
for "the sins of the father" and be retried again by the fickle tribunal of
the bonnets rouges the Jacques) that also seek
redress for all the injustices dealt them by the aristocracy.  As another parallel, in
Chapter II of Book the Third, there is an incident that recalls the metaphoric Chapter V
of Book the First that presages the French Revolution's bloodbath as the grindstone that
sharpens the blades of the guillotine emerges with the hideous and frenzied faces of
those who turn it madly drink much as the frenzied residents of Saint Antoine drank
the spilled cask of wine,

readability="22">

As these ruffians turned and turned, their
matted locks now flung forward over their eyes, now flung backward over their necks,
some women held wine to their mouths that they might drink; and what with dropping
blood, and what with dropping wine, and what with the stream of sparks struck out of the
stone, all their wicked atmosphere seemed gore and fire. The eye could not detect one
creature in the group free from the smear of blood. Shouldering one another to get next
at the sharpening-stone were men stripped to the waist, with the stain all over their
limbs and bodies; men in all sorts of rags, with the stain upon those rags; men
devilishly set off with spoils of women’s lace and silk and ribbon, with the stain
dyeing those trifles through and through. Hatchets, knives, bayonets, swords, all
brought to be sharpened, were all red with
it.

This parallel to the
spilling of the wine casket in Book the First in the company of the other parallels
mentions suggests very strongly that Charles Darnay will, as his mother feared, have to
answer for the crimes of the family Evremonde.

What does “the most beautiful thing we can experience is mysterious“ mean?

This is a quote from Albert Einstein, and it is missing a
word. There is also more to the quote:

readability="9">

The most beautiful things we can experience is
the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science.  He to whom this
emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are
closed.

By this, I believe
Einstein meant that there is beauty in the mysteries of the universe and of humankind.
He is telling us to slow down, observe, appreciate, and having done so, to solve the
mysteries, find the patterns, explain the behavior of our world and ourselves.  This is
what art and science are meant to do.  A good example, looking back in history, is
Charles Darwin.  He found beauty in the natural world around him and contemplated its
mysteries.  He was open to new ideas.  His finding the beauty in the mysterious led to
the theory of evolution.  And I do think no matter how many mysteries we solve, there
will be more mysteries and more beauty for us to stand "rapt in
awe."

what is the conflict between Puritan law and the laws of nature or human law.

Nowadays, we have laws that protect citizens (against
rape, murder, kidnapping, and the like), and people suspected of violating these laws
will be brought forward before a court and sentenced as a judge and or jury sees
fit.

However, the Puritans had extra "laws" against certain
ways of dressing, certain ways of practicing Christianity, even how certain daily duties
are addressed (for example, they weren't allowed to do ANY work on Sundays). And the
Puritans would reinforce these laws by socially ostracizing and/or excommunicating those
that did not adhere to these social and spiritual rules. They would also publicly punish
or chastise those who would rebel against them.

Locate examples of the word "night" in the text, discussing its contextual use in Night.

I think that one of the best uses of the term "night" in
Wiesel's work would have to be upon his entrance into Auschwitz.  Wiesel's reflection
about what that first "night" was like is profound:

readability="9">

Never shall I forget that night, the first night
in camp, which has turned my life into one long night, seven times cursed and seven
times sealed.

The events that
surround this word helps to confirm that the Holocaust's terror is one that happens both
outside the victim and inside them, as well.  Eliezer's first entrance into Auschwitz-
Birkenau was filled with horrific images that ended up cementing themselves into the
mindset of the subjective.  The chimneys, the fires from the crematoriums, the children
dying, and the break up of his family in an instant where mother and sister was sent to
one side and father and son sent to another.  This "night" was one where darkness
shrouded him.  The use of "night" is powerful here because this particular setting is a
"nightmare," one from which there can be no alleviation or waking up.  The lack of
vision in "night" is especially poignant when one considers that this becomes the final
moment he sees his mother and his sister.  The shroud of darkness that must have
overcome at this moment, an instant where Eliezer never understood that separation would
mean permanent loss, but rather one that prevented him from seeing his whole family
again.

On the subjective level, the use of "night" helps to
bring forth the idea that there is a certain recurring nightmare that happens in the
realm of the subjective in terms of life post- Holocaust.  It is this particular idea
that helps to bring out the psychological horror of the Holocaust for those who had to
survive it.  This survival is a nightmare, one where the redemption of dawn is missing
and one where the feeling of living in darkness is almost permanent.  The use of "night"
is brought to an emotional crescendo with the idea of "my life into one long night." 
This helps to confirm the idea that the true horror of the Holocaust is not experiencing
what happened, but lives the psyche of the survivors where there is a sense of continual
and constant return to those initial moments of pain, those elements where pain is
inescapable, and where "night" is a realm of darkness without sleep and without
dawn.