Please explain the chart "Factors Underlying the Broadest Pattern of History" in Ch. 4 of Guns, Germs, and Steel.Found in Chapter 4: Farmer Power

In this chart, Diamond is attempting to show us what
factors led to the Europeans' possession of "guns, germs and steel" and other "proximate
causes" of their ability to defeat people such as the
Incas.

At the bottom of the chart, we see the things that
actually allowed the Europeans to be so dominant.  These are things like horses, guns,
ships, political organization, and epidemic diseases.  We all know that these things
helped the Europeans, but Diamond says knowing this is not enough.  Instead, he says, we
have to understand why the Europeans had these things while the Incas and others did
not.  This is the purpose of this chart.

The chart shows
the factors that made these proximate causes happen.  For example, we can see that
Europeans had epidemic diseases because they had many domesticated plant and animal
species.  We can see that they had many domesticated species because of things like the
east-west axis of Eurasia and the consequent ease of species
spreading.

Overall, then, this chart shows us the ultimate
causes of the things (horses, guns, diseases, etc) that allowed the Europeans to
dominate the world.

While writing my internal dialogue (monologue) from Shakespeare's Hamlet, how can I resolve Hamlet's decision to not kill Claudius while praying?

If Hamlet kills Claudius while he is praying, Hamlet fears
that Claudius will enter Heaven and find eternal forgiveness. Hamlet does not desire to
have Claudius forgiven of such a cruel crime as killing King
Hamlet.

Perhaps you could write about Hamlet's feelings
while overhearing his Uncle Claudius praying. Perhaps you could begin with Hamlet's
emotions while he overhears Claudius praying. The following would be an
example:

Hamlet:

Oh
how I hate his prayers!

He prays so reverently when he
should die violently.

Oh how I wish to divide his prayerful
heart with my sword!

In haste, I must not kill him
now.

I must patiently wait for him to sin against God and
Heaven.

Then shall his guilty heart receive my
sword.

(Perhaps, the above has helped you know how to
begin).

(Continue to write how that Hamlet must be patient
in his desire to avenge his father's death).

(Continue to
write how Claudius' death must be met with sin in his
heart).

(Write about the decision Hamlet has to make in
waiting until Claudius is in a drunken, sinful, angry
state).

I hope this helps you get started. Good
luck!

From which three characters in To Kill a Mockingbird do you think Jem and Scout learned the most? Discuss with close reference to the events of the...

Jem and Scout certainly learn a lot during the course of
To Kill A Mockingbird, and their "education" comes from experiences
and interactions with many different characters.

Primarily,
Scout and Jem learn what's important (and what really isn't) from their father.  In
Chapter 10, Scout complains that her father is old, works in an office (as opposed to
working on a farm, working as a truck driver or a sheriff, or working in a garage), and
has bad eyesight:

readability="7">

He did not do the things our schoolmates' fathers
did: he never went hunting, he did not play poker or fish or drink or smoke.  He sat in
the living-room and
read.

From this description,
it's safe for readers to assume that Scout is too young to appreciate that her father's
work (and beliefs, and attitudes) is very important.  As the novel goes on, though,
Scout and Jem observe Atticus as he defends Tom Robinson; he is ridiculed by Maycomb's
citizens, yet he doesn't let this ridicule stop him from doing what is right.  Atticus
teaches the children not to judge people until you consider things from their point of
view--a lesson that is too difficult for Scout to understand at the beginning of the
novel. Ultimately, though, Scout and Jem learn that their father is a good man--and that
is what is most important.

This idea is further reinforced
by Miss Maudie, the Finches' neighbor, who doesn't fall victim to the same prejudicial
thinking that plagues most of Maycomb's citizens.  Miss Maudie tells the kids that their
father does a job that most people couldn't handle, and she echoes Atticus's
instructions that the children should not judge people before they know
them.

Finally, through their interactions with Boo Radley
and their indirect involvement in the Tom Robinson trial, the children learn that it is
unfair to judge a person because of his skin color, because of rumors about him, or
because of any other information they get second-hand.  By the end of the novel, Scout
and Jem learn that

readability="6">

You can't really understand a person until you
consider things from his point of view--until you climb into his skin and walk around in
it.

This advice, offered by
Atticus at the beginning of the novel, finally resonates with Scout once she has seen
the injustice done to the Robinson family and to Boo Radley.

What does this quote mean said by Danforth in The Crucible?"We burn a hot fire here; it melts down all concealment."

This quote is said in Act Three to John Proctor, just as
he brings his claim that the girls, led by Abigail, are all making up the serious
charges of witchcraft that they bring against so many of the people of Salem. This quote
is incredibly important for a number of reasons. Firstly, it foreshadows the way that
the system of "justice" does indeed melt down "all concealment," in particular focusing
on John Proctor's infidelity with Abigail and his act of adultery against his
wife. Secondly, it is indeed true that the court does "burn a hot fire," as is shown by
the subsequent death of so many innocent lives. There is also the allusion to the fires
of hell in this quote, which is rather appropriate, given the hell-like nature of the
Salem witch trials and the way that so much harm was done with the intention of only
achieving good.

Explain some important quotes in the book The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins.

"You're all they're talking about.  The
star-crossed lovers from District Twelve!" (135)

Haymitch knows that Katniss and
Peeta have more of an advantage in the Games together, than apart.  Collins alludes to
Romeo and Juliet, comparing Peeta and Katniss to the more famous pair of lovers doomed
to tragedy.  Although she's not aware of Shakespeare's play, Katniss reflects on the
challenge of playing an ill-fated lover throughout the rest of the
novel. 

"I don't want them to change me in
there.  Turn me into some kind of monster that I'm not"
(141).

Peeta says this to Katniss on the eve
of the games.  This quote represents the theme of choice throughout the novel,
reinforcing the idea that the characters are thrown into horrible circumstances like the
Games, but their personal choices in how they react define their
humanity.

"Destroying things is much easier
than making them."

Katniss says this to Rue
about destroying the Careers' food stash, but the quote is emblematic for the entire
novel. The Capitol's casual use of violence is a prominent theme throughout The Hunger
Games, and Katniss knows she must play along in order to survive the Games.  She
unwillingly accepts her situation and the imperative for violence, but uses it to her
advantage.

Contrast Fixed and Cycle MenusCreating Menus

A "cycle menu" simply refers to a set of meals that
rotates through a period of time. The senior living complex where my parents lived had a
four week menu cycle in the dining room. Week one had different meal offerings for
breakfasts, lunches and dinners each day than did the menus for weeks two, three or
four. Obviously, the length of time covered by the cycle can be established by the
facility or restaurant or wherever the food is being
provided.

A "fixed menu" presents a selection of meals for
a set price. There is generally no substitution allowed regarding what is included in
the meal, but the price of the meal is usually considered extremely reasonable. The
concept is common in Europe, usually known by the French name of "prix fixe" (price
fixed) menu.

Contrasting the two is difficult because they
are address different concerns. A restaurant could develop a series of fixed menus that
are presented on a cyclical basis.

Describe the history and evolution of health care economics, and the timeline of health care funding.

Before 1900, there really wasn't what you could call major
health care in this country.  The American Medical Association (AMA) was just getting
off the ground, hospitals were just getting established, doctors still made house calls
and traded their services for goods, and people still used a lot of home remedies to
treat their ailments.  Health insurance was unheard
of!

But, between 1901 and the 1940's medicine and health
care made some major leaps and bounds!  Hospitals became more and more important,
advances were made in antiseptics and cleanliness, antibiotics were discovered, and
several people were coming up with ideas for health insurance and employer medical
benefits.  President Truman proposed a national health care plan, but it was shot out of
the water by both the AMA and Congress.

By the 1960's,
though, we started to see health insurance companies popping up all over, Social
Security had been implemented, and Medicare/Medicaid had been signed into law.  HMO's
came into existence in the 1970's and health care costs began to climb radically,
eventually spiraling out of control!

Over the past fifty
years, we've seen health care costs continue to rise to the point that some low-income
families and the elderly are unable to get medical treatment.  Decentralization of the
hospital care system has prompted private companies to enter the health care industry. 
The 21st Century ushered in the biggest "can of worms" our health care system had ever
seen!

Over the last ten years, several government officials
have lobbied for a nationalized health care system, and finally on March 23, 2010, the
Affordable Care Act became law.  The idea is to revolutionize the health care industry,
cut down on insurance fraud, make sure everyone is able to get medical services and
insurance, and bring down health care costs.  All this is supposed to be accomplished by
2014. 

Health care economics, as the Health Economics
Research Institute HERI) says is . . .

readability="6">

"Exploring and testing better ways to organize
and finance the system in order to improve patient
care."

Their goal is to
improve the delivery of medical services, fund innovative and cost-effective medical
procedures, cut the costs of health insurance, improve the nation's health through
prevention and better nutrition, and eliminate graft and corruption in the health care
industry while raising it to a level that's consistent with the rest of the
world. 

Do Liesel and Max get married at the end of The Book Thief?

This is an interesting question, as the future of these
two characters is never specifically disclosed to us. What we do know is that in the
penultimate segment of the novel, Max and Liesel are reunited, and when they see each
other again, we are told that: "They hugged and cried and fell to the floor." It is the
final segment of the novel that tells us about how when Death went to take Liesel away,
she was in Sydney and she is an "old woman." This therefore very strongly implies that
she married Max and moved to Sydney, free to enjoy a happy and long life before her
final death. However, the book, as with so many other issues, never spells out her
destiny precisely, and we are left uncertain of whether Max and Liesel actually married
or not. All we can say is that the narrative strongly suggests this
outcome.

How did the Germanic languages influence the English language?

The Germanic languages were extremely influential in
shaping the English language as we know it today.

The
original inhabitants of the islands we now know as the British Isles (England, Scotland,
Wales, Ireland) spoke a group of languages loosely known as the Celtic languages. In
roughly the 5th Century CE (the 400s CE), these islands were invaded by members of the
Angles, Saxons, and Jutes - Germanic tribes that came from the area we now know as
northern Germany and Denmark. As the invaders moved into their new territory, they
pushed the Celtic speakers to the north and west and established residence in the main
area of the larger island, what we now call England. The primary language of the
invaders was called Englisc.

While English has evolved
greatly since the mid-400s, there are still recognizable Old English words in our
vocabulary today. Examples include bequeath, henceforth, midst, seek,  and
wrought.

Pros of a stable goverment (US UK) Cons of a Unstable goverment (Mexico Russia)

The advantages of a stable government are primarily the
stability itself. Its economy tends to be more stable, its military, if necessary, more
loyal, and its citizenry more secure. The United States, as the world's oldest surviving
republic, is testimony to that fact. Its stability is a primary reason that it has the
world's largest economy, is the last surviving superpower, and its currency sets the
standard for the rest of the world. From a historical standpoint, the stable government
of the United Kingdom was a substantial factor in the Industrial Revolution originating
there.

In contrast, unstable governments (for which Latin
America is notorious) do not have stable economies or currencies, their military is
often loyal to a military leader as opposed to the government; and its citizens can
never feel truly safe. With unstable governments, there is the constant fear of
rebellion and the attendant bloodshed. The safety and welfare of a nation's citizens is
quite often dependent on the stability of its
government.

It should be noted that oppressive governments,
such as dictatorships are by their very nature unstable. They seldom survive the
lifetime of a single ruler. North Korea is a possible exception to that rule, but North
Korea is perhaps the epitome of an unstable country whose citizens are
starving.

Between his position as an official and his disenchantment with the bureaucracy, how does George Orwell become disillusioned with the aims and...

As an Anglo-Indian official, George Orwell writes in his
essay "On Shooting an Elephant" that he has learned about the real motives for which
despotic governments act from being sent to destroy an elephant which has broken its
chain and was destroying the bazaar.  For, he realizes that the oppressor is almost as
much the oppressed as those who are under his rule.

readability="8">

When the white man turns tyrant it is his own
freedom that he destroys....For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his
life in trying to impress the "natives," and so in every crisis he has got to do what
the "natives expect of
him.

The main motive for much
of the action of the bureaucracy is to maintain appearances in the presence of the
Burmese; it "would never do" for them to see him frightened or for them to see him act
in any way but the expected manner.  In short, Orwell realizes that he kills because he
does not want to appear as weak or foolish.  This motivation is similar to that of the
colonial bureaucracy that imposes laws and restrictions simply so as to give the
appearance of strength regardless of the effects of the laws and restrictive actions. 
Thus, both the colonial power and those ruled feel the same
degradation. 

What are some examples of situational archetypes in The Road by Cormac McCarthy?

Great question to ask. This excellent book is of course
reminiscent in many ways to other great epics such as The Odyssey,
which features the archetype of a journey. If we examine what happens to the father and
the boy on this journey, we can see that there are situational archetypes that occur to
them that are similar to those encountered by epic heroes such as Odysseus. For example,
consider the obvious danger that the father and son face so often, in particular, the
house they enter when they find the people locked in the basement. Clearly, the way that
they are nearly trapped in this house and are kept as food has echoes of when Odysseus
and his men are trapped in the cave of the Cyclops. You might also like to think about
the way that the father dies, leaving his son to "carry the torch." This could be
related to the relationship between Odysseus and his son Telemachus. Archetypal themes
such as the perseverance of hope in the face of despair dominate this compelling
narrative.

What is a summary of "The Open Window" by Saki?

A summary of "The Open Window" doesn't present a
chronological straight time line because there are many
flashbacks. Flashbacks take the reader back to a time
before the opening moments of the story and give vital information that relates to the
narrative's present tense events. For example, the story opens in the present with the
"self-possessed young lady of fifteen" apologizing for her aunt's delay and proposing
that Mr. Framton Nuttel will have to settle for being entertained by the young lady. The
first flashbacks follows in which we are told that (1) he has a nervous condition and is
undergoing a doctor's "cure; (2) that his sister intervened with letters of
introduction; (3) that Framton is given to being a moping recluse. We are neatly brought
back to the present by Framton wondering if the aunt he was waiting to see was one of
the people his sister had said were nice.

In the present,
the niece ascertains that Framton has never been in the district before, that he knows
no one in the area yet, and that he knows nothing of the young lady's aunt he is there
to visit. Now she hatches her wicked plan and, after alluding to the open
ceiling-to-floor French window and the month of the year, begins her tale about her
aunt's "tragedy" that "happened just three years ago." In a flashback of her own
devising and that forms the critical part of her tale, she tells how husband and
brothers were lost in a bog while on a daily hunting trip. Then, returning to the
present, she speaks of how her aunt still believes they will return from the dead to
walk in through the open window as they were accustomed to
doing.

The aunt now enters and begins normal conversation
with normal reference to husband and sons being due to walk in through the open window
at any moment. Framton interrupts her cheery talk by exclaiming that he is to have
complete mental rest. Just then, the aunt, Mrs. Sappleton cries out, "Here they are at
last!" In a fit of horror deepened by the girl's good dramatic acting, Framton flees the
house as the three men enter through the open window. The resolution reveals the girl
keeps her secret evil to herself while the aunt classifies Framton as some inexplicable
and "most extraordinary man."

readability="9">

"I expect it was the spaniel," said the niece
calmly; "he told me he had a horror of dogs. He was once hunted into a cemetery
somewhere on the banks of the Ganges by a pack of pariah dogs, and had to spend the
night in a newly dug grave ...."

With regards to the commandments Old Major gives the animals, why does he see them as vices?

I think that the commandments or edicts that Old Major
forbids the animals to do are the result of how he has seen humans abuse these ideas in
their treatment of the animals.  They represent "luxuries," to a great extent, that have
been abused by humans and this reflects the disproportionate relationship with the
animals.  At the same time, Old Major points out these habits to avoid because animals,
themselves, have not been able to partake in these, representing a level of denial
between what animals do and what humans can do.  For Old Major, any replication of these
habits is a duplication of the abuse that humans heap on
animals:

And
remember also that in fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him.  Even when
you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices.  No animal must ever live in a house, or
sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money or
engage in trade.  All the habits of Man are
evil.

For Old Major, human
beings are seen as both a political and moral evil.  The bad acts they perpetrate are
abhorrent on both levels.  This is why Old Major sees the habits of men as "vices," and
not be duplicated.  The behaviors are vices because they are the domain of human beings,
a realm that is incapable of redemption and only likely to spur more vice and more
sinful behavior.  In this construction, Old Major has been able to give a spiritual
dimension to the animals, convincing them that what they fight for is as much an issue
of right and wrong as it is about power.

What does the title "Riders To The Sea" mean?

The title of this great play is actually an allusion to
the Book of Exodus from the Bible, which says: "The horse and his rider hath he thrown
into the sea." Clearly, the title therefore relates to the death of Maurya's sons and
the way that the sea has been the reason for all of their deaths. This allusion also
represents the theme of fate or destiny, as Maurya seems fated to lose all her sons to
the sea, whatever she tries to do to stop this from happening. This relates to the
central character of Maurya and the dignity with which she is bestowed in the face of
the incredible suffering she has endured and continues to endure. Consider how she is
presented in the final speech she gives in the play:

readability="10">

Michael has a clean burial in the far north, by
the grace of Almighty God. Bartley will have a fine coffin our of the white boards, and
a deep grave surely. What more can we want than that? No man at all can be living
forever, and we must be
satisfied.

The title,
alluding as it does to a part of the Old Testament which declares God's sovereignty and
his control over life, therefore introduces one of the central themes in this play,
which is the inescapable nature of fate and destiny. Maurya is the central character who
is shown to accept and to submit to this force, even when it robs her of everything she
has.

Please identify the literary devices of allusion, mood, and tone in Brave New World.

Thanks for your question. "Mood" or "tone" (the words are
interchangeable) is the author's way of using language to express her or his "attitude"
or "feelings" about a topic or subject Contemporary's Completed GED (2002). If you were
to read: war is the scourge of the earth and those who start them should be
banned from our midst. From this example, you pick up the author's mood: he
does not like warmongers or those who start wars.

Allusion
may certainly be made in your writings. Allusions are references to some other work or
story. I remember watching the Disney animated movie Hercules (1997) some years back and
thinking how it made references (allusions) not only to Greek mythology and modern day
cities like New York city, but also to the Christian faith Matt. 1:18 (Revised Standard
Version). For example, Hercules like the baby Jesus was born under unusual circumstances
grew up with a sense that He was not on earth for any ordinary purpose, and then had
supernatural abilities (Hercules, 1997). Well, this is what I saw and then there were
the references (allusions) to things like when Hercules and his faithful horse, Pegasus
went to the city. They were advised by Hercule's trainer, Phil, "Don't look anyone in
the eye,") (Hercules, 1997). It is said that this advice is given to people traveling to
big cities like New York city-- no offense to New Yorkers. I like New Yorkers ; in fact
my family made friends with a family from New York city at Walt Disney World in Florida
last summer.

You asked about characters and foil in your
original question. Characters foil other characters in a situation like the characters
in Huckleberry Finn or the Tom & Jerry cartoon characters Short (2011). Foil
characters are like alter-egos to the main character(s). They are often the opposite in
character than the main character(s). The main character may be sullen and withdrawn,
but the main character is upbeat and outgoing. Hope this
helps.

References

Disney
Interactive (Producer), & Clements, R. & Musker, J. (Directors). (1997).
Hercules. USA. Retrieved from http:/www.imdb.com and href="http://disney.go.com/disneyinsider/history/movies/hercules">http://disney.go.com/disneyinsider/history/movies/hercules

Short,
K (2011, August). How to write a foil character. eHow. Retrieved from href="http://www.ehow.com/how_2143839">http://www.ehow.com/how_2143839.

Eacott,
P. (2002). Contemporary's complete GED: Comprehensive study program for the high school
equivalency examination. Chicago: McGraw-Hill.

George bursts into a long speech about what he could do if he were alone. Discuss the implications of this speech.

When George launches into his tirade about what he could
have done had he not been saddled with the responsibility of Lennie, it reveals a couple
of large scale implications regarding the book and its characterizations.  The first is
that the speech shows how much of a struggle solidarity is in a time of economic
despair.  When resources are so scarce, to uphold the bonds of solidarity are extremely
difficult.  I think that this is something that is brought out in the speech.  George
balances the demands of financial scarcity with social solidarity.  In this, he achieves
an almost heroic quality.

Another element brought out in
the speech is how truly alone both of them are.  An unintended effect of George's speech
is one that shows how Lennie is nothing without George.  George is the brains behind the
operation, and like a classical hero, "does the thinking for both of them."  I think
that this is brought out in all that George could do without Lennie. Yet, at the same
time, George brings out that he, himself, is alone.  In bringing out the vision of the
farm that is shared between them at the end of his tirade, George subconsciously admits
that he is just as alone as Lennie is.  Both of their senses of "aloneness" end up
defining them and helps to explain why they are together.

I
think that the final implication of the speech is that George understands that his being
in the world is defined as Lennie's caretaker.  We understand later why this is the
case.  Yet, George reveals that his primary purpose of taking care of Lennie and
protecting him is a part of his character.  It also serves to foreshadow how their
relationship will emerge out over the course of the novel. Steinbeck's genius in
bringing out this tirade early helps to establish the arc of their relationship over the
course of the novella.

Which economic crisis led to the creation of the SEC?

The SEC is the Securities and Exchange Commission.  The
purpose of this agency is to protect people who invest in stocks, bonds, and the like. 
The SEC is supposed to do this by ensuring that the markets are open and honest.  The
SEC was created in 1934 in response to the events and conditions that led to the Great
Depression.

In the time leading up to the stock market
crash of 1929 and the Great Depression, there were few laws regulating the stock
markets.  For example, firms could and did sell stocks that had very little basis in
reality; ones that were essentially worthless.  There were no laws to prevent this sort
of fraud.  This sort of thing helped to lead to the crash and the
Depression.

In response to the crash and the Depression,
the SEC was created.

What are the "fates of men" according to the poem "The Wanderer"?what does he mean

According to the speaker in the poem "The Wanderer", the
fates of men is death. The entire poem speaks to the fact that the Wanderer is left in
isolation given all of those he has known are dead.

The
Wanderer searches the sea for anyone who knows of his lands or people, "wished to
console the friendless one", or entertain him.  The Wanderer realizes that nothing on
earth will ever remain constant. Death is inevitable.

In
the end, the Wanderer realizes that the only thing that can remain (and is more powerful
than death) is ones faith. At the close of the poem, the Wanderer seems to have come to
terms that he, too, must surrender to the fate of man- death. The only thing which helps
the Wanderer to accept this fate is the promise that his faith is
immortal.

In The Crucible, which character conforms outwardly while questioning inwardly?

Part of what makes Miller's work fairly intense and
dramatic is that characters have to end up making conscious choices between what is
being presented as truth and what they feel truth to be.  Characters in this
configuration have little opportunity to feel one way, but act in another because the
dramatic tension is so intensely thick.

This is probably
why characters who conform outwardly are probably those who directly benefit from the
power that comes with conformity.  Cheever, Danforth, Hathorne, Putnam, Parris, and
Abigail with her crew all conform and derive power from this.  There is little in way of
feeling opposite of their conformist status because of the power they benefit from
conforming. In this, there is no disconnect between what they display and what they
internall experience.  By the same analysis, the characters who do not conform
legitimately do so in opposition of what is being done.  John Proctor, Giles Corey, and
Rebecca Nurse are all examples of how characters who display defiance and dissent
actually feel this.

We do find two slight exceptions where
there is some ambiguity in acting and feeling.  The first would be Elizabeth's lie in
court.  She conforms with what she thinks is "the right thing to say."  She does display
some stammering and some heavy discomfort with having to say that her husband is guilty
of adultery.  She ends up conforming with what she thinks is best and her lie is
something she ends up regretting, for she does not know that her conformity has actually
done damage to her husband.  When John yells across the courtroom that he already
confessed, this feeling of regret is apparent.  Her questioning of her conformity is not
something that is inwardly felt, for it is externally articulated.  Yet, she could be
seen as an example of conforming with a sense of regret.

I
would say that Hale could be seen as another close example of someone whose conformity
is come to seen with regret.  Yet, the problem here is that Hale's conformity is
believed.  He arrives to Salem "like a bridegroom," convinced that he is going to do
good.  He does not question his conformity.  Over the course of his interactions at
Salem, most noticeably at the trial, he does recognize that something is not right. 
Yet, he does not harbor this, for once he sees it, like Elizabeth, he speaks out against
it, much to the displeasure of Danforth and the court.  In this, there is a regret of
conformity, but itis not one that is harbored inward.  Like Elizabeth, when Hale
recognizes wrong and recognizes what he sees as injustice, he speaks out against it and
does not keep it locked within.

How would we describe the purpose or message of The Hunger Games?

This is a book that has received something of a mixed
reception thanks to the brutal violence that is depicted between children. However, I
think we can make some helpful conclusions regarding the novel's purpose if we think
about the setting and the way that this a dystopian novel. One of the aspects of
dystopian literature is the way that harsh, authoritarian and tyrannical regimes oppress
the rights of their citizens. Through Katniss the author shows how one person can defy
such autocracy and tyranny. Although Katniss is forced to a certain extent to do what
the Capitol requires of her, as she must fight in the Hunger Games and kill others to
survive, at the same time, she actively looks for ways to shame the Capitol and to
expose their abuse of power. Note what she feels after the death of
Rue:

I want
to do something, right here, right now, to shame them, to make them accountable, to show
the Capitol that whatever they do or force us to do there is a part of every tribute
they can't own. That Rue was more than a piece in their Games. And so am
I.

Also, consider the way
that Peeta and Katniss refuse to play along with the Capitol at the end, choosing to die
together rather than having to kill one another. Through such events, the novel points
towards the way that, no matter how harsh or repressive a regime, it is possible to
resist and to oppose such tyrannical forces. However others treat us, we can choose to
resist such objectifications and defy being oppressed through our actions, as Katniss
shows.

Why did satire became popular in the age of Dryden & Pope? (700 words)I want to get an elaborate answer.

The satire originated, in literature, during the very
earliest literary periods (periods of Horace and Juvenal). Later, poets such as Dryden,
Pope, and Johnson, wishing to return to the classical forms, gave rebirth to the
satire.

Given that the satire's purpose was to "poke fun
at" the reactions and feelings people had to the political and social world around them,
the Seventeenth century was a perfect place to examine people given the unrest brought
about by civil war of the Seventeenth century.

While the
satire was enjoyed by most (giving people the ability to laugh at themselves) the
underlying message provided one by which people could examine the vices they held
up.

Given that the satire included elements of irony and
metaphorical language, a reader needed to be active concerning the reading given if they
were not they would miss the moral, or lesson, being
taught.

Overall, the satire provided a sort of comic relief
for the people of the time. This being said, those the satire was written about tended
to disregard the work as unimportant and many times the authors were deemed outcasts for
going against the norm.

1-4. Are the following results correct? Simplify. Assume a, x , and y are not zero. 1. 8x/12 = 1x/3 (8*1,8*3) 2. 15a^3/25a = 3a^3/5a (3a^3*5,...

#3 correct.  Here are the explanations of the
problems.

1.  8x/12 can be simplified by
4. 

8x `-:` 4 = 2x 

12 `-:` 4
= 3

The correct answer is
2x/3.

 

2. 
15a^3 / 25a can be simplified by 5. 

15a^3 `-:` 5 =
3a^3

25a = 5a

3a^3 / 5a can be
simplified using exponential laws.  When dividing powers, you subtract the exponents. 
Note that 5a is actually 5a^1.

a^3 - a^1 =
a^2

A positive exponent places the variable in the
numerator.

The correct answer is 3a^2 /
5. 

3.  10^3 /
10^2

10^(3-2)

10^1

10

The
correct answer is 10.

4. 
-x^2y/(-x^2)^2y^2

For problems with multiple variables, I
recommend dealing with one variable at a time and then combining them at the
end.

You must first work the parentheses according to order
of operations.

(-x^2)^2

To
find the power of a power, you multiply the
exponents.

-x^(2*2) = -x^4

So
now (just dealing with the variable x), we have...

-x^2 /
-x^4

First of all, the negatives cancel, so now we
have...

x^2 / x^4 = x^(2-4) =
x^(-2)

Because the exponent is negative, x^2 will go in the
denominator in the final answer.  Now lets work with the variable
y.

y / 2y^2

To make things
easier, give y a coefficient and exponent of 1.

1y^1 /
2y^2

Set aside the constants (numbers).  The final fraction
will contain 1 / 2.

y^1 / y^2 = y^(1-2) =
y^-1

Because the exponent is negative, y^1 (or simply just
y) will go in the denominator of the final answer.

Now we
bring the answer together.

We have the fraction
1/2.

We know that x^2 is in the
denominator.

We know that y is in the
denominator.

The correct answer is 1 / (2x^2
* y).

Just as a review, here are
the basic exponentials laws:

n^a * n^b =
n^(a+b)

n^a `-:` n^b =
n^(a-b)

(n^a)^b = n^(a*b)

n^-a
= 1 / n^a

What are the struggles Juliet face in ACT 4 SCENE 1 of Romeo and Juliet and her attitudes in that scene.

By this time in Shakespeare's play, Juliet is despondent,
to the point of being suicidal, and she is desperate. She is already married to Romeo
who has been banished for killing her cousin Tybalt, and she is arranged to marry Paris.
This sets the stage for a major struggle that she faces in Act 4, Scene 1. Juliet must
figure out how she can get out of marrying Paris. She is desperate to get out of this
arranged marriage. She goes to Friar Laurence for help with this problem. She is so
desperate to elude the arrange marriage that she threatens suicide several times. Friar
Laurence devises the plan for Juliet to get out of the arranged marriage, which is
faking her own death. Her attitude in this scene is that she is more than willing to do
this, without even giving it a second thought. She mentions several methods of death
she'd rather endure than having to marry Paris, like leaping to her death from a tower
or being chained to ravenous bears.

Why does Robert A. Dahl feel that democracy is a bit chancy?

Robert Dahl feels that democracy is difficult to achieve
because having a perfect democracy requires that a country meet some very difficult
criteria.  He says that a perfect democracy needs to
have

• Effective participation, where citizens
  have opinions and get to express their opinions effectively on important
  matters.


• Voting equality.  This means that all people
  must have the same amount of influence as other people do on the outcome of an issue or
  election.


• Enlightened understanding, which means that
  citizens need to have plenty of opportunities to truly understand the issues that face
  their country.


• Control of the agenda.  In other words,
  the people must be the ones to determine what issues are deemed important.  They must
  control what issues come before the government to be
  decided.


• Inclusiveness.  All people and groups must be
  included and made to feel equal.

This list is,
clearly, a set of goals that is impossible to actually achieve.  Because democracy
requires so many difficult things, it can never be done perfectly and will always be in
danger.  This is why it is "a bit chancy."

What is the main conflict in The Magician's Nephew?

This is an interesting question, because actually I would
want to argue that there are several conflicts in this great novel. However, if we are
trying to identify the "main" conflict, I would say that it would have to be the
conflict between Digory and Polly and Digory's uncle, Uncle Andrew. Of course, it is
Uncle Andrew himself that uses the children as guinea pigs, sending Polly against her
will into another world and then forcing Digory to go after her so she can return. Note
how Uncle Andrew is presented in Chapter Two:

readability="13">

"I hope," said Uncle Andrew presently in a very
high and mighty voice, just as if he were a perfect Uncle who had given one a handsome
tip and some good advice, "I hope, Digory, you are not given to showint the white
feather. I should be very sorry to think that anyone of our family had not enough honour
and chivalry to go to the aid of--er--a lady in
distress."

Uncle Andrew is
therefore presented as a manipulative man who uses children to do what he is not brave
enough to do himself, and blatantly blackmails Digory into fulfilling his commands
without any moral compunctions. It is this conflict between the children and Uncle
Andrew that starts the story and leads them on into the other conflicts that they
face.

Many Americans did not support George Washington, and instead they supported Britain's king, George III. Why did these people remain loyal to the...

During the revolutionary days leading to America's
independence from Britain, there was a low percentage of the colonial population who
was, indeed, against the war and in favor of the perpetuity of the monarcy as a form of
government. This group amounted to no more than 20% of the total population. They were
known as "loyalists", namely, because these were people who were still loyal to England
and its monarchy.

Loyalists were people who had specific
interest in that the colonies remained attached to England for a myriad of different
reasons:

Some loyalists had economic interests, since
England commissioned them to come to America for specific endeavors. These loyalists
were often merchants, military officers, politicians or ambassadors of some
form.

Other loyalists included anglican priests who had a
religious interest in attending the interests of the crown and the Church of England in
America.

There were indentured servants and even blacks who
were promised freedom once they stepped on American soil. They would be loyalists
because of their gratitude to the crown for providing them a mean of
freedom.

Another sect of loyalists was made of the German
population or Americans of German ancestry. King George III and all of the "Gorgeous
Georges", as they are known historically, weremembers of the house of Hannover, which is
of German origin. Hence, these loyalists would be so in honor of their
heritage.

Finally, the loyalists also included, simply,
pacifists. These were people who worried about the aftermath of a way against the
English super power and did not want to endanger the little economic safety that the
colonies had from England. Although they would admit that the English were abusing the
colonists, they could not envision a future without the support of their
motherland.

It is a risky decision to separate completely
from an Empire, no matter how shaky this Empire is. Therefore, you can conclude that the
story of the United States is one that involved risk, tremendous courage and incredible
determination. Loyalists, as powerful as they may have thought they were, still did not
possess a good enough argument to prevent the War. One cannot blame them, however,
because the thought of an independent country was like jumping into the unknown.
However, we all know now that it was the correct thing to do.