Orwell once observed that he thought the disappearance of the milk was the turning-point of the novel in Animal Farm. In what sense is this true?

The pigs taking the milk and apples is the turning point of the novel because it demonstrates that the pigs were taking charge and reserving luxuries for themselves.

After the animals revolt and the humans are forced off the farm, the cows need to be milked.  They are very uncomfortable it they do not get milked.  The pigs are able to milk them successfully, and the other animals begin eying the milk.  Milk is a hot commodity on the farm.  All of the animals like it.

"What is going to happen to all that milk?" said someone.

"Jones used sometimes to mix some of it in our mash," said one of the hens.

"Never mind the milk, comrades!" cried Napoleon, placing himself in front of the buckets. "That will be attended to. The harvest is more important. …” (Ch. 2)

What does happen to the milk, and the apples, is actually very significant.  These two luxuries seem to disappear and the animals do not know where they are going.  Soon they find out what happened.

It was mixed every day into the pigs' mash. The early apples were now ripening ... The animals had assumed as a matter of course that these would be shared out equally; one day, however, the order went forth that all the windfalls were to be collected and brought to the harness−room for the use of the pigs. (Ch. 3)

Squealer explains to the animals that the milk has to go to the pigs because they are the farm’s brain trust.  Since they work harder than everyone, and they are in charge, they deserve the milk and apples.

This is a turning point for the animals and for the reader. It is the first time we realize that Animal Farm is not going to be the egalitarian paradise that Old Major foresaw.  Corruption is already setting in.  Taking the milk and apples for themselves is only the first abuse the pigs engage in.  Soon they are worse masters than the people they replaced.

What are two examples of when a group of people was treated unfairly by another group of people?

Throughout human history, people have treated groups of people unfairly based on race, gender, and/or social class. Two examples of this occurred during the colonial period. First, Europeans and white Americans treated the Native Americans reprehensibly. They destroyed their cultures (Aztec, Inca, etc.), forced them to convert to Catholicism (in Spanish colonies), and stole their lands. In the United States, for instance, Native Americans were forced to either conform to the conventions of white American society or abandon their homes and move to reservations in the West.

Second, Europeans and white Americans enslaved Africans and forced them to work on plantations in the New World. These slaves--who grew labor-intensive crops such as sugar, tobacco, and cotton--reaped huge profits for their masters but were often treated even worse than animals. 

In both cases, the oppressive group justified their actions by claiming that the group they were treating unfairly was subhuman. 

What is the plot of the movie Life of Pi and what is the psychological aspect behind the movie or story?

The movie, and the book, Life of Pi tells the story of a boy named Pi and his battle for survival while aboard a life boat.  The story begins in Pondicherry, and readers/viewers see into Pi's life.  He is an incredibly curious and tolerant boy.  He sees no reason why he can't practice three religions at the same time.  His family is in charge of the city zoo, so Pi learns a great deal about animals during his childhood.  Unfortunately, Pi and his family must leave Pondicherry.  They board a freighter with many of the zoo animals and leave to go to Canada.  The ship winds up sinking, and Pi is fortunate enough to make it into a life boat.  He is the only human in the life boat.  The other passenger is a tiger named Richard Parker.  The rest of the story is about how Pi and Parker survive together on the life boat for weeks on end.  

The psychological aspect of the story is squarely focused on Pi's struggle to not give into fear and hopelessness.  His situation is dire, and it would be easy for him to just give up.  But every day, Pi finds enough inner strength to keep on trying to survive just one more day and keep Richard Parker alive as well.  

Despite the conditions in which they found themselves, a few concentration camp prisoners did act morally; a few did "do the right thing" in their...

Levi explains these "exceptions to the rule" by referencing the internal and entrenched moral compass of the individuals who stood formidably against the onslaught of suffering and degradation in the camps.

In the book, Levi discusses the case of Elias, a five-foot-tall dwarf who was built like a tank. Elias' face had looked "like a battering ram, an instrument made for butting." A "bestial" vigor had emanated from Elias unconsciously and readily. He survived the camps by stealing; as a thief, he demonstrated the "instinctive astuteness of wild animals." He was never caught. Levi maintains that Elias survived acute bodily suffering because of his physical endurance; as for mental suffering, Levi asserts that Elias survived because of his "insanity." In discussing Elias, Levi argues that, without some sort of moral compass, an individual was not likely to survive catastrophic circumstances without mental fragmentation:

For those who have no sound inner resources, for those who do not know how to draw from their own consciences sufficient force to cling to life, the only road to salvation leads to Elias: to insanity and to deceitful bestiality. All the roads are dead-ends.

Another example of a man who was able to act morally, despite the horrific circumstances, was Lorenzo. According to Levi, Lorenzo was an Italian civilian worker who brought him, without fail, "a piece of bread and the remainder of his ration every day for six months." Lorenzo also gave Levi a vest, wrote a postcard on his behalf to Italy, and returned to give him a reply to the postcard. Levi maintains that Lorenzo did all these things without hope of a reward.

The prisoners who were able to act morally, despite their own great suffering, were like Lorenzo. They reached deep within and purposed to remember all that they had been before they came to the death camps. They were able to act morally because they refused to part with the image of humanity within them, even when debilitating circumstances spurred their temptation to surrender it. These prisoners helped Levi believe that "there still existed a just world outside our own, something and someone still pure and whole, not corrupt, not savage, extraneous to hatred and terror; something difficult to define, a remote possibility of good, but for which it was worth surviving."

What are a few examples of figures of speech in chapter one of Animal Farm?

A figure of speech is a word or phrase that means something different than its immediate, literal meaning. Examples of figures of speech include metaphors, similes, personification, hyperbole, puns, and others.

Animal Farm is chock-full of interesting and important figures of speech. Chapter one contains an abundance of figures of speech. Personification and metaphor are two common—but very important—types of figures of speech that can be found in chapter one.

Personification is a figure of speech in which a nonhuman object is given human characteristics. An example of personification occurs very early in chapter one of Animal Farm:

With the ring of light from his lantern dancing from side to side.

A ring of light is not human and it does not literally get up and dance. Therefore, depicting the ring of light as being able to mimic the human act of dancing makes this statement an example of personification.

A metaphor is a figure of speech which implicitly compares two things that are not directly related. 

The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth. 

Considering the animals on the farm are not literal slaves, this statement is a metaphor. The animals' grueling daily labor and their resulting unhappiness make their lives easily comparable to slavery.

In the play Trifles, how was Mrs. Wright like the canary?

In the play Trifles, Mrs. Wright was similar to the canary. First off, she loved singing when she was younger. She sang with the choir and really enjoyed it. When she got married, her husband hated the sound of music/her singing and somehow made her stop.

Like the canary, Mrs. Wright was in a cage. Her marriage acted as a cage because her husband was so controlling and an unfriendly person. Remember, the women discuss how miserable of a man he was, so Mrs. Wright's marriage was like the cage in which the canary was kept.

She bought the canary to replace the singing that was stolen from her by her husband and to have a little bit of cheer in her life. When he killed the small bird, it was the same as how he killed her happiness, in a way. That is what caused her to get revenge by killing him.

What are two characteristics from "The Devil and Tom Walker" that let the reader know the story is fiction?

First, the story includes the famous scene at the pine and hemlock swamp where Tom Walker meets the devil or Old Scratch. Tom makes a pact with Old Scratch; however, this fact taken alone, may still lend some ambiguity as to whether the story is fiction or non-fiction. After all, who hasn't heard some true story of someone making a pact with the devil? Usually, however, this 'pact' with the devil is not made face to face, as no one has seen the devil. However, in the story, Old Scratch's words soon convince us this is a work of fiction when he exclaims about the future fate of one important colonist, Crowninshield.

"He's just ready for burning!" said the black man, with a growl of triumph. "You see, I am likely to have a good stock of firewood for the winter."

The author tells us that Tom Walker is meeting the devil face to face and he further presents the imagery of the devil presiding over the fires of Hell and over the souls of sinners burning for their sins. Right away, the first few pages of the story tell us that this is a work of fiction. Two characteristics of fiction:

1)Non-fiction relates real events happening to real people, in real places. Fiction is open to interpretation. Near the end of the story, Tom Walker is carried off by the devil towards the direction of the swamp and the old Indian fort. The whole scene of Tom Walker's abduction by Old Scratch is couched in fantastic imagery; such seemingly supernatural occurrences also highlight common superstitious beliefs held by many in 18th century New England. The author tells us that people have been 'accustomed to witches and goblins and tricks of the devil in all kinds of shapes from the first settlement of the colony.' Again, this connects to superstitious beliefs rather than realistic events that have been documented.

2)In fiction, we can find characters like devils, vampires, werewolves, hobbits, changelings, and shapeshifters. However, such characters are not found in non-fiction. Hence, with the inclusion of Old Scratch in Tom Walker's tale, we can be sure that this short story is fiction.

Who was the first black president of Ghana ?

The first black president (and indeed the first president of any race) of Ghana was Kwame Nkrumah.  He became the prime minister of Ghana when that country gained its independence from Great Britain in 1957.  At that point, the Queen of England was still the official head of state for Ghana.  In 1960, Nkrumah succeeded in getting Ghanaians to ratify a new constitution, making Ghana a republic.  Under the new constitution, there was a president who was both head of state and head of government.  Nkrumah became that president, the first president of Ghana.

Before independence, the country of Ghana had not existed.  The area that is now Ghana had been a British colony called the Gold Coast since 1867.  Before the Europeans came, that general area had been ruled by a variety of native kingdoms.  There had been no state that controlled all of the area that is now Ghana.  The Gold Coast was created by the British.  This means that before independence in 1957, there had never been a country called Ghana.

Nkrumah remained as president of Ghana until he was overthrown in 1966.

In The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian what happens at Junior's grandmother's wake?

A few important events happen at Junior's grandmother's wake. First, her wake is a testament to how beloved she was, as almost 2,000 Indians attend, so many that they had to move the wake from the tribal longhouse to the football field to accommodate everyone.  

Another important occurrence is that the bullying and abuse that Junior has been experiencing since he started going to school at Reardon finally ends. He suspects that the other members of the rez realize he's been through enough already. "Or maybe they just realized they'd been cruel jerks" (pg 160).

The strangest thing that happens at Junior's grandmother's wake, though happens when people are telling stories about her. An eccentric white billionaire named Ted stands up to talk about how much of a connection with Indian culture he feels. He tells the story of an Indian who came to his Montana home to sell a powwow dance outfit. He says he bought it even though he suspected it was stolen, until he decided to track down its owner – Junior's grandmother. He presents the powwow outfit, very ceremoniously, to Junior's mother, who tells him that it couldn't be Junior's grandmother's outfit, as she was not a powwow dancer. She continues to say that it doesn't look Spokane at all, and his expert must not know what he's talking about. Embarrassed, the billionaire packs up and speeds off. 

The absurdity of this incident, and the offensiveness of the billionaire's attempts to have a meaningful moment with real Indians, causes all the Indian wake-goers to burst out laughing. Junior says,

"It was the most glorious noise I'd ever heard. And I realized that, sure, Indians were drunk and sad and displaced and crazy and mean, but, dang, we knew how to laugh. When it comes to death, we know that laughter and tears are pretty much the same thing" (pg 166)

How would you describe the character of the king and the way he rules his people in The Lady or the Tiger? Do you think the narrator believes he is...

Bluntly stated, the king in Frank Stockton's short story "The Lady or the Tiger" is a dictator. He appears to make all the important decisions for his subjects without consulting any advisors or the people. Stockton writes:

He was greatly given to self-communing, and, when he and himself agreed upon anything, the thing was done.

The king believes that he alone knows what is best and that he can solve any problem. He is initially described as "semi-barbaric" and his idea of the arena is savage (men can be torn to pieces by a ferocious beast by choosing poorly). He is also a man who believes the world can be explained simply; it is either black or white. An accused subject is either guilty, if he opens the door of the tiger, or innocent, if he opens the door of the lady. The institution of the arena also reveals his idealism. The ideal of the justness of the arena is worth the fact that innocent men could meet their death. He's not ultimately worried about things being fair as long as the ideal of justice is met.

Stockton never reveals his opinion of the king. He simply describes how the king arrived at the concept of the arena. He does not editorialize about the equity of the king's justice, nor does he either praise or criticize the king's methods. Stockton does say the arena was a "popular" institution and that subjects came from far and near to witness the spectacle. Of course, it's difficult to say that sheer popularity makes the king a good leader.

If the supply of a good decreases and it causes total revenue to increase, this shows that the good has an a) inelastic demand b) inelastic supply...

We are shifting the supply curve, which means we're moving along the demand curve--so the elasticity we're interested in is the elasticity of demand, which narrows it down to (a), (d), or (e).

By decreasing supply, we increase revenue. This means that as quantity sold Q goes down, the price P rises so much that the revenue P*Q goes up.

In terms of math, this means that the rate of change in [P*Q] with respect to Q is negative:

d[PQ]/dQ < 0

Using the Chain Rule we can separate this into two parts:

P + dP/dQ * Q < 0

With some simple algebra, we can turn this into an expression of the inverse elasticity:

dP/dQ * Q < - P

dP/dQ * Q/P < -1

The elasticity is just the inverse of this, and yes, indeed, dP/dQ = 1/(dQ/dP), though this is actually a calculus theorem and not nearly as obvious as it looks at first.

Also, don't forget to reverse the inequality when you take the reciprocal of both sides:

dQ/dP * P/Q > -1

That is, demand is inelastic, because an elasticity greater than -1 means an elasticity closer to 0. Therefore the answer is (a), inelastic demand.

In words, what we're saying is that we only have to decrease the quantity sold a little bit to get the price to rise a lot, and that means quantity is falling slower than price is rising, so demand must be inelastic.

Back into the cave! Characterize and explain Montag’s reaction to the televisions shows that Mildred and her friends are watching in the...

Montag is disgusted by the violent shows that Mildred and her friends are watching. He describes what the women are watching on TV:

"Three White Cartoons chopped off each other's limbs to the accompaniment of immense incoming laughter. Two minutes more and the room whipped out of town to the jet cars wildly circling an arena, bashing and backing up and bashing each other again. Montag saw a number of bodies fly in the air" (page 94 in the Del Ray edition, 1991).

Montag feels disgusted by the women's hysterical reactions to the shows and their delight in the constant displays of violence. The women react loudly and without thought. Earlier in the chapter, Montag describes them as "a monstrous crystal chandelier tinkling in a thousand chimes" (page 93). This description implies that the women are as hard as crystals and make noise without meaning.

Montag has already started to read books at this point in the book, and he feels increasingly distanced from his wife and her friends, who spend their days watching TV and delighting in wanton violence. Later in this chapter, he "stood looking at the women's faces as he had once looked at the faces of saints in a strange church he had entered when he was a child" (page 95). In other words, the women are as strange and foreign to him as religion, as he has never practiced religion. His distance from his wife and most of society will only continue to grow as the novel goes on.

Am I on the right path when I move the supply curve up?

Yes, you are absolutely on the right path!  In this scenario, supply is dropping.  Paradoxically, a decrease in supply is shown by moving the supply curve upward, or to the left.

As you probably remember, supply can be defined as the amount of a good or service that producers are willing and able to produce at a given price. The scenario that you have been given says that there has been a drought that has affected the strawberry crop.  A drought will tend to make the strawberries grow more poorly, resulting in a smaller harvest.  When this happens, producers will be able to produce fewer strawberries at any given price (because they are producing fewer strawberries overall).  To show this, you have to move the supply curve upward, or to the left, which is what you have done.

By moving the supply curve upward, you have created a new equilibrium point.  At this new equilibrium, the quantity supplied and demanded will be lower and the price will be higher.  This is why a decrease in supply is a bad thing for consumers.

What does Mr.Myles and Nora use to plant?

Nora is Mr. Myles’ caretaker in Seedfolks, and she is determined to get him involved in life again.  Mr. Myles is in a wheelchair and just observes the world without engaging with people or participating in events outside his home.  Nora decides to get Mr. Myles involved in the garden that is springing to life around them.  She buys a big, plastic trash bin, wheels Mr. Myles out to the garden, cuts holes in the bottom, and fills it full of dirt.  She has also bought packets of seeds, and she gets him to plant them in the barrel.

This simple act by Nora gets Mr. Myles interested in the garden and his life as well.  Once again, we see the garden begin to change peoples’ outlooks on life. Not only does the garden get Mr. Myles out in the community, it also gives him hope by tending to and nourishing the seeds that he plants. 

What are five traits/characteristics of the writing of William Butler Yeats, using "The Lake Isle of Innisfree" as an example?

William Butler Yeats is perhaps Ireland's most famous poet, and is indeed considered one of the greatest poets of the 20th century. His subject matter embraced a number of topics, including love, war, folklore and the supernatural. In choosing characteristics of Yeats' writing as exemplified in this well-loved poem, one thing that stands out is Yeats' frequent practice of writing poems that have an unusual and unexpected rhyme scheme.

Although some of Yeats poems are very rhythmic, this one plays with the expectation of rhythm and form, and the result is that the end rhymes of the lines are somehow more impactful. The ending lines are roughly half the length with half the number of syllables, of the previous three lines in each stanza. This sensation of the stanza ending somewhat abruptly has the effect of making the words more memorable, and encouraging readers to muse on those final words, like "bee-loud glade" and "linnet's wings" and "deep heart's core."

Another characteristic present in Yeats poetry that is exemplified here is the representation of nature as both beautiful and melancholy, and the subject of deep yearning and persistent memory. The images described are offered as being on the poet's mind constantly, even though he is not physically present to experience them:

or always night and day 

I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore

What are the three branches of government?

The three branches of government established by the United States Constitution are the legislative (Congress), the executive (the President) and the judicial (the Supreme Court and the federal court system). The President and the executive branch are responsible for carrying out the laws, which they do through the federal bureaucracy. The legislative branch makes the laws, and the judicial branch is responsible for interpreting and figuring out how to apply the laws under the Constitution. All governments perform legislative, executive, and judicial functions, but not all vest them in separate branches of government. The Framers of the Constitution gave the powers to the separate branches to ensure that no one branch, especially the executive, would become too powerful. They also granted each branch certain powers over the others (the presidential veto power, or the power to approve presidential appointments held by the Senate) to establish what have become known as "checks and balances" to further this process. 

Classify potassium chloride as a strong electrolyte, weak electrolyte, or nonelectrolyte.

Types of Electrolytes

An electrolyte is a substance that will conduct electricity when dissolved in water. When electrolytes dissolve in water, they disassociate into positive and negative ions. These charged particles are able to facillitate the conduction of electricity through the solution.

• A strong electrolyte is a substance that completely disassociates into ions when dissolved in water.

• A weak electrolyte is a substance that only partially disassociates into ions when dissolved in water. This means that some of the substance remains in its original form and does not disassociate into ions. 

• A nonelectrolyte is a substance that does not disassociate into ions when dissolved in water. 

Potassium chloride (KCl) is a strong electrolyte because it completely diassociates into positively charged potassium ions and negatively charged chloride ions when dissolved in water.

Was pre-war capitalism solely responsible for America's prosperity in the 1900s?

There were many factors responsible for our prosperity in the 1900s. I will focus on the prosperity of the 1920s and the 1950s since you are referencing a pre-war time period in your question.

There are similarities to the prosperity of the 1920s and the 1950s. In both time periods, there was a great deal of demand for products due to the sacrifices people made during World War I and during World War II. Many products weren’t being produced, and others were in short supply. When the wars ended, people felt more confident about spending. They also wanted to buy various products because they postponed those purchases during both world wars.

Government policies also helped promote prosperity after each war. In the 1920s, the government got out of the way of businesses. With a policy of laissez-faire, businesses were free to do many things. Many new products were invented during this time. Because of these factors, more jobs were created, people had more money to spend, and they also had more free time. This helped boost our economy significantly. After World War II, the government passed the GI Bill of Rights. The GI Bill of Rights gave soldiers loans to go to school, to build houses, and to start businesses. This also led to significant economic growth and prosperity.

Our capitalist economic system was also a factor in the prosperity of the 1920s and the 1950s. With the marketplace determining price and supply and with limited government involvement in the economy, we were able to enjoy times of prosperity. However, it wasn’t just our capitalist economic system that allowed this prosperity to occur. Other forces had to be in effect to help promote the prosperous time. With a pent up demand for products, with government policies that encouraged economic growth, and with the freedoms available in a capitalist economic system, our economy grew significantly, and we experienced a great deal of prosperity after World War I and after World War II.

What are the settings in "Charles" by Shirley Jackson?

The story takes place in the late 1940s at Laurie’s home and school during the beginning of the school year.

The story’s setting is significant in “Charles.” Because the story takes place at the beginning of the school year when Laurie starts kindergarten, the plot involves his and his parents’ adjustment to starting school. The story takes place over the period of a few weeks, giving the plot plenty of time to develop to its surprise ironic ending.

You can tell that the story takes place in the middle of the twentieth century partly by the clothes.

The day my son Laurie started kindergarten he renounced corduroy overalls with bibs and began wearing blue jeans with a belt; I watched him go off the first morning with the older girl next door, seeing clearly that an era of my life was ended. . . .

The setting of the 1940s is significant. Things were a little different back then. Children could walk home from school by themselves. Kindergarten was not as intense as it is now, and it only lasted half a day. Mothers typically did not work, staying home with the children. For this reason, the story is able to progress with Charles coming home from school each day to have lunch with his parents.

The kindergarten setting is not one the reader sees directly.  All information about it comes to us through the unreliable narrator, Laurie.

“The teacher spanked a boy, though,” Laurie said, addressing his bread and butter. “For being fresh,” he added, with his mouth full.

“What did he do?” I asked. “Who was it?”

Laurie thought. “It was Charles,” he said. “He was fresh. The teacher spanked him and made him stand in a corner. He was awfully fresh.”

We find out what happened in kindergarten with Laurie’s precocious blend of humor and half-truth. His parents do seem supremely gullible. Their home is a chaotic one, though. With a kindergartener and a young baby, things are bound to fall through the cracks.

School was also different in those days. Laurie’s teacher seems very patient. I can’t imagine teachers today letting things go for several weeks without contacting the parents.  Laurie's teacher just takes care of it herself. In today’s schools, the teachers do not directly discipline the students in most cases, but in those days, corporal punishment was common. Laurie's parents show only vague interest in the number of severe punishments that Charles gets, such as spankings and having his mouth washed out with soap.

The closest we get to seeing the school setting is when Laurie's mother finally makes it to a PTA meeting, and the teacher only says Laurie had a little trouble adjusting. That sounds like quite an understatement!

In "The Moonlight," explain how Abbé Marignan is a dynamic character.

A dynamic character is one who develops and changes over the course of a narrative, so an easy way to answer this question is to ask simply, “How does the Abbé Marignan change from the beginning to the end of this story?”

Guy de Maupassant is very upfront with his description of the Abbé at the start of “In the Moonlight.”  Marignan is a very erect, God-fearing man.  He has a very rigid view of the world that extends even to God, and he believes that he is and moreover should be privy to the machinations of the Divine.  Life, to him, and the world, have been created and subsequently operate within a system of undeniable logic, a belief illustrated by the line, “Dawns existed to make waking up a pleasure, days to ripen the crops, rain to water them; evening to prepare for slumber, and the night was dark for sleeping.” 

He despises women and the lusty thoughts their presence conjures in the minds of men, and Marignan has a private plan to send his niece to a convent once she is old enough, to spare her from this devilish female fate.  He becomes furious when he learns that she has taken a secret lover, and plans to ambush them at night, at the site of their tryst.  Recall the above quote:  “evening [existed] to prepare for slumber, and the night was dark for sleeping.”  It is safe to assume that the Abbé does not get out at night very often.  And on this occasion his violent plans are swept from his mind, because “he was immediately distracted, moved by the glorious and serene beauty of the pale night.”  Here we see his carefully constructed schema of the rules and boundaries of life begin to fall apart – if dark was for sleeping, why is the nighttime so beautiful?  Why is he so transfixed, so emotionally moved by the splendor of the shimmering darkness?  His convictions are being called into question. 

The Abbé has an almost Panglossian line of reasoning – the seasons are made for growing crops, rather than the growing of crops being adapted to the seasons – and he therefore must ask himself, in reference to the night, “For who was it intended, this sublime spectacle, this flood of poetry poured from the sky over the earth?”  And here his dynamism is even more marked, for he spies his niece and her lover, walking together by the river in the moonlight, in the serenity of the still night, and understands that it was made for them.  And he turns around, having forgotten his desperate goal, to leave them in peace.  So he went from a man who loathed love and all the “sin” it carried in its entourage, to a man who understood the beauty of deep attraction, and who finally understood its place in the world.

So, in short, the Abbe became a more tolerant person; he went from a man who viewed love as the ultimate departure from God to a man who understood that love, as well, was a part of the Divine plan for humanity.  And in doing so he allowed his worldview to be changed and expanded.  He became ever so slightly more flexible in his understanding of the world.

Why do you think "La Blanche" had that name?

Your question refers to a character who is mentioned three times in Kate Chopin's story "Desiree's Baby". La Blanche is one of the slaves at the L'Abri estate where Desiree lives with her husband and infant. The first time La Blanche's name is mentioned is when Desiree described how loud her baby can cry; it can be heard "as far away as La Blanche's cabin". The fact that La Blanche has a cabin is a clue to us that she is probably one of the slaves.

The second time her name is mentioned is when Desiree's baby is three months old and "one of La Blanche's little quadroons" is doing the job of fanning the baby. La Blanche, then, is implied to be the mother of a child that is one-quarter black. If her child is one-quarter black, it must mean that his mother is half-black and his father is all black. La Blanche, as a half-black and ostensibly half-white person, may have been named "La Blanche" because her name means "the white" and because her skin was likely paler than the other slaves' skin color due to her heritage.

The third time La Blanche's name is mentioned is when Armand speaks cruelly to Desiree as she desperately tries to get him to agree that Desiree is white, even whiter than Armand himself. He replies that her hand is "as white as La Blanche's". Armand means that Desiree is only as "white" as a half-white person, and therefore is basically black in his estimation.

The irony of this, of course, is that we later learn that Armand himself is the one who had a black parent. We never learn anything about Desiree's true parentage. For Armand to use a comparison to La Blanche as an insult would be the height of hypocrisy if he had known that he too had one black parent. Unfortunately, Armand's belief that Desiree's bloodline is responsible for their baby's darkening complexion leads to Desiree's desperate decision to leave. We can only suppose that she and her baby have perished in the cold October forest, having left in clothing inadequate for the season. Armand does not discover the truth that his mother is black until after Desiree's disappearance.

The name "La Blanche" serves a primarily symbolic purpose. It means "white", and is thus directly connected to the issue of La Blanche's parentage. Furthermore, white is often used as a symbol for purity or innocence. When Armand compares Desiree to La Blanche in terms of color, it may be an attempt by Kate Chopin to say something about Desiree's (not to mention La Blanche's) position of being an innocent victim of racial prejudice. Desiree's clothing is white, she lies upon white muslin, and she is as white as a stone statue when waiting for Armand to read her mother's letter. The white imagery that runs throughout the story indicates that there is a question of virtue at stake in it.

What is Andrew Jackson's legacy?

Jackson's legacy is complex. He was such an influential figure that many historians still use the phrase "Age of Jackson" to describe the United States between the 1820s and early 1840s. This answer will focus on three aspects of his legacy.

The first is that Jackson and his New York political ally Martin Van Buren very shrewdly took advantage of the new, more popular and democratic politics that emerged in the United States during this period. Most states relaxed or eliminated property restrictions for voting during the 1820s and 1830s, and this empowered ordinary white men to vote in elections for the first time. Jackson's appeal to the "common man" and Van Buren's mobilization of working-class people in New York City in particular would permanently change politics in the United States. After Jackson, active campaigning, the dispensation of government jobs, organized political parties, and the affectation of a popular political style all became essential parts of the new mass politics that was, it turned out, there to stay.

The second part of Jackson's legacy is that he expanded the role of the Presidency. While this, again, was largely a matter of style, Jackson was seen as an activist president, someone who believed that he was put into office to carry out what he believed to be the will of the people. His veto of the (re)charter for the Second Bank of the United States, as well as his decision to ignore the Supreme Court's decision in Worcester v. Georgia, contributed to this legacy. So did his decision to take a hard line against the nullifiers in South Carolina, a stance that put him at odds with many Southerners. That the Whig Party that formed largely in opposition to Jackson's policies took a name that recalled opposition to the King in seventeenth and eighteenth century England says much about how Jackson's political enemies viewed his largely unprecedented exercise of executive powers.

The final part of Jackson's legacy is the most shameful one, but it is tied directly to the emergence of a democratic politics in the United States during his presidency. We have to remember that the democracy Jackson and his followers (the so-called "common man") envisioned a white man's democracy, sometimes termed a "herrenvolk democracy" by historians. The most stark example of this is Jackson's support for the removal of the Southeastern Indians. This policy ranked highest on Jackson's agenda upon entering office, and it resulted in the removal of thousands of Cherokee, Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole Indians from the American Southeast. This process, which we would term "ethnic cleansing" today, also paved the way for the dramatic expansion of slavery into the fertile soils of Alabama and Mississippi, as planters brought thousands, even millions, of slaves to cultivate cotton. So it is important to remember that "Jacksonian democracy" that is so important to Jackson's legacy, and positive portrayals of him in textbooks, was in large part dependent on the taking of Native lands and the expansion of slavery.

What is the importance of phosphorus in plants and animals?

Phosphorus is absolutely essential to all life on earth. In the form of phosphates (PO4) it is part of the backbone of DNA/RNA molecules, the genetic code for all lifeforms. As part of the ATP (adenosine triphosphate) molecule it is involved in energy production for the cell, by the transfer of a (highly reactive) phosphate group from one molecule to another. Phosphorus is a component of some amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. It is a component of bones and teeth. It helps with muscle contractions and keeping the heartbeat regulated. It aids in kidney functioning. Phosphorus helps in the nervous system.

We need dietary phosphorus to survive, but it is in every cell of every type of food we eat. Phosphorus deficiencies are rare.

(note: the phosphate group is a phosphorus atom with four atoms of oxygen attached. I could not do a subscript in the second sentence of my answer.)

What is the message Mrs. Merriweather is sending the ladies of the Missionary Society in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

In Chapter 24 of To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee uses Mrs. Grace Merriweather's message about the African tribe called the Mrunas and forgiving the Negroes to express the hypocrisy that dominates Maycomb.

At one of Aunt Alexandra's meetings of the Missionary Society, Mrs. Merriweather explains the state and culture of the Mrunas. According to her, men of the tribe "put the women out in huts" when they have gotten too old, and children are dreadfully mistreated and riddled with parasites and disease. She feels it is her Christian duty to persuade others to go out to the Mrunas since currently only J. Grimes Everett has had the courage to "go near 'em." Unbeknownst to her, Mrs. Merriweather actually gives a description of the tribe's society that directly parallels Southern society:

The poverty ... the darkness ... the immorality--nobody but J. Grimes Everett knows. (Ch. 24)

In the middle of her description to Scout of the spiritual darkness of the tribe, Mrs. Merriweather breaks off to start talking about the "cooks and field hands" in Maycomb, meaning the African Americans or what Maycomb citizens would refer to as the Negroes. According to Mrs. Merriweather, the Negroes have been "grumbling" ever since Tom Robinson lost the trial, and according to Mrs. Merriweather, the best course of action is to "forgive and forget" the Negroes, especially to "forgive and "forget" Tom Robinson's wife, Helen Robinson, for having had such a sinful husband. Mrs. Merriweather argues that, if Maycomb's citizens "forgive and forget" Robinson's actions, they will teach Mrs. Robinson Christian ways, and perhaps she'll be able to teach her children Christian ways.

But, of course, what Mrs. Merriweather is overlooking is the fact that there is nothing to "forgive and forget" since all evidence points to Robinson's innocence. She is further overlooking the fact that the African Americans of the county are acting out because they see exactly how much the verdict of the trial was based on racism. Therefore, likewise, the Christianly Mrs. Merriweather is also acting and thinking based on racism, which shows the amount of hypocrisy that is deeply rooted in Maycomb county and in the South in general.

Were you surprised by the ending of "The Sniper"?

The surprise ending of Liam O'Flaherty's short story "The Sniper" is meant to shock the reader and highlight the brutality of war, especially a civil war that matched countrymen against each other. At the end of the story, the Republican sniper deceives his Free State adversary into revealing himself and the Republican kills him, as he does two other enemies. When the sniper examines the body he discovers that he has killed his own brother.

O'Flaherty's purpose is to not only shock but also play on the sympathy of the reader and make the point that there are no real victors in a war which pitted brother against brother. Immediately after killing the opposition sniper, and before knowing who he was, the sniper is overcome with regret over the killing and the war itself. For the sniper, the war ends up being a tragedy affecting not only his family but also his mental stability.

If the reader knows the background of the story and the Irish Civil War, the ending may not come as that much of a surprise. Not long before the battle described in the story, the Irish Republican Army had split over the Anglo-Irish Treaty which was negotiated by the Provisional Government and made Ireland a free state within the British Commonwealth. Some members of the army bitterly disagreed with the treaty. They wanted Ireland to have total sovereignty. It became a matter of principle for the men of the army. Some broke away, and became known as Free Staters, and some remained Republicans. The brothers probably served together before the split, and so it is not that startling that they should be set against each other on the rooftops of Dublin in the summer of 1922. 

In Lyddie, where is there a diary entry about the mill in Lowell?

Lyddie, the main character in the novel, does not keep a diary for a couple of reasons: first, she does not know how to read and write very well, and second, she does not have money for such a purchase. However, one could pretend to write a diary from Lyddie's perspective to help make the Concord Corporation mill at Lowell seem more real. To construct a few diary entries for Lyddie's first days at the mill, write in first person (saying "I" and "me") and describe the details about the factory from chapters 8, 9, and 10 using words that Lyddie might use.

For example, based on chapter 8, you could have Lyddie recount her experience going into the factory with Mrs. Bedlow to go through the company's hiring process. Lyddie goes into the factory following Mrs. Bedlow through the door of one of the low buildings. They walk through a room of accountants working at tables and out into a huge courtyard. Lyddie sees the "gigantic six-story brick building" where the cotton mill is housed. She goes through a door marked "Agent" and receives the company regulations and gets her smallpox shot.

Her first day of work, Mrs. Bedlow takes her after lunch, so she only works for four hours. She can feel the pulsing of the machines as she climbs up the outside wooden staircase to get to the fourth floor. The machines are deafening. Lyddie can't hear what the overseer tells her, but a kind worker named Diana helps her. She shows Lyddie how to perform the "kiss of death procedure." Everything moves too fast for Lyddie, but Diana can handle it all easily. 

The next day Lyddie works for a full day, and it is much harder on her. She still hates the noise of the machines, and she can barely breathe because the "air was so laden with moisture and debris." She goes to the window to try to get fresh air, but the window doesn't open. Then her machine jams, and Diana comes and shows her how to get it going again. At 7:00 Lyddie leaves with the other girls to go get breakfast, then comes back to work. Finally Lyddie hears the bell ring to signal quitting time. She is utterly exhausted.

Here is a sample of how a diary entry might start:

"Dear Diary: Today I got hired by Concord Corporation in Lowell to work in the cotton mill. Mrs. Bedlow took me to the factory. We first walked through a room of bored people working at desks, then into a huge courtyard where I could see the six-story factory building. It's gigantic!"

What strategy do the wolves use to kill caribou in Julie of the Wolves?

The wolves killed caribou by closing in on them.

At one point in the story, Miyax states, “They’re chasing the weakest… It’s just like Kapugen said- wolves take the old and sick.”

During a particular kill, Amaroq jumped and “sank his teeth” into the shoulder of a caribou. As Amaroq used his teeth to hang onto the animal, Silver attacked the caribou from the side. The caribou tried to defend himself by aiming his hoofs at Amaroq’s head. However, Amaroq jumped high into the air and “sunk his teeth in the animal’s back” a second time. Amaroq used his teeth and the weight of his body to ride the caribou. At this point, Silver leapt in front of the caribou and tripped the bull. Meanwhile, Nails gripped the hind leg of the caribou. At this point, the caribou fell to its knees and stumbled to a final defeat.

Should Japan have adopted a position of isolation at the start of the Edo period?

In general, isolationism is not a good idea. The more you separate yourself from the rest of the world, the easier it is to fall behind technologically and economically. Isolation denies you the enormous benefits of trade and cultural sharing, and while it seems to protect you from attack for awhile eventually it can put you in even more danger as other nations overtake you technologically and don't have the interdependence of culture and trade to deter them from attacking you.

For example, while France has a strong military and a substantial nuclear arsenal, these are not the reason the US does not invade France. The US and France both share so much culture and trade that it would be a clear loss to both of them to engage in hostilities, regardless of the outcome of the war; more than that, we even think of each other as friends and would never want the other to come to harm. Indeed, this is now largely the relationship between the US and Japan---but it certainly wasn't during the Edo Period. (The US was actually founded in the middle of the Edo Period; but due to Japan's isolationism, they hardly seemed to notice.)

That said, if anyone could get away with isolationism, it would be Japan. (The second would be the United States, and we also went through some significant periods of isolationism, albeit nowhere near as long as Japan did.) The geography of the islands of Japan makes the entire country essentially a natural fortress, which was basically impervious to attack until the invention of airplanes. Their isolation from other countries combined with their high level of national security has given Japan the opportunity to develop one of the world's most distinctive cultures, largely free of external influences for centuries.

A major motivation for the isolation of the Edo Period was the exclusion of other religions, particularly Christianity. This was largely successful; to this day most people in Japan maintain beliefs in Shinto or Buddhism even as the rest of the world has become increasingly converted to Christianity. So there were upsides to the isolation, but in general I think the downsides of being excluded from world trade outweigh the upsides.

In the end, Japan's hand was forced by some quite literal gunboat diplomacy, as in 1853 the United States brought battleships to Japan's shores and demanded that they reopen trade. While they were no doubt unhappy about this, in the long run Japan has benefited greatly from being industrialized and reintegrated into global trade, so much so that they are now essentially a First World country.

On what page does Winston say that "freedom is the ability to say that two plus two equals four?"

In 1984, this quote appears at the very end of Part One, Chapter Seven, on page 84. To put this quote into context, Winston writes in his diary that the proles could overthrow the party, if they wanted to. The only obstacle to rebellion is the proles themselves: "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."

In this chapter, Winston also remembers a time when three party members were arrested for treason. Winston knew that they were innocent, having seen a photograph of them at a function when they were supposedly committing their crimes. But they were arrested and confessed publicly to all manner of horrible crimes. The men were eventually released and allegedly reinstated to senior party positions but Winston saw them in a cafe in the prole district about a year later. 

These two instances are very important in understanding the above quote. They demonstrate how the party is able to control people's concept of truth and manipulate their understanding of reality. The proles, for instance, are socially ousted by the party and portrayed as inferior. Over time, they have come to accept this status as truth and so they never pose a real threat to Big Brother.  Similarly, Winston destroys the photograph which proves the innocence of the three men. Though he does this through fear, it is illustrative of his job, more generally. He rewrites history, on the party's behalf, and erases  all historical events which the party does not want people to remember. The point is, then, that the party are capable of manipulating the truth to suit their agenda. If they say, for example, that 2 + 2 = 5, who will stand up against them and say that it is wrong? People are too afraid of the Thought Police and Room 101 to question what the party tells them and so, over time, they will come to accept whatever the party says as truth. As Winston says: "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." In other words, the party are the creators of truth. 

In this understanding, then, it is only by avoiding the party's indoctrination that a person can truly be free. Winston uses the example of '2 + 2 = 4' to illustrate this point but, arguably, any idea that we conceive as 'truth' can be used. It is not the example which matters but the ability to develop one's own thoughts and to express them openly, without fear of violence. That is what Winston truly seeks and why he has become a rebel against Big Brother.

Please note that my copy of 1984 is the Penguin Classics, published in London in 1990, and the page number may differ slightly to yours.

In Faulkner’s "A Rose for Emily,"is there evidence that the townspeople knew what had happened with Emily and Homer prior to the shocking reveal...

The narrator of Faulkner’s "A Rose for Emily" represents the townspeople and what they knew/suspected about both Emily Grierson and the fate of Homer Barron. The narrator tells the reader of three separate incidents that may be seen as evidence that the townspeople suspected that something bad had happened to Homer in Miss Emily’s house.

One such piece of evidence is Miss Emily’s purchase of arsenic. Around the time when Homer Barron left for a few days, Miss Emily purchased poison from the druggist. When asked to provide a reason for the purchase of the poison, Miss Emily merely stared the druggist down until he acquiesced and sold it to her. The narrator presents this anecdote as an example of why the townspeople were worried that Miss Emily might be going insane, but it also highlights that her refusal to tell the druggist her purpose for buying the poison was suspicious.

Another piece of evidence that Miss Emily had something to do with Homer Barron’s fate is that he is last seen entering her house by means of the back door. This incident occurs after Miss Emily’s cousins have come to town to persuade her to end her very public—and perceived as inappropriate—relationship with the northern carpetbagger. Homer does leave town for a time, but he returns again after Miss Emily’s cousins have left. However, after he is seen entering Miss Emily’s house, none of the townspeople ever see him again. As with the poison, the narrator relates this incident as more a sign of her eccentricity than anything else, but it is another event that shows that the townspeople were at least suspicious of Miss Emily.

The strongest evidence that the townspeople knew, or at least suspected, the fate of Homer Barron involves a terrible smell coming from Miss Emily’s house. This incident happens shortly after Homer’s disappearance and is coincident with Miss Emily not leaving her house for some time. Upon the first complaint about the smell, the mayor suggests it is likely a snake or rat that Miss Emily’s servant has killed. After a second complaint, men from the town sneak onto Miss Emily’s property at night and pour lye around the house and in the cellar in an attempt to mask the smell. The mayor, as well as the men who go to spread the lye, seem to understand that the smell is from a decomposing body of some kind. This, as well as the fact they are unwilling to confront her about the smell, shows that they are suspicious concerning it.

All three incidents are suggestive that the townspeople at least suspected that Miss Emily had something to do with the fate of Homer Barron.

How does Squeaky's attitude in "Raymond's Run" by Toni Cade Bambara change by the end of the story?

In the beginning of "Raymond's Run" by Toni Cade Bambara, Squeaky is only concerned about herself and her handicapped brother, Raymond. She is very competitive and brags about being the best runner in town with the exception of her father. Squeaky is also especially protective of Raymond and is always ready for a fight with anyone who makes fun of him. She is easily irritated with the other girls in her class, specifically Gretchen, who will be her main competition in the May Day race and who, as Squeaky says, "...talks about me like a dog" (Bambara 4).  By the end of the story, though, Squeaky realizes Gretchen actually is a pretty good runner, and both girls have a new-found respect for one another. Squeaky also sees that Raymond has run right along side of them on the other side of the fence, and she thinks about possibly partnering up with Gretchen to train her brother. In the short span of the story, Squeaky has matured considerably.

What are the differences and similarities between the main plot and the subplot in King Lear?

One obvious difference between the main plot and the subplot in King Lear is the fact that the main plot concerns two daughters (the third being absent), while the subplot concerns two sons. In both cases it is a question of a father's title and properties being taken over by his offspring. Shakespeare's theme is about old age and the way one generation inevitably and relentlessly replaces the generation that came before it. Shakespeare wanted two sons to balance the two daughters in order to show that his theme was macrocosmic and not microcosmic. In his play Measure for Measure, Shakespeare has Vincentio, the Duke of Vienna who is disguised as a friar, give the imprisoned Claudio some examples of the vanity of human existence, including the following regarding children:

Friend hast thou none;
For thine own bowels, which do call thee sire,
The mere effusion of thy proper loins,
Do curse the gout, serpigo, and the rheum,
For ending thee no sooner.

In other words, your own children wish you were dead so that they can inherit whatever property you have acquired and will free them of the burden, or possible burden, of taking care of you in your old age. We see plenty of examples of this in our own times because old people take up so much space and seem to enjoy pharmaceutical immortality. It is true enough that Goneril and Regan care nothing about their father King Lear and only want his property, and that Edmund only wants the title and property of his father Gloucester. Edmund expresses his thoughts on this subject in a letter which he attributes to his gullible brother Edgar.

'This policy and reverence of age makes the world bitter to the
best of our times; keeps our fortunes from us till our oldness
cannot relish them. I begin to find an idle and fond bondage in the
oppression of aged tyranny; who sways, not as it hath power, but as it is suffered. Come to me, that of this I may speak more. If our
father would sleep till I waked him, you should enjoy half his revenue forever, and live the beloved of your brother, Hum–conspiracy!—“Sleep till I waked him,—you should enjoy half his revenue,”
(Act 1, Scene 2)

Edmund follows up on the effect of the letter by telling his father:

"I have heard him oft maintain it to be fit that, sons at perfect age, and fathers declined, the father should be as ward to the son, and the son manage his revenue."

Regan expresses a similar idea in an exchange with her father in Act 2, Scene 4, when the two selfish daughters are stripping Lear of his provisio to keep a retinue of a hundred knights. When Lear pathetically protests, "I gave you all," Regan replies, "And in good time you gave it." She was doing him a favor to take it off his hands, since he was getting too old and senile to manage it himself. In fact, he held on to it too long to suit her. Her sister Goneril is in complete agreement. They have no gratitude for the gift of Lear's entire kingdom divided between them. They feel it is their property and that the old man was only obstructing them from enjoying possession by insisting on remaining alive. They would like him to die. 

In both the main plot and the subplot the elderly fathers find themselves cast out into the open country where they are subject to exposure and slow starvation. Gloucester has even been blinded. There is a touching scene in which the two old men, now worse off than beggars, come together by chance in an open field and commiserate on their fate. They have learned the bitter truth that there is little love in this world but that life is an ongoing struggle for existence. Lear tells Gloucester:

If thou wilt weep my fortunes, take my eyes.
I know thee well enough; thy name is Gloucester:
Thou must be patient; we came crying hither:
Thou know'st, the first time that we smell the air,
We wawl and cry.     (Act 4, Scene 6)

Cordelia, Edgar, and Kent, of course, are exceptions to the general rule and serve mainly as contrast to the ruthless, selfish Goneril, Regan, and Edmund. It is appropriate that Lear's two vicious daughters both fall in love with the Gloucester's villainous illegitimate son Edmund. "Birds of a feather flock together." Or, as Albany tells Goneril:

Wisdom and goodness to the vile seem vile:
Filths savor but themselves.     (Act 4, Scene 2)

So there are more similarities than differences between the main plot and the subplot. Both plots are intended to illustrate the same truth: that each generation (to use Keats' terminology in his "Ode to a Nightingale") is trodden down by the hungry generation it created and nourished. It can't be any other way.

Do you think it is possible for Atticus to remain friends with his community members following the trial?

In Chapter 9, Atticus has a conversation with Scout about defending Tom Robinson. Atticus tells his daughter that there is no chance of winning and that she will have to control her emotions when she is provoked. He encourages Scout to remember that their neighbors are their friends and that she must keep her fists down no matter what. Although the community members are prejudiced, many of them secretly respect Atticus for valiantly defending Tom. Even though they disagree with Atticus, they are still friendly to him and his children. During Aunt Alexandra's missionary circle, Mrs. Merriweather indirectly refers to Atticus as "good, but misguided," and Scout says the Maycomb citizens continue to re-elect Atticus to the state legislature. His re-election is proof that citizens respect him and still view him in a positive light. In my opinion, the community realizes they convicted an innocent man and the only person brave enough to challenge the social norms by defending a black man was Atticus. I think it is absolutely possible for the community members of Maycomb to remain friends with Atticus following the trial.

How did people send messages in olden days?

By "olden days" I will assume you mean the days before technology, or perhaps even the days before the telephone was in widespread use. Letters were a common means of communication prior to the electronic age. Unlike today, when letters take as many as two to three days or longer to travel across the continental United States by mail, letters written during the Victorian era could be exchanged on a much faster basis. Generally the wealthy classes had servants delivering letters to local residents by carriage or horseback; and in this way an urgent correspondence could take place and several letters a day could be sent and received. The "Pony Express" was a method used to deliver mail in the western states after the Civil War ended and settlements sprung up slowly with the building of the railroads. Horses were used and could cover an amazing amount of territory in a short period of time, making it a very efficient message delivery system.

The invention of the telegraph in the 1830s did allow a sort of electronic message to be sent, but this was mainly for military usage. However, the telegraph could be used to send an urgent message for personal delivery called a telegram. When a soldier was killed in war, as during World War I or World War II, the family would often be notified by a telegram sent by the US government. 

The question I need to answer is: What other factors (besides the witches) contribute to Macbeth's and Banquo's increasing distrust of one another?...

After the witches' prophesy, Macbeth welcomes Duncan and his entourage (including Banquo) to his castle for the night. Macbeth and his wife have plotted to kill Duncan, but before that happens, Banquo and Fleance are out after midnight because Banquo can't sleep. He says to Fleance, who is guiding him with a torch: 

A heavy summons lies like lead upon me,
And yet I would not sleep: merciful powers,
Restrain in me the cursed thoughts that nature
Gives way to in repose!

He has a nasty feeling about what is about to happen. He's having dreams that disturb him. He feels like he should do something, but isn't sure what. He and Fleance encounter Macbeth and are surprised that he is still awake. Banquo tells him he dreamt of the weird sisters, for "To you they have show'd some truth." Macbeth lies and says he hasn't given them any thought. So we know what woke Banquo and what sneaking suspicions he has. They agree to talk later--presumably about the prophesies--when they have the time. 

After the murder, Banquo is alone and thinks: 

Thou hast it now: king, Cawdor, Glamis, all,
As the weird women promised, and, I fear,
Thou play'dst most foully for't: yet it was said
It should not stand in thy posterity,
But that myself should be the root and father
Of many kings. 

That is, Macbeth now has everything the weird sisters promised him, but Banquo is afraid he murdered Duncan to make it happen. At the same time, he remembers that the witches predicted he himself would sire many kings, while Macbeth would have no line of kings. This, no doubt, makes him nervous, particularly now that Macbeth is king. 

Shortly thereafter, Banquo and Fleance ride because they presumably have business a day's ride away, but they promise to return for Macbeth's feast. After they leave, Macbeth tells us (the audience): 

To be thus is nothing;
But to be safely thus.--Our fears in Banquo
Stick deep; and in his royalty of nature
Reigns that which would be fear'd: 'tis much he dares;
And, to that dauntless temper of his mind,
He hath a wisdom that doth guide his valour
To act in safety. There is none but he
Whose being I do fear...

He is afraid that Banquo knows the truth and will avenge the king, and do so stealthily. But further, Macbeth is angry that he has murdered "the gracious Duncan" for Banquo's sons, since no son of Macbeth's will succeed him.

What would Q do if he had George Washington's underwear?

Assuming you mean Q from the series Star Trek: The Next Generation, I believe Q would be far more likely to bring George Washington himself to the ship.  However, if only in possession of George Washington's underwear, then he would certainly use it to make a point about humanity to the crew, as well as use it to irritate Captain Picard (whom he has shown to have a long-standing interest in).  Q would no doubt point out the irrational attachment that "puny humans" have to material possessions, especially those they attach historical significance to.  He would likely make a game of destroying the underwear (perhaps by forcing the captain into a game by which he could save them), and in the end demonstrate that the destruction of George Washington's underwear has no affect upon history (or anything of significance).  Q likes to comment on humanity, and thus the underwear would serve his purpose...with the addition of annoying the captain (which he also seems to enjoy).

What is containment? List and define three examples of containment.

Containment was our policy after World War II to stop communism from spreading. This policy was based on the Long Telegram that was issued by George Keenan. The Long Telegram suggested that communism was a flawed system that would fail. Keenan believed we needed to prevent communism from spreading.

There were several examples where we worked to prevent communism from spreading. One was in West Berlin. The Soviet Union wanted to force the Allies out of West Berlin so they could make the entire city a communist city. The Soviet Union cut off all land routes into West Berlin in an event that is known as the Berlin Blockade. We refused to leave West Berlin, and we organized the Berlin Airlift to get supplies into West Berlin. Eventually, the Soviet Union backed down and ended the Berlin Blockade.

Another example where we opposed the spread of Communism was in South Korea. When North Korea invaded South Korea to make Korea a communist country, we worked with the United Nations to remove North Korea from South Korea. Under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur, we were able to keep South Korea from becoming a communist country.

A third example of containment was the European Recovery Program, known as the Marshall Plan. We offered aid to countries that were resisting the spread of communism. For example, Greece and Turkey were two countries that were offered aid. Both countries didn’t become communist.

The goal of containment was designed to stop the spread of communism. This policy was successful in many places.

Why did Russia join World War II?

The Soviet Union had signed a non-aggression pact with Germany just before World War II began. The Germans didn’t want to fight a two-front war in World War II, and the Soviet Union didn’t want to go to war. This agreement made sense for both sides.

However, in 1941, Germany broke this agreement and invaded the Soviet Union. Thus, the Soviet Union had no choice but to join the war and support the Allies, Great Britain and France, in the war against Germany, Japan, and Italy.

The Soviet Union defended every inch of their land. After some initial success, the Germans got bogged down in the Soviet Union. The cold, Russian winters were a factor that negatively impacted Germany. Germany suffered major losses in the Battle of Stalingrad. Germany was on the retreat after this battle and never went on the offensive again. Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union was one of Germany’s fatal errors in World War II, leading to their eventual defeat.

Is there any humor in the story "A Rose for Emily" or is it mainly grimly?

The Glossary of Literary Terms defines humor as:

The quality of a literary or informative work that makes the character/and or situations seem funny, amusing or ludicrous. 

A "quality" is a standard of something measured against something else. In turn, a standard is assigned the value that is desired by whoever is determining it.

This essentially means that it is up to you, and the contextual or personal connections that you make as you read, what determines whether something is "funny," "amusing," or "ludicrous."

Note that something humorous does not have to fit all three of these variables. Hence, to find something amusing, even to a minor degree, implies eliciting humor. 

This being said, there are several things in the story "A Rose for Emily" that are described in ways that befit any of the three descriptors just mentioned. 

1. That nosey narrator

Take, for example, the fact that the narrator is not a narrator per se, but the combination of the voices of the townsfolk.  To a reader who has been raised in a small town or county, such as Emily's Jefferson country, the compilation of observations made by the townsfolk regarding Emily may seem amusing.

It is interesting to observe how people who grow up and live close together acquire a collective identity that leads them to want to look out for "their own."

In "A Rose for Emily" this townsfolk collective of voices knows everything that goes on it he lives of the Grierson's: They know that aunt Wyatt went crazy, that Emily's family thought they were better than everyone else, that there were aunts in Alabama no different than Old Man Grierson, that Old Man Grierson was territorial with Emily, and every kind of information that can only be known when told from person to person.

It is, indeed, amusing (it does not have to be "funny" to be humorous) to see how these dynamics occur. 

2. A modern-day slave?

Another example of humor may experienced by a reader who finds it ludicrous that Emily has managed to keep the equivalent of a modern-day slave serving in her household, up to the day when she died. How in the world do you get to that point in servitude, whether it is a fictional story or not? It may elicit a sarcastic chuckle to even think of this being plausible. Then again, it may come to a shock to other readers to find out that the type of relationship between Tobe and Emily was, actually, possible. 

3. No taxes

Finally, there is the humor that comes from something being actually funny. This quality is also open to interpretation, temperament, and personal connection. Some readers may find it funny that Emily did not flinch and said, plainly and simply, that she isn't paying any taxes in Jefferson country. To someone who has been audited by the Internal Revue Service (IRS), or someone who has been overtaxed in this country, those words from Emily surely would have caused humor. 

4. Dark humor

Let's not forget also another type of humor, not mentioned yet, which is "dark humor."  This one is described by The Free Dictionary as 

...the juxtaposition of morbid and farcical elements (in writing or drama) to give a disturbing effect...

Now, think about this as you read the story "A Rose for Emily." Aren't there enough elements of dark humor, particularly in situations that are, both, ludicrous and amusing (interesting)? Doesn't the end of the story cause, indeed, a very disturbing reaction?

Think about: 

• Emily, a traditional Southern girl from a haughty family, selecting none other than Homer Barron, a loud, brash Yankee, as her lover. 


• Emily's refusal to give up the body of her father even days after he died (she has a penchant for the dead, apparently). 


• Emily's secret: She lived as a married woman for decades, with the decaying corpse of Homer Barron, whom she presumably killed herself by poisoning him. 


• The entire town had lived by Emily without even knowing that this was going on until the moment that she died and the room was finally opened. 

Aren't these amusing things? They are, indeed, dark and morbid, but nevertheless it is impossible to deny that they are interesting tidbits of life to look into, and ask many, many questions. 

Therefore, there is plenty of humor in the story "A Rose for Emily." Humor does not have to be funny. It simply has to induce amusement, interest, and even curiosity. 

What does the poet mean by saying, "stands about the woodland ride"?

This is old-fashioned language for a cherry tree standing by the side of a road which leads into or through the woods. 

"Stands about" means standing on either side of, or next to. 

The image this should create in your mind is that of a road or path through the woods which, at some point, is lined with cherry trees.  Perhaps the other, taller trees behind the cherries have not yet begun to bloom or put out any leaves, but the cherry trees have already burst into white flower.  They would stand out and be easy to spot.

Although the poem speaks of "the cherry," as if there is only one, the implication is that there are many.  The poet is planning to look at all the cherry trees out there.  This is similar to how we might say, "The bear hibernates through the winter," meaning all bears.  In the last line of the poem,

About the woodlands I will go/To see the cherry hung with snow

it is clear that the poet is planning to take a long ramble all over the woods to enjoy the many cherry trees that he knows are there. 

What is unique about the maiden behind the door in "The Lady or the Tiger?"

The maiden behind the door is specifically selected for the accused.

The semi-barbaric king has a very unique system of justice.  He had an arena built with two special doors. Behind one door is a tiger, and behind the other is a lady. If the accused chooses the door with the lady, he is innocent. If he chooses the door with the tiger, he is guilty. That is the trial.

The king wants to make sure that whichever door he chooses, the accused is immediately punished or rewarded.  The tiger is the fiercest that can be found, and the accused will immediately be mauled to death if he chooses that door. The audience assembled will get to see some fine bloodshed.

However, if the accused is innocent, he will choose the door with the fair maiden behind it. The king will have not just any maiden there, but the perfect maiden for the accused, specifically selected for him.

[The] ranks of maiden youth and beauty throughout the land were carefully surveyed by competent judges in order that the young man might have a fitting bride in case fate did not determine for him a different destiny. 

If the accused man chooses the maiden, the audience will be immediately treated to a huge party as he weds his new bride. It does not matter, by the way, if the accused man is already married or seeing someone. He is just happy to be alive, and goes along with it.

Of course, the problem the princess has with this system is obvious. If she points her lover to the door with the tiger, he will die! Yet if she points him to the door with the lady, he will go to someone else. The princess is not the forgiving sort. The princess knows not just which door is which, but exactly who is behind that door.

It was one of the fairest and loveliest of the damsels of the court who had been selected as the reward of the accused youth, should he be proved innocent of the crime of aspiring to one so far above him; and the princess hated her.

It is supposedly a test of your view of human nature which one you think the princess chose. If you think she chose the tiger, you believe humankind is naturally malicious. If you think she chose the lady, your view about mankind is that people are generally good.

How do the people of Ilujinle feel about Lakunle in "The Lion and the Jewel"?

Lakunle is the village school teacher who displays contempt for traditional ways of life. Lakunle values Western civilization and is a vocal advocate for modernization and progress. At the beginning of the novel, Lakunle asks Sidi to marry him but refuses to pay the bride-price. Sidi laughs and criticizes Lakunle by telling him that the villagers call him the madman of Ilujinle. Sidi also says that everyone, including children, call Lakunle a fool. She chastises Lakunle for his use of "big words" and new concepts that are not yet fully accepted in the village of Ilujinle. Lakunle curses the villagers for their insults and backward way of life. Sidi also mentions that people jeer at Lakunle in the town, and the villagers question why he is allowed to run the school. Lakunle is nontraditional and most of the villagers, including Sidi, think he is crazy for his progressive thoughts and views.

I need help understanding Lillian Stewart's poem in Spoon River Anthology.

Lillian Stewart introduces herself as "the daughter of Lambert Hutchins." We know then, right away, that her life has been defined by him and his legacy. 

Lillian was "born in a cottage near the grist-mill," which indicates that she was born to modest means. She ends up in a mansion that her father built. She describes its splendor. The fifth and sixth lines employ anaphora, emphasizing "how proud" her parents were of the mansion -- an indication of "[her] father's rise in the world." 

There is a shift in the ninth line: "But I believe the house was a curse / For Father's fortune was little beside it..." We learn that the mansion is unlucky, primarily for Lillian, because her father only had the house he had built, not the wealth people assumed went with it. Thus, when she marries, her husband is disappointed that he married "a girl who was really poor." Focus on those lines. What does this say about her husband and his true intentions for marrying Lillian?

He calls the house "a fraud on the world / A treacherous lure to young men..." Both of those lines are interesting and slightly different in meaning. The first is more of a social betrayal, while the latter is a personal one. 

She goes on, speaking, it seems in her husband's voice: "And a man while selling his vote / Should get enough from the people's betrayal / To wall the whole of his family in." "Vote" here is used as a metaphor. One could say that the reference is to her husband's "loyalty" or the taking of vows. "The people's betrayal" is a reference to her own family. Clearly, he expected them to offer him enough "of a dowry" to care for his own kin. 

The poem ends with Lillian tormented by her husband until she chooses to go back home to be "an old maid," to "[keep] house for father." Notice how "old maid" has a double meaning here. Also, the mansion takes on new connotations. It has transformed from a source of pride to one of torment.

How is the title of "The Prison" by Bernard Malamud relevant to the story?

The title “The Prison” is appropriate on a myriad of levels, for Tommy is trapped in a series of mental and sociological prisons, one nesting snugly within the next.

First, he feels trapped in his life -- in the boring, daily grind of working in the candy store, of living a routine life with no variation. “Time rotted in him,” Malamud writes; Tommy cannot escape the tight, ever-present pull of banal responsibility. It’s an inescapable cycle, forced upon him to a certain extent by himself -- he quit his vocational school at sixteen and took up with unsavory types, types that happened to be prolific in his underprivileged neighborhood.  And, as he asserts near the end of the story, when contemplating the multigenerational consequences of this sort of a cycle,

“You never really got what you wanted. No matter how hard you tried you made mistakes and couldn’t get past them. You could never see the sky outside or the ocean because you were in a prison, except nobody called it a prison, and if you did they didn’t know what you were talking about, or they said they didn’t.” 

The candy store itself it a type of physical prison, but what it represents is also a prison: the economic constraints of a working-class existence, those invisible barriers that prevent a person from pursuing higher goals or validating him- or herself on a personal level.

Which brings us to another type of prison -- that of an unequal society. Tommy, as a boy, had had dreams of “getting out of this tenement-crowded, kid-squawking neighborhood, with its lousy poverty,” but at the time the story takes place he is still in that very same neighborhood, running a candy store with a woman his father arranged for him to marry, staying out of trouble because he doesn’t have the time or the energy to repeat the antics of his younger years. He never had the opportunity to escape the life of poverty and need that had circumscribed his childhood. “Everything had fouled up against him before he could.” This is an inherent flaw in our current society -- those who have little and need much are crowded into housing projects and forced into poorer areas, where opportunities for vertical mobility are slim and the temptation to fall into illegal habits compounds with the desperation to make ends meet and the resulting high availability of said unsavory jobs and habits. This forces individuals into a steady cycle of poor opportunity, desperate choices, and poverty. This is the cycle Tommy has fallen into -- he is to a certain extent a product of his environment, and only by the luck of having the right connections is he not in jail and instead running a candy store, even if it is “for profits counted in pennies.”

It is this cycle Tommy sees the little girl falling into when he discovers her stealing candy, and he feels a strong compulsion to talk to her, to prevent her from messing up her own life as he messed up his. And yet he cannot bring himself to speak to her because he doesn’t want his lesson to be misconstrued, which demonstrates yet another prison in which he finds himself -- he is paralyzed with anxiety and indecision, scared to be perpetuating the cycle himself through an inability to not get through to the little girl, such that his inaction ultimately leads to a messy and nonconstructive confrontation.

So, while Tommy may be free, or at least not be in jail like his old friend Dom, he is stuck in a multitude of prisons nonetheless -- the prison that is poverty and miscreant behavior, the prison that is indecision, the prison that is routine. And all these prisons feed off each other, and all these prisons are perpetuated over generations. And what’s worse is that all these prisons are willfully ignored by both the individuals who suffer in them and the individuals in power who could take steps to deconstruct them, thus contributing to their perpetuity.

Describe the irony in the following lines found in Act 3, scene 2 of the play, Julius Caesar: "Good countrymen, let me depart alone. And, for my...

The irony lies in the fact that, without realising it, Brutus is setting the stage for his eventual downfall. By asking the crowd to allow him to leave on his own and not follow him and thus listen to Antony's oration, he creates an opportunity for Antony to inflame the crowd and turn them against the conspirators.

Brutus completely underestimated Antony's ability or desire to incite the citizens against him and his fellow conspirators. After they had murdered Caesar, Antony came to ask permission to speak at Caesar's funeral. Brutus was quite agreeable to this, much against the much more suspicious and cynical Cassius' advice. In an aside he told Brutus:

You know not what you do: do not consent
That Antony speak in his funeral:
Know you how much the people may be moved
By that which he will utter?

Brutus replied:

By your pardon;
I will myself into the pulpit first,
And show the reason of our Caesar's death:
What Antony shall speak, I will protest
He speaks by leave and by permission,
And that we are contented Caesar shall
Have all true rites and lawful ceremonies.
It shall advantage more than do us wrong.

Cassius was keenly aware that Antony could say things which could culminate in a citizen's riot against them but Brutus naively believed that if he set terms on how Antony should address the crowd and protest against whatever is inappropriate, there would be no danger. This adds to the later irony after he had addressed the crowd since he does not have the opportunity to protest because he leaves when Antony takes the podium.

Brutus informs Antony:

Mark Antony, here, take you Caesar's body.
You shall not in your funeral speech blame us,
But speak all good you can devise of Caesar,
And say you do't by our permission;
Else shall you not have any hand at all
About his funeral:

As it so happened, Antony followed Brutus' instructions to the letter and repetitively referred to the conspirators as honourable men, each time after he had mentioned one or other of Caesar's virtues. The crowd soon caught on that Antony was mocking the conspirators so-called honour by repeatedly contrasting their actions with Caesar's virtues. His cleverly constructed speech soon had them baying for blood. The crowd who had, just moments before, supported Brutus were now intent on destroying him and all the other plotters.  

Antony slyly stayed the crowd, asking them to wait until he had read Caesar's will. He wanted to drive them into a frenzy so that they were completely overwhelmed by a lust for vengeance. Once he had read the favourable terms of Caesar's will, they had become so worked up that they became unstoppable and as seen as Antony concluded his speech, they went on the rampage, hunting down and tearing to pieces whoever they believed had been involved in Caesar's brutal assassination. 

The unfortunate Cinna the poet became a victim of the citizen's savage retribution and he was torn to pieces even though he mentioned that he was not a conspirator. The crowd, however, had been overwhelmed by an overriding bloodlust and he was killed for 'his bad verses.' As for Brutus and his partners in crime, they all fled the city, fearing for their lives.  

What are examples of parallelism in the "I Have a Dream Speech..."

Parallelism involves using similar structures for two or more parts of a sentence or sentences to create a comparison or pattern. One example in the "I Have a Dream Speech" is the four sentences that begin "one hundred years later" in the third paragraph to discuss all the ways in which African-Americans are still not free. Within one of these sentences that reads "One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination," King also uses parallelism. The phrases "manacles of segregation" and "chains of discrimination" are in parallel form, as they are three-word phrases with a noun, the word "of," and another noun.

Later, in the sixth paragraph, King begins several sentences with the parallel phrasing "now is the time to..." to speak about the agenda of the Civil Rights movement to end injustice and segregation. After he states "we can never turn back" later in the speech, he uses parallel constructions for several sentences that begin "We can never be satisfied as long as..." These sentences not only use repetition, but they also use parallel constructions, as the parts of the sentence that follow this phrase are all written in the present tense about an injustice that is currently occurring in the nation. Later, King ends the speech with several parallel sentences that begin famously with "I have a dream that..." These sentences also use repetition and are all written with the same structure, as they contain the future tense and use of words such as "will," "will be," or "shall" to express a hope for something that will happen in the near future. 

What does Juliet plan to do if Friar Lawrence refuses to help her? What does Juliet's language in the scene reveal about her state of mind?

In Romeo and Juliet, Act 4, Scene 1, Juliet and Friar Lawrence devise a plan to fake Juliet's death in order to save her from having to marry Paris and forever be separated from her one true love, Romeo. Her first words to Friar Lawrence after Paris is gone have to do with violence - specifically suicide. This prompts Friar Lawrence to devise the plan to fake her death by taking a sleeping drought, "bury" her in the tomb, and then free her with Romeo. From there, Romeo and Juliet can flee to Mantua, far away from the bitter rivalry between their families. The plan would in theory leave no one the wiser, but there are clearly a lot of things that could go wrong. The biggest "what if" hinges on Romeo being informed of the plan, which of course is where it falls apart and leads to the lovers' double suicide. 
As far as Juliet's language goes in the scene, she uses very violent terms (which is pretty obvious since she is talking about killing herself) and she reveals that her state of mind has become quite desperate by this point. In her second long speech before the plan is hatched, beginning around line 77, she uses allusions to mythology to link her love story to those of old. The first method of death she refers to is "O bid me leap, rather than marry Paris,/From off the battlements of any tower," (4.1.77-78), which is a reference to Hero's reaction when hearing of her lover's, Leander's, death. The next section refers to being buried alive, which leads to Friar Lawrence's plan. The nature of Juliet's speech relates both her desperation and also her equating of her own love story to the great stories of the past. 

How does the setting of the play Riders to the Sea make it both local and universal at the same time?

The setting of this short drama is the Aran islands of Ireland.  That sounds like a great location.  Hawaii is awesome, so why shouldn't all islands be like that?  That's not the case with the Aran islands though.  They are some of the most barren and forlorn islands of the entire country.  Life there is hard.  The people that live there are dependent on the ocean in order to earn their living and feed their families.  This means that the sea is a great provider of life, while at the same time being dangerous enough to kill men just trying to scratch out a living.  In that regard, the setting is incredibly local and specific. 

But the setting is also universal in the sense that there are locations all over the world where men and women are struggling in a man vs. nature battle.  I could even use something as "mundane" as farming.  It doesn't seem dangerous or life threatening, but those farmers are at the mercy of the weather.  If they make their crop quota, they earn enough money to provide for their family and keep their equipment up to date.  But that same weather has the ability to destroy entire crops and bankrupt the farmer.  The drama's theme of constant hard work is universal across just about any given population.