In The Crucible, why won't proctor go to court to expose Abby's lies when he first hears about the trial?

He is covering for his good name in the community. Early on Abby reveals that it is all farce. However, it is revealed that Proctor has had an affair with Abby, and given the strict Puritan code of conduct and public shame, this complicates things drastically. If he exposed the girls as frauds, it means he must confess his adultery, which is a grave offense.

So it save his good name, he keeps quiet and hopes things will blow over. This, of course, adds to the irony of the play. Had Proctor spoken out, innocent lives likely would have been spared but his name would have been shamed. Since he keeps quiet, many innocent people are murdered and his name is shamed, but through his refusal to have his confession tacked on the church door, he recovers some of his dignity, albeit it costs him his life.

What effect does the remark, "As I am sure they do" have on Brutus's speech in Act 2 of Julius Caesar?

The line you ask about in Act 2:1 of Shakespeare's
Julius Caesar doesn't relate to Brutus trying to get the
conspirators on his side--the deal has already been done by this time.  All this speech
by Brutus is about is whether or not they should all swear an
oath. 

The speech starts in line
121:

No, not
an oath.  If not the face of men,

The sufferance of our
souls, the time's abuse--

If these be motives weak, break
off betimes,

And every man hence to his idle
bed.

So let high-sighted tyranny range
on

Till each man drop by lottery [be killed on the whim of
a dictator].  But if these

(As I am sure they do) bear fire
enough

To kindle cowards and to steel with
valor

The melting spirits of women, then,
countrymen,

What need we any spur but our own
cause

To prick us to redress?  What other
bond

Than secret Romans that have spoke the
word

And will not palter [waver, shift
position]?...

Brutus simply
says that an oath is not necessary, that the face of the men involved in the deal, the
suffering of those men's souls, and the abuse of the times (presumably under Caesar)
binds them together and will make them go through with the assassination.  An oath is
not necessary. 

In fact, the line you ask
about:

(As I
am sure they do) (line
131)

goes back to lines 125
and 126.  The these, in line 130, that leads up to the "(As I am
sure they do)" refers to the faces, souls, and abuses of 125 and 126. 
These is a pronoun that refers back to that which will hold the
conspirators together, and Brutus is giving the conspirators a vote of confidence.  He
is sure these conspirators possess enough fire and valor to continue on with their
plan--no oath is necessary.

How did the threat of atomic warfare affect President Truman's Policy of Containment?

Basically, it just made him have to be more
careful.

If there were not a threat of having a nuclear
war, it would be much easier to threaten the Soviet Union and to take chances in trying
to drive the Soviets out of a particular place where they were trying to
expand.

However, if there is the chance of nuclear war, you
have to be a lot more careful.  If all weapons are conventional, you can have a small
battle here or there without too much risk.  But if you have nukes, any battle can
become a really horrifying war.

What threat does the Lord of the Flies make to Simon?

In simplest terms, the Lord of the Flies threatens Simon with the charge that he, Simon, will be seduced by the evil and savagery within himself just like all the other boys on the island.  Furthermore, the LotF tells Simon that there is nothing Simon can do stop the snowball effect of savagery.

Explain why the Vietnam Memorial is a symbol of national unity?

I agree with pohnpei in that perhaps national unity is the
wrong way to describe it.  Unifying in that those who were for or against the war could
nevertheless agree on the fact that the loss of 58,000 Americans was a tragedy, and that
they should be honored for their sacrifice.  Some have argued that it was a healing
symbol by allowing both civilians and veterans to connect with those they lost in the
war, and to leave offerings, poems, shrines, etc. in a final connection with them (a
stunning exhibit of items left at the Wall is on permanent display at the Smithsonian
Museum of American History in Washington DC).

The Vietnam
War was a very painful chapter in American history and the Wall has allowed many
Americans to begin, at least, to process and heal from that
grief.

Calculate Integral [(1+(tgx)^2)/tg x]dx and specify the method.

First of all, we'll notice that 1+(tgx)^2 = 1/(cos x)^2,
from the fundamental formula of trigonometry:

(sin x)^2 +
(cos x)^2 = 1

(sin x)^2/(cos x)^2 + 1 = 1/(cos
x)^2

(tg x)^2 + 1 = 1/(cos
x)^2

Int [(1+(tgx)^2)/tg x]dx=Int dx/(tg x)(cos
x)^2

Now, we can choose the method of
substitution.

tg x = t, so, differentiating, we'll
have:

 dx/(cos x)^2 =
dt

Int (1/t)dt = ln t + C = ln (tg x) +
C

In what chapter of Into the Wild does McCandless give his money to charity?

Christopher McCandless gives his money to charity in
Chapter 3, entitled "Carthage."

Chapter 3 recounts Chris's
graduation from college and his activities immediately thereafter. Chris had received "a
forty-thousand-dollar bequest left by a friend of the family;" the money had paid for
the final two years of his education at Emory University in Atlanta, and at the time of
his graduation, "more than twenty-four thousand dollars" remained in Chris's account.
Chris's parents had assumed that he would use the remaining money to go to law school,
but to their surprise, they soon found that he had donated the entire sum to OXFAM
America, "a charity dedicated to fighting hunger."

Although
Chris had dutifully completed the requirements to earn a degree in history and
anthropology, he planned, once he graduated, to do exactly what he had yearned to do all
his life. Announcing to his parents that, "on principle, he would no longer give or
accept gifts," he shed virtually all trappings of materialism, cut himself off from
family and acquaintances, and took to the road. Donating all his money to charity was
the first in a series of gestures in Chris McCandless's declaration of his own
emancipation. After graduation, he essentially separated himself from all ties,
obligations, and acts of conformity, and spent the rest of his short life as a vagabond,
inventing "an unfettered new life for himself, one in which he would be free to wallow
in unfiltered experience."

What are two actions about the U.S. Cold war that were harmful to American Society?

One that hasn't yet been mentioned is the enormous amounts
of spending based on estimates of Soviet power including both conventional weapons and
nuclear weapons.  We know now that we overestimated the actual amount of weapons the
Soviet Union had on almost every level and we spent huge amounts of money building up
weapons that (hopefully) will never be used.  The billions of dollars that were spent on
projects of enormously limited utility, for example the triangle shaped stealth bomber
that would take off from a carrier, were completely wasted.  They might very well have
used this money for more effective purposes, but one would also argue that we were
acting on the intelligence we had at the time so...

A
second might be the incredible emphasis on the idea of us and them, two sides that can
only be opposed and will never actually be able to reach an agreement.  We have a huge
problem in this country because every issue is almost always portrayed as right or wrong
and black and white.  With the Cold War it was either us or them and we were willing to
go to places like Korea and Vietnam to fight against the Soviets in
proxy.

This lack of openness is never helpful in terms of
helping a society to be open minded or to help both its own people grow and advance as
well as being willing to do things for the good of the rest of the
world.

What is the moral lesson of The Little Prince?

Depending on how you view it (stories are all subjective), the lesson from this book can be seen as the only way we can learn in our lives, is through experiencing it ourselves first hand. We cannot rely on others telling us, teaching us, or trying to get a message across. Unless we are there experiencing it ourselves, we will not be able to learn from what is true. Furthermore, the story teaches us the importance of friendship, being invisible, and responsibility. Depending on how the reader views it, this story has many teachings it can offer.

How does Animalism represent Communism in the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell?

animalisim is a reflection of communisim because they both are same like are people are equal and all animal are equal their shoul be a proper life style and are people are have same life style Russian Revolution: Russian Revolution Leon Trotsky Other leader of “October Revolution” Pure communist, followed Marx Wanted to improve life for all in Russia Chased away by Lenin’s KGB (secret police)

Animal Farm : Animal Farm Napoleon Not a good speaker, not as clever as Snowball Cruel, brutal, selfish, devious, corrupt His ambition is for power, killed opponents Used dog, Moses, and Squealer to control the animals

Why does the family live in such poor conditions, and why do they move into the new house even though the white man didn't want them there?

The family lives under poor condition because of the lack of job opportunities that color people had.  The main jobs that they were "accepted" was domestic, and serving others, as Walter's familly did.  Out of the five people that are living in the house, ony three are actually working, and Walter in occasion does not take his job seriously, since he is not pleased with what he does.  Beneatha is studing and demands money, not only in her studies, but also for her pleasure.  As Ruth mentions when Beneatha was taking horse lesson and they paid $50 for the suit she needed, and Beneatha did not last.  $50 may not seem alot to many today, but in the 50's it was a lot. 

 When it comes to the issue of them moving into a neighborhood that did not want them, as Mama said, they were proud people.  The deserved more than what they had, and no color should be an obstacle for that.  Not to mention that it had always been a dream of Big Walter.

How was the Yalta conference similar to the Treaty of Versailles? social studies 30-1. Chapter 7

The Yalta Conference and Treaty of Versailles represents
quite different kind of events in history. The Yalta conference (1945) was a meeting of
allies in World War II to agree on a common understanding between when the war is won.
In contrast Treaty of Versailles (1919) refers to the agreement reached between warring
parties after declaration of armistice in the first world
war.

Yalta Conference was a meeting between President
Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States, Prime Minister Winston Churchill of Great
Britain, and Premier Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union.  The Treaty of Versailles
provided an official peace between Germany and nearly all of the 32 victorious Allied
and associated nations, including France, the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, and Japan.
However, there wee some similarities between Treaty of Versailles and agreement reached
in Yalta conference.

The main similarity was the provisions
for creating organizations and mechanism for promoting international peace. Treaty of
Versailles created several new international organizations, including the League of
Nations and the Permanent Court of International Justice. The Yalta conference similarly
agreed on a structure of a world peacekeeping organization that was to become the United
Nations. The two agreements, like all similar agreement involving settlements after war
also provided for reorganization of territories of some
countries.

Where did they get the binder and what happend when they got the binder in October Sky?

They actually decided on moonshine as the best binder,
since it was the best source of pure alcohol around.  In order to get it, they had to
head out to John Eye Blevin's place up in the hills.  Blevin was a worker in the mine
but was injured in an accident where huge amounts of stone fell and one piece of the
slate cut off a big chunk of one of his feet.  Because he was injured in a mine
accident, the owners of the mine have allowed him to remain when most non-mine workers
are expected to leave.

So the boys head up to the house and
end up accepting John's offer of a drink so they are quite drunk when they leave. 
Apparently it doesn't take much pure alcohol to send them
flying!

What does the orangutan symbolize in Life of Pi? What do orangutan symbolize in other cultures that connect to the story?

The orangutan symbolizes Pi's mother in the story. 

Orangutan babies tend to spend a long time with the mother, an average of 8 to 9 years which is much longer than most other ape species.  Orangutans are also known to be good mothers.  This is described in the story by Pi.  Therefore the orangutan symbolizing Pi's mother makes sense.

In some cultures, the orangutan symbolizes the 'old man' of the forest probably because of its slow movements and solitary nature.  This could tie into the story in that the mother would have been the wise and old man character in Pi's life.  She always knew how to help him especially in the conflicts which Pi had with his father - the mother is the balance. 

How does Napoleon use the sheep’s bleating of “Four legs good, two legs bad” to his advantage?

Napoleon reduces all of the Seven Commandments to the
single maxim: "two legs bad, four legs good." This works to his advantage for several
reasons: first, it obscures the equalitarianism and specificity of the actual Seven
Commandments, which declare that all animals are equal and don't kill each other, and it
differentiates between animals and humans in concrete ways: animals don't wear clothes,
sleep in beds or drink alcohol. Napoleon thus reduces a manifesto about animal ethics
and identity into a mindless slogan. It also becomes a mindless slogan taken on faith,
representing the animals' slide into authoritarianism. Tellingly, the birds at first
protest that they have only two legs; then, when they can't understand Napoleon's
explanation that their wings are like legs, simply accept the truth of the statement
without question.

Napoleon drums the statement into the
minds of his followers through encouraging its repetition and painting it in big letters
on the wall of the barn. It will work in his favor because his followers, especially the
sheep, will chant it over and over to drown out dissent. Napoleon, for example, works
behind the scenes so that the sheep will start the chant at crucial times to disrupt
Snowball's speeches. 

Later, the sheep's chanting of "four
legs good, two legs bad" will silence protests, such as when Napoleon retires the song
"Beasts of England," a seven-stanza song full of images and ideas, and replaces it with
the simplistic, short and authoritarian

readability="7">

Animal Farm, Animal Farm,
Never through
me shalt thou come to
harm!

Later, Napoleon will
change the "four legs good, two legs bad" slogan into "four legs good, two legs better,"
a reversal of the original meaning of the chant. 

In
Napoleon's manipulation of language, Orwell illustrates one his central theses: the idea
that dumbing down the language paves a way for authoritarian and totalitarian regimes to
seize and hold power. What we say and how we say it is important, Orwell argues, and
animals (and people) need to actively resist efforts to embrace slogans and
propaganda.

What elements heighten the contrast between Atticus and Aunt Alexandra? (chapter 13)

The contrasts are extreme.  Scout thinks her aunt finds her dull while she knows Atticus finds her interesting. Alexandra has "river boat boarding school manners," and while Atticus is a gentleman, he is also very relaxed and unpretentious. She feels she is better than others, while Atticus is quick to tell her that their "generation's practically the first in the Finch Family not to marry its cousins," noting they are as "common" as anyone else. Alexandra wants Scout to behave like a lady, and while Atticus tries to reinforce his sister's wishes, Scout knows that he loves her the way she is, which, at the time, is more of a tomboy than a lady.

In Oedipus Rex, what does Teiresias predict will happen to the man that killed Laios?

In the first act of Oedipus Rex,
Teiresias predicts that Oedipus will be a sibling to his own children, and a
son to his own wife.  He also tells Oedipus that Laius was the man whom Oedipus killed
on the road.  Oedipus does not believe the words of Teiresias, and Teiresias is angered
by Oedipus's insolence.  Teiresias is known for his truthful prophecies and predictions,
but Oedipus's character will not allow him to accept his mistakes and his
fate.

In the poem "Mending Wall" by Robert Frost what do lines 18 to 25 mean?

We have to
use a spell to make them balance: 
'Stay where you are until our backs are
turned!' 
We wear our fingers rough with handling them. 
Oh, just
another kind of out-door game, 
One on a side. It comes to little
more: 
There where it is we do not need the wall: 
He is all pine
and I am apple orchard. 
My apple trees will never get across 
And
eat the cones under his pines, I tell
him.

I've included line 26
because it finishes the thought. I have always seen these lines as containing the best
argument for the speaker's side. There is  a genuine and sweetly humorous interaction
between the two men. Here they are, doing what they do every year, and they are, rough
as the work is, having a little bit of boyish fun together. It's this feeling of brief
camaraderie that prompts the speaker to suggest this about walls,
mischievously:

readability="17">

'Why do they make good neighbors? Isn't
it

Where there are cows?

But
here there are no cows.

Before I built a wall I'd ask to
know

What I was walling in or walling
out,

And to whom I was like to give
offence.

Something there is that doesn't love a
wall,

That wants it
down.'

Unfortunately, the
neighbor is not convinced by the arument nor the little fun they've shared and would
prefer to keep things just as they've always been.

Do you agree with Heck Tate's views on justice in chapter 30? Explain.To Kill a Mockingbird by Heck Tate

The decision of Heck Tate is wise considering the
setting.  For in the 1930s, provisions were not made for exceptionalities.  The fact
that Boo Radley is probably not normal psychologically would not enter into a trial as a
mitigating factor as it would in modern times.

If Boo
were brought to the jail, there would be, as Heck Tate worries, the curiosity seekers
who would want to poke and peek.  Probably, Boo Radley would have a breakdown, or even
kill himself in his panic at being made into an exhibition.  For, in the thirties, there
were also not provisions made to protect people of diminished
capacities.

Clearly, Heck Tate's decision is an altruistic
one; it is also a wise one considering the times in which the narrative is
set.

How do Scout and Jem change during the course of the novel?from To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

To Kill a Mockingbird stands among
many novels in a genre often give the name of Bildungsroman, or the
novel of maturation.  In such a novel, the central character(s) are taken from an
ingenuous state and brought to an experienced and enlightened state, resulting from a
series of misadventures which compose the narration.  In the three years with which the
novel is concerned, Scout comes to abandon her childish superstitions of "haints" and
spectres such as Boo Radley and Mrs. Dubose; and, she learns to accept people for who
they are as individuals and not according to the gossips or stereotypes.  She also
learns  about religious and racial prejudice, as well as learning much about her own
father, whom she at one time has viewed "as a feeble old
man."

Both Scout and Jem learn about virtues, also.  From
Mrs. Dubose, Atticus, and Boo Radley, she apprehends the real meaning of courage.  For
instance, after Mrs. Dubose withdraws from morphine and dies with nothing for her pain,
Atticus tells Jem who has been reading to her until shortly before her
death,

I
wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a
man with a gun in his
hand.

The children learn
about fortitude from their father, as well, when he shoots the rabid dog, and when he
takes on the case for Tom Robinson, saying that he could not face his children if he
does not do so.  When the mob comes to the jail, Atticus does not waiver in his defense
of Tom's right to a trial.

Aware from his father that
justice should be administered regardless of race and class, the idealistic Jem
undergoes a maturation after the trial of Tom Robinson as he is faced with the
incongruity of what is right with reality.   Scout also learns about hypocrisy when the
Missionary Society feigns concern for the natives in Africa while they criticize their
maids.  On his part, Jem learns of hypocrisy, too.  He also learns to act maturely.  For
instance, when Jem tells Atticus that Dill is in their house, Scout becomes angry with
him for "telling on Dill," but Jem maturely realizes that Dill's mother wil be worried
when she discovers that he is missing.

Both Scout and Jem,
as well as their friend, Dill, learn several moral lessons in To Kill a Mockingbird.  As
she stands on the Radley porch, after having learned to "consider things from his point
of view," Scout even concludes that there is little else for her and Jem to
learn--except, perhaps, algebra.

Define linear equation and function?Are they the same? Why or why not?

A linear equation is an equation with one or more
variables but the degree of the highest of the  terms of the equation  is
one.

Example : 5x+3y = 10 ,  x+3y+z = 15 , 5x +8= 3x-7
etc.

A function is a relation between two sets in such a
way that every element of one set is reated to a unique element of the second set. A
linear function definitely is linear equation or viceversa. But the purpose and
perspectives of the equation and function is slighly different. We use function and
graph from the purpose of analysis of relation. In equation we want particular solution
of the variables.

Who is responsible for More's death in A Man for All Seasons?Explain with more in-depth detail.

I assume that you are referring to the death of Sir Thomas
More as depicted in the play, A Man for all Seasons, by Robert
Bolt, which has also been made into a movie. Although this play is based on the real
life of Thomas More, Chancellor of England, the playright has used "poetic license" to
infuse his own political thoughts into the action, so not everything that occurs in the
play is necessarily historically accurate. That, said, back to your
question.

In the play, Sir Thomas More, an important
government official and back in those days, affiliated with the Church of England,
refused to sanction King Henry VIII's divorce from Catherine of Aragon so that he could
marry his mistress, Anne Boleyn. More believed that this would be a sin because the
church did not sanction divorce. More's opponents included King Henry, Cromwell, Wolsey,
Cranmer, Chapuys, and Norfolk. In the play, they are depicted as being either corrupt,
evil, and/or power-hungry, more concerned with pandering to the king and thus keeping
their earthly power. More contends he answers to a higher
power.

In the play, the Spanish get involved because
Catherine is a Spanish princess. They plot to attack the king, telling More about it
hoping he will agree with them. More informs Norfolk of the plot, however, showing
loyalty to the King. More also refuses to speak against the king, and in the play, it
appears that Cromwell prosecutes him out of personal spite. Cromwell is the major
antagonist in the play. Eventually, More is executed after a convoluted series of legal
maneuvers for breaking the law.

You will no doubt receive
several opinions as to who is responsible for More's death, but my opinion is that it is
King Henry VIII. If he had not been so intent on having a son, no matter what it took,
the entire affair would not have even taken place. There would have been no attempted
divorce, there would have been no break with the church of England, and there would have
been no subject matter for the play in the first place. Henry was king and the buck
stops there. The way the monarchy was set up in those days, the king could have done
pretty much what he wanted, including stay the
execution.

Thomas More was eventually made a saint in the
Catholic Church.

In The Witch of Blackbird Pond, what are some quotes that describe Kit's character?

There are a number of quotes that point out Kit's impulsiveness, or tendency to act before she thinks.  After she insists on making a trip in the longboat, the narrator says "she already regretted this impulsive trip ashore."  A little later, when a little girl drops her toy in the sea, Kit reacts characteristically - "'Turn back, Captain,' she ordered impulsively."  Kit is aware of her inclination to act impulsively, and chides herself, "I am forever doing foolish things!" 

Kit is genuine and not shy or pretentious. When she meets John Holbrook, the narrator describes her direct response - "'I am Katherine Tyler,' she answered forthrightly."

Kit also has a strong, robust constitution, and is at home on the water.  The author says, "she had proved to be a natural sailor...certainly she had not spent the voyage groaning and retching like some of the passengers."

(all quotes are from Chapter 1)

How does Winston's behavior change in 1984?

In the beginning, Winston just goes through the daily routine of work and home, ever aware of Big Brother's presence everywhere. While his job requires him to rewrite "reality" according to the Party, he tries to remember his past. In his dreams, he envisions a place where there's peace. He feels cut off from everyone since relationships aren't allowed. This is why he gets involved with Julia and becomes friends with O'Brien. Winston's secret individuality gets him into trouble in the end, however. He's tortured and brainwashed until he loses his desire for individuality and says he loves Big Brother. He becomes an alcoholic who is only a shell of what he used to be once he gives into Big Brother.

Describe Connie's relationship with her mother, father, and sister.

`The opening sentences tell us much about her relationship to her mother and to her sister. Her mother is no longer pretty, and therefore criticizes her daughter about everything. "Stop gawking at yourself," she tells her. "You think you're so pretty?"  As for her father, he "was away at work most of the time and when he came home he wanted supper and he read the newspaper at supper and after supper he went to bed."  He doesn't talk much to her or the rest of the family either. June was "plain and steady," the good girl who does things right and therefore the yardstick against which Connie is measured.  For all of these reasons, Connie finds meaning in the music around her, which almost becomes her religion, and in this vulnerable state she becomes easy prey for the likes of Arnold Friend.

Ray Bradbury has often commented on how Fahrenheit 451 is not a novel about state censorship. What do you think he means? I have to write an essay...

The novel is not about state censorhisp so much as it is about the idiot masses.  You could analyze how Bradbury criticizes the ignorance inherent in popular culture. The novel is a warning about how easily the masses can be entertained and duped into leading a meaningless existence.

Montag is blindly trudging through his life, living a very hollow existence. What real meaning does he have in his life? Mildred lives to watch her TV walls. She is overjoyed to be able to play a minor role in an interactive program, yet she could play a major role in her real life. However, she finds no meaning or relevance in her life with Montag, so she must live her life vicariously through the TV. The lack of meaning or purpose in her life is one reason she overdoses on the sleeping pills early in the novel.

Note too how the medics who arrive to save Mildred, inform Montag how busy they are with suicide attempts. Bradbury is making a statement about how people need books and ideas to develop meaning and purpose in their lives. The masses in Fahrenheit 451 are incapable of this; thus, the suicide rates are high.

Until Montag meets Clarisse, he is unaware of how pointless his life really is. Clarisse relishes the natural world and thinking and talking rather than simply being entertained. Once Clarisse helps Montag realize the power of ideas and the beauty of the natural world, he begins to change. Faber too is instrumental in this.

Why are Romeo and Juliet called "star-crossed lovers"?

A pair of
star=crossed lovers take their life,
Whose misadventured piteous
overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents" strife.
(1.1.6-8)

In the Prologue
of Romeo and Juliet that is spoken by the Chorus, who introduce the
play to the Elizabethan audience, the term "star-crossed" would be one quite familiar to
these Elizabethans. For, the stars are part of the Chain of Being. When one part of this
chain is upset, as in the stars, then there is disorder and chaos. So, when the stars
are taken out of their order, things go awry and fate changes the order of
things.

Therefore, when Romeo and Juliet have their stars
taken out of order and "crossed," they become fated lovers, lovers to whom misfortune
will come. Thus, their lives contain a destiny that will prove tragic for them. In
modern times, one would say that they have bad luck, such as when they meet and their
families are in a feud against one another; or, when Romeo happens upon Mercutio and
Tybalt fighting and he inadvertently kills Tybalt; or, when John cannot get the Friar's
message to Romeo because Mantua is quarantined; or, when Friar Laurence runs out of the
catacombs and Juliet is left alone to her fate.

I am reading Hamlet and was curious if there is "evil" revealed in the characters of the play.I am trying to find the evil in the characters such...

Concerning Shakespeare's Hamlet,
you're looking at the wrong character if you're looking at Hamlet for the presence of
evil.

Hamlet's killing of Polonius is a mistake.  He thinks
it's the king behind the arras when he kills
Polonius:

I
took thee for thy better.  (Act
3.4.32)

Hamlet can be accused
of cruelty in his treatment of Ophelia and Resencrantz and Guildenstern, but not evil. 
His treatment of those he hurts is the natural result of the wrongs they do him, as
least in part.  If he errs, it is in his going too far.

If
you want evil, examine Claudius.  He kills his brother, a sin on a level with Cain
killing Abel, then marries his brother's wife, which is seen as incest in his society. 
Once he knows Hamlet knows about his murder of King Hamlet, he arranges for Hamlet's
execution in England.  When that fails, he plots to underhandedly kill Hamlet by
unblunted sword and poison.

Finally, Claudius knows his
actions are evil and he knows he is eternally damned, but he still refuses to give up
his ill begotten gains, so to speak.  He would like to be forgiven, but he is unwilling
to give up what his sins helped him achieve.  As he says while
praying:

O,
what form of prayer

Can serve my turn?  'Forgive me my foul
murder'?

That cannot be, since I am still
possessed

Of those effects for which I did the
murder--

My crown, mine own ambition, and my
queen.

May one be pardoned and retain th' offence?  (Act
3.3.51-56)

If you're looking
for evil, Claudius is your man.

In Chapter 18, why does Judge Taylor not hold Mayella in contempt of court?

In chapter 18, Atticus questions Mayella on the stand. She is as nervous as her father had been on the stand. Atticus is polite but thorough, and Mayella's struggles to keep her story straight.

Mayella is questioned about her father, as well. She tries to explain that he is fine unless he drinks. There are times that she seems as if she is going to break down and tell the truth, but she does not.

When Atticus questions her as to why no one heard her scream, and tries to get her to admit it was her father that beat her up, Mayella starts to cry. She tells Atticus that all the social niceties, calling her ma'am and such,  are not going to get her to say what Atticus wants. At this point she breaks down into sobs, and refuses to answer any more questions.

Mayella's lack of knowledge of the legal protocols expected of her was evident at this point.

"I guess if she hadn't been so poor and ignorant, Judge Taylor would have put her under the jail for the contempt of court she had shown everybody in the courtroom." (188)  Because Mayellla was ignorant of the rules she was breaking, it would serve no purpose to charge her with contempt of court, and there would be no one to come forward with money to bail her out.

Why does Bernard hesitate to intervene in the conflict?Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

In Aldous Huxley's Brave New World,
Bernard Marx is a self-serving person who brings John the Savage back to the New World
in order to advance himself and put the Director, who is John's real father, into a
compromising position because he has threatened to have Bernard
exiled.

However, things do not go as Bernard has planned. 
So, in Chapter 16 when Mustapha Mond calls Bernard and the Savage in after the incident
at the hospital, he asks John if he does not "like civilization," and John frankly
answers no:

readability="12">

Bernard started and looked horrified.  What
would the Controller think?  To be labelled as the friend of a man who said that he
didn't like civilization--said it openly and, of all people, to the Controller--it was
terrible.  'But, John,' he began.  A look from Mustapha Mond reduced him to an abject
silence.

As Mond continues to
interrogate John, Bernard sinks into "a yet more hopeless misery."  Clearly, then,
Bernard is pusillanimous and only interested in saving himself from any situation.  So,
in Chapter 15 when John attempts to bring freedom to the "khaki mob" by throwing out
their soma and urging them to think for themselves, Bernard
whispers, "He's mad....They'll kill him.  They'll...." and he worries for himself.  But,
suddenly, Helmholtz is at the side of John, demonstrating the sharp contrast between him
and Bernard.

"They're done for," Bernard thinks, but he
does run forward, "urged by a sudden impulse."  However,
he

thought
better of it and halted; then ashamed, stepped forward
again; then again thought better of
it , and was standing in an agony of humiliated indecision--thinking that
they might be killed if he didn't help them, and
he might be killed if he did--when
(Ford be praised!), goggle-eyed and swine-snouted in their gas-masks, in ran the
police.

Indecisive and weak,
Bernard fears for himself.  And, in truth, he does not really wish to rebel completely
as his exclamation--Ford be
praised!--indicates.

Give one example of "Much Ado About Nothing" in the play.

Much Ado's main focal point and plot device is the readiness of the characters to accept error and misinformation.  This is a common method of comedy in Shakespeare's plays. Don John's false presentation of Hero is the most important incident in a series of erroneous reports and misunderstandings.  While Don John, the evil brother, and his cohort maliciously mislead their intended victims, Don Pedro benevolently tricks Benedick and Beatrice.  Dogberry is fully capable of confusing himself and everyone else. 

Disguise, another source of error, is also a prominent motif in the play.  At the masque in 2.1, Beatrice and Benedick converse in masks, and their dialogue, more bitter and biting than usual, marks the extreme extent of their hostility.  In the same scene Claudio is pretending to be Benedick when Don John tells him that Don Pedro loves Hero.  More important, the play turns on Margaret's use of a disguise, Hero's clothes, as part of Don John's plot to slander Hero.  The episode is lent futher mystery and confusion by being only reported (in 3.3 by Borachio and in 4.1 by Claudio) and not actually seen on stage.

In act 2 scene 3 of Shakespeare's Macbeth, identify and explain an example of verbal irony.

There are numerous examples of verbal irony in the conversation between Macbeth, Macduff and Lennox soon after their arrival at his castle, Inverness. The king had lodged there for the night and Macduff enquires after him:

Is the king stirring, worthy thane?

Macbeth replies:

Not yet.

There are two samples of verbal irony. First in Macduff's simple question and second in Macbeth's even simpler reply. Firstly, Macduff calls Macbeth 'worthy', meaning a person who deserves respect, praise and commendation for the good that he/she has done, but Macbeth is far from 'worthy.' He is, in fact despicable and not deserved of any praise for he has just committed a foul deed. He murdered his cousin, the king, whilst he was sound asleep and therefore defenceless. Although he had his guards with him, they were in a drunken stupor and hardly responded when Macbeth committed his heinous crime. It is therefore deeply ironic that Macduff should call him 'worthy.' This is also an example of dramatic irony for the audience knows what Macbeth has done but Macduff and Lennox do not.

Macbeth's reply is ironic since he knows that it is impossible for the king to make any move. He, Macbeth, has made sure of that. He killed Duncan but replies as if there is a possibility that the king might stir, i.e. awaken, but Duncan has been untimely sent to his eternal rest.

Further irony lies in the fact that Macduff mentions that he has 'almost slipped the hour' in meeting the king, and he has actually missed meeting the king, forever. Macbeth's statement' 'I will bring you to him' is further irony, for his words imply that the king is still alive, when he is not.

Added to this is Macduff's statement about this being a 'joyful trouble' for Macbeth without realising how true his words actually are. Macbeth expresses the fact that his duty to take care of his liege, 'physics pain,' i.e. it is a soothing balm or medication to what strife or pain he may be experiencing, is entirely correct, but not in the manner that Macduff understands it.

Macbeth had been in torment about killing his king and has now been relieved that the deed has actually been done. Furthermore, he has now removed the biggest stumbling block in his aspiration to be king. With the king dead, it would be much easier for him to ascend the throne.  

What indications are there at the end of chapter 7 that Tom and Daisy are going to stay together despite his affair and her love for Gatsby?Chapter...

Gatsby has lost Daisy by the end of chapter seven in
The Great Gatsby.  The issue is decided by
then.

It's actually decided earlier in the chapter, when
Daisy says to Gatsby:  "...you want too much!"   She
continues:

"I
love you now--isn't that enough?  I can't help what's past."  She began to sob
helplessly.  "I did love him once--but I loved you
too."

But that
isn't enough.  Gatsby's illusion is that he and Daisy have a
special love, a love that transcends the norm.  For Gatsby's illusion to be complete, he
needs Daisy to have always loved him (since their relationship five years earlier).  He
needs her to have married Tom only for money, rather than for love.  And Daisy won't lie
and say this is so. 

Interestingly, even if Daisy were to
later change her mind and choose Gatsby, Gatsby's dream would remain shattered.  For the
relationship to be equal to his illusion of it, Daisy has to have always loved him and
him only.  And that, Daisy insists, was not the case. 

Tom
knows he's won when he tells Daisy to go ahead and ride home with Gatsby, because, he
says,

He
[Gatsby] won't annoy you.  I think he realizes that his presumptuous little flirtation
is over." 

Nick knows, and
Daisy knows, too.  Gatsby probably knows, also, although he still refuses to give
up. 

It's important to note that Daisy's choice is not
about money--Gatsby has plenty of money, and he certainly leads a more exciting life
than Tom.  He has the nicer shirts, remember, and he's the one who throws the great
parties. 

Three ways that the conversation and relationship between Pony and Cherry fit the appearance vs. reality theme.

Both Ponyboy and Cherry appear to epitomize the gangs to
which they are affiliated: Pony's haircut, stance and closeness to his brothers
contrasts with Cherry the cheerleader riding in cars with boozed up Soc's. However, each
of them have hidden depths. Cherry chooses to discuss the sunsets they both share and
Pony discusses his love of reading. They are able to open up to each other in a unique
way.

A fourteen year old boy would be expected to have a
crush on a beautiful seventeen year old who is prepared to talk to him, yet Pony seems
more captivated by her honesty than any lustful desires. Similarly Cherry unexpectedly
comments on how much Pony looks as handsome as his older brother,
Soda.

Both Pony and Cherry can see that there is something
beyond gang loyalty - sincerity, integrity and respect. These values can -and do -
transcend gang loyalty for both of these characters.

What is the point of view of "Tess of the D'Urbervilles"? What was the conflict?

In response to what is the point of view of the novel: Hardy uses 3rd person omniscient point of view, which means he presents the story as it is understood by various characters so that we know the thoughts of many, and Hardy includes a strong narrative voice to guide the reader interpret the story. Here is an example of the narrative voice guiding the reader: “It is a vale whose acquaintance is best made by viewing it from the summits of the hills that surround it--except perhaps during the droughts of summer. An unguided ramble into its recesses in bad weather is apt to engender dissatisfaction with its narrow, tortuous, and miry ways” (Ch 2). Here the point of view is inside the mind of the protagonist: “As for Tess Durbeyfield, she did not so easily dislodge the incident from her consideration. She had no spirit to dance again for a long time, though she might have had plenty of partners; but ah! they did not speak so nicely as the strange young man had done” (Ch 3). I include conflicts in a separate answer.

What new perspectives (that we have not seen in the play thus far) on political intrigue and ambition do Lady Macduff and her son provide?story of...

The murder of Macduff's family in Act 4.2 of Shakespeare's
Macbeth reveals new heights of Macbeth's ambition, and of what he
is politically willing to do to maintain power.

Perhaps I
should say "new lows" of ambition and political intrigue are revealed.  The killing of
Macduff's family serves no strategic purpose.  It is petty and motivated only by
Macbeth's being insulted by Macduff.  It is revenge ordered for petty reasons, and is
not directly related to Macduff's going to England to join Malcolm.  Macbeth is, in
effect, being a big baby here, as well as a bully.  He can't get to Macduff because he
is in England (a more powerful nation), so he lashes out at Macduff's family.  Of
course, such immaturity and ruthlessness and impetuosity are dangerous in a
tyrant.

Of course, dramatically, this kicks up Macbeth's
level of evilness.  Ordering the deaths of Banquo and Fleance is bad enough, but at
least they were, indeed, in the way of Macbeth's maintaining power for himself and any
heirs he might conceive.  But ordering the death of Macduff's family is without reason
and petty.  And it displays Macbeth's evil nature to be worse that even previously
revealed.

Discuss Frankenstein from a Darwinian perspective. this is my essay topic. but i don't have any idea. plz help me

This is an intriguing and difficult topic in that
Frankenstein was written several decades before Charles Darwin
conducted his famous research. However, this does not mean that one cannot analyze the
novel from a Darwinian perspective.

Two items stand out
immediately when one attempts to view the novel in this light. The first item concerns
Victor Frankenstein’s method of assembling the creature. Remember, Victor raids “charnel
houses”, “the dissecting room”, and “the slaughter house” for his materials to assemble
his creation. One might argue that Victor is selective in his choice of material;
otherwise, he would have simply attempted to reanimate one specific dead body. From the
Darwinian perspective, Victor’s collection method could be viewed as some form of
natural selection. If one connects this idea with the creature’s superhuman abilities,
one can arguably see a rudimentary form of evolution.

This
idea can be further discussed when one analyzes the second possible Darwinian item found
in the novel. The traditional Romantic view of the novel sees the creature as a lonely
individual in need of a friend and companion. After all this is the reason the creature
gives for wanting Victor to create a companion creature. However, Victor destroys the
second creature because he fears the result of the creatures’ union would be children.
Indeed, Victor fears that “a race of devils would be propagated upon the earth.”
 Clearly, Victor is viewing the situation from a scientific perspective, one that could
arguably be called Darwinian. Victor’s fear is that a race of creatures would “make the
very existence of the species of man a condition precarious.” In other words, a race of
creatures may replace the human species as the dominant life form on earth in a manner
similar to the Darwinian view of human evolution.

Further
items from the novel that may be relevant to this topic include the creature’s rapid
intellectual development and Robert Walton’s impression of the creature. More details of
the two primary concepts mentioned can be found in Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the
novel.

How has Winston's environment changed, what does he do with his time, and how does he show his obedience to the Inner Party?

Winston is being held in a prison cell that is bleak and frightening in its isolation.

He spends his time repeating 2+2=5. "God is Power" and"Freedom is Slavery" to remind himself of the pointlessness of resistance.

He complies with them by betraying Julia to escape more torture.

In Act III, scene I , what does Banquo suspect about Macbeth?I am really confused on this question , it shows me to answers but I don't know which...

Banquo has good reason to be suspicious of Macbeth--to think Macbeth killed Duncan and to be afraid that his own life and his son Fleance's life are in danger. Even before Duncan's body is discovered by Macduff, Banquo was acting extremely cautiously for a man who was a guest in another man's castle. In Act 2, Scene 1, Banquo is carrying his sword. As the scene opens he gives it to Fleance, but then where he sees someone coming he says

Give me my sword--Who's there?

It is Macbeth, who is planning to murder King Duncan. But Macbeth knows he should also murder the King's two sons, Malcolm and Donalbain, because they stand in the way to his succession to the throne. This is a big undertaking for one man. He cautiously sounds Banquo out about joining him in a conspiracy, since they have the same interests. Banquo cannot have his heirs become kings until Duncan and his sons are disposed of, and according to the witches' prophecies Macbeth will have to become king before Banquo's  prospects can be realized. Here is the pertinent dialogue in Act 2, Scene 1:

BANQUO
All's well.
I dreamt last night of the three Weird Sisters.
To you they have showed some truth.

MACBETH
I think not of them.
Yet, when we can entreat an hour to serve,
We would spend it in some words upon that business,
If you would grant the time.

BANQUO
At your kindest leisure.

MACBETH
If you should cleave to my consent, when 'tis,
It shall make honor for you.

BANQUO
So I lose none
In seeking to augment it, but still keep
My bosom franchised and allegiance clear,
I shall be counseled.

MACBETH
Good repose the while.

BANQUO
Thanks, sir. The like to you.

Banquo knows that Macbeth has as good as asked him to join him in an assassination plot. He turns Macbeth down. Banquo knows that Macbeth wants to become king immediately. As king, Macbeth would be an even greater threat to Banquo and Fleance than he is now. Macbeth would have much greater power to injure Banquo and his son, even to have them executed on some trumped-up charge. Banquo does not want to be a traitor and an assassin, and he knows that his best strategy is to wait. If the prophecies of the Weird Sisters are accurate, then he will have to be dead before his heirs become kings. He would like to live many more years, and it might actually be many more years before their prophecies concerning him are realized. As it turns out, Macbeth becomes king, then Malcolm becomes king in his place, Banquo is dead, and still the prophecies regarding Banquo's sons and grandsons have yet to be fulfilled.

What Banquo suspects is that Macbeth killed Duncan and that Macbeth is capable of doing anything. If Macbeth can kill the king, he certainly wouldn't have qualms about killing Banquo and Fleance. And Banquo knows that Macbeth must have a motive to do so, because Macbeth would not want to kill Duncan for Banquo's benefit. Macbeth himself speaks of this in a soliloquy in Act 3, Scene 1.

For Banquo's issue have I filed my mind;
For them the gracious Duncan have I murdered,
Put rancors in the vessel of my peace
Only for them, and mine eternal jewel
Given to the common enemy of man
To make them kings, the seeds of Banquo kings.
Rather than so, come fate into the list,
And champion me to th' utterance.

Macbeth frequently talks about opposing Fate itself. This is the only thing that makes him seem heroic. Here where he says "champion me," he is challenging Fate to come and fight him in a formal combat. It might be said that the main conflict in the play is between Macbeth and Fate, with Macbeth the protagonist and Fate the antagonist. In the end Fate proves invincible. Fate intends for Macbeth to die, just as it intends for all of us to die. It is always invincible. Fate can be visualized as a black knight astride a black horse with his face hidden by a black helmet.

What is the difference between a relative maximum or minimum and an absolute maximum or minimum value?

An extreme point of a function is found by differentiating
the expression of the function and, after that, solving the equation of the
differentiated function.

In the point where the first
derivative is cancelling, the function has a minimum or maximum
point.

We know that maximum or minimum points could be
either relative, or absolute. The relative maximum or minimum is also called the local
maximum or minimum. That means that the tangent to the graph of function in the point
where the first derivative is cancelling, is horizontal but is not the highest or lowest
value of the function.

An absolute maximum or minimum is
the point where the tangent is horizontal and there is no other value of the function
higer or lower than this one.

Note that the relative
maximum or minimum could be an absolute maximum or minimum.

Can The Great Gatsby of F.Scott Fitzgerald and Dickens' Great Expectations be compared? The two books The Great Gatsby of F.Scott Fitzgerald...

In my mind, the most interesting contrast is in the way
that the more optimistic ending of Great Expectations contrasts
with the ending of The Great Gatsby.  So much of the build up in
downtrodden guy makes it big to get the girl stories leads up to this climax, and in
Gatsby everything is falling apart.  It becomes clear that Daisy is
using everyone in sight and can't be honest, even with herself.  But as Pip gets to know
Estella better, she becomes in many ways more and more of a proper object of his
affection and efforts, in many ways the opposite of Daisy who starts as a somewhat
admirable character but very quickly becomes worthy of contempt.  The way that these two
objects of affection diverge at the climax of the two novels is particularly intriguing
in my mind.

What does Twain think about past, present, and future of America, her politics and history in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?Find evidence to...

One of the things that is important to note about Twain
and his views on politics and culture of the United States is that many people felt he
got deeper into the heart of things than many of his peers and thats why his opinion was
so valuable.  William Dean Howells, the editor of The Atlantic Monthly described him as
follows

It is
in vain that I try to give a notion of the intensity with which he [Mark Twain] pierced
to the heart of life, and the breadth of vision with which he compassed the whole world.
... Emerson, Longfellow, Lowell, Holmes—I knew them all and all the rest of our sages,
poets, seers, critics, humorists; they were like one another and like other literary
men, but Clemens was sole, incomparable, the Lincoln of our
literature.

In terms of his
view of politics, in "The Edge" he wrote:

readability="7">

The political and commercial morals of the United
States are not merely food for laughter, they are an entire
banquet.

He often was very
cynical about the way that the government operated and about most people in positions of
power.

He was pretty positive about the potential of
Americans and the early direction of the country but had grown somewhat cynical as
evidenced by the following quote from a speech he gave in
1890:

We are
called the nation of inventors. And we are. We could still claim that title and wear its
loftiest honors if we had stopped with the first thing we ever invented, which was human
liberty.

If you read his
novels and his short stories, he clearly has a belief in the goodness of the human
character and the ability of people to be good and to make good decisions and care for
each other, but he is also more than happy to point out their flaws and the fact that
often the most celebrated and famous cannot stand up to the actions of the good and
downtrodden people of the world and of the worlds of his
stories.

How is "A Jury of Her Peers" a more fitting title than Trifles?

"Trifles" means small things, insignificant details.  While it is these "trifles" that give away Minnie's guilt, the women are the only ones who pick up on them.  They put themselves in her shoes as any one of them might have done the same thing had they been in her situation.  They recall the Minnie they knew before her marriage and all see what being married to such a cold man and isolated in such an unforgiving setting have done to the once happy girl who sang.

The women are her peers...not the men who are actually there to gather evidence against her.  The women make a decision collectively to hide the things that would have convicted Minnie.

The reader wonders whether or not the men would have even discovered the evidence which condemns Minnie.  They didn't take time to notice anything other than her unkept household. If the women had not been there to pick up a few things for her, perhaps Minnie's story would never have been told.  They are "trifles" to the men, but they are the every day misery which tell the story of Minnie's neglectful and demoralising existence.

What was one external conflict Charlie Gordon had in the book?

In harmony with the above comments, Charlie struggled with fitting in: when he lacked intelligence he always allowed things to happen to himself in order to amuse Joe, Frank, et al and as his intelligence increased he had trouble fitting in with those who weren't as smart as he had become especially Ms. Kinnian because he would talk about concertos, math, and many languages and those less intelligent people were unable to comprehend. So on both ends of the spectrum Charlie struggled with acceptance.

Describe Fortunato's character in "The Cask of Amontillado."

Fortunato appears to be an extreme extrovert. He likes to get drunk. He has a lot of money and evidently enjoys spending it on his own enjoyment. He is wearing a jester's costume when Montresor encounters him on the street. People generally choose costumes that represent what they think of themselves, how they would like others to perceive them, and/or what they would like to be. Fortunato would like to be thought of as a very funny fellow, but if he has really injured Montresor a thousand times, then he is the kind of "funny fellow" who likes to inflict pain. The court jesters of old were often cruel in their jests because they had the protection of a powerful patron. The grave digger in Hamlet says that Yorick, the king's jester, poured a bottle of wine over his head one time. That may have amused the king and his guests, but the victim would not have been amused. King Lear's fool is constantly saying hurtful truths to Lear and to others. Many of the "injuries" Montresor suffered from Fortunato may have been painful digs that hurt his pride. Montresor describes Fortunato as "a man to be respected and even feared."

What is the setting of The Count of Monte Cristo?

This question can be answered in two ways. 

First, when it comes to setting from a temporal point of view, the story takes place during the time of the decline of Napoleon's empire. More precisely, the story starts in 1815 and it ends in 1844. 

Second, when it comes to location, the story mostly takes place in Paris. Most of the major events of the book are in Paris, which make sense because the Count of Monte Cristo (Edmond) is reintroduced into society as a wealthy nobleman. 

Other places are also important. Marseilles is where Edmond is from. This is his hometown, where his father was and died as well as where he fell in love with Mercedes. This is also where he was framed. 

Rome, Greece, and Constantinople also play important roles. For example, Edmond emerged in Rome after nearly a decade (after his escape) and makes friends with Albert de Morcerf, who in turn introduced him to Parisian society. 

Retell the main events that Jerry might tell his best friend or to his own son later in life.This question is from "Through the Tunnel."

A good place to start with this question would be to think
about what Jerry himself has learned or gained from this experience - or perhaps more
precisely, how he has changed as a result of going through the tunnel. This would give
you a focus point to start your answer. I guess one of the things you would have to
focus on is what Jerry is like before - think about his relationship with his mother and
how he reacts to the boys he sees diving and the need he feels to be accepted - and then
how he has after - again with his mother and his apparent lack of desire to be with the
boys again. Of course, you will also need to spend time focussing on the actual journey
through the tunnel itself - the sense of danger and the very real threat of drowning
that Jerry underwent. And no doubt you will need to spend time closing with the sense of
elation he felt on achieving his task! Hope this helps - just a few pointers to guide
you.

Discuss the theme of social criticism in the way of the world?

When Charles II ascended to the throne again and monarchy
was restored in 1660, the then English society got relief from the suppression of the
stern Puritan rules. But, this led the society to over-indulgence of sensual pleasure
and immoral acts. The king himself was not a moral human at all. The society started
losing their sense of priority. Immoral acts enveloped the society's good sides. While
theaters were being flourished, writers & dramatists were patronized by the
rulers, bad poets & notorious actors-actresses took birth (ref: John Dryden's
McFlecknoe). Women were being disregarded and felt insecure. So,
most of the women's primary goal became to charm men, and to make their own future
secure anyhow. They used to pass time by gossiping, playing cards, having walks in the
park with their male admirers, whereas, men used to pass time playing cards and drinking
chocolate at the chocolate house. Extra-marital affair was a common phenomenon among the
couples. But, neither husband nor wife expressed their internal feelings in front of
others even if they hated each other. They always wore a facade. This was the condition
of the Restoration society.

These social behavior and
manners are depicted in many plays by playwrights like William Congreve, Richard
Brinsley Sheridan of the age. The main target of such witty, satiric comedies is the
society as a whole, not a particular theme or character, since the purpose of the play
is to teach a moral via highlighting the social follies and criticising the manners and
customs of the society.

Congreve's The Way of the
World, shows many a portraits: Mirabell as a beau already done harm to Mrs.
Fainall, Millament as a beautiful young lady feeling inertly insecure who always remains
surrounded by some foolish men, Marwood's making love with the husband of Mrs. Fainall,
Marwood's habit of eavesdropping and harming Mirabell & Milament being refused
by Mirabell, Mrs. Fainall's wedding to Fainall to secure her future, and most
importantly, Lady Wishfort's untiring willingness to make herself look young &
beautiful and thus making herself more vulnerable, all these portraits are exact
depiction of 18th century urban society. Through witty dialogues and careful handling of
the plot, Congreve has superbly made it a successful Restoration comedy which is a
social critique.

In chapter 40, how does Pip's discussion with Jaggers disabuse him of the notion that Miss Havisham has been his patron? (Great...

This chapter in Great Expectations is
a pivotal one to the theme of Appearances vs. Reality.  For, after Magwitch appears at
the residence of Pip and Herbert and explains his history, Pip realizes that he has been
disillusioned all along about the identity of his benefactor. With this new knowledge,
he goes to Mr. Jaggers. 

First of all, Jaggers is very wary
when Pip appears and cautions him,

readability="6">

Don't commit yourself' said Mr. Jaggers, 'and
don't commit anyone.  You
understand--anyone.

When Pip
says that he has been informed by a person named Abel Magwitch that "he is the
benefactor so long unknown to me," Mr. Jaggers makes only the comment, "That is the
man...--in New South Wales."  He does not acknowledge to Pip, however, that he is aware
that Provis/Magwitch is in London because, by law, he would have to report Magwitch: 
"Don't commit yourself."

Mr. Jaggers, instead,
declares,

readability="11">

I communicated to Magwitch in--New South
Wales--when he first wrote to me--from New South Wales--the cation that he was not at
all likely to obtain a pardon, that he was pexpatriated for the term of his natural
life, and that his presenting himself in this country would be an act of felony,
rendering him liable to the extreme penalty of the
law.

So, while Jaggers
confirms for Pip that Magwitch is the true benefactor, he entertains no more
conversation about Magwitch.  Jaggers also gives Pip no consolation for his
disappointment and disillusionment:

readability="7">

Not a particle of evidence, Pip...ake nothing on
its looks; take everything on evidence.  There's no better
rule.

What problems were mentioned in The Scarlet Ibis and why are they problems?Can you give me four problems and why?

The most central problem is that Doodle is born disabled.  This is a conflict of man vs. society.  In the time period of the story, the disabled had very little chance for a normal life.  Doodle will grow up needing medical care that isn't available, and will face being an adult without ever being able to get a job and support himself.

Other social conflicts that are mentioned include drought and crop failure.  As the boys live in an agricultural community, these problems mean a lack of income for local families, less money to pay for food and for doctors, which directly affects Doodle and his brother.

The narrator has a few internal struggles.  He does not like having a disabled brother, and feels ashamed of Doodle.  This is a problem because it forces him to push Doodle to improve.  Although this causes some good changes, it also leads to bullying and eventually to Doodle's death.

Doodle himself has an internal struggle.  Doodle wants to please his brother.  He feels that is a failure to his family and he wants to be accepted, as most people do.  He allows his brother to push him and takes his failures very personally.  This also helps to lead to his death.

"compliments of the season" by o henry. -----------------------In "Pigeon" McCarthy's pocket was a section of one-inch gas-pipe eight inches...

In putting these two things together, the author is trying
to tell us in a humorous way that One-ear Mike is a criminal and that he has come from a
family of criminals.

Brass knuckles are, of course, used
mainly by criminals.  There is not much of a legal use for something like that.  When
the author says that they are an heirloom, he is implying that Mike's set of brass
knuckles has been handed down to him from his ancestors.  This implies that Mike's
ancestors were criminals just like he is.