Given the point (a,2) and the point
(3a,-5).
We need to find the distance in terms of
a.
We will use the distance between two points formula to
calculate.
==> We know that
:
D = sqrt[ (x1-x2)^2 + (y1-y2)^2
]
==> D = sqrt( a-3a)^2 +
(2+5)^2]
==> D = sqrt(4a^2 +
49)
Then the distance between the points in
terms of a is :
D
= sqrt(4a^2+49)
Laissez-faire capitalism is an economic system. Capitalism
involves the ownership of property by individuals. The individual's goal is to use this
property, or capital (buildings, machines, and other equipment used to produce goods and
services), to create income. Individuals and companies compete with one another to earn
money. This competition between companies determines the amount of goods produced and
the prices company owners may demand for these goods. The French term laissez-faire
literally means "to let people do as they wish." Thus, supporters of laissez-faire
capitalism do not want the government to interfere in business matters, or if
governments do involve themselves in business matters, to keep government influence to a
minimum. Although the economies of the United States and many other industrialized
nations are highly capitalistic, there is no pure capitalist system because national
governments regulate business to some
degree.
Further Information:
Buchanan, James M., and Dwight R. Lee. "Having It Both Ways."
Forbes. February 27, 1995, p. 87; "Laissez-Faire." Funk
and Wagnalls.com. [Online] Available target="_blank">http://www.funkand
wagnalls.com/encyclopedia/getpage.asp?book=FWENCOnline&page=015000081.asp,
October 30, 2000; Reisman, George. "Toward the Establishment of Laissez-Faire
Capitalism." Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics. [Online]
Available target="_blank">http://www.capitalism.net/Laissez-Faire%20capitalism.htm,
October 30, 2000.
In Chapter XVII of Voltaire's famous satire, Candide and
his servant Cacambo, in desperate straits, reach Eldorado where they are amazed at the
riches, as well as the cultivation of the country for both utility and aesthetic
pleasure. As they enter a village, the two men notice children playing
quoits happily, using balls of gold and precious gems as carelessly as if
they were stones. At a resplendent house, they smell delicious cooking and hear
delightful music. When Cacambo approaches the house and hears his native tongue spoken,
he tells Candide that he will be his interpreter. They are graciously invited to have
dinner with the owners of the home, who are amused when Candide and Cacambo offer to pay
for their meal with the "stones" of Eldorado.
Eldorado is a
land of plenty where no one wants for food or any of the necessities of life. They all
worship one God; everyone is a priest so there is no need for the hierarchy of a
traditional religion:
"What! You have no monks who teach, argue, rule,
plot, and burn people who don't agree with them?"
"We'd be
mad if we did," said the old man. "We all agree with each other here, and we don't know
what you mean when you talk about your
monks."
As the two men are
shown around the town, they see buildings that rise to the clouds, and market places
adorned with everything one could want. When Candide asks where the law courts are, he
is told that there are none; neither are there any prisons. Then, after their tour,
Candide and Cacambo are invited to a meal at the royal palace where His Majesty allows
them to kiss him on the cheeks as though he were a friend. At the dinner table, all the
conversations are "sparkling" and witty. Indeed, in Eldorado everyone is content; there
is no greed, no envy or jealousy, no lust, no false pride--none of the seven deadly sins
so fatal to happiness and spiritual progress. Clearly, Eldorado is a
utopia.
Your question works so well with the beginning of the very
last chapter of this wonderful novel:
But the question you want answered, I know, is
did they live happily ever after?
Yes ... and
no.
That is the exact (albeit
general) answer. However, now allow me to give you a few more specifics about the main
characters. To make it as simple as possible, I'll use a 1-10 happiness scale (with 1
being despair and 10 being bliss):
ROSCURO (7 on the
Happiness Scale): All Roscuro ever wanted was light. He achieves light at the end of
the story, ... with a twist. "He was allowed to go back and forth from the darkness to
the light. But, alas, he never really belonged in either place." He also gets an extra
"happy point" for managing "to shed some small light, some happiness into another
life." Roscuro tells the princess about the prisoner and allows that prisoner to be
united with his daughter: Miggery Sow.
MIGGERY SOW (7 on
the Happiness Scale): All she ever wanted was to be a princess (and eventually, all she
ever wanted was her "Ma"). Mig never gets either of those things. However, she does
get her dad who "treated her like [a princess] for the rest of his
days."
PRINCESS PEA (7 on the Happiness Scale): Due to the
loss of her mom, the queen, Princess Pea cannot be put above a 7. (The princess, of
course, has all of her mental capacity, unlike poor Mig.) She does, however, gain a
wonderful friend: Despereaux.
DESPEREAUX (7 on the
Happiness Scale): Due to the fact that Despereaux is and always will be in love with
Princess Pea, but cannot marry her, he can't achieve more than a 7 on the Happiness
Scale. "Even in a world as strange as this one, a mouse and a princess cannot marry.
But, reader, they can be friends. And they were. Together, they had many
adventures."
I truly adore the complexities of your
question. Why? It allows you, the reader, to truly think critically about the
characters and ascertain exactly how happy they become. "Did they live happily ever
after? Yes ... and no." That translates to a 7 on the scale for all of them. You
see, "happily ever after" implies living in bliss: a perfect 10. None of our main
characters live in bliss. Does anyone?
This emotion is love. When Jonas experiences the memory
of grandparents, he realizes that there is an emotion in the room that he has not
experienced before. He is perplexed. Jonas has never experienced love, because it does
not exist in the community. This occurs in chapter 16, page 123, when The Giver shares
his favorite memory.
When The Giver asks Jonas what he is
feeling, Jonas is uncertain:
“Warmth,” Jonas replied, “and happiness. And—let
me think. Family. That it was a celebration of some sort, a
holiday. And something else—I can’t quite get the word for
it.”
And on page
125:
Jonas
hesitated. “I certainly liked the memory, though. I can see why it’s your favorite. I
couldn’t quite get the word for the whole feeling of it, the feeling that was so strong
in that room.”“Love,” The Giver told
him.Jonas repeated it. “Love.” It was a word and concept
new to him.
Jonas considers
the impracticality of grandparents, but still likes the idea of love. On page
126:
“I liked
the feeling of love,” he
confessed.
Jonas states that
the memory shows a dangerous way to live. He says he is talking about the candle and the
fire, but he is really talking about love. Love is dangerous because it leads to
attachment. Attachment makes control difficult. There is no attachment in the
community, and control is considered most important.
The main issue with trying to describe the nature of the
epic is that the term is applied across a wide variety of poems from many different
cultures. The Greek term ἐπικός was originally used to refer to long narrative poems
performed orally, including the Homeric epics and the works of Hesiod. These two authors
alone illustrate the variability of epic forms, with one focusing on historical
narrative and the other on supplying information (e.g. the gnomology of Hesiod's "Works
and Days").
Within an oral-traditional culture, the poems
(or epics) that are performed and transmitted across generations are ones of cultural
importance. These may include ones which versify agricultural or religious calendars,
stories about gods and heroes, or other culturally important themes. Many epics have a
strong narrative component, but do not necessarily follow the rather restrictive
Aristotelian dramatic model described above. The necessity of oral composition means
that many examples of oral-traditional epos use extensive
repetition, formulaic elements of plot, scene, and story, flat characters, and concrete
world views.
The advent of literacy expanded verse genres
in many cultures, and epic based on received traditional models developed many variants.
Long didactic poems remained common, ranging from Lucretius' "De Rerum Natura" to Pope's
"Essay on Man". As well as traditional heroic epics such as the Norse sagas, one also
encounters mock epics such as "Orlando Furioso" or "Don Juan", extended epistles in
verse, and modern long poems such as Walcott's "Omeros". Although some have a
traditional narrative arc, many do not.
Although one can
talk about typical features of selected groups of epics, such as oral-traditional heroic
epics or mock epics, eventually the only universal quality is that they are long poems,
and that conventions vary depending on period and cultural
context.
The function is continuous over the interval [3;4] (the
function is discontinuously for x = 1 and x = 2). Also, the function, being continuous,
it could be differentiated over the range [3 ; 4].
We'll
apply Lagrange's theorem over the range [3 ; 4]:
f(4) -
f(3) = f'(c)(4 - 3), if c is in the range (3 ; 4).
f'(c) =
[f(4) - f(3)]/(4-3)
f(4) =
1/(4-1)(4-2)
f(4) = 1/6
f(3) =
1/(3-1)(3-2)
f(3) = 1/2
f(4) -
f(3) = 1/6 - 1/2
f(4) - f(3) =
(1-3)/6
f(4) - f(3) =
-1/3
Now, we'll determine
f'(x):
f'(x) =
[1/(x-1)(x-2)]'
f'(x) = [1/(x^2 - 3x +
2)]'
f'(x) = (-2x +
3)/[(x-1)(x-2)]^2
f'(c) = (-2c +
3)/[(c-1)(c-2)]^2
But, according to Lagrange's theorem,
we'll get:
f'(c) =
-1/3
f'(c) = (-2c +
3)/[(c-1)(c-2)]^2
(-2c + 3)/[(c-1)(c-2)]^2 =
-1/3
6c - 9 =
[(c-1)(c-2)]^2
The number c, located over the
range (3 ; 4), has to verify the identity
6c - 9 =
[(c-1)(c-2)]^2,
for Lagrange's
theorem to be valid.
It is an interesting question to consider how much a work
of fiction reflects the life and concerns of its author. When we examine this excellent
novel in this light, we are able to detect some similarities. Arundhati Roy herself
studied architecture like her heroine, Rahel, though now no longer pursues it.
Interestingly, given the massive success of this, her first novel, she has never written
another work of fiction. Instead, she has involved herself in protesting against a
variety of dam projects that threaten to uproot and disempower indigenous people. She
has been effective in using her celebrity status to champion such causes. We can see her
focus on the way that man alters nature for the worst in her description of the river in
Chapter Five:
One it had had the power to evoke fear. To
change lives. But now its teeth were drawn, its spirit spent. It was just a slow,
sludging green ribbon lawn that ferried fetid garbage to the sea. Bright plastic bags
blew across its viscous, weedy surface like subtropical
flying-flowers.
Note how
political opportunism and greed is said to be responsible for the "death" of this river.
Mankind's unthinking attempts to control nature and bend it to man's will are shown to
be destructive in every sense, which is a true theme of Roy's work in protesting against
large-scale damming schemes.
2- 5*l 2x-3 l <
7
First we will need to isolate the absolute values on the
left side.
Let us subtract 2 from both
sides.
==> -5*l2x-3l <
5
Now we will divide by -5 and reverse the
inequality.
==> l 2x-3 l >
-1
==> 2x-3 >
-1
==> 2x >
2
=> x >
1...............(1)
-(2x-3) >
-1
==> 2x-3 <
1
==> 2x <
4
==> x <
2...............(2)
Now we will
rewrite:
==> -1 < 2x-3 <
1
Add 3 to all
sides.
==> 2 < 2x <
4
Now we will divide by
2.
==> 1 < x <
2
Then the values of x belongs to the
interval (1, 2)
When a company seeks to gain entry into a new market,
there are many obstacles that it faces. They include factors like existing players
having economies of scale; when a new company makes an entry it usually starts off on a
small scale. There are large capital requirements in setting up entire production
facilities. Existing customers of companies already in the market and producing similar
goods to the new company may find the switching costs associated with moving custom to
the new company are too high to warrant a shift. New companies would also have to spend
a lot of resources in setting up completely new channels of accessing raw materials,
distributing their products, etc. In many cases, especially where the entry of foreign
companies is involved, there could be several restrictions placed by the
government.
An alliance is a good way of navigating around
several of these problems. The company already in the market will have a sound
production mechanism with access to suppliers and distributors; it has a customer
loyalty; and is largely free from government regulations.
A
new company seeking market entry can use these strengths in an alliance. They can in
turn infuse funds for the combined entity to expand and bring in new research and
technology to improve products and efficiency. An alliance saves a new company from many
of the risks associated with entry into a new market while allowing enjoyment of the
benefits.
After Pip goes to London to begin his education and
training to be a gentleman, he meets Herbert Pocket again as they become boarders
together at Barnard's Inn. While they eat supper, Herbert relates the tale of Miss
Havisham:
She was a spoiled child whose mother died when
she was a baby. The father, who was very rich and very proud, denied her nothing. He
had a brewery next to the Satis House and privately married his cook, who gave birth to
a boy. After the cook died, the father told his daughter what he had done; then, the
son began to reside in the house. But, he became a most disreputable young man,
riotous, extravagant and undutiful--so bad, in fact, the father had disinherited him,
but relinquished and left him well off.
When the letter
arrived and Miss Havisham read the contents, she closed Satis House, shutting out the
dark. Curtains were closed and candles lit as Miss Havisham became reclusive, and she
walked around the wedding cake.
Nevertheless Miss Havisham
was now an heiress, and was sought after. And, although her half brother had ample
means, he wasted them. Consequently, strong differences developed between the siblings
with the brother harboring a terrible grudge against her. Because of this antipathy
toward his sister, Arthur met another man, who later began to pursue Miss Havisham. As a
result, Miss Havisham came to adore him and gave him large sums of money. This man,
named Compeyson, coerced Miss Havisham to buy her brother out of the brewery so that
when he was her husband, he would hold and manage it
all.
Herbert's father had warned Miss Havisham about the
young man, but she angrily ordered him out of her house. Yet, the marriage day came and
the bridegroom sent a letter at 8:40. Miss Havisham fell ill, and after she recovered,
she laid wait to the place, and she has never since looked upon the light of
day. Herbert adds that the man who left Miss Havisham at the altar had conspired with
Arthur, and they split the money and were not seen
again.
Left alone, Miss Havisham is given a child ro raise
in the desolate house, a child named Estella. This child Miss Havisham molds
into a cruel young woman who will scorn and tease anyone of the male race. So, one day
Miss Havisham calls upon Pip to come to Satis House in order to have him play with
Estella, who ridicules his hands and boots, and mocks his calling the some of the face
cards "jacks" rather than "knaves." To Estella, Miss Havisham whispers, "You can break
his heart."
Pip, who is taken with Estella's beauty, looks
anew at himself and is ashamed as he returns to the forge. As a result, he desires to
become a gentleman in order to win the love of Estella.
I'll add a few things as well, concerning narration in
The Great Gatsby.
First, almost all
fiction is told in the past tense. Very little fiction uses present tense and tries to
make readers pretend that the story is occurring simultaneously with their reading of
it. It just doesn't work well.
Telling a story in the past
tense, after the events have occurred, doesn't make for a story told in flashback. It
makes for a story told in past tense. Nick's narration is no different from most other
fiction in this respect. He openly talks about the fact that he is writing about the
events after they've occurred, but that doesn't make the story
flashback.
A flashback reveals occurrences previous to the
present in the novel. When Nick describes Gatsby's pursuit of Daisy five years before
the novel opens, he is using flashback. The entire novel is not flashback,
however.
To add to what you know about the first-person
point of view, Nick is an unreliable narrator. That is always a possibility with any
narrator, but especially with a first-person
narrator.
Nick makes a point to inform the reader at the
beginning of the novel that he is objective and doesn't judge people. He uses an
anecdote to explain to the reader that his father taught him to not judge people,
because others didn't necessarily have all the advantages that he had. Nick emphasizes
that he always tries not to judge people.
Of course, this
shows that he often judges people. You don't have to excuse people for their
backgrounds if you don't judge them negatively to begin with. And you don't have to
concentrate on not judging people, if you don't judge
people.
And Nick often judges people. He condemns Tom
immediately, the first time he describes him, going back to his days at Yale with him.
He also judges Jordan when they first meet. He makes value judgments throughout the
novel.
I assume you are referring to The
Outsiders. In The Outsiders, there is reference to the
following poem:
Nature's first green is gold,
Her
hardest hue to hold.
Her early leafs a flower;
But only so an
hour.
Then leaf subsides to leaf.
So Eden sank to grief,
So dawn goes down to day.
Nothing gold can
stay.
This poem is called
"Nothing Gold Can Stay" by Robert Frost. The meaning of the poem is that everything
starts out young and innocent, but it cannot stay. Good is "the hardest hue to hold"
because there are so many influences just from living life that can corrupt us. When
Johnny tells Ponyboy to "stay gold" he means that he wants him to stay good, and not be
corrupted by the negative forces in the
world.
The Outsiders is a coming of
age story. Although Ponyboy is a good person, he gets caught up in gang life and ends
up going on the run after a boy dies. Throughout the story, Ponyboy keeps his good
heart and does manage to stay gold.
The major case in which the Supreme Court struck down a
New Deal program was the case of Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States (1935).
In this case, the Court struck down the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 -- one
of the major programs of the New Deal. The Court did so for two
reasons.
The first reason was one of separation of powers.
The Court ruled that the Congress had given away too many of its powers to the executive
branch. This was the case because Congress had let the Executive assign a group to make
broad policies (as opposed to Congress making the policies and letting the Executive
make rules to implement that policy).
The second reason had
to do with the definition of interstate commerce. The Court ruled that the federal
government could not regulate Schechter's poultry operation because the chickens
involved were no longer part of interstate commerce. Because the chickens had come to
"permanent rest" in the state of New York and were not going to cross state lines again,
the federal government could not regulate them. (This is because the federal government
can generally only regulate interstate commerce, not things that happen solely within
one state.)
For these two reasons, the Supreme Court struck
down the NIRA.
In Molière's comedy Tartuffe, we see
women who challenge or support the traditional roles of women in terms of the power
structures of Molière's time.
After Orgon introduces
Tartuffe—the scam artist who presents himself as a pious and holy man—into the
household, other members of the "family unit" are critical and
suspicious.
Madame Pernelle, Orgon's mother, refuses to
continue to live under the roof where the family refuses to heed the religious messages
of Tartuffe. Madame Pernelle would represent the devout followers of the religious
community who believed without opening their eyes, following the rhetoric when it was no
longer guided by faith, but by men (i.e.,
Tartuffe).
Orgon's wife Elmire, and his daughter Mariane
are presented as subservient women who will follow the dictates of the head of household
dutifully, even if it means their feelings—or even religious and social dictates—are
ignored. In terms of the power structure, these women have no free will, and would be
expected to conform without question. It is not until the end that Elmire devises a way
to show her husband what Tartuffe is really like—because even after all he has heard
from others, he will not believe what his wife says but must see (or hear it) for
himself.
The one female character who opposes the power
structures in the play is Dorine. Dorine (Mariane's maid) tries repeatedly to explain to
Orgon why Mariane's marriage to Tartuffe would be a mistake. It is she who tells Mariane
that she must refuse her father's wishes for the marriage (but Mariane is too obedient
to consider opposing her father). It is also Dorine who says she will come up with a
plan to make certain that Mariane and Valère do marry, while taking steps to guarantee
that the couple does not lose sight of their love for each
other.
Molière portrays three very different kinds of
women, within the society presented in his play.
This will be challenging because there are several layers
of ambiguity present. The first is the premise of "knowing thyself," to borrow a
Transcendental bromide. Whether or not anyone "knows themselves" and how one
demonstrates they do or do not know themselves is a challenge to prove. Outside of this
would be the perception of the man, himself. There will be some who will debate this
point out of dislike or support of the individual. To have to filter these two levels
out in assessing answer is going to be difficult. If one was to take the vision
presented in Dreams from My Father, it might help in assessing the statement because of
the limits set. The issue of how one deals with race and its impact on one's identity
might be how the statement can be addressed with knowing oneself. That is to say, that
Obama has addressed that the issue of race and ethnicity are challenging elements in
attempting to define oneself. Once an individual has understood the implications of
these forces on one's identity, then the individual has a better chance of understanding
the full dimensions of one's identity construction and stands a better chance of
success. The memoir does display this to a strong extent, in that individuals who are
of "the other" have to endure a bit more reflection to understand how race and other
social constructions impact who they are and how they are perceived. Understanding the
role of his father both in his life and outside of it, the function of his mother, and
his raising by his grandparents, as well as how society viewed him and how he viewed
himself are all parts of what Obama defines as "knowing himself" in the narrative.
Through this reflection and rumination, it is apparent that he understands more of
himself and can place himself in a position to succeed.
I believe that you meant to ask how would a boy
demonstrate his affect to his resentment at his father and feelings for his mother when
looking at Freud's Oedipus complex.
The answer depends on
whether the boy is manifesting positive complex or passive/negative oedipus complex. The
expected manifestations of Oedipus complex among males (according to the earlier
versions from Freud) argue that young boys would want to amorously connect with their
mothers to the point of envying their fathers. When the fathers react to this, the boys
experience phobias and anxieties called psychological castration. The opposite would
happen with little girls wanting to bond amorously with their fathers, substituting
their mothers and creating penis envy if they do not achieve their
wishes.
In modern days, however, these expected
manifestations have come to a different viewpoint. It is widely accepted and observed
how boys tend to gravitate towards their mothers while girls "the so-called daddy's girl
syndrome" tend to also connect in infancy with their fathers. It may or may not change
through time, but it does not show nearly as much intensity in emotion as Freud would
have expected to find under a controlled environment using specific participants to
prove his hypothesis.
In Shakespeare's Macbeth, Lady
Macbeth is a woman in a dominant man's world. She is extremely ambitious and
authoritative, and eager to make plans. At the opening of the play, she has a lot of
influence over Macbeth. Her only object for her ambition is her husband, however, as
was generally true for all women of that era. Any leading she does will have to come
through his position in society.
She is, of course, also
ruthless, and some might even say evil, although physically defeating a ruling monarch
through assassination or battle is somewhat the norm in Shakespeare's day, not to
mention 11th century Scotland.
She is also not quite so
ruthless as she wishes to be, and not quite so ruthless as she first appears. She prays
to her spirits to make her as ruthless as a male warrior (thus showing she has natural
limits to her ruthlessness). Then she cannot bring herself to kill Duncan because he
reminds her of her sleeping father. Finally, she mentally and emotionally breaks down
after Banquo, Lady Macduff, and the Macduff children and household are all slaughtered.
Those murders were not part of her original plan, and were more hideous than anything
she could cope with.
We'll write the numerator: 6x-8=2x+4x
-9+1
y=(6x-8)/(2x+1)=[(2x+1)/(2x+1)]+[(4x-9)/(2x+1)]
y=1+[(4x-9)/(2x+1)]
We'll
try to do the same with the ratio
[(4x-9)/(2x+1)]=[(2x+1+2x-1-9)/(2x+1)]=
[(2x+1)/(2x+1)]+[(2x-10)/(2x+1)]=1+[(2x-10)/(2x+1)]
So y
= 1+1+[(2x-10)/(2x+1)]
We'll follow the same
steps:
[(2x-10)/(2x+1)].
[(2x-10)/(2x+1)]=
[(2x+1-1-10)/(2x+1)]=1- [11/(2x+1)]
y=1+1+1-
[11/(2x+1)]
y=3-
[11/(2x+1)]
If y is integer, the fraction [11/(2x+1)] has
to be also an integer number. For this reason, (2x+1) has to be the divisor of the
number 11. So, (2x+1) could be:+1,-1,+11,-11.
Now, we'll
put (2x+1) = 1
2x=0, x=0 and is a natural number, so it
follows the
constraint
y=(6*0-8)/(2*0+1)
y=-8/1
y=-8
(2x+1)
= -1
2x=-2
x=-1, but "-1" is
not a natural number, so (2x+1) is different
from -1
(2x+1) =
11
2x=10
x=5 and is a natural
number.
y=(6*5-8)/(2*5+1)
y=22/11
y=2
(2x+1)
= -11
2x=-12
x=-6 and is not a
natural number.
The natural values of x, that
makes the ratio y integer, are: {0 ; 5}.
A prominent citizen of the village, Mr. Summers owns the
coal company, one of the main businesses of the area. Since he is married to "a scold"
and has no children, Mr. Summers is probably not socially active in the community.
Thus, as a businessman who represents cold capitalism and is alienated from the social
life by both his economic status and personal situation, Mr. Summers easily can be
distant and officious in performing his civic
duty.
Dispassionate and businesslike, Mr. Summers concerns
himself with the immediate by following procedures. For example, he has suggested that
a new black box should replace the old, worn one. He has been successful, however, in
replacing the wood chips for slips of paper. He compiles lists of families, heads of
families and the members in each family. In short, Mr.
Summers
was
very good at all this; in his clean white shirt and blue jeans, with one hand resting
carelessly on the black box, he seemed very proper and important as he talked
interminably to Mr. Graves and the
Martins.
Yet, by the fact
that he talks incessantly, there is a hint that Mr. Summers may be somewhat ill at
ease about his duties. Nevertheless, he conducts business: "...guess we better get
started, get this over with, so's we can go back to work. Anybody ain't here?" He
waits with "polite interest" when Mrs. Dunbar says that her husband is missing, and
makes a note on his list.
When Tessie Hutchinson's name is
drawn, Mr. Summers's voice is hushed and he says, "Let's finish quickly." This man
without imagination, education, or courage knows only the perfunctory proceedings of
business in which he has enveloped himself, so he desires an end to the proceedings to
which he has been assigned.
Social Realism developed as a reaction against idealism
and the exaggerated ego encouraged by Romanticism. With a new sense of social
consciousness, the social realists pledged to “fight the beautiful art”, any style which
appealed to the eye or emotions. They focused on the ugly realities of the contemporary
life and sympathized with working class people, particularly the poor. They recorded
what they saw in a dispassionate manner. It is known as social realism. And if we go
through dictionary- Social is a word that means living in company or convivial or
pertaining to society. The other meaning may be used as inter-dependent. If we live in
society we are called social. Realism means theory in regard to things in their true
nature or freedom from prejudice. Social Realism may be defined as reality of the
society - its culture, its customs contemporarial values all are included in social
realism. The word Social Realism is used by Arundhati Roy in a very profound and vivid
manner. In many incidents and situations, we feel as such things are just happening
before us.“The God of Small Things has it all : the echoes, calls and the cries of the
Earth. But more importantly, an intellectual daring. This... is not just an
extraordinary novel, but an uncoiling spring of human foreboding and inevitability. It
is quite simply unbeatable.”The God of Small Things is a great work by Arundhati Roy
which presents the glimpse of social realism, its true picture through many incidents
described in the novel. “In The God of Small Things, Roy creates a microcosm that
encompasses wife battleing in fidelity, molestation, emotional insecurity, pride and
death within one family in the Southern Indian state of Kerala.”2 Gender discrimination,
untouchability (a great evil of society, corrupt police administration, problems
& clashes of cultures, all are the best examples of social realism. In these
aspects, we can see the reality of the contemporaries.
The theme of
the novel is the confrontation between ‘The Big Man’ and ‘The Small Man’. In the novel
two small persons, Ammu and Velutha have to leave the world for the big things. “Even
later on the thirteen nights that followed this one instinctively, they stuck to the
small things. The Big things ever lurked inside. They knew that there was nowhere for
them to go. They had nothing. No future, so they stuck to the small things.”The God of
Small Things is a realistic portrayal of the gender discrimination prevalent in Indian
society. Ammu is the central character who yearns for pleasure and happiness and for a
life far from hurdles and constraints. As a little girl, Ammu had to face a lot of
worries and anxieties, fret and fever of life. She had to face the cruelty of her
father, Pappachi who used to beat her and her mother, Mammachi with a brass-vase. Ammu
was also deprived of the higher education. Pappachi thought that college education is
not at all useful for a girl
In The House on Mango Street,
Esperanza describes a guy whom Marin meets one night at a party. Marin does
not have a chance to get to know him; all she knows is that his name is Geraldo. Later
that night, he is in a car accident and rushed to the hospital. Marin goes with him,
but she cannot tell the doctors any details about him. On the literal level of the
story, Geraldo does not have a last name because he only has a brief relationship with
Marin at a local dance. However, on a figurative level, Geraldo is symbolic of many
young men who leave their home countries to find better lives in America. Near the end
of the vignette, there are references to men working any job they can get, living
frugally, and sending money home to family. This is the reality for many people, and
Geraldo is representative of this population. He, like many others, tries to find some
dreams in the Mango Street area, but loses his dreams to harsh
reality.
As you say, the stock market crash did not cause the
Depression all by itself. But it did help, and the buying of stocks on margin was a
major reason that it did so.
Buying of stocks on margin
refers to the practice of borrowing money to buy stocks. If the stock price goes up,
you're fine because you can pay back what you borrowed. If the stock price goes down,
you have to pay back the debt and have no money with which to do
so.
After the crash, the stock prices were way down. So
now all sorts of people owed money for their margin buying. They couldn't pay the loans
back. This meant banks went broke as their loans all went bad. When this happened,
depositors (pre-FDIC) lost their money. Businesses couldn't borrow either. Between all
of these things, the economy took a very hard hit because of the margin buying followed
by the crash.
In a proportional representation system, parties generally
get to be represented in the legislature in proportion to the amount of the vote they
receive. In other words, a party that got 25% of the vote in a US election would get 0%
of the representation. In countries like Germany that use PR, that party would get
around 25% of the seats in the Parliament.
Some argue that
this system is fairer than the US system. It allows more parties to enter politics and
thereby lets more people have their voices heard. In the US, a large minority might not
be heard because it cannot defeat the major parties. In a PR system, it would be
heard.
The flip side to this is that a PR system is more
prone to extremism and parties that concentrate only on single issues. A party can get
into the government and "cause trouble" simply by having strong support on a single
issue. Parties in PR, unlike those in the US, do not have to appeal to a broad range of
people and so they do not encourage compromise.
The poem uses two distinct rhythms. It uses dactyl (each
foot is one hard stressed beat followed by two soft beats: DUM da da) and trochee (each
foot is one hard stress followed by a soft beat DUM da). The first four lines would be
read like this:
DUM da da DUM da da DUM da DUM
da
DUM da da DUM da DUM da
DUM
DUM da da DUM da DUM da
DUM
DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM
da
The meter is tetrameter.
This is four feet per line. So this poem uses dactylic and trochaic
tetrameter.
One significant use of tetrameter is that it
uses four beats per measure. In different periods of history and definitely in the
modern era, this is the most common meter for songs. Lindsay was known to travel and
recite his poetry almost like a vaudeville act. So, it fit his style. Fittingly, the
poem is in the most common meter of song structure.
The
speaker in the poem is clearly stating that something is wrong with the factories,
working conditions or the culture under the industrial age. His reference to
Hamlet, “Something is rotten – I think, in Denmark” indicates that
something is wrong in America as a whole. Noting that no stones are thrown through
chapel windows, Lindsay is indicating that a religious (Christian) perspective will only
help America through its industrial revolution. The “rotten” things in American
factories might be poor working conditions but Lindsay may also be referring to the
emerging materialistic culture.
The use of tetrameter as a
song also functions as a hymn, which adds to this religious angle. Lastly, using common
song structure appeals to the emotions and to memory. It is catchy, harmonious and gets
stuck in your head.
In The Good Earth, Wang Lung does
decide to move his family south when a drought takes over the land, but this happens
earlier in the novel. In Chapter 29, Wang Lung and his family have already returned to
their land, and they have met prosperous harvests over the years. Wang Lung has taken
Lotus as his second wife, and his sons are older--the eldest married and his wife is
soon expecting a child. Wang Lung buys the House of Hwang and decides to move his
family from the farm to the courts at the big house. The women continually fight, and
Wang Lung wants peace, so he figures that moving them to separate courts in the House
will be a good decision.
Child marriage is a practice when young children who have
not reached an age where they are mature enough to choose their partners for life are
forcibly bound into an relation by their parents.
This
practice was widely prevalent in India till a few decades back. Now with new laws and an
increased awareness, the practice has reduced considerably and is the norm in only a few
areas.
There were several reasons behind the prevalence of
child marriage. In India, girls are usually considered a burden due to the social
practices followed. It is in the interest of parents to get their girl child married as
soon as possible and this encourages the marriage of girls at a very young
age.
Another leading cause of child marriage was to ensure
that caste and social hierarchies are maintained. By marrying children at a young age,
in many cases right after they were born, parents ensured that they did not get a chance
to find an unsuitable partner as they matured who may not be of the same caste or hold
the same social status. Child marriage was also used as a way to improve relations
between families and create alliances.
Child marriage in
now illegal in India and the minimum age for marriage is 18 for women and 21 for
men.
In Book 18 of the Odyssey, Odysseus
finds out that some of the servant women have been loyal to him and some of them have
them disloyal to him. Many of them are having sex with the suitors, which is a betrayal
to Odysseus and his family. Some of them have been disloyal to Penelope by trying to
find out her ploys and divulging information to the
suitors.
Throughout the epic, Odysseus has been learning
about loyalty. It is one of the major themes of the entire work. Many people in Ithaca
are still loyal to him (including his swineherd Eumaios and his housekeeper Eurycleia),
even after his twenty year absence. They are rewarded with his return. The disloyal
people, like the servant girls who are sleeping with the enemy, are punished. In fact,
Odysseus has twelve of the women, who are proven to be disloyal, put to death by
hanging.
First of all, there is the ever-important death of his
father, and his mother's marriage to his uncle only weeks afterwards. That event sends
Hamlet into a downward spiral of rage and depression, causing him to mope about the
castle, break up with his girlfriend, reject his friends, and want to kill himself,
essentially. Those events are the foundational groundstone for all else in the play;
they help to define him as a deeply emotional and disturbed young
man.
Then, we have the fact that he sees his father's ghost
and is told by said ghost that he was murdered by the hated uncle and to top it all of,
he wants Hamlet to enact revenge. That shakes Hamlet's world, first of all by revealing
that his uncle is a conniving murderer and manipulator of women, and secondly, by giving
him command to commit murder himself. He spends the rest of the play mulling over this
task of revenge, and trying to decide how, when or even if to do it. The entire play is
centered around Hamlet's moral quandary and hesitation to act out that revenge; this
incident defines him as a contemplative, hesitant and thoughtful person who is tentative
about killing someone.
The next significant event is the
play that he stages, in which it becomes quite clear that his uncle is guilty of
murder. This event defines Hamlet in a couple ways. First of all, it defines him as
clever; he was pretty smart to set up that play. Secondly, it shows that he wants to be
totally sure that the man is guilty before taking his life. This defines Hamlet as a
moral, conscience-driven person who has set boundaries and rules of
conduct.
Another event that defines Hamlet is his refusal
to kill Claudius while he is praying. This shows that Hamlet is a very religious person
who has the fear of God in him, and that he truly believes in Hell, and wants to ensure
Claudius goes there. It also defines him in a negative way as it highlights his
cowardice; he is assured of his uncle's guilt and has the perfect opportunity to kill
him, but doesn't. He's kind-of a chicken.
I think one
significant even that often gets overlooked is his reaction to seeing the dead Ophelia
being lowered into her grave. In a moment of true candor, he jumps into the grave and
declares that he loved her with all his heart, more than any brother could have loved
her. This is incredibly defining, because it shows that when he was rude to Ophelia
before, it was all a show, a farce, and that he wasn't being sincere. It also shows him
revealing a bit of sadness and remorse over the fact that his actions might have harmed
someone else. We see him exposed, vulnerable, and for once, not putting on a show for
someone else's benefit. It defines him as a deeply feeling
individual.
I hope that those give you a couple ideas; good
luck!
I would place my focus on the central character for whom
the drama is named. Antigone's loyalty to her family is symbolic of her attachment to
her family. She refuses to accept the law that Creon dictates as it goes against the
honor of her family. She even distances herself from her lover and sister in her zeal
towards her family and attachment to it. Antigone had always possessed a sense of
kinship with her family, remaining devoted to her father when others shunned him and
honoring the family name when others did not. Her stance towards the law is
unflinching, regardless of consequences. This focused and harnessed drive toward her
family justifies her as a symbol of family attachment. In The Godfather, one of the many
great scenes has Sonny, the older brother, telling Michael, the younger one, "Your
family ain't your country." Indeed, Antigone's belief in blood being more precious than
nation is something that is demonstrated from the start of the play and continuing
towards the end of it.
We have to find the derivative of
(x+3)/(2x-5).
This can be done using the product rule which
states that the derivative of h(x) = f(x)* g(x) = f'(x)*g(x) + f(x)*g'(x) and the chain
rule
Take the given expression
(x+3)/(2x-5)
= (x+3)*(2x -
5)^-1
The derivative is (x +3)*(-1)*2*(2x - 5)^-2 + 1*(2x -
5)^-1
=> -2(x + 3)/ (2x - 5)^2 + 1/ (2x -
5)
=> [-2x - 6 + 2x - 5]/ (2x -
5)^2
=> -11 / (2x -
5)^2
The required result is -11 / (2x -
5)^2
Although he possesses some of the characteristics of the
hero created by Lord Byron in Childe Harold's Pilgrimage, Gatsby is
not developed as a classic Byronic hero. For instance, he is not cynical; Gatsby is the
most romantic personality Nick Carraway has ever known. He is not tormented by
conflicting emotions; after meeting Daisy, Gatsby's life is determined and thereafter
ruled by one emotion--the need to experience life again as he had known it for a brief
while with Daisy Fay in Louisville, the emotional need to actually repeat the past.
Gatsby is motivated by love, and there is no conflict in his feelings for
Daisy.
That being said, like classic Byronic heroes, he
does reject one particular norm of society at large. By throwing in with Meyer
Wolfshiem, he chooses to become a gangster and build his fortune through criminal
pursuits. He maintains secrecy in regard to his "business ventures" because they are
illegal; they are also socially unacceptable, except to the underworld society that he
has joined. In a near-violent confrontation with Gatsby, Tom Buchanan clarifies his
criminal activities:
You're one of that bunch that hangs around with
Meyer Wolfshiem . . . I found out what your "drug stores"
were.
Tom then reveals that
Gatsby is a bootlegger and more; he is guilty of violating gambling laws and currently
engaged in putting together a criminal enterprise that people are afraid to talk about.
Gatsby's reaction to Tom's revelations indicates that the romantic Gatsby is, in some
respects, indeed a dangerous man. Nick notices a change in his usually controlled
demeanor:
Then
I turned back to Gatsby--and was startled at his expression. He looked--and this is said
in all contempt for the babbled slander of his garden--as if he had "killed a man." For
a moment the set of his face could be described in just that fantastic
way.
Nick's observation
suggests that beneath the idle party gossip about Gatsby's life there may lie some
truth. Making Gatsby dangerous, as well as mysterious, does add elements of the Byronic
hero to his character. Furthermore, although Gatsby's life is guided by one primary
emotion, to win Daisy back, he does demonstrate conflicting emotions in this scene; his
hatred for Tom Buchanan and desire to strike out at him conflicts with his love for
Daisy and his need to remain calm and behave in a socially acceptable
manner.
In regard to Gatsby's disrespect for "rank and
privilege," it can be interpreted in conflicting ways. Gatsby does not reject the social
superiority of the upper class. He aspires to become one of the privileged few, buying
his way into membership with his wealth and material possessions. However, Gatsby might
be seen as disrespecting the rank and privilege of the upper class because he refuses to
see it as inviolate; he does not acknowledge that belonging to such a group is beyond
him. He has no respect for the social barriers that separate him from Daisy; moreover,
he does not recognize their existance.
This is a key moment in the text. We have already been
presented to the mother, who becomes obsessed with her supposed lack of money to the
point when even the house is filled with strange voices saying "There must be more
money! There must be more money!" The children, growing up in this environment, are
obviously impacted by this insatiable hunger for more money, which leads to the
conversation that Paul has with his mother:
"Oh!" said Paul vaguely. "I thought when Uncle
Oscar said filthy lucker, it meant
money."
"Filthy lucre does mean
money," said the mother. "But it's lucre, not luck."
"Oh!"
said the boy. "Then what is luck, mother?"
"It's what
causes you to have money. If you're lucky you have money. That's why it is better to be
born lucky than rich. If you're rich, you may lose your money. But if you're lucy, you
will always get more
money."
It is important to
note that the word "lucky" plays a very importnat role in the story. The mother's
assertion that luck determines whether or not a person has money indicates her
single-minded focus on wealth and its acquisition and gives Paul the mistaken impression
that to be lucky is to be wealthy, whereas, obviously, there are lots of different ways
in which you can be lucky. It is this conversation that places Paul on the path to
self-destruction as he inspires himself to be ever luckier to gain more money for his
mother. The ending of the story clearly shows how destructive this view is, as the
pursuit of luck and money leads to Paul's death, ironically giving the mother what she
wants, but taking away one of her most precious possessions.
I think that all of the characters possess believability
in the drama. I would like to believe that the virtuous characters such as John or
Elizabeth Proctor, Giles Corey, or Francis or Rebecca Nurse are believable. I would
like to think this. The harsh truth for me is that the characters who are not so nice
are highly believable because this is more reflective of how individuals manipulate the
field and landscape of politics and elements of control. The fact of the matter is that
Reverend Parris is more concerned with his position than anything else or that Thomas
Putnam is more involved in the aspect of real estate control and speculation, using the
town crisis as a way to enhance his own position, are both highly believable and very
sad. I think that Abigail Williams is a very believable individual. There are people
who lie and carry on deceit in order to make themselves appear better than they are and
manipulate public perception against enemies. The reality is that all of the characters
in the drama are believable. I have seen more examples of the characters who possess
the negative qualities, and find them more prevalent in the modern day setting, than the
characters with those redemptive qualities. Perhaps, this is where I find that the text
is a statement of what is and a clamoring for what should be.
I think that the relationship between both Winston and
Julia represents the dichotomy between hopes and reality. On one hand, the relationship
is depicted as one that represents a source of potential hope and redemption for both.
It is a refuge from the numbing reality under Big Brother. It is a realm that is
distinct from the control of The Party, and I think that both Winston and Julia
recognize a realm that is distinct from the public domain. Yet, with the arrest of each
and the betrayal that follows, there is a brutal undercutting of dreams. In the moment
of betrayal through the use of the other's deepest fears, the renouncing brings to light
that all are controlled by Big Brother. When both see one another in the park with the
numbing admittance that both betrayed the other, the reality that confronts them and all
of the citizens of Oceania is that there is no relief, no absolution from Big Brother.
This is where hopes and promises are undercut by reality and control. In this vision,
personal redemption comes second to public domination.
For the reasons stated above, to be sure. I would add
that the method of attack, using hijacked planes full of involuntary victims as a
suicide bomb, was designed to be high profile and to spread
terror.
Hitting the World Trade Center was intentional, in
that it panicked our financial markets and was instrumental in causing a recession. In
other words, the fear they caused with these attacks hurt our economy, exactly as
planned.
Al-Qaeda was not sponsored by any nation state,
they were acting as an independent group with unconventional methods of
fighting.
The attacks were designed to topple the WTC
buildings (bin Laden is a civil engineer by training), and timed separately, so that one
strike would look like a horrible accident, and the second strike would instantly spread
the terrible knowledge that we were under attack.
To determine the maximum of the given function means to
find the vertex of a parabola.
We'll write the function
as:
f(x) = a(x-h)^2 + k, where the vertex has the
coordinates v(h,k)
We'll re-write the given
function:
f(x) = 1(x^2 - 1x) - 6
We'll
complete the square:
x^2 -2*(1/2) x + (1/2)^2 = (x -
1/2)^2
So, we'll add and subtract the value
1/4:
f(x) = 1(x^2 - x + 1/4) - 1/4 -
6
We'll combine like terms outside the
brackets:
f(x) = (x - 1/2)^2 -
25/4
We'll compare the result with the standard form and
we'll get the coordinates of the vertex:
(x - 1/2)^2 -
25/4 = a(x-h)^2 + k
h = 1/2
k
= -25/4
The coordinates of the vertex are:V
(1/2 ; -25/4)
Another way to determine the
local extreme of the function is to use the first derivative of the function (the vertex
is a local extreme).
f'(x) = 2x -
1
We'll determine the critical value of
x:
2x - 1 = 0
2x =
1
x = 1/2
Now, we'll calculate
the y coordinate of the local extreme:
f(1/2) = (1/2)^2 -
1/2 - 6
f(1/2) = 1/4 - 1/2 -
6
f(1/2) =
(1-2-24)/4
f(1/2) =
-25/4
We notice that the
vertex of the function is located in the 4th
quadrant.
The climax of this moving and incredibly powerful book
undoubtedly comes in Chapter 19, when Kit is tried for supposedly being a witch. When we
look back at the rising action, however, we see that there are a number of different
events of sequences of events that have led to this point, known as the rising action in
terms of the plot.
Firstly, and centrally, the friendship
between Kit and Hannah Tupper, who is shunned, isolated and ostracised by the rest of
the townsfolk, is key to this development. It is the friendship that results in Kit
bringing Prudence to Hannah's house for her reading lessons and above all it is the love
that Kit has for Hannah that impels her to go to Hannah's house and help her flee before
the enraged mob burn her house down and potentially do something terrible to Hannah
herself. Kit repeatedly disobeys her Uncle Matthew's instructions to not go to Hannah's
house, thus casting suspicion on herself, as Hannah is thought to practice witchery by
the townspeople.
Secondly, the fever that strikes the town
is another crucial element that leads to Kit's arrest and trial. Kit herself is sick,
but only fleetingly, and recovers soon, able to help others back to health. However, the
swiftness of Kit's recovery combined with her friendship with Hannah Tupper appears to
be another piece of evidence that suggests that Kit is a witch, or at least in league
with one.
Thus Kit's friendship with Hannah and the way
that she recovered from the fever so quickly automatically makes her a suspect to the
frenzied townsfolk who are eager to find a victim, especially as Hannah Tupper managed
to elude their trap. It is this that leads to Kit's arrest and trial and the climax of
this novel.
There is also a class and ethic dynamic in The
Kite Runner that I believe is reflected in the use of this statement, first
by Hassan to Amir and then later by Amir to Sohrab. Amir and Hassan are not from the
same class or ethnic group, and this difference is central to the plot and themes.
Amir is a Pashtun, and Hassan is a Hazara. The Pashtuns
are the ruling class in Afghanistan, and it is clear that the Hazaras are a lower class
and ethic group, historically treated quite poorly, and also shown as treated quite
poorly in the setting of the novel. Hassan and his father Ali are servants in the
household of Baba and Amir, and while Amir and Hassan are raised together, there is a
clear line in Amir's mind of their differences. Amir
notes,
But in
none of his stories did Baba ever refer to Ali as his friend. ... I never thought of
Hassan and me as friends either
(25).
Amir looks down upon
Hassan, and the relationship is such that Hassan saying "For you, a thousand times over"
is really what Amir expects from Hassan, because he perceives him to be an inferior
servant. He really does not see that Hassan is a true friend and is saying this out of
love, not out of duty as a servant.
On his long journey
of learning and repentance, as Amir finds himself and his father looked down upon in the
new land, the shoe is on the other foot. They are subject to small, daily humiliations
in the United States, for example, Baba's humiliation at collecting any kind of benefits
and Amir's concern about not being quite good enough to wed Soraya, whose father is a
general. Amir begins to understand what it feels like to be regarded as inferior. By
the time he rescues Sohrab and says to him, "For you, a thousand times over," this is
meant to represent not only his repentance for what he had done to Sohrab's father, but
also his understanding that we must all be servants to one another and that class and
ethnicity should play no part in our willingness to do so. He is saying this out of love
and friendship, as Hassan had said it to him.
So, while
there is no question that the use of this declaration represents Amir's repentance for
all he has done wrong to Hassan (and Ali), I do think that the class and ethnic tension
are part of the meaning behind its use, too.
In a discussion of William Golding's Lord of the
Flies as an allegory, the reader recognizes the major characters as
archetypes, or embodiments of a generic personality type which has recognizable and
typical behaviors. Ralph and Jack Merridew are the two characters in Golding's novel
who become leaders and who vie for ultimate
leadership.
Ralph
From
the first pages of the narrative, Ralph emerges as the "born leader," the stereotypical
"golden boy" who is handsome and charismatic. Repeatedly he is referred to as "the fair
boy." This phrase indicates his light hair, but it is also a 1950s buzzword for
"favorite" (e.g. The boss's fair haired boy=his favorite). When Piggy asks him his
name, he merely replies with his first name: "Ralph"--an indication of his importance
as very famous people such as biblical figures and movie and rock stars are often known
just by their first names. Uninhibited as he is aware of his beauty, Ralph quickly
strips off his clothes from his "golden body" so he can jump into the water and cool
off. Confident and somewhat arrogant, Ralph laughs at Piggy's nomenclature and mock's
Piggy's plea not to call him by this name. After the swim,he commands Piggy to get his
clothes, and laughs with pleasure at the prospect of having "a coral island" on which
to dwell.
When Piggy shows him the conch and explains how
to blow into it, Ralph uses the conch to call the others on the island. The children
who respond automatically give him "the same simple obedience that they had given to the
men with megaphones," because Ralph is a commanding figure. However, upon the arrival of
Jack Merridew, Ralph recognizes his rival; he seeks to override Jack's order to
Piggy--"Shut up, Fatty," by telling a small boy named Henry to "Shut up," adding "Seems
to me we ought to have a chief to decide
things."
Jack
Merridew
A dark party of boys, the choir,
emerges from a mirage after Ralph blows the conch. As they fall into line, a tall boy
shouts orders which the choir wearily obeys. When one boy collapses from the heat and
sun, the tall boy dismisses his act as a pretense: "He's always throwing a faint,...He
did in Gib; and Addis; and at matins over the precentor." As the choir boys snigger,
they examine Ralph with interest. But, Piggy asks no names, for he is intimidated
by
the
uniformed superiority and the offhand authority in Merridew's voice. He shrank to the
other side of
Ralph...
Repeating his last
name, Golding has Merridew say, "Then we'll have to look after ourselves," thus
attempting to take charge of the situation. Ralph asserts himself, saying, "We'd better
all have names...so, I'm Ralph." But Merridew vies with him for
dominance,
"Kids' names," said Merridew. "Why should I be
Jack? I'm
Merridew."
When Ralph calls
for the election of a chief, Merridew--who, interestingly is now referred by
Golding only as "Jack," loses his prominence although
Piggy
is
intimidated by this uniformed superiority and the offhand authority in Merridew's
voice.
The two archetypes,
Ralph and Jack, thus become the two opposing forces of man's nature in the
allegorical novel--the one civilized and the other brutish and
savage.
The answer to this is no. The character that Morgan
Freeman plays in this movie was not a real person. Morgan Freeman plays a character
named Theodore Joadson in this film. The character, in the film, is portrayed as a
leading abolitionist (he is a freed slave) in the film. There was never any such
person.
This is not uncommon in films that are based on
historical events. Writers tend to create characters when there are not any real life
characters who embody the ideas or characteristics that the writers want to show. This
is one of those cases.
Certainly, the opening scene of Chapter I of
Great Expectations is one of the best in all of literature as there
is metaphor and much imagery arranged with parallelism in the
paragraphs :
Ours was the marsh country, down by the river,
within twenty miles of the sea. My first vivid impression of things seems to me to have
gained on a memorable raw afternoon toward evening....I knew that the dark flat
wilderness beyond was the marshes; and that the low leaden line beyond was the river;
and that the distant savage lair from which the wind was rushing was the sea; and the
small bundle of shivers growing afraid of it all and beginning to cry was
Pip.
Similarly, the
description of the first convict is replete with imagery and
parallelism:
A fearful man, all in coarse gray, with a great
iron on his leg. A man with no hat, and with broken shoes, and with an old rag tied
around his head. A man who had been soaked in water, and smothered in mud, and lamed by
stones, and cut by flints, and stung by nettles, and torn by briars; who limped and
shivered, and glared and growled [alliteration]; and who teeth
chattered in his head as he seized me by the
chin.
In the description of
Uncle Pumblechook, Dicken employs figurative language, using
simile:
...Uncle Pumblechook--a large, hard -breathing
middle-aged, slow man, with a mouth like a fish, dull
staring eyes, and sandy hair standing upright on his head, so that he looked
as if he had just been all but choked, and had that moment
come--...
Another passage
of figurative language is in Chapter XXII in a passage in which Pip reflects that it has
been some time since he has seen Joe and Biddy:
That I could have been at our old church in my
old church-going clothes [alliteration], on the very last Sunday
that ever was, seemed a combination of impossibilities, geographical and social, solar
and lunar. Yet in the London streets, so crowded with people and so brillantly lighted
in the dusk of evening, there were depressing hints of reproaches for that I had put the
poor old kitchen at home so far away; and in the dead of night, the footsteps of some
incapable imposter of a porter [metaphor] mooning about Barnard's
Inn, under pretence of watching it, fell hollow on my heart
[metaphor]
in
Chapters XXII and XXIII, with the description of the ridiculous Mrs. Pocket and her
frustrated husband, Dickens's language is playful, sentimental, cynical, imaginative,
and comically ironic:
...I saw that Mr. and Mrs Pocket's children were
not growing up or being brought up, but were tumbling up..... that there were no fewer
than six little Pockets present, in various stages of tumbling up. I had scarcely
arrived at the total of six when a seventh was heard, as in a region of air, wailing
dolefully.
...Miller, who was the other nurse, retired into
the house, and by degrees the child's wailing was hushed and stopped, as if it were a
young ventriloquist [simile] with something in its
mouth.
Then in Chapter XXIII
the reader is introduced to Mr. Pocket:
He was a very young looking man, in spite of his
perplexities, and his very gray hair, and his manner seemd quite natural. I use the
word natural in the sense of being unaffected; there was something comic in his
distraught way as though it would have been downright ludicrous but for his own percept
that it was very near being
so.
Indeed, the prose of
Charles Dickens contains a poetic beauty and color throughout.
The answer to this question can be found in Chapter Two of
this great novel. This, of course, occurs directly after the brutal murder of Susie by
Mr. Harvey in his structure that he had built in the field. Let us consider how Susie's
heaven is constructed:
When I first entered heaven I thought everyone
saw what I saw. That in everyone's heaven there were soccer goalposts in the distance
and lumbering women throwing shot put and javelin. That all the buildings were like
suburban northeast high schools built in the 1960s. Large, squat buildings spread out on
dismally landscaped sandy lots, with overhangs and open spaces to make them feel modern.
My favourite part was how the coloured blocks were turquoise and orange, just like the
blocks in Fairfax High.
Soon,
Susie begins to realise as she spends more time in "her" heaven that actually you make
your own "version" of heaven which reflects your own understanding of life and the
world. The javelin throwers and shot putters are actually in their own heaven too, just
like Suzie. Their "version" found a "fit" with Susie's heaven, and thus they were there
too. Thus Susie's heaven features her own school buildings and even things such as the
coloured blocks which are a direct copy of her own school.
This question has been asked and answered before -- see
link below. However, I think that there is one very important factor that is not
addressed in any of the answers in the "q and a" link
below.
The factor that is not addressed there is the fact
that the United States had so much more trade with the Allied countries than it did with
the Central Powers. This was true before the war and it became even more true as the
war went on and the British blockade of Germany took
effect.
Because of this trade, there was a great financial
incentive for the US to side with the Allies. If the Allies lost, the money owed to US
companies by the Allies would be lost as well. This would give Americans a powerful
incentive to side with the Allies.
We can see that
Americans of the time thought that this had helped to cause US involvement in the war.
This is shown by the fact that the Neutrality Acts passed in the 1930s to prevent US
involvement in another war prohibited trade with belligerent countries. Congress did
not want the US to have such a financial incentive to go to war
again.
The thing that is very important to realize here is that
this case does not tell states or school districts what they
must do. Instead, it tells them what they
may do. In this case, the Supreme Court told the Hazelwood
school district (and others) that they were allowed to have their principal censor a
part of the student newspaper that was, in his opinion, contrary to the educational
goals of the school district.
However, this is not a
requirement. The Supreme Court did not tell all school districts that they had to have
their principals censor school papers. This was a case that was about saying when
schools could abridge their students' First Amendment rights, not one that was mandating
when schools have to censor their newspapers.
So the answer
to your question is that states do not have to "opt out." There is no requirement
imposed by Hazelwood. This case merely tells what schools
may do and it is up to the school district or state to
decide if it will take advantage of this ability.
Any case to present a proposal, as in this essay, is made
stronger and more powerful if the anticipated results are presented before the actual
details of the proposal itself as it focuses the readers' attention on the potential
results and what could be gained rather than problems or issues arising from the
proposal itself. Note how Swift is very careful to delay the actual nature of the
proposal. Indeed, at the beginning of his essay, he is careful to paint a very bleak
picture of the "deplorable state of the kingdom" and the "prodigious number of
children." Note how he also makes a very strong ethical appeal before detailing his
proposal:
There is likewise another great advantage in my
scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of
women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us, sacrificing the
poor innocent babes, I doubt, more to avoid the expense, than the
shame...
Presenting the
advantages of his plan in such a reasonable fashion helps us to agree with the proposal
once it is unveiled, and also raises our anticipation and curiosity as to what the
proposal might be. Of course, Swift has a double purpose here, because by making us wait
to hear his proposal he emphasises the horror of it when it is actually unveiled thus
reinforcing his main theme: the inhumane way that the government and people of Britain
viewed the starving in Ireland.
Let the amount of money that is divided be
C.
It is divided in the ratio 10 : 7 : 5 among X, Y,
Z.
This can be written in another way as X gets 10/ 22 of
the amount, Y gets 7/22 of the amount and Z gets 5/22 of the
amount.
As Y gets $14 more than
Z
(7/22)*C - (5/22)*C =
14
=> C*( 2/ 22) =
14
=> C =
14*11
=> C = 154
The
amount that X gets is (10/ 22)*154 = 70
The
required value for the total amount is $154 and X gets
$70.
This depends on the chapter from which you are
reading.
In chapter 2, when Jem takes Scout to school, we
find that Jem earned some money for doing so and we later learn that on these trips to
school, once in a while Jem was entrusted with his father's pocket
watch.
The most significant rite of passage
would occur in chapter 12 when Calpurnia begins referring to him as Mister Jem. This
signifies that he has earned her respect as a man. It is at that point that he had just
turned 12.
Near the end of the book, in
chapter 25, Jem demonstrates maturity and gets into one of his "moods" when Scout wants
to kill a roly-poly. He won't let her.
In those late 20s
chapters, Jem also gets a hair under his armpit and tries to show it to Scout. She can't
really see it, but pretends to be impressed.
In Book the Second, Chapter 10 of A Tale of
Two Cities, Charles Darnay displays a certain
obsequiousness toward Dr. Manette. Having established himself in England as a teacher
of the French language, Darnay yet expects to work hard. So, as he approaches Dr.
Manette to ask permission to marry Lucie, Darnay is very respectful toward the old
doctor. Having waited a year to declare his love, Darnay approaches
with acknowledgement of his and Lucie's closeness, and Manette expresses gratitude for
this show of respect. Darnay apologizes,
Dear Doctor Manette, ...always seeing her and
you with this hallowed light about you, I have forborne, and forborne, as long ...and do
even now feel, that to bring my love--even mine--between you , is to touch your history
with something no quite so good as itself. But I love her. Heaven is my witness that I
love her!
However, when
Darnay tries to reveal his real name and explain, Manette stops him, asking Darnay not
to tell him anymore until Lucie's and his wedding day. The poor doctor has been
disturbed by Darnay's announcements and regresses to his work table at night, cobbling
shoes.
On this same evening, in contrast to the
respectfulness of Darnay and Manette to each other, Stryver works Sydney Carton late
into the night. He boldly announces that he intends to marry Lucie
Manette:
Accordingly, Mr. Stryver inaugurated the Long
Vacation with a formal proposal to take Miss Manette to Vauxhall Gardens; that failing,
to Ranelaigh; that unaccountable failing too, it behoved him to present himself in Soho,
and there declare his noble mind.
Toward Soho, therefore,
Mr. Stryver shouldered his way from the Temple...bursting in his full-blown way along
the pavement, to the jostlement of all weaker
people...
Also, in his
"shouldering way," Stryver announces to Mr. Lorry his intentions. Distraught at the
news, Mr. Lorry tells Stryver, "you know there really is so much, too much of you!" As
crass as ever, Stryver does not understand when Lorry asks him to postpone his asking
Lucie to marry him, but Stryver perceives himself a suitable match. Nevertheless, Lorry
persuades Stryver to wait until he talks with Dr. Manette and Lucie. Later that night,
Mr. Lorry confers with Stryver, telling him that they would refuse his proposal. As
Stryver listens,
The necessity of being angry in a suppressed tone
had put Mr. Stryver's blood-vessels into a dangerous
state....
Mr. Stryver tells
Mr. Lorry that this news "beats everthing past, present, and to come," and he
rationalizes that this decision of Lucie to reject Stryver of King's Bar is a "vanity"
of an "empty-headed " girl; then he storms out of Tellson's Bank after requesting that
Lorry say nothing of this affair. He vows to "put you all in the
wrong."
The sharp contrast between the suave and perceptive
Darnay and the brazen and obtuse Stryver is easily apparent. In fact, Chapter 12 of
Book the Second offers much comic relief from a serious tale with the satiric
descriptions of Mr. Stryver.
Both of the characters of Edgar Allan Poe's short story,
"The Cask of Amontillado," share several similar traits. They are both wealthy and come
from families of longstanding influence. They both show an interest in wine; Montresor
uses Fortunato's weakness for Amontillado to lure him into his family's vast catacombs,
which doubles as a wine cellar. They are apparently old acquaintances, and Fortunato
considers Montresor a friend. However, to Montresor, Fortunato is his mortal enemy.
Montresor is far colder and more detached than the jovial Fortunato who, though drunk,
appears in the carnival costume of a court jester. Fortunato is obviously much more
trusting than Montresor; Fortunato willingly follows him into the cellars, never
considering that his friend has ulterior motives. Montresor, meanwhile, lies to his
servants, telling them that he will be absent from the house; he knows they will take
advantage of this and head to the carnival festivities. Montresor's coldness and lack of
trust continues for the next half century: During his retelling of the story, he shows
no hint of remorse, and he relates that he has never disclosed the story to
anyone.
We have the equation 9x^2 + 4y^2 + 36x – 8y + 4 =
0
9x^2 + 4y^2 + 36x – 8y + 4 =
0
collect the x and y terms
together
=> 9(x^2 + 4x) + 4(y^2 – 2y) =
-4
complete the squares of the terms within
brackets
=> 9( x^2 + 4x + 4) + 4(y^2 – 2y + 1) = -4
+ 36 + 4
=> 9(x + 2) ^2 + 4(y – 1) ^2 =
36
divide by 36
=> (x +
2)^2 / 4 + (y – 1)^2 / 9 = 1
This is of the form (x – h)^2/
b^2 + ( y – k)^2/a^2 = 1
The center is given by (h, k ) = (
-2 , 1)
The vertices are (h , k + a) and (h, k – a) or ( -2
, 4) and (-2, -2)
The foci are (h, k + sqrt( a^2 – b^2))
and (h, k - sqrt( a^2 – b^2)) or ( -2 , 1 + sqrt 5) and ( -2, 1 – sqrt
5)
The required center is (-2, 1). The
vertices are ( -2 , 4) and (-2, -2) and the foci are ( -2 , 1 + sqrt 5) and ( -2, 1 –
sqrt 5)
Biodiversity is the variation that exists within a group
and can be generalized to a population, ecosystem or the biosphere. Biodiversity is not
consistent across the globe and it is dependent on genetic
variation.
Think of the different types of biomes that
exist (desert, tundra, tropical to name a few) and think of the types of organisms that
live in these environments. Each environment hosts its own biodiversity and as you
expand to the entire earth the diversity increases. The organisms best suited to live
in each environment are able to survive and reproduce; increased ecological variation
leads to increased biological diversity. As humans continue to destroy various
environments biodiversity is lost.
Genetic variation leads
to new adaptations and creates differences within a species and creates new species.
Genetic variation is a result of sexual reproduction. Without sexual reproduction DNA
would not be "mixed up" and therefore would not lead to differences with in species,
natural selection and evolution which in turn would not develop a world rich in
biodiversity.
Success comes in many forms and from many directions.
Often it does not come easily and all the obstacles and distractions thrown in our
direction will do their best to stop us from acting on our dream and achieving the
success we want.
I find it helpful, when I'm going through
a difficult time and the obstacles look insurmountable, to read about how others have
succeeded -- in whatever way they were pursuing their dream and working to make it
real.
Opportunity is missed by most
people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
-- Thomas
Edison
As
I find them, I'll be posting success quotes here from the famous and not so famous.
Perhaps you'll find one or more of them to be inspirational and maybe this will be a
small help in motivating yourself to act on your
dream.
When I started thinking about this page, I was
thinking of success quotes like the ones that follow this poem. But, when I ran across
this beautiful poem about success written by Ralph Waldo Emerson, I knew I had to
include it first. In just a few short phrases, he has illustrated a successful life that
isn't defined by wealth, power, and fame. Using this as a guide, any of us can change
our life and achieve the level of success we
want.
To laugh often and much;
to win the
respect of intelligent people
and the affection of children;
to earn
the appreciation of honest critics
and endure the betrayal of false
friends;
to appreciate beauty,
to find the best in
others;
to leave the world a bit better,
whether by a healthy child,
a garden patch
or a redeemed social condition;
to know even one life
has breathed
easier because you have lived.
This is to have
succeeded.
Ralph Waldo
Emerson
Many
of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when
they gave up. --Thomas
Edison
Victory belongs to the most persevering.
-- Napoleon
Bonaparte
It is a rough road that
leads to the heights of greatness.
-- Seneca
Success
is how high you bounce when you hit bottom. -- General George
Patton
A man is not
finished when he is defeated. He is finished when he quits. -- Richard
Nixon
Sometimes our best
is simply not enough.... We have to do what is required. -- Sir Winston
Churchill
