Name each of the following compounds.

The first compound shown is named 3,3-dimethyl-pentanol.

The root word used is pentane, which is a 5-carbon alkane, because the longest carbon chain is five carbons in length. The suffix -ol is added because the -OH group makes the compound an alcohol. The two -CH3 groups are called methyl groups. They're on the third carbon because the carbons are numbered starting from the end closest to the -OH group. The prefix 3,3-dimethyl tells us that there are...

The first compound shown is named 3,3-dimethyl-pentanol.

The root word used is pentane, which is a 5-carbon alkane, because the longest carbon chain is five carbons in length. The suffix -ol is added because the -OH group makes the compound an alcohol. The two -CH3 groups are called methyl groups. They're on the third carbon because the carbons are numbered starting from the end closest to the -OH group. The prefix 3,3-dimethyl tells us that there are two methyl groups on carbon 3. If the -OH group isn't on the first carbon an infix number must be included in front of the suffix -ol, for example 3,3-dimethyl-pentan-1-ol.

The second compound shown is named propanone.

The -one ending describes the ketone functional group, which is the oxygen double bonded to a carbon, and the root word propane describes a three-carbon alkane. The common name for this compound is acetone.

The third compound shown is named ethoxypentane.

The oxygen that's single bonded to two carbons forms an ether group. Ethers have the form R-O-R. The smaller R-group is named first, followed by oxy, then the larger R-group name. The name of this ketone comes from the root word ethane for a 2-carbon alkane and pentane for a five-carbon alkane.

The fourth compound shown is named butylamine.

The -NH2 group is the amine functional group and the -C4H9 is a butyl group. When the amine group is on the first carbon it's not necessary to include an infix number, which describes the location of the functional group. If the infix is included the name is butan-1-amine.  An alternative but usually less preferred way of naming alkyl amines is by using the prefix amino-, whereby this compound would be called amino-butane.

What is the Narrabeen man?

The "Narrabeen Man" is the name given to a skeleton unearthed near the intersection of Ocean Street and Octavia Street in Narrabeen, Australia in January 2005 by workers digging a ditch to work on electricity cables. Radiocarbon dating shows the skeleton to be some 4,000 years old, dating it to approximately 2000 BC. 

The skeleton is of a man approximately 6 feet tall, which is substantially taller than most aboriginal men of his period. He was...

The "Narrabeen Man" is the name given to a skeleton unearthed near the intersection of Ocean Street and Octavia Street in Narrabeen, Australia in January 2005 by workers digging a ditch to work on electricity cables. Radiocarbon dating shows the skeleton to be some 4,000 years old, dating it to approximately 2000 BC. 

The skeleton is of a man approximately 6 feet tall, which is substantially taller than most aboriginal men of his period. He was between 30 and 40 years old at the time of his death. His last meal consisted of fish. 

What makes this skeleton particularly interesting is the manner of his death. He was killed by being stabbed in the back as well as the front with several spears of a particular type with stone barbs, and he was not given a traditional burial. Some archaeologists have suggested that this might be evidence for this having been a ritual murder.

Can low air pressure cause dizziness and headaches?

Low atmospheric pressure can cause headaches and dizziness, especially for someone not used to being in an environment with low atmospheric pressure. The lower atmospheric pressure means that the air that is being breathed in is less dense and there is less oxygen in a given amount of air. Because lungs cannot expand more than usual to compensate, the result is that there is less oxygen in the lungs during a breath which means...

Low atmospheric pressure can cause headaches and dizziness, especially for someone not used to being in an environment with low atmospheric pressure. The lower atmospheric pressure means that the air that is being breathed in is less dense and there is less oxygen in a given amount of air. Because lungs cannot expand more than usual to compensate, the result is that there is less oxygen in the lungs during a breath which means less oxygen in the person's bloodstream. The low oxygen levels are what causes the headaches and dizziness. 

While even weather changes can bring about these symptoms, they are most often seen at high altitudes. Bodies do adjust for the difference in oxygen levels and adapt to use oxygen more efficiently in these environments. Athletes, for example, are advised to be in the high altitude or low atmospheric pressure environments days in advance before strenuous activity so that their body has time to adjust before being put under stress. Some athletes train in high altitudes so that their body has the added oxygen use efficiency even when doing activities at a higher atmospheric pressure.

What is catenation and what are two elements that exhibit the property of catenation?

Bonds are formed when two or more atoms share electrons with each other, usually to satisfy the octet rule which states that having 8 electrons in the valence shell confers stability. In the case where a bond is formed between the same atoms, the molecule is called a homonuclear diatomic. This is the case for oxygen gas (a diatomic atom of two oxygens bound to each other). 

Some atoms, meanwhile, are capable of forming long...

Bonds are formed when two or more atoms share electrons with each other, usually to satisfy the octet rule which states that having 8 electrons in the valence shell confers stability. In the case where a bond is formed between the same atoms, the molecule is called a homonuclear diatomic. This is the case for oxygen gas (a diatomic atom of two oxygens bound to each other). 

Some atoms, meanwhile, are capable of forming long chains by bonding with each other. This is called catenation. Catenation is the linkage of atoms of the same element to form long chains. Two famous and common examples of this are carbon and silicon. Other atoms capable of catenation are sulfur and boron. 

Silicon can form chains of `S_n H_(2n+2)`, but it is highly challenging to purify the compound for n greater than 8. Meanwhile, catenation in carbon is more ubiquitous. Carbon chains are prevalent in nature; this is the reason why carbon is important in life and survival of carbon-based beings. Carbohydrates and lipids contain tails of carbon chains of varying lengths. 

The reason why carbon has such special and unique properties is because of its valency and size. It has four valence electrons and is hence capable of sharing these with four other atoms to form four bonds. Moreover, being the smallest atom with this property, its bonds are strong.

In brief, catenation is the linkage of atoms of the same element to form long chains. Examples of atoms that form such long chains are carbon, sulfur, silicon, and boron. In a way, this property explains why carbon is very important in the persistence of life as we know it.

“You'll be glad, too, when the end comes.” When and where was this said in And Then There Were None?

This line is delivered by General Macarthur and it occurs in chapter 8, after the first day has passed. Earlier in the chapter it is clarified that Vera felt restless the entire morning, so this scene likely takes place in the afternoon of their second day on the island. 

"After a while Vera strolled slowly down to the sea. She walked along towards the extreme end of the island where an old man sat staring...

This line is delivered by General Macarthur and it occurs in chapter 8, after the first day has passed. Earlier in the chapter it is clarified that Vera felt restless the entire morning, so this scene likely takes place in the afternoon of their second day on the island. 

"After a while Vera strolled slowly down to the sea. She walked along towards the extreme end of the island where an old man sat staring out to the horizon."

The old man she joins is General Macarthur. The description of the setting is minimal, but it is implied that Vera and the general are sitting near the water. 

The line "You'll be glad, too" is the General referring to the relief that he mentioned a handful of lines earlier. He is convinced that they will all die on the island and has come to the realization that he feels relieved to know that he will soon be free of the guilt he has been carrying with him for so long. He tells Vera that when her turn to die comes, she will also feel relieved.

How did Mark Antony counteract the allegations made against Caesar?

The answer to this question can be found in Act III, Scene 2 of Julius Caesar. After carrying out the assassination of Caesar, Brutus justifies the act by explaining to the crowd that Caesar was an ambitious man, and moreover that these personal ambitions would eventually destroy Rome and the liberties that its people held sacred. Antony, whose speech to the Roman people follows that of Brutus, counters this charge by emphasizing Caesar's nobility,...

The answer to this question can be found in Act III, Scene 2 of Julius Caesar. After carrying out the assassination of Caesar, Brutus justifies the act by explaining to the crowd that Caesar was an ambitious man, and moreover that these personal ambitions would eventually destroy Rome and the liberties that its people held sacred. Antony, whose speech to the Roman people follows that of Brutus, counters this charge by emphasizing Caesar's nobility, as he does in the following passage:

He was my friend, faithful and just to me;
But Brutus says he was ambitious,
And Brutus is an honorable man.
He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill.
Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept;
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff.
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious,
And Brutus is an honorable man.

In this speech, Antony manages, without directly casting aspersions on Brutus's character, to paint Caesar's assassins as criminals who have killed a noble Roman, one who loved his people. Having won over the crowd, he begins to dispense with the pretense that he believes Brutus and the other conspirators to be "honorable" men. As the crowd forms a circle around the body of Caesar, Antony has them look at the corpse, "marr'd...by traitors." Brutus's attack, Antony says, was the "unkindest cut of all," as it was carried out by a man Caesar loved and trusted. In short, Antony counters Brutus's claims by an appeal to pathos, to the emotions of the crowd. He is completely successful, and the crowd that was chanting for Brutus ends up, after Antony's speech, chanting for Brutus's blood and rioting in the streets of Rome.

What is the irony of the title "Marriage is a Private Affair" by Chinua Achebe?

The title is also ironic because it uses the word "affair," which can mean several different things. 

The word "affair" can refer to an incident or an occurrence. As the other educators pointed out, it can also refer to a private matter or concern. However, another meaning of the word is understood as, "an illicit relationship or dalliance."

The title states that "marriage is a private affair." Normally, no one would refer to a marriage...

The title is also ironic because it uses the word "affair," which can mean several different things. 

The word "affair" can refer to an incident or an occurrence. As the other educators pointed out, it can also refer to a private matter or concern. However, another meaning of the word is understood as, "an illicit relationship or dalliance."

The title states that "marriage is a private affair." Normally, no one would refer to a marriage as an illicit dalliance. In fact, marriage is a public declaration of fidelity. As is the usual practice, "forbidden" affairs are often conducted in secret, and the parties involved are usually not too keen on their secret being discovered. Much is at stake in such an arrangement.

In Achebe's story, the title indicates what is made clear in the story. The groom's father (Okeke) makes his disgust with his son Nnaemeka's impending marriage to Nene public knowledge in his community. The men from Okeke's community unequivocally sympathize with Okeke's grief and anger. They condemn in blistering terms Nnaemeka's rebellious insistence on marrying Nene. In fact, the men characterize Nnaemeka's actions as a grave sin against his parent and God.

In characterizing Nnaemeka's actions in this manner, both Okeke and his male compatriots have reduced holy matrimony between two people to the level of an immoral dalliance. In these men's eyes, Nnaemeka and Nene's marriage is not a sacred, lasting alliance but a wicked sexual flirtation that is bound to fail. In Nnaemeka and Nene's case, the irony in the title is clear: far from their marriage being a sacred alliance, it is now a "private affair," something to be ashamed of within the confines of Ibo culture. 

What does Piggy do after the meeting breaks up in Lord of the Flies?

In chapter 5 Ralph calls a meeting to emphasize the importance of keeping the signal fire lit at all times so they don't miss another chance at being rescued. At the same time, he tries to deal with a number of "housekeeping" issues such as sanitation and work duties. However, the meeting deteriorates as the boys start discussing their fears. Jack speaks against "the rules" and leads most of the boys away in a "random...

In chapter 5 Ralph calls a meeting to emphasize the importance of keeping the signal fire lit at all times so they don't miss another chance at being rescued. At the same time, he tries to deal with a number of "housekeeping" issues such as sanitation and work duties. However, the meeting deteriorates as the boys start discussing their fears. Jack speaks against "the rules" and leads most of the boys away in a "random scatter." 

Piggy's reaction to this is notable because he reacts as the voice of maturity and logic. He laments, "What's grownups going to say?" He prods Ralph to use the conch to reassemble the rowdy boys. He tells Ralph, "You got to be tough now." Ralph is afraid that doing so would seal the boys' rebellion and all order would crumble. When Ralph voices his confusion about ghosts and beasts, Piggy scolds him like a parent would. He then encourages Ralph to keep on in his role as chief, explaining that Jack is a dangerous threat, not just to order, but also to their lives. The three boys, Piggy, Ralph, and Simon, then begin to extol the virtues of adult life. 

In this scene, Golding uses Piggy to play the part of the "grown up" and to depict how the boys are straining to hold on to the last bits of civilized society. 

In "Desiree's Baby" by Kate Chopin, what is the significance of the little quadroon boy fanning Desiree's baby with peacock feathers?

Kate Chopin's story "Desiree's Baby" is full of ambiguities. Many details of the story are purposefully left vague, and many can be interpreted in at least two different ways. The little quadroon boy, the slave La Blanche's son, is significant because he causes Desiree to have a revelation. However, the nature of the revelation is ambiguous.

By the time Desiree's baby is three months old, nearly everyone has realized that he has African facial features....

Kate Chopin's story "Desiree's Baby" is full of ambiguities. Many details of the story are purposefully left vague, and many can be interpreted in at least two different ways. The little quadroon boy, the slave La Blanche's son, is significant because he causes Desiree to have a revelation. However, the nature of the revelation is ambiguous.

By the time Desiree's baby is three months old, nearly everyone has realized that he has African facial features. Desiree is the only one who simply admires him for who he is without noticing anything unusual about him. Armand has already stopped talking to Desiree and avoids the child. Faraway neighbors have come to the plantation for mysterious reasons, presumably to consult with Armand about the matter of his mixed race child. One day Desiree is in her room with the baby lying on her bed and the quadroon (mixed-race) boy is fanning him with peacock feathers. She looks back and forth several times between the two boys, and then says, "Ah!" She breaks into a sweat and her blood runs cold. When she asks Armand to look at their child and tell her what it means, he says, "It means ... that the child is not white; it means that you are not white."

One obvious conclusion about what Desiree noticed and what made her exclaim "Ah!" is that she compared the facial features of the quadroon child and her own son's facial features and saw a resemblance between them that suggested her child was partially black.

Another interpretation is that she saw a resemblance between the two and noticed Armand's features in both of them. In this case, the meaning of her question to Armand would be, "Look at our child. He looks like he could be La Blanche's boy's brother. What does this mean?" The voice she said it in "must have stabbed him, if he was human." (It might be noted here that in Armand's case, this is a big "if.") Her tone seems accusatory. There are hints that Armand may have fathered the quadroon boy and that he may have a habit of taking advantage of his female slaves. During the days after the baby's birth, Armand is able to hear the baby's cry "as far away as La Blanche's cabin." One might wonder what need the plantation owner would have to be at a female slave's cabin. In addition, the brutality with which he treats his slaves suggests that he would not hesitate to use his female slaves as concubines.

The quadroon boy is significant in the story because he is the cause of Desiree's revelation. What that revelation was, like so many other details in this story, remains ambiguous. 

What does Clarisse say people talk about?

Clarisse is a seventeen-year-old girl who curiously shows up along Montag's walk home one night after work. She asks him many introspective questions that "normal" people wouldn't think of; such as, "Are you happy?" (10) or "Do you ever read any of the books you burn?" (8). She even tells him that she is not afraid of him because he is a fireman. He asks her why she would be afraid of him and she says, "So...

Clarisse is a seventeen-year-old girl who curiously shows up along Montag's walk home one night after work. She asks him many introspective questions that "normal" people wouldn't think of; such as, "Are you happy?" (10) or "Do you ever read any of the books you burn?" (8). She even tells him that she is not afraid of him because he is a fireman. He asks her why she would be afraid of him and she says, "So many people are. . . But you're just a man after all. . ." (7).

Montag continues to talk with this girl multiple times. He asks about her life and why she's not in school. She tells him that she goes to therapy because she is "anti-social." She also says that she listens to people at soda fountains and "People don't talk about anything" (31). What Clarisse means is that people don't talk about anything important. They discuss things rather than ideas. For example, she says they will talk about cars, clothes or swimming pools, "But they all say the same things and nobody says anything different from anyone else" (31).

Clarisse is significant because she gets Montag thinking about his daily life, his home, his wife, people's behaviors, and the quality of life as a whole. By realizing that "people don't talk about anything," Montag later says to Faber the following:

"Nobody listens any more. I can't talk to the walls because they're yelling at me. I can't talk to my wife; she listens to the walls. I just want someone to hear what I have to say. And maybe if I talk long enough, It'll make sense" (82).

Why does Piggy believe that Ralph must regain control?

In Chapter 5, Ralph leads an assembly where he discusses the true identity of the beast. Jack believes that a beast does not exist because he's traveled everywhere on the island and hasn't seen it. Piggy agrees that there is no beast on the island, but believes that the boys should examine the issue pragmatically. A littlun named Percival claims that he's seen a beast come out of the sea at night. Then, Simon attempts...

In Chapter 5, Ralph leads an assembly where he discusses the true identity of the beast. Jack believes that a beast does not exist because he's traveled everywhere on the island and hasn't seen it. Piggy agrees that there is no beast on the island, but believes that the boys should examine the issue pragmatically. A littlun named Percival claims that he's seen a beast come out of the sea at night. Then, Simon attempts to tell the boys the true nature of the beast, but cannot articulate his thoughts. When it is suggested that Simon is trying to describe a ghost, Piggy grabs the conch and begins to protest. Jack steps in and insults Piggy. Ralph raises the conch to hold a vote on whether or not there are ghosts on the island, and the boys are silent. He feels the power of the conch weakening when the boys do not respond by voting. Jack begins to challenge Ralph's authority and says,

"Bollocks to the rules! We're strong---we hunt! If there's a beast, we'll hunt it down! We'll close in and beat and beat and beat---!" (Golding 91)

Jack leads his group of hunters away and dismisses Ralph and the assembly.

Ralph does not blow the conch and assert his authority after the boys follow Jack. He feels that if he were to blow the conch and have the boys disobey, then they would be complete animals on the island. Ralph then says that he wants to give up being chief. Piggy encourages Ralph to regain authority. Piggy wants Ralph to be chief because he knows that Ralph is his only protection from Jack and the group of hunters. Without civility and rules, the physically weaker members of society, like Piggy and Simon, will suffer.

Provide some quotes as evidence to prove that Simon is a static character in Lord of the Flies.

A static character, in literary terms, is one who undergoes little or no inner change. It is a character who does not grow or develop.

Simon is anything but a static character. He is actually the one who gains new insight and comes to understand our inner fears and innate barbarity. He is the character who concludes that we have nothing to fear but ourselves and it is this fear and our inbred savage nature that makes us turn against each other instead of resolving our inner conflict.

Simon draws attention from the outset. He is the boy that faints at the beginning and who, apparently, had been consistently doing so even during the boys' flight. In spite of the fact that he is small and frail, Ralph chooses him to accompany Jack and himself to further explore the island, instead of one of the bigger boys. He is the one who conscientiously helps Ralph in building the shelters and who supports his leadership telling Ralph that he is the leader and that he should tell the other boys off for not assisting.

It is also Simon who suggests that the beastie or snake thing was not real and mentioned that the littluns acted as if it were. Simon, of all the others, is the one who fearlessly goes deeper into the island where he finds himself in a secluded spot. It is here where he essentially becomes one with his surroundings, one with nature, as suggested in the following extract:

When he was secure in the middle he was in a little cabin screened off from the open space by a few leaves. He squatted down, parted the leaves and looked out into the clearing. Nothing moved but a pair of gaudy butterflies that danced round each other in the hot air. Holding his breath he cocked a critical ear at the sounds of the island.

We also see that Simon is, more than any of the other boys, prepared to share and help. He does this with the littluns when he helps them get fruit and he gives Piggy his share of the meat when Jack refuses to give him any. It is also Simon who recognises the inner beast in all of us but when he tries to share this insight with the others, they cannot understand.

“What I mean is. . . maybe it’s only us.”
“Nuts!”
That was from Piggy, shocked out of decorum. Simon went on. “We could be sort of. . . ”
Simon became inarticulate in his effort to express mankind’s essential illness. Inspiration came to him.
“What’s the dirtiest thing there is?”

The response was Jack uttering a crude, disgusting word which created uproarious laughter and Simon was forgotten. Simon's insight is constantly displayed such as:

However Simon thought of the beast, there rose before his inward sight the picture of a human at once heroic and sick.

Simon is the one who encounters the Lord of the Flies which is a pig's head on a stick and here realises the truth about their fear.

...in front of Simon, the Lord of the Flies hung on his stick and grinned. At last Simon gave up and looked back; saw the white teeth and dim eyes, the blood—and his gaze was held by that ancient, inescapable recognition. In Simon’s right temple, a pulse began to beat on the brain.

During this incident, Simon hallucinated and then fainted. He then ventured further up the mountain since he believed that that would be the only way to discover the truth about the beast and found the dead parachutist's body, surrounded by flies. He realised that that was what Sam and Eric had seen. He released the body from its trappings and decided to go down to the beach to inform the others of his discovery. This was to be his final act, one which he had foreseen during his hallucination.

When Simon reaches the beach, just as a storm came up, he cries out what he had seen. The other boys, thinking that he is their worst fear come to life, attack him in a frenzy. Ralph and Piggy join in and Simon is killed. His body is later washed out to sea. Simon had become a victim of the other boys' deepest and most profound fear.

Why do we see the color orange?

The human eye has two kinds of photo receptive cells, rods and cones. Rod cells are those that are not very sensitive to the color of light falling on them. They largely function as cells that detect the presence or absence of light and therefore pass on signals of black and white to the brain. The cone cells on the other hand are responsible for color and visual sharpness. There are three types of cone...

The human eye has two kinds of photo receptive cells, rods and cones. Rod cells are those that are not very sensitive to the color of light falling on them. They largely function as cells that detect the presence or absence of light and therefore pass on signals of black and white to the brain. The cone cells on the other hand are responsible for color and visual sharpness. There are three types of cone cells that are sensitive to either of green, red or blue light. These three colors can be used to create all other colors in our visible spectrum. The color orange is one which can be created by mixing red with a little bit of green. 

If a body has an outer surface such that all of blue is absorbed, all of red is reflected and a small portion of green is also reflected, the reflected light from the object is perceived by our eyes as orange. It is the proportion of red, blue and green absorbed/reflected by an object that determines if it appears orange in color.

Is it easier to remove a nail from a board using a hammer if the nail is closer to the hammer handle or farther away?

Hammers are commonly used to pound nails into a given material. A hammer claw is used to remove nails from a given material. The idea is to hold the nail in the hammer claw and pull it by either using a continuous sideways rocking motion (while simultaneously pulling it out), or using a support to pull it out directly. 

How far the nail should be from the handle end is an example of how we...

Hammers are commonly used to pound nails into a given material. A hammer claw is used to remove nails from a given material. The idea is to hold the nail in the hammer claw and pull it by either using a continuous sideways rocking motion (while simultaneously pulling it out), or using a support to pull it out directly. 

How far the nail should be from the handle end is an example of how we can use levers to maximize work with minimum effort. Think of a seesaw. A lighter person can balance a relatively heavy person by being as far away as possible from the fulcrum (the center pivotal point). The same is the principle here. The further the load end is from the effort end, the lesser effort is needed. Thus, we should ideally keep the nail as far away from the handle end as possible. One can also think of the different efforts needed to put a nail in when holding the hammer near the handle end or near the hammer end.

Hope this helps. 

I want to write an argumentative essay about this quote from "The Story of an Hour": "When the doctors came they said she had died of heart disease...

This quotation, the last line of the story, refers to the first line of the story and the fact that Louise Mallard is believed to have heart trouble.  Because of this malady, her sister tries to gently break the news that Mr. Mallard, Louise's husband, was killed in a train accident.  Louise does not react the way her sister or we would expect her to.  Rather than mourn the loss of her husband, she actually...

This quotation, the last line of the story, refers to the first line of the story and the fact that Louise Mallard is believed to have heart trouble.  Because of this malady, her sister tries to gently break the news that Mr. Mallard, Louise's husband, was killed in a train accident.  Louise does not react the way her sister or we would expect her to.  Rather than mourn the loss of her husband, she actually seems to rejoice that she is now "'free, free, free!'"  She sits at a window, suddenly aware of all of the evidence of "new spring life" including the "delicious" rain, the "twittering" sparrows, and the "blue sky": positive and vibrant images that match her new life as a free, single woman.

Watching her reaction to this news, there are clues that Louise's heart is actually not fragile.  The narrator says that the lines in her face "bespoke repression and even a certain strength."  Further, "Her pulses beat fast, and the coursing blood warmed and relaxed every inch of her body."  She doesn't sound weak, and her excitement doesn't enfeeble or enervate her; instead, it warms and soothes her.  It seems, perhaps, that the only reason her heart might have seemed weak before was due to the "repression" she has apparently endured as a result of her marriage.  

Her husband was not a bad one, and she's aware that he loved her, but she is happy that "a long procession of years to come [...] would belong to her absolutely."  She now prays that life will be long when, only yesterday, "she had thought with a shudder that life might be long."  It was, apparently, her life as a wife, as one who must compromise and submit, that weakened her; now, though, her new independence gives her strength and vigor that she lacked when her husband lived.  Thus, when her husband opens the door, everyone else assumes that she died of a joyful shock that was too much for her heart.  Ironically, it was the opposite: she died of the terrible shock that the freedom she believed was now hers was snatched away.

Why did Paul's mother call the fire department?

Paul’s mom decides to call the fire department after Paul notices the air’s gray tint and foul smell when he steps outside in the morning. Paul’s mom is skeptical at first, but becomes alarmed once she also steps outside. To both family members, the smoke and foul smell are incredibly alarming! Both know that there’s a fire somewhere, but they can’t locate the source of the smoke and foul smell. They look up to check...

Paul’s mom decides to call the fire department after Paul notices the air’s gray tint and foul smell when he steps outside in the morning. Paul’s mom is skeptical at first, but becomes alarmed once she also steps outside. To both family members, the smoke and foul smell are incredibly alarming! Both know that there’s a fire somewhere, but they can’t locate the source of the smoke and foul smell. They look up to check if their house is actually on fire, but they don’t see any flames.

As soon as Paul suggests that the source could be smoldering electrical wire within their house, Paul’s mom quickly dials the fire department.

It turns out that the smoke and bad smell come from a muck fire. Muck fires are common occurences in Florida. They burn underground after lightning strikes buried decomposing vegetation. Since Paul mentions being woken up by lightning strikes the night before, the cause of the muck fire is apparent. For most long-time inhabitants of Florida, a muck fire wouldnt cause any worry; however, because Paul and his mom are new to Tangerine, they understandably panicked.

Their lack of knowledge of Tangerine’s strange natural occurences and disasters is a constant theme throughout the book, as lightning strikes, muck fires, and sink holes continue to make Paul’s already abnormal life even more difficult.

What is referred to as "a House" in the poem "Because I could not stop for Death-"?

In Emily Dickinson's poem "Because I could not stop for Death," the speaker in the poem is picked up in a carriage by Death and Immortality. The carriage drives slowly past symbols of her childhood and "leisure" (the school), and past symbols of her adult life and "labor" (the fields of grain). Then they pass "the Setting Sun," indicating the end of her life. Finally they come to a stop "before a House that seemed...

In Emily Dickinson's poem "Because I could not stop for Death," the speaker in the poem is picked up in a carriage by Death and Immortality. The carriage drives slowly past symbols of her childhood and "leisure" (the school), and past symbols of her adult life and "labor" (the fields of grain). Then they pass "the Setting Sun," indicating the end of her life. Finally they come to a stop "before a House that seemed / A Swelling of the Ground." This house can be none other than her grave. The roof of the house is "scarcely visible," and its "Cornice - in the Ground." The repetition of the word "Ground" as the exact rhyme of the stanza emphasizes the fact that this journey with death to Eternity ends in the ground. Surely this echoes the words of the familiar English Burial Service: "earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust." Dickinson adds to that, "Ground to Ground." The final stanza speaks about the narrator's life in Eternity. There are no more travels; her last stop, her "final resting place," is this house in the ground, her grave.

What lessons can readers learn from the relationship between Squeaky and Raymond in the short story "Raymond's Run"?

There’s a lot we can learn from the bonding between Squeaky and Raymond. Their relationship exemplifies deep attachment and selfless love between siblings. Squeaky teaches us that true love is never affected by one’s drawbacks, while Raymond teaches us not to grumble about the activity our loved one is passionate about. 

Most importantly, both of them teach that true love can bring about unexpected positive changes in one another. It’s through their love for one...

There’s a lot we can learn from the bonding between Squeaky and Raymond. Their relationship exemplifies deep attachment and selfless love between siblings. Squeaky teaches us that true love is never affected by one’s drawbacks, while Raymond teaches us not to grumble about the activity our loved one is passionate about. 

Most importantly, both of them teach that true love can bring about unexpected positive changes in one another. It’s through their love for one another that brings about a sudden change in their attitudes towards their lives, giving them their moments of epiphany.

We see that Squeaky is transformed into a much more mature and content girl towards the end of the story. She is able to transcend the fear of losing her reputation as “the fastest thing on two feet.” Actually, she is overwhelmed at her discovery that Raymond can be groomed to become a great runner. She’d like to become his coach and help him to make his life meaningful.

On the other hand, Squeaky's company has drawn out the inherent athletic talents in Raymond. When Squeaky would run on the streets, Raymond would follow her. He would also copy her breathing exercises. These habits gradually developed his running skills without his or Squeaky’s noticing them.

Imagine what would have happened had Squeaky found accompanying her brother Raymond, who suffers from cognitive disabilities, to be a burden, or had Raymond objected to Squeaky’s constant running habits and demanding breathing exercises.

Perhaps they’d never have found the epiphanic moments that have brought them immense satisfaction. These moments were possible because true love has taught them never to complain about each other’s shortcomings or eccentricities. Without putting in any extra ounce of effort, they have always known how to accommodate each other with whatever they are. This is possible only when you love someone from the bottom of your heart. Squeaky and Raymond have always loved each other with the sole objective of seeing each other happy and unharmed.

Most importantly, they teach us how to love truly.

Describe Montag’s transition from duty-bound fireman to intellectual revolutionary.

At the beginning of the novel, Montag is fully satisfied with his life as a fireman. He takes pleasure in burning the books and has a visceral high from his job, somewhat like an addiction: 

He knew that when he returned to the firehouse, he might wink at himself, a minstrel man, burntcorked, in the mirror. Later, going to sleep, he would feel the fiery smile still gripped by his face muscles, in the dark. It never went away, that. smile, it never ever went away, as long as he remembered. 

In this role, Montag is a tool of the authorities. He has been conditioned and brainwashed to believe that burning books is a righteous vocation. He has also been taught that creative thinking and questioning things are practices that will only lead to dysfunction and unhappiness. So, he doesn't think of such things. 

The first instance that sparks the beginning of change in Montag occurs with his first conversation with Clarisse. After bombarding him with questions, she leaves asking him if he is happy. He is struck by the fact that she got him to think about himself in a profound way: 

People were more often-he searched for a simile, found one in his work-torches, blazing away until they whiffed out. How rarely did other people's faces take of you and throw back to you your own expression, your own innermost trembling thought? 

He goes home and has to deal with Mildred's overdose. Then he actually says, "I don't know anything anymore." He is clearly uncertain about things at this point, whereas at the beginning of the novel, he is comfortable and happy in his ignorance. 

Another conversation with Clarisse moves Montag to have more questions. He sees a woman choose to burn with her books during a raid on her house. This affects him deeply. In a later conversation with Millie regarding this event, he says, "There must be something in books, things we can't imagine, to make a woman stay in a burning house; there must be something there. You don't stay for nothing." Montag steals a book from the raid. 

His curiosity about books and knowledge increases. He takes more books. He seeks out advice from Faber, a college professor. Clarisse's disappearance also is a clue. He begins questioning a society that would eliminate a girl simply for being curious about life. In a culminating moment, he reads poetry to Millie and her friends. This leads Millie and one of her friends to turn Montag in. But by this point, he has his mind set on becoming the intellectual revolutionary. In the end, he must flee his own home and happens upon the other traveling intellectuals. 

What is the analysis of the play Antigone?

Among the many notable elements of Antigone that might be discussed in analyzing the play, we might look at (1) the essential and highly important thematic differences between the characters of Antigone and Creon and (2) some similarities in theme between Antigone and Oedipus Rex. 

Antigone vs. Creon

There are many differences in perspective between Antigone and Creon, but they spring for the most part from a single well. While we might at first think that the main difference between the two has to do with Antigone's dead brothers Polynices and Eteocles, the principal difference is instead related to a larger, philosophical outlook.

Antigone wants to bury Polynices because that is what the gods decree as the right thing to do. Creon wants to leave the body of Polynices to rot, unburied, because he places a higher value on the state (on politics, on government, and on his own position therein) than on the decrees of the gods.

This issue animates the central conflict of the play as Antigone goes to great lengths, even sacrificing herself, to fulfill the duties demanded of her by the gods.

...you see me now, the last

Unhappy daughter of the line of kings,

Your kings, led away to death. You will remember

What things I suffer, and at what men's hands, 

Because I would not transgress the laws of heaven.

Creon refuses to see the folly of his ways and claims repeatedly that his choices are made with the integrity of the state in mind. Thebes, for Creon, is more important than the rites of the gods. 

This division is an interesting one. In the context of a Greek tragedy, the question of which figure is acting rightly probes a deep question regarding the extent to which special circumstances, political exigencies or complex times might remove individuals from their religious obligations.

Translating the question at its face into today's terms is actually rather straight-forward: Is there ever a time when a person's religious beliefs can be validly subordinated to the needs of the state? Or, is there ever a time when the needs of the state can validly be subordinated to the religious beliefs of an individual? 

The question is far from simple, which is perhaps one reason that the play is so thorny in its complexity and so fascinating in its themes. 

Spending some time analyzing the specific differences between Antigone and Creon may yield some interesting insights into what ideas these characters stand for in the narrative in light of the civic/religious schism we are looking at here. 

Oedipus Rex and Antigone

These two plays hinge on the fault of hubris in man. Both Oedipus and Creon attempt to place themselves before the gods, judging that they can determine the best course of action regardless of soothsayers' advice, prophecies and the like. 

In choosing to escape his prophesied fate, Oedipus acts on a deeply rooted pride (hubris) and ultimately he suffers for this choice. 

Creon may attempt to justify his decisions with political discourse but he too is punished for failing to give the proper credence or respect to the decree of the gods.

The final chorus of Antigone could very well stand as the final words for Oedipus Rex as well, speaking again to the dangers of human hubris in a Greek world commanded by gods. 

There is no happiness where there is no wisdom;

No wisdom but in submission to the gods. 

Big words are always punished, 

And proud men in old age learn to be wise. 

In following this line of analysis, you might focus on the character of Creon in Antigone and look for examples of pride and rash decisions. If you are familiar with Oedipus Rex and would like to fully pursue this thematic connection, you might compare Creon's reasonable attitude and good advice to Oedipus in Oedipus Rex to his uncompromising and dictatorial attitude in Antigone. 

The particular about-face that Creon's character undertakes from one play to the other is telling in the context of an analysis of hubris as a theme in each play.

In addressing just Antigone, you might still look to make comparisons between Creon and other characters, identifying wisdom and folly as they are highlighted in the play in connection to humility and pride. 

Is gerrymandering good or bad? Why?

This is, to some degree, a matter of opinion.  My own view is that gerrymandering is a bad thing.  I believe that it makes our political system more partisan and more divided.

Gerrymandering is the process of drawing political electoral districts in ways that are meant to help the political party that is doing the drawing.  Typically, this means drawing districts in such a way that your own political party gets more seats in the...

This is, to some degree, a matter of opinion.  My own view is that gerrymandering is a bad thing.  I believe that it makes our political system more partisan and more divided.

Gerrymandering is the process of drawing political electoral districts in ways that are meant to help the political party that is doing the drawing.  Typically, this means drawing districts in such a way that your own political party gets more seats in the legislature.  With this definition in mind, we can see that gerrymandering is something that is done for partisan gain and not for the good of our country.

In our society as it exists today, gerrymandering is particularly negative because it contributes to the hyper-partisanship that is so harmful to our country.  The parties gerrymander electoral districts, making sure that as many seats as possible are “safe” for their party.  This means that fewer and fewer legislators have to run in “swing” districts where they have to appeal to people of both parties.  Instead, the majority of our legislators run in one-party districts where their best path to success is to become more partisan and extreme.  This is harming our country badly (at least in my view).

It is hard for me to see any good in gerrymandering.  It is a process that is done in order to rig the political process to help the party that is doing it.  Doing this is selfish and (in my view) unethical and it results in a more partisan and less unified country. 

How is the human attempt to control a theme in this chapter? How is the sureness of uncertainty a theme?

You must be taking about Chapter Four: the Potato! The subtitle of this chapter, "Control," addresses the attempts by humans to utilize the potential of potatoes as a food crop by modifying them via genetic engineering. These methods can produce potatoes which are resistant to common pests, and thus make them more resilient and prolific, as well as more profitable.

But there is an historical lesson discussed in this chapter as well: Pollan explores the...

You must be taking about Chapter Four: the Potato! The subtitle of this chapter, "Control," addresses the attempts by humans to utilize the potential of potatoes as a food crop by modifying them via genetic engineering. These methods can produce potatoes which are resistant to common pests, and thus make them more resilient and prolific, as well as more profitable.

But there is an historical lesson discussed in this chapter as well: Pollan explores the legacy of the Irish potato famine, which, ironically, was not caused because too few potatoes were grown, but because the ones that did grow were infected with blight, and caused illness and death in those who ate them. The lack of diversity in Ireland's agriculture was one of the factors that caused this to occur: the overwhelming dependency upon potatoes as a source of food led to widespread hunger and even starvation. By controlling the structure of agriculture to make it focused upon this one important crop, farmers created a precarious situation that led to disaster. But control is also inherent in the desire to create new strains of potatoes that wouldn't be vulnerable in this way.

Botanists used this event as a starting point to find ways to make the potato a more successful food crop, and to study other cultures where there was a lack of diversity in agriculture. The idea of a "sureness of uncertainty" refers, perhaps, to Pollan's finding the genetic modification of potatoes to be a "solution" that may be causing its own problems. Even if certain pests or diseases are banished, are we inviting a whole new set of problems by genetically modifying plants?

In this chapter, Pollan also explores the idea of control via the concept of human nature's desire to have Apollonian order; while nature prefers a sort of Dionysian chaos. So even as humans attempt to impose order, chaos may still be able to reign.

Do you think George will be happy without Lennie and will he still go for his dream?

George and Lennie had their dream of owning their own little farm and being independent. But George also had another dream which he was candid enough to describe to Lennie. He does this at considerable length in the first chapter when they are camping beside the river.

"God a'mighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. I could go get a job an' work, an' no trouble. No mess at all, and when the end of the month come I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get whatever I want. Why, I could stay in a cat house all night. I could eat any place I want, hotel or any place, and order any damn thing I could think of. An' I could do all that every damn month. Get a gallon of whisky, or set in a poolroom and play cards or shoot pool....An' whatta I got," George went on furiously. "I got you!"

George is only half-involved with the dream he shares with Lennie. Candy is the catalyst who almost makes it happen. The old swamper has several hundred dollars he can contribute to the purchase of the little farm George knows about. But with Lennie out of the equation, the little farm is out of the question. George would be doing all the heavy work and living with an old man who wasn't much good with a missing hand and would keep getting feebler until he was a complete liability. 

George's alternative dream would likely be the one that he would realize. For some reason he doesn't consider a practical, conventional and realizable course of finding a single woman--a widow, perhaps--who already has a little farm and would appreciate having a good man share it with her. George doesn't want a commitment. A cat house is his idea of love. A gallon of whiskey is his idea of happiness. With Lennie dead, George might end up like Crooks and Candy, old and barely hanging on to a job.

Lennie understands George's "alternative dream" and even sympathizes with him, as we see in the very last chapter when Lennie asks his friend to tell him what he would do if he were alone and free of responsibility. He encourages George to express his anger and frustration.

"Well, ain't you gonna say it?"

George shook himself. He said woodenly, "If I was alone I could live so easy." His voice was monotonous, had no emphasis. "I could get a job an' not have no mess." He stopped.

"Go on," said Lennie. "An' when the ends the month come--"

"An' when the end of the month come I could take my fifty bucks an' go to a . . . cat house . . ." He stopped again.

This is pitiful. Lennie is used to George's verbal abuse. Lennie seems to understand that their shared dream was nothing but a dream all along, one that never would come true. He is offering George his freedom. George will not be any happier without Lennie. It was Lennie who kept that other dream of freedom and independence alive. George will undoubtedly go on to live out his alternative dream. What choice does he have? 

Lord of the Flies Why does Jack suddenly feel empowered to openly challenge Ralph and "the rules" (chapter 5)? Make sure to cite evidence from the...

When Ralph calls an assembly in chapter 5, he wants to get various issues of order resolved, especially keeping the fire going, but also issues of sanitation and work duties. Unfortunately, he calls the meeting late in the day, and in the darkness, his authority is less visible, so less respected.

Jack, fresh off the successful pig hunt, is feeling empowered. When the meeting starts to break down by discussing the fears of the littluns,...

When Ralph calls an assembly in chapter 5, he wants to get various issues of order resolved, especially keeping the fire going, but also issues of sanitation and work duties. Unfortunately, he calls the meeting late in the day, and in the darkness, his authority is less visible, so less respected.

Jack, fresh off the successful pig hunt, is feeling empowered. When the meeting starts to break down by discussing the fears of the littluns, Jack uses the confusion and chaos to step in and offer himself as a strong leader. He assures the boys that, as a hunter, he has been all around the island and has not seen a beast. He tells the children, "Of course we're frightened sometimes, but we put up with being frightened." When Jack thinks Ralph is favoring Piggy, his jealousy prompts him to lash out at Ralph and say, "Who are you, anyway? Sitting there telling people what to do. You can't hunt..." After Ralph reminds him of rules, he shouts, "Bullocks to the rules! We're strong--we hunt!" A combination of his success with hunting, the chaos caused by the littluns' fear, and his jealousy inspires Jack to rebel and challenge Ralph's leadership.

As to whether Jack really experiences fear, yes, he does. In chapter 3, Jack confesses to Ralph and Simon that sometimes when he is hunting, "you can feel as if you're not hunting but--being hunted, as if something's behind you all the time in the jungle." So although he may not have considered a beast from the ocean before this, nevertheless he actually is afraid himself. It appears that he was not as much using the littluns' fears as strategic manipulation but simply capitalized on them in the moment to advance himself. In addition, by promising to protect the rest of the boys from the "beast," he was bolstering his own courage with his bravado. 

In 1984, what does Newspeak refer to according to Winston's friend Syme? What is its ultimate purpose?

In Part One, Chapter Five of 1984, Winston is lectured by his friend Syme on Newspeak, which is the official language of Oceania. Syme is an expert on Newspeak because he works in the Research department of the Ministry of Truth and is involved in the writing of the eleventh edition of the Newspeak dictionary. 

According to Syme, the essence of Newspeak involves "cutting language down to the bone." In other words, it involves...

In Part One, Chapter Five of 1984, Winston is lectured by his friend Syme on Newspeak, which is the official language of Oceania. Syme is an expert on Newspeak because he works in the Research department of the Ministry of Truth and is involved in the writing of the eleventh edition of the Newspeak dictionary. 

According to Syme, the essence of Newspeak involves "cutting language down to the bone." In other words, it involves the elimination of words which the party deems unnecessary. We see this in Syme's handling of adjectives:

"A word contains its opposite in itself. Take 'good,' for instance. If you have a word like 'good,' what need is there for a word like 'bad'? 'Ungood' will do just as well."

He goes on to say that the purpose of cutting the language down is to "narrow the range of thought" and therefore eliminate the possibility of ever committing Thoughtcrime. It simply won't be possible to think something bad about the party because Newspeak will have removed all the words that make these feelings possible.

On a deeper level, the development of Newspeak is about enabling the party to control people's thoughts. They already control people's movements through the telescreens, but Newspeak will allow them to enter people's conscious and unconscious thoughts and manipulate them accordingly. If people are unable to articulate their dissatisfaction with the party, for example, they will (theoretically) be unable to feel it. And this, in Syme's words, will signal the party's total control over Oceania: "The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect. Newspeak is Ingsoc and Ingsoc is Newspeak." 

How would you compare and contrast the poems "Ain't I A Woman?" by Sojourner Truth, and "Let America Be America Again" by Langston Hughes?

Both Sojourner Truth's "Ain't I A Woman?" and Langston Hughes's "Let America Be America Again" discuss the oppression of specific marginalized groups and beg for freedom. One difference between the two is that Truth's poem specifically addresses the oppression of women and African-American women, whereas Hughes's poem addresses the oppression of all marginalized groups besides women.

Truth's poem opens by talking about the special treatment women receive from gentlemen because they are considered the weaker sex, including being "helped into carriages," carried over ditches, lifted over mud puddles, and being given the "best place." The speaker points out, though, that she is not given this much respect even though she, too, is a woman. The speaker's rhetorical question found in the refrain — "And ain't I a woman?" — serves to emphasize the fact that, due to her African descent, the narrator is not treated as having equal status with other women. Her references to inequality serve to protest against the injustices suffered by marginalized African Americans, especially African-American women.

Truth does not focus entirely on the oppression experienced by African-American women. By the seventh stanza, Truth notes the belief held by men over the ages that women are not equal to men:

Then that little man in black there say
a woman can't have as much rights as a man
cause Christ wasn't a woman.

The speaker then continues to point out the logical fallacy of that man's claim. By pointing out how illogical it is that all women are considered unequal to all men, the speaker is also protesting against the marginalization of all women, not just African-American women.

Similarly, when Hughes states, "America never was America to me," the speaker protests against the lack of liberties in America due to the oppression of the marginalized. In one stanza, Hughes sets out to list the marginalized he is acting as the voice of:

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek—
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

Since Hughes does not specifically mention women as a marginalized group seeking freedom, it can be said that one difference between his and Truth's poem is that Truth's poem speaks of the oppression of women, whereas Hughes's poem speaks of the oppression of men in other marginalized groups.

I am hoping to find someone that can take this quote and help me understand it better. The quote is:“Liberty has never come from the government....

Although Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, and although conservatives today think he was a terrible president, this quote goes perfectly with what conservatives or Republicans believe today. It is saying that the government is not what guarantees our freedom.  Instead, it says, we get our freedom when we limit the power of the government.

Today, Democrats and liberals tend to believe that things are better when the government has more power.  When we give the...

Although Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat, and although conservatives today think he was a terrible president, this quote goes perfectly with what conservatives or Republicans believe today. It is saying that the government is not what guarantees our freedom.  Instead, it says, we get our freedom when we limit the power of the government.

Today, Democrats and liberals tend to believe that things are better when the government has more power.  When we give the government more power, it can protect us from environmental dangers.  When we give the government more power, it can protect the weak from the strong, who try to abuse them.  When the government has more power, it can create more economic justice.  For all of these reasons, more government is seen as a good thing

Conservatives, though, think that this is dangerous. They think that a stronger and bigger government is a grave danger because it will take away our liberties. Instead, what we need is a more limited government.  They say that the way to protect our liberty is to take away the power of the government. If the government is limited, it cannot take away our right to freedom of speech or religion. If the government is limited, it cannot take away our right to do as we wish with our private property. This is why the Framers of the Constitution were so eager to make government weak.  The Constitution tells us all sorts of things that government cannot do and it creates an awkward system of separation of powers and checks and balances that makes it still harder for the government to act. This is meant to protect our freedom.

Think about it this way: if you were afraid someone was inclined to want to steal from you, wouldn’t you want them to be weaker? Wouldn’t you want to be sure they didn’t have weapons or other things that would make it easier for them to take your things?  This is what Wilson is saying.  The government is likely to steal our freedom so the best way to protect our freedom is to keep the government from getting too strong.

Why do you think Delia stays with Sykes after he has been so abusive towards her?

In Hurston's short story, "Sweat," Delia leads a very hard life. She labors over other people's laundry while her husband goes around town with another woman. Sykes is abusive to her and torments her every chance he gets. Hurston doesn't give much textual evidence as to why Delia would stay with him; however, we can make some assumptions. During that time, the 1920s, women didn't often leave their husbands--it was unconventional for that time. This...

In Hurston's short story, "Sweat," Delia leads a very hard life. She labors over other people's laundry while her husband goes around town with another woman. Sykes is abusive to her and torments her every chance he gets. Hurston doesn't give much textual evidence as to why Delia would stay with him; however, we can make some assumptions. During that time, the 1920s, women didn't often leave their husbands--it was unconventional for that time. This could be part of the reason. Another possible reason is because Delia is the type of person who will bear things that are difficult. She also seems as though she upholds commitments. She is consistently at work on Sundays even though this is a day of rest and she married her husband, so seems to be committed to stay with him regardless of how he treats her.

What is the setting of Trifles?

The place of Susan Glaspell's play, Trifles, is a farmhouse in rural Iowa; the development of the plot occurs mainly in the kitchen.The time is the winter of 1900. 

Interestingly, Glaspell skillfully uses setting as the objective correlative for the atmosphere and the emotional conditions of the characters. T. S. Eliot describes this literary element as

...a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked. 

• Place Setting

In Trifles, the place setting of a cold, bitter, lifeless winter and the isolation of the farm acts as the objective correlatives of Minnie Wright's loneliness in an empty farmhouse devoid of the laughter of children and their love, distant from neighbors. As Mrs. Hale, who has a farm nearby, remarks, "We live close together and we live far apart." The Wright farm is in a hollow and it "don't see the road....It's a lonesome place and always was."

Within the kitchen, where warmth from stoves and human hearts should abide, there is a terrible chill as the fire has gone out when the county attorney, the sheriff and his wife, and a neighbor and his wife arrive. In the cupboards, jelly jars containing the fruits that Mrs. Wright grew, picked, cooked, and preserved have frozen and cracked. These frozen jars and ruined fruit correlate with the coldness of Mr. Wright's heart that has wrought this painful loneliness and suffering in Mrs. Wright. 
Also within the cupboards is the dead canary, the bird who gave voice to Minnie Wright's solitary soul, but it has been silenced by the authoritarian husband.

• Time Setting

Also acting as an objective correlative is the time setting of 1900. During this era women possessed little voice in the affairs of men, or even in their homes. Not only was their repression widespread, but they were often oppressed in their homes, victims of emotional neglect or abuse. The torn clothing of a woman who once was pert, attractively dressed, and part of the church choir, suggests Mrs. Wright's neglect as do the erratic stitches in the quilt she was making.
The evidence of this oppression convinces the women in the kitchen, the wife of the sheriff and the neighbor, that Mrs. Wright was much more a victim than the perpetrator of a crime.

How can hubris lead to a character's downfall?

The term "hubris" in most literature classes refers to a particular element of the analysis of Greek tragedy in Aristotle's Poetics. According to this account, the typical protagonist or tragic hero is a noble character, greater and more powerful than the average person, whose downfall is occasioned by hubris. For us to feel "fear and pity" at this downfall, the reversal of fortune must be caused by a combination of external events and the...

The term "hubris" in most literature classes refers to a particular element of the analysis of Greek tragedy in Aristotle's Poetics. According to this account, the typical protagonist or tragic hero is a noble character, greater and more powerful than the average person, whose downfall is occasioned by hubris. For us to feel "fear and pity" at this downfall, the reversal of fortune must be caused by a combination of external events and the character's own weaknesses or "tragic flaws."

Hubris, in this context, means overbearing arrogance. Often it is framed as a challenge to the authority of the gods, in which a mortal forgets that no matter how powerful or wise he may be, he can never triumph against fate or the will of the gods. Often the protagonist is portrayed as receiving warnings from prophets or natural signs that the gods disapprove of his actions, and nevertheless persists in those actions, and then is punished by the gods.

For example, in Sophocles' Antigone, Creon decides to punish Antigone and leave the corpse of Polynices unburied, despite evidence of divine preference and the warnings of Tiresias. As a consequence, Creon's wife and son commit suicide.

The mechanism by which hubris leads to downfall is usually fate or divine intervention, but sometimes can be the inherent logic of the protagonist's actions. 

Who is Guy Pehrsson in Will Weaver's Red Earth, White Earth?

Guy Pehrsson is the main character or protagonist in Will Weaver's 1986 novel Red Earth, White Earth. Described in the story's prologue, Pehrsson is "thirty, tall, fair-haired, with wide, bony shoulders." Guy is a successful businessman residing in the affluent San Francisco Bay area when he is summoned home by an ominous, somewhat cryptique letter from his grandfather, whom Guy had believed was physically incapable of sending any such form of communication due to...

Guy Pehrsson is the main character or protagonist in Will Weaver's 1986 novel Red Earth, White Earth. Described in the story's prologue, Pehrsson is "thirty, tall, fair-haired, with wide, bony shoulders." Guy is a successful businessman residing in the affluent San Francisco Bay area when he is summoned home by an ominous, somewhat cryptique letter from his grandfather, whom Guy had believed was physically incapable of sending any such form of communication due to the elderly man's failing health. "Home," in Weaver's story about the clash of civilizations within the American Midwest, specifically, the socially-dysfunctional Native American reserves and the white majority population that grew in size, wealth and power while exploiting the indigenous populations' rightful assets.

Red Earth, White Earth could be considered a little formulaic, but Weaver’s novel is written for “young adults,” and exposes that readership to the cultural and social wounds that permeate Native American populations and the emotional tolls taken by those who flee their tribal or ancestral homelands for greener—read, “whiter”—pastures. As one could expect of a novel with such a theme, Guy, who had, indeed, fled the depressing, dysfunctional environment of the reservation for the affluence of Silicon Valley, is reawakened to his heritage by this summons home from his grandfather. Guy becomes involved in the dispute that has been brewing between the Native American population and the vested interests that seek to further exploit the economically-destitute tribes. Not content to present his protagonist as simply self-exiled from his ancestral home, Weaver makes sure the reader is fully aware of just how morally-exhausted Guy has become during his exile. As Guy drives his Mercedes car across the West and Midwest, he is depicted as the personification of white, affluent, narcissistic excess--“a quarter gram of cocaine, and three speeding tickets later”—but he is Native American, and cannot escape his heritage. Weaver’s story is about a coming home that serves to temper those excesses and remind one of the importance of a soul. Guy’s reunion with childhood friend and Native lawyer Tom Little Wolf and his involvement in the land dispute with the white farmers and developers who covet yet more native land provides the basis for this emotional return to one’s roots and to the new-found respect Guy develops for his heritage.

Why are the students so unwilling to associate with anyone outside their ethnic/racial groups? Where does this intolerance come from?

Interesting question! In the book The Freedom Writers many of the students are unwilling to associate with other students from different ethnic or racial backgrounds.

Throughout the book, students comment about their unwillingness to associate with others from different backgrounds. Although many of the students find this behavior in others (such as during their reading of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet) to be wrong or illogical, they find the segregation to be normal with themselves.

...

Interesting question! In the book The Freedom Writers many of the students are unwilling to associate with other students from different ethnic or racial backgrounds.

Throughout the book, students comment about their unwillingness to associate with others from different backgrounds. Although many of the students find this behavior in others (such as during their reading of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet) to be wrong or illogical, they find the segregation to be normal with themselves.

In the book, several of the students express that blending the different backgrounds into one classroom seems problematic. Many of the students segregate during lunch. This appears normal to many of the students. As one student reveals:

“This school is just asking for trouble when they put all of these kids in the same class. It’s a disaster waiting to happen.”

Although there are numerous different explanations about this intolerance, there are some particularly noteworthy causes. As some students illustrate, the segregation has existed for years; thus, change seems unlikely. Furthermore, many of the students do not believe they can cause a change of such magnitude. Others appear scared of upsetting their parents. Lastly, violence instills this separation as well.

Consequently, segregation is commonly seen in this book. Throughout the story, students begin to question the intolerance. However, several factors encourage their unwillingness to associate, such as violence and fear.

Why does Miss Maudie believe that appointing Atticus was no accident?

One day, Scout, Dill, and Jem are visiting with Miss Maudie, their neighbor.  Miss Maudie tells them that "there are some men in this world who were born to do... unpleasant jobs" (To Kill a Mockingbird, Chapter 22).  She notes that Atticus Finch is one of those men.  He has been appointed to defend Tom Robinson, a black man accused of raping a white woman.  

Jem expresses his frustration regarding the Tom...

One day, Scout, Dill, and Jem are visiting with Miss Maudie, their neighbor.  Miss Maudie tells them that "there are some men in this world who were born to do... unpleasant jobs" (To Kill a Mockingbird, Chapter 22).  She notes that Atticus Finch is one of those men.  He has been appointed to defend Tom Robinson, a black man accused of raping a white woman.  

Jem expresses his frustration regarding the Tom Robinson trial.  He questions who will help Tom Robinson.  Miss Maudie notes that many people are supportive of Tom.  She poses a question:

"Did it ever strike you that Judge Taylor naming Atticus to defend that boy was no accident?  That Judge Taylor might have had his reasons for naming him?"

Typically, if the court appoints an attorney for defense in Maycomb, a man named Maxwell Green is selected.  Scout and Jem had not previously thought of this fact.  Green is a new lawyer and has needed to take on more cases to gain experience.  

Miss Maudie knows that Atticus will not win this case.  However, she knows that "he's the only man in these parts who can keep a jury out so long in a case like that."  She knows that Atticus will try his best to give Tom a fair trial even though he is accused of a serious crime for a black man.  He will represent Tom well.  She thinks it is a step in the right direction in the fight against injustice.

Why did Harper Lee name the book To Kill a Mockingbird?

The title comes from the idea that some people are targeted unfairly by society because they are different.

When Scout and Jem get guns for Christmas, Atticus tells them not to shoot at mockingbirds.  Unlike some of the other birds he names, he considers Mockingbirds worthy of protection. 

“I’d rather you shot at tin cans in the back yard, but I know you’ll go after birds. Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can...

The title comes from the idea that some people are targeted unfairly by society because they are different.

When Scout and Jem get guns for Christmas, Atticus tells them not to shoot at mockingbirds.  Unlike some of the other birds he names, he considers Mockingbirds worthy of protection. 

“I’d rather you shot at tin cans in the back yard, but I know you’ll go after birds. Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit ‘em, but remember it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird.” (Ch. 10)

Scout asks Miss Maudie to explain.  She has never heard her father say it’s a sin to do anything before, so he obviously feels very strongly about the mockingbirds.  Miss Maudie tells her that mockingbirds never hurt anyone, and just make music for people to enjoy.

There are two mockingbirds mentioned in the book.  Tom Robinson’s death is compared to “the senseless slaughter of songbirds by hunters and children” by Mr. Underwood in an editorial (Ch. 25).  Boo Radley is the second mockingbird.  When he kills Bob Ewell to protect the children, Atticus and Heck Tate decide not to tell anyone because the notoriety would be a disaster for the shy, reclusive Boo.  Atticus asks Scout if she understands why they are keeping Boo’s involvement a secret.

“Yes sir, I understand,” I reassured him. “Mr. Tate was right.”

Atticus disengaged himself and looked at me. “What do you mean?”

“Well, it’d be sort of like shootin‘ a mockingbird, wouldn’t it?” (Ch. 30)

Boo Radley and Tom Robinson both helped people rather than hurting them, but both were misunderstood.  People were against Tom because he was black and when he was accused of raping a white woman, everyone assumed he was guilty even though all he was doing was helping her.  Boo Radley was a neighborhood recluse who made some bad choices in his youth, and for that the town vilified him. 

What is a quote from Chapters 3 and 4 of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird that depicts Scout's personality?

"Catching Walter Cunningham in the schoolyard gave me some pleasure, but when I was rubbing his nose in the dirt Jem came by and told me to stop" (Lee 30).

One of Scout's most predominant personality traits is her short temper.There are numerous scenes throughout the novel that depict Scout losing her temper and physically becoming aggressive towards others. Chapter 3 begins with Scout physically punishing Walter Cunningham because Miss Caroline disciplined...

"Catching Walter Cunningham in the schoolyard gave me some pleasure, but when I was rubbing his nose in the dirt Jem came by and told me to stop" (Lee 30).

One of Scout's most predominant personality traits is her short temper. There are numerous scenes throughout the novel that depict Scout losing her temper and physically becoming aggressive towards others. Chapter 3 begins with Scout physically punishing Walter Cunningham because Miss Caroline disciplined Scout after she attempted to stick up for him. One of the most significant lessons Atticus teaches his daughter is the importance of controlling her anger. As Scout matures, she learns how to deal with her anger and control her emotions. In the scene where Scout is taking pleasure in beating up Walter, Jem steps in and tells Scout to stop. This is typical of their relationship. Jem is usually the voice of reason, being that he is four years older. Scout obeys her brother, which is another action that portrays her personality. Scout looks up to Jem throughout the novel and typically follows her brother's directives, even if she does not agree with him.

Compare and contrast "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud" to Walter de la Mare's poem "The Storm." How does each poet depict nature differently? How do...

In “I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud,” the speaker is a human, who experiences the startling beauty of nature through the unexpected discovery of an entire sea of daffodils by the water. This poem is pensive and calm, using light, frivolous vocabulary: the daffodils are “fluttering and dancing in the breeze,” and “tossing their heads in sprightly dance.” The waves in the bay, as well, dance and sparkle, and yet the daffodils are more captivating even than the ocean, multitudinous as they are, as the stars in the sky. 

In Wordsworth’s poem nature is powerful and inviting, exhibiting forces of healing in the form of bright colors and gentle vibes. It is recounted from a comfortable, safe perspective; when the speaker is resting on his safe, warm couch, the memories of his solo walk along the bay

…flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.

These recollections serve as a comfort and pleasure to him, even when he is comfortable in a pleasant environment.  Such was the power of the scene.

De la Mare’s poem also presents nature as a powerful force, but an impersonal, destructive one. The poem is told from the perspective of sea birds in a storm, and the vocabulary is a violent as Wordsworth’s is serene:  “And the wind rose, and the sea rose,/To the angry billows’ roar,” and in the second verse,

And the yeasty surf curdled over the sands,
The gaunt grey rocks between;
And the tempest raved, and the lightning’s fire
Struck blue on the spindrift hoar –

Here the birds have lost control, and the storm is forcing them onto the shore, waves tossing and wind howling, a wholly different scene than Wordsworth’s happy spring day.  Even in the end, when the storm breaks and the sun comes out, we see the lingering effects of the chaos – “the bright green headlands shone/As they’d never shone before,” and yet within this setting we have vast hoards of sea birds breaking this lovely post-storm calm with their “screeching, scolding, [and] scrabbling.” But in the final two lines of the poem, we see also “A snowy, silent, sun-washed drift/Of sea-birds on the shore.” And herein lies the true destruction: while a whole host of birds are tumbling through the sky, another host of birds has been killed by the violence of the storm.

Both poems depict the unpredictability of nature, and yet because Wordsworth’s poem is from the point of view of a man, on a bright spring day, his poem is more domestic and simple than that of de la Mare. The latter presents the point of view of nature itself, only to switch to a third person, withdrawn perspective at the end of the poem; humans have no role in the events that unfold. Any humans that exist in the area would have been safely indoors during the storm, away from any danger. We therefore get the rawness of nature where we would normally escape it for our fires and our beds; here is the flip-side of natural beauty – natural destruction. This poem is no walk in the garden, but a story of the wildness of natural processes.

What are some of the stories about Arthur (Boo) Radley in To Kill a Mockingbird?

In the opening chapter of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, the first story we are told about Arthur (Boo) Radley is that, when he was 18 years old, he started spending time with a bunch of trouble-making boys. One night, they stole a cheap vehicle, were arrested, and were convicted upon "charges of disorderly conduct disturbing the peace, assault and battery, and using abusive and profane language in the presence and hearing of...

In the opening chapter of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, the first story we are told about Arthur (Boo) Radley is that, when he was 18 years old, he started spending time with a bunch of trouble-making boys. One night, they stole a cheap vehicle, were arrested, and were convicted upon "charges of disorderly conduct disturbing the peace, assault and battery, and using abusive and profane language in the presence and hearing of a female" (Chapter 1). All the boys except Arthur were sent to the industrial school, where they received high-quality educations. Mr. Radley felt it best to keep Arthur under his own care and received permission from the judge to keep him under house arrest.

The second story we learn in the first chapter is that, after 15 years of house arrest, at the age of 33, Arthur was apparently driven insane enough to drive a pair of scissors into his father's leg as Mr. Radley passed by Arthur while Arthur was working on his scrapbook. According to Miss Stephanie Crawford's rumors, Mr. Radley refused to have his son sent to an asylum. He did, however, concede to jail time but without pressing any charges. The "sheriff hadn't the heart to put him in the jail alongside Negroes, so Boo was locked in the courthouse basement" until the town council insisted Arthur be taken under Mr. Radley's care again (Chapter 1).

Other stories we learn about Arthur are myths about his sneaking out at night, watching Miss Stephanie through her bedroom window in the middle of the night, and poisoning the pecans that fell onto his lawn.

What is the function of the heart and how does it work?

The heart is one of the most important organs in the body, responsible for pumping blood throughout our many tissues. The heart is part of the circulatory or cardiovascular system, along with arteries, veins, capillaries, and the lungs. As blood circulates throughout the body, powered by the heart, it delivers nutrients and oxygen to our tissues and picks up metabolic waste to be excreted.

Below I've shared a simple diagram of the circulatory system. Arteries...

The heart is one of the most important organs in the body, responsible for pumping blood throughout our many tissues. The heart is part of the circulatory or cardiovascular system, along with arteries, veins, capillaries, and the lungs. As blood circulates throughout the body, powered by the heart, it delivers nutrients and oxygen to our tissues and picks up metabolic waste to be excreted.

Below I've shared a simple diagram of the circulatory system. Arteries are depicted in red, and veins in blue. Arteries are responsible for carrying fresh, oxygenated blood away from the heart, and veins are responsible for carrying de-oxygenated blood back towards the heart.

The heartbeat is one of the involuntary or autonomic functions of the body. An electrical impulse from the brain causes the heart to contract (systole) and release (diastole.) The systolic action pushes blood further throughout the circulatory system. The diastolic action fills the heart back up with blood in preparation for the next contraction. 

When deoxygenated blood is returned to the heart, it is pushed on to the lungs, where the cells are supplied with oxygen from the air we breathe. The blood then returns to the heart once more (dropping off a little fresh oxygen on the way) and is pumped throughout the rest of the body. The valves which separate the ventricles and atria of the heart are responsible for regulating the flow of blood throughout the heart and the body.

If you click here, you can see a simple diagram of the directional flow of blood throughout the body.

If you

I am trying to marry the idea of the phrase "Know your place" to two creative works in the arts category. I am currently exploring the idea of...

If I were you, I would look specifically at visual art. There are a myriad of paintings and sculptures that would help you expand on your thesis.

For this topic, you might want to start with the portraits of British Royal Academy artists, such as Joshua Reynolds and Thomas Gainsborough. Their work is very status conscious. Consider, for example, Reynolds's painting "The Ladies Waldegrave." Here, you have three young sisters from an upper-class family engaged...

If I were you, I would look specifically at visual art. There are a myriad of paintings and sculptures that would help you expand on your thesis.

For this topic, you might want to start with the portraits of British Royal Academy artists, such as Joshua Reynolds and Thomas Gainsborough. Their work is very status conscious. Consider, for example, Reynolds's painting "The Ladies Waldegrave." Here, you have three young sisters from an upper-class family engaged in leisure activities in sumptuous surroundings. Their skin is very white, which is a sign of their coddled lifestyle (they never need to go out to do anything), and they are clustered around a small table in what may be a drawing room. Reynolds's understanding of the place of these women may have informed his choice to organize the figures as he did in the painting.

Another genre to consider is American art of the 19th- and 20th-centuries. For the 19th-century, I think that the work of Winslow Homer is very helpful. Consider his 1876 work, "A Visit from the Old Mistress." This painting very well illustrates "knowing one's place," or status, in a clearly stratified society.

Another work, "At the Window" is a consideration of a woman's place in 19th-century society. A young woman sits alone in a chair in a shadowy room. Her only company are two small plants on the windowsill. Framed in the window, just beyond her, is a lush landscape. She turns away from that landscape and looks instead within the house. The conclusion one may draw: her place is in the home.

If you would like to use the work of an artist who answers this question from a more satirical perspective, I would strongly consider the work of Kara Walker. Her collection "Kara Walker: My Complement, My Enemy, My Oppressor, My Love" contains many examples with which you can work -- if you are willing to deal with her violent and lurid images.

How did the British colonial government influence the geographical position of Kenya?

What ultimately became Kenya was first colonized not by the British government but by a private corporation called the East Africa Company. This was part of a general colonial rush by European powers to carve up Africa between them in order to secure its abundant natural resources, a violent and destructive process that still has harmful ripple effects in Africa today.The East Africa Company set up its colony with two major constraints: The first...

What ultimately became Kenya was first colonized not by the British government but by a private corporation called the East Africa Company. This was part of a general colonial rush by European powers to carve up Africa between them in order to secure its abundant natural resources, a violent and destructive process that still has harmful ripple effects in Africa today.

The East Africa Company set up its colony with two major constraints: The first was a series of treaties and alliances between Britain and other European powers, restricting the terrain they were allowed to claim. The second was the availability of natural resources and valuable trade routes. The position of Kenya was set in part by the desire to construct a railway from the coast to Lake Victoria in order to facilitate the transport of goods from central Africa to Europe---as a result Kenya extends from the coast to Lake Victoria. Eventually the Crown saw that the East Africa Company was not up to the task of managing an entire country of millions of people, and dissolved the corporation and established the East Africa Protectorate as an official British colony. Eventually the name was changed to Kenya in a half-hearted effort to signal a friendlier relationship with local people.

In general, the problem with the way countries were established in Africa is not what did influence the geography, but what didn't---the existing alliances and conflicts between local tribes were basically ignored, as were all ancestral claims to the land. European powers set the borders according to what seemed most convenient or expedient for their purposes, and where the local people disagreed they were forced out or even killed.

How can I analyze the three-way relationship between Hamlet, Gertrude, and Claudius?

This is a complex relationship. Claudius sums it up best at the beginning of the play.

Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen,  Th' imperial jointress to this warlike state,  Have we, as 'twere with a defeated joy,  With an auspicious, and a dropping eye,  With mirth in funeral, and with dirge in marriage,  In equal scale weighing delight and dole,  Taken to wife; (I.ii.208-213).

He explains to the reader (or audience) that Gertrude was once...

This is a complex relationship. Claudius sums it up best at the beginning of the play.

Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen, 
Th' imperial jointress to this warlike state, 
Have we, as 'twere with a defeated joy, 
With an auspicious, and a dropping eye, 
With mirth in funeral, and with dirge in marriage, 
In equal scale weighing delight and dole, 
Taken to wife; (I.ii.208-213).

He explains to the reader (or audience) that Gertrude was once his sister-in-law, married to his brother, but is now his wife. This makes Claudius not only Hamlet’s uncle but also his stepfather. Additionally, it creates strain in the mother and son relationship since Hamlet can’t understand how his mother could love his father so dearly yet marry his father’s brother so soon after the funeral.

Though the play begins after King Hamlet is dead, it is this exposition that shows us the complexity of Hamlet’s situation not only in his home at Elsinore but in the kingdom as well. Denmark is at odds with Norway. Young Fortinbras wants to attack and avenge his father, and now Denmark is ripe for the picking with a changeover in the throne. Everything about this set up is precarious, and when we soon after learn that the new king is the one who murdered the old, it’s easy to understand why Hamlet’s relationship with his mother becomes even more strained. Either she was in on the plot to murder King Hamlet or she wasn’t, but either way, she is married to her husband’s killer and places her trust in her husband up until the moment she drinks the poisoned wine. And when Claudius believes Hamlet has uncovered his secrets, he aims to get rid of Hamlet as well, which is what catalyzes the deaths of Gertrude, Laertes, Hamlet, and Claudius himself in the end.

The relationship between Hamlet, Claudius, and Gertrude is volatile from the beginning. It is this set-up that sets the rest of the play in motion until it comes to a tragic end.

Describe the climate in the first stanza of the poem.

The first stanza of the poem conveys the solitude of the speaker in these woods as well as the tranquil scene that has caused him to pause and enjoy.  He says,

Whose woods these are I think I know.   

His house is in the village though;   

He will not see me stopping here   

To watch his woods fill up with snow. (lines 1-4)

So, he claims that he is familiar with the owner of...

The first stanza of the poem conveys the solitude of the speaker in these woods as well as the tranquil scene that has caused him to pause and enjoy.  He says,

Whose woods these are I think I know.   

His house is in the village though;   

He will not see me stopping here   

To watch his woods fill up with snow. (lines 1-4)

So, he claims that he is familiar with the owner of these woods, but the owner's home is actually in the village and not in the woods themselves.  In other words, the owner lives a ways off, and the implication is that he is not even nearby to enjoy the beauty to which he has such personal and unlimited access.  Moreover, the absence of the owner of this land indicates that the speaker is alone here.

Further, the visual imagery conveyed by the idea of watching "his woods fill up with snow" is arresting.  It is as though the woods are a container that can be "filled up" with something; we can imagine the tall, thin trees growing deeper and deeper in the snow as it piles up around them.  Such a line emphasizes, again, the solitariness of the scene and impacts the mood of the poem as well, and we can know that it is the tranquility of this silent, darkened scene that has so arrested the speaker.

Describe any four characteristics of Jerome K. Jerome.

Jerome K. Jerome, the author of Three Men in a Boat, had a number of interesting characteristics, including having been a loyal life-long friend to Carl Hentschel and George Wingrave, with the latter of whom he shared lodgings before he'd made a name for himself. They all shared a love of the theater. His four youthful ambitions, as confided to George, were to be an editor, to be a playwright, to be a novelist and...

Jerome K. Jerome, the author of Three Men in a Boat, had a number of interesting characteristics, including having been a loyal life-long friend to Carl Hentschel and George Wingrave, with the latter of whom he shared lodgings before he'd made a name for himself. They all shared a love of the theater. His four youthful ambitions, as confided to George, were to be an editor, to be a playwright, to be a novelist and to be a Member of England's Parliament. He was never elected to Parliament but succeeded in the other three. Jerome K. Jerome also had these characteristics:

• He left school at age 14 to help the family earn a living.


• He worked as a clerk, a journalist, and an actor, having played every role in Hamlet except Ophelia.


• He traveled to Russia and America more than once.


• He was always most well known for Three Men in a Boat although he was a prolific author.


• He did not own a dog when writing Three Men in a Boat.


• His two life-long friends, united with him by mutual love of the theater and adventure, were Carl Hentschel (rechristened by Jerome as William Samuel Harris) and George Wingrave.


• Jerome and his two friends were active and adventurous, bicycling through Germany's Black Forest, skiing in the Alps, boating down the Thames.

The character of J., created by Jerome, has some character traits that match Jerome's because, just as Jerome used George and Carl ("Harris") as models for the characters of George and Harris, he used himself as a model for the character of J. Some of J.s characteristics are these:

• He imagines himself a hypochondriac though in reality he is really only suffering the boredom of ennui.


• He is a staunch friend of George and Harris (just as in real life Jerome was the staunch friend of George and Carl ("Harris")).


• He was very fond of drinking, knowing all the pubs in several neighborhoods.


• He was philosophical and lyrical in his thinking (when not struggling with packing), as shown when he is musing about the "boat of life."

[O]h, heaviest, maddest lumber of all!—... luxuries that only cloy, with pleasures that bore, with empty show .... It is lumber, man—all lumber!
   Throw the lumber over, man! Let your boat of life be light, packed with only what you need—a homely home and simple pleasures, one or two friends, worth the name, someone to love and someone to love you, a cat, a dog, and a pipe or two, enough to eat and enough to wear, and a little more than enough to drink....