Compare and contrast the loss of immortality suffered by Gilgamesh and the fall from grace suffered by Adam and Eve.

In both the Biblical story of Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh we find a story of the decline of humanity from an idyllic state to our current mortal state. In both cases this decline is attributed to offending one or more gods. 

The two narratives, however, follow a different path. Adam and Eve initially are immortal, and as we read through the book of Genesiswe discover how they lost their immortality. In the...

In both the Biblical story of Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh we find a story of the decline of humanity from an idyllic state to our current mortal state. In both cases this decline is attributed to offending one or more gods. 

The two narratives, however, follow a different path. Adam and Eve initially are immortal, and as we read through the book of Genesis we discover how they lost their immortality. In the case of Gilgamesh, the hero is very long-lived, but not himself immortal. After the death of his friend Enkidu, Gilgamesh undertakes a quest in which he travels to obtain immortality, which is possessed by Utnapishtim and is a gift of the gods. Humans are not by nature immortal by can be made immortal if the gods will it.

Utnapishtim tells the story of humans angering the gods and the gods sending a great flood, during which only Utnapishtim and his wife were spared, a story that bears obvious similarity to that of Noah. 

Although Gilgamesh fails the test Utnapishtim sets him, Utnapishtim does tell Gilgamesh of a plant that can restore lost youth. Gilgamesh finds the plant, but puts it down briefly and it is stolen by a serpent, ending Gilgamesh's chance of becoming immortal. The agency of a serpent is also a similarity to the Biblical account, although Gilgamesh's serpent is just a snake, not a devil in disguise.   

How and why does Scout feel differently once the trial has started versus how she felt earlier while thinking about the incident at the jailhouse...

At the start of Chapter 16 of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, once in bed after having faced a mob surrounding her father, Scout finally begins to understand that night's dangers and starts crying. Prior to that moment, she had only understood that her father was talking to a group of men in front of the jailhouse. Atticus's seemingly calm demeanor is partially responsible for her earlier naive interpretation. However, Mr. Underwood appearing...

At the start of Chapter 16 of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, once in bed after having faced a mob surrounding her father, Scout finally begins to understand that night's dangers and starts crying. Prior to that moment, she had only understood that her father was talking to a group of men in front of the jailhouse. Atticus's seemingly calm demeanor is partially responsible for her earlier naive interpretation. However, Mr. Underwood appearing in his own window with his shotgun, saying he had Atticus covered all along, serves as a strong clue to young Scout that the mob was dangerous and that she had helped break up the mob. She explains her slow understanding of the danger of the situation in her following narration:

I was very tired, and was drifting into sleep when the memory of Atticus calmly folding his newspaper and pushing back his hat became Atticus standing in the middle of an empty waiting street, pushing up his glasses. (Ch. 16)

The next morning, Scout further expresses her understanding that the mob presented dangers by asking her father why Mr. Cunningham had "wanted to hurt [Atticus]" if he is a friend of the Finches.

Yet, as the day unfolds, Scout's fears for her father's safety evolve into fascination with the trial. One reason why her feelings evolve is because all of Maycomb county is fascinated by the trial. As Scout, Jem, and Dill stand in the Finches' front yard that morning, they watch all of Maycomb county head down their street into the town square. By the time the children make it into town themselves after lunch, they see that the town square is so full that there isn't a single space left at the "public hitching rail for another animal" and that "mules and wagons were parked under every available tree" (Ch. 16). Due to the size of the crowd gathered in the square, Scout describes it as a "gala occasion" (Ch. 16). In other words, the density and excitement of the crowd make it seem like the trial is a celebratory occasion, just like other "gala occasions," which made the children feel equally excited about the trial. Hence, Scout's feelings changed that morning from feelings of fear for her father's safety due to the trial to feelings of excitement that the trial was taking place. However, the feelings of fear soon return after the trial.

How can I relate Odysseus's revenge from Homer's The Odyssey to a situation in real life?

The short story of Odysseus's revenge on the suitors boils down to a few details: he didn't return from the Trojan War in a timely manner, so his community assumed he was dead.  Suitors came to his house to woo his wife, Penelope, but she will not choose one until she has proof that Odysseus is really gone.  The suitors, however, will not leave until she picks a new husband from their ranks.  They proceed...

The short story of Odysseus's revenge on the suitors boils down to a few details: he didn't return from the Trojan War in a timely manner, so his community assumed he was dead.  Suitors came to his house to woo his wife, Penelope, but she will not choose one until she has proof that Odysseus is really gone.  The suitors, however, will not leave until she picks a new husband from their ranks.  They proceed to take advantage of the resources of Odysseus's home for years, eating his food, drinking his wine, slaughtering his animals, and so on.  Worse, they won't even share with Odysseus when he is disguised as a beggar!  They've taken advantage of his home's hospitality and exploited it, and they've disrespected his wife and son. 

In modern life, we might find an equivalent if a woman's husband went away on a long trip and never returned; let's say that his plane crashed into the ocean but his body was never recovered.  Now, the community insists that she hold a memorial service so that people can mourn him, and even though she doesn't believe he is dead, she feels obligated to do so because it is socially appropriate.  After the memorial service, everyone comes back to her house for lunch and then, suddenly, all her husband's old friends refuse to leave until she chooses one of them as her new husband.  They set up camp in her home, eating up everything in the pantry, raiding the wine rack, driving his Lexus, and flirting with his daughters.  Finally, one day, after several years, the man returns.  He is exhausted and all he wants to do is see his wife and kids and relax in his home for the first time in a very long time.  Instead, he finds it infested with smarmy jerks who are getting fresh with his wife and using all his stuff. He'd probably very likely seek revenge too, although he might simply choose to sue them for damages.  Obviously, litigation is not the way ancient Greek heroes resolved their conflicts, and so Odysseus takes revenge in the best way available to him: by killing them all in cold blood.

What conflicts did Claudius go through in Hamlet?

Claudius has external conflicts with Hamlet and internal conflicts about what to do with Hamlet.

Claudius killed his predecessor, King Hamlet, and married the queen, Gertude.  This resulted in a lot of resentment on Hamlet’s part.  He was not happy that his uncle would marry his father—especially since the two men were brothers!

Hamlet’s conflict with Claudius is an outspoken one.  While Claudius has to be careful to be kingly, Hamlet does not really behave...

Claudius has external conflicts with Hamlet and internal conflicts about what to do with Hamlet.

Claudius killed his predecessor, King Hamlet, and married the queen, Gertude.  This resulted in a lot of resentment on Hamlet’s part.  He was not happy that his uncle would marry his father—especially since the two men were brothers!

Hamlet’s conflict with Claudius is an outspoken one.  While Claudius has to be careful to be kingly, Hamlet does not really behave like a prince.  He is sullen and acts out.  He makes no secret of his opinion of the marriage and of Claudius. 

Claudius tries to laugh off Hamlet’s mood, and comments that the young man should snap out of it.

KING CLAUDIUS

… But now, my cousin Hamlet, and my son,--

HAMLET

[Aside] A little more than kin, and less than kind.

KING CLAUDIUS

How is it that the clouds still hang on you?

HAMLET

Not so, my lord; I am too much i' the sun. (Act 1, Scene 2)

Hamlet’s remark about the relationship between himself and his uncle demonstrates his strained relationship with Claudius.  Hamlet is the man’s nephew and his son, since he married Hamlet’s father.  Claudius comments on Hamlet’s mood, and Hamlet’s reply is sullen and cryptic.

Claudius is presented with an internal conflict about what to do about Hamlet, especially as he gets more and more suspicious that Claudius killed King Hamlet.  He can’t just kill Prince Hamlet, because that would be too obvious.  Hamlet’s bizarre actions make him unsure what to do.

Claudius attempts to pray about the whole situation. Hamlet actually sees him and thinks he is praying, and doesn’t kill him because he thinks he will go to Heaven.  Instead, we learn that Claudius is so conflicted he can’t even pray.

KING CLAUDIUS

[Rising] My words fly up, my thoughts remain below:
Words without thoughts never to heaven go. (Act 3, Scene 3)

Claudius does try to kill Hamlet, but Hamlet is too clever for him.  In the end, almost everyone dies in the complicated duel and poison of Act 5, including Gertrude.  Hamlet gets his revenge!  It is at great cost.

Claudius is evil.  It takes a lot of guile and no morals to kill your brother and marry your sister in law.  He desires power, and will go to any means to get it and to hold onto it.  However, he is outwitted by Hamlet.  Hamlet's crazy is too much for Claudius.  Whatever he does, Hamlet is always one step ahead of him.

If the federal reserve changes the reserve ratio in the economy from 10% to 5% explain the effect this will have on the broader economy (GDP) in...

The quantity theory of money says quite simply that the amount of money in the economy is the amount of money spent in the economy. (When you put it that way, it sounds kind of obvious.)

M is the supply of money.
V is the velocity at which money is spent; if the average dollar circulates three times a year, V = 3/year.

P is the price level, an abstract aggregate of all prices in the economy.
Q is the quantity of goods sold, the real GDP.

MV = PQ

The money multiplier is a simple way of expressing the way that fractional-reserve banking constrains the money supply. It says that the total money supply is equal to the monetary base divided by the reserve requirement.

M1 = M0/R

This comes from the fact that as banks lend, they can lend up to 1 - R of what they have. The first bank has M0, and lends M0*(1-R), which ends up in the second bank, which lends out M0*(1-R)^2, and so on. As you add up this geometric sum, it converges to M0/R. This is actually an upper bound on the money supply---if banks don't lend out everything they can, the real money supply can be less than this.

Thus, if the Fed drops the reserve requirement from 10% to 5%, the reserve requirement has been cut in half, which means that the money supply can potentially double.

Going back to the quantity theory of money:

MV = PQ

We just made M bigger (potentially twice as big, in fact). If people's spending habits don't change, V will remain the same. If prices take awhile to adjust, in the short run P will not change much either. That means that the increase in M must cause an increase in Q in direct proportion.

In this example, if we assume that V and P really do remain fixed and banks immediately lend everything, we can double GDP overnight. The reason this doesn't happen in real life is that banks don't lend everything out immediately, and very large changes in money supply like that are transferred over to changes in V and P, particularly once Q approaches its maximum potential.

Pi notes, “The Greater Good and the Greater Profit are not compatible aims, much to Father's chagrin” (78). What is the significance of this...

Pi's father owns and runs the Pondicherry zoo, but when there is a political transition in the mid-1970s, the nation's economy suffers and he has to sell out. Pi says that small businesses are the ones that risk the shirts on their backs. That is to say that since small businesses are run by one or a few families, people's own finances can get hurt more easily. Unfortunately, they don't have multiple resources to keep going...

Pi's father owns and runs the Pondicherry zoo, but when there is a political transition in the mid-1970s, the nation's economy suffers and he has to sell out. Pi says that small businesses are the ones that risk the shirts on their backs. That is to say that since small businesses are run by one or a few families, people's own finances can get hurt more easily. Unfortunately, they don't have multiple resources to keep going if people stop showing up. Father also says the following to describe their situation:

". . . the Greater Good and the Greater Profit are not compatible aims" (78).

This means that a zoo—which provides services that positively influence the community's education and culture—usually doesn't make the most money for profit. He also mentions that public libraries and museums can be placed in the same category as zoos because the benefits from these businesses provide enrichment for the greater good, but they aren't necessarily good for the private owner's pocket.

In 2008, the United States suffered a decline in the economy because of a recession. Created mostly from the housing market crash, the recession forced many to lose their jobs and homes. When economic recessions or depressions afflict a nation, the small business owners and average laborers tend to feel the pinch in their pocketbooks the most. This is what happened to Pi's father. The nation suffered an economic hardship and he was forced to sell. Not only that, he decided to move to Canada in search of better financial opportunities.

For further examples of how economic decline affects service-oriented jobs, educational services and government services, look up the Great Depression that started in October of 1929, and/or government shutdowns, and the influence of national debts as seen on the news recently. When a nation falls financially, the little man seems to fall first, faster, and harder.

Why does the community regard the previous Receiver of Memory as a failure?

When Jonas is appointed Receiver-in-Training, the Chief Elder tells the community that this is a very special assignment. She explains that the current Receiver is very old and that the job will set Jonas apart from the community. The appointment of this new Receiver is very important, she says, because "We failed in our last selection" (61). She goes on to say that the experience was so bad that she can't even dwell on the matter because...

When Jonas is appointed Receiver-in-Training, the Chief Elder tells the community that this is a very special assignment. She explains that the current Receiver is very old and that the job will set Jonas apart from the community. The appointment of this new Receiver is very important, she says, because "We failed in our last selection" (61). She goes on to say that the experience was so bad that she can't even dwell on the matter because it caused "terrible discomfort." Jonas learns later while in training what happened. Rosemary, the precious receiver, had five weeks of training and asked for Release because it was too traumatizing for her. Apparently, the Giver gave too many difficult and painful memories to her too quickly in the training process and she couldn't take it. She asked for Release and they gave it to her.

Chapter 18 describes what happened to the community when the previous Receiver-in-Training asked for Release. The Giver explains the following to Jonas:

"I think I mentioned to you once. . . that when she was gone, the memories came back to the people. If you were to be lost in the river, Jonas, your memories would not be lost with you. Memories are forever.

"Rosemary had only those five weeks worth, and most of them were good ones. But there were those few terrible memories, the ones that had overwhelmed her. For a while they overwhelmed the community. All those feelings! They'd never experienced that before. . .

". . . if they lost you, with all the training you've had now, they'd have all those memories again themselves" (144).

Basically, when a Receiver dies, the memories are then set loose upon the citizens of the community, who are not prepared to deal with deep feelings or profound pain. The Giver admits that he had failed in his training because it forced Rosemary to want to be Released. As a result, there was a new rule placed on the Receiver-in-Training: he can't apply for Release.

What did Timothy teach Philip in Theodore Taylor's The Cay?

In Theodore Taylor's young reader's novel The Cay, Timothy teaches Phillip many things including the value of self-sacrifice, independence, and perseverance. Two teachings that keep Phillip alive the most are independence and perseverance.When Phillip becomes blind due to a severe head injury, he feels completely vulnerable and dependent. Timothy teaches him that he is actually very capable, despite his blindness. Though Phillip resists learning at first, the more he realizes Timothy is trying...

In Theodore Taylor's young reader's novel The Cay, Timothy teaches Phillip many things including the value of self-sacrifice, independence, and perseverance. Two teachings that keep Phillip alive the most are independence and perseverance.

When Phillip becomes blind due to a severe head injury, he feels completely vulnerable and dependent. Timothy teaches him that he is actually very capable, despite his blindness. Though Phillip resists learning at first, the more he realizes Timothy is trying to help him be independent, the more willing he becomes. Through Timothy's help, Phillip learns how to weave sleeping mats, build a shelter, build a device to catch rain water, make his way around the island using a cane, and fish. The more independent Phillip grows, the braver and stronger he becomes until one day he decides he is able to climb the coconut tree in order to harvest the coconuts for their nutritious meat and milk. At one point, while climbing the tree, he freezes from fear, but though Timothy comforts him by saying, "'Tis no shame" to come back down, Phillip persists because he can't bear to disappoint Timothy (p. 99). Phillip succeeds in climbing to the top and in dropping coconuts to the ground, a very significant and symbolic triumph.

By the time Timothy sadly passes away as a consequence of weathering the severe hurricane, Phillip is able to continue taking care of himself. Most importantly, though he is all alone at this point of the story, he has learned not to feel defeated. When he is alone and a plane flies overhead without landing, though he sobs at first, he has gained enough inner strength from Timothy to be able to calm his emotions down and think rationally about what might have caused the problem and how to fix it. He figures out that the smoke coming from the signal fire must have been white, which would be impossible for a plane to see. He further figures out that adding the oily sea grapes to the fire might turn the smoke black. His black smoke signal soon works, and he is soon rescued. However, if Timothy had not taught him perseverance, he would have succumbed to a fate of death on the island.

Who makes all the major decisions in the family?

The role of decision-maker is all-important in A Raisin in the Sun. Typically, in a traditional family, the head of the household is the man. The reader knows at the beginning of the play that Mama's husband, Big Walter, has recently died.  Traditionally, he would have been the head of the household, which also includes brother and sister, Walter Lee and Beneatha, respectively.  Because Walter Lee is the next oldest male, he should have...

The role of decision-maker is all-important in A Raisin in the Sun. Typically, in a traditional family, the head of the household is the man. The reader knows at the beginning of the play that Mama's husband, Big Walter, has recently died.  Traditionally, he would have been the head of the household, which also includes brother and sister, Walter Lee and Beneatha, respectively.  Because Walter Lee is the next oldest male, he should have been the decision maker, but therein lies the conflict of the play.

Decisions in the household are actually made by Mama throughout most of the play.  The question of how to spend the $10,000 life insurance check is the key conflict because the major characters want to spend the money in different ways: Beneatha wants to pay for her medical school, Walter Lee wants to invest in a liquor store business with his friends, Mama wants a house, and Ruth just wants her family to be whole again.  

When the family discovers that Ruth is expecting another child, that plot twist pushes Mama to make the decision to put a down payment on a house, thinking that a house will solve all the issues in the family. However, by taking that decision out of Walter Lee's hands, who should have been the head of household, she has taken away his power. When Mama decides in Act II to give that power back to Walter Lee, giving him the rest of the money to do with it what he wishes, he shows that he is not capable of making decisions for the family--instead of giving some money for Beneatha's schooling and keeping some for his liquor store, he instead gives all the money to his friend Willy, who disappears with it instead of investing it.  

At this point in the play, Mama could have taken the role of decision-maker away from Walter Lee.  However, she gives him another chance. When Walter Lee wants to recant the down payment on the house in order to salvage some of the life insurance money, when he wants to give in to the white pressure of the Neighborhood Association, Mama forces him to confront his son, Travis, and look him in the eye.  It is this pivotal moment where Walter Lee earns the right to be the head of the household.  Instead of giving into the demands of the discrimination facing him and his family, Walter Lee stands tall and declares that the family will indeed move into their new house.  That house is a symbol of the family coming together again as a unit, and they get behind Walter Lee in his decision.

What is revealed about the relationship between Bruno's grandparents?

In Chapter 8, Bruno recalls the events that took place on the last Christmas he spent with his grandparents. Bruno says that his father wears his fancy new uniform on Christmas Day, and the Commandant's father, Matthias, is very proud of his son's accomplishments. Bruno's grandmother, Nathalie, is the only person not impressed by the Commandant's uniform. Nathalie criticizes her son and refers to him as "a puppet on a string" who doesn't...

In Chapter 8, Bruno recalls the events that took place on the last Christmas he spent with his grandparents. Bruno says that his father wears his fancy new uniform on Christmas Day, and the Commandant's father, Matthias, is very proud of his son's accomplishments. Bruno's grandmother, Nathalie, is the only person not impressed by the Commandant's uniform. Nathalie criticizes her son and refers to him as "a puppet on a string" who doesn't understand the real meaning of what his uniform represents. Nathalie, who is ethnically Irish, is ashamed that her son supports the Nazi cause. Matthias, Bruno's grandfather, essentially tells his wife to calm down and then mentions how proud he is to see his son hold such a valuable position in the Third Reich. Bruno's grandmother argues with her husband and calls him foolish for supporting the Nazi regime. Nathalie loses her temper and criticizes the Commandant and Matthias by commenting that all they care about is their fancy uniforms and medals, while they ignore the fact they are committing terrible atrocities. As Bruno's grandparents leave, Nathalie yells, "Ashamed!" and Matthias shouts, "Patriot!" (Boyne 93).

Matthias and Nathalie's relationship is controversial. They both have different political views and disagree with their son's position as a Nazi Commandant. Matthias is proud that his son supports the "Motherland" and the Nazi cause, while Nathalie is ashamed. They argue and raise their voices during the family gathering which portrays the major rift in their relationship.

Who put the blanket around Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird?

Although Harper Lee never explicitly tells us who put the blanket around Scout, we can infer that it is Boo Radley who does the kind deed. When a sudden snowstorm blankets Maycomb with a think layer of snow, Miss Maudie’s house catches on fire from an unattended stove she lights to keep her plants warm from the cold. The fire brings everyone in the neighborhood out to gawk at the scene.  Atticus tells Scout and...

Although Harper Lee never explicitly tells us who put the blanket around Scout, we can infer that it is Boo Radley who does the kind deed. When a sudden snowstorm blankets Maycomb with a think layer of snow, Miss Maudie’s house catches on fire from an unattended stove she lights to keep her plants warm from the cold. The fire brings everyone in the neighborhood out to gawk at the scene.  Atticus tells Scout and Jem to go down the street to get away from the fire, and they stop and stand in front of the Radley house to watch the chaos of the fire.  It’s cold outside, and suddenly when the fire is put out and Scout and Jem are ready to go home, Scout finds a blanket gently placed over her shoulders.  The children were so enthralled with the fire that they didn’t hear or see Boo Radley place it there.  Jem and Scout are amazed, and Jem tells Atticus about his ripped pants and the presents in the tree revealing all he has learned about Boo. The kind gesture with the blanket is just another sign that Boo is not a “malevolent phantom” but is a kind friend to Scout and Jem. 

What are the pros and cons of the United States government withholding information from its citizens?

This really depends on the type of information that is being withheld. For example, one major controversy at this time is the so called "ag-gag" laws in which state legislatures are making it illegal to publicize animal abuse in industrial livestock organizations. Criminalizing honest reporting does a major disservice to the public; the public also has a right to know the amount of money legislators are receiving from the agriculture industry so that they can make informed decisions about voting.

Similarly, the existence of Super-PACs harms the democratic process by making opaque the names of people who are funding political candidates, subverting the democratic process which is based on voters' ability to make informed choices. The government needs to ensure that all information relevant to making judgments that inform voting, including politicians' contacts with lobbyists and campaign funding, is freely available. 

A less clear cut case is funding for military projects. Some of military spending is opaque because the money is spent on "black projects", highly classified projects whose funding details are not made publicly available; in fact, details of some such projects may not even be available to most members of Congress.

On the one hand, it is important that leading edge developments in military technology not fall into the hands of foreign powers, and keeping all information about such projects on a "need to know" basis can protect such information against espionage. On the other hand, not all "black projects" really need such a high level of secrecy from the viewpoint of military intelligence. In some cases, secrecy about military funding can conceal cost overruns and politically motivated funding for companies in the constituencies of powerful members of Congress. In such cases, secrecy harms the right of voters in a democracy to make decisions about government spending.

How does Julie survive in a challenging environment in the book Julie of the Wolves?

There is one very simple explanation as to how Julie survives in the challenging environment of the Alaskan tundra:  she uses the "old ways" of the Eskimo to overcome fear.

Fear becomes easy for Julie to overcome as soon as she begins the concentration on survival.  For example, Julie is smart enough to take necessities with her on her journey:  matches and her ulo knife.  Unfortunately, Julie does lose her way, but she immediately builds...

There is one very simple explanation as to how Julie survives in the challenging environment of the Alaskan tundra:  she uses the "old ways" of the Eskimo to overcome fear.

Fear becomes easy for Julie to overcome as soon as she begins the concentration on survival.  For example, Julie is smart enough to take necessities with her on her journey:  matches and her ulo knife.  Unfortunately, Julie does lose her way, but she immediately builds a sod hut in order to find shelter.  Julie's next order of business in regards to survival is food.  It is this aspect of survival that makes Julie cling to the wolves she meets.  Julie is extremely patient while observing them and is eventually able to determine how to submit to the lead wolf, Amaroq (by laying belly-up).  

Because Julie easily reverts to the "old ways" of the Eskimo people that she knows so well (because of her years living with Kapugen in the seal camp), survival is possible. Remembering her father's advice always serves Julie well.  This memory is another method of survival.  Very importantly, Kapugen's advice is coveted when Julie comes upon the pack of wolves which will eventually become her family:

Wolves are brotherly. ... They love each other, and if you learn to speak to them, they will love you too.

I cannot think of a clever title for my To Kill A Mockingbird essay. The essay topic is the evil, hypocrisy, and injustice of the adult society.

When writing an essay, sometimes it is best to write an outline that shows the direction you want to go first, before selecting a title. If you already have the essay written, go back through it and choose a sentence or phrase that encompases your main idea. If you don't have your essay written yet, do that first and be thinking of your title as you write.

If you haven't written the essay yet, and...

When writing an essay, sometimes it is best to write an outline that shows the direction you want to go first, before selecting a title. If you already have the essay written, go back through it and choose a sentence or phrase that encompases your main idea. If you don't have your essay written yet, do that first and be thinking of your title as you write.

If you haven't written the essay yet, and since your topic addresses three major themes, you could assign one character to each in order to specifically address the issues surrounding him or her. For example, if you decide to talk about Bob Ewell as evil, Miss Gates as a hypocrite, and Mr. Nathan Radley as unjust, then your title could be the following: Ewell, Gates, and Nathan Radley: The Evil, the Hypocrisy, and the Unjust. It all really depends on what you want to say in the essay and that will determine the title. Another option would be to entitle your essay simply, The Evil, the Hypocrisy and the Injustice of Maycomb County.

Without seeing the essay itself, it is difficult to come up with a title; so again, write it first and simplify the title by the major themes, by people, or by events. The title doesn't necessarily need to be clever as long as it ties in to what your main theme or message is.

According to the novel Fahrenheit 451, why are books important?

In Part Two of the novel Fahrenheit 451, Montag visits Faber’s house to ask for his help in understanding various texts. Faber, a former English professor, is initially reluctant to help Montag out of fear that government forces will arrest him for conspiracy. Faber calls Montag a hopeless romantic and tells him that it is not necessarily books he is in need of, but rather the ideas and substance found inside the books that...

In Part Two of the novel Fahrenheit 451, Montag visits Faber’s house to ask for his help in understanding various texts. Faber, a former English professor, is initially reluctant to help Montag out of fear that government forces will arrest him for conspiracy. Faber calls Montag a hopeless romantic and tells him that it is not necessarily books he is in need of, but rather the ideas and substance found inside the books that Montag is searching for. Faber explains that books were only one type of receptacle where humans stored knowledge they were afraid to lose. Faber says that books truthfully recorded details in each page and are full of quality, texture, and information. According to Faber, books are important because they record humanity’s accomplishments, but more importantly, they preserve humanity’s mistakes. He says that books are there to remind us of what fools we once were, in hopes that we won’t make the same mistakes in the future. Faber compares books to Caesar’s praetorian guard whispering in his ear that he is a mortal. Essentially, books record valuable information about the past that can positively shape our future decisions.

In "The New Colossus," what do you think the author is trying to say in the second paragraph that begins: "Keep, ancient lands..?"

Emma Lazarus wrote "The New Colossus" in 1883 as a celebration of the Statue of Liberty. At the time of writing, the statue was not built, let alone installed (this did not happen until 1886) but, already, Lazarus recognised its potency as a symbol of American freedom and liberty. 

In essence, then, the second stanza of the poem offers a hearty welcome and a message of encouragement to future immigrants. In this call to action,...

Emma Lazarus wrote "The New Colossus" in 1883 as a celebration of the Statue of Liberty. At the time of writing, the statue was not built, let alone installed (this did not happen until 1886) but, already, Lazarus recognised its potency as a symbol of American freedom and liberty. 

In essence, then, the second stanza of the poem offers a hearty welcome and a message of encouragement to future immigrants. In this call to action, she portrays foreign nations as being dominated by "storied pomp" and neglectful to their people. As a result, these people have become "tired" and "poor" and are now "yearning to break free." In fact, their lives are so bad that they are huddled on the "teeming shores," desperate to get away.

Life in these foreign countries contrasts sharply with the "golden door" to America. Here, Lady Liberty will lift her "lamp" to welcome immigrants and direct them in their new lives. She is, thus, portrayed as a caring and welcoming figure, akin to a mother, who will turn no person away and who will nurture and protect against the tyranny of the Old World. 

How much soap (C18H35NaO2) is produced when 21 grams of NaOH (lye) reacts with goat milk?

Soap is made by a reaction called saponification, in which fat is heated with sodium hydroxide or potassium hydroxide. A fat molecule consists of a glycerol backbone with three attached long chain fatty acids. During the saponification process the three fatty acids are removed from the glycerol, their acidic hydrogens are removed and each one associates with a sodium or potassium ion to form a soap molecule. In this case sodium hydroxide is being used,...

Soap is made by a reaction called saponification, in which fat is heated with sodium hydroxide or potassium hydroxide. A fat molecule consists of a glycerol backbone with three attached long chain fatty acids. During the saponification process the three fatty acids are removed from the glycerol, their acidic hydrogens are removed and each one associates with a sodium or potassium ion to form a soap molecule. In this case sodium hydroxide is being used, and one sodium ion reacts per soap molecule produced. 

The mole ratio of soap (C18H35NaO2) to NaOH is 1:1.

The molar mass of NaOH is 40.0 g/mol

The molar mass of C18H35NaO2 is 308 g/mol

The mass of soap produced is:

(21 grams NaOH)(1 mol/40.0 g)(1 C18H35NaO2/1 NaOH)(308 g/mol) = 161.7 g

What causes a solar eclipse?

A solar eclipse occurs when the moon passes between the earth and the sun so that the sun's rays are blocked from an area on the earth. In other words, it is the shadow of the moon, on a part of the earth. There are different types of solar eclipses based on how much of the sun is blocked from the area of the earth. Even if the eclipse is total--that is, the moon completely...

A solar eclipse occurs when the moon passes between the earth and the sun so that the sun's rays are blocked from an area on the earth. In other words, it is the shadow of the moon, on a part of the earth. There are different types of solar eclipses based on how much of the sun is blocked from the area of the earth. Even if the eclipse is total--that is, the moon completely blocks the sun--the eclipse is only visible from a small part of the earth. Sections of the earth that are near the path of totality will see only a portion of the Sun blocked by the moon, resulting in a partial eclipse.

The reason a solar eclipse can occur at all is due to the fact that the size of the moon is perfect for such an event--it is 400 times smaller than the sun, but also 400 times closer to the Earth. Due to this, when conditions are perfect the moon completely blocks the sun from view, except for the corona (plasma surrounding the sun). Because the moon's orbit is not a perfect circle, it does not always completely cover the sun when an eclipse occurs, and more of the sun is visible. These are called annular eclipses. 

For more information, and pictures of the various types of solar eclipses, see the attached link.

How can one describe the shape of fire? How can one convert this element into abstract fashion design elements?

It is common for fashion designers to take inspiration from nature. Fire is an unusual element to consider in this way since it does not really have form, even though it is visual. Its shape is always moving, and if it stops moving it stops burning. What it does have is energy, and color, and these two aspects can easily be translated to fashion design elements.

The energy of fire can be interpreted with emotional...

It is common for fashion designers to take inspiration from nature. Fire is an unusual element to consider in this way since it does not really have form, even though it is visual. Its shape is always moving, and if it stops moving it stops burning. What it does have is energy, and color, and these two aspects can easily be translated to fashion design elements.

The energy of fire can be interpreted with emotional concepts, which are also commonly used in fashion design. Passion, heat, aggression, sexuality, all of these correspond to fire and can be suggested in a fashion design. One interesting example of the use of the fire element in fashion design occurs in the book and the film adaptation of The Hunger Games. Katniss is to wear a gown designed by Cinna, and he wants to capture the element of fire for her personality, since her district is the one of coal. The undergarment is a black leather catsuit (the black leather being reminiscent of the coal) but the top is a cape that will be set on fire during the performance/presentation before the games begin. 

The colors of fire are usually the warm colors of red, yellow and orange, but one can often see traces of blue, violet and even green in fire at times. Fire is the element associated with the astrological signs of Leo, Sagittarius and Aries, so these symbols could also be used to interpret the idea of fire in a fashion design. Sagittarius, the Archer, carries a bow and arrows like Katniss. The sign of Saturn is ruled by the planet Jupiter, the largest planet in the solar system, associated with travel, learning and adventure. Leo, the Lion, is ruled by the Sun, associated with youth, beauty, courage and vigor. Aries, the Ram, is ruled by Mars, planet of war and aggression, and is associated with boldness, confidence, initiative and action.

Compare the relationship between Juliet and her parents from Act III, Scene 5 to Act IV scene 5.

In Act III, Scene 5 Juliet's parents inform her that they have promised her hand in marriage to Count Paris. Capulet has changed his mind about Paris (earlier he had required the Count to "win" Juliet's love before consenting) and believes the family needs a "day of joy" after the death of Tybalt. Juliet's parents know nothing about Romeo and it is ironic that they would break the news to their daughter just after she...

In Act III, Scene 5 Juliet's parents inform her that they have promised her hand in marriage to Count Paris. Capulet has changed his mind about Paris (earlier he had required the Count to "win" Juliet's love before consenting) and believes the family needs a "day of joy" after the death of Tybalt. Juliet's parents know nothing about Romeo and it is ironic that they would break the news to their daughter just after she has been with Romeo on the couple's honeymoon night.

When Juliet refuses to marry Paris (because she is already married to Romeo), Lord Capulet becomes enraged and Lady Capulet treats her coldly. Capulet threatens to disown her and put her out in the street. He says,

Hang thee, young baggage, disobedient wretch!
I tell thee what: get thee to church o’ Thursday,
Or never after look me in the face.
Speak not; reply not; do not answer me.

While not quite as demonstrative as her husband, Lady Capulet is also angry  at Juliet and refuses to be of any assistance when Juliet asks for some reprieve. Lady Capulet says,

Talk not to me, for I’ll not speak a word.
Do as thou wilt, for I have done with thee.

Juliet eventually seeks advice from Friar Lawrence who devises the plan for her to fake her death and avoid the marriage with Paris. When she returns home she basically lies to her father and tells him she will do whatever he wants. She says in Act IV, Scene 2,

By holy Lawrence to fall prostrate here [Kneeling.]
To beg your pardon. Pardon, I beseech you.
Henceforward I am ever ruled by you.

Juliet also treats her mother cordially in Scene 3 just before she takes the potion which will render her lifeless for almost two days. When she is discovered supposedly dead, her parents are distraught and mournfully praise their daughter. Lady Capulet says in Scene 5,

O me! O me! My child, my only life,
Revive, look up, or I will die with thee.
Help, help! Call help.

And Lord Capulet is heartbroken at finding Juliet. He echoes his wife's words, 

Despised, distressèd, hated, martyred, killed!
Uncomfortable time, why cam’st thou now
To murder, murder our solemnity?
O child! O child! My soul and not my child!
Dead art thou! Alack, my child is dead,
And with my child my joys are burièd.

In retrospect, the relationship doesn't really change. Juliet is lying to her parents throughout these scenes. She never reveals her relationship with Romeo, even when presented with the marriage to Paris. In Act IV, Scene 5 she is also deceiving them by faking her death. Honesty is totally lacking in the relationship from the very moment Juliet meets Romeo.

What is the reason why Ponyboy will participate in the rumble?

In Chapter 9, the Greasers are getting ready to rumble against the Socs. Ponyboy is feeling sick but decides he is going to fight. Ponyboy begins to contemplate why other Greasers enjoy fighting while they are getting ready. Ponyboy puts lots of oil in his hair to show that he is a Greaser and comments that tonight the boys could be proud to be Greasers. He does not fully understand why they are proud of...

In Chapter 9, the Greasers are getting ready to rumble against the Socs. Ponyboy is feeling sick but decides he is going to fight. Ponyboy begins to contemplate why other Greasers enjoy fighting while they are getting ready. Ponyboy puts lots of oil in his hair to show that he is a Greaser and comments that tonight the boys could be proud to be Greasers. He does not fully understand why they are proud of being "hoods," and even mentions that he doesn't like having the reputation of a Greaser. Ponyboy begins to ask the other Greasers why they like to fight. Ponyboy mentions that he'll fight anybody anytime, but doesn't like to. When Darry says that he doesn't think Ponyboy should be in the rumble, Ponyboy thinks,

"Oh, no, I thought in mortal fear, I've got to be in it. Right then the most important thing in my life was helping us whip the Socs. Don't let him make me stay home now. I've got to be in it." (Hinton 134)

Although Pony is opposed to fighting, he is fiercely loyal to his friends. He knows that his gang needs all the help it can get, and he is willing to fight at all cost. Darry is hesitant to let Ponyboy fight, but Sodapop convinces him that Ponyboy will be alright because they were not going to use weapons. Ponyboy tells Darry that he is ready to rumble and will get ahold of a little guy. Darry finally allows Ponyboy to participate in the rumble.

What are the antagonizing forces in "The Management of Grief" by Bharati Mukherjee?

Instead of having a typical villain, the antagonists of "The Management of Grief" are all abstract. Cultures, stereotypes, and expectations all plague the protagonist, Mrs. Shaila Bhave, as she learns of and attempts to cope with the loss of her husband and sons in a politically-motivated airplane bombing. 

One such antagonizing force comes from the title: the expectation that grief is something to be managed and overcome by a strong-willed survivor. Even though Shaila seems just...

Instead of having a typical villain, the antagonists of "The Management of Grief" are all abstract. Cultures, stereotypes, and expectations all plague the protagonist, Mrs. Shaila Bhave, as she learns of and attempts to cope with the loss of her husband and sons in a politically-motivated airplane bombing. 

One such antagonizing force comes from the title: the expectation that grief is something to be managed and overcome by a strong-willed survivor. Even though Shaila seems just the type to recover most easily (she is identified as one of the survivors who took the news in the "best" way), she finds herself completely passive in the face of her grief. Rather than being able to manage and actively work her way through her grief, she can only experience it, allowing herself to be pulled along the necessary steps of grief without any corresponding feeling of recovery. This expectation is exemplified in the character of social worker Judith Templeton and her expectations for how the survivors might go about managing their grief. She describes the widowed women as "hysterical" and "a real mess," demonstrating her lack of true empathy and understanding of their loss and cultural reaction to it, as discussed below. 

Another antagonizing force is the clash of Indian and Canadian cultures. As Indians living in Canada during the tragedy, many of the survivors have felt this clash of cultures for a long time, and characters like Shaila and Kusum have felts their children moving further away from them and their roots and further towards Western culture, as shown with Kusum's argument with her Westernized daughter, Pam. However, Shaila herself feels more of this cross-cultural push and pull after the tragedy. While Westerners like Judith Templeton are impressed with Shaila's calm acceptance of the tragedy, Shaila points out that her fellow Indians expect her to mourn loudly and publicly and the calm she feels is unnerving to her. At the same time, however, she mourns the fact that upper class Indian expectations kept her from telling her husband she loved him or speaking his first name. An Indian living in a Western world, Shaila is challenged by both cultures in the face of this tragedy.

A third "antagonizing force" is the Sikh religion and culture. Even though Shaila was brought up in a progressive household and was taught not to generalize and stereotype others (especially after experiencing this herself in the West), she still cannot help but blame Sikhs for the death of her husband and sons. She says, "I stiffen now at the sight of beards and turbans,’’ referring to the dress and hairstyle of Sikh men. This antagonism is not only Shaila vs. Sikhs, but Shaila vs. a part of her that wants to simplify the tragedy by blaming it on an easily-identifiable group of people. This conflict within herself is one of the most relevant in our post 9/11 world.

Who are your favorite male and female characters in Arms and the Man and why?

First, my favorite characters may not be your favorites; this is something you really need to decide for yourself as you read the play.

That being said, my favorite male character is Captain Bluntschli, the lead male character. In many ways, he acts as a mouthpiece for Shaw himself. He is intelligent, pragmatic, and cynical, albeit with a somewhat romantic streak when it comes to charming young women. Unlike the other characters in the play, he...

First, my favorite characters may not be your favorites; this is something you really need to decide for yourself as you read the play.

That being said, my favorite male character is Captain Bluntschli, the lead male character. In many ways, he acts as a mouthpiece for Shaw himself. He is intelligent, pragmatic, and cynical, albeit with a somewhat romantic streak when it comes to charming young women. Unlike the other characters in the play, he does not view war through the lens of Romantic literature, but as a profession, and despite (or perhaps because of) being a soldier is actually more critical of the causes and practices of armed conflict than the other characters in the play.

For female characters, I don't really find any of them admirable. Louka is petty and spiteful and Catherine Petkoff is silly and snobbish. Raina is meant to be the heroine of the play, and does exhibit a combination of being open to new ideas and kindness and thus is really the best of the female characters, but her role is to a large degree to be educated by Captain Bluntschli rather than to stand as a strong and independent character on her own. She strikes me more as a rather impetuous adolescent (albeit a nice one) than as someone I can really admire.

Do humans need rules and order to maintain a stable society, according to William Golding's Lord of the Flies?

Lord of the Flies is William Golding's answer to the Victorian novel The Coral Island, in which boys left to themselves have adventures. Golding's novel relates how boys left to create their own society actually degenerate into murder and mayhem. The reasons are that they reject the basic foundations of civilization, namely order, purposeful work, and morality.

Throughout the story, Ralph is the one who is the greatest advocate for order and purposeful work. As...

Lord of the Flies is William Golding's answer to the Victorian novel The Coral Island, in which boys left to themselves have adventures. Golding's novel relates how boys left to create their own society actually degenerate into murder and mayhem. The reasons are that they reject the basic foundations of civilization, namely order, purposeful work, and morality.

Throughout the story, Ralph is the one who is the greatest advocate for order and purposeful work. As the elected chief, he wields the conch, the symbol of authority. He makes decisions and assigns duties, giving permission for Jack's choir boys to be hunters, Simon to help with the exploration of the island, and Piggy to take names of the little 'uns. He also oversees the building of the shelters and establishes the rule of having a signal fire burning on top of the mountains at all times. However, from the beginning Ralph does not have a firm moral core; he immediately hurts Piggy by telling everyone the nickname Piggy had asked him not to reveal. Rather than apologizing sincerely, he takes the morally neutral road of saying, "I'm sorry if you feel like that," and then redirecting Piggy to a task.

Ralph finds it difficult from the beginning to maintain order among the boys and keep them focused on their tasks. Only a couple of boys are committed enough to erect the final shelter. Jack's hunters operate as a kind of savage band who follow raw instincts rather than order. They have been assigned the purposeful work of keeping the fire going, but they let it go out and miss having a passing ship see it. 

Simon is the character who represents the inner core of morality that the boys truly need to survive. He alone realizes that the beast "is only us." When he "meets" with the Lord of the Flies and receives a fuller realization of the "beast within," he learns that the moral darkness is "the reason why it's no go." Simon, of course, is murdered by the boys in their savage dance in the dark of night, symbolizing the complete loss of morality.

Ultimately, the conch--the symbol of order--and Piggy's glasses and Piggy himself--the symbols of purposeful work--are shattered as the boys plunge into complete disorder controlled only by savage instincts. Golding shows that their society has failed due to lack of order, lack of purposeful work, and lack of morality.

In The Outsiders, on what page can you find the word "scrap"?

I can't find the word "scrap" on any page. I opened a pdf copy of The Outsiders and I searched for the word "scrap." I found "scraped" on page 51, and "scraping" on page 91 and page 151.

The word "scrap" can mean a small piece, or a fight (or rumble).

I found a few instances where a piece of paper is mentioned. On page 41, Two-Bit tears up a piece of paper with Marcia's...

I can't find the word "scrap" on any page. I opened a pdf copy of The Outsiders and I searched for the word "scrap." I found "scraped" on page 51, and "scraping" on page 91 and page 151.

The word "scrap" can mean a small piece, or a fight (or rumble).

I found a few instances where a piece of paper is mentioned. On page 41, Two-Bit tears up a piece of paper with Marcia's number on it. On page 70, Dally gives Ponyboy a piece of paper with a letter from Sodapop.

"Scrap" can also mean "fight" or "rumble." Ponyboy talks about fighting on pages four, ten, and 18, and Two-Bit discusses fighting with Cherry and Marcia on page 27. On pages 48 and 49, Ponyboy and Johnny get into a fight with Bob and the other socs. On page 107, Dally and the greasers start preparing for the rumble with the socs. On page 109, Two-bit and Ponyboy talk to Cherry about the upcoming rumble. The rumble starts on page 117.

I hope this helps. If you still want to find a specific word in The Outsiders, I suggest you purchase a pdf or other ebook version and use your search function on your computer or e-reader. Good luck!

How did life change for the skilled worker during the industrial revolution?

During and after the Industrial Revolution, many skilled laborers found their work was no longer marketable due to the invention of machines which could perform the same tasks. For weavers, seamstresses, millers, and many other skilled laborers, the early phases of the Industrial Revolution meant they no longer had jobs. Machines which were faster and more efficient in production—and required only a one-time purchase rather than an ongoing wage—rapidly replaced a significant portion of the...

During and after the Industrial Revolution, many skilled laborers found their work was no longer marketable due to the invention of machines which could perform the same tasks. For weavers, seamstresses, millers, and many other skilled laborers, the early phases of the Industrial Revolution meant they no longer had jobs. Machines which were faster and more efficient in production—and required only a one-time purchase rather than an ongoing wage—rapidly replaced a significant portion of the skilled labor force. As time went on, the rate of unemployment caused by machines began to decline, and people who might once have marketed a skill were hired to mind the machines in factories. 

The Industrial Revolution also inspired a shift in labor demographics. Becoming a skilled laborer takes many years of training, meaning that if someone didn't begin an apprenticeship as a child, he or she might not begin to make a living wage until well into adulthood. With machines doing all of the skilled work in place of people, there was less demand on adult labor. Child employment skyrocketed during the Industrial Revolution because children were small enough to fit inside of machines in need of repair and also required less food and wages.

What are centripetal forces and centrifugal forces present in Belgium?

Belgium is a country that seems to be on the brink of falling apart.  This implies that the centripetal forces that serve to hold it together are having a hard time overcoming the centrifugal forces that threaten to tear it apart.  The centrifugal forces in Belgium have mainly to do with nationality while the centripetal forces have to do with history, modern political/social norms and, to some degree, with governmental structure.

The major centrifugal force...

Belgium is a country that seems to be on the brink of falling apart.  This implies that the centripetal forces that serve to hold it together are having a hard time overcoming the centrifugal forces that threaten to tear it apart.  The centrifugal forces in Belgium have mainly to do with nationality while the centripetal forces have to do with history, modern political/social norms and, to some degree, with governmental structure.

The major centrifugal force that is tearing Belgium apart is nationality.  Belgium is made up of two main regions, each with its own national majority.  The north of Belgium is called Flanders and the people are Dutch speakers called Flemings.  The south of Belgium is called Wallonia and is made up of Walloons, who speak French.  These two nations never thought of themselves as one.  They were only put together into one state in the 1830s by other powers in Europe.  Today, with nationalist sentiment rising around Europe, this centrifugal force has become more powerful.

The main centripetal force that keeps Belgium together is history.  While Belgium has not been a country for very long, it has existed for over 100 years.  This means that people are used to thinking of the existence of Belgium and they feel it is at least somewhat natural.  Relatedly, people in Belgium are drawn together to some degree by the feeling that modern people should not split with one another over issues of language and culture.  This is particularly true as there is pressure within Europe for greater centralization and less nationalism.  In other words, as Europe has become tied together more closely through the EU, there is some amount of pressure on people to eschew nationalism.  The other centripetal force is the Belgian system of government.  By having a federal system, Belgium gave its two regions a great deal of autonomy and ability to remain distinct. This made it more possible for them to accept remaining together as one state.

Thus, Belgium is affected both by centripetal and centrifugal forces.  At this point, it appears that the centrifugal forces may overcome the centripetal forces at any time.

Petrol remains affordable because it is subsidized by the government. Using an appropriate diagram, illustrate and explain the effect of subsidy on...

I've made a diagram and I'll explain it, but you should also make sure you can replicate it yourself. Get used to these supply-and-demand diagrams, because you're going to keep seeing them. They are everywhere in economics.

I'm not sure it's really true that petrol is affordable primarily due to subsidies; subsidies haven't increased that much lately but oil prices have been plummeting. But okay, subsidies do make petrol cheaper, so it's at least in part the reason why it's still affordable.

Why do subsidies make things cheaper? It's basically the same reason that taxes make things more expensive, but in reverse. A subsidy drives a wedge between the buyer's price and the seller's price, because the buyer does not have to pay the subsidy (at least not directly---maybe through taxes or whatever) but the seller still receives it.

Take a look at my diagram. I've set up the supply (red) and demand (blue) curves, so that the competitive equilibrium would be at a price of $6 per gallon and the quantity sold would be 4 million gallons. This is represented by the green lines that intersect where the supply and demand curves intersect.

Now I introduce a subsidy of $2 per gallon; the result is represented by the orange lines. The new buyer price is on the demand curve, the new seller price is on the supply curve, and the gap between them is equal to the amount of the subsidy. The quantity sold now is greater than it would have been in the absence of the subsidy. In this case, the new buyer price is $5 per gallon and the new seller price is $7 per gallon---notice how they differ by $2, the subsidy. The new quantity sold is 5 million gallons.

You can also use this diagram to figure out how much the government will have to pay; it's the entire orange rectangle, which is 5 million gallons times $2 per gallon, so $10 million.

How does your impression of Mrs. Dubose change as Chapter 11 progresses?

At the beginning of Chapter 11, Mrs. Dubose is depicted as a mean, racist, old woman who yells derogatory comments at Jem and Scout as they walk past her house.She says to Jem, "Your father's no better than the niggers and trash he works for!" (Lee 135) This comment gets under Jem's skin, and as he is walking back from the store with Scout, he takes Scout's new baton and destroys the camellia bush...

At the beginning of Chapter 11, Mrs. Dubose is depicted as a mean, racist, old woman who yells derogatory comments at Jem and Scout as they walk past her house. She says to Jem, "Your father's no better than the niggers and trash he works for!" (Lee 135) This comment gets under Jem's skin, and as he is walking back from the store with Scout, he takes Scout's new baton and destroys the camellia bush in her front yard. Atticus punishes Jem and makes him read to Mrs. Dubose for two hours every afternoon, including Saturdays, for an entire month. Atticus explains to Jem that she is old and ill and that he shouldn't hold her responsible for things she says and does. When Jem reads to Mrs. Dubose, she is continually correcting him and making derogatory comments towards him. Jem ignores her negative comments, and he begins to notice that the longer he reads, the less she corrects him, and eventually she has a "fit." When the alarm rings, her housekeeper Jessie says it's time for her medicine.

Towards the end of the chapter, Mrs. Dubose passes away. Before she dies, she tells Jessie to give a gift to Jem. Atticus gives the gift to Jem, and it is a candy-box with a white camellia in perfect condition inside. Atticus explains to Jem that it was a gift of appreciation and is her way of saying "everything's all right now" (Lee 149). Jem learns that Mrs. Dubose suffered from a terminal illness and became addicted to morphine to ease her pain. When Mrs. Dubose approached Atticus about writing her will, she told him that she wanted to "leave this world beholden nothing to nobody" (Lee 148). Jem finds out that his reading kept her occupied in between her doses of morphine, and as his reading sessions were lengthened, the longer she went between doses. Eventually, Mrs. Dubose was able to break her morphine addiction. Atticus comments that she was the bravest person he ever knew. The audience goes from viewing Mrs. Dubose with contempt because she is an ornery racist, to admiring her for her courage and strong will.

Why was Germany punished after World War I?

Germany was blamed for starting World War I, and this guilt was stated in Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war. This clause has been called the "War Guilt Clause." Part of the reason Germany was punished for the war was so that the Germans could pay reparations, or money, to Britain and France to compensate them for the losses these countries had incurred in the war. This amount was crippling...

Germany was blamed for starting World War I, and this guilt was stated in Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war. This clause has been called the "War Guilt Clause." Part of the reason Germany was punished for the war was so that the Germans could pay reparations, or money, to Britain and France to compensate them for the losses these countries had incurred in the war. This amount was crippling to Germany (in 1921, it was settled at about $12.5 billion) and was far more than the fines, or indemnities, that more lenient victors thought Germany should pay. Though the reparations that Germany agreed to were very high, they were still less than some Europeans wanted. The Americans who wrote the War Guilt Clause, including John Foster Dulles, did not think the clause would engender as much controversy as it did, as they saw the clause merely as a legal way to get Germany to pay reparations. 

Germans were also punished because they had pushed the conflict between Serbia and Austria-Hungary into a war. Instead of agreeing to a peace conference after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary in June of 1914, they declared war on Russia and France. Nations such as France also wanted to punish Germany through large reparations to make sure Germany's economy would be crippled so that the Germans could not threaten other European nations.

The Germans reacted to the War Guilt Clause with great opposition, as their loss was a humiliation and they did not think they deserved all the blame for starting the war. Many historians and diplomats began to believe, particularly in the years leading up to and after World War II, that the guilt clause and reparations had been mistakes that in part paved the way for Hitler's rise to power after Germany was humiliated.  

How has Lyddie's proficiency affected her salary in Lyddie?

Lyddie gets paid more when she becomes proficient because she gets paid by the piece.

Ever since she lost the farm and her family was split up, Lyddie has worried about money. She gave what little money she had to Ezekial, an escaped slave. Then she was fired from the tavern. This led her to get a job at the factory, where she felt more in control of her own destiny. 

When her roomates go...

Lyddie gets paid more when she becomes proficient because she gets paid by the piece.

Ever since she lost the farm and her family was split up, Lyddie has worried about money. She gave what little money she had to Ezekial, an escaped slave. Then she was fired from the tavern. This led her to get a job at the factory, where she felt more in control of her own destiny. 

When her roomates go home for the summer holiday, Lyddie comforts herself by hoping that she can use this as an opportunity to make more money. She does not really have a home to return to.

I may earn even more. If the weaving room is short of workers, Mr. Marsden may assign me another loom. Then I could turn out many more pieces each week. For she was proficient now. Weeks before she had begun tending her own loom without Diana's help. (Ch. 11)

After working at the factory for a short time, Lyddie no longer needed Diana’s help. Not only could she run a loom on her own, but she felt that she could handle another one too. Lyddie was willing to do anything for just a little more money.

The pay reflected her proficiency. She was making almost $2.50 a week above her $1.75 board. While the other girls grumbled that their piece rates had dropped so that it had hardly been worth slaving through the summer heat, she kept her silence. (Ch. 11)

Lyddie is a hard worker and values independence. She believes that if she works hard and saves money, she will eventually be able to pay off the family’s debts. Then, she hopes she can get her family back together on the farm.  Her brother works for a mill, and her mother and two littlest sisters went to her aunt’s house.

To what degree could Locke’s theories as found in his Second Treatise of Government (chapters 1-5 only) support environmentalism?

In the first chapter of this treatise, John Locke argues that Adam was not actually given authority over the earth. Moreover, he claims that the notion of Adamic authority passing down to his heirs depends on being able to identify the heirs of Adam, but we cannot do so. Although this does not provide a clear pro-environmental argument, it can be used to counter the argument advanced by some evangelical Christians that as Adam's heirs...

In the first chapter of this treatise, John Locke argues that Adam was not actually given authority over the earth. Moreover, he claims that the notion of Adamic authority passing down to his heirs depends on being able to identify the heirs of Adam, but we cannot do so. Although this does not provide a clear pro-environmental argument, it can be used to counter the argument advanced by some evangelical Christians that as Adam's heirs we have an absolute right to do anything we wish to the earth and the animals living on it.

Next, we have the argument that rulers rule with the consent of the ruled. When we look at environmental issues such as habitat destruction and ensuing species extinction, we can argue that (given recent evidence that certain animals think and feel) we have no right to kill animals and destroy their habitat without their consent.

We can also look at environmental issues in terms of the right to private property. Locke argues that the natural rights of one person to act as he wishes end when such actions impinge upon the property or freedoms of other people. Damage to any part of the global environment can affect many other parts. For example, global climate change and rising sea levels may actually submerge inhabited low-lying islands such as Kiribati. If the private property of individuals is damaged or destroyed by the carbon emissions of certain other people, that infringes on property rights. 

what propaganda technique is used in Animal Farm through this quote "all animals were equal but some are more equal than others”?

This phrase uses more than one propaganda technique but it most prominently engages in doublespeak, a term invented by Orwell in 1984 to indicate saying the opposite of what is meant. Doublespeak actually inverts meaning, such as, in 1984, calling war "peace" or the ministry devoted to torture the ministry of love (minilove). In Animal Farm, a slogan devoted to radical equality: "all animals are equal," is turned into its opposite: all animals are...

This phrase uses more than one propaganda technique but it most prominently engages in doublespeak, a term invented by Orwell in 1984 to indicate saying the opposite of what is meant. Doublespeak actually inverts meaning, such as, in 1984, calling war "peace" or the ministry devoted to torture the ministry of love (minilove). In Animal Farm, a slogan devoted to radical equality: "all animals are equal," is turned into its opposite: all animals are equal, except some are not; in other words, all animals are not equal.  

Other propaganda techniques make this doublespeak possible. Using the language of the common man is another form of propaganda, such as when politicians say "God bless America" whether they mean it or not or when politicians are photographed eating grits in a diner when they are wealthy people who normally would never go near a diner. In Animal Farm's case, the equality slogan speaks the language of the common animal, so it is easy to confuse the issue by attaching doublespeak to it. Finally, the doublespeak is reinforced by conditioning: the animals have learned to feel good about the equality slogan, so anything attached to it, even it turns the meaning of the original statement upside down, is likely to evoke a "feel good" sensation.

In The Merchant Of Venice, would you agree that Shylock has been much mistreated by the Christians? Above all that, is it fair that he's also been...

It is true that Shylock has been treated with contempt, especially by Antonio. As Shylock himself mentions in Act 1, scene 3:

...He hates our sacred nation, and he rails,
Even there where merchants most do congregate,
On me, my bargains and my well-won thrift,
Which he calls interest.

Antonio's prejudice is also obvious, for he later criticizes Shylock's reference to scripture in his attempt to prove that charging interest is not immoral, as Antonio believes. Antonio tells Bassanio in this instance:

Mark you this, Bassanio,
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart:
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

Antonio has offered to stand surety for a loan from Shylock to Bassanio, and when he asks the moneylender if he will consider providing the loan, Shylock replies:

Signior Antonio, many a time and oft
In the Rialto you have rated me
About my moneys and my usances:...
...You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,
And spit upon my Jewish gaberdine,
And all for use of that which is mine own...
...You, that did void your rheum upon my beard
And foot me as you spurn a stranger cur
Over your threshold:

In this extract Shylock mentions examples of Antonio's abuse. He has publicly criticized him for his moneylending practices, specifically with regard to the fact that he charges interest. He has also called him a heathen, and compared him to a merciless dog and spat on his cloak. He has also spat in his face and kicked him as he would a vagrant dog that crossed his door. Shylock sarcastically calls these "courtesies" and rhetorically asks if he should then lend Antonio money for such ill treatment.

Antonio's response to these accusations is unapologetic:

I am as like to call thee so again,
To spit on thee again, to spurn thee too.

He clearly does not have any amity for Shylock and states that he will do the same if the occasion should present itself. Antonio's attitude towards Shylock is typical of the ill-feeling that Venetians bore towards foreigners at the time. They could not accept the impositions sprung upon them by outsiders and they resented their presence, their customs and their religion. This sentiment was returned by the foreigners and Shylock expresses his loathing for Antonio.

I hate him for he is a Christian,...

...If I can catch him once upon the hip,

I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him.

Shylock evidently wants to take revenge on Antonio, for he bears him a very old grudge. He wishes to catch Antonio at a disadvantage to do so. It is this shared malice between the two which almost results in tragedy. This is, however, avoided due to Portia's timely intervention during Antonio's trial, where Shylock has asked for judgement against Antonio for forfeiting on the loan which he had granted him. The principal condition of the bond was that Shylock could claim a pound of Antonio's flesh if he should forfeit.

Once Shylock has gotten Antonio at a disadvantage, he stubbornly refuses to accede to any other arrangement. He is appealed to by different parties to reconsider and be merciful, but refuses to give even an inch. As a result, Shylock becomes a victim of his own malice. The court, through Portia's advice, orders him to give up half his property to the state and donate the other half to Antonio. The judgement is based on the fact that he, a foreigner, wanted to intentionally harm a Venetian citizen. Because of this, the duke can, furthermore, decide whether he should also forfeit his life.

At this point Antonio intervenes and in an act of what he believes is mercy, requests the court that it should set aside its original judgement and compel Shylock to donate half his wealth to his new son-in-law, Lorenzo, and will the other half to the married couple who will then be his heirs upon his death. Antonio also asks the court to compel Shylock to become a Christian.

This is seemingly the harshest punishment of all, since Shylock is a devout Jew and cannot tolerate Christians. It is a lifelong burden which he will have to bear and is also an indication of Antonio's vindictive nature. One may argue that Antonio has saved Shylock's life and half his property, that he has been merciful, but if one should weigh the two judgments against each other, it should be obvious that asking the deeply devout Jew to abandon his faith is probably the worst. That, however, is probably just a matter of opinion.

In "Two Kinds" by Amy Tan, the story is told from the daughter's point of view. How does that change the way we see the characters? Who do you...

Amy Tan's short story "Two Kinds" is told from the point of view of June, the daughter of a Chinese immigrant to San Francisco. The daughter's narration at first helps the reader understand her point of view and sympathize with her, though at the end of the story, her perspective shifts so that the reader can sympathize with the mother too.

At the beginning of the story, the mother's constant pestering of her daughter makes...

Amy Tan's short story "Two Kinds" is told from the point of view of June, the daughter of a Chinese immigrant to San Francisco. The daughter's narration at first helps the reader understand her point of view and sympathize with her, though at the end of the story, her perspective shifts so that the reader can sympathize with the mother too.

At the beginning of the story, the mother's constant pestering of her daughter makes the reader sympathize with the daughter. For example, the daughter thinks, "And after seeing, once again, my mother's disappointed face, something inside me began to die. I hated the tests, the raised hopes and failed expectations" (pages 2-3). The reader feels sorry for the daughter for having to endure the tests and exercises her mother makes her go through. When the daughter decides to rebel, the reader is on her side. The daughter says, "I won't let her change me, I promised myself. I won't be what I'm not" (page 3). As the daughter is narrating, we know her side of the issue. Although we know that the mother suffered a great deal in China and lost her family, we don't really know why she is pushing her daughter to succeed until the end of the story.

At the story's conclusion, however, the mother has died, and the daughter comes to realize that she is thankful for the trust and belief the mother invested in her. The daughter starts playing the piano she hasn't touched in years: "I played a few bars, surprised at how easily the notes came back to me" (page 9). She plays two songs--"Pleading Child" and "Perfectly Contented," and she "realized that they were halves of the same song" (page 9). In other words, in the end, the daughter realizes that she has more in common with her mother than she thought, and she is thankful that her mother believed in her for all those years. After all, the daughter still has the ability to play the piano because the mother forced her to do so. It is only at the end of the story that we as readers sympathize with the mother's point of view because the daughter finally does. We understand that the mother always believed in the daughter, and the daughter only understands this reality at the end of the story.

What concept is Sherlock Holmes unable to comprehend?

In the story "A Scandal in Bohemia," written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes and his companion, Dr. John Watson, are commissioned by the King of Bohemia to retrieve a compromising photograph from a past lover. Holmes employs his skills in disguise to gain entry into the home of Irene Adler and stages a fire (caused by Watson throwing a lit smoke-rocket through a window) in order to find out where she has hidden this...

In the story "A Scandal in Bohemia," written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes and his companion, Dr. John Watson, are commissioned by the King of Bohemia to retrieve a compromising photograph from a past lover. Holmes employs his skills in disguise to gain entry into the home of Irene Adler and stages a fire (caused by Watson throwing a lit smoke-rocket through a window) in order to find out where she has hidden this photograph. Naturally, in thinking her home is on fire, Adler rushes to retrieve it from its hiding place. Holmes sees where the hiding place is and plans to return the next day to steal it in secrecy. Upon arrival, he finds that Adler's servant is expecting them, and inside he finds a letter with his name waiting. Adler had been expecting some attempts by the King to retrieve the photograph, and became suspicious when the strange man (Holmes in disguise) had fled her home during the staged fire. She employed her own talent for disguise, following Holmes and Watson home, and overheard their discussion of their attempt to steal her photograph. In the letter, she applauds him for his attempt, but assures him the photograph will no longer be used as blackmail.

In the story, Sherlock Holmes is either unable or unwilling to imagine that someone—namely, Irene Adler—might be as smart as or smarter than him. It seems impossible, in a world where Holmes is always the smartest man in the room, that someone might be one step ahead of his plans. For the rest of his days, Holmes has the highest regard for Irene Adler, who is the only woman to have ever beaten him at his own game.

Who is Clarriker in Great Expectations?

Pip, once he received his legacy when he came of age, decides that he wants to get Herbert Pocket a job as a clerk to pay him back for his help and his friendship. Not wanting Herbert to know of this, and thus feel that he is a target for charity, Pip goes to the shipping merchant, Clarriker, to arrange a spot for Herbert, with himself paying his wages. Clarriker agrees to this, and Herbert...

Pip, once he received his legacy when he came of age, decides that he wants to get Herbert Pocket a job as a clerk to pay him back for his help and his friendship. Not wanting Herbert to know of this, and thus feel that he is a target for charity, Pip goes to the shipping merchant, Clarriker, to arrange a spot for Herbert, with himself paying his wages. Clarriker agrees to this, and Herbert excitedly informs Pip that he has found a good job as a clerk, which he has long wanted. When Pip finds out that it is Magwitch, not Miss Havisham, who is his benefactor, he asks Miss Havisham to take over his role as the person who pays Herbert’s wages. Herbert eventually proves his worth and is sent to Egypt to work in the headquarters there. After Magwitch’s death, Pip joins him there, with Clarriker as his employer.

What are some metaphors in Acts 4 and 5 of Julius Caesar?

A metaphor is a type of figurative language where something is described as being something other than it is.  It is an indirect comparison. Two examples of metaphors are the condemnation of the proscribed with a spot and the conversation about bees in the parley.

After Julius Caesar’s death, Mark Antony formed a triumvirate with Lepidus and Octavius Caesar. A triumvirate is basically a power-sharing arrangement. One of the first things they did was institute what was known as proscription. This consisted of making a list of one’s enemies and then taking their property or killing them. In this case, the proscription list supposedly contained the names of those involved in the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar.

In the beginning of Act 4, the triumvirate meets to discuss the proscription list. Shakespeare uses this opportunity to portray the three men as callous and opportunistic. We see a different side of Mark Antony here, when he easily condemns his nephew to death.

LEPIDUS

Upon condition Publius shall not live,
Who is your sister's son, Mark Antony.

ANTONY

He shall not live; look, with a spot I damn him.
But, Lepidus, go you to Caesar's house;
Fetch the will hither, and we shall determine
How to cut off some charge in legacies. (Act 4, Scene 1) 

When Antony says “with a spot I damn him,” he is using a metaphor. The spot is Publius’s position on the proscription list. By checking off Publius, Antony condemns him to death. He makes light of the situation with this turn of phrase, possibly to make a show of his ruthlessness for the other triumvirs. It appropriately demonstrates his callousness and cold-bloodedness.

Another example of an interesting metaphor from Act 5 comes during the parley. A parley is a battlefield conversation. The two sides meet under temporary truce and supposedly discuss terms. The parley between Antony, Octavius, Brutus, and Cassius is hardly productive.

CASSIUS

Antony,
The posture of your blows are yet unknown;
But for your words, they rob the Hybla bees,
And leave them honeyless.

ANTONY

Not stingless too.

BRUTUS

O, yes, and soundless too;
For you have stol'n their buzzing, Antony,
And very wisely threat before you sting. (Act 5, Scene 1)

Cassius's metaphor comparing Antony’s words to flowers humorously turns the parley into a verbal jousting match. Antony thrusts Cassius’s words back on him with his comment about taking the stings away from the bees (the enemy), and Brutus extends the metaphor by commenting that Antony is all talk.

Why didn't the conspirators want Cicero to join them?

The conspirators do not want to let Cicero in on their plot to assassinate Julius Caesar because Cicero apparently is a poor follower. In Act II, Scene 1, Cassius suggests that Cicero be included. Casca, Cinna, and Metellus support that idea. They believe that he and his "silver hairs / Will purchase us a good / opinion." His positive reputation with the people of Rome will help to support the decision to murder Caesar. The...

The conspirators do not want to let Cicero in on their plot to assassinate Julius Caesar because Cicero apparently is a poor follower. In Act II, Scene 1, Cassius suggests that Cicero be included. Casca, Cinna, and Metellus support that idea. They believe that he and his "silver hairs / Will purchase us a good / opinion." His positive reputation with the people of Rome will help to support the decision to murder Caesar. The conspirators recognize the inevitable backlash that will follow their killing of such a celebrated man, and they need all of the help they can get to combat the uproar they will cause. However, Brutus protests the inclusion of Cicero in their scheme. He states:

O, name him not; let us not break with him,
For he will never follow anything
That other men begin.

This means that Cicero is bad at following the orders of other men. "He will never follow anything / That other men begin" is another way of saying that Cicero wants to be in charge of everything that he is a part of. His inability to be a follower instead of a leader will make him a bad part of their plan and might cause unnecessary problems in the execution. 

Is there a way to understand if its a monopoly by just looking the quantities (Q), marginal costs (MC), marginal revenue (MR), and average costs...

What you can actually detect is market power, not monopoly per se.

Monopolies have market power, but there are other ways to get market power such as oligopoly and monopolistic competition. But these are also similar in many ways to monopoly, so in a broad sense you can detect "monopolistic situations" just by looking at marginal revenue and marginal cost.Specifically, a firm with market power will set its marginal revenue equal to its marginal...

What you can actually detect is market power, not monopoly per se.

Monopolies have market power, but there are other ways to get market power such as oligopoly and monopolistic competition. But these are also similar in many ways to monopoly, so in a broad sense you can detect "monopolistic situations" just by looking at marginal revenue and marginal cost.

Specifically, a firm with market power will set its marginal revenue equal to its marginal cost:

MR = MC

Compare this to a competitive firm, which would set its price equal to its marginal cost:

P = MC

The marginal revenue is typically smaller than the price, because increasing the quantity sold will also decrease the price as long as the demand curve is downward-sloping.

Specifically:

MR = d[PQ]/dQ = dP/dQ Q + P

If the demand curve is downward-sloping (as they usually are), dP/dQ is negative and thus MR < P.

Therefore we expect a monopoly (or more generally a firm with market power) to set a price higher than its marginal cost and sell a quantity smaller than the optimal quantity a competitive firm would sell.

How does a project differ from other management activities?

The broad term “management” refers to the activity of observing, handling, adjusting, and being responsible for the success of a complex operation, be it the financial success of a business enterprise, or the efficient functioning of one aspect of a complex undertaking. The management task is considered a daily, ongoing task (in fact, one method is called "management by walking around")A project, by definition, implies a complex coordination of several disparate departments, skills, personnel, and...

The broad term “management” refers to the activity of observing, handling, adjusting, and being responsible for the success of a complex operation, be it the financial success of a business enterprise, or the efficient functioning of one aspect of a complex undertaking. The management task is considered a daily, ongoing task (in fact, one method is called "management by walking around")A project, by definition, implies a complex coordination of several disparate departments, skills, personnel, and substructures requiring a managerial oversight that insures the successful meshing of all its parts, toward a specific, foreseen, and named result. An example will clarify these abstract terms: a business names a project, say the launching of a new product onto the market. The project’s manager then forms a team of personnel, and oversees the team’s progress toward the actual launch – branding, advertising venues, distribution on the wholesale level, perhaps even production schedules. Like all management, managing a project requires excellent communication skills, an organized mind and attention to details; in addition, managing a project requires good time management, a sense of how people work together, good conflict resolution skills,  and sensitivity to the market’s time clock.  Since there is a measurable, visible result of the project, the management skills (and shortcomings) are immediately measurable as well.

True or False: A respondent refers to a relatively small number of people selected to represent a sample, which is the entire group of interest.

That one is definitely false.A respondent is a single individual in your sample, specifically someone who actually answered your survey questions. (Typically you can't get everyone in your sample to answer your questions. The proportion who do is called the response rate.) A respondent would never be a group of people. Sometimes we might use a larger unit of analysis such as a city or a country; but we wouldn't call those "respondents"....

That one is definitely false.

A respondent is a single individual in your sample, specifically someone who actually answered your survey questions. (Typically you can't get everyone in your sample to answer your questions. The proportion who do is called the response rate.) A respondent would never be a group of people. Sometimes we might use a larger unit of analysis such as a city or a country; but we wouldn't call those "respondents".

The sample is the group of people (or like I said, cities, countries, etc.) that you actually gather data about. It is contrasted with the population, which is the entire group that you're interested in. The population is what you really want to know about; the sample is what you gather data on. Typically the sample is much smaller than the population---maybe you have a sample of a hundred people to study a population of millions. There are exceptions, especially for large units of analysis: For some econometric studies of different countries the sample and the population are the same thing.

Explain Salanio's short speech, "I have never heard a passion so confused..."

In this scene, Salanio describes how Shylock reacted when his daughter Jessica stole his money and ran off with a Christian. Salanio is mocking Shylock’s priorities and laughing at his loss. According to him, Shylock could not figure out what to mourn more, the loss of his daughter or his money: “My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter!” Hence, why Salanio refers to his outburst as “a passion so confused.” (Salanio might also be...

In this scene, Salanio describes how Shylock reacted when his daughter Jessica stole his money and ran off with a Christian. Salanio is mocking Shylock’s priorities and laughing at his loss. According to him, Shylock could not figure out what to mourn more, the loss of his daughter or his money: “My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter!” Hence, why Salanio refers to his outburst as “a passion so confused.” (Salanio might also be laughing at the potentially bawdy joke about the two precious stones that Jessica has “upon her.”)

This description indicates that Shylock is so flustered, he does not know how to react or what outrage to first address. He calls for the law and exclaims for his “Christian ducats,” because now a Christian has his money. Shylock’s obsession with his ducats derives from offensive stereotypes about Jews. Salanio’s view of Shylock’s reaction may be tainted by the character’s antisemitism (he calls Shylock “the dog Jew”), but the text itself also demonstrates antisemitic elements by portraying Shylock’s hard-hearted fixation on profit.

What were the advantages and disadvantages for British people living in India?

British people lived in India first under the British East India Company (from about 1750-1850) and then in the British Raj (from 1858 to 1947). During the Raj, Britain's crown ruled India. The advantage that many British people gained in India was access to better jobs as members of the civil service or army than they could attain at home. This was particularly true of the younger sons of aristocratic or wealthy families, as the...

British people lived in India first under the British East India Company (from about 1750-1850) and then in the British Raj (from 1858 to 1947). During the Raj, Britain's crown ruled India. The advantage that many British people gained in India was access to better jobs as members of the civil service or army than they could attain at home. This was particularly true of the younger sons of aristocratic or wealthy families, as the older sons often inherited the title to land. British people in India often had servants, who they could not have afforded at home, and they had higher status than they would have had at home. Finally, living in India provided them with a type of adventure that living in England would not have.

The disadvantages were that they were subject to cholera, smallpox, and other diseases. Civil servants serving in India under the British East India Company died at twice the rate of those at home in England. British people might also have felt socially isolated at times in a country that was not really their home and in which there were very different religious and social practices than at home. In addition, there were rebellions against British rule, including the Indian Rebellion of 1857 (also called the Sepoy Rebellion). After World War I, there was increased pressure on England, in a movement led by Gandhi and others, to give India independence. Over time, sentiment developed towards ending British hegemony in India.