According to microeconomic theory, what will happen to the following things if computer firms are reaping high profits?suppose you read in a...

Here are a few predictions that were not mentioned.

1. Computers would have to get better and more innovative. In fact, I would say that there would have to be some major advancement, or computer companies will not be able to sustain growth. Why would people buy another computer without good reason?

2. In time the number of computers in the world will increase to the point that it might hurt the computer market. Through this, sales may eventually do down.

3. While times are good, many allied companies will do well, such a advertising.

I am very hot natured. My skin feels cool, then immediately hot. feels like I radiate heat. total hyster. in '88. take HRT 1.25 PremarinI was a...

I'm not a doctor, but I do have lots of experience with "female" problems.  More than likely, you have a hormone imbalance.  It will trigger the hot/cold or simply hot sensation that you describe.  I had "fema" problems for years, finally resulting in an emergency hysterectomy four years ago literally to save my life.  Afterwards, while recovering from surgery, I did a lot of reading.  I discovered all my problems were cause by my body not making enough progesterone.  Normally, progesterone is a male hormone, but it is present in small amounts in females.  It's the hormone that all the other hormones are made from.  It's also the hormone that determines whether women can get pregnant and maintain the pregancy to produce a full-term, healthy baby.  Lack of it produces almost every known ailment in women including PMS, infertility, osteoporosis, and obesity.

I strongly recommend that you go to Barnes & Noble Bookstores and get a book titled, "What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Menopause, the breakthrough book on natural hormone balance," by John R. Lee, M.D.  While it sounds like a book for only older women, it is a veritable storehouse of information for all women!  I believe all females should read it, and girls should start reading it as soon as they reach puberty.

I think you will find the answers to your questions and problems in the book. 

When Pheobe's father reads the note from his wife, why does Sal react the way she does in Walk Two Moons by Sharon Creech?When Phoebe's father...

When Phoebe's father reads the note from his wife telling him she is going away, Sal has "a sinking, sinking feeling" because her own mother had gone away under similar circumstances, and had never come back.

Phoebe's mother is vague about why she is leaving, but it is clear that she is unhappy and needs to have some time alone to straighten things out in her own mind. Sal's mother had needed to do the same thing, and Sal has still not quite reconciled for herself exactly why her mother left and why she had not come back. Sal's feelings are in turmoil, and she is consumed by feelings of loneliness, betrayal, and even guilt. She refuses to talk to anyone about her unhappiness, however, preferring to avoid the issue because it is too difficult for her to face.

When Phoebe's father reads the note from his wife, it is kind of a situation of deja vu for Sal. The message brings back far too clearly the memory of how things were when her own mother left, a memory which she has been struggling mightily to forget. Sal knows how things will be for Phoebe's family now, how they will be confused and angry and hurt until the problem with Phoebe's mother is resolved. As close as she is to Phoebe, Sal also probably senses that now, she too will be forced to relive a time she would prefer not to remember (Chapter 20).

Find 2 examples of parallelism & 2 quotations that demonstrate Patrick Henry's attempt to build/maintain ethos/logos/pathos.

In "Speech to the Virginia Convention," Patrick Henry uses parallel structure when he questions the House about when the country will be stronger and able to endure any attacks by Britain:

"Will it be the next week, or the next year?  Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house?"

He uses parallelism here to ask the House to consider the position of the American forces.

In the entire speech, Henry moves from appeals to ethos, to logos, and then to pathos.  At the beginning of the address, he makes an appeal to patriotism to suggest his loyality to the colonies and the government:  "No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as the abilities, of the very worth gentlemen who have just addressed the House."

In the middle of the speech, Henry moves into more logical appeals through his use of rhetorical questions that ask the House to consider the logical implications of not acting against Great Britain: 

"Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other."

Finally, Henry ends the speech with appeals to pathos to arouse the audience and encourage them to resist the British forces: 

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Henry maintains a continuum of appeals in his speech to persuade the House to act.

Can any one tell me how gerund is used absolutely in the following sentence? Playing cards being aversion, we didn't play bridge.

In order to begin, I must conclude that you have omitted the necessary article an. You're sentence ought to read:
Playing cards being an aversion, we didn't play bridge.

Longmans Dictionary of Contemporary English Online is the best source for confirming word usage as they use clear models with definitions. Longmans shows that there are two usages of aversion. One usage model for aversion is aversion to something or someone. Their example is:

Despite his aversion to publicity, Arnold was persuaded to talk to the press.

The second model is have an aversion to something. Here aversion is followed by the complement to, but must be preceded by the article an. Your sentence falls under the second usage model for aversion, therefore must be preceded by the article an.

Now to the case of the word playing. A gerund is a manifestation of a verb. It is a verb in the present participle form. Present participle verbs end in -ing and follow or precede the conjugated forms of the verb to be.

Present participles forms are used for four syntactical functions: (1) as tense forming verbs and (2) at the head of participle clauses; (3) as adjectives; (4) and as nouns called gerunds.Examine each so you can identify what comprises a gerund.

(1) The present participle verb is formed with to be + [verb] + -ing (to be + -ing).

(2) A present participle clause (also called an adverbial clause) is formed with an -ing verb followed by a noun or noun phrase (popcorn (N), the theater (NP)): -ing + N/NP. Exs: Passing popcorn being awkward, I spilled it. Passing the shop, I saw I was lost.

(3) A present participle functions as an adjective when it forms part of a noun phrase: a flying bird: article + present participle adjective + noun.

(4) A present participle functioning as a noun gerund is formed in relation to the sentence Verb.

A gerund may precede the Verb when it fills the slot of a Subject or it may follow the Verb when it fills the slot of the Object. Examples: A gerund as Subject is Singing is good for you. A gerund as an Object is I enjoy singing.

A gerund is formed by the verb and the present participle, either as Verb + present participle gerund (V + -ing) or as present participle gerund + Verb (-ing + V).

Do you think there is a moral to the story, "Harrison Bergeron"? Why or why not?

In this Vonnegut story the moral is that it is wrong to try and make everyone equal. The theme of absolute equality has already appeared two years before "Harrison Bergeron" was published for the first time in Fantasy and Science-Fiction Magazine (1961). It was Vonnegut's novel The Sirens of Titan. However, in this work the theme is only a minor feature and is not really developed.The idea probably intrigued Kurt Vonnegut and forced him to develop it into a short story. Those who are familiar with Kurt Vonnegut's writing will certainly recognize some other themes of this story. For example the fear of de-humanization of human beings, being stuck in amber.

In "Harrison Bergeron", Kurt Vonnegut presented a scary view
of a future society, where everyone was equal. "Nobody was
smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else." (Vonnegut 1988:7). It was the job of the agents of the United States Handicapper General to keep it this way. Beautiful people had to wear ugly masks. People not heavy enough had to wear handicap bags full of lead. Clever people had to wear a radio in their ear tuned to the government transmitter, which sent out sharp noises to keep people from taking advantage of their brains. It was a world where competition was the greatest of sins.

I think that this view can be very easily related to modern
society. People are striving for equality of some kind--equality
of races, sexes etc. People try to eliminate racism, sexism,
lookism, ableism, ageism. Even the word speciesism starts to
appear in modern dictionaries of Politically Correct language.
The society in "Harrison Bergeron" succeeded in eliminating these prejudices--everybody got the same opportunity to do
anything--and the result was fatal.

How did the creature first demonstrate ethical behavior from his hovel in Frankenstein?

After being chased by villagers, physically threatened, & after suffering in the elements, the creature finds a small woodshed in which he can hide. While there, he discovers the De Lacey family, the few people with whom he will feel a connection in the story. To him, they are beautiful creatures of grace, & he cannot understand why they are sad. Then he realizes one reason is poverty:

They often, I believe, suffered the pangs of hunger very poignantly, especially the two younger cottagers; for several times they placed food before the old man, when they reserved none for themselves.

This trait of kindness moved me sensibly. I had been accustomed, during the night, to steal a part of their store for my own consumption; but when I found that in doing this I inflicted pain on the cottagers, I abstained, and satisfied myself with berries, nuts, and roots, which I gathered from a neighbouring wood.

Thus he resolves to never steal their food again, even though he had been doing it in order to survive. He decides to go hungry, rather than cut into their meager stores. then he takes it one step further:

I discovered also another means through which I was enabled to assist their labours. I found that the youth spent a great part of each day in collecting wood for the family fire; and, during the night, I often took his tools, the use of which I quickly discovered, and brought home firing sufficient for the consumption of several days.

Thus he begins cutting wood for them as well, shortening their own work day and decreasing the amount of physical labor they must do in order to survive. Of course, the sad irony is that he will never be accepted by them, no matter how much he helps the family. He will always be an outcast. He greatly admires this family, and seeks to emulate them, but he comes to realize his own position as a monster in the eyes of humans. Indeed, this is how he's come to regard himself:

I had admired the perfect forms of my cottagers -- their grace, beauty, and delicate complexions: but how was I terrified, when I viewed myself in a transparent pool! At first I started back, unable to believe that it was indeed I who was reflected in the mirror; and when I became fully convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification. Alas! I did not yet entirely know the fatal effects of this miserable deformity.

Yet he will discover them soon, when he reveals himself to the family, only to be torn away & cast out into the world once again.

Compare and contrast the way the authors depict dangerous situations by discussing the characters behaviors and feelings.O. Henry's "After Twenty...

Let me point out that the dangerous situations in the two stories are of different natures and may not even seem particularly dangerous, not in comparison to a spy story, for example.

The dangerous situation in "After Twenty Years" is that Patrolman Welles is approaching an unknown person standing in a darkened doorway of a business neighborhood that closes early with all the shops quiet and secure.

The dangerous situation in "The Lottery" is that villagers are standing in clusters--with the children having to be called away from a great pile of stones--awaiting the conclusion of the lottery drawing.

The character's behavior, in the first, is that Patrolman Wells "suddenly slowed his walk" at the sight of a seemingly unexpected man leaning in the darkened door of a hardware store--retrospect tells us he slowed in his tracks from the emotion of fulfilled expectation. When Wells perceives the truth of his situation through the service of a lighted match when "[the] man in the doorway struck a match and lit his cigar" (as in Narayan's "The Astrologer's Day"), he remains calm, gets additional information, then moves calmly away, quietly continuing his duties.

The policeman twirled his club and took a step or two.

"I'll be on my way. Hope your friend comes around all right. Going to call time on him sharp?"

"I should say not!" said the other. "I'll give him half an hour at least. If Jimmy is alive on earth he'll be here by that time. So long, officer."

In the second, villagers complain about how long the process takes. They talk about their perception of an ever-shortening time between annual lottery drawings. While standing passively, they watch who goes up and are intent on the proceedings though in a distracted, anxious sort of way.

"I wish they'd hurry," Mrs. Dunbar said to her older son. "I wish they'd hurry."

"They're almost through," her son said.

O. Henry uses the Patrolman's motions and psychological state of outward composer despite inner anticipation to paint a picture of a dangerous situation, emphasizing the behavior of the one who poses the danger (Silky Bob). Jackson uses the villager's collectively uniform distraction and anxiety to paint a dangerous situation, emphasizing the behavior of the ones to whom the danger is a threat (the villagers).

Does the speaker seem to change in "The Raven"? If so, how would you describe his feelings?

The narrator in Edgar Allan Poe's poem "The Raven" does indeed go through many emotional changes during the course of the poem. "Weak and weary," the narrator is nonetheless awake during the middle of the night, reading a book about ancient history in hopes of alleviating the misery he feels for his lost love. 

... --vainly I had sought to borrow / From my books surcease of sorrow--sorrow for the lost Lenore--

As he tries to nap, a noise is heard. The narrator becomes nervous, wondering about the cause of the sound. It is a raven, which flies inside and perches on a statue. At first the narrator is happy to have a visitor...

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling, / By the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore...

and finds such humor in the situation that he speaks to the bird.

"Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou," I said, "art sure no craven, / Ghastly grim and ancient Raven wandering from the Nightly shore--/
Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night's Plutonian shore!"

When the raven answers, "Nevermore," the narrator is filled with wonderment and begins a conversation with his new friend. But the narrator becomes perturbed with the bird's continuous reply of "Nevermore," and when the bird later fails to answer him, the man's overwhelming sadness causes him to become unglued. When he asks if he will ever recover from his lover's death, the raven once again answers in the same manner.

The air becomes "denser," and the narrator "shrieks," "cries," "implores" and then "shrieked" at the bird to rid him of its evil presence. He seems near madness.

"Be that word our sign of parting, bird or fiend!" I shrieked, upstarting-- / "Get thee back into the tempest and the Night's Plutonian shore! / Leave no black plume as a token of that lie thy soul hath spoken! / Leave my loneliness unbroken! --quit the bust above my door! / Take thy beak from out my heart,and / Take thy form from off my door!" "Quoth the Raven "Nevermore."

The speaker's sorrow apparently will go on, and his "soul" is lost forever.

 

In Invictus, what is the meaning of "Looms but the Horror of the shade"?

One key to understanding "Invictus" is to know a bit about the author. William Henley contracted tuberculosis as a child, and had one foot amputated; doctors barely managed to save the other foot. Although he enjoyed short periods of good health, much of his life was spent in and out of hospitals, and his writing reflects this experience. 

When Henley utters the famous line "My head is bloody, but unbowed" in the second stanza, he is referring to not giving in to despair despite enduring the pain and uncertainty of the disease that eventually killed him. The "place of wrath and tears" refers to the world of the living, in which he is both angry and sorrowful at what he endures as a man with tuberculosis. What lies beyond the pain and suffering of this life is "the Horror of the Shade", in other words, death, in which one becomes a shade or shadow of one's former self. 

In this poem, Henley asserts that he will face both present pain and the horror of death with as much courage as possible.

Tolstoy's narrator says, Ilych begins to feel that he is living "all alone on the brink of an abyss, with no one who understood or pitied him."...

Remember, Ivan Ilych is an "Everyman."  His name is like "John Smith" in English.  He stands for all mankind universal.  Later in the novella, when he's closer to death, he will have these two epiphanies:

A.   That all of his human relationships have occurred simply as institutional categories, rather than as genuine human connections.

B.    That he himself has been nothing more than an institutional category and is going to die without ever having lived in a meaningful way.

This sentence in your question comes at the end of chapter 4 (of which there are 12).  Tolstoy focuses on Ivan's health, although the narrative avoids medical discussion: "The doctor said that so-and-so indicated that there was so-and-so inside the patient..." (one of the great sentences by Tolstoy, who otherwise famed for his realism).  The chapter ends thusly:

With this consciousness, and with physical pain besides the terror, he must go to bed, often to lie awake the greater part of the night. Next morning he had to get up again, dress, go to the law courts, speak, and write; or if he did not go out, spend at home those twenty-four hours a day each of which was a torture. And he had to live thus all alone on the brink of an abyss, with no one who understood or pitied him.

This paragraph describes not only a physically sick man but a spiritually sick one.  Both mind ("consciousness") and body ("physical pain") are afflicted.  Ivan feels tortured by the absurdity of pointless labor which, ironically, he's been doing for years.

His trip the the doctor's office is no consolation.  The doctor is so matter-of-fact about Ivan's maladies that Ivan feels like a litigant in his own courtroom being callously dealt with by a judge.  To the doctor Ivan is an abstraction, patient X, a disease, nobody, a cog in a machine.  Ivan is beginning to realize this about all of the illegitimate society, and it sickens him.

It is also ironic that Ivan's symptoms--the bad taste in the mouth and fits of anger--coincide with Praskovya's pregnancy.  So, we have a death-birth connection here: neither the end of life nor the beginning of life is free from this spiritual malaise.

So, the "brink of the abyss" is not only death but the aforementioned realizations about one's life (A & B above).  The whole novella is a brink of Ivan's abyss, the last moments of a dying man.  Before death, like the thief on the cross, he will be realize that a Buddhist brand of Christianity (a secular belief in Jesus' teachings, focusing on poverty and servitude) should have given meaning to his otherwise pointless life.

What is the meaning of Thoreau's quote "There is no odor so bad as that which arises from goodness tainted"?I simply dont get the meaning of this...

In this passage, from the first chapter of "Walden," Thoreau is talking about how bad it is when people try to *do* good (especially for others).  Instead of trying to *do* good, we should try to *be* good -- the best we ourselves can be, and never mind worrying about whether that helps others.  If we do that, it will actually turn out to be better than if we consciously try to *do* good.

If you look a bit before that, he talks about how the sun does best when it ignores everything else but just shining as brightly as it possibly can.  Compared with that, when Phaeton tried to do good for others, he burned a bunch of stuff up.

So Thoreau is saying that people who try to *do* good for others stink (figuratively) and that they'd be of more help if they just tried to be good to the best of their ability.

In a way, this is like the capitalist defense of self-interest that argues that when people act selfishly (trying to get the most possible money for themselves) they actually end up helping society.

In The Crucible how does Miller portray male/female relationships, in particular between Betty and Parris?

If you look at the key male/female relationships in the play, you might start to wonder if Miller really meant to portray such negative, heated interactions between the two.

Let's look at Betty and her father, Reverend Parris.  Betty is so terrified of getting in trouble by her father that she becomes, almost literally, paralyzed by fear.  He discovered her dancing in the woods, and knew that most definitely she would be whipped, and maybe more if the "other stuff" was discovered.  Fear of her father makes her go inert, pretending illness instead of having to face him.  This relays male/female relationships as fraught with a dominant male and a cowering female.

Then, let's look at John and Abby.  These two obviously, at one point, had a very passionate relationship--one based mostly on lust, probably, but it soon turns sour when John ends it.  John feels bitterness towards her in the end, and she pines after him--her desire for him drives her to drastic actions.  So, we see a love/hate relationship develop between the two; Miller seems to portray this one as a firey, but overall destructive and negative relationship.

Next is John and Elizabeth.  Miller portrays their relationship as fraught with distrust, negativity, criticism, careful words, and explosive arguments.  Elizabeth is a cold, critical woman and John is resentful and prideful; his affair still interferes in their happiness.  However, in this relationship, there is hope.  In the closing act of the play, Miller shows them in a tender moment of reconcilation and love; he seems to be saying that marriage can be hard, but it is worth it to fight through challenges.

The other relationship that we can infer from is that of Mr. Putnam and Ruth; later, Ruth is prompted, through her father, to accuse an innocent man of witchcraft, so that he can get the man's land.  This shows an overpowering father figure again, with a girl willing to please and do what he says, no matter the repercussions.

I hope that those analyses help a bit; good luck!

Cloning can produce twins?

Cloning remains a very controversial area. It's issues  are very different, as the angles of which is seen. Doctors can consider it a therapeutic method of the future, patients can consider it the hope of healing , researchers could see it as discovering key information about the unknown genes. And some of us consider cloning a way to bring back dead loved ones. The idea was inspired by the way cloning is shown in movies. Others hoped that cloning is actually the answer waited in attempts to conceive a child.

Specialists try to smash these false hopes and present medical truth, scientific: only 1-2% of all cloned animals live (develop normally and are born live). The percentage of human embryos is even lower, pregnancy in humans is  much more complex than in animals. Unfortunately, even from this small percentage, many animals die within the first weeks after birth. In the end,  the figures are even less encouraging. Even though many cloned animals appear normal, genetic tests refute this impression. In terms of safety to clone a future child it is not a thing to be considered. It is too dangerous, and the implications could be catastrophic. In addition, reproductive cloning is still banned in many countries.

Even if it is reached a point where it will consider cloning a much more certain method, it is wrong the assumption that such a method can duplicate or multiple humans. It should not be encouraged and not perpetuated.

Nor have to be encouraged the idea that by cloning can be achieved identical twins, in every respect. Even in the natural process, identical twins are in fact ... different. Aspect is perhaps the only common point, though, despite the fact that DNA is 100% identical, fingerprints differ.They develop their personality in different ways.

In the same way, each clone is actually a unique individual.

What does this quote mean? Can you give an example to help me understand the meaning?[from The Crucible, at the end of Act II there's a monologue...

Proctor's quote at the end of Act II means we are the same people we have always been; however children who are overtaken by social fears have the power to control the life or death of a single individual, by accusing them of witchcraft. In addition, simple revenge by common people against each other is the motive behind it all.

This is true of Salem at that time in history. It's what Miller's The Crucible is all about: people accusing each other just to get revenge in a climate where children have the power of life or death by merely pointing a finger at them. It's hysteria.

What is Henry's brilliant idea with regard to Thomas Becket?Why does he do this?

Henry II, King of England, was very interested in maintaining and expanding the power of the monarchy.  He was especially concerned with making sure that the Church did not get to be too powerful and too independent.

In Act I of this play, Thomas Becket is Henry's friend and his chancellor -- the official in charge of collecting taxes.  Becket and Henry have trouble getting the Church to pay the taxes the King thinks they should.

Henry's brilliant idea is to appoint Becket as Archbishop of Canterbury (head of the Church in England).  That way he will be loyal to Henry and not to the church and Henry will have more power.

Becket does not side with Henry and Henry, of course, ends up having him killed.

If we take one dollar away from a rich person and give it to a poor person, the rich person losses less utility than the poor person gains. Comment?

A dollar taken away from a rich person and given to a rich person creates more utility for the poor person more than the reduction of utility for the rich person. This happens because of the law of diminishing marginal utility. This law of economics holds that marginal (or additional) utility of a dollar spent on a good reduces with the total quantity of that goods consumed increases.

Implication of the law of diminishing marginal utility is that a person will spend the first dollar available on the good that gives maximum utility per dollar spent. As more and more dollars are spent on that good, its marginal utility will decrease to a level below that of the marginal utility of some other good. In this situation the next dollar will be spent on this second good. In this way, as more and more money is available with a person, more and more goods will be added to the purchase basket, In this purchase basket, the last unit of the last item added will have the lowest utility. Further, the utility of the last unit of last item spent in terms of utility per dollar will decrease as the total spending decreases. As per this reasoning the utility of the last dollar spent by a rich person will be less than utility of last dollar spent by a poor person because the total spending of a rich person is more than that of a poor person.

The logic given above assumes that both rich person derive same kind of utilities from same goods, or that their preferences among different goods are same. Let us assume a situation where the rich person is faced with a life threatening health disorder so that he has to cut down expenses on many other items to be able to pay the medical bills. In this case the utility of the last dollar spent by a rich person in such a situation may be more than the last dollar spent by a comparatively poorer person.

"TOTAL INDUSTRY SALES ARE $105 MILLION.THE TOP FOUR FIRMS ACCOUNT FOR SALES OF $10 MILLION,$9 MILLION,$8 MILLION, AND $5 MILLION,...

Concentration ratio in economics is a measure of market power of dominant firms in a monopolistic or oligopolistic market. Concentration ratio or, more specifically, four-firm concentration ratio is  the percent of total industry turnover accounted by the largest four firms in the industry. The concentration ration could be calculated for some other number of firs also. For example we can calculate eight-firm concentration ratio also. In a monopoly market there will be only one firm with concentration ratio of 100 percent.

In the question above, information is provided on turnover of four firms therefore we will calculate four-firm concentration ratio.

The total turnover of the four top firms is $32 million (10+9+8+5 = 32).

The total turnover of the industry is $105 million.

The turnover of the four top firms as percentage of industry turnover:

= (32/105) x 100 = 30.4762 %

Therefore four-firm concentration ratio for the given example is 30.4762 %.

Please note that a four firm concentration ration is considered to be at lower side of medium. Thus the market will qualify more as a fairly competitive market, rather than as a monopolistic market. At the most the market may be considered a oligopolistic market.

In "How much land does a man need?", was Pahom a victim of his desires or a victim of the devil?

You need to remember that this story is allegorical by nature which means that it works on two levels and has a clear message. The characters and events of allegories such as this tale can be understood both for what they are (a literal interpretation) as well as for the abstract principles they represent (a more symbolic interpretation). Thus what you need to do as you read the tale is consider how the characters work symbolically - what they might represent.

So, to return to your question, you could say that both options are completely correct. It is clear that the tale refers to the Devil as creating a "tussle" between himself and Pahom that results in his demise, but equally, reading the character of the Devil more allegorically, you could argue that he represents human weakness and greed and man's insatiable desire to have more and his inability to never be satisfied. Both explanations are valid for this allegory, but to pick one ignores the depth and richness of the point Tolstoy is trying to make. You might want to go back now and consider what other characters, events and locations might represent in this tale.

Why does Palestine have the right to exist and Israelis do not belong in Palestine?Please ASAP and give me details

I'm not sure this question has a solid "yes" or "no."  If we use the religious book argument, the God of Abraham promised specific areas of land to both the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael.  The area we call Palestine was promised to the Hebrews, Isaac's children, not the Arabs, Ishmael's, although they were also promised vast areas.  Muhammad was born in today's Saudi Arabia, not Palestine.

If we use the argument of history, the area was lived in mostly by Arabs since AD 70 when the Romans drove out the Jews after the Jewish Revolt.  But many Jews have lived there throughout this time, also.

Another historical argument is that the Palestinians are the descendants of the ancient Philistines, the people who invaded Israel after the Hebrews drove out the Canaanites in the centuries after Moses.  This doesn't hold water, since the modern Palestinians are not related; the earlier Philistines were wiped out by the ancient Phoenicians, which is to say the Lebanese.

Then there's the idea that Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites, also not true.  Palestinians are Arabs originally from Arabia and the lands to the east.

The real problem is that the Holocaust convinced the world the Jews needed a modern nation-state, and since it is the area of ancient Israel, it was the place chosen.  Palestinians were offered equal citizenship with all the same rights as Jews, but their leaders fomented a war in the fear they would lose power over the Palestinian people.  If Palestinians had votes in a modern democratic Israel, how could their fuedalistic leaders have kept control?  But they lost the war, and their Arab brothers have bewailed their plight since 1948 but have never offered real help. The Arab nations keep them in refugee camps, and have never offered to share any of their land, have never offered any but the most parsimonious financial aid.  The hypocrisy among Arab governments about the Palestinians is appalling. The Arab people are very affected, but their governments don't seem to really care.

Personally, I believe both Israel and the Palestinians obviously have the right to exist, and that both Israel and other states such as Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia should all offer land for a Palestinian state, and the incredibly rich Arab countries should financially help set it up.  Any other plan is unworkable, as we have seen for the last 61 years.

What is "optimism?"People say: "Be optimistic." I'm wondering what that means. "Once a man was falling off the thirteenth story of a high...

Optimism is an attitude, an attitude of always looking at the brighter side of things. Sometimes it is rather naive or forced to believe that this world is the best possible world. At bottom it is a religious attitude like believing that God is good, just as Browning observed that God is in Heaven, and everything will be set right.

But think of Micawber in Dickens's 'David Copperfield'. Plunged in a pool of debt, and even boxed up in the Debtors' Prison, Micawber could go on harping the same iterative phrase, 'something 'll turn up'.

Simple and unqualified optimism does not help in real situations. Often optimism may take the shape of a mockery of hope or faith, for example in Samuel Beckett's famous play, 'Waiting for Godot', where the two tramps--Lucky and Pozzo--go on waiting for one Godot who never comes. Are they really optimistic of the arrival of Godot? Or do they mock uncritical / unrealistic optimism?

Why does Douglass make the point that a slaveholder who has fathered a child is likely to be tougher on that child?

I think that Douglass' primary motivation in pointing this point of view about the slaveholder's child is to reflect the psychological destruction that is so intrinsic to slavery.  Douglass shows slavery to be both bad and psychologically damaging to everyone.  On one hand, the child who has a slaveowner father, yet is a slave is one who suffers intense psychological trauma.  Their lives are in bondage, yet they were brought into this world by one parent who is not a slave.  This creates a divided consciousness, which, on many levels, is destructive to one's psyche.  Douglass points this out in bringing out more opposition to the nature of slavery as one that yields destruction and suffering on a personal level, something not as readily evident by the outsider.  Additionally, Douglass brings out the psychological confusion of the master.  Douglass illuminates how emotionally discombobulated and fragmented the slaveowner is.  On one hand, they fathered a child out of their own choice.  Yet, their own self- hatred is what compels them to mistreat this child and treat them even worse.  In this, the slave owners are shown to be as psychologically fragmented, if not more, than the slave.

Sandstone, siltstone, shale.The three rocks above are all made up of very, very small sediments. What is the name of the process which takes these...

It is called diagenesis. Diagenesis occurs in several stages. First, compaction happens as the particles are pressed together by the increasing weight of what is above. The size of the spaces between is reduced, and water is forced out. As new minerals fill in the remaining space, cementation occurs, and particles bind together. Further steps can occur later, if compression continues and the rock hardens further. The below link is a good source for more info.

In The Scarlet Letter, what specifically is Dimmesdale's plea to Hester?

Dimmesdale struggles with the inner torment of his secret sin. He knows that it will slowly kill him, eating at him from the inside out. He also knows that he does not have the strength to confess his sin himself. While Hester stands on the scaffold, he as her pastor begs her to reveal the name of the man who she had an affair with. He tells her that she should not have to bear the penalty of their sin alone. He also tells her that perhaps he is too weak of an individual to reveal his own sin and that her naming him might save him much inner torment. At the time, he seems like a dutiful pastor. Later the audience realizes that this plea is because of his own guilt and weakness.

In the drama "A Christmas Carol,"the second ghost remarks that he has "over eighteen hundred brothers." What does he mean by that?It is said by...

The Ghost of Christmas Present is referring to the approximately 1800 Christmases that have come and gone since the birth of Christ, leading up to the point where Dickens wrote "A Christmas Carol" in the mid-1800's.  Interestingly, it is the period of Victorian England that produced many of the cultural hallmarks of today's American Christmas celebration, including the Christmas tree, of course, which was borrowed from Germany.  Ironic that the same time period in England that produced so many of the secular and commercial aspects of our Christmas traditions also produced a writer, Dickens, who was able to articulate through his fictional work what the true meaning of Christmas was and should remain. 

Why was Ponyboy so surprised that he got along with Cherry in The Outsiders?

Ponyboy was surprised that he was friends with Cherry because she was part of the Socs', the rich kids who had everything.  How could she possibly have anything in common with Pony when he was from the other side of the tracks.  He was a Greaser and she was a Soc, total opposites.  Pony thought of the Socs' as spoiled rich kidss with no consideration for people's feelings or any else that should have mattered.  Ponyboy is so sensitive and caring, that he doesn't believe a Soc would understand him.  He groups Cherry as just another Soc that would usually be cruel to him and treat him badly, just because of his background and social status.  The Socs' looked down upon the Greasers.  They thought they were better, just because they had more money.  Socs' didn't associate with the Greasers because to them, Greasers were poor and pathetic, low class compared to them.  So Pony figured, Cherry would be that same way, materialistic, unfeeling and shallow.  That was not the case, however, and Pony soon found out that he and Cherry had a lot in common.  She wasn't like the other Socs'.  Cherry Valance was warm, intelligent, caring and thoughtful, to his surprise.  The two became friends, regardless of their obvious differences.

What does the following quote from Macbeth mean: "Things bad Begun make strong themselves by ill" (III.ii.55)?

The quote expresses Shakespeare's view of human nature--that mankind is basically evil.  Specifically, in this quote, the playwright suggests that evil reproduces itself.  If someone premeditates any type of crime or "sin," that premeditation causes the crime or sin to spin out of control and to become more than the perpetrator intended. The word "ill" has several interpretations.  It is used in place of "evil," but it is also connected to the phrase "ill will" which means that someone intends to harm another or wishes for someone else to experience difficulties.

In the case of Macbeth, neither he nor Lady Macbeth had any idea at the beginning that their "ill" plot would lead to so many deaths or that it would have such a profound psychological effect upon them.

Why is high speed tailgating a bad idea?related to physics

Newton's first law of motion, in its simplified form, states that a body at rest tends to stay at rest and a body in motion tends to stay in motion.

A car is a body in motion. Therefor it tends to stay in motion. This tendency is called inertia.

A body in motion has a certain momentum. Momentum is mass times velocity.

A fast moving car has velocity (its speed) and mass (its weight).

The faster and heavier a car is, the more momentum it has and the more force it has (inertia) to keep moving and therefor, the harder it is to stop.

Thus if you are tailgating, the faster you are moving, the harder it is to avoid hitting the car in front of you if that car should suddenly slow down.

The rule of thumb is: keep one car length between you and the car in front of you for every ten miles per hour of speed. This means that if you are going fifty miles per hour, keep five car lengths between you and the car you are behind.

How did Oaks Tutt die in "Oaks Tutt" from Spoon River Anthology?

Masters' Spoon River Anthology has a piece entitled, "Oaks Tutt."  However there is no mention of his death in this piece or anywhere else in the anthology.

Oaks Tutt's mother was a suffragette, it seems; his father was a rich man, and Oaks grew up dreaming of righting the wrongs of the world. After his father's death, Oaks travels the globe to learn how he can reform the world.  He travels to famous places, including the necropolis at Memphis.  There he is caught up by "wings of flame."  As a Biblical allusion, the prophets often used fire to do God's ("a voice from Heaven said to me...") work or were called by God, with fire. (Elijah called fire down from the sky; Moses hears God in the burning bush.)  Oaks Tutt is directed (by God) to fight for justice.

Returning home to say his goodbyes to his mother, the people of Spoon River notice the gleam in his eye and surmise what his intent is; so he is challenged by Jonathan Swift Somers to debate the statement "Pontious Pilate, the Greatest Philosopher of the World."  Giving the name of "Jonathan Swift Somers" to Oaks' "nemesis" would allude to Jonathan Swift, the famous English writer, satirist and critic, which is certainly not done by accident on Masters' part, but indicates that this man is out to break Oaks' spirit,or at the least, cast self-doubt onto his new-found purpose.

Tutt argues to the negative and loses to Somers.  At the end of the debate, Somers asks this final question of Tutt: "...of Pontius Pilate: 'What is Truth?'"

The allusion here is to Pilate's part in the crucifixion of Christ, when he washed his hands of Jesus' fate and turned him over to the Jewish leaders.  "What is Truth?" would then refer to the age-old debate of whether or not Pilate was at fault by stepping away from this explosive political situation, or if the Jewish elders were to blame.  It would seem that Somers is asking Tutt if he knows the truth, as truth may be a different thing depending on who you talk with, and/or whose perspective you study regarding a specific situation.

In the piece entitled "Oaks Tutt," there is no mention of his death, but Oaks is challenged to know the truth before he tries to tell the world what the truth actually is.  The deeper challenge, of course, is how can anyone know what the truth really is?

What are some examples of revenge imagery in Hamlet?

The most obvious revenge imagery in Hamlet is the Ghost of Hamlet's Father.  The Ghost comes in on the first scene to set the stage (as it were) of the whole play.  He comes in and says everything that Hamlet has secretly been thinking or worrying about in lurid detail and eggs Hamlet on to start down the spiral of madness he embarks on throughout the play. 

After saying a lot of terrible things about Hamlet's uncle and mother, the Ghost uses the oldest parent guilt trip in the book, "If thou didst ever thy dear father love—".  In other words, if you ever loved me you would do this thing for me, it's what I need you to do for me.  How could Hamlet refuse his dead father's wish?  So his fate is sealed. 

What does this quote means by Thoreau: "However mean your life is, meet it and live it; do not shun it and call it hard names."How can I explain it...

Well that is a great quote.  Thoreau was an incredible thinking.  Here is an interesting picture of the guy, by the way.

To better understand the quote, make sure you have a good knowledge of all the terms being used in it.  Most are easy, but a few could use explanation:

mean life: a hard, unpleasant life filled with challenges and obstacles.

meet it: do not run away from it.

shun: to not look at, to turn away from, to refuse to acknowledge.

hard names: insults (and curse words!)

So, in this context, take a look at the quote: "However hard or unpleasant your life is, do not run away from it; do not turn away from it or call it mean names."

This is a call to "rise up to the challenges." It is very easy to give into discouraging thoughts and events in life.  It is very easy to just sit there and say "my life blows" and "why does everything bad always happen to me?"  But that doesn't get you anywhere.  The only course of action is to meet the obstacles head-on and overcome them.

For example, think about a man whose wife leaves him for a younger, more studly fella.  He could very well sit back, get fat, and complain to anyone who will listen that about how his life has been ruined and how much it sucks.  It could be an excuse to let his life run down...instead, it would make more sense to meet the challenge head on.  Improve, reflect, and move on.  That is a far more effective strategy.

What are examples of allegory specific to the character Napoleon in Animal Farm?

Below are a couple of allegorical actions by Napoleon.

1. Napoleon turns the animals against Snowball, runs him off the farm, and then blames him for negative events that occur on the farm.  This series of events represents Stalin's (Napoleon) running Trotsky out of Russia and then blaming him and "insurgents" for subversive of questionable activities that occurred in Russia after Trotsky's exile.

2. When animals, such as the hens, oppose new policies enacted by Napoleon, he sets his dogs upon them so that all opposition will be silenced (normally permanently). Simlarly, Stalin is notorious for his gulags (prisons) and executions reserved for those who dared to speak out against his policies or question past promises.

Describe the Buchanans and their background. How are they related to the narrator in The Great Gatsby?

Tom and Daisy Buchanan live in East Egg, the fashionable and extravagant neighborhood of "old money" on Long Island.  Both grew up in Louisville among the elite of society there.  Daisy is the cousin of Nick, the narrator of the story; and Tom is a former classmate of Nick's when they both attended Yale.  Daisy, we learn mid-way through the novel, married Tom only after Jay Gatsby left for the war, but she was and is still in love with Gatsby.  Unlike her husband Tom, Daisy has always been faithful in their marriage.  Fitzgerald also hints that Tom may be physically abusive to Daisy.  Gatsby lives directly across the bay from the Buchanans in an elaborate house he purchased only in hopes of being able to see Daisy again.  He stages outrageous parties in the hopes that she might one night wander in.  This extravagance is in direct contrast to Tom's neglect.  Both Tom and Daisy represent the "old guard," those whose families have a history of wealth, while Gatsby represents those who made their fortunes in the booming economy preceding the Great Depression. 

In "A Scandal in Bohemia," Sherlock Holmes says to Dr. Watson, "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data."Explain why this is an...

This statement is essentially saying that a person must not make assumptions.  Instead, a person must wait until they have evidence.  I suppose you could say it is an ironic statement because, you can argue, Holmes makes assumptions about Irene Adler without having data to back them up.  These assumptions cause Holmes to lose the battle between him and Adler.

Holmes just assumes that he is smarter than Adler.  He assumes that he has fooled her with his tricks.  But he has not collected any data to find out if she is too smart to be fooled.

In the end, it turns out that she was too smart.  It is ironic, then, for Holmes to scold Watson for this when Holmes is going to be defeated by that very mistake in this story.

The answer they are looking for can be found in your study guide, on page 252. It says there..

Note that Holmes tells Watson, "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data." Ironically, it is Holmes's failure to adhere to this rule later in the story that causes his failure- a unique event in Holmes stories. What assumptions does Holmes make that lead to his failure?

Hope this helps!

Is the narrator of An Ecclesiastical History of the English People, third-person omniscient or first-person limited?

The preface of Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, otherwise known as An Ecclesiastical History of the English People, is written in first person.  Bede was an English monk, and this, his most noted work, told the history of the Church of England, but it also contained a lot of English history, as well.  After writing this book, he was often referred to as "The Father of English History".  In the preface, Bede is basically telling the reader why he's writing the history, and how he went about writing it.

After the preface, though, the "I" point of view so common with the first person narration disappears.  It can be assumed, however, that this first person narration continues, but from a limited point of view.  My definition of first person limited has always been that the narrator is a "fly on the wall", making observations but not participating in the actual events, as opposed to the regular first person narrator who not only observes but also participates in the plot.

After reading Bede's work and taking into consideration the definition of a first person limited narrator, I would have to say that our narrator is third person omniscient, since he was not actually living to observe all of the history he so painstakingly wrote about.

Besides needing permission to marry, how are women oppressed in Washington Square by Henry James?For example, Catherine, a woman, has to get...

I do not believe that women needed permission to marry if they were of age. In Washington Square, Dr. Sloper definitely refuses to give Catherine his approval of her engagement to Morris Townsend. Nevertheless, Morris and Catherine agree to elope and get married without her father's approval. The only reason they do not get married is that Morris jilts the poor girl. She has an independent income of $10,000 a year, but when her father dies she would have an income of $30,000. Morris is, in effect, selling himself for $30,000. But when he realizes that Catherine's father will not relent in his threat to disinherit his daughter if she marries without his consent, Morris calculates that he is worth more in the marriage market than $10,000 a year. He is a cold, calculating, mercenary young man. He knows he can have his choice of dozens of marriageable girls because of his good looks and charm, but Catherine is the only girl who could bring him a fortune of $30,000 a year if he could only find some way to get around her father. Catherine and Morris would have been married without her father's permission or approval. That seems to prove that women of the time did not need a male guardian's consent to be married. As a matter of fact, it might have been possible for a girl much younger than twenty-one to get married without her father's or some other male guardian's consent. Once a girl was legally married, there was nothing her father or male guardian could do about it. In one of Jane Austen's novels a girl surprises her whole family by getting married when she is apparently only around fifteen or sixteen. (Juliet in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet was legally married without her father's consent, or even his knowledge, when she was still only thirteen.)

What were Lincoln's motives & the effects of those actions during the Civil War. Was he more conservative or revolutionary?

As stated, Lincoln's motives were to preserve the United States, and he did so, even at times acting illegally.  The sectionalism that had been growing since the founding of the original colonies finally came to conflict in the 1860's; slavery was but a minor component to the differences between North and South.  However, Lincoln brilliantly used the issue of slavery in the Emancipation Proclamation by "freeing all slaves in areas in rebellion against the United States" which didn't eliminate slavery, but allowed the Union Army to act as the liberator of the oppressed.  By Lincoln actively stating the North's opposition to slavery (and this was done in 1863, during the middle of the war) he had also hoped to make this a foreign policy directive in keeping Great Britain out of the war on the Southern side.  Since Britain had banished slavery in her confines in the 1830s, they could not openly recognize the Confederacy.  Lincoln's gambit worked.

However, the Constitution specifies how areas may join the United States; it does not specify how areas may leave the United States.  Had the Founders inserted that provision, the whole war may have been avoided.  Lincoln did not preserve the Constitution; he preserved the Union by conquering the South.

How does understanding global history help a person become a better global citizen?

I suppose the first question you would have to ask yourself is "what does it mean to be a 'better global citizen?'" Technically the concept of being a global citizen means that you do away with traditional governments and have everyone be part of a one giant type of global country.  I suspect that's not what your question is asking, though.

I suspect that your question is really asking about being a "global citizen" in terms of being aware of, and caring about, what goes on in the rest of the world.  In this sense, global history becomes important in the same way that national and local history is important to us now. How can we understand the problems of the world, and work toward fixing them, unless we understand how those problems began in the first place?  Studying global history gives people the chance to understand how we got ourselves in some of the messes we are in: starvation, war, environmental damage...you name it.  Without understanding the history behind a region of the world it is impossible to suggest ways to move forward toward making the world a better place.

For example, we know that the rain forests are disappearing in countries like Brazil, but why?  What forces are in play that make people destroy their environment by burning the rain forests down in the first place?  Studying the history of that area and situation would give us clues as to why it happened and what we might be able to do in the future to fix it (or keep it from happening again somewhere else.)

The more you know about people the more likely you are to embrace them.  Ignorance is the enemy of people being able to get along.  The more you care about people who don't immediately live around you (being a good global citizen, that is) the more likely you are to care about their situations and want make the world a better place to help them.

I hope this helped!

What's a good website to explicate Romeo and Juliet's archaic vocabulary?

Do you know that right now you are on a website that has a modern version of Romeo and Juliet that runs parallel to the original?  Added to this, many of the archaic words are underlined in red in the original text.  All that you need do is take your mouse arrow over these words and the modern meaning of the word will appear for your convenience.  For example, in Act I the word collier is used in the second line of Scene 1.  Its meaning is revealed by moving the arrow so that  people who move coals appears.

Below is the site you need:

What would be a thematic statement for the movie Finding Nemo?

First, what a great movie! Second, there are many themes. So, I am sure that people will have different answers. Before I give it a shot, let me say one thing about the name "Nemo." In Latin the name means "no one." I wonder if this has something to do with the theme. I am not sure, but it is something to think about.

I think the major theme is a father's love for his son. Father's may not know how to love perfectly and they might make many mistakes long the way, but a father will do anything for his son, even die.  I think Marion shows this as he risks it all to find Nemo.

What are some examples of dark and light motifs in Romeo and Juliet?

            As the play progresses, the demise of the two lovers becomes more apparent.  While in Capulet’s orchard after Juliet’s discussion of the morning lark, Romeo says, “More light and light-more dark and dark our woes”(3.5.36).  After the death of Mercutio and Tybalt, the weight of the relationship between the two lovers has become apparent.   Romeo realizes the path of the two lovers is abysmal – it has been predetermined that both lives will tragically end.  Another example of dark/light imagery can be inferred from the Capulet tomb which represents a site which consumes all life but, also, is place of rebirth.   At the churchyard in Act 5 scene 3, Romeo says while opening the tomb, “Why I descend into this bed of death is partly to behold my lady’s face”(5.3.28-30).   For Romeo, this burial site is the end – truly, a black hole.   Unbeknownst to Romeo(dramatic irony), Juliet is still alive awaiting his return.  The dark imagery represented by the burial site, and the light imagery depicted by Juliet’s presence, a desire to start her new life with Romeo once she awakens.  Throughout the play’s progression, longer shadows appear as unsuspected circumstances and consequences find themselves in the lives of the two lovers.          

In Shakespeare, Act 3, Scene 5, can anybody find some rhyming, and analyze why it has been used?

I am assuming we are talking about end-rhyming.  In at least one spot in this scene, in which Romeo and Juliet have spent their first married night together and are joking, in verse, together about how the rising sun is really the moon, Shakespeare uses rhyming for humor and emphasis.  They are doing this because Romeo has to leave as soon as it is light, or he will undoubtedly be hunted down and killed by the Capulets in retribution for Romeo having killed Tybalt.  So the young married couple have only a few minutes together, and they are joking about how the celestial bodies of the sun and moon should cooperate and extend their time together. And though Romeo knows he must leave, he jokes that he will stay in Verona and die for Juliet's sake (something she would never want or allow).  Here, the rhyming is funny, because Romeo is saying something both romantic and improbable:

I have more care to stay than will to go.
Come, death, and welcome! Juliet wills it so. (23-24)

To make this into a rhyming couplet underlies the hyperbole of the statement, and makes the reader (and, Romeo hopes, Juliet) smile.

Juliet follows up with another rhyming couplet, in the same position in her speech (the third- and second-to-last lines)

Since arm from arm that voice doth us affray,
Hunting thee hence with hunt's-up to the day!

Juliet is continuing the joke, implying that she wishes that the lark and the toad had changed voices, and the morning lark would not bring the day to them.  The rhyming here serves the same purpose.

Juliet finishes speaking

O, now be gone! More light and light it grows.(35)

And Romeo finishes with another rhyme, showing that their time alone together is coming to an end.

More light and light—more dark and dark our woes!

As a general rule (although not 100% of the time) the higher-class characters speak in verse, and often their speeches of blank verse end in rhyming couplets.  Romeo and Juliet are of this class of people, so you are more likely to find them speaking in rhyme than some of the lower-class characters (such as the Nurse).

Later in this scene Juliet uses end-rhyming to emphasize the irony when she is talking to her mother about marrying Paris.  The audience knows that Juliet cannot marry Paris, but Lady Capulet does not.

Now by Saint Peter's Church, and Peter too,
He shall not make me there a joyful bride!(120)
I wonder at this haste, that I must wed
Ere he that should be husband comes to woo.

There's not a lot of rhyming in this scene, but when Shakespeare uses it he uses it to good effect, and usually for humor or irony.  This is true of most of the play.  As a general rule (again, this is not 100%) there is less rhyming in Shakespeare's tragic plays than in his comedies.  Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy.

How do the small joys and kindnesses that Eliezer describes illustrate the theme of human dignity in the face of in human cruelty? how do the...

The moments where Eliezer experiences small joys and acts of kindness help to prove Wiesel's theme of human beings retaining a voice in all circumstances, regardless of how dire the situation may be.  In a speech entitled "The Perils of Indifference," Wiesel speaks quite powerfully about the idea of being able to take action in the name of righteousness and justice in any and all circumstances.  Human beings never lose their voice unless it is by conscious and deliberate choice.  His speech speaks to the idea that:

...Indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. The political prisoner in his cell, the hungry children, the homeless refugees -- not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope is to exile them from human memory. And in denying their humanity we betray our own.

This speaks quite lucidly to Wiesel's own view that our humanity is on stage at every moment to display our best and not so best.  It is with this idea that he includes the rare moments where others acknowledge Eliezer's own sense of humanity with acts of kindness and generosity in the face of horrific circumstances.  In the final analysis, these rarities, precious jewels of human character that are shown to all, display the idea that we as human beings can represent "havens in a heartless world" and "shelters from the storm" provided that we have the moral courage to do so.  In depicting these moments or examples of joy and kindness in Eliezer's situation, Wiesel is stressing that individuals are not silenced robots or automatons of suffering that have lost the ability to be the active and creative agents of their own world.  Rather, that the best of situations and worst of predicaments are impacted and developed through the human element and problem of choice.

How are liquor and marijuana used in "Cathedral"?

The narrator in the short story "Cathedral" is a very cynical, judgmental, bitter man who can't find happiness or satisfaction in anyone or anything around him.  He is not happy about the blind man, Robert, coming to visit, and expresses a lot of sardonic displeasure at his wife's relationship with him.  He is also nervous about the visit; he says, "He was no one I knew.  And his being blind bothered me."  He doesn't know how he will entertain the man, or what they will talk about.

So, before Robert even gets there, the narrator is drinking--probably because he is nervous, and wants to relax a bit.  Immediately upon Robert's arrival, the narrator offers him a drink, and mentions that drinking is "a bit of a pastime" for him.  Possibly, the narrator is a drinker.  They settle in and pretty quickly have several drinks.  This helps to loosen up the narrator a bit; it puts him at ease, and makes him less nervous about Robert's visit.  After dinner they break out the weed, and that relaxes the narrator even more.  Normally an uptight and picky man, he becomes easy-going and comfortable with Robert.  This enables him to be open to the experience that ends up impacting him so greatly, the drawing of the cathedral with his eyes closed.  If he hadn't been relaxed and eased through drinking and smoking, he might not have consented to letting a man grab his hand and guide him through drawing a cathedral.  The drinking and smoking ease his stress and strain, and through the drawing of the cathedral, he has a very profound experience.  For the first time in his life, he is able to see something from someone else's perspective.  It is "like nothing I've experienced" in his life before, and seems to floor and awe the rather closed and un-impressible narrator.

Now, the narrator might have been open to different experiences even if he hadn't been smoking or drinking--who knows.  But, it is that that puts him at ease, keeps him socializing with Robert even after his wife went to bed, and lended an air of relaxed comraderie between the two men.  I hope that helps; good luck!

What simile does the speaker use in lines 11-12 to describe his new state of mind? Does this simile strike you as a good description of joy?

The images brought out in lines 9-12 are the critical points in the sonnet as it changes the focus of the sonnet.  The first portion of the sonnet focuses on a great deal of challenge and misfortune.  Yet, through the invocation of the love subject of the speaker, we begin to see how the power and redemptive spirit of love can be transformative.  The simile which helps to evoke this would be the use of the bird.  When Shakespeare describes "the lark at the break of day arising," one begins to see how there is a certain powerful element within the love of another that can help to reconfigure trying circumstances into ones of triumph and rebirth.  The negative element of thoughts which are described as "despising" is countered with the power of love, which is seen as a type of dawn, "excellent and fair."  The song of the bird, or "lark," is one that recasts negativity and challenge into one that transcends "sullen earth."  It is extremely powerful in its description of joy.

How can one write an elegy on Piggy in Lord of the Flies?I really need help because I am not that good in writing an elegy, and I cannot use an...

We are gathered together on this day to remember our friend Piggy.  Piggy was a loyal friend.  I met Piggy when we first crashed on the island.  We were both scared but we found strength in one another.  Piggy, if you all recall, was the one who discovered the conch could be used to help us keep order when we had something to say.  He knew that if we did not use some kind of an object to honor who was speaking, everyone in our group would talk at once.

Yes, it is true that Piggy was somewhat overweight, had asthma, and wore glasses, but he was the best kind of person.  He believed in civilization and following a code of moral conduct.  He was not athletic and he couldn't see a lick with out his glasses, but he was there for anyone who needed him.  When the littleuns were scared of the beast, he helped to calm them.

Piggy grew up with his auntie since his father had died when he was young. His auntie, as he called her, had a candy store, and he ate as much of it as he could.  He told me once that he loved candy.  Later he was sent to the boy's school.  He was one of us boys, who landed on the island.  He knew the importance of having adults around, but it just could not be, as they had died in the plane crash. 

Since the first day we crashed, Piggy was afraid of dying on the island.  He had good reason.  We were young and had no idea how to care for ourselves.  However, Piggy did not deserve to die the way he did.  Jack and the boys should have been kinder to him.  They should not have stolen his glasses leaving him barely able to see.  Despite his unfair treatment he still tried to make us feel good and recommended that we meet with the other boys so he could retrieve his glasses. 

Even though Piggy seemed like a wimp at times, he had courage.  He could have turned out like Jack and his tribe, but he didn't.  He had a kinder nature.  I do not believe that in death he holds hatred to Rodger for using the lever and causing the rock to come down on him knocking him in the sea which killed him. 

The sea has claimed him now so we stand here and morn him.  He was a good kid, a different kid, the kind of kid that everyone could pick on, but he would let it go and still try and be their friend.

Based on the chapters in the book.

How are we as a society influenced by food?

We are also influenced by our accessibility to cheap food. This makes it very difficult to pass any kind of health regulations, or to enforce those that are already passed. Many Americans remain unaware that USDA inspections are voluntary, & there are no repercussions for a factory that does not adhere to them. Any time a referendum or bill is suggested, powerful food conglomerates (such as Con-Agra) lobby to defeat it. This makes it difficult to improve the quality of our inexpensive food, particularly meat. Hence the outrageous prices for organic/grass-fed beef, or the recent uproar from the egg industries after the passing of Prop 2 in California. the sad thing is that most Americans have no idea of the influence such food companies have over policy and regulations. A very good book to check out is The Politics of Food, which explores many of these issues.

Also, food has influenced our cultural identity. What's more American than apple pie, right? Certain foods are associated with our national heritage, & it's deemed "right" to barbecue or eat hot dogs on the 4th of July. Foods like beef (think hamburgers and ribs) are identified as masculine, and thus vegetarians are often seen as "wussy" or feminine. And we quickly become offended when someone challenges our right to eat anything, even deep-fried twinkies. Even the result of food influences that identity: we are known throughout the world for our outrageous levels of obesity.

In all these ways, in addition to the important points made by the first poster, we as a country are influenced by our food.

Is Emerson's purpose in writing about "Self-Reliance" similar to that of "Nature"?

Emerson's essay "Nature" is an explanation of how humans and animals and plants are all part of the natural world, and within Nature is contained a beauty that also comes from people's response to its beauty and grandeur. Thus, "Nature" is an essay that proposes the tenets of Transcendentalism, the belief that man should enjoy an original relationship to the universe--indeed, an individual relationship with the universe. This contemplation of the majesty of nature can take a man by "surprise," and yet he can also know it. 

Its effect is like that of a higher thought or a better emotion coming over me, when I deemed I was thinking justly or doing right.

This "higher thought of better emotion" can, then, certainly connect to the message of Emerson's other essay, "Self-Reliance." For, in this essay Emerson desires that each person find his/her own beauty and entertain his or her own higher thoughts and not compromise by becoming part of "the joint-stock company" of society that is in conspiracy against the individual. "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind." Each person is unique and has a distinct role to play in life, a role that he can discover in his contemplation in Nature. While Emerson does not explicitly state the connection between the individual and Nature as opposed to society, he does suggest that man can discover his individuality away from the conspiracy of society.

How does race affect attitudes towards homosexuality?

The above have valid points, but let's look at racial and homosexual minority groups in the white U.S. macro-culture:

Homosexuals and certain non-white racial groups both are subject to minority status. This not only affects voting and representation in government, but it affects opportunity in competing with the majority groups who attain master status.

Both are targets of prejudice. This, of course, leads to various degrees of socio-economic treatment.  For example, real estate agents have been known to keep minority groups out of white neighborhoods.  Whereas it is more difficult to hide racial status, homosexuality can be more easily masked when it comes to socio-economical status (in this case, securing real estate.

Marriage and the military seems to be the front lines in the homosexuality debate, but immigration is the sticking point in the racial divide.

How long after being released does the stone strike the beach below the cliff? Answer in units of s. A student stands at the edge of a cliff and...

The horizontal velocity imparted is not affected by gravity or it does not play a role in the time taken for the stone to land . It is only the gravitation that has a role in the time for the stone to reach the ground. The initial vertical velocity of the stone is 0 m/s and its horizontal velocity .

The vertical displacement , s = 24.4m. the depth of the cliff.

The  law of motion of the stone relating to vertical displacement and time is: (1/2) gt^2 = s............(1)

g=9.8m/s^2 and s=24.4. Substituting the values g=9.8m/s^2 and s=24.4  in  eq (1) we get :

(1/2)9.8t^2= 24.4 or

t= sqrt(2*24.4/9.8) =  2.2315 s is the time the stone takes to land.

At first in "Two Kinds," what are Jing-mei's mother's ambitions for daughter motivated by?

Jing-mei's mother escaped Communist China and wants everything for her daughter that she never experienced.  She witnesses child prodigies such as Shirley Temple and believes that because she and her family live in American that her daughter, too, with enough hard work can be famous or highly successful.  So, at first Jing-mei's mother is motivated by the promise of America--what it can do for Jing-mei and her family.  Later, she demonstrates that she was also motivated by wanting her daughter to have a better life than she did, a life in which Jing-mei works hard but is also rewarded for that hard work and is content with her life.

In chapter 55 of Great Expectations, What happened to Compeyson, who had prevented Magwitch's escape?

In chapter 54, Magwitch and Compeyson begin a fight and go overboard in the water where Magwitch either kills Compeyson, or Compeyson is overcome by wounds/water/injuries.  No one knows exactly what happened besides Magwitch (who confesses little) and Compeyson, because it was difficult to see.  What we do know in chapter 55 is that Compeyson is dead and Magwitch is wounded.  In the beginning of 55, since Compeyson is dead, investigators have to call another witness to identify Magwitch because his accuser, Compeyson, was dead.  Jaggers, of course, refuses to comment on the identity.

How will you describe the form and structure of the book No Country for Old Men?In my essay I have to pay "particular attention" to form and...

Structure: the novel weaves three story lines: Llewellyn Moss, Anton Chigurh, and Tom Bell.  The story, like The Odyssey, begins "in medias res" (in the middle), and it's all action, except for Bell's story: he's like the Greek Chorus, commenting on the action; he's the voice of the author.

It's a chase: each of the characters chase the other.  Chigurh chases Moss; Bell chases Chigurh and Moss.  The Mexicans chase Moss.  Carson Wells chases Chigurh and Moss.  They all chase the money, except Bell.  It's all about the money; the irony is that no one really cares about the money.  Chighurh certainly does not.  What does Moss buy with the money?  Tent poles, new boots, and hotel rooms?  Is that worth dying over? So, money is essentially a red herring.

For most of the novel, these three never really meet: Chigurh and Moss shoot it out, but never speak; Bell and Chigurh are in the motel room where Moss died, but they never speak.  Instead, they speak through proxies: Chigurh speaks to Wells and later to Carla Jean; Moss speaks to Wells and Carla Jean; Bell speaks to Loretta, Wendell, and the old sheriffs.

The function of characters is fascinating.  Many are archetypal--the kind you see in Westerns and in quest literature.  Chigurh is hard to pin down: is he real?  He seems like a force of nature, fate, the devil, a ghost, and the Terminator all in one.

In form and function, it's a revenge tale, like Othello, in that the villain pursues an unwitting protagonist, and like Iago, Chigurh has no real motive for revenge.  Is he trying to take revenge on Moss for taking the money and, like Wells says, "inconveniencing him"?  Ironically, his pursuit of the money is nobler than Moss'.  In many ways he's taking revenge on Moss (on modern man) for chasing money, for being materialistic.  He's a character of divine evil, like The Misfit from Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man Is Hard to Find."  Like Wells says:

You don't understand. You can't make a deal with him. Even if you gave him the money he'd still kill you. He's a peculiar man. You could even say that he has principles. Principles that transcend money or drugs or anything like that. He's not like you. He's not even like me.

McCarthy seems to be saying that our society conditions us to doggedly pursue materialism the way cave men used to hunt for food, unthinkingly, out of primordial instinct.  It is a baseless, empty quest; modern man becomes an absurd knight-errant.  McCarthy never even shows us the climax: Moss' death.  It's anti-climax...so his quest for money is immoral, meaningless.

In terms of form, McCarthy's style is a lot like Hemingway's: Plain / Tough. Here's the breakdown:

VOCBULARY-high frequency words-monosyllabic words-contractions, articles-1st person pronouns-action verbs, active tense-no dialogue tags-no quotes--colloquial-Anglo-Saxon words

SENTENCES-simple sentences-short, choppy-compound sentences (lots of coordinating conjunctions “and”)

POINT OF VIEW: even though it's third person it's still-1st Person (I –oriented)-subjective-informal (causal)-male (macho) voice

RHETORICAL APPEAL-ethos (credibility)-trustworthiness of the writer or speaker-inductive reasoning-stream of consciousness

CONVENTIONS: -in medias res-irony-metaphor, simile-allegories-double meanings

"It is the language of intimacy, the language of no pretensions. The words are simple and the grammar is simple.  The writing is not planned, but just happens, in a stream of consciousness kind of way—you are there."

The use of light and dark within chapter Five Frankenstein?In particular how is light and dark a symbol within chapter five, quotes would be...

In Shelley's Frankenstein, light represents the act of discovery. It also represents obtaining knowledge/ enlightenment. In the novel, the main goal of Victor is to seek out the light of understanding. However, as we know, much of nature is a mystery. Victor uncovers dark secrets(the darkness) in the laboratory. (These are secrets he should not know.)In chapter 5 he describes the monster he both loves and hates, that he created. He feels relief when it escapes. This is because he is so conflicted about creating it. The monster learns things on his own, like when there is fire there is light. He is almost hypnotised by fire and that it causes light in the darkness of the woods.When he is burned by it it surprises him.

Remember the myth of Prometheus ? He stole the fire from the gods. Victor cannot obey in a similar manner that Prometheus could not obey Zeus. Victor disregards the "mystery" of life and thinks he can create a human from mere body parts. Victor Frankenstein is a retelling of the Promethean myth of both creation and fire. Fire equals light and represents enlightenment. However going into the realm of nature causes pain; this is the darkness. It is darkness because mere mortals are not permitted to go there. Victor in a sense has the same experience with the fire of enlightenment similar to his monster; however, he is hurt by enlightenment, the way the monster was burned.When he sees the monster by the light of the moon, he realises the horror of his act: trying to create a human being when it was not his right to create it. (And he could not successfully create a human being after all.)

Which type of literary device is the quote, "Her voice is full of money" from The Great Gatsby.Example: Metaphor, Personification, or Idiom

Your question has several correct answers.

1. It is an example of a metaphor because Fitzgerald is making an indirect comparison between two seemingly disconnected or unlike objects.  Someone's voice is not normally associated with his/her wealth/status; admittedly, we do connect accents, dialect, and vernacular with social classes, but generally, the tone of someone's voice is not compared to his or her social class.

2. The quote is also an example of an idiom in the sense that it must be taken figuratively.  Readers cannot extract individual words from the quote, look up their literal meanings, and still correctly infer Fitzgerald's comment about Daisy.

3. Finally, Fitzgerald uses synesthesia within the quote.  Synesthesia in a literary sense is the mixing of sensory words (such as "he hit a sour note on the trumpet").  In the above quote from Gatsby, readers normally associated the word "voice" with the sense of sound, but in this case, Fitzgerald associates it with Daisy's intangible/non-sensory characteristics.

What can we say about Pakhom's character on the basis of this story?From the story "How much land does a man require" by Leo Tolstoy.

This is an interesting question because before we can focus on a character study of Pakhom we need to pay particular attention to the type of short story that "How much land does a man need?" is. Because this tale is a parable or an allegory, the character of Pakhom is not fully developed into a round character. Rather the details we are given serve to establish him as a type instead of an intensely interesting pscyhological phenomenon.

Pahom is shown from the first to be a poor peasant, who desires more land to have an easier life. He resents being treated badly by other landowners and is clearly preoccupied with providing for his family. However, envy begins to enter him when he hears of other peasants buying their own land, which leads to his own purchase of land. Having bought his own land, Pahom now finds that he is treating other peasants the same way that he was treated by landowners - the ownership of land has resulted in a change of his character. This is something that continues throughout the tale, until his attitude to land is juxtaposed harshly with that of the Bashkir chief: the more land Pakhom receives, the less he will share, wheras the Bashkirs treat land as something to be shared and something that is held in common. Throughout the story, however, Pakhom's desire to own more and more land grows with intensity until it finally results in his own death, and the grimly ironic possession of 6 feet of land - all that is needed to bury him.

Therefore, Pakhom as a character is not fully developed - he is rather a medium through which Tolstoy conveys his concerns about the impact of land ownership on peasants and suggests that they might not actually be better off after their emancipation in some ways.

How did the Crusades increase European interest in trade?

In addition to fighting during the Crusades, trade was an important component as new goods and ideas were exchanged. They came into contact with empires that were in many ways more advanced than their own. The Arabs taught Europeans about advanced mathematics and the numeral system, in addition to medical principles that had long been forgotten.

Crusaders had to buy their own foods and were introduced to new items that they would bring back with them to Europe. These foods included sherbet, sugar, coffee, fruits, and rice. The introduction of new food items helped increase trade with the East.

Everyday household items were also bought from Muslim traders and included mirrors, textiles, carpets, and sailing compasses. It became obvious that the east was technically more advanced. When these goods were brought West, demand for trade was enhanced. Many of the goods were thought to be exotic in nature and the wealthy felt compelled to buy them. The increased demand for these items sent merchants to the east permanently to establish trade networks. These trade ties led to a regulated currency system that enabled fair trade between the two parties.

In what kind of community does "There Will Come Soft Rains" occur, and why does that make the story effective?

The sad story of Ray Bradbury's "There Will Come Soft Rains," appears to be set in the idealistic surburban neighborhoods of America.  The story specifically mentions Allendale, California, which has many suburban elements to it: house, car and garage, mowed lawns with sprinklers, a family of two and a dog.  This idealistic setting, one that many people dream of having their entire lives, is, in this story, not enough to save the family and neighborhood from the destruction that came their way.

This setting makes the story effective, because the suburbs of America are supposed to be blissfully happy, filled with peace and safety, free from turmoil and conflict.  It is a safe place that, if you work hard your entire life, you can live in and quietly raise a family.  It symbolizes prosperity, the American dream, happiness, and achieving one's goals.  And yet, even with all of these things, it too was not unreachable from the evil influences of the outside world.  It is more effective because there is a calm, happy family just living their lives (the father and son are playing catch--how much more idealistic can you get?), and yet are wiped out.  The went day to day, unaware of what was coming their way.  It is more tragic, more ironic, and more profound, making a statement that we can never be too careful, we must always be involved in protecting our country, because everyone can become a victim if we are left vulnerable.  It shows the true victims of such awful warfare.  I hope that those thoughts helped a bit; good luck!

In "The Crucible" what does Hale have Proctor do to prove his faith? What does Proctor happen to forget and why is this ironic?Act 2

Hale, concerned that the Proctors have been mentioned briefly in court, goes to their house in order to get to know them a bit better.  He wants to get a feel for their faith, and question some of their weak spots a bit, to see if there is any possible validity to potential claims of witchcraft that might come in regards to the Proctors.

There are, unfortunately, weak spots in the Proctors' spiritual records.  For one, they haven't been to church much in the past year, AND, their recently born third son hadn't been baptized yet.  No baptism for an infant meant that the child could not be saved in heaven.  Proctor explains that it was because Elizabeth "were sick" quite a bit, which made it difficult to go to church.  Also, to be honest, they really don't like Reverend Parris, so didn't want him baptizing their son.

Hale takes this information in, and as a further "test," asks John to recite his commandments.  The commandments, in Puritan communities, were law.  And, if you recall earlier in the act, Goody Osburn was convicted of being a witch, in part because she couldn't recite her commandments.  John proceeds, but ironically forgets the commandment that states, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."  This is ironic because that is the commandment that he has recently broken, by having an affair with Abigail.  You would expect him to remember that commandment, since he was such a violator of it in the past.  But, ironically, he doesn't, and his wife chips in with that one.  John tries to play it lightly, telling Hale that

"between the two of us we do know them all.  I think it be a small fault."

Hale counters by saying that it is the smallest cracks in a fortress that bring the walls down.  I hope that clarifies things for you a bit; good luck!

Why did Bilbo steal the cup in The Hobbit?

There's many different reasons behind Bilbo's theft. One has to do with the similarities between Tolkien's story and the epic poem Beowulf. Tolkien was an accomplished scholar and translator, and English literature fascinated him. Textual similarities between each scene of conflict with the dragon confirm Tolkien’s statement that “the episode of theft arose naturally (and almost inevitably) from the circumstances.” In each tale, the conflict arises after a cup is stolen from a mound of treasure, which enrages the dragons, to which the treasure does not originally belong. Each dragon is likened to a giant worm and presented as bloodthirsty and destructive, ruining nearby villages.

It also be just simple greed. Who wouldn't be tempted when surrounded by that treasure? When Bilbo sees the hoard:

His heart was filled and pierced with enchantment and with the desire of dwarves; and he gazed motionless, almost forgetting the frightful guardian, at the gold beyond price and count.

Thus he willingly took the risk. After all, didn't Gandalf appoint him the "burglar" of the group? He was simply living up to his job title.

Consider the collision of two identical parti-cles, with m1 = m2 = 10 g.The initial velocity of particle 1 is v1 and particle 2 is initially at...

v'2 = v1 is the right answer. The choice b  is correct.

A proof is given as follows:

By consevation of momentum and kinetic energy we obtain the following 2 equations.

10v1 = 10v1'+10v2'

(1/2)10v1^2=(1/2)v,'^2+(1/2)v2'^2

Solve these simple two simultaneous equtions for v1'f and v2'f the final velocity of the first and 2nd particle.

Then we get the solutions: v1' = 0 and v2' = v1. That is ,two perfect elastic bodies, when one is at motion with a velocity of v1 collides with  another other with equal mass body at rest, the first comes to rest imparting its entire velocity v1 to the 2nd.

How did Jasper become a vampire?

Jasper was born in 1843. He joined the confederate army in 1861. He was promoted quite quickly through the ranks. By the first battle of Galveston he was the youngest major in in Texas. He was put in charge of evacuating the women and hildren from the city when the union's mortar boats reached the harbour. He stayed long enought to make sure they were all situated and then he got a fresh horse and mad ehis way back to Galveston.

He found three women about a mile out of the city, he presumed they were straglers and got of his house and went over to them to offer them any hep they might need. He was stunned to see they were so beautiful and he was speechless. Their names were Maria, Nettie and Lucy. Nettie thought he smelled delicious and probaly would have fed on him if Maria hadn't stopped her. Nettie and Lucy went off to hunt and Maria said, "I truly hope you survivem Jasper. I have a good feeling about you." Then he woke up three days later as a vampire.

In Shakespeare's 9th sonnet, what are some devices of language used?Like symbolism, irony, allusion, imagery, diction, allusion, etc.

I respectfully disagree with the previous poster. The speaker in the sonnet is not the one who chooses to remain single and childless. The speaker is addressing another man, the "thou" (or "you") in the poem. As I read the poem, the speaker seems to be saying that the man he's talking to is too beautiful to die without first having children. To die childless would be a crime: "No love toward others in that bosom sits / That on himself such murderous shame commits."

The line "The world will wail thee, like a makeless wife" introduces at least two devices. The first, a simile, is quick and easy; it's the comparison between "world" and "wife" that begins with the word "like." The other device is personfication, the world is turned into a human-like figure, one that can experience and express emotions. This personification is the most fully developed literary device in the poem.

What are some quotes that prove that Hamlet is pretending to be insane?

In  Act II of Shakespeare's "Hamlet," Hamlet bandies words with Polonius, whom he suspects of treachery.  He first calls Polonius "a fishmonger," then he remarks, "Then I would you were so honest a man.  This bandying with words continues as he talks to Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, whom he also suspects.  When Hamlet says, "Denamrk's a prison" (II,ii, 236), the former friends of Hamlet disagree.  To this Hamlet replies,

Why then 'tis none to you; for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.  To me it is a prison.

While these remarks are not insane, they become a cause for some concern by others, especially when they learn that Ophelia has been frightened by him. She tells her father,

My lord, as I was sewing in my closet,/Lord Hamlet with his doublet all unbraced,/No hat upon his head, his stockings fouled,/Ungartered and down-gyved to his ankle,/Pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other,/And with a look so piteous in purport /As if he had been loosed out of hell/To speak of horrors--he comes before me. (II,i,76-83)

Her father asks if Hamlet is mad for her love.  Ophelia replies that she does not know; she only knows that she fears this affection, telling Polonius,

He took me by the wrist, and held me hard,/Then goes he to the length of all him arm,/And with his other hand thus o'er his brow,/He falls to such perusal of my face/As'a would draw it.  Long stayed he so./At last, a little shaking ofmine arm,/And thrice his head thus waving up and down,/He raised a sigh so piteous and profound /As it did seem to shatter all his bulk...And with his head over his shoulder turned/He seemed to find his way without his eyes...(II,I,88-97)

Later, in Act III, Polonius and Claudiius decide to put Hamlet and Ophelia together to decide if love is what makes Hamlet mad.   When Ophelia greets Hamlet and tries to return his gifts, Hamlet denies having given her anything, subjecting her to paradoxical outbursts (lines 11-114 "Ay, truly....) and criticisms:

Get thee to a nunnery.  Why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners?  I am myself indifferent honest, but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me. (III,i,119-121).

His remarks about his own mother suggest that Hamlet is still reacting to the realization that his mother has married the murderer of his own father.  His disgust with his mother has engenered misogyny in Hamlet.

Discuss the characteristics and classifications of abnormal behavior

Abnormal behavior is a term applied to describe any type of behavior, positive or negative, that is out of the social, physical, or emotional norm.  For example a person who is who takes all of his money and gives it all to the poor can be considered abnormal.  Society dictates what behaviors are considered abnormal.  In American culture it is quite normal to kiss on the mouth, but in some cultures it is considered to be disgusting abnormal behavior. 

In the psychology sector the DSM manual is used to determine the classification of behavior with the use of specific tests including a person's social history.  The tests take in to consideration that a person who is grieving is going to respond different on the tests that someone who not grieving.  It is not abnormal for a grieving person to feel sad and despondent, but it would be for a five year old child in a seemingly happy well functioning family. 

Axis I: Clinical disorders caused by stress related issues in a client/person's life

Axis II: Personality disorders-maladaptive ways of responding to other people

          Mental Retardation/Intellectual functioning below a full scale IQ score of 72

Axis III:  General medical conditions

Axis IV: Psychosocial and environmental problems

Axis V:  Global assessment of functioning

In act three of "The Crucible" explain John Proctor's stand in court against the girls. What is his aim at this point of the play?

In act three, John Proctor goes to the courts with Giles Corey and Francis Nurse, all in the hopes of providing evidence that will help to set their wives free.  All three of their wives have been arrested, and they are desperate to get them out--the "evidence" is shaky and illogical at best, and so they come to the courts armed with several different tactics in the hopes that they can prove their wives' innocence.

As John comes to the courts, he knows that the girls are all liars, and fakes.  He knows this because in act one Abby herself told him that the dancing in the woods "had naught to do with witchcraft."  The entire foundation of their validity as testifiers lies in the fact that they accused women of bewitching them into dancing in the woods.  Also, Mary Warren herself has told him that they are all pretending.  So, he knows that the girls are false, and is prepared, if necessary, to testify to this.  His main purpose in doing this is to prove that his wife is innocent (because they girls lied when accusing her), and secondly, to prove that anyone that the girls accused is also innocent (because the girls were lying).  He cares mostly for setting his wife free, but also wants to help the wives of his friends too.

The proofs that John offers are first of all, a petition that people signed, attesting to the Christian nature of the women accused.  That doesn't work.  Then, he plans on Mary's testimony standing as a witness that the girls are false.  That too fails.  His last resort, one he didn't want to use, was to reveal his affair with Abby, in the hopes that it will discredit her reputation as a "saint."  That too, fails, when Elizabeth lies to protect his honor.  So, despite John's intents against the girls, he fails, and is himself arrested.  I hope that those thoughts helped; good luck!

What does this phrase from Chapter 38 of Maniac Magee mean: "For the McNabs, there was nothing free about public education"?

The phrase about which you are asking is actually found at the end of Chapter 37.

Russell and Piper McNab will only go to school if they are bribed, and thus "there (is) nothing free" about their education.  As the author says, "a tuition (has) to be paid" for Russell and Piper to go to school, and "every week, Maniac (pays) it".  In a twist on the usual meaning of the term "free public education", the tuition must be paid to Russell and Piper, not to the educational system.

The McNab boys are growing up in squalor and chaos.  Their father is a drunk, their mother is apparently not present, and their house is a mess, with spoiled food everywhere and disgusting animal droppings on the floor.  Russell and Piper, who are about eight, run wild, and their father's only effort to get them to advance their schooling is to holler at them, "Do you homework" as he goes out in the evenings and again when he comes home inebriated.  Maniac, who despite his own lack of a structured upbringing, has a healthy sense of the value of education, and bribes the young McNab boys to go to school each week.  At first, he offers them pizza to attend, but after awhile the Russell and Piper demand that he perform a series of heroic feats in order for them to go.  Ironically, the amazing stunts Maniac does for the boys to get them to go to school provides them with something they sorely need, both in school and in their lives in general.  The other kids now pay attention to them, "always crowding around, pelting them with questions" about what the famed Maniac Magee, who is living with them, is like.  Russell and Piper are starved for attention, and the attention they receive because of Maniac makes them feel important for the first time in their experience.  This importance, to the little McNabs, is "a wonderful thing" (Chapters 34-37).