List the qualities that Portia feels a husband should have in Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice.

In Act I, scene ii, Portia and Nerissa discuss the suitors who have come to take their chances to win Portia's hand in marriage. Since Portia cannot choose a husband for herself, for each must try his hand at choosing the correct box after deciphering a riddle, she has Nerissa remind her of the men and she will tell her the qualities that are good from each of them. Unfortunately, Portia cannot find any good qualities in any suitor who is prepared to take his chance with the caskets; thus, we can only learn what Portia believes are good qualities for a husband through deductive reasoning.

First, Nerissa names a Neapolitan prince. From him we learn that all he talks about is his horse and brags how he can shoe it himself. Then there's County Palatine who never smiles and seems depressed all of the time. From Portia's reaction to these two men, we learn that she prefers a man who is happy, smiles, does not brag, and can talk about more than just his horse.

Next, Nerissa names a French lord, a baron from England, and a Scottish lord. Portia says that the Frenchman is worse than the two previous men because he brags about himself and "he would fence with his own shadow" (I.ii.52). Then, the Englishman is fine to look at, but they don't speak the same language, so they can't understand each other. In addition, the Englishman has no fashion sense which embarrasses her. The Scottish lord, then, is nice, but he's always borrowing from the French to pay the English and this does not satisfy her. As a result, from these men we see that Portia needs a man whom she can understand and have conversations with, someone who can dress himself appropriately and fashionably, and he needs to be able to stand his own ground without needing help from anyone else.

Finally, there is a German, the Duke of Saxony's nephew, who is vile when he is sober and vile when he is drunk. She says that he is "little better than a beast" (I.ii.76). Hence, Portia needs someone who isn't a drunk, and again, someone who is polite, understands the need for manners, and can hold an intellectual conversation and is also attractive. Ironically enough, Nerissa mentions Bassanio, who isn't an official suitor, but probably the epitome of what Portia is looking for, as follows:

"a Venetian, a scholar and a soldier, that came hither in company of the marquis of Montferrat. . . He of all the men that ever my foolish eyes looked upon was the best deserving a fair lady" (I.ii.95-96, 98-99).

Portia agrees with Nerissa about Bassanio and remembers him well. This mentioning of Bassanio is a foreshadowing of his eventual arrival as it secures his place in Portia's mind as well as that of the audience. Bassanio is the one who has all of the qualities Portia seeks, but he still must decipher the riddles and choose the correct casket for her hand in marriage.

How did Boo know Jem and Scout were in trouble?

The most likely explanation is that Boo heard the children screaming (Jem yells "Run!"). Since the children had been playing games, pretending to be the Radley's, Boo had taken an interest in them. He put gifts in the tree until his father put an end to that. So, there is the distinct possibility that Boo was looking out for them, from his home. 

It is likely that he heard them because they would have been close to the Radley house when Bob Ewell attacked. The high school and elementary school are at the south end of town. Going north, coming home from the pageant, the children would go from the schoolyard, make a turn in the road, and this leads to the Radley house and eventually the Finch's home. 

In Chapter 28, when the children are on their way to the pageant, they pass the Radley's house. It is so quiet that they can (symbolically) hear a mockingbird. So, it might have been just as quiet when they were returning. Atticus didn't hear anything because he had the radio on. But the Radley house was quiet. On a quiet night, with only the birds to be heard, it is likely that Boo heard Jem tell Scout to run. They are attacked when they are near one of the two oaks near the Radley's home. This offers further proof that they were near Boo's house and makes it more likely that he would have heard their screams. 

Each integral represents the volume of a solid. Describe the solid.

The formula provided represents the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region enclosed by the curves , about x = 1, using washer method:

You need to find the endpoints by solving the equation:

Hence, evaluating the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region enclosed by the curves , about x = 1, using washer method, yields

What three ways was the bronze bow used?

The bronze bow is a motif that Elizabeth George Speare uses throughout the novel. Not only do the characters use the bow in three different ways, but Speare uses it as a symbol with at least three different meanings.

Daniel first considers the idea of the bow of bronze when Joel reads him scripture while he is recuperating in the passageway of their home. The three friends have made a vow to fight for God's victory, and Joel offers Daniel the use of a secret entrance to their home if he wants to get a message to Joel from Rosh. Joel suggests that Daniel could "mark some sign on the wall" to let them know he was there, and Thacia suggests the sign of the bronze bow.

Second, in chapter 12 when Daniel is forming his band of men within the village to assist Rosh, they determine they need some brand to show they are all part of the group and trustworthy. Rather than taking an outward brand, which would have violated the Law, Joel suggests they "carry the sign of the bow in our minds" and use it as "our password."

Third, in chapter 15, Daniel fashions a cloak pin in the shape of a bronze bow with the pin as its arrow. He decides to keep "his experiment" as a way "to remind him of his purpose."

Speare uses the bow as a symbol in various ways as the book progresses. First, it is a symbol of the bond of friendship between Daniel, Joel, and Thacia. Second, when Daniel thoughtfully fashions the little pin while working at his blacksmith shop, he "thought again of Jesus, and his hopes flared anew." That month, when he looked back on it later, turned out to be a month of "quietness and hope." Here Speare uses the bow as a symbol of hope, showing how Daniel is beginning to open his heart toward the pleasures of his own life and toward Jesus. Third, Speare uses the bow in the final chapter to drive home her theme that love, not hate, is the road to victory. When Jesus comes to Daniel's home to heal Leah, in the face of Jesus' love Daniel realizes that "only love could bend the bow of bronze." Here the bow symbolizes love and faith in Jesus as the answer to the pain of life.

Speare uses the bow in three concrete ways with her characters and in three symbolic ways to advance the themes of her novel.

Who is most responsible for Roylott's death?

Dr. Roylott appears only once while he is still alive. This is when he storms into Holmes' sitting room and demands to know what his niece has been telling him. Holmes insolently ignores his questions, which infuriates the ill-tempered doctor even further.

“I will go when I have said my say. Don't you dare to meddle with my affairs. I know that Miss Stoner has been here. I traced her! I am a dangerous man to fall foul of! See here.” He stepped swiftly forward, seized the poker, and bent it into a curve with his huge brown hands.

The author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's purpose in creating this confrontation was to establish that the dramatic conflict in the story was between Dr. Roylott and Sherlock Holmes. Roylott's dangerous personality hovers over the rest of the story like a black cloud. He could show up at any moment while Holmes and Watson are inspecting the rooms at Stoke Moran. If he did so, he would be likely to try to kill both men on the grounds that a man's home is a castle. A country gentleman like Roylott would be sure to have a number of hunting guns available. Holmes has asked Watson to bring his revolver along, which adds to the dramatic tension.

Since Conan Doyle based the story on a conflict between Holmes and Roylott, he must have felt it necessary to show that Holmes won that battle by causing Roylott to be killed by his own snake. Holmes actually assumes this responsibility at the very end.

"Some of the blows of my cane came home and roused its snakish temper, so that it flew upon the first person it saw. In this way I am no doubt indirectly responsible for Dr. Grimesby Roylott's death, and I cannot say that it is likely to weigh very heavily upon my conscience.”

Conan Doyle wanted Holmes to kill Roylott as a sign of complete victory in their conflict--but to do so in such a way that the detective could not be considered guilty of homicide. 

Explain how oxygen is removed from the leaves of a plant?

Plants undergo the process of photosynthesis, for which carbon dioxide is a reactant and oxygen is a product. Thus, plants need to obtain carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release the produced oxygen into it. This exchange of gases takes place through pores on the leaves, known as stomata. These pores or openings are situated on the lower side of the leaf skin (known as epidermis) and guarded by two guard cells. The gases are exchanged, with the atmosphere, through the opening and closure of the stomata, throughout the day. At nighttime, when no photosynthesis is taking place, plants take up oxygen from the atmosphere and continue the process of cellular respiration. A side-effect of opening of stomata is the loss of water from plants (through the process known as transpiration). 

Hope this helps. 

What is salvation? Why is it important to young Hughes that he be saved?

Salvation is the act of being saved or born again in the Christian religion.  As a young man, Hughes feels the pressure to “see” Jesus when he and his other friends go to church to be saved.  Hughes is pressured by his aunt and other members of the church’s congregation to show that he has been saved.  Hughes tries and tries for it to happen, but it doesn’t.  Salvation is not something you can wish for or hope to automatically take place.  You must have deep faith in God and your religion.  At Hughes’ young age, he doesn’t understand that and becomes frustrated that it doesn’t happen to him like it does to the others in the church. In order to release the pressure he feels to be saved, he fakes it.  His family is thrilled by his act of faith, but that night, Hughes cries and is troubled by his lie and inability to find his faith. As readers, we can infer that this incident will affect Hughes views on religion for a long time to come.

Describe how Candy is affected by the death of his dog in Of Mice and Men

Candy had a very difficult time when his dog was shot. First, he clearly did not want Carlson to shoot his dog.  Candy had his dog for a long time, and in some ways it was his only companion. This is a significant point, because in this world, friendships are rare. So, when he heard the gun shot in the distance, he was in pain. Here is the quote.

A shot sounded in the distance. The men looked quickly at the old man. Every head turned toward him

For a moment he continued to stare at the ceiling. Then he rolled slowly over and faced the wall and lay silent.

Second, Candy also has regrets.  So, we can say guilt affects him.  He confides in George. He says that he should have shot the dog himself.  This shows that Candy also knows that his dog is old and in pain.  It might have been the merciful thing to do, namely to give the dog a good death.  However, he should have been the one to do it.  Here is what the text says:

"I ought to of shot that dog myself, George. I shouldn’t ought to of let no stranger shoot my dog."

In the second book of The Tale of Despereaux, how would Botticelli's personality be best described?

In The Tale of Despereaux Botticelli's character personifies pure evil, unfettered by a conscience. Other characters in the story display evil qualities and tendencies, but nearly all possess some goodness as well. Botticelli is a rat who is evil to his core. He is described as old, one-eared, and vaguely hypnotic. 

"The meaning of life," said Botticelli, "is suffering, specifically the suffering of others."

These lines from chapter 16 encapsulate the villainy of the character. However, Botticelli isn't just a personification of evil in the story; he is also a reflection of the darker nature of Roscuro. Nearly every name in this book tells the reader something of the character in question. The Princess Pea was named after a legume commonly found in soup, which is one of her mother's favorite foods. Despereaux was named "for the many despairs in this place."

Roscuro's full name, Chiaroscuro, means "the arrangement of light and dark," specifically in relation to painting or drawing. Botticelli is the name of a famous painter. If the rat Chiaroscuro is a contrast of light and dark, then his friend Botticelli is the painter who shapes him. Botticelli encourages Roscuro to seek revenge and to make the princess suffer. Botticelli's last name is Remorso, and while the rat never experiences the emotion himself, Roscuro's darkness does, in the end, give way to remorse. 

Ultimately, Botticelli Remorso's name is more prophetic and indicative of Roscuro than of the one-eared rat himself. 

What are some symbols in the novel Jane Eyre?

Bronte's novel Jane Eyre is heavily embedded with symbols that make this Gothic tale of love that much richer. We can begin with the red room of Aunt Reed's house. Locked in the same room where her uncle had died a few years before, Jane is punished for her perceived infractions and forced to contend with her wild imagination in a room draped in red. The closed in nature of the room, as well as the red walls and drapes, reminds us of a womb. Jane is, in a sense, being reborn through this terrifying experience. She emerges from the room, or is at least released, as a new person in the sense that her self-identity becomes stronger.  She will no longer live under the rule of Mrs. Reed's thumb. While it is just the first step, she begins in the room her journey to self-actualization.

Fast forward a few years and we find Jane inhabiting Thornfield Hall, a place that is sometimes old but more often than not, burning fires within the walls and within Jane.  Here fire comes to represent the passions that foment within Thornfield. Jane finds herself captivated by Rochester as the fire roars in the great fireplace. His madwoman wife, Bertha, becomes the catalyst for most fires as she sets Rochester's bed on fire. She was a passionate woman and her fire seems to embody all of the passion of Rochester and Jane's budding romance.

Fire becomes symbolic again near the end of the novel as Bertha sets Thornfield ablaze a final time, symbolically burning any hinderances Rochester and Jane might have to actually be together in the end.

But before the final, fateful blaze, nature takes on a symbolic role with the chestnut tree and the storm. The tree is clearly meant to represent Jane and Rochester, intrinsically intertwined. But the lightening bolt cleaves the two apart, representing the separation they will have to endure before they can come back together. 

While there are others, the paintings, the dreams, these are the most overarching symbols present in Jane Eyre.

What happened during the battle of Lexington?

The Battle of Lexington, together with that of Concord, kicked off the American Revolutionary War. It began very early in the morning of April 19 1775, around 77 of the colonial minutemen, so -called because they needed only a minute to get ready to fight, were summoned to Lexington Green and awaited an advance of around 240 British soldiers. Both sides to stood face each other and the British commander said to the minutemen: "Throw down your arms! Ye villains, ye rebels!" The minutemen were then ordered by their leaders to disperse when, suddenly, came the sound of a bullet. Historians still do not know who fired this shot but it became known as the 'shot heard around the world' - the signal of the start of the American Revolutionary War.

The shot prompted more shooting and, by the time the smoke cleared, eight of the Americans were dead and another nine lay wounded on the ground. Only one British soldier was wounded. 

This skirmish was brought to an end as the British marched off to nearby Concord, to meet up with other regiments who had joined the fight. 

What is Don John's character profile in the play Much Ado About Nothing?

Don John is the villain of Much Ado About Nothing. By all appearances, he is sullen and quiet. When Leonato welcomes him into his home, Don John says that he is “not of many words.” Beatrice says that he looks so “tartly” she is “heart-burned an hour after.” She compares him to “an image [that] says nothing,” and Hero admits that he “is of a very melancholy disposition.”

The reason for his gloom is because he is the prince Don Pedro’s illegitimate brother. They have only recently reconciled, and Don John resents his position. He is also jealous of Claudio for stealing Don Pedro’s affection. Don John refuses to show any gratitude, stating that he will “smile at no man's jests” and laugh only when he is merry. He explains quite clearly how bitter and disagreeable he is:

I had rather be a canker in a hedge than a rose in his [Don Pedro’s] grace, and it better fits my blood to be disdained of all than to fashion a carriage to rob love from any: in this, though I cannot be said to be a flattering honest man, it must not be denied but I am a plain-dealing villain.

Don John and his friends devise a plot to shame Don Pedro, Claudio, and Hero, Claudio’s innocent fiancée. He first manipulates Claudio into thinking Don Pedro wants Hero for himself and then “proves” to Claudio and Don Pedro that Hero is having an affair with the drunkard Borachio. (It is actually Borachio and Margaret, not Hero, who have the liaison.) Don John’s cruel devices put a damper on the celebrations in Messina.

What was government like under the Articles of Confederation?

Under the Articles of Confederation, state governments held most of the power. The preamble to the Articles described the government they formed as a "firm league of friendship," and this is more or less what it was. The national government consisted only of a Congress composed of delegates from each state. Each state's delegation only had one vote, meaning that the smallest states held the same amount of political power as states with bigger populations. Congress lacked the power to tax, the power to regulate interstate commerce, and the power to require states to send troops for the national defense. This caused a number of problems, most critically the inability to pay the nation's growing debt from the Revolutionary War. Without the ability to pay the debt, the nation found it difficult to secure trade and loan agreements with the nations of Europe. Additionally, some states imposed tariffs on goods from other states, and many creditors refused to accept currency from other states as payment for debt. Internal disorder in many states threatened to become nationwide (a problem made clear by Shays' Rebellion in Massachusetts). In short, many political leaders across the new nation believed that the nation would descend into chaos without a stronger national government. The result was the Constitution written at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787.

Did erosion or deposition form the Okeechobee lake?

Neither one, evidently.  Okeechobee Lake in the southernmost part of Floridas peninsula was formed many years ago when ocean waters receded from that part of Florida.  It was a shallow area in the middle part of the state, and became an inland lake when the waters of what are now the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean retreated.  This formed what is now the state of Florida.  Okeechobee means "big water" in the Seminole indian language, which was the native tribe of indians who populated that area.  Okeechobee lake serves as an essential supply source of fresh water to the Everglades swamp in southern Florida.  Lakes that are formed from deposition are formed by the movement of glaciers, while lakes that are formed by erosion are carved out of landforms by the force of water erosion.

How is natural law incorporated into the American Legal System and explain how Natural Law encourages the protection of the rights of those accused...

Natural law is incorporated into the American legal system at a foundational level. In fact, one must go back to not only the Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution but also to before these documents, to esteemed thinkers such as Aristotle and John Locke, to determine natural law’s importance in establishing the jurisprudence of the United States. Once one understands the concept of natural law, one can more easily grasp how fundamental it is to America’s understanding and implementation of law and justice.

Natural law can be defined as “a recognition and assertion of the natural rights of men, a declaration that, in a state of nature and before the formation of political society, men were equal in their possessions of certain inalienable rights which Jefferson, author of the Declaration, described as rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’” (Desmond 235-6).

Natural law derives from natural rights, inalienable rights, which are those rights with which one is born. John Locke asserted that men are free, naturally. They are born equal to one another. He noted that free and equal people, in a society, enter into a social contract where they exchange some of their natural rights for certain limited rights under a government, which exists to protect the people’s lives, liberty, and property. Locke further asserts that natural law, as opposed to, for example, divine law, applies to everyone and can be ascertained solely by reason (Tuckness).

Natural law encourages protecting a criminal defendant’s rights because it recognizes one’s inherent right to life, liberty, and property. If one is accused of a crime, but possesses a natural right to liberty, meaning he or she was born free, already enjoying this right, it is significant that the accusers may restrict that person's liberty if they prove the accused has committed a crime against another person. The accusers must be able to prove the person, in fact, committed the crime. Otherwise, any penalty for committing the crime, any restriction of one’s liberty, would be arbitrary and would violate natural law, which, again, holds that a person’s natural state is liberty.

Charles S. Desmond, Natural Law and the American Constitution, 22 Fordham L. Rev. (1953).

Tuckness, Alex. "Locke's Political Philosophy." Stanford University. Stanford University, 2005. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

Evaluate the integral

To evaluate, apply integration by parts intu dv = uv  -int vdu.

So let

and

Then, differentiate u and integrate dv.

and

And, plug-in them to the formula. So the integral becomes:

Therefore,   .

What is the most important metaphor in The Way to Rainy Mountain?

Because Momaday does not actually name the "most important metaphor" for his readers, we are left to decide for ourselves. Your question, then, is an opinion question.  In my opinion, the most important metaphor in The Way to Rainy Mountain can be found in the significance of the title itself. Rainy Mountain becomes a metaphor for the myth, history, and personal experience of the Kiowa tribe of Native Americans.

We can use a few pertinent quotations to further explain the above idea in The Way to Rainy Mountain:

A single knoll rises out of the plain in Oklahoma, north and west of the Wichita Range. For my people, the Kiowas, it is an old landmark, and they gave it the name Rainy Mountain.

The metaphor of Rainy Mountain is furthered by Momaday's description of "the way" to this Kiowa landmark. There is an explanation given for that as well:

I returned to Rainy Mountain in July. My grandmother had died in the spring, and I wanted to be at her grave.

If you put these two quotations together with the organization of the book, the metaphor becomes even more clear. The book contains three main parts: "The Setting Out," "The Going On," and "The Closing In." These main  parts are divided into twenty-four numbered sections written in three separate voices: one about myth, one about history, and one about personal experience. 

Every single part, section, and voice leads directly back to the main metaphor: Momaday's "way" back to "Rainy Mountain" as Momaday's research and discovery of his own Kiowa heritage and religion. Momaday's metaphor becomes complete as he learns about the Kiowa myths, researches the dates of Kiowa history, and listens to his own grandmother, Aho, as she tells her own personal stories about the Kiowa tribe.

What does Scout notice about Mayella as she leaves the witness stand and passes Atticus' defense table in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

Scout, speaking from the innocent perspective that she had back when the trial took place, remembers the "glare of hatred" in Mayella's eyes. Like the previous answer correctly noted, this glare was a very angry look that Mayella gives to Atticus, and to everyone else, really. It resulted from a variety of things. First, Atticus was able to demonstrate that Mayella was making things up to turn the blame on Tom Robinson. Second, he uncovered the chaotic dynamics of the Ewell household, including the questionable father/daughter relationship between Mayella and Bob. Third, Mayella was already angry and, in her low intellectual mentality, was sure that she was being made fun of, and that she was being disrespected by the people in court. While these things do not justify Mayella's behavior, it is interesting that Scout attempts to make logic of what she sees. 

Notice that Scout consistently makes observations about Mayella. Among these observations, Scout notices that Mayella must be a very lonely person, and that she has no friends or support systems whatsoever

When Atticus asked had she any friends, she seemed not to know what he meant, then she thought he was making fun of her. (ch 19)

She also notices that Mayella may have never been treated with respect by anyone in her life. Moreover, Scout is quite surprised that Mayella found it offensive that Atticus had referred to her as "Ma'am" or "Miss" in court. These ways to refer to women are quite polite and professional. Moreover, these are accepted ways in polite society to refer to a female. Still, Mayella is not part of this polite society, and she does not know what is acceptable behavior. In spite of all of this, Scout is able to put all the variables together. She develops empathy for the poor woman. These are signs of maturity from Scout's character. She is not just making conjectures based on what she can see at plain sight.

What are two quotes in Acts 4 and 5 of Macbeth that show how Macbeth has become insane, with an explanation of the quotes?

Macbeth's mind has become more unstable since killing Duncan and Banquo.

The fact that Macbeth is conjuring witches and asking them for advice shows a little bit on instability.  However, accepting that he is otherwise sane and there is just magic afoot, Macbeth is well into a downward spiral by the fourth act.  He is getting more and more paranoid, and his paranoia continues his murder spree.

Killing Banquo because he might have been suspicious (and because the witches said his sons, and not Macbeth’s, would be king) was just the first of Macbeth’s murders.  He seems to think that time itself is against him.

Time, thou anticipatest my dread exploits:
The flighty purpose never is o'ertook
Unless the deed go with it; from this moment
The very firstlings of my heart shall be
The firstlings of my hand. (Act 4, Scene 1)

These are the ravings of a madman.  Macbeth is basically saying that if he thinks it, he will do it.  He decides that Macduff is a threat, so he will kill Macduff.  He sends murderers to kill Macduff, and they kill his wife and son.  Lady Macbeth is worried that her husband has lost his mind.  Even though she does not know the details, she is afraid.  She confides in Ross, who tells her to have patience.  She responds that Macbeth is the one with no patience.

He had none:
His flight was madness: when our actions do not,
Our fears do make us traitors. (Act 4, Scene 2)

The fact that his wife, who planned the murder of King Duncan so meticulously, thinks that Macbeth is mad shows how far he has gone.  By the time Malcolm and his army are storming the castle, Macbeth’s wife is dead and he has lost his faith in himself.

Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing. (Act 5, Scene 5)

Proof of the fact that Macbeth has lost his mind is his reaction to Macduff when the two meet in battle.  He was told two seemingly contradictory prophecies by the witches, that no man born of woman can hurt him, and that he should beware Macduff.  When Macduff tells him that he was “from his mother's womb/Untimely ripp'd” Macbeth loses all confidence that he is safe (Act 5, Scene 8).  It is actually pretty easy for Macduff to kill him then.

Macbeth was not all too sane to begin with.  It was very easy for him to be manipulated by the witches and his wife.  Soon he was killing left and right to protect a throne he wasn’t even sure he wanted.  Macbeth’s downfall seemed inevitable. He was destroyed by his own ambition.

What value does Foucault give to dreams and the unconscious?

Your question is asking about the relationship between Foucault and psychoanalysis, more specifically Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, and his theories on the unconscious and dreaming. While at first one can say of course he was influenced by psychoanalysis, upon a deeper examination it is important to notice Foucault's critique of it.

Foucault wrote an introduction to Binswanger's paper in 1954 where he said that dreams are the beginning of the earth and where one could understand the beginning of one's own heart. We see from this introduction that he was deeply influenced by Freud's work on dreaming.

Later Foucault departs from Marxist and Psychoanalytic thought in his critique of modern society in his book The History of Sexuality. He believed that psychoanalysis main power came from its focus on the unconscious. He criticized Freuds focus on sexuality and its power believing that overly focusing on sexuality within every interpretation was actually giving into desire and reinforcing traditional forms of power and hegemony.

Instead Foucault would prefer that we use the unconscious and dreams as a source for resistance, not to give into the dominant powers of sexuality and unconscious desires. He argued that in order to change dominant Western power systems we must develop a philosophy of resistance. 

See:

Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality An Introduction. New York: Vintage. 1990. ISBN: 0679724699.

Miller, James (1993). The Passion of Michel Foucault. New York City: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-674-00157-2.

How are George and Hazel characterized? That is, why has Hazel not been handicapped? How and why does George feel about his handicaps?

Hazel is average and fits perfectly into the society of Vonnegut's story, "Harrison Bergeron." On the other hand, George has much innate intelligence; therefore, he must wear the headgear that equalizes him. Also, he must wear handicaps on his body since by nature he is superior in strength and agility.

The society in which George and Hazel live values equality at the cost of excellence. So, in order to maintain this equal mediocrity, people are fitted with handicaps if they are naturally superior to others. Since Hazel has no stellar characteristics, she wears no handicaps. "Who knows better'n I do what normal is" she asks her husband. Her thoughts are simple, her ideas quotations from something she may have heard. For instance, when the television announcer tries to say "Ladies and gentlemen," but he falters and stumbles because of a speech impediment, Hazel remarks, 

"That's all right...he tried. That's the big thing. He tried to do the best he could with what God gave him."

George's thoughts, however, are often interrupted by his mental-handicap radio in his ear that intercepts any logical, complex, or subversive thought. When, for instance, he regards the ballerinas on the television broadcast, he reasons that, perhaps, ballerinas should not be handicapped so that they could really be graceful and thereby provide beautiful entertainment. But, his radio sends shocks to this subversive thought about the notion of the necessity for superiority in some areas, and his head rings and tears fill his eyes. 

George's body, too, is handicapped: He wears a forty-seven pound canvas bag filled with birdshot. About his handicap George bravely comments, "I don't notice it any more. It's just a part of me." Some explanation for this remark is the fact that George fears the penalty for removing it: "Two years in prison and two thousand dollars fine for every gall I took out....I don't call that a bargain." Because George is well aware that his rebellious son, Harrison, is imprisoned because of his lack of compliance with the rules of their society, he resigns himself to a modern version of a ball and chains in his own home.

There is no question that the futuristic society of what should be harmonious equality lacks greatly in such harmony. For, people must accept oppressive measures in the name of "equality," and the individual civil rights of citizens have been greatly compromised in this desensitized society.

What is Mrs. Sommers feeling when she departs on the streetcar in "A Pair of Silk Stockings"?

After having given herself a pleasurable hiatus from her domestic deprivations, as Mrs. Sommers rides the cable car home, she feels a poignant yearning for the continuation of the pleasurable suspension from her hard reality.

Prior to her shopping trip, Mrs. Sommers has conditioned herself to be frugal and concerned with her motherly obligations. But, when she sits on a revolving stool at a counter because she feels faint from not having eaten lunch, Mrs. Sommers's hand brushes against a pair of "very soothing, very pleasant to the touch" silk stockings that are reduced in price. She cannot resist buying them. Further, the feel of luxury on her legs after she changes from her cotton stockings into the new silk ones ignites a desire in Mrs. Sommers to treat herself to more luxuries with the money which she has unexpectedly obtained. In short, she lives a day like that of a lady of luxury.

At the end of the pleasurable respite from her domestic duties, Mrs. Sommers feels enjoyment in her escape from enforced frugality so much that she feels "a poignant wish" that the cable car would continue on with her and never stop. 

At the end of the book Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, what happens to Frankenstein and the creature? What are some differences and similarities...

At the end of Frankenstein, Victor and the monster both come to death. Victor dies on Captain Walton's ship while running from the monster. Right before he dies, however, he has just agreed to go back to England after all that time, indicating that he has finally given up and perhaps will face his creation. But then he dies before that can happen. Then, Walton comes into the room where Victor's body is, and the monster is there, crying over him. Finally, after narrating a good deal of his own story to Walton, the creature says in the second to last paragraph of the book, 

"I shall die, and what I now feel be no longer felt. Soon these burning miseries will be extinct. I shall ascend my funeral pile triumphantly and exult in the agony of the torturing flames. The light of that conflagration will fade away; my ashes will be swept into the sea by the winds. My spirit will sleep in peace, or if it thinks, it will not surely think thus. Farewell." 

And then he jumps from the window and floats away on an iceberg, never to be seen again. 

Although Victor and the monster both die in the end of the book, Victor's tragedy was brought on by his own reckless and selfish actions in creating the monster, whereas the monster's was not. Additionally, although Victor does ultimately die far from the ones he loves—though most are dead by that point—he dies in the company of Walton, who understands him and cares for him as a friend. The monster, through no fault of his own, is entirely isolated. The only person he had in the world who could have cared for him was his creator and Victor's response to him was to view him as an "abortion" (the monster's own words). So, although their ultimate ends are similar, the reasons for their ends and the nature of their isolation are different. 

We call lightning a process due to static charges, and say that it is discharge of static electricity. But, to my knowledge, static electricity is...

Static electricity is not necessarily due to friction. While you can see the effects of static electricity by using friction (for example, when you rub a balloon on your hair, the hair will stand up, or when you rub a Styrofoam cup on the wall, it will stick to the wall for a few seconds), the definition of static electricity is just that it involves stationary charges, as opposed to moving charges, such as in electric current. Friction is used to move some of the charges from one surface to another, which results in the attraction of the surfaces, as in the above example with the cup. However, it does not matter how the stationary charges are produced; any phenomenon involving them would be still called a static electricity phenomenon.

It is correct that the lightning is a discharge of static electricity. There are a number of processes that result in a storm cloud being statically charged. One of them is the high-speed collisions of the water droplets, due to which the electrons, which are negatively charged, separate from the atoms, which then become positively charged. The cloud then becomes polarized, as the positive charges end up on top and the negative charges on the bottom. Please see the reference link for a detailed description of various mechanisms of this process. Thus, the cloud then becomes a gigantic capacitor, and once the charges on the opposite sides become large enough, the electric discharge takes place. 

What do you think is the meaning of the writing on the rocks in Bud's suitcase?

In Chapter 8, Bud takes the five rocks out of the tobacco bag that he keeps in his suitcase to make sure they are all still there. Bud mentions that someone had taken a pen and wrote a secret code on each of them, and he does not understand what the writing means. The rocks say, "kentland ill. 5.10.11, loogootee in. 5.16.11, sturgis m. 8.30.12, gary in. 6.13.12, and flint m. 8.11.11" (Curtis 79). One can surmise that the names written on the rocks are locations in the United States, and the numbers are specific dates. Whether or not Bud's mother visited those places to watch Herman E. Calloway and his band play is unclear. The locations and dates could also be places where Herman E. Calloway performed. He could have possibly given the rocks to Bud's mother as a keepsake.

Later on in Chapter 18, Herman asks Bud to pick up a rock, and when Herman opens his glove compartment, Bud sees a bunch of rocks with similar names and dates written on them. Later on, Miss Thomas tells Bud that Herman picks up rocks wherever he performs for his daughter, who is actually Bud's mother. When Bud's mother was four or five, she asked her dad, Herman Calloway, to bring her back a rock from Chicago. Ever since then, Herman picks up a rock for his daughter wherever he travels to perform.

Why does Montresor want revenge against Fortunato?

Montresor begins his narrative by stating

The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge.

Since Montresor never describes the insult or any of the injuries, readers have offered all sorts of conflicting opinions about his motivation. Some believe that Montresor was never injured or insulted at all and therefore must be insane. Poe avoids having to clarify or justify Montresor's motivation by having him address his communication, or confession, or letter, to a person he calls 

You, who so well know the nature of my soul

Presumably this person knows so much about Montresor that it is not necessary for him to give any examples of the injuries. This device is effective because it forces the reader to pay close attention to the text in an effort to deduce facts that are fully understood by "You, who so well know the nature of my soul." This is very much like Ernest Hemingway's famous "Iceberg principle." 

If a writer of prose knows enough of what he is writing about he may omit things that he knows and the reader, if the writer is writing truly enough, will have a feeling of those things as strongly as though the writer had stated them. The dignity of movement of an ice-berg is due to only one-eighth of it being above water. A writer who omits things because he does not know them only makes hollow places in his writing.
                         Ernest Hemingway, Death in the Afternoon

It does not seem likely that Montresor could be insane and write such a coherent narrative. He must be sane and telling the exact truth. There should be indications within the narrative of the types of injuries that have driven Montresor to plan and execute his revenge. The injuries would have to be of a kind that are known only to Montresor and Fortunato. Montresor wants to kill with "impunity," and he could not expect impunity if it were widely known that he had been injured by Fortunato anything like a thousand times. Poe offers a clue in the third paragraph of the story, which should be read with special attention.

He had a weak point—this Fortunato—although in other regards he was a man to be respected and even feared. He prided himself on his connoisseur-ship in wine. Few Italians have the true virtuoso spirit. For the most part their enthusiasm is adopted to suit the time and opportunity, to practise imposture upon the British and Austrian millionaires. In painting and gemmary, Fortunato, like his countrymen, was a quack, but in the matter of old wines he was sincere. In this respect I did not differ from him materially;—I was skilful in the Italian vintages myself, and bought largely whenever I could.

This sounds as if both men are "gentlemen-brokers" who earn their livings by dealing in luxury goods such as paintings, jewelry,antiques, gourmet wines--even in real estate. Fortunato is rich, Montresor is poor. Montresor puts up with Fortunato's injuries because he is dependent on him financially. There are many impoverished Venetian aristocrats who are forced to dispose of family heirlooms in order to survive in their decaying palazzi. Montresor may often need to borrow from the man he constantly describes as his good friend in order to purchase an item for resale. Or he may go into an ad hoc partnership with Fortunato on a purchase. Or he may simply receive a finder's fee for introducing his good friend to a prospective buyer or seller of some one-of-a-kind family treasure. Fortunato would have plenty of opportunities to "injure" Montresor, without anyone else knowing about it, by taking an unfair share of the profits on a transaction, by paying a lower finder's fee than agreed upon, or cheating him in a dozen other ways. As Montresor says to his good friend when they are in the catacombs:

“Come,” I said, with decision, “we will go back; your health is precious.You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was. You are a man to be missed. For me it is no matter."

Montresor knows that Fortunato is planning to cheat him on the nonexistent Amontillado. It would be just the sort of opportunity Fortunato could not resist. He is planning to taste the wine and, assuming it is genuine, tell Montresor it is only ordinary sherry, then find the nonexistent Spanish ship with its nonexistent cargo of Amontillado and buy up the whole shipload. When Montresor found out what happened, Fortunato would laugh it off as "an excellent jest." He is a scoundrel, but he considers himself a funny fellow, which is why he wears a jester's costume in the carnival.

This is a logical explanation of why Montresor, who is extremely clever and perfectly sane, should want revenge against Fortunato. Montresor has been cheated by this man so many times that he knows he can entrap him simply by offering him an apparent opportunity to cheat him once again.

What is the long retelling of a story called? (Not a summary—something with more detail.)

There are two definitions that answer your question.  The term abridgment refers to a book or other piece that has been condensed to a shorter form.  The main ideas of the story are contained in an abridgment, but the writing is more concise.  For example, the original book might say "Hannah jogged from the north end of the park to the south end while the chilly Autumn air brushed against her cheeks and the red leaves crunched beneath her shoes."  In an abridged version of the book, that extended and detailed sentence would be shortened.  It might change to "Hannah jogged through the park on a chilly Autumn day."  This still gets the point across that the character jogged through the park, as well as what time of year it was and what the weather was like.  Extra pieces of information, such as the direction she jogged and how the leaves crunched under her shoes, are excluded because they are unnecessary details to the main plot of the story.  Another example of an abridgment is when a long piece of classic literature is shortened and the language is simplified.  Little Women, for example, is a book that is usually about 500 pages long.  There are several abridged versions for children that are condensed down to approximately 200 pages.  All of the main plot elements are in these abridged versions of Little Women, but the text is more concise.

Another type of long retelling of a story is a chapter-by-chapter summary.  In this type of retelling, each chapter of the book is summarized.  Rather than a basic synopsis, a chapter-by-chapter summary contains all or most of the important plot information and supporting details.  The length of this type of summary depends on how long the book is and how much information is contained in each chapter.

Was Tom Robinson guilty of assaulting and raping Mayella Ewell in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird?

Despite the contradicting testimonies of the Ewells and a lack of evidence, Tom Robinson is wrongly convicted of assaulting and raping Mayella Ewell. Mayella Ewell made sexual advances towards Tom Robinson, prompting Tom to run out of her home. Still, Bob Ewell witnessed Mayella kiss Tom, and Bob Ewell proceeded to assault his daughter. Atticus explains in his closing remarks that Mayella felt guilty about breaking the "time-honored code" of not having relations with a black man. In order to cover up her offense and protect her father, she falsely accused Tom Robinson of assaulting and raping her. Atticus illuminates the fact that Tom Robinson has a crippled left hand and would not have been able to inflict the serious injuries to the right side of Mayella's face that she has. Mayella's bruises around her neck also indicate that someone with two strong hands choked her. Atticus suggests that Bob Ewell assaulted his daughter in order to punish Mayella for kissing Tom. Although Tom Robinson is not guilty, he becomes another victim of racial injustice after he is wrongly convicted.

Please paraphrase the poem Lucy Gray by William Wordsworth.

 The poem "Lucy Gray" can be divided into three parts. In the first, Lucy, a child of nature, spends most of her time outside, running innocent, wild, and free like an animal. She is compared to a fawn and a hare. In the second section, her father gives her a lantern and sends her into a snowstorm to fetch her mother home safely. However, Lucy gets lost. Her frantic parents search for her everywhere, "shouting far and wide." They are ready to give up and accept she has died when the mother sees Lucy's footprints in the snow. The parents follow the footprints until the footprints stop, suddenly and mysteriously, in the middle of a wooden bridge.  The last section of the poem wonders if Lucy might still be alive, for some people say she can be seen running and singing on the wild moors. 

Why free rotation occurs in sp2 hybridization?

Hybridization is the restructuring of atomic orbitals necessary for formation of molecules. Through this, we end up with hybridized orbitals that have a different allocation of electrons than the original orbitals. For example, in methane, we have 4 equivalent orbitals which are formed by excitation of 1 electron from s orbital to p orbital. This results in sp3 hybridization that has 4 hybridized orbitals, each of which contains 1 electron. These electrons can each combine with 1 hydrogen atom to form methane. Similarly, there are sp2 and sp hybridizations as well.

There is no free rotation in case of sp2 hybridization or even in sp hybridization. It is only possible in case of sp3 hybridization. The reason is simple, sigma bonds are unaffected by rotation, while pi-bonds are not. Pi-bonds are formed in case of double (contains 1 sigma and 1 pi bond) and triple (contains 1 sigma and 2 pi bonds) bonds or, in other words, in case of sp2 and sp hybridization. This is the reason, compounds like ethene and ethyne have no free rotation. 

Hope this helps. 

A lot of information online suggests that Laurie (Charles) is both the protagonist and the antagonist. How could this be the case? Discuss using...

The reason we see Laurie interpreted as both protagonist and antagonist is due to the role both play in terms of plot. The protagonist is largely the main character who drives the action in the story; as such, every decision or action the protagonist makes elicits a reaction from the other characters in the story. The antagonist, of course, contends with the protagonist; this tug of war  drives the plot forward.

In the story, Laurie is the protagonist; like all little boys, he has a little of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in him. Interestingly, Dr. Jekyll is often viewed as the protagonist in Louis Stevenson's story, while Mr. Hyde is definitely the antagonist. Similarly, in Shirley Jackson's story, it is Laurie who drives the action of the plot: it is he who has created his alter ego, Charles. Therefore, every infraction Charles commits is also, by relationship, Laurie's. However, a part of Laurie also wants to feel good about himself, so he allows his alter ego to take the fall for his less than admirable predilections. Through Charles, Laurie can indulge in the kind of behavior his parents or teachers might find offensive. In the meantime, Laurie still gets to be known as the good kid.

This is similar to the plot in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. While Dr. Jekyll goes about as a respectable doctor, engaging in philanthropic work and attending to his religious duties, he can freely indulge in his cruel vices through his alter ego, Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde gets the blame for everything, while Dr. Jekyll gets off scot-free. Eventually, however, Dr. Jekyll finds himself unable to control even his transformations into Mr. Hyde; in essence, Mr. Hyde comes to take over the transformation process, and eventually, he 'kills' off Dr. Jekyll. Now, Mr. Hyde is the clear antagonist.

You can see this process in Shirley Jackson's story as well. As the story begins, we see how smug Laurie is: he's the good boy, while Charles is the bad apple in class. He even begins to enjoy linking Charles' name to any negative incident at home; the fact that his parents join him in his game accords him great satisfaction. It becomes an empowering experience for Laurie. However, like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, you can see Laurie struggles to 'control' Charles. This is why Charles alternates between being a helpful boy as well as being a disruptive student in class. So, in essence, Laurie is both protagonist and antagonist: the dual conflict between the good and the bad in Laurie drive the action of the story.

Ominous hints of Charles' future, reminiscent of Mr. Hyde's, is reflected in the incident when Charles gets a little girl to say a bad word twice in class. In telling the story to his mother, Laurie happily asserts that nothing happens to Charles as a consequence, while the little girl gets her mouth washed out with soap. However, Charles eventually earns a similar punishment when he is himself caught saying the bad word three or four times. Like Dr. Jekyll at the end of Stevenson's story, we are left wondering if Charles will eventually succeed in appropriating Laurie's character for himself.

Laurie's parents, meanwhile, are supporting characters or character foils. Usually, a character foil provides a contrast to the protagonist; the character foil's role is to highlight the importance of the major character. Laurie's parents play the role to perfection, as their sole and overwhelming concern in the story centers on Laurie/Charles. They react to Laurie/Charles rather than indulge in actions which drive the story.

I hope this is helpful!

Your house is worth 500k. Every year, there is a 0.02% chance that a fire will occur and cause a complete damage. In addition, there is a 0.05%...

The insurance premium will be equal to the expected loss, plus the profit margin for the insurance company.

The expected loss is the probability of the loss times the magnitude of the loss, added up for all possible outcomes:

0.02*500,000 + 0.05*200,000 = 10,000 + 10,000 = 20,000

Adding a 20% profit margin for the insurance company means we multiply this by 1.20:

20,000*1.20 = 24,000

The annual insurance premium is therefore $24,000.

By "risk aversion parameter", I'm assuming you mean relative risk aversion parameter, which for y = 1 means that your utility function is logarithmic:

U = ln(C)

(As a reminder, normally it would be U = 1/(1-y) * (C^(1-y) - 1), but for y = 1 there is a special limit case which is U = ln(C).)

Ignoring all other spending, your consumption will be:

$76,000 if you buy insurance
$100,000 if you don't buy insurance and nothing happens (93% probability)
-$100,000 if you don't buy insurance and you get a small fire (5% probability)
-$400,000 if you don't buy insurance and you get a large fire (2% probability)

We can immediately see that you must buy the insurance, because your consumption goes negative and therefore your utility goes to negative infinity if you don't buy the insurance and you have a fire. You simply cannot afford to have a fire.

Under these conditions, your reservation price is actually $100,000. You are willing to spend all of your money to insure your house, because you cannot afford what would happen if you didn't.

Why do you think Carton sacrificed his life for Charles?

Sydney Carton changes places with Charles Darnay out of love for Lucie. When Carton and Darnay were first introduced at the scene of Darnay’s trial, the fact of the similarity of face is an important part of the story and can be seen as a foreshadow when this fact will play a major part. Carton resents Darnay because the Frenchman, while similar in appearance, is quite differenct in what they have made of their lives. Carton loves Lucie, but he knows he would not have a chance with her, even without Darnay. His life has been too ruined by drink to have made him worthy of her. He accepts the fact that Darnay is to be Lucie’s husband, even deciding to be friends with him. When he makes it clear to Lucie what his feelings are, he promises that he would do anything for her or for anyone that she loves. He has become a close friend of the family, especially to Lucie’s and Charles’s children. He sees his life as worthless, however. In his sacrifice of himself, he sees that he gains some measure of redemption, that his life has some meaning. His “prophecy” at the guillotine tells him that he will be well remembered and honored in the Darnay family.

In Ethan Frome why do you suppose Ethan feels that if his mother had died in spring instead of winter he would not have married?

Ethan’s marriage to Zeena took place during one of Starkfield’s long, cold winters. It was also after a long period of pain and sorrow, when Ethan was growing desperate between the impending death of his mother, her silence, the overbearing coldness, and the prospects of living alone forever in the farm. All of these feelings were exacerbated by the darkness and the coldness outside. Therefore, when Zeena came to become Ethan’s mother’s caretaker during that winter, she filled every single void in Ethan’s life during that particular long and horrid period of time.

Her efficiency shamed and dazzled him. She seemed to possess by instinct all the household wisdom that his long apprenticeship had not instilled in him. 

Even though seasons do change, even in Starkfield, Ethan Frome still never gave a second thought to his future. Instead, he focused entirely on his immediate present, on his mother's death, on his fear of loneliness, and on the feeling of uneasiness that the never-ending winter made him feel. Therefore, in a moment of haste, and of fear of being alone, Ethan asks Zeena to marry him.

When he saw her preparing to go away, he was seized with an unreasoning dread of being left alone on the farm; and before he knew what he was doing he had asked her to stay there with him.

Therefore, Ethan realizes that he had made this decision in haste, and only because of the feelings that he was having at that moment, under those circumstances.

This is why he wonders if things could have been differently had these variables been also different in his life. If his mother had died in a different set of circumstances, including the weather, could things have been different for Ethan?

Another, less cordial perspective to consider

We could also analyze this from another perspective. Ethan, who is a bad decision maker, is questioning whether the weather at the time of his mother's death played a factor in one of his many flawed life choices.

While the question is obviously figurative, it is also risible, considering who is asking it. What difference could the weather have made in his decision to marry Zeena, when Ethan continuously makes flawed choices, despite of anything?  Any doubts on this statement should be put to rest when looking into Ethan’s choice of agreeing with Mattie to commit dual suicide by sledding into a tree. 

Having established that Ethan just does not think things through, it is clear that he never really analyzes his rationale behind marrying Zeena, until he starts having feelings for Mattie.

Interestingly, Zeena knows better, and even reproaches Ethan for having asked her to marry him for mere convenience. Therefore, if even Zeena can tell what a bad choice maker Ethan is (and so is she), it is clear that only Ethan would have asked himself the asinine question of whether the weather would have made a difference in making a choice to get married.

Back to the question of the weather

Regardless of whether the question of the weather makes sense or not, the reason why he asks the question in the same from both perspectives discussed. He really wonders if the factors that were in place at the time that his mother died, and when he chose to marry Zeena, could have made a difference in his life if they had been different factors. Whether the question is logical or not, does not matter. The mere fact that he is asking the question is indicative of his current state of desperation, and his desire to see his life change, for good.

What is a quote from the novel To Kill a Mockingbird that describes Atticus gaining respect for someone?

In Chapter 11, Atticus gains respect for Mrs. Dubose after she breaks her addiction to morphine. Earlier in the chapter, Jem loses his temper and destroys Mrs. Dubose's camellia bush after she insults his father. Unbeknownst to Jem, Mrs. Dubose asked Atticus to prepare her will and told him "she was going to leave this world beholden to nothing and nobody." (Lee 148) Mrs. Dubose planned on beating her addiction to morphine before she died. Atticus gains respect for Mrs. Dubose because she had the courage to battle her addiction in the last days of her life. Atticus tells his children that he wanted them to witness what real courage was. According to Atticus, real courage is "when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway, and you see it through no matter what." (Lee 149) Mrs. Dubose knew that she was going to die soon, and nobody would have blamed her for taking morphine to die a peaceful death. Atticus tells Jem and Scout, "She was the bravest person I ever knew." (Lee 149) This comment provides evidence that Atticus has gained respect for Mrs. Dubose.

What does Macbeth plan to do in Scene 4 of Act III after Banquo's murder?

At the end of Act III Scene 4, after Macbeth has learned that Banquo is dead but Fleance escaped, then behaved like he was a sandwich short of a picnic when the ghost of Banquo showed up at his banquet, thereby deeply disturbing all the lords in attendance, Lady Macbeth dismisses the guests ("Stand not upon the order of your going / But go at once."). Macbeth, still disturbed by the gory ghost of Banquo (who has left the scene), says, "It will have blood; they say, blood will have blood," then muses about how odd things happen in nature (trying to make sense of what he has seen). 

Macbeth then says: "How say'st thou, that Macduff denies his person / At our great bidding?" That is, "What do you think of the fact that Macduff, who was invited to the banquet, didn't show up?"

Lady Macbeth responds oddly, saying, "Did you send to him, sir?" This is an odd question, in my view, because until now, Macbeth has conspired with his wife, but this tells us that she didn't know about his orders to have Banquo killed, which means she didn't understand what he was raving about at the banquet. She must have been as freaked out as his guests. 

Macbeth responds, "I hear it by the way; but I will send," meaning he's heard rumors of why Macduff didn't attend, but he'll check into it. This is again odd. Why doesn't he tell his wife, who started this trail of bloodshed, about his orders to have Banquo and Fleance murdered? But he keeps the facts close to his chest. He merely responds, "There's not a one of them but in his house / I keep a servant feed," meaning that he has spies in every great house in his kingdom. 

What does he plan to do next? Go back to the weird sisters, of course. He is now "bent to know / by the worst means, the worst. For mine own good, / All causes shall give way: I am in blood / stepp'd so far that, should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go o'er. / Strange things I have in head, that will to hand; / Which must be acted ere they may be scann'd."

This marks a deep psychological change in a man who was, in the beginning, "too full of the milk of human kindness / To catch the nearest way" to the crown. Macbeth, without consulting his wife, let alone being coerced by her to commit evil deeds, has decided that he will return to the witches (understood to be against nature and God's law, so he's daring hell here) to find out what lies ahead for him, and he will know, no matter what he has to do. He has realized at this point that he has gone so far that it doesn't matter if he slaughters a few more people; he's already a murderer, so what's a few more murders in the grand scheme of things? He resolves to act on his plans (to retain his crown) before he has a chance to think about them from here on out. He has shut off his conscience now. 

In the novel, Lord of the Flies, what is Ralph uneasy about in the beginning? Who comforts him and what does he say?

Ralph, is in fact, mostly unconcerned. He relishes the idea about being on an island as illustrated by the following quotes:

Ralph danced out into the hot air of the beach and then returned as a fighter-plane, with wings swept back, and machine-gunned Piggy.

Ralph did a surface dive and swam under water with his eyes open; the sandy edge of the pool loomed up like a hillside. He turned over, holding his nose, and a golden light danced and shattered just over his face.

Here was a coral island. Protected from the sun,
ignoring Piggy’s ill-omened talk, he dreamed pleasantly.

Here at last was the imagined but never fully realized place leaping into real life. Ralph’s lips parted in a delighted smile and Piggy, taking this smile to himself as a mark of recognition, laughed with pleasure.

It is obvious that being here is nirvana for Ralph. In fact, when we are introduced to him, he clearly relishes being on the island and displays no concern whatsoever. He undresses and goes for a swim, throws sand on his body and enjoys the warmth of the sun.

Piggy, the other boy, is the one who expresses his unease in a variety of ways. He firstly speaks about there being no adults around to supervise them. He then expresses the notion that all the others who were on the plane with them could have died in the crash. He furthermore voices concern about the fact that they might be on an island and that they might not be rescued. Ralph concedes that it might be an island and assures Piggy that they would be rescued:

“I could swim when I was five. Daddy taught me. He’s a commander in the Navy. When he gets leave he’ll come and rescue us.

Piggy wants to know when this will happen and Ralph tells him that he would do so as 'soon as he can.' Ralph is quite unperturbed about their situation. Their rescue is of no immediate worry to him. It is Piggy who is anxious and finicky, especially about his health, his 'ass-mar', which Ralph dismisses with disdain by saying, 'Sucks to your ass-mar!'

Piggy consistently refers to their being on an island since he realises that, if it were so, the chance for rescue would diminish dramatically. Ralph, on the other hand, does not much care.

How can studying communication theory affect your life?

How studying communication theory can affect your life depends on how you study it and how you apply it. 

The first area in which professors hope your studies will affect your life is in making you a more critical audience for mass communications, able to see through advertising and political campaign promises and make informed decisions, and able to separate reliable from unreliable sources of information.

Next, you can apply communication theory to practical skills such as workplace communications and writing academic papers. Understanding the theory of communications allows you to create your own communication strategies applicable to a wide range of rhetorical situations as opposed to simply replicating a limited number of preexisting strategies by rote.

Finally, understanding communication theory is prerequisite to many types of advanced studies in such areas as business communication, information technology, and professional writing, and may be important for your major.

What are three examples of alliteration in the poem "Paul Revere's Ride"?

Alliteration is defined as the repetition of the initial letter or sound of a word within a single line (in poetry) or sentence (prose). It can be repeated just twice or more than that. It is a form of figurative language often used in poetry for different effects. In general, alliteration gives a certain rhythm to a poem, or line of a poem, and this is certainly the case in this poem. 

In the poem "Paul Revere's Ride" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, we can find multiple examples of alliteration. Here are just a few:

"Ready to ride and spread the alarm"

Here the "r" sound is repeated.

"Wanders and watches with eager ears,"

Here we have the "wa" sound repeated, as well as the "ea" sound.

"The muster of men at the barrack-door,"

In this line the "m" sound is repeated.

"Masses and moving shapes of shade, —"

In this line there are two separate examples of alliteration, that of the "m" and the "sh."

"Struck out by a steed that flies fearless and fleet"

And again we have two instances of alliteration within one line, first the "st" sound and then the "f" sound, which is repeated three times.

More can be found throughout the poem, but here are a few examples.

What two changes took place in Scrooge by the end of A Christmas Carol?

After Scrooge's grim visit from The Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come, he realized that he had been unkind and miserly.  He changed in two ways.  He became a kind, caring person.  He visited his nephew, Fred, and his wife the next morning.  He joined them in their Christmas Day celebrations.  Scrooge also became like a second father to Bob Cratchit's crippled son, Tiny Tim.

Scrooge also became a generous person.  He had a large, expensive turkey sent to the Cratchit family for their Christmas Day dinner.  Scrooge ran into the gentleman who had come to see him the day before and promised to donate an unspecified amount of money by whispering into his ear.  He also told his employee, Bob Cratchit, that he was going to give him a raise.

In Lord of the Flies, chapter 10, who becomes second in command in Jack's camp? Why?

There is no direct or actual nomination of a boy becoming second in command in Chapter 10. But you could argue that Roger takes up this position by default. In other words, Roger assumes this position by himself. When he approaches the Castle Rock, he is not surprised to be greeted and confronted by a guard, Robert. Roger tells him that he could not stop him if he was determined to pass. But Robert shows him a rock poised to fall on anyone who he would want to deter from entering. Roger admires this use of the threat of violence. 

Robert also informs Roger that Jack plans to beat Wilfred. The reason is unknown. Roger has something of an epiphany here. This appeals to Roger because he has, or has chosen to have, a penchant for violence and intimidation. The fact that the tribe is now beating dissidents gives Roger a greater sense of purpose; this shows an opportunity for more violence in the future. It seems that Roger might consider himself the most likely enforcer of such violence. And from this epiphany, Roger foresees that he will assume this authority, albeit with Jack remaining as chief. Roger assimilates "the possibilities of irresponsible authority." In other words, Roger understands the possibility that he will be able to utilize his desire for violence. He will be able to utilize this irresponsible authority. 

How does the U.S government use Manifest Destiny to make the country grow?

The notion of Manifest Destiny was created in the 1840's by an American journalist. It was the theory that the ultimate future of the United States was to control all of the lands from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific coast. The theory was built on the notion of American exceptionalism and Christian theology. Theologically, it was a strong belief that God wanted Americans to have this land because they were better suited to take care of it and prosper. The theory had a very strong following in the American government, whether because of actual Christian beliefs, or the political expedience in promoting it.

The idea of Manifest Destiny would drive the expansion of American territory in the second half of the Nineteenth Century. This would include the acquisition of Oregon Territory, California, and the annexation of Mexican lands in the Southwest. The concept of Manifest Destiny also fueled American imperial excursions in the Caribbean in the early Twentieth Century.

Give examples of linguistic variations from different social levels taken from accounts of Peter Trudgill and the Norwich study (1974) focusing on...

Peter Trudgill's 1974 Norwich study dealt with the patterns of pronunciation associated with class and prestige. In particular Trudgill considered words with "ing" endings, with particular attention given to whether a subject used a velar consonant ending (walkin') or an aveolar consonant ending (walking). The velar consonant was associated by the subjects with lower social status use, and the aveolar consonant ending with higher social status use.

The most noted finding of Trudgill's study was a difference in gender usage. Women tended to use, or attempt to use the aveolar "ing," associating themselves with higher social status, and with refinement. Conversely, men often affected a "coarser" velar pronunciation, often aiming below their own actual social status. 

The findings were that the velar "walkin'" ending was in fact more strongly found in lower-class speech.  Women believed themselves to use upper-class aveolar "ing" more than they actually did. The more carefully any subject spoke, the higher the level of aveolar "ing" endings.  Men of all classes used velar "walkin'" endings more than women of the same class.

Are sima and oceanic crust the same ?

Sima is a short form for magnesium silicate, which primarily makes up the oceanic crust rocks. Hence, oceanic crust and sima are, sometimes, interchangeably used. Sima is the lower layer of Earth's crust and represents much younger rocks (as compared to the rocks comprising the continental crust). Typically, oceanic crust is composed of rocks which are no older than 250 million years. The most common form of sima is basalt.  

Another term commonly used to describe the crustal rocks is sial, which is short form for silica and aluminum. Sial is the upper layer of Earth's crust and is much thicker (30-40 km thick, on average) as compared to sima or oceanic crust (6-10 km thick). Sial is comprised of much older rocks, with an average age of about 1500 million years. 

Hope this helps. 

We use Washer method to evaluate the volume of the solid.

Here

about

the volume of the solid is 

Where is the ship Prophetess sailing towards in Cloud Atlas?

When the readers first meet Adam Ewing, he is in the South Pacific, spending a week on one of the islands. The ship he was aboard, the Prophetess, has been caught in a tempest and taken on damage. During the week, it will be repaired and return to sea. 

Adam Ewing's final destination is his home in San Francisco, but the ship will be making other stops, including Bethlehem Bay and Hawaii.   

Part 1 of this storyline ends while they are still aboard the ship, having left the unnamed island...

And Part 2 begins many pages later, with the sighting of land. They land in Bethlehem Bay, New Zealand, where the men from the Prophetess establish a trade route to San Francisco. Their stay here is short and they are soon back on board, sailing for Honolulu, Hawaii. 

At this point, Dr. Goose's poisoning of Adam Ewing has him near death, and he fears reaching never Hawaii, let alone his home in San Francisco. Thanks to the the former slave Autua, Ewing's life is saved and he is nursed back to health in Hawaii.

How did the Morlocks overcome the Eloi?

In Chapter Seven of The Time Machine, the Time Traveller makes a startling discovery about the Morlocks and the Eloi:

And for the first time, with a sudden shiver, came a clear knowledge of what the meat I had seen might be.

This is the critical realisation that the Morlocks hunt and eat their neighbours, the Eloi. This explains the "Great Fear" which the Eloi demonstrate whenever the Time Traveller tries to ask questions about who might have taken his time machine and who dwells in the darkness below. 

Based on his early observations, the Time Traveller believes that this society split into the Haves and Have-Nots at one time in the past:

So, in the end, above ground, you must have the Haves, pursuing pleasure and comfort and beauty, and below ground, the Have-Nots, the workers getting continually adapted to the conditions of their labour.

Eventually, the Morlocks ran out of food and looked to their neighbours above for a fresh source of meat:

The Eloi were mere fatted Cattle, which the ant-like Morlocks preserved and preyed upon.

The reader sees how the Morlocks have adapted to suit their hunting of the Eloi. They have "large, bright eyes," for example, which enable them to better see the Eloi in the darkness. They are expert climbers, described as a "human spider" by the Time Traveller (Chapter Five). Again, this agility is what helps them to hunt efficiently. Likewise, the Eloi have evolved in a manner which makes them easy prey: they are "fragile" and unintelligent, and exhibit a "childlike ease," says the Time Traveller in Chapter Four. Thus, the Morlocks and the Eloi have adapted to become the hunter and the hunted.

How is Magwitch presented in Great Expectations, and how does this change throughout the novel? Use quotations to help explain.

Pip's attitudes towards Magwitch change throughout the novel. We first see Magwitch through the child Pip's frightened eyes. To this young child, the convict is terrifying:

Hold your noise!" cried a terrible voice, as a man started up from among the graves at the side of the church porch. "Keep still, you little devil, or I'll cut your throat!

A fearful man, all in coarse gray, with a great iron on his leg. A man with no hat, and with broken shoes, and with an old rag tied round his head. A man who had been soaked in water, and smothered in mud, and lamed by stones, and cut by flints, and stung by nettles, and torn by briars; who limped, and shivered, and glared, and growled; and whose teeth chattered in his head as he seized me by the chin.

"Oh! Don't cut my throat, sir," I [Pip]pleaded in terror. "Pray don't do it, sir."

But for all his terror, Pip treats the convict with compassion. Magwitch never forgets this. 

The next time Pip meets Magwitch, having learned it is Magwitch, not Miss Havisham, who has provided the money that has set him up as a gentlemen, he is repelled and horrified to think he owes his status to a convict. He is also distressed that he is harboring a convict, and is responsible for keeping him safe from arrest. This is the adult Pip, who is snobbish and class conscious. As Dickens well knew, our attitudes towards the world change as we grow up:

Nothing was needed but this; the wretched man, after loading wretched me with his gold and silver chains for years, had risked his life to come to me, and I held it there in my keeping! If I had loved him instead of abhorring him; if I had been attracted to him by the strongest admiration and affection, instead of shrinking from him with the strongest repugnance; it could have been no worse.

But by the end of the novel, Pip has changed again. His heart has softened, and he has been humbled. Now he can see the good in Magwitch beneath the outer wrapping and he genuinely wants to help him:

For now, my repugnance to him had all melted away, and in the hunted wounded shackled creature who held my hand in his, I only saw a man who had meant to be my benefactor, and who had felt affectionately, gratefully, and generously, towards me with great constancy through a series of years. I only saw in him a much better man than I had been to Joe.

Unlike a lesser novelist, Dickens portrays a character who changes and grows, developing compassion towards others through his own suffering.

As a reader when do you begin to sympathize with Farquhar before or after his introduction in section II? Why?

There are two ways in which a fiction writer creates identification, empathy, or sympathy with a character. One is to tell everything from that character's point of view. The other way is to give the character a problem with which it is easy for the reader to relate. In the opening of "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" we are kept strictly in Peyton Farquhar's point of view. For example:

He unclosed his eyes and saw again the water below him. "If I could free my hands," he thought, "I might throw off the noose and spring into the stream. By diving I could evade the bullets and, swimming vigorously, reach the bank, take to the woods and get away home. My home, thank God, is as yet outside their lines; my wife and little ones are still beyond the invader's farthest advance."

Peyton Farquhar's problem is very simple and very easy to identify with. He is going to be hanged and he would like very much to be able to live. Wouldn't we all? In fact, it is his strong desire to live and to return to his plantation and his beautiful wife that shape the remainder of the story. Although he can't actually escape from the situation he is in, he fantasizes about doing so while he is falling to his death with the noose around his neck.

A problem in fiction usually involves a motivation. Farquhar's motivation is to escape. He has a real problem because he is surrounded by Union soldiers, has his hands tied behind his back, and has a noose around his neck. A problem is not necessarily solved in a story. For example, the problem of the unnamed protagonist in Jack London's story "To Build a Fire" is that he wants to get to safety without freezing to death. He has the problem because of his motivation to stay alive and get to the cabin where there will be shelter and warmth. Jack London's attitude towards the human condition is not much different from that of Ambrose Bierce. In spite of the protagonist's strong desire to survive, he ends up dying in the snow. We have been hoping all along that he would make it to shelter.

Peyton Farquhar's original motivation to burn down the Owl Creek Bridge was what got him into the situation he was in. Then his motivation evolved into wanting to get away. We identify with him from beginning to end. We are pleasantly surprised when it appears that the hanging rope broke and he is in the creek with a chance to escape. We identify with him up to the moment when he seems to have reached his plantation and is about to embrace his loving wife. We have been imaging ourselves to be in his predicament all along. It is the ability of human beings to identify with others that makes drama and fiction possible.

Then with his characteristic cynicism, pessimism, and nihilism, Ambrose Bierce shows us how foolish we are to expect miracles to happen for us in this world.

As he is about to clasp her he feels a stunning blow upon the back of the neck; a blinding white light blazes all about him with a sound like the shock of a cannon--then all is darkness and silence!

Peyton Farquhar was dead; his body, with a broken neck, swung gently from side to side beneath the timbers of the Owl Creek bridge.

How did the Enlightenment ignite the French Revolution and government reform? Include specific ideas and people from the Enlightenment and where...

The Enlightenment played a significant role in the French Revolution. It inspired French citizens to demand their rights as humans by deposing of their monarchy. There were two important political philosophers that influenced the actions of the French during their revolution.

John Locke spoke of unalienable rights that no government had the authority to abridge. These rights included life, liberty, and what he felt was the most important, property. Locke did not feel that a monarch could adequately protect these rights because kings act in their own self-interests.

Baron de Montesquieu was a French Enlightenment philosopher. He also decried the existence of monarchs in Europe and explained how government's primary responsibility was to protect property and political freedom of its people. Montesquieu pushed for a representative democracy with particular emphasis on an elected legislative body. Montesquieu also proposed a government system divided into branches to balance power.

The idea of a republic that was proposed by the Enlightenment thinkers was a strong influence on the French Revolution. At the conclusion of the struggle, a republic style government was installed in France.

What is the setting of Arms and the Man?

Arms and the Man by George Bernard Shaw was first staged on April 21, 1894 and enjoyed a successful stage run before being published in Shaw's collection Plays Pleasant in 1898.

The play is actually set in a period a few years before its opening, during the Serbo-Bulgarian War of 1885. The setting is very precisely identified in the stage directions on the first page of the first act of the play:

A lady's bedchamber in Bulgaria, in a small town near the Dragoman Pass. It is late in November in the year 1885, and through an open window with a little balcony on the left can be seen a peak of the Balkans.

Thus, the play is set in Bulgaria in 1885. The battle described in the play is probably based on the Battle of Slivnitsa that was fought in mid-November of 1885. Although the name of the town is not mentioned, Dragoman is the closest Bulgarian town to the pass.

The stage directions also suggest that, culturally, the Petkoff family is an aspirational one, blending native Bulgarian traditions with imitation of Western European styles and fashions.

What do you know of the village of Ziavi from the descriptions given in the text of Draper's Copper Sun?

Amari's home, the small African village of Ziavi, is described lovingly:

“Amari loved the rusty brown dirt of Ziavi. The path, hard-packed from thousands of bare feet that had trod on it for decades, was flanked on both sides by fat, fruit-laden mango trees, the sweet smell of which always seemed to welcome her home.”

The village is welcoming, symbolized by the "hard-packed" path.  Anyone who makes their way to this place can expect kindness.  The village is also plentiful, as seen by the "fruit-laden" trees that line the path.  The huts that the villagers call home are arranged close together because the people draw strength from each other and support one another.  The villagers are proud of their historical values; their strong traditions of hospitality are displayed in juxtaposition to the travesty of the destruction of the village. When the village is invaded by white slave traders, it is even more obscene because of the love and welcome the Ziavi people showed the men.  The peaceful African village stands in sharp contrast to the cruel new world in America.

In The Merchant Of Venice, what proper honour is given to Arragon to indicate that he is a prince?

The Prince is one of many suitors who came to Belmont to chance their luck at winning Portia's hand in marriage by choosing from three caskets: gold, silver and lead. In terms of her father's will, Portia must marry the one who chooses the right chest. She is not much impressed with the line of suitors but has no choice but to adhere to her father's wish if she wants to inherit his estate.

Portia expresses her disdain for the Prince by mentioning the following:

Ay, that's a colt indeed, for he doth nothing but
talk of his horse; and he makes it a great
appropriation to his own good parts, that he can
shoe him himself. I am much afeard my lady his
mother played false with a smith.

She and Nerissa refer to him as the Neapolitan Prince and Portia clearly believes that he is obsessed with his horse and he quite likes the idea that he can shoe the animal himself. She, however, affords him the proper honour as befits his title when he arrives to make his choice, in both the manner in which his entrance is announced and in her address. Firstly, there is a flourish of coronets and secondly, she refers to him by his title:

Behold, there stand the caskets, noble prince

She also refers to him as 'my lord' indicating her respect for his position.

The Prince refuses the lead casket since he is not prepared 'to give and hazard all he hath' and he, likewise, rejects the gold casket for he deems himself different from the multitude since the inscription reads 'Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire.' He deems himself special and does not subscribe to the idea that he is so common as to fall for gold's glitter. 

He decides on the silver casket and is disappointed since he has made the wrong choice. The inscription reads:

Who chooseth me shall have as much as he deserves.

The Prince is then confronted by a fool's head when he opens the casket. To add insult to injury, the inscription calls him a fool who arrived with one fool's head but who will now leave with two. The Prince, obviously upset, leaves immediately with his train of servants and followers in tow. 

Why is Brutus essential to the plot to assassinate Caesar?

In the play Julius Caesar Brutus is essential to the success of the conspiracy for many reasons. 

Although Cassius initiates the conspiracy and manipulates Brutus to join the conspiracy, Brutus is already concerned about Caesar in Act I. Brutus reveals that he is "with himself at war" about what to do about Caesar's ambition (I, i, 134). Brutus reveals that he is deeply attached to the Roman Republic. Part of the reason for this attachment is the role that Brutus' ancestors played in establishing the Republic. As Brutus debates what will result from the people's desire to crown Caesar and Caesar's ambition, he concedes that Caesar is like a "serpent's egg" and must be "killed him in the shell" (I, iv, 633-635).

Brutus's concerns are important because they reveal to the reader (and he will reveal to the Roman people at Caesar's funeral) that his reasons for joining the conspiracy are noble. He desires to preserve the Republic.

It is for these reasons why Cassius and Casca both deem it necessary that Brutus join the conspiracy. Casca compares Brutus' "countenance" to "alchemy" in Act I scene iii. This implies that Brutus is not only well-respected, but that he is influential on the Roman people. When Brutus becomes involved in the conspiracy, it legitimizes the cause. Cassius knows that his tumultuous relationship with Caesar may imply that Caesar was killed out of jealousy. But if Brutus leads the conspiracy, the people will support what the conspirators did because as Mark Antony declares in Act V after Brutus dies, "here lies the noblest Roman of them all/ All the conspirators save only he/ Did that they did in envy of great Caesar" (2753-55).

How did the material used by the royal family in the film, Coming to America, separate them from the ordinary people?

Aside from the obvious wealth separating the royal family from ordinary people in Coming to America, there are several other things used in the movie that creates a divide. 

The rose bearers follow Eddie Murphy's character wherever he goes. As the royal family sees it, a son of a king should not have to walk on anything less than rose petals anywhere he goes. It puts the prince on a pedestal. He is seen as better than an ordinary person. 

In his arranged marriage, his "future wife" does whatever Murphy says on command. The woman had been trained for years to please the prince. It is all about his wants and desires, and her wants and desires are irrelevant. 

Murphy has servants in the movie, but the actions they perform treat him well above that of a normal person. While most people shower or bathe by themselves, Murphy is bathed by a staff of women. He is enthralled by everyday things people have to do when he goes to America. He only knew a life where everything was done for him. 

Of course, Murphy is also on the national currency. His family believes his face should be seen all over the country. 

Ultimately, the film humorously exaggerates the Royal family's wealth by depicting them as deserving of the best of everything and enjoying some of the stereotypical luxuries one would expect for a Royal family. This becomes a problem for the family when Eddie Murphy's character falls in love with a "commoner."