What is the significance of the porcupine theme in Jerry Spinelli's novel Stargirl? Why specifically a porcupine rather than some other type of...

In his young adult novel of conformity and tolerance, Stargirl, author Jerry Spinelli’s protagonist and narrator, Leo Borlock, is infatuated with porcupines. More accurately, he is infatuated with porcupine neckties. As Leo explains in the novel’s opening passages, “When I was little, my uncle Pete had a necktie with a porcupine painted on it. I thought that necktie was just about the neatest thing in the world.” As Leo grows, and his family moves from Pennsylvania to Arizona, the young boy’s love of porcupine neckties remains a part of his life. In fact, so in love with porcupine neckties has Leo become that he starts a collection of them – a hobby or passion that assumes greater significance as the present-day narrator reflects on his relationship with Stargirl Caraway, a highly unconventional addition to his conservative Arizona high school’s student body who attracts considerably attention among her fellow students for her more liberal choices in clothing and interests.

Spinelli never provides an explanation for the use of the porcupine, so the reader is forced, if one so chooses, to interpret the author’s meaning in selecting this one particular animal. Stargirl is about the effects of individuality on a larger group the members of which tend to identify with one-another. She is ostracized to a certain degree among her fellow high school students solely on the basis of her unwillingness to conform to society’s expectations. The novel’s tragedy, of course, lies in its protagonist’s failure to muster the personal courage and integrity needed to support this eminently likeable young woman whose only crime is to follow her own path in life irrespective of whether it meets with the approval of the other students. That it is Stargirl, however, who acknowledges Leo’s passion for porcupine neckties and who, it is revealed, surreptiously presents him with the gift of such a necktie, one she had made by her mother, illuminates the superficial and often hostile attitude among the larger social group towards those who don’t quite fit in. And it is within this theme that the significance of the porcupine can, possibly, be ascertained.

Porcupines as a symbol can represent several possible meanings. One is the perception among some, like Native Americans, that this particular animal represents tranquility and, in the words of one source a link to which is provided below, “the knowledge of living in harmony with the land and other animals.” Porcupines are also solitary animals, going about their business armed with a formidable system of defense against predators, namely, their quills. Stargirl is a solitary figure, homeschooled up until the tenth grade, by which time socialization has taken control of most high school students’ lives. She is also, more than her contemporaries, attuned to the world around her, especially the natural world, symbolized early-on by her “large canvas bag with a life-size sunflower painted on,” and by the ukele she has strapped to her back when Leo first sees her early in the story.

Another interpretation of the symbolic importance of the porcupine in Stargirl is its confidence and the feeling of emotional security it provides when walking alongside those who, in the words of the other discussion linked below, are feeling apprehensive or vulnerable—the very characteristic of some socially-awkward adolescents. In short, the symbolic importance of the porcupine in Spinelli’s novel lies in its metaphorical value to the story’s free-spirited, home-schooled, aptly named “Stargirl.”

Dramatic irony occurs when the reader knows something that a character does not. Identify three examples of dramatic irony in this story. What is...

Perhaps the biggest example of dramatic irony within The Cask of Amontilladois the overall plot in and of itself: Montresor is planning on killing Fortunato, which we learn at the beginning of the story, though Fortunato is under the impression that he is on his way to test the validity of a non-existent barrel of amontillado. But there are still smaller parts within the plot that also exhibit dramatic irony, such as when Montresor...

Perhaps the biggest example of dramatic irony within The Cask of Amontillado is the overall plot in and of itself: Montresor is planning on killing Fortunato, which we learn at the beginning of the story, though Fortunato is under the impression that he is on his way to test the validity of a non-existent barrel of amontillado. But there are still smaller parts within the plot that also exhibit dramatic irony, such as when Montresor repeatedly says that they should turn back because of Fortunato's health, which we know is the opposite of what Montresor actually wants. Also, Montresor gives Fortunato a couple of drinks of alcohol from his stores on their way down to the end of the vaults, telling Fortunato that is to "defend [them] from the damps", but in reality he is simply trying to keep Fortunato too drunk to fight back; he even goes so far as to say that he drinks to Fortunato's long life.

Dramatic irony always adds something to a reader's experience. In this case, it is suspense as we ask ourselves: When will Fortunato find out what Montresor's true intentions are? Will Fortunato find out? Or will he just fall victim to Montresor's revenge without knowing it? The story is fairly short, so we don't have long to wonder about Fortunato's fate, but while we read, we do find ourselves wondering about how everything will end.

Characterize Montresor. What kind of person is he?

Montresor is an extremely proud man; he is also very clever and manipulative.  At the beginning of the story, he exaggerates the number of injuries he had sustained at the hands of Fortunato, as if to justify his murder.  He says, 

The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge [....].  At length, I would be avenged; this was a point definitely settled [...].  I must not only punish but punish with impunity.  A wrong is redressed when retribution overtakes its redresser.

His pride will not allow him to labor any more under the insults with which Fortunato has apparently assaulted him.  He must seek revenge, and it must be done in such a way that he can never be punished for it (or else it doesn't really qualify as revenge because he'd be harming himself in the process).  Montresor feels that he must live up to his family motto: "No one harms me unpunished."  He clearly feels a great deal of family pride, as he tells Fortunato, "'The Montresors [...] were a great and numerous family.'"  Because Montresor speaks in the past tense, here, we might assume that his family is no longer as great or numerous as it once was, and this might be another reason why he feels so strongly about honoring the family by upholding their motto.  

Further, he thinks he knows just how to move forward with his plan to exact his revenge "with impunity," and he very nearly does achieve it.  He is quite cunning while preparing a trap to catch Fortunato, ironically, with Fortunato's own pride.  Montresor says,

It must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will.  I continued, as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile now was at the thought of his immolation.

He wants to be sure that his auditor understands how craftily he proceeded with his plan.  Montresor tells us that Fortunato has one weak point, and though he never names it directly, we can assume that it is Fortunato's own pride, especially in his talent and taste as a wine connoisseur; Montresor says that "in the manner of old wines, [Fortunato] was sincere."  Montresor rather brilliantly exploits this one weakness in order to exact his revenge.  He engages Fortunato's pride by telling him that he bought a type of rare wine and that he was looking for another local expert to help him confirm the wine's identity, so to speak.  Fortunato cannot turn down an opportunity to showcase his talent (or rub Montresor's nose in his likely error).

What Montresor doesn't count on, however, is his own guilt.  He planned for everything except the way his own conscience might punish him.  It seems that, even though he was never formally punished for Fortunato's murder, his guilt has lingered for some half a century and this, perhaps, has actually been his punishment.  The fact that Montresor seems to be an old man now, on his deathbed, confessing the sins which still weigh heavily on his conscience, tells us that the murder has stayed with him.  He is telling this story to one who he says, "so well know[s] the nature of [his] soul," and the final Latin line that translates to "rest in peace," seems to support this reading as well.  Further, when he describes his feelings after he'd walled Fortunato in, he says, "My heart grew sick; it was the dampness of the catacombs that made it so."  This, again, sounds like someone trying to convince himself not to feel guilty, that his actions were warranted, even justified, and there is really no reason to convince ourselves that we shouldn't feel guilt if we already don't.

Thus, Montresor is quite proud, and very intelligent...just not quite as intelligent as he believes himself to be because he failed to account for the way a guilty conscience could punish him for the remainder of his life.

What are some quotes about Calpurnia being educated in To Kill a Mockingbird?

Some of the strongest evidence to support Calpurnia's being educated comes at the beginning of Part II, in Chapter 12, when Cal takes the children to her church- The First Purchase African M.E. Church- while Atticus is away.

After Calpurnia's son, Zeebo, leads the congregation in a call and response format for their hymns, Jem asks why they don't have hymnals, and Calpurnia explains that most of the congregation can't read. Cal says, "Can't but about four...

Some of the strongest evidence to support Calpurnia's being educated comes at the beginning of Part II, in Chapter 12, when Cal takes the children to her church- The First Purchase African M.E. Church- while Atticus is away.

After Calpurnia's son, Zeebo, leads the congregation in a call and response format for their hymns, Jem asks why they don't have hymnals, and Calpurnia explains that most of the congregation can't read. Cal says, "Can't but about four folks in First Purchase read... I'm one of 'em" (Lee 141) .

Cal goes on to explain that she taught her son to read as well; "There wasn't a school even when he was a boy. I made him learn, though" (Lee 142). In the same scene, she explains how she taught Zeebo by having him read from a bible along with a book called Blackstone's Commentaries that Scout and Jem's grandfather gave to her so that Miss Buford (Miss Maudie's aunt) could teach her to read when she was a child growing up at Finch's Landing.

There's also a scene early in the book when Scout casually mentions Calpurnia's literacy and how it was Cal who taught Scout and Jem how to read and write. In Chapter 2, when Miss Caroline punishes Scout for already knowing how to write (which the rest of the class won't study until they get to third grade), Scout explains:

"Calpurnia was to blame for this. It kept me from driving her crazy on rainy days, I guess. She would set me a writing task by scrawling the alphabet firmly across the top of a tablet, then copying out a chapter of the Bible beneath. If I reproduced her penmanship satisfactorily, she rewarded me with an open-faced sandwich of bread and butter and sugar. In Calpurnia's teaching, there was no sentimentality: I seldom pleased her and she seldom rewarded me" (Lee 21).

These quotes regarding Calpurina's literacy and her teaching of the children are the main evidence of her being educated.

Why does Ammu recognize Velutha as "the God of Small Things"?

Ammu first mentions the idea of “The God of Small Things” in Chapter 11, after she has a dream of a man with one arm holding her close. Not only is the man holding her close, but Ammu and this man are almost the center of attention in a crowd. In the dream, we don’t know who this man is, but it is suggested that he is “The God of Loss” or “The God of Small Things.”  

As Ammu dreams, Estha and Rahel watch her carefully so that they don’t wake her up. When she does wake up, she quickly realizes that the twins have just spent time with Velutha because of the wood shavings in their hair. This makes her realize who “The God of Small Things” is (Chapter 11):

By not mentioning his name, she sensed that a pact had been forged between her Dream and the World. And that the midwives of that pact were, or would be, her sawdust-coated two-egg twins. She knew who he was - the God of Loss, the God of Small Things. Of course she did.

While this may be the first moment that Ammu realizes her feelings for Velutha, the romantic relationship has been developing all along: from the time they were younger, when Velutha no longer had to stretch out his hands to give her gifts, to now, when her children refer to him as their best friend. Ammu almost predicts a tragic end by warning her children not to get too close to Velutha because something bad might happen.

Due to their opposing social statuses, both Ammu and Velutha know that their relationship has no viable future. Their love affair is all they have (Chapter 21):

Even later, on the thirteen nights that followed this one, instinctively they stuck to the Small Things. The Big Things ever lurked inside. They knew that there was nowhere for them to go. They had nothing. No Future. So they stuck to the small things.

Because of the narrative structure of the novel, the events are not presented in the order that they happen chronologically. However, the novel ends at a place that we could almost consider as the beginning - it’s the beginning of Ammu and Velutha’s love affair. Ammu leaves by telling Velutha “Tomorrow,” and he confirms “Tomorrow.”

Velutha becomes “The God of Small Things” because their relationship can only unfold and develop day by day, no matter how strong or legitimate their feelings are for each other.

In the second sentence in part 2 of "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge," the word "secessionist" is used. What does that sentence mean?

"An Occurrence at Owl Breek Bridge" is set during the American Civil War, when the North and South fought over many things, but most importantly, slavery.  The main character of the story, Peyton Farquhar, is described as "a well-to-do planter, of an old and highly respected Alabama family" and a slave owner.  Politically-speaking, then, he sides with the South in their wanting to keep slavery as an economic right.  The South wanted to secede, or...

"An Occurrence at Owl Breek Bridge" is set during the American Civil War, when the North and South fought over many things, but most importantly, slavery.  The main character of the story, Peyton Farquhar, is described as "a well-to-do planter, of an old and highly respected Alabama family" and a slave owner.  Politically-speaking, then, he sides with the South in their wanting to keep slavery as an economic right.  The South wanted to secede, or split, from the rest of the country and create their own country, which is why they had their own President for a time, Jefferson Davis.  In the context of this story, Farquhar is a proud Southern plantation owner who has devoted himself to their cause from the beginning.  This information is important to the story because it is this fervor for the Southern cause that persuades him to attempt to blow up the Owl Creek Bridge, which he was tricked into doing by a Federal scout (mentioned in the last sentence of Part II); the Federal scout is on the Northern side, but he was dressed in grey, which was the uniform of the Confederates (the South).

The correct formula for an ionic compound that obeys the octet rule is: NaO, KBr2, GaCI, AIF3, CaO2. Why?

The formula that is correct as written is aluminum fluoride, AlF3.  Aluminum is in the boron group, group thirteen, which has three electrons in it's outer energy level.  Aluminum is also classified as a metal, meaning it donates it's electrons to satisfy the octet rule, rather than trying to find five more to add to it's outer energy level.  Fluorine is a member of the halogen family, group seventeen.  All the members of the halogens...

The formula that is correct as written is aluminum fluoride, AlF3.  Aluminum is in the boron group, group thirteen, which has three electrons in it's outer energy level.  Aluminum is also classified as a metal, meaning it donates it's electrons to satisfy the octet rule, rather than trying to find five more to add to it's outer energy level.  Fluorine is a member of the halogen family, group seventeen.  All the members of the halogens have room for one electron to complete their outer electron energy level.  The halogens are also very electronegative, meaning they willingly take donations from electron donors.  The three fluorine atoms willing accept aluminum's three electrons, producing an aluminum ion (+3) and three fluorine ions (-1, each).  The oppositely charged ions attract each other in a strong bond known as an ionic bond to produce aluminum fluoride.

How is Blake's "A Poison Tree" a parable?

A parable is a short symbolic story that teaches a moral lesson. Blake's "A Poison Tree" is a parable about the dangers of suppressing anger. The poet explains the point he is trying to make in the first stanza, in which he says:

I was angry with my friend;I told my wrath, my wrath did end.

In other words, when he became angry with his friend, he told him about why he was angry...

A parable is a short symbolic story that teaches a moral lesson. Blake's "A Poison Tree" is a parable about the dangers of suppressing anger. The poet explains the point he is trying to make in the first stanza, in which he says:

I was angry with my friend;
I told my wrath, my wrath did end.

In other words, when he became angry with his friend, he told him about why he was angry and he soon felt better, but

I was angry with my foe:
I told it not, my wrath did grow.

When he became angry with someone he disliked, he kept it a secret and  became more and more angry. The rest of the poem describes, using symbolic language, the consequences of not telling his "foe" of his anger:

And it grew both day and night.
Till it bore an apple bright.

His anger has become a tree that bears an "apple bright," like the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. Suddenly the "anger" that started all this has become very serious, a kind of original sin. The poet, like the serpent in the Bible, tempts his foe with the apple, and his foe is too easily fooled:

In the morning glad I see;
My foe outstretched beneath the tree.

That is, his foe has eaten of the fruit of his anger, and is poisoned by it. The moral of this parable is that suppressing anger can make things much, much worse.

How is the setting of the book Catching Fire important to the story?

Two settings stand out as particularly important to the story of Catching Fire. One is District 12, Katniss's home, where she has returned in a mixture of triumph and guilt after winning the previous year's Hunger Games. Katniss's participation in the games has changed her irrevocably and District 12 just doesn't seem like the same place. For one, she is no longer living in her family's tiny shack, but a mansion built for the...

Two settings stand out as particularly important to the story of Catching Fire. One is District 12, Katniss's home, where she has returned in a mixture of triumph and guilt after winning the previous year's Hunger Games. Katniss's participation in the games has changed her irrevocably and District 12 just doesn't seem like the same place. For one, she is no longer living in her family's tiny shack, but a mansion built for the Victors. While it certainly looks nicer and feels more comfortable, Katniss is isolated from everyone else in the District, both physically (her only neighbors are the other Victors, Haymitch and Peeta) and through the circumstances of their lives. When she goes to The Hob, where she used to bring her hunting catches in to trade, she notes that now she enters with coins, and tries to spend them at as many different stalls as possible, to spread the money around to her impoverished fellow citizens.

The atmosphere in District 12 has changed as well. There is a new Head Peacekeeper whose violence includes a severe, potentially deadly beating inflicted on Gale. It's clear that this crackdown is the result of Katniss defying the Capitol by using poison berries to threaten them at the end of the last Hunger Games, which only adds to her guilt. President Snow's visit to her house seals the feeling in her mind that her former home is now dangerous and that it is all a result of her actions.

The second important setting of the novel is the arena for the 75th Hunger Games - the giant, ticking clock. This arena is symbolic of how Katniss has felt since her name was called for her very first Hunger Games: that she will never be totally safe again, that every second is bringing her closer to her inevitable death at the hands of the Capitol. The fact that the arena is a clock with a new horror every hour shows that Katniss is not alone. All the former Victors have a target on their back, with the arena ticking away the hours, minutes, and seconds left before they are destroyed. Additionally, the mathematical precision and logic to the way the arena works suggests a cruelly systematic way of destroying the Victors. It shows that the Capitol is strategic in everything it does, including this new attempt to wipe out the potentially rebellious Victors. It takes the brutality of the Capitol to a new, creepier level.

What is "Encouragement" by Paul Laurence Dunbar about?

Paul Dunbar's "Encouragement" is about a male/female relationship. The speaker is a woman who loves a man, but he is reticent about his feelings. 

This poem is written in dialect, so it has a genuine tone to it in its depiction of the couple. The good-natured woman cajoles Ike Johnson after inviting him into her house. She teases him about his being like those who just "Dat jes' shet dey mouf an' frown—" (who just...

Paul Dunbar's "Encouragement" is about a male/female relationship. The speaker is a woman who loves a man, but he is reticent about his feelings. 

This poem is written in dialect, so it has a genuine tone to it in its depiction of the couple. The good-natured woman cajoles Ike Johnson after inviting him into her house. She teases him about his being like those who just "Dat jes' shet dey mouf an' frown—" (who just shut their mouth and frown), instead of talking. "Speak up, Ike, an' 'spress yo'se'f, she encourages him. This is a refrain at the end of each stanza.

Fortunately for Ike, the speaker keeps talking and tells him about her friend who just got married and how she has some new things for her.

I could ma'y in a week
If de man I wants 'ud speak

Still she asks Ike to express himself, but he remains silent. So, she keeps talking until finally she says

I loves you
You's my choice and allus was.

Finally, the woman tells Ike, "I loves you" and says that he is the one she wants and always has. She takes Ike's arm and ask him to hug her, asking him, "Why have you made me beg you so?"
Ironically, she continues her refrain of asking what he wants to know and urging Ike to speak up and express himself. But, Ike has not spoken a word; instead, it is she who has spoken up and expressed herself.

What is the climax in "The Lady or the Tiger?"

The climax of the story comes when the young lover in the arena goes to the door indicated by the princess and opens it. Naturally the reader would expect to see whether the lady or the tiger emerged. But the author leaves that question unanswered forever. The following paragraph is the climax. 

He turned, and with a firm and rapid step he walked across the empty space. Every heart stopped beating, every breath was held, every eye was fixed immovably upon that man. Without the slightest hesitation, he went to the door on the right, and opened it.

Something undoubtedly happens, but we will never know what it was. It happened, as the author says, "In the very olden time." We don't wonder so much about what happened to the princess's young lover as we wonder about the princess herself. She gave her lover a swift and subtle signal to choose the door on the right.

No one but her lover saw her. Every eye but his was fixed on the man in the arena.

The lover's fate was dependent, not on his choice between the two doors, but on hers. That is really what we want to know because it would tell us about the princess and perhaps about women in general. Would she prefer to see her lover torn to pieces by a tiger or married on the spot to the beautiful rival whom she hates. If she lets her lover get torn to pieces, that spectacle would be over with quickly. But if she lets him marry the woman she hates, she would have to endure her jealousy for many years. The two would be happy together. They might have many children. And meanwhile the princess would have to settle for another man whom she might not even love and whose inferior qualities would be a continual reminder of the man she had lost.

The princess did not make up her mind on the spur of the moment. She had plenty of time to think about what she was going to do, although it only took her an instant to give her lover the signal to choose the door on his right. Like the princess, the reader is visualizing two possible outcomes for the trusting lover. The author himself speculates about the outcome after the climax is reached.

The more we reflect upon this question, the harder it is to answer. It involves a study of the human heart which leads us through devious mazes of passion, out of which it is difficult to find our way.

In terms of their origins, what did the American, English, and French Revolutions have in common? Why were they significant to the development of...

All three revolutions--the English Revolution of 1642, the American Revolution that broke out in 1775, and the French Revolution of 1789--were caused by the growing power of parliamentary or other representative bodies that challenged the divine or unchallenged right of kings. Underpinning all the revolutions was the growing idea that monarchs had to listen to the needs and abide by the rights of those they governed. Many people developed this idea, sometimes referred to as...

All three revolutions--the English Revolution of 1642, the American Revolution that broke out in 1775, and the French Revolution of 1789--were caused by the growing power of parliamentary or other representative bodies that challenged the divine or unchallenged right of kings. Underpinning all the revolutions was the growing idea that monarchs had to listen to the needs and abide by the rights of those they governed. Many people developed this idea, sometimes referred to as the "social contract," including Thomas Hobbes and John Locke in the 17th century. These ideas developed in part because of the Enlightenment and its focus on reason and the way in which people were governed.

The English Revolution broke out in part because the Stuart kings were Catholic in a Protestant nation, and the Stuart kings also attempted to rule without summoning Parliament. The American Revolution was in part a protest against the right of the British monarchs to impose taxes on the American colonies without the consent of the colonies or the direct representation of the colonies in the British Parliament. The French Revolution arose because the French kings, including Louis XVI, refused to summon the Estates General, or the parliamentary body, until they were faced with immense debt. The members of the English and French Parliaments and the American colonists expected monarchs to provide them with a say in the governing of the country, and the age of the divine right of kings was over. Enlightenment ideas about the natural rights of man ("man" was the term they used to refer to all people) influenced all three revolutions, as people began to believe that they had certain rights to representation that no monarch could take away from them. 

How does a hot cup of tea lose heat ?

Thermodynamics is the field that studies energy transformations that occur in matter.

A cup of hot tea is actually an open system in which energy can be transferred from the hot tea to the surroundings. The molecules in the hot tea are moving faster than those in the surrounding environment and there will be a transfer of heat to the surroundings due to convection. If the tea is very hot, the air above it gains...

Thermodynamics is the field that studies energy transformations that occur in matter.

A cup of hot tea is actually an open system in which energy can be transferred from the hot tea to the surroundings. The molecules in the hot tea are moving faster than those in the surrounding environment and there will be a transfer of heat to the surroundings due to convection. If the tea is very hot, the air above it gains heat energy and the molecules move apart from each other causing them to become less dense and they rise. Eventually, as heat dissipates to the surroundings, the molecules of the atmospheric gases move closer together, become more dense and will sink. The process of convection occurs when matter is in the liquid or gaseous states.

Conduction will occur if someone places their hand on the hot tea cup. The higher temperature of the cup of hot tea will transfer heat by conduction to the cooler object--the person's hand when the faster moving molecules transfer energy to the slower moving molecules.

Therefore, both convection and conduction cause the hot tea to lose heat energy to the surrounding environment.

What is the function of Tiny Tim in the Christmas Carol?

Tiny Tim performs a very important function in the short story, A Christmas Carol.  He is the one who shows Scrooge in Present time (through which Scrooge is ushered by the Ghost of Christmas Present) the effect of Scrooge's stinginess on those around him. 

Scrooge can see the effect on Bob and his family of the poor wages he pays Bob Crachit.  Ill, weak, feeble and walking with a crutch, he will soon die....

Tiny Tim performs a very important function in the short story, A Christmas Carol.  He is the one who shows Scrooge in Present time (through which Scrooge is ushered by the Ghost of Christmas Present) the effect of Scrooge's stinginess on those around him. 

Scrooge can see the effect on Bob and his family of the poor wages he pays Bob Crachit.  Ill, weak, feeble and walking with a crutch, he will soon die.  Scrooge asks if there is any help for such a boy and his own earlier words are turned against him by the Spirit of Christmas Present: 

"What then? If he be like to die, he had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
   Scrooge hung his head to hear his own words quoted by the Spirit, and was overcome with penitence and grief.

Scrooge now understands what the effects are on the whole family when he pays his help, Bob Cratchit, so poorly.  Tiny Tim illustrates for the reader what the difference is between greediness and kindness. The story is timeless, and it is so partly because this question is still relevant today.

What changes can be made to make "The Bet" by Anton Chekhov more interesting?

Personally, I think famous writer Anton Chekhov did a fine job at making his story "The Bet" interesting, and I doubt there is anything any of us could do to make it better. However, if you want to rewrite his story in a different way, you might do it in real time instead of as a flashback. That would probably turn it into a very long book, but that way, you would be able to...

Personally, I think famous writer Anton Chekhov did a fine job at making his story "The Bet" interesting, and I doubt there is anything any of us could do to make it better. However, if you want to rewrite his story in a different way, you might do it in real time instead of as a flashback. That would probably turn it into a very long book, but that way, you would be able to know each characters' thoughts as the years go by. Or, maybe you could, instead, just choose a couple of instances during each of the fifteen years, where the readers might gain insight into each character's thoughts and feelings and/or answer the questions some of us might have. For example, why did the lawyer stop playing music and then take it up again? What books did he read that had the biggest impact on him and why? How did he survive the loneliness of all those years? These are questions that aren't answered in the story as it is. 

Or, you could just change the ending. Have a big knock down, drag out fight after the lawyer wakes up while the banker is trying to kill him. The banker somehow ends up dead instead, and the lawyer is taken off to a real prison, where he has to spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement. Personally, I like Anton Chekhov's version better!

Who are the main characters in The Nightingale by Kristin Hannah?

The novel The Nightingale revolves around the lives of two sisters, Vianne Mauriac and Isabelle Rossignol, in France during World War II. Rossignol (Also Vianne's maiden name) means 'nightingale' in French and is used later in the book as the code name for Isabelle. Although they are sisters, their personalities and interests could not be more different. Vianne originally wants only to keep her daughter safe and maintain the status quo while awaiting the...

The novel The Nightingale revolves around the lives of two sisters, Vianne Mauriac and Isabelle Rossignol, in France during World War II. Rossignol (Also Vianne's maiden name) means 'nightingale' in French and is used later in the book as the code name for Isabelle. Although they are sisters, their personalities and interests could not be more different. Vianne originally wants only to keep her daughter safe and maintain the status quo while awaiting the return of her husband from the front lines while Isabelle cannot sit still and is eager to join the resistance and fight in any way she can. Both sisters end up becoming heroes of France and of the Jewish community in completely different ways.

While Vianne and Isabelle are the main characters, there are a few other major characters that greatly impact the decisions the sisters make. Sophie, Vianne's daughter, grows up during the German occupation of France. Many of Vianne's decisions are to protect her daughter. Captain Wolfgang Beck is the first of two German officers given orders to stay at Vienne's house. Captain Beck is kind, well-mannered, and honorable, making sure that Sophie has enough to eat once he realizes that Vianne has been starving herself to feed her and warning Vianne when the Jews are to be deported. Rachel has been Vianne's best friend since childhood and is Jewish. When she is rounded up with the rest of the area's Jewish population after a failed escape attempt resulting in her daughter's death, she begs Vianne to take her son and raise him. This move sparks what would be Vianne's greatest contribution during the war. For Isabelle, the greatest influence is a man named Gaëtan, who not only helps Isabelle survive the journey away from Paris to her sister's house during German attacks, but is later instrumental in getting her into the resistance.

How do clast sizes affect transportation of sediments with different size clasts? How are sediments of each clast size deposited?

The fundamental concept here is quite simple: Bigger things are heavier. The clast size tells us how large the individual pieces of rock are, and thus how heavy they will be.

Therefore, a sediment with large clast size (such as gravel) will require more energy to transport than a sediment with a small claster size (such as sand). Small clast sediments can often be carried simply by the wind (sand dunes are actually sediment being transported by wind). Large clast sediments are more likely to be spread by water.

Small clast sediments will generally be carried further than large clast sediments. This creates an effect called sorting, where long periods of erosion will tend to separate out sediments by their clast size, with larger clasts being dropped first or left behind, and progressively smaller clasts being dropped further away until the very smallest clasts are carried the furthest.

If this were the only process, clasts would all be separated by now. There are other processes which can mix them back together, including volcanoes, glaciers, earthquakes, and landslides. These occurrences are much rarer, but have large, catastrophic effects; erosion, by contrast, is very slow but very steady.

Analyze how the Atlantic slave trade reshaped sub-Saharan African societies and explain which groups benefited from Africa's growing entanglements...

Let us address Part 1 of the question first: how the Atlantic slave trade reshaped sub-Saharan African societies. The slave trade caused a general weakening of the African societies as a whole because able-bodied men, women, and children were being enslaved. This left the continent open to colonization by European settlers in search of diamonds, gold, spices, and any other valuable trade items.

In general, sub-Saharan Africa in the 1700’s was a series of small states or loose federations. These groups often warred among themselves in order to gain power and land. Around this time, the Europeans introduced firearms into Africa. They would help one particular city-state defeat another, then buy the captives for the slave trade.  It was common for European traders to ally with one tribe seeking to overthrow another. This caused wars to escalate, leading to a large increase in the number of people enslaved. Warfare of varying degrees occurred all along the Atlantic coast.

This fighting completely wiped out some groups while others became more powerful. Enslavement as a punishment for crime became a common practice. If someone were accused of witchcraft, theft, or some other crime, he or she could be sold into slavery.  Even those who were considered ‘social misfits’ could be subject to banishment by slavery.

As the slave trade intensified, families and communities were torn apart. Some groups tried to establish practices to limit the slave trade within their area to little avail. To protect relatives, some men and women offered to trade places with the loved one being given to the slave traders. Others tried to buy the person back.

Sometimes resistance to the slave trade became violent. Slave ships and depots were attacked and some enslaved groups tried to revolt. However, these efforts did little to stop the growing demand for slaves.

Politically, sub-Saharan Africa was fragmented. Several small city-states and loose federations could not support a strong enough government to slow the slave trade’s impact. Within these small political groupings, leaders often succumbed to greed. They controlled the ports and trade routes and were more than happy to encourage the slave trade with the Europeans, since it made them individually wealthy. The slave trade, especially the large loss of people (estimates range from 7.5 million men to 15.5 million people taken), prevented African societies from becoming large, strong, unified states. It also stunted economic growth, as communities did not focus on producing crops or making goods for trade. Europeans encouraged the factions to war in order to take the defeated onto the slave ships. This left the sub-Saharan continent in constant unrest; any peace was short-lived at best.

Now, to the second part of your question: which groups benefited from Africa’s growing entanglements in global commerce?

Primarily, western European countries became the wealthiest from the slave trade. England had three major ports dedicated to human trafficking; Holland, Portugal, and France also had large ports to route the ’cargo.’ There was a huge demand for labor, especially in the Americas, and wealthy landowners didn’t really care where the workers came from.

European traders bought slaves from Africa communities for very little compared to the selling price. Commonly they would trade shells, iron bars, cloth, or small amounts of silver or gold for a human being. The profits were enormous.

Local African leaders also benefited by selling prisoners of war, those accused of a crime, those in debt, or even those who simply ‘didn’t fit in’ in the leader’s view.

Additionally, a growing pirate trade also benefited from the African slave market. Though smaller in scale than the European enterprises, these individual captains and crews also made huge profits selling human beings.

How to find the minimum value of a function f(x)=x^2-5 ?

Find the minimum value of f(x)=x^2-5:

(1) If you have calculus, the minimum can only occur at a critical point of the function. Since this is a polynomial the function is continuous and differentiable everywhere, so we find where the first derivative is zero:

2x=0 ==> x=0. Since f(0)=-5 the minimum is -5 and occurs at x=0.

(2) If you do not have calculus, you can proceed numerically/algebraically, or graphically:

(a) The graph of the...

Find the minimum value of f(x)=x^2-5:

(1) If you have calculus, the minimum can only occur at a critical point of the function. Since this is a polynomial the function is continuous and differentiable everywhere, so we find where the first derivative is zero:

2x=0 ==> x=0. Since f(0)=-5 the minimum is -5 and occurs at x=0.

(2) If you do not have calculus, you can proceed numerically/algebraically, or graphically:

(a) The graph of the function is a parabola. Since the leading coefficient is positive, the parabola opens up and has a minimum at the vertex. There are multiple ways to identify the vertex; one way is if the function is written in standard form take `x=(-b)/(2a) ` ; since b=0 we have x=0 as the x-coordinate of the vertex, f(0)=-5 so the minimum is -5 at x=0.

(b) Numerically, see that `x^2>=0 ==> x^2-5>=-5 ` with equality at x=0.

The graph:

In Irene Hunt's Across Five Aprils, what does Jethro think about war?

Caught between the competing visions of the war that is tearing apart his country, Jethro Creighton struggles to reconcile the disparate perspectives to which he has been privy just within his own family. Brother Bill's decision to side with the Confederacy, for instance, makes it impossible for the younger Jethro to demonize that side of the conflict, while the depravity inherent in the practice of slavery makes sympathy for the South a more problematic undertaking....

Caught between the competing visions of the war that is tearing apart his country, Jethro Creighton struggles to reconcile the disparate perspectives to which he has been privy just within his own family. Brother Bill's decision to side with the Confederacy, for instance, makes it impossible for the younger Jethro to demonize that side of the conflict, while the depravity inherent in the practice of slavery makes sympathy for the South a more problematic undertaking.
Like many boys his age (nine when the story begins; thirteen when it ends), Jethro initially conceives of war as an exciting adventure wherein the dangers are stricly hypothetical, but he's smart and perceptive and, exposed to the discussions and debates within his own family, he is exceptionally informed regarding the moral complexities inherent in armed conflicts. That his favorite brother, Bill, will side with the Confederacy while the rest of the family continues to identify with the Union, makes Jethro's internal deliberations all the more compelling. Make no mistake, however, this young boy will experience a fundamental transformation regarding his views of war--a transformation intended to allow Hunt to develop the theme of war as the ultimate, and ultimately futile tragedy. Early in Across Five Aprils, the author notes Jethro's initial excitement at the prospect of war:
"He had listened to his brother Tom and his cousin Eb, the two younger of the grown boys in the household, and their excitement had found its way into his blood."
As the reader learns, however, the realities of war, mainly conveyed to Jethro through letters home from his brothers on the front lines of combat, from the stories he will hear about the horrors of combat from the seriously-wounded Shadrach and from the deserter Eb and, finally from the news of President Lincoln's assassination all faciliate Jethro's dramatic transformation from one who views war as adventure to one who views at as the tragedy that it is.

What comes after 1? |

Another way to think about this is to look at what can come after 1, but before 2.

2 is the next integer (a counting number). But there are infinitely many real numbers between 1 and 2.

We have 1.1, 1.01, 1.001, 1.0001, and can basically do this forever.  We can make numbers that are really really close to 1, such as 1.00000000001. But we can always add more zeros, we can always make it...

Another way to think about this is to look at what can come after 1, but before 2.

2 is the next integer (a counting number). But there are infinitely many real numbers between 1 and 2.

We have 1.1, 1.01, 1.001, 1.0001, and can basically do this forever.  We can make numbers that are really really close to 1, such as 1.00000000001. But we can always add more zeros, we can always make it even closer. There is no real answer to what comes after 1.

How does Rikki-Tikki come to live in the bungalow?

The reason that Rikki-Tikki-Tavi is living with humans in a bungalow instead of with the rest of his mongoose family is narrated in paragraph three of Kipling's enjoyable story.  A summer monsoon and following flood washed Rikki out of his burrow and carried him away.  He was soaking wet and rather dead looking when the young boy in the story found him.  

One day, a high summer flood washed him out of the burrow...

The reason that Rikki-Tikki-Tavi is living with humans in a bungalow instead of with the rest of his mongoose family is narrated in paragraph three of Kipling's enjoyable story.  A summer monsoon and following flood washed Rikki out of his burrow and carried him away.  He was soaking wet and rather dead looking when the young boy in the story found him.  

One day, a high summer flood washed him out of the burrow where he lived with his father and mother, and carried him, kicking and clucking, down a roadside ditch. He found a little wisp of grass floating there, and clung to it till he lost his senses.

The mother of the family decided to dry him off and nurse him back to health.  

They took him into the house, and a big man picked him up between his finger and thumb and said he was not dead but half choked. So they wrapped him in cotton wool, and warmed him over a little fire, and he opened his eyes and sneezed.

The narrator of the story then proceeds to tell the reader that a mongoose is a naturally super curious animal.  With that in mind, alongside the natural kindness that the family has already shown Rikki, he decides to stay at the bungalow for awhile.  It's a funny bit of narration to think that a mongoose chooses to stay somewhere, because he thinks it is "cool."  

"There are more things to find out about in this house," he said to himself, "than all my family could find out in all their lives. I shall certainly stay and find out."

Please explain to me the 23rd line of the poem "War is Kind" by Stephen Crane. The line is: "Mother whose heart hung humble as a button." (Please...

The meaning of the 23rd line “"Mother whose heart hung humble as a button" in the poem “War is Kind” by Stephen Crane is that this mother humbly accepts what war does to families. The meaning here in this line is that this mother, while not totally believing in war, does accept that men and women do go to war and that loss ensues and must be accepted. There is really nothing she, nor other mothers can do about this.

This 23rd line has to be looked at in the context of the rest of this poem. Only then can the power and meaning of this line really come through. The poem talks of great battles and heroic acts that take place in war, where soldiers sacrifice for others and confront their enemies and their own fears, such as is conveyed in the line:

“These men were born to drill and die.”

However, the people left behind, while others go off to war, realize that war also consists of “A field where a thousand corpses lie.” There is no beauty or glory in war. Mothers on both sides of a battle lose their sons and/or daughters in war. It’s as if the mothers are to accept this patiently, enduringly, and humbly. This is why Stephen Crane says that the mother has a humble heart as she looks at the “…bright splendid shroud…” of her dead soldier son.

The poem has a somewhat sarcastic tone to it when it says that one should point out to the soldiers the “virtue of slaughter.” There is no virtue whatsoever in slaughter – it is a reviling, destructive, and sickening thing. In addition, there is nothing positive about killing and about Man always being in contention with Man.

But, again, this poem, in the 23rd line, is saying that mothers almost have to look the other way - away from the horrors of war - and humbly accept that their husbands and sons and daughters do go off to war at the behest of the nation’s government and there is valor in accepting the call to defend one’s country and fight for freedom.

This is where the patient acceptance and humbleness of the mother comes in -  a mother who must look down upon her dead son and deferentially know and hope that the ultimate cause was at least somewhat worthwhile. Nonetheless, a mother, or anyone else who looks at war critically, will never really totally accept that war is the answer to disputes, as war breeds more war and is the never-ending saga of humankind from its beginnings to this very day.

What is the behavior of Kevin in Freak the Mighty?

Kevin, also known as Freak, has a small crippled body with an enormous brain. He speaks as if he already has a PhD in science and sometimes acts like a knight in King Arthur's court. He has so much knowledge in his head about chemistry, robotics, computers, and literature that it flows out into his language and behavior. His best friend Max doesn't understand most of what he says, so Kevin decides to introduce him...

Kevin, also known as Freak, has a small crippled body with an enormous brain. He speaks as if he already has a PhD in science and sometimes acts like a knight in King Arthur's court. He has so much knowledge in his head about chemistry, robotics, computers, and literature that it flows out into his language and behavior. His best friend Max doesn't understand most of what he says, so Kevin decides to introduce him to a dictionary to improve communication. Speaking of Max, Kevin actually scares him when he first moves into Max's neighborhood. Because Kevin is so scientifically minded and imaginative, he points a crutch at Max and orders him to identify himself. Kevin also calls Max "Earthling," makes his crutch out to be a gun, and then makes shooting noises while Max tries not to trip over his shadow with his big feet. Max describes how he felt afterwards in the following passage:

"Scuttle into your dim hole in the ground, Maxwell dear. Big goon like you, growing about an inch a day, and this midget kid, this crippled little humanoid, he actually scared you. Not the kind of scare that makes your knee bones feel like water, more the kind of scare where you go whoa! I don't understand this, I don't get it, what's going on?" (10).

Most kids would probably be intimidated by Kevin's behavior as well. He's definitely quirky. Kevin dominates verbally whether he is speaking to kids or to adults; so, he's probably misunderstood verbally, and underestimated intellectually and emotionally. Fortunately, Kevin's behavior becomes even more confident as he is carried around on the shoulders of his new best friend Max. He also proves to behave courageously, loyally, and selflessly when his friend is kidnapped and almost killed. And when he also faces his own death, he thinks of Max first by telling him not to worry, he'll get his bionic body eventually.

Why did the ancient people who would become Native Americans come to the Americas?

This question is still debated among archaeologists and anthropologists.

Recent findings have overturned the old theory that there was only one migration of the Clovis people which resulted in the colonization of all of the Americas; we now know there were at least three distinct major migrations that occurred.

These migrations began around 15,000 years ago, and continued until at least 14,000 years ago, possibly longer.

It's important to recognize that even though we speak of "a migration", these were probably not organized expeditions with the goal of colonizing new lands. (That sort of thing would not happen until civilizations became organized, as "recently" as 4,000 years ago.) More likely, there were many individual tribes who lived near each other, sometimes in harmony, sometimes in conflict, and as each tribe grew they would sometimes find that they no longer had enough room for everyone.

People would then leave their ancestral lands and try to find new homes elsewhere. Over hundreds of years, a series of these small migrations adds up to a very large migration. We think the reason it happened around 15,000 years ago is that during this time, the Bering Strait was free of ice and the water level was low enough that people could basically walk or swim across.

Another motivation was likely food. In the absence of previous human habitation, wildlife in the Americas was extremely plentiful. There is a long pattern in human evolution of migrants arriving in an area, and gradually driving all the large mammals to extinction---usually by eating them. Human-caused extinction is nothing new; we've been doing it since at least 40,000 years ago in Africa and Asia. Many migrants may have come to the Americas because they found more plentiful animals to hunt there.

In fact, it is also possible that some of the migrants really were trying to explore new lands, simply out of curiosity for what might lay beyond. This is, after all, something humans like to do. We travel to new continents, we climb mountains, and now we even land on the Moon and send robots to other planets. Some of these ancient explorers may have traveled thousands of miles before setting down roots permanently.

What were George Washington's biggest challenges as the first president?

George Washington had many challenges as President of the United States. One of them was dealing with other countries that were trying to push us around to see how we would respond to their aggressive actions. Britain and Spain were causing issues in North America. Spain insisted that our border with Spanish Florida was further north than we said it was. Spain also made it difficult for us to use the Mississippi River. Both Britain and Spain were accused of encouraging the Native Americans to attack us. Britain interfered with our trade, impressed our sailors, and wouldn’t leave forts in the western areas. Washington decided the best way to deal with these issues was through negotiations with Britain and Spain. Washington believed a war would be harmful to us. Thus, Pinckney’s Treaty was negotiated with Spain, and Jay’s Treaty was negotiated with Great Britain. These treaties helped to resolve some of the issues we faced with these countries.

Another issue facing President Washington was dealing with our debt. We owed a lot of money to other countries. Washington’s Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, proposed a plan that would combine the federal debt with the state debts. Then, the government would issue new bonds to pay the debt. Some tax dollars also would be used to be the debt. This plan was accepted after much discussion with an agreement also being made to move the capital to Washington, D.C.

A final issue that President Washington faced was getting people to buy into the new system of government created by the Constitution. Some people didn’t want to give up the power that they had with their state government and didn't want to follow federal laws. When farmers protested the whiskey tax and rebelled against it, President Washington sent in the military to show that he was going to enforce federal laws. President Washington made it clear that federal laws were supreme. President Washington faced many issues as President of the United States.

Describe the effect of the old man's final words in Act 2, scene 4 of Macbeth.

The old man suggests that Macduff makes the best of a bad situation, as he will do when he confronts Macbeth with Malcolm.

At the end of Act 2, Scene 4, the Old Man suggests to Macduff that he will be able to make the most of the tragic situation.  He seems to have faith that Macduff will be able to turn things around.  Duncan has been killed, but instead of fretting or mourning, Macduff...

The old man suggests that Macduff makes the best of a bad situation, as he will do when he confronts Macbeth with Malcolm.

At the end of Act 2, Scene 4, the Old Man suggests to Macduff that he will be able to make the most of the tragic situation.  He seems to have faith that Macduff will be able to turn things around.  Duncan has been killed, but instead of fretting or mourning, Macduff will join Malcolm, where he can fight Macbeth alongside Scotland’s rightful leader.

The old man’s last words in this scene are prophetic.

God's benison go with you 

and with those

That would make good of bad

and friends of foes! (Act 2, Scene 4)

It may seem odd to have some random old man standing around the castle, but the old man seems to serve as a harbinger and commentator of events.  Here he gives a blessing to Ross and Macduff.  Ross is Macbeth’s cousin, and he continues alongside Macduff into the final battle with Macbeth.

Macbeth’s ability to make the most of a bad situation is clear throughout the play.  When his family is killed, he is devastated.  However, he does not let this stop him from his duty or mess with his head.  Rather than being blinded by rage, he is able to face off against Macbeth and take his head off.

I have no words:

My voice is in my sword, thou bloodier villain

Than terms can give thee out! (Act 5, Scene 8)

It is because he is able to keep his head in his exchange with Macbeth that he can get him off guard and off balance.  Macbeth thought he was invincible, but feared Macduff because of the witches’ prophecies.  When Macbeth told Macduff that he could not be harmed, Macduff told him he really could.  Macbeth was not born the usual way, and that fact demoralized and frightened Macbeth enough to distract him so that Macduff could kill him.

Shakespeare often uses no name characters to say important lines.  Their words can point to future events or the importance of certain characters.  They can also comment on what is happening or predict what is coming.  The old man serves this role in the play.

What is meant by Henry VIII's 'reformation'

The 16th-century English King Henry VIII started the "English Reformation" by separating the English Christian Church from Roman Catholicism and the authority of the Pope. The Reformation had begun in continental Europe in 1519 when Martin Luther, a German monk, had broken with the Catholic Church over the nature of salvation.

The Reformation quickly spread throughout the continent, but England remained Catholic.. Henry had once been a staunch defender of the Catholic Church--his attacks on...

The 16th-century English King Henry VIII started the "English Reformation" by separating the English Christian Church from Roman Catholicism and the authority of the Pope. The Reformation had begun in continental Europe in 1519 when Martin Luther, a German monk, had broken with the Catholic Church over the nature of salvation.

The Reformation quickly spread throughout the continent, but England remained Catholic.. Henry had once been a staunch defender of the Catholic Church--his attacks on Protestant doctrine had earned him the title "Defender of the Faith"--but the king grew angry at Pope Clement VII when he refused to annul his marriage.

Henry was upset that his wife, Catherine of Aragon, had not borne him an heir, so he wanted to marry a new wife. Catholics were not allowed to divorce, so Henry had to request special permission from the Pope. After Clement refused to grant him this permission, Henry made the decision to steer the Church of England toward Protestantism.

Parliament supported him by passing the Act of Supremacy; this bill declared Henry and all future English monarchs--not the Pope--the leader of the Church of England. Thus England became Protestant.

What were Diana Moon Glampers' motivations in "Harrison Bergeron"?

The thing about authoritarian governments is this: the leaders all believe that they are doing the right thing for their respective countries regardless of the negative consequences. Diana Moon Glampers is no different. This idea of everyone being "equal" would be, to most at least, a desirable trait and Diana Moon Glampers is enforcing that trait. So, even though we might look at Moon Glampers's ideas regarding "equality" as warped, she probably sincerely believes she...

The thing about authoritarian governments is this: the leaders all believe that they are doing the right thing for their respective countries regardless of the negative consequences. Diana Moon Glampers is no different. This idea of everyone being "equal" would be, to most at least, a desirable trait and Diana Moon Glampers is enforcing that trait. So, even though we might look at Moon Glampers's ideas regarding "equality" as warped, she probably sincerely believes she is doing the right thing. 

Throughout the story, George Bergeron, the father of the title character, explains why equality is important. He sums it up here when his wife suggests he temporarily removes some of his handicaps (the devices he has to carry to make him "equal" by lowering him to others): 

"If I tried to get away with it ... then other people'd get away with it and pretty soon we'd be right back in the dark ages, with everybody competing against everybody else."

This thought process, in addition to the society being prohibited from thinking, is why there is not outrage when Moon Glampers walks into the studio and immediately kills Harrison and the ballerina who ripped off their handicaps and were "leaping" into the air. But, according to this society's thought process, Harrison and the ballerina were in the wrong. Moon Glampers killed two people who tried to destroy the current social order, which seems to have brought a sense of peace to this society. 

Harold Bloom has argued that 'the plays and poetry of Shakespeare are at the centre of the West’s creativity and a constant source of...

It is difficult to argue against this Harold Bloom quote as, along with staple stage performances, there are multiple movie versions of Shakespeare's plays available. Shakespeare continues to be a source of inspiration in current culture.

Shakespeare is at the center of Western culture. This can be argued as being a detriment to the growth of theater, sustaining an image of theater that is anachronistic with contemporary culture (although film versions and adaptations strive to...

It is difficult to argue against this Harold Bloom quote as, along with staple stage performances, there are multiple movie versions of Shakespeare's plays available. Shakespeare continues to be a source of inspiration in current culture.

Shakespeare is at the center of Western culture. This can be argued as being a detriment to the growth of theater, sustaining an image of theater that is anachronistic with contemporary culture (although film versions and adaptations strive to rise above this).

So, how did Shakespeare become cultural currency giving a person cultural authority in context of literature? While part of Shakespeare's cultural power has to do with his popularity among admiring Enlightenment thinkers, like Goethe, Shakespeare's power also is rooted in British Imperialism and the spread of the English language.

Imperialism is not only a political function, it is also a cultural function because the imperialist's culture is carried in transported social structures and in transported language, which often becomes the language of education as happened during British Imperialism.

Shakespeare became the golden standard for the expression of the English language. Since English has been transported to all corners of the world and to all generations through English based education, Shakespeare has been a global cornerstone of English. The book, Political Shakespeare: Essays in Cultural Materialism, has many essays on this topic.

How has the speaker evolved from her former “bitch” self?

The failure of the speaker’s ex-lover to reciprocate with love and affection, and his “ultimate dismissal” of her are the factors that cause the speaker to evolve from her former “bitch” self. The speaker, however, never reflects her "bitch" self while she converses with her ex-lover. She refrains herself from breaking down and is in full control of herself.

Her inner self, meanwhile, recalls the period when the couple were together. She remembers,

“…how she...

The failure of the speaker’s ex-lover to reciprocate with love and affection, and his “ultimate dismissal” of her are the factors that cause the speaker to evolve from her former “bitch” self. The speaker, however, never reflects her "bitch" self while she converses with her ex-lover. She refrains herself from breaking down and is in full control of herself.

Her inner self, meanwhile, recalls the period when the couple were together. She remembers,

“…how she came running   
Each evening, when she heard his step;
How she lay at his feet and looked up adoringly

This tells us that before the transformation in the speaker, she had been quite devoted to her lover. She was submissive and loyal to him and seemed to be always ready to do anything to please him.

But her ex-lover didn't seem to be as fond of her as she was of him. Instead of returning her love, “he was absorbed in his paper;” “Her devotion” bored him, and he would order “her to the kitchen.”

He would love her infrequently, only “when he’d had a good day, or a couple of drinks.”  He returned her love with his “casual cruelties.” Finally, he dumps her.

It had hurt her deeply. But she had to move on, and she has. She tries to console her inner "bitch" self saying, 

"He couldn’t have taken you with him;
You were too demonstrative, too clumsy,
Not like the well-groomed pets of his new friends."   

Now, this explanation offers a deep psychological insight. 

It’s possible that she’s not really sure about what the reason could have been for his dismissing her. She has always known herself to be highly devoted to him and very caring.

So, she tries to explain her inner self in a self-deprecatory way:

You were too demonstrative, too clumsy,
Not like the well-groomed pets of his new friends.

In this way, with time and with lots of pain, she has evolved herself from her inner "bitch" self. Though she has evolved and never breaks down emotionally before her ex-lover, she can't help being drawn towards him. 

What's the significance and literary device for this specific quote from Romeo and Juliet? How would I figure it out? I fear, too early: for my...

On the way to Capulet's party in Act I, Scene 4, Romeo tells Mercutio that he has had a dream, but before he can speak about it, Mercutio launches into his monologue about Queen Mab. Only at the end of the scene, in an aside, does Romeo reveal his thoughts. An aside is a dramatic device where a character tells his thoughts only to the audience. Other characters are still on stage, but they do...

On the way to Capulet's party in Act I, Scene 4, Romeo tells Mercutio that he has had a dream, but before he can speak about it, Mercutio launches into his monologue about Queen Mab. Only at the end of the scene, in an aside, does Romeo reveal his thoughts. An aside is a dramatic device where a character tells his thoughts only to the audience. Other characters are still on stage, but they do not hear what is said. It is usually only a brief comment, as opposed to a monologue or soliloquy which is longer.

In these lines Romeo foreshadows the events to come, especially his own death at a very young age. He recognizes that by going to Capulet's party fate may intervene to change his life. Fate is described as: "Some consequence yet hanging in the stars." He fears this "consequence" will end in his death. Nevertheless he goes on. Fate is personified in the following lines:

But he that hath the steerage of my course
Direct my sail. On, lusty gentlemen.

Romeo, of course, is right. He meets Juliet at the party propelling the plot toward the ultimate tragedy of the two young lovers.

I need help on an assignment which requires that I write an essay comparing and contrasting the French and American Revolutions. The essay needs...

The people expressed their resentment towards the oppressive absolute monarchs by supporting the revolution in their countries. America stood against King George while France rejected King Louis XVI. The societies in both countries rallied against oppressive tax regimes instituted by the monarchs. However, the revolution in France was socially supported by a larger upper-class population as compared to the American Revolution.

Economically, the two revolutions were caused by oppressive taxation regimes enforced in attempts by...

The people expressed their resentment towards the oppressive absolute monarchs by supporting the revolution in their countries. America stood against King George while France rejected King Louis XVI. The societies in both countries rallied against oppressive tax regimes instituted by the monarchs. However, the revolution in France was socially supported by a larger upper-class population as compared to the American Revolution.

Economically, the two revolutions were caused by oppressive taxation regimes enforced in attempts by the administration to deal with failing economies. For instance, France had emerged from the Seven Years War that was far too costly for the nation. The difference between the two revolutions was that France was in a worse situation economically compared to America prior to the onset of the revolution.

Politically, the two revolutions were similar because the people lacked representation in both countries. Power and control were vested in the absolute monarchy and nobility. The two revolutions resulted in the withdrawal of recognition accorded to titles of nobility and instead focused on equal representation. The difference between the two was American representation in the British parliament was limited while in France the people had no adequate representation. In France, administration and public policy were restricted to the monarchy and the clergy.

What are the general distributions of landmasses of the Tertiary period?

The term "Tertiary" is no longer considered a valid descriptor, although it still appears frequently in literature and outdated materials. The Tertiary period generally includes the time period more-or-less immediately preceding the present (about 2 million years ago) to the time immediately following the extinction of the dinosaurs at the end of the Mesozoic. Since the Tertiary describes a period of over 60 million years, it's impossible to precisely describe the position of the landmasses,...

The term "Tertiary" is no longer considered a valid descriptor, although it still appears frequently in literature and outdated materials. The Tertiary period generally includes the time period more-or-less immediately preceding the present (about 2 million years ago) to the time immediately following the extinction of the dinosaurs at the end of the Mesozoic. Since the Tertiary describes a period of over 60 million years, it's impossible to precisely describe the position of the landmasses, but we can generally say that they would have been fairly recognizable if viewed from orbit.

A series of research-supported maps are available in the link below. Starting with the Eocene and ending with the Miocene, you can see that the landmasses are generally the same as they are today, with the exception of a few details, particularly in low-lying areas. For example, Central America did not initially connect North with South, Africa was not connected to Eurasia, large amounts of Russia were flooded, and the Himalayas were in the process of forming. 

Why does Thoreau believe " a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it"?

As a Transcendentalist, Henry Thoreau believed in the power of the individual; and that everyone has an internal “higher law” that successfully guides them through life. In the fourth paragraph of “Civil Disobedience” then, he questions the authority and tradition of “majority rule” specifically because it does not take into consideration any additional valid points made by individuals. Government does not honor and respect individual differences of thought or action. It expects conformity, whereas the...

As a Transcendentalist, Henry Thoreau believed in the power of the individual; and that everyone has an internal “higher law” that successfully guides them through life. In the fourth paragraph of “Civil Disobedience” then, he questions the authority and tradition of “majority rule” specifically because it does not take into consideration any additional valid points made by individuals. Government does not honor and respect individual differences of thought or action. It expects conformity, whereas the Transcendentalists expect all voices to be heard and considered. He continues:

Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? … Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subject afterward. … The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.

Admittedly, this could be a challenging way to govern millions of people. Much trust and respect would have to be present on all sides. By the end of the essay, in its final paragraph, Thoreau even wonders if democracy is the best managing system available to us. (We could still debate this issue.)

Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.

Why is fiction more powerful than statistics (especially in regards to The Devil's Arithmetic)?

Please realize that this is an opinion question with no “right” answer; however, in my opinion fiction is more powerful than statistics because moving stories mean more to people than simple numbers.  This is especially true in The Devil’s Arithmeticin that the transformation of Hannah is moving indeed.  Hannah changes from a child who is annoyed by her faith to a young adult who appreciates many aspects of her Jewish heritage.  Further, the sacrifices...

Please realize that this is an opinion question with no “right” answer; however, in my opinion fiction is more powerful than statistics because moving stories mean more to people than simple numbers.  This is especially true in The Devil’s Arithmetic in that the transformation of Hannah is moving indeed.  Hannah changes from a child who is annoyed by her faith to a young adult who appreciates many aspects of her Jewish heritage.  Further, the sacrifices of characters such as the “real” Chaya are meant to tear at a reader’s heart.  Chaya, of course, sacrifices herself in order to save Rivka from death in the gas chamber.  As a result of this fictional story, bravery such as Chaya’s will never be forgotten.  Compare this moving historical fiction with a simple list of numbers.  More than five million Jews were killed in the Holocaust.  That number can be delineated further by country, by sex, and by age.  However, numbers rarely move a reader to tears.  The story of Chaya from The Devil's Arithmetic, however, is much more powerful.  These powerful stories are what remind us of the Holocaust horrors so that we can prevent them from happening again.

What are examples of hatred and disorder in Romeo and Juliet?

There are many examples of hate and disorder throughout Romeo and Juliet. In fact, many of the ultimate failings within the play can be traced back to the themes of hate and disorder. Broadly, the Montagues and Capulets hate each other, and this is outlined right at the beginning in the prologue. This is seen in most areas of the play, but these hatreds' nuances closely articulate the disorder within the families' dynamics. 

Here are some specific examples:

GREGORY and SAMPSON in 1.1 - These two characters spar right in the beginning of the play, demonstrating to the audience the hatred articulated by the Prologue.

PRINCE in 1.1. - The Prince, who represents the state, demonstrates hatred towards both the Capulets and the Montagues, and specifically their feud. 

CAPULET in 1.5 - Capulet demonstrates hatred towards Romeo when he first sees him at the party. 

BENVOLIO in 3.1 - Benvolio is incredibly spiteful when the brawl is about to occur between the Capulets and Montagues. The hatred between the families evolves into a brutal dysfunction that Benvolio frequently discusses and admonishes. 

ROMEO in 3.3 - Romeo kills Tybalt, which is fueled by hatred, and this creates further dysfunction. Specifically, Romeo worries this hatred will cause Juliet to not be in love with him.

PRINCE in 5.3 - At the end of the play, the Prince clearly articulates that the carnage and tragedy is a result of the hatred felt by Capulets and Montagues. As he says, "See, what a scourge is laid upon your hate" (5.3.302), the reader and audience see that hatred breeds dysfunction. 

In The Giver, what are the main events that occur in chapters 8 to 15 as part of the rising action?

These events in the rising action include Jonas’s appointment to Receiver of Memory and his training.

The first part of a book, chapters one through seven in this case, is exposition.  Exposition is the part of the book that introduces the main elements, including the characters, setting, and initial conflict.  The middle of a book, chapters eight to fifteen here, makes up the rising action.  Rising action is the important events of a story that occur between the exposition and the climax.  These events lead up to the climax and build suspense and interest.  The climax, of course, is the most exciting part of the book and the turning point of the plot.

At the beginning of the rising action, Jonas is preparing himself for the Ceremony of Twelve.  This is the event that will shape the rest of his life.  He does not know what assignment he will get, because he has never focused on any one area of study.  Jonas is apprehensive and curious.

When Jonas is chosen to be the new Receiver of Memory, it is a shocking moment for him because it comes as just as much a surprise to him as to the reader.  First, Jonas is skipped during the ceremony.  This leads him to believe he must have done something wrong.  It turns out that he was skipped because his is a special appointment that does not happen very often.

"Jonas has not been assigned," she informed the crowd, and his heart sank.

Then she went on. "Jonas has been selected." (Ch. 8)

Everyone in the community seems puzzled.  They must have a very short memory, because Jonas is not the only time a Receiver of Memory has been chosen.  His predecessor Rosemary failed.  Jonas was chosen to replace her ten years later.  The Chief Elder describes the traits that Jonas has that mean he is up to the task: intelligence, integrity, courage, and the Capacity to See Beyond.

Most people have no idea what that last one means, but Jonas has been having strange visions for quite some time now. He has one there, at the ceremony, and confirms that he does have all of the traits listed, including the Capacity to See Beyond.  Jonas gets a list of rules for his assignment, and they confuse and trouble him.  He is told that he can lie, and that he cannot apply for release.  He has no idea what these rules mean.

Jonas begins his training with The Giver.  This is another key event in the rising action.  As Jonas gets more and more training, he learns that the world used to be pretty different.  Before sameness, there was snow and hills.  Jonas takes a ride on a sled, and gets a sunburn.  Both are completely new concepts to him.

"It hurt a lot," Jonas said, "but I'm glad you gave it to me. It was interesting. And now I understand better, what it meant, that there would be pain." (Ch. 11)

Jonas later dreams about the memory, even though before he rarely dreamed.

After talking with his friend Fiona, who seems much changed since she started her training as a Caretaker of the Old, Jonas asks The Giver about the Capacity to See Beyond.  The old man explains that Jonas began to see the color red, as in the apple, Fiona’s hair, the skin tones at the ceremony, and now the sled.  Jonas asks the man if he will ever see all of the colors.

"Of course. When you receive the memories. You have the capacity to see beyond. You'll gain wisdom, then, along with colors. And lots more."  (Ch. 12)

The Giver gives Jonas a special memory of a rainbow.  Soon Jonas can see all of the colors in his everyday life.  He asks The Giver why no one in the community can see colors, and The Giver explains that it is part of Sameness.  With colors come choice, and choice has been mostly eliminated from their lives.  Choosing, even only with colors, would be “not safe” Jonas decides.

Jonas tries to tell Lily that her comfort object, an elephant, was once real.  When she does not believe him he attempts to transmit a memory to her.  It completely fails.  Lily does not have the Capacity to See Beyond.  Jonas tries to find out if The Giver is lonely, because he is starting to realize he is very different from everyone else.  The Giver confides that he lives an isolated life, but tells him that when the last Receiver failed, it was disastrous for the community.  They need him and Jonas, to hold their memories and their pain.  The Giver tells Jonas that his instructors “know nothing” about memory (Ch. 13).

Jonas asks The Giver what causes him pain, and takes the ride on the sled again—this time with a broken bone.  It is like nothing he has ever felt before, and no relief of pain medication can cure it.  Jonas realizes what the pain The Giver has warned him about means.  He also realizes that no one in his community has ever really known pain.

That night, Jonas’s father announces that identical twins are about to be born.  The smaller one will be released.  Jonas is unclear what this means.  He thinks the other twin will be taken somewhere else.  Jonas volunteers to have Gabriel sleep in his room. When he is rubbing the baby's back, he accidentally transmits a memory to him.  Gabriel does have the Capacity to See Beyond, because he, Jonas, and The Giver are related (you can tell by the pale eyes).

The next day, Jonas comes in and finds The Giver in pain.  He agrees to take the memory, and finds himself in the middle of an old fashioned war.  He sees death for the first time, and is horrified and frightened.  The Giver asks Jonas to forgive him.

These events lead up to the climax, when Jonas’s father kills the infant.  It is then that Jonas puts all of the pieces together, and realizes what release means.  That coupled with an argument with Asher about playing war leads Jonas to understand that his people have no concept of death or suffering of any kind, any more than they understand pleasure.  This realization causes him to despise his community and all it stands for.  He plans an escape to return the memories to the people and bring reality to his world.

Why did Virginia's eyes became dim with tears after the funeral?

Virginia's eyes grow dim with tears after the funeral for the Canterville ghost because she remembers his description of the Garden of Death. The ghost had earlier painted a picture for her of this garden that he longed to enter, a nighttime setting where the nightingale sings, the hemlock blooms and the moon shines. The Canterville ghost had said to her:

"Yes, death. Death must be so beautiful. To lie in the soft brown earth,...

Virginia's eyes grow dim with tears after the funeral for the Canterville ghost because she remembers his description of the Garden of Death. The ghost had earlier painted a picture for her of this garden that he longed to enter, a nighttime setting where the nightingale sings, the hemlock blooms and the moon shines. The Canterville ghost had said to her:

"Yes, death. Death must be so beautiful. To lie in the soft brown earth, with the grasses waving above one's head, and listen to silence. To have no yesterday, and no to-morrow. To forget time, to forget life, to be at peace. You can help me. You can open for me the portals of death's house, for love is always with you, and love is stronger than death is."

Virginia, the aptly named virginal symbol of purity and goodness in the story, has helped the ghost to die, an act of love that relieves him of the burden of his sins. For the Victorian middle-class, children often represented innocence, and Virginia fits perfectly this notion of  the child as the representation of purity, and aligns as well with the Victorian concept of the good female as the redemptive angel of the home. She is the one person in the story who has truly treated the ghost with compassion and humanity.

Now that he is buried her eyes dim with tears for two reasons: she both sorrows in losing him and yet knows, happily, he is in a place of peace. Her tears are bittersweet.

"Man's inhumanity to man is often for the sake of political gain." Can anyone tell me any events (more than one) that happen in the novella Animal...

The clearest evidence of man's inhumanity to man occurs in Chapter Five of Animal Farm when Napoleon runs Snowball off the farm during a public debate about the windmill. Sensing his impending defeat, Napoleon resorts to violence (inhumanity) to advance his position (political gain) on the farm:

At this there was a terrible baying sound outside, and nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn. They dashed straight for Snowball, who only...

The clearest evidence of man's inhumanity to man occurs in Chapter Five of Animal Farm when Napoleon runs Snowball off the farm during a public debate about the windmill. Sensing his impending defeat, Napoleon resorts to violence (inhumanity) to advance his position (political gain) on the farm:

At this there was a terrible baying sound outside, and nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn. They dashed straight for Snowball, who only sprang from his place just in time to escape their snapping jaws.

This violent reaction ensures that Snowball does not return to the farm and also makes the animals terrified of Napoleon:

Silent and terrified, the animals crept back to the barn.

From now on, Napoleon knows that violence will succeed in keeping any opposition at bay. In this respect, his inhumanity leads directly to political gain.

Another example of this quote comes later, in Chapter Seven, when Napoleon deceives Whymper about the state of affairs on the farm. Though the animals are almost starving, Napoleon wants Whymper to think that the farm is prosperous and he uses a number of deceptive tactics to make him believe this, like filling grain bins with sand so that they appear full. This example shows that Napoleon would rather fool Whymper (and gain politically) than end his inhumanity to the other animals by improving the farm's productivity.

How does Shakespeare present Macbeth in Act two, scene two?

In Act II, scene II, Macbeth returns to Lady Macbeth right after he has murdered Duncan. In killing Duncan, Macbeth has stepped over a moral line and knows he can't go back. Shakespeare presents him as filled with agitation, guilt and foreboding. Macbeth ponders his terrible deed and wonders if he will ever be able to sleep again. "Macbeth does murder sleep," he says. His nerves are terribly on edge, and we can imagine him...

In Act II, scene II, Macbeth returns to Lady Macbeth right after he has murdered Duncan. In killing Duncan, Macbeth has stepped over a moral line and knows he can't go back. Shakespeare presents him as filled with agitation, guilt and foreboding. Macbeth ponders his terrible deed and wonders if he will ever be able to sleep again. "Macbeth does murder sleep," he says. His nerves are terribly on edge, and we can imagine him filled with adrenaline, pacing, excited, jittery, and talking too fast. Lady Macbeth tries to calm him, urging him not to think about what he has done.

He reacts with guilt and nerves when he hears someone knocking. Why is it, he asks, that "every noise appalls me?" He looks at his bloody hands and wonders, "Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood/Clean from my hand?" He realizes, however, that nothing can wash away the guilt. Rather than the sea washing off his blood, his blood would make the "green one [sea] red." Nothing can rid him of his guilt. 

Some of Macbeth's most famous speeches take place in this scene in which Shakespeare captures the extreme psychological agitation of a first-time murderer through Macbeth's heightened language.

Did Cherry helping Ponyboy have anything to do with sunsets in The Outsiders?

Ponyboy likes Cherry, and feels that they have a true connection, but also feels separate from her because of their social class difference, and the fact that there is an ongoing rivalry in their school between Greasers and Socs. Since the novel is written in the first person, we learn that he thinks she must see the same sunset he does every night. In the film version made by Francis Ford Coppola, the scene is...

Ponyboy likes Cherry, and feels that they have a true connection, but also feels separate from her because of their social class difference, and the fact that there is an ongoing rivalry in their school between Greasers and Socs. Since the novel is written in the first person, we learn that he thinks she must see the same sunset he does every night. In the film version made by Francis Ford Coppola, the scene is played out with dialogue between the two characters. Ponyboy asks her if she can see the sunset from the side of town where she lives, and she says yes, pretty good. He says he can see it from his house too. She smiles and realizes he is saying that nothing really separates them after all, that it would be possible for them to be friends. Later in the film, Ponyboy is angry when he thinks Cherry is behaving charitably towards him out of pity. She says she wasn't trying to give him charity; that she likes him, and thinks fondly of him when remembering how they talked.

Sunsets are also a theme in the novel of things that connect everyone regardless of imagined or artificial differences like class. Sunsets occur every day, moving time forward predictably; they are a constant in a world where many people think that change is within their grasp. In this way sunsets can be seen both as a symbol of hope and change, but also of sameness and repetition, a reminder that nothing ever changes. Ponyboy looks at the sunset and thinks of "hundreds of boys who maybe watched sunsets and looked at stars and ached for something better."

What's definition of fast food?

Food is considered fast food if it can be made quickly, easily and relatively cheaply. Both the popularity and the negative effects stem from the nature of fast food. Cheaper ingredients are usually not healthier and the methods and ingredients that make the food taste good and cook quickly are not always healthy either.

The popularity of fast foods is due to the fact that it is a quick and easy meal as well as...

Food is considered fast food if it can be made quickly, easily and relatively cheaply. Both the popularity and the negative effects stem from the nature of fast food. Cheaper ingredients are usually not healthier and the methods and ingredients that make the food taste good and cook quickly are not always healthy either.

The popularity of fast foods is due to the fact that it is a quick and easy meal as well as the fact that many people find it to taste good and most fast food companies have brightly colored child sized meals that contain toys or other items that appeal to children. Brightly colored commercial during children's television programming make it a top request among kids. Also, for the current environment where many people are working long hours, fast food is seen to be preferable to having to cook a meal after work.

While the extensive use of fats, salts and frying makes fast food far from healthy, the negatives of fast food are not limited to nutrition. Due to the demand for large quantities of agricultural items from chicken and beef to potatoes, the agricultural industry has changed significantly. Large scale agricultural operations now manufacture waste products at an unprecedented level. Instead of the picture that many people have of farms with animals roaming free in fenced in areas, the demand means that farmers end up going for the most possible animals per area. Because of the squeeze, especially in animal production, extra measures have to be taken to take care of E. coli and diseases that were not common contaminants. These measures include the use of antibiotics and ammonia and kerosene washes for meats before they get shipped out. 

Fast food is a popular and delicious food option for many Americans. It is convenient and fits easily into a fast paced life. When used as a staple meal, the increase in calories and the lack of proper nutrition in the meals can cause health problems such as obesity, but when used as a treat, the bad effects are not visible. While significant, the agricultural and environmental negatives are easy for consumers to miss because the agricultural aspect of the industry is so far removed from their lives.

What are the similarities and differences between Thomas Moore's and Niccolo Machiavelli's humanistic ideas if we consider their...

More and Machiavelli's differing backgrounds gave rise to two distinctive works about politics and governance.

Sir Thomas More was a devout Catholic who served under King Henry VIII in his native England. During the last years of his life, he found himself at odds with his king and benefactor, the inimitable King Henry, who wanted to style himself the head of the new Anglican church. At the time, King Henry's decided purpose was to marry his mistress, Anne Boleyn. More, being a devout Catholic, was incensed that the king would callously put away his devout Catholic queen, Catherine of Aragon. At last, unable to reconcile his political and religious views with that of the king's, Sir Thomas More was beheaded for treason on July 6, 1535. During his years of service to the king, More was ever opposed to the greed and corruption that infected Henry's court. His personal convictions can be seen in his famous work, Utopia, which highlights an imaginary country defined by the common interest and simultaneously governed by secular, humanist values.

In contrast, Niccolo Machiavelli was born during a time when Italy was divided into four rival city-states; then, Italy's political and national viability was threatened by stronger governments in Europe. During his fourteen years as a diplomat after the temporary fall of the ruling Medici family, Machiavelli took the time to hone his political acumen to perfection. His treatise on governance, The Prince, focused on strong leadership amid the vagaries of political turmoil. Machiavelli died in Florence on June 21, 1527. Today, he is known as the father of modern political theory.

Now, we have a context in which to discuss the differences and similarities between Utopia and The Prince.

One of the greatest similarities between More's Utopia and Machiavelli's The Prince is the avowed interest in the necessity for structure in governance. In Utopia, Hythloday describes the city of Amaurot, which structures its government similarly to every other city in Utopia. Accordingly, thirty families appoint a leader, called a Syphogrant; ten Syphogrants are overseen by a Tranibore. All the Syphogrants choose a Prince, who rules for life. Interestingly, in order to prevent the Tranibors from conspiring with the Prince to subjugate the people, Syphogrants are given first authority in any matter concerning the populace.

In The Prince, Machiavelli states that a strong country or acquired principality is always necessarily governed by a monarch. Machiavelli hypothesizes that this method of governance is best for preserving peace and unity in any kingdom. As his treatise is primarily concerned with conquest, the successful rule of new principalities always takes three steps (this can be found in Chapter 5 of The Prince):

1)The complete ruin of the previous societal and political construct must be secured.

2)The new king must occupy his new domain.

3)The king sets up an oligarchy, specially chosen by him and dependent on his graces and patronage. The subjected peoples should also be allowed to live under their own laws.

So, both More and Machiavelli agreed that structure in government was necessary for the preservation of order and unity. They just differed on how the government should be structured. While More proclaimed a government based on equality, Machiavelli was more focused on domination. However like More, Machiavelli also espoused a code of honor among rulers that must never be broken. He cited the grievous example of Agathocles of Syracuse, who rose to power through heinous means. Machiavelli stated that such a ruler could achieve power, but never lasting glory.

Yet it cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire, but not glory.

True, Machiavelli stated that every conquest must be occasioned by violent upheaval, but no newly acquired principality could be successfully ruled by  'barbarous cruelty and inhumanity with infinite wickedness.' In other words, rulers cannot hope to achieve lasting peace in any new domain if he, like Agathocles, will persist in perpetrating gratuitous violence on his new subjects. You can read all about this in Chapter 8 of The Prince. A new prince inspires fear, but never hatred, if he wants his new domain to prosper.

Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women.

One noted difference between Utopia and The Prince is that citizens in Utopia do not own private property. This is significant because More believed that war and violence was often inspired by the wicked ambitions of hegemonic rulers.  In More's ideal society, everyone is equal, and all work equally for the greater good of the society they live in. There is no self-interest, but rather, common interest, which is the prevailing philosophical ideal espoused by all Utopians. In More's treatise, Hythloday states that every Utopian works six hours a day. Both men and women contribute to the common welfare. Hythloday then voices More's position on idle priests, noblemen, and gentlemen, who contribute nothing towards the common good. Instead, they are like parasites, who prosper through the labors of others. In More's utopian kingdom, even rulers like the Syphogrants work. More than anything, these rulers work to set a good example for those they lead.