In Life of Pi, what were the 5 most important events in chapters 1-8?

In no particular order, we can isolate the following as being important plot points in Chapters 1-8:

1.  Pi had a double major in zoology and religious studies at the University of Toronto, and excelled in both fields.  These interests have been with him for his entire life, and as the book progresses we learn why, and how different people in his life have influenced him in different ways to pursue these studies.

2.  We learn that he spent a good deal of time in a hospital in Mexico – that he was in a severely weakened state, and malnourished – and that he has gone through some terrible hardship with someone named Richard Parker.  As the story progresses, we learn in detail what he has been through.

3.  We learn about Pi’s name:  how a close friend of the family, an exceptionally talented competitive swimmer, studied in Paris and talked often about the many swimming pools in the city.  Pi is named after “the only pool that made Mamaji fall silent, his memory making too many lengths to mention” – the crown jewel of Paris swimming pools, the Piscine Molitor.  And so Pi came to be called Piscine Molitor Patel.  Unfortunately, in school the other students nicknamed him Pissing Patel, an agony that Pi could barely endure.  So, upon graduating to middle school, Pi encouraged his new classmates to call him by this nickname, drawing a circle on the board in every class when the time came to introduce himself, emphasizing the Greek letter in ritualistic fashion – and the name stuck.  He had found a constructive way to silence the demons.

4. Pi’s father is the director of the Pondicherry Zoo, and Pi speaks at length about the common misconceptions people harbor about animals in zoos.  He puts to rest the myth that animals in the wild are somehow happier or freer than animals in a zoo, and compares a zoo enclosure to a human’s home – a compact area that has everything one needs within a very short walking distance.  “Territories in the wild are large not as a matter of taste but of necessity,” he argues. 

Whereas before for us the cave was here, the river over there, the hunting grounds a mile that way, the lookout next to it, the berries somewhere else – all of them infested with lions, snakes, ants, leeches, and poison ivy – now the river flows through taps at hand’s reach and we can wash next to where we sleep, we can eat where we have cooked, and we can surround the whole with a protective wall and keep it clean and warm.  A house is a compressed territory where our basic needs can be fulfilled close by and safely.  A sound zoo enclosure is the equivalent for an animal.

Within this long speech about zoos and their reputation, Pi draws a parallel with religion:  “Certain illusions about freedom plague them both.”  This will not be the last parallel, nor has it been the first, drawn between Pi’s two subjects of study, and helps set the stage for a theme that runs through the entire book.

5.  Finally, in Chapter 7 Pi speaks of Mr. Satish Kumar, his biology teacher in middle school and “the first avowed atheist I ever met.”  Mr. Kumar visited the zoo often, and one day when Pi encountered him there, Pi was given quite a bit of religious philosophy to think about.  Mr. Kumar claimed that “religion is darkness,” and this fell quite contrary to Pi’s young beliefs.  Pi recalls later that Mr. Kumar had provided him with “my first clue that atheists are my brothers and sisters of a different faith, and every word they speak speaks of faith.”  Mr. Kumar had a profound influence on Pi as a child and contributed very strongly to his understanding of the world.  These lessons will carry Pi through all the hardship he faces in life afterward.

When should one use the simple past or the present perfect in summaries?

Present perfect tense is the less specific of the two: "I have eaten horse meat" informs the listener that the speaker has, at some point in his past, eaten a kind of meat that most people avoid. Simple past tense is a lot more specific: "I ate horse meat yesterday." The listener knows not only that the speaker has eaten it in the past, but specifically when.

Suppose you were applying for a job at...

Present perfect tense is the less specific of the two: "I have eaten horse meat" informs the listener that the speaker has, at some point in his past, eaten a kind of meat that most people avoid. Simple past tense is a lot more specific: "I ate horse meat yesterday." The listener knows not only that the speaker has eaten it in the past, but specifically when.

Suppose you were applying for a job at a very specialized restaurant. They have horse meat on the menu and want to know if you are squeamish about eating, preparing or recommending this delicacy to their clientele. their first question might be "Have you eaten horse meat?" The present perfect is the right way to answer: "Yes, I have eaten horse meat." In your resume of life experiences, eating this is on the list. But eating horse flesh is suddenly popular, because a famous rock star just announced he loves eating it. So now the restauranteur wants to know: "Is this something you did a long time ago as a child, or if it's something you've done recently, so the details are vivid?" And you want to give a detailed, specific answer: "Why yes, I ate horse meat last night. It was delicious!"

What are the effects of floods on different people?

Floods have a great impact on their surrounding ecosystem, including the plants, animals, and people who live there. Some people reap a benefit from flooding, while for others it can be catastrophic. For example, Ancient Egyptian peoples relied on flooding of the Nile river to grow their crops. In contrast, the flooding that resulting from an earthquake off the coast of Japan in 2011 destroyed miles of homes, schools, and public buildings.

In places where...

Floods have a great impact on their surrounding ecosystem, including the plants, animals, and people who live there. Some people reap a benefit from flooding, while for others it can be catastrophic. For example, Ancient Egyptian peoples relied on flooding of the Nile river to grow their crops. In contrast, the flooding that resulting from an earthquake off the coast of Japan in 2011 destroyed miles of homes, schools, and public buildings.

In places where the only major source of natural water is rivers, annual river flooding was often celebrated. The Nile river floods yearly and deposits lots of nutrient-rich, damp soil as the water retreats. These flooded areas were cultivated for growing crops like sugarcane, millet, and barley. Mud from flooded areas could also be carried and deposited in areas where crops were beginning to dry out. Animals, too, would flock to the riverbed for water and to graze on small vegetation or prey on smaller creatures! Because of this, the river doubles as a source for both plant and animal foods. Because the Nile runs through a desert, it really served as a vital lifeline for Ancient Egyptian peoples. Today flooding still occurs, but Egyptian people no longer rely on it as the only source of hydration for crops.

In other parts of the world and throughout time, floods have a much worse reputation. Flooding occurs both as a regular, predictable circumstance (as with the Nile) and as a sudden, natural event. These sudden cases of flooding are usually more catastrophic as people are less likely to be prepared for possible damage. When people live near lakes, rivers, or oceans where flooding occurs, a lot of damage can be done. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the South coast of the United States, primarily affecting people living in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Many homes and public buildings were destroyed, some even with people trapped inside. Many people who were not able to flee before the damage began lost their lives. Parts of these states still suffer from the damage of this storm.

Humans adapt to living in flood prone areas in different ways. Some people build their homes on stilts to stay above flood level, while others avoid living within a flood zone entirely. Adaptation isn't just about avoiding negative consequences, but making the best of what nature throws at you. I think the Ancient Egyptian flood-agriculture really shows this to be true!

Sources:

http://www.history.com/topics/hurricane-katrina

http://www.livescience.com/39110-japan-2011-earthquake-tsunami-facts.html

Robert J. Wenke, The Ancient Egyptian State (2009)  ISBN: 0521574870

How would McGregor's X and Y be applied in today's diverse workforce?

Douglas McGregor, who was a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, wrote The Human Side of Enterprise in 1960. He described in it what became the widely known Theory X and Theory Y of management. In his formulation, these were not two distinct methods, but the end points of a broad and continuous spectrum of management assumptions and associated behaviors.

Theory X generally assumes that workers are not self-motivated and will only do...

Douglas McGregor, who was a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, wrote The Human Side of Enterprise in 1960. He described in it what became the widely known Theory X and Theory Y of management. In his formulation, these were not two distinct methods, but the end points of a broad and continuous spectrum of management assumptions and associated behaviors.

Theory X generally assumes that workers are not self-motivated and will only do work well and efficiently if closely supervised. This theory requires that managers create strict rules, rewards, and punishments. Theory Y, on the other hand, assumes that workers are self-motivated and will strive to do well for the intrinsic satisfaction of the job itself if management encourages them to be creative and take responsibility.

With today's diverse workforce, one should not use either one of these different theories exclusively as people from different cultural backgrounds respond well to different management styles. Instead, one should adopt elements of these different management styles to different groups of workers.

As was true in McGregor's time, different types of workers should be managed differently. Workers in fast food or manufacturing may need more standardized procedures and rules, while workers in the new knowledge economy respond better to Theory Y. Also, the entrepreneurial contract workers of the "gig economy," because they are contractors rather than employees, are by nature functioning within a Theory Y context.

Why was control of the federal judiciary essential to the Federalist party?

The Federalist party of the United States was one of two early factions in the republic.  The party was led by George Washington, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton and advocated a strong federal presence in the United States.  The party was a strong advocate for the United States Constitution and believed that the future economic success of the United States depended on a strong national government.

The federal courts were very important to the agenda of the Federalist Party.  Since George Washington and John Adams were the first two presidents, they would have the opportunity to fill the courts with judges that supported Federalist positions.  The importance of this relates to the length of terms for judges.  Federal judges and Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president and serve lifetime terms.  This meant that even if the Federalists lost the chief executive, the legacy of their court selections would endure.  Thomas Jefferson lamented this point as third president with the following thought:  

The Federalists have retired into the judiciary as a stronghold . . . and from that battery all the works of Republicanism are to be beaten down and destroyed. 

Thomas Jefferson did not make these comments out of thin air. Many of the court appointments made by Washington and Adams were making the federal government's presence stronger through their decisions. John Marshall, who was appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court under John Adams, made key decisions that strengthened the Supreme Court, and the federal government in general.

Marshall, like most federalists, endorsed a loose interpretation of the Supreme Court. This meant that if the Constitution did not expressly forbid the federal government from certain actions, the federal government was permitted to pursue said actions. The following two quotes by John Marshall demonstrate his belief in a strong federal court and government system:

The government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the constitution, form the supreme law of the land.

The constitution is either a superior paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it. It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. This is the very essence of judicial duty.

John Marshall and his court used the notion of implied powers when interpreting the Constitution.  Although a law may seem to contradict the powers granted to Congress by the Constitution, the Marshall Court would interpret laws based on what the Constitution implied.  This was true even if the Constitution did not specifically express the power.  The Marshall Court ruled in landmark cases that would give precedence for a strong federal court system.  The cases that need to be mentioned as important to the Federalist cause include the Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland, and Gibbons v. Ogden cases.  These cases happened after the Federalist hold on the executive branch and indicate the importance of the Federalist control of the judiciary.  

Information on the above Supreme Court cases can be found at the following places. If you are writing a paper on this question, you could spend at least a paragraph each on the three court cases.

Marbury v. Madison Supreme Court Case

McCulloch v. Maryland

Gibbons v. Ogden

These court cases are seen as very important in giving the federal government the strong presence over the state governments that it has enjoyed during the history of the Republic.  You can imagine the frustration of Thomas Jefferson in that he finally became the president as an anti-federalist, but still had to accept the rulings of the judges from the previous federalist administrations.  

What is the meaning of the symbol “the bird of night” in Julius Caesar?

Act I Scene III

Casca speaks:

And yesterday the bird of night did sitEven at noon-day upon the marketplace,Hooting and shrieking. 

The discussion takes place on the eve of the Ides of March. Casca, speaking to Cicero, describes bad omens he has witnessed. Hearing an owl hooting and screeching in the middle of the day is unusual, and he considers it a bad omen, especially when considered among other omens he saw. Owls,...

Act I Scene III

Casca speaks:

And yesterday the bird of night did sit
Even at noon-day upon the marketplace,
Hooting and shrieking. 

The discussion takes place on the eve of the Ides of March. Casca, speaking to Cicero, describes bad omens he has witnessed. Hearing an owl hooting and screeching in the middle of the day is unusual, and he considers it a bad omen, especially when considered among other omens he saw. Owls, crows and ravens were considered bad omens at the time. Cicero dismissed Casca's omens, insisting that natural explanations exist even when things appear to be unnatural.

Later in the scene, Casca meets with Cassius and they discuss the omens. Cassius says that the bad omens mean trouble for Julius Caesar. Numerous omens point to Caesar's death in the play. The "bird of night" is one of those warnings that tell the audience to prepare for the tragedy soon to befall Caesar.

Among the themes, we find the impact a sick society experiences with the death of their king, as seen in the above quote. This suggests that the growing number of omens may result from the agitation, guilt and potential danger they face.

What are character sketches of Bruno, Father, Mother, Shmuel, and Gretel?

While The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is a very unrealistic account of the treatment of the Jews in Auschwitz (children were usually eliminated), it is a tale that depicts the various moods that existed in the German people, and it is a narrative from which young readers can derive some sense of man's inhumanity to man during this infamous era of German history.

Certainly, the characterization points to those Germans who were appalled at the Nazi Regime, those who did not or chose not to know, those who took sadistic delight in the Final Solution, and others who enjoyed the chauvinism of the time and the sense of bravado that many of the soldiers displayed, as well as the growth in the country's economy. The development of characters also points to the divisions within families on ideologies. For instance, Bruno's paternal grandparents differ greatly: Bruno's grandfather is proud that his son Ralf, who shows off his uniform one Christmas, is the commandant of the concentration camp; however, the former singer and actress, the grandmother, is very ashamed of her son. 

Within Bruno's family, there are also divisions. Gretel, who is attracted to the cruel and inhumane Lt. Kotler, selects her own reality as many Germans did during World War II, laughing with him at his cruel jokes. Her mother, too, is attracted to Kotler, typifying the illicit and godless behavior that was concomitant with the acts of inhumanity of the time as she has Kotler staying overnight when her husband attends military meetings in Berlin. Of course, she is probably neglected by her husband whose career absorbs his time.

Bruno, like the Jewish prisoner from Poland, Shmuel, who shares his birthday, is ingenuous. While Shmuel keeps trying to find his father, Bruno has no comprehension of what goes on at "Out-With." Although the narratives about these two boys is unrealistic, the characters serve to illustrate the idea that they are two innocent children, victims of their environments, and could have been in each other's place given the circumstances with the other race having been stronger and equally cruel.

Unlike any other character outside the fences, Bruno has compassion for Shmuel and Pavel, who work in the kitchen. However, Bruno's charitableness toward Shmuel before one dinner party actually harms the small boy. Unfortunately, Bruno means well, but his giving of pieces of chicken to Shmuel effect his receiving a tremendous beating from Kotler because the frightened Bruno denies before Kotler offering the chicken to Shmuel.