What is the main conflict in Ray Bradbury's story, "All Summer in a Day?"

The main conflict in the story is between Margot, a child who has relatively recently moved to Venus from Earth, and the other children in her class. The story takes place on Venus, a planet of constant rain, except for a few hours every seven years, when the sun briefly comes out. Margot is withdrawn and poetic, and refuses to play the games the other children enjoy. But her real crime is memory: "that she had...

The main conflict in the story is between Margot, a child who has relatively recently moved to Venus from Earth, and the other children in her class. The story takes place on Venus, a planet of constant rain, except for a few hours every seven years, when the sun briefly comes out. Margot is withdrawn and poetic, and refuses to play the games the other children enjoy. But her real crime is memory: "that she had come here only five years ago from Earth, and she remembered the sun and the way the sun was and the sky was when she was four in Ohio. And they, they had been on Venus all their lives, and they had been only two years old when last the sun came out and had long since forgotten the color and heat of it and the way it really was." Margot's memory of the sun, in a sense, is her memory of being human. When the children lock her in a closet and forget about her during the time when the sun finally comes out, it is as if they are trying to erase, or deny, her humanity. The story ends, however, without any resolution to this conflict: what Margot does, after they let her out of the closet, is anyone's guess.

In "The Sniper" what are some text examples that indicate the title character feels remorse?

Throughout the beginning of Liam O'Flaherty's short story "The Sniper" the title character is portrayed as dispassionate and a brutally efficient killing machine. He is a "fanatic" who apparently has no feelings for the enemies he kills. He even kills a civilian woman without the slightest hesitation. During his cat and mouse game with the Free State sniper he retains his composure even after being wounded. He devises a plan to draw his enemy into the open, and when it works, he coldly kills the man with his revolver from fifty yards. It is as he sees the body falling to the street below that he is struck with horror and remorse in the face of death. O'Flaherty writes,

The lust of battle died in him. He became bitten by remorse. The sweat stood out in beads on his forehead. Weakened by his wound and the long summer day of fasting and watching on the roof, he revolted from the sight of the shattered mass of his dead enemy. His teeth chattered, he began to gibber to himself, cursing the war, cursing himself, cursing everybody.

After throwing the revolver to the ground and it firing accidentally, the sniper is brought back to his senses: "The cloud of fear scattered from his mind and he laughed." When he gets to the street he cannot resist taking a look at the enemy sniper and has to avoid machine gun fire to do so. He then discovers that it was his brother. O'Flaherty ends the story here, but, judging by his earlier bout of regret, the reader must assume that he would feel even more remorse at realizing the ultimate horror of war. 

How is ambition shown to be destructive through the character Macbeth?

When William Shakespeare's Macbeth is taught in high schools, one of the themes teachers tend to focus on is ambition. How the two main characters, Macbeth and his wife Lady Macbeth, react to to the effects of ambition-gone-wrong provides much of the play's drama.

In the beginning, Macbeth's ambition is tepid at best. He is tantalized by the idea of becoming king, but he doesn't seem committed to actually doing what must be done to...

When William Shakespeare's Macbeth is taught in high schools, one of the themes teachers tend to focus on is ambition. How the two main characters, Macbeth and his wife Lady Macbeth, react to to the effects of ambition-gone-wrong provides much of the play's drama.

In the beginning, Macbeth's ambition is tepid at best. He is tantalized by the idea of becoming king, but he doesn't seem committed to actually doing what must be done to achieve his goal (he says, “I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent”— in modern English, "I just can't make myself do it"). When Macbeth tries to back out of his plan to murder King Duncan, Lady Macbeth plays on her husband's ego by questioning his manhood.

After the murder of King Duncan, Lady Macbeth and Macbeth switch places, in a sense. She is haunted by guilt and wanders in her sleep, trying to wash imagined blood from her hands. Macbeth, on the other hand, just goes deeper into ambitious madness, killing Banquo and Macduff's family to preserve his own power. When Lady Macbeth kills herself, the guilt produced by her ambition has in a sense taken her life.

Ambition leads to Macbeth's downfall in a different way. He doesn't kill himself like Lady Macbeth, but when he learns of her death he essentially gives up on life:

Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player

That struts and frets his hour upon the stage

And then is heard no more; it is a tale

told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

After all of the terrible things Macbeth has done, he is left with nothing. Most importantly, he no longer sees a reason to live.

How is the mechanical hound used as a propaganda device in Fahrenheit 451?

The news media endlessly shows off the Hound's hunt so that people are so frightened of the Mechanical Hound that they will be deterred from lawbreaking.

The main law everyone seems concerned about is owning and reading books.  This is illegal, and if a citizen breaks this law firemen will burn that citizen's house and the books in it.  People who try to run away or do not surrender are chased down and captured by the Mechanical Hound.  The news media praises the Hound, making everyone aware of its capabilities.

Montag is frightened of the Mechanical Hound, even though as a fireman he is supposedly on its side.

The Mechanical Hound slept but did not sleep… Light flickered on bits of ruby glass and on sensitive capillary hairs in the nylon-brushed nostrils of the creature that quivered gently, gently, gently, its eight legs spidered under it on rubberpadded paws. (Part I) 

Montag has always felt uneasy about the Hound.  It seems alive and not alive at the same time.  It has a special stinger where it can drug its prey so that he or she can be captured.  Montag also feels the Hound has been treating him differently, perhaps even suspecting him.  He thinks he hears it sniffing at his house. 

Montag comes in one day and the Hound is not in its kennel.  He gets nervous, especially since Beatty is acting strangely.  He is quoting a lot of authors no one is supposed to be allowed to read.  The Mechanical Hound is not the only one who is suspicious, and its absence means Beatty is on to him. 

When Mildred turns Montag in, he is afraid to run because of the Hound.  He thinks the Hound will capture him before he can escape.  He is speaking to Faber in a special earpiece.  Faber asks him if he can run, and he says he can’t because of the Hound.  Beatty thinks he is talking to him and taunts him with threats of the Hound.  Montag kills Beatty and runs.  The Mechanical Hound that was chasing him is destroyed in the fire, but when Montag is on the run the media gleefully predicts he will never be able to get away from the Hound: 

"Mechanical Hound never fails. Never since its first use in tracking quarry has this incredible invention made a mistake. Tonight, this network is proud to have the opportunity to follow the Hound by camera helicopter as it starts on its way to the target" (Part III) 

The media relentlessly tracks and praises the Hound as the Hound tracks Montag.  If citizens ever consider hiding a book, coverage of the Mechanical Hound might dissuade them from doing so. 

Despite its ability, the Hound does not catch Montag.  He and Faber distract the Hound, and another unfortunate soul is caught instead.  The Hound must have its prey, and the cameras must have their victory.

What are the differences between parliamentary and presidential forms of government?

In a parliamentary form of government, the executive is usually known as a prime minister. He or she is chosen from the majority party in the parliament, and chooses a cabinet, or ministry, that is sometimes also drawn from parliament. In a presidential form of government, the executive is separate from the legislative. The president usually has some legislative powers, including the veto, but operates independently from the legislature, which may (and indeed often does...

In a parliamentary form of government, the executive is usually known as a prime minister. He or she is chosen from the majority party in the parliament, and chooses a cabinet, or ministry, that is sometimes also drawn from parliament. In a presidential form of government, the executive is separate from the legislative. The president usually has some legislative powers, including the veto, but operates independently from the legislature, which may (and indeed often does in the United States) have a majority of members that are drawn from a different party than the president. The United States is the world's oldest presidential government, and it is based upon a system of checks and balances that often places the President at odds with a Congress frequently dominated by the opposition.

One feature of the presidential system in the United States is that it is essentially a two-party system. This feature is not shared by many parliamentary democracies (and indeed some other presidential systems) around the world. Thus many parliamentary systems emphasize coalition-building as a means of governing, and in many cases prime ministers are chosen with the support of coalitions rather than of a single party with an outright majority.

One more significant difference is that prime ministers can often be removed with greater ease than presidents. If the ruling party is driven from power in parliamentary elections, then the prime minister will lose their job as well. In most parliamentary systems, prime ministers can be removed by a vote of "no confidence" by the legislature, which is generally much easier to carry out from a procedural standpoint than the impeachment and removal process by which a president can be removed.

What themes involve opposites in Romeo and Juliet?

The theme of light and dark imagery recurs in the play. The important scenes, including the balcony scene or the fight in Act III, Scene 1, take place either late at night or in the morning. Shakespeare uses the contrast in light and dark, night and day, to show opposing alternatives in the play.

In the beginning Shakespeare use this imagery to suggest Romeo's despair over his unrequited love for Rosaline. His father describes how...

The theme of light and dark imagery recurs in the play. The important scenes, including the balcony scene or the fight in Act III, Scene 1, take place either late at night or in the morning. Shakespeare uses the contrast in light and dark, night and day, to show opposing alternatives in the play.

In the beginning Shakespeare use this imagery to suggest Romeo's despair over his unrequited love for Rosaline. His father describes how Romeo locks himself in his room and shuts out the light of day. Lord Montague says in Act I, Scene 1,

Away from light steals home my heavy son
And private in his chamber pens himself,
Shuts up his windows, locks fair daylight out,
And makes himself an artificial night.

Later in Act I, instead of darkness, Romeo uses the light to further reinforce his depression as he tells Mercutio and Benvolio he would rather just hold the torch at Capulet's party, rather than dance and have a good time. He says in Act I, Scene 4,

Give me a torch. I am not for this ambling.
Being but heavy I will bear the light.

When he sees Juliet at the party he uses light imagery to describe her. She is literally the light that brings him out of his depression over Rosaline. In Act I, Scene 5 he says,

O, she doth teach the torches to burn bright!
It seems she hangs upon the cheek of night
As a rich jewel in an Ethiop’s ear—
Beauty too rich for use, for Earth too dear.

During the balcony scene, which takes place at night, Romeo compares Juliet to the sun: "It is the east and Juliet is the sun." He urges the sun to kill the "envious" moon. Juliet makes him forget his sadness over Rosaline. She is now the brightest thing in his life and capable of transforming darkness to light.

Juliet too uses light and dark imagery in her soliloquy in Act III, Scene 2. As she impatiently awaits their honeymoon night she demands the gods to drag the sun across the sky, hastening night. She says that Romeo is so bright he will actually outshine the sun,

Give me my Romeo, and when I shall die,
Take him and cut him out in little stars,
And he will make the face of heaven so fine
That all the world will be in love with night
And pay no worship to the garish sun.

Light and dark imagery suggests opposing alternatives as it pervades Act III, Scene 5 in Juliet's bedroom after the couple's honeymoon. Juliet is reluctant to see Romeo leave. He has been banished from Verona. She declares that it is the nightingale, the symbol of the night, singing outside her bedroom window. She urges Romeo to stay but he knows it is actually the lark, "herald of the morn" outside the window. The night is Romeo and Juliet's ally and the light of day their enemy as Romeo is exiled to Mantua. Romeo suggests this when he says,

More light and light, more dark and dark our woes.

Also see the link below for another discussion of light and dark imagery in Romeo and Juliet.

Frank, who is 18 years old, applies for a job as a clerk in a sporting goods store in Ontario. The store manager is impressed with Frank and says...

In my answer to this question, I will discuss both sides of the issue where that seems useful.

One the one hand, you can say that the store manager has violated Frank’s human rights because he has refused to hire Frank on the basis of a traffic violation.  You can argue that a traffic violation is not relevant to the position Frank applied for.  People should have a right to be hired (or rejected) based...

In my answer to this question, I will discuss both sides of the issue where that seems useful.

One the one hand, you can say that the store manager has violated Frank’s human rights because he has refused to hire Frank on the basis of a traffic violation.  You can argue that a traffic violation is not relevant to the position Frank applied for.  People should have a right to be hired (or rejected) based on their actual qualifications for the job, not based on any other characteristic. 

On the other hand, you can argue that the store manager did not violate Frank’s rights.  There are two possible arguments here.  First, we can say that the careless driving conviction is relevant.  You can say that a person who would drive “without reasonable consideration for other persons” is a person who does not have a good moral character.  You want people with good characters working for you so this is relevant.  Second, you can say that society does not need to protect people from discrimination on the basis of criminal background.  We should not discriminate against women, minorities, the disabled, and other such groups, but people who commit crimes is not a group of this nature.

You can argue that we would be more lenient with a 17 year-old.  A 17 year-old has less capacity to control themselves.  We should expect that they would make bad choices at times.  On the other hand, you can also argue that a 17 year-old who would drive carelessly would be just as bad for your business as an 18 year-old who would do so.

Finally, I would argue that there is no way you can say that the manager violated Frank’s rights if Frank were applying for a job that involves driving.  The careless driving conviction would be directly and indubitably related to that job.  There would be no reason to say that the manager should not consider the conviction in that situation.

What plans and policies have arisen in the Battle of the Cowshed in Animal Farm by George Orwell?

After the Battle of the Cowshed, animals are expected to follow orders, Napoleon is in charge, and Animal Farm will trade with neighboring farms.

After the Battle of the Cowshed, Napoleon and Snowball are arguing over everything.  The windmill is an issue, but there are other farm issues that are being discussed that Napoleon and Snowball cannot agree on.

According to Napoleon, what the animals must do was to procure firearms and train themselves in...

After the Battle of the Cowshed, animals are expected to follow orders, Napoleon is in charge, and Animal Farm will trade with neighboring farms.

After the Battle of the Cowshed, Napoleon and Snowball are arguing over everything.  The windmill is an issue, but there are other farm issues that are being discussed that Napoleon and Snowball cannot agree on.

According to Napoleon, what the animals must do was to procure firearms and train themselves in the use of them. According to Snowball, they must send out more and more pigeons and stir up rebellion among the animals on the other farms. (Ch. 5) 

Napoleon has Snowball run off the farm by his secret guard dogs.  These are the puppies that he took from Jesse and raised to be his secret police.  Things also become much more martial with only Napoleon in charge. 

Every Sunday morning at ten o'clock the animals assembled in the big barn to receive their orders for the week. The skull of old Major, now clean of flesh, had been disinterred from the orchard and set up on a stump at the foot of the flagstaff, beside the gun. After the hoisting of the flag, the animals were required to file past the skull in a reverent manner before entering the barn. (Ch. 5) 

The pigs sit at the front on a raised platform, clearly demonstrating their superiority over the other animals.  Napoleon announces to the animals’ surprise that the windmill will be built after all, and Napoleon was never really against it.  The animals work hard, putting in a sixty-hour workweek throughout the spring and summer while the pigs supervise.  In August, Napoleon institutes “voluntary” Sunday work. 

Napoleon also announces that Animal Farm will trade with neighboring farms.  They had previously said there would be no interaction with humans.  A man named Willingdon is hired to conduct the transactions, including selling the hens’ eggs.  Napoleon says that the hens should welcome the sacrifice.

How does the poem "Aftermath" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow connect to Romanticism?

Good question! Since Longfellow is known to have brought elements of literary Romanticism to American poetry, and since he was a big fan of both English and German Romantic poets, we should definitely look for signs that his poems, such as "Aftermath," exhibit the qualities of that movement.

Let's explore two particular qualities of Romanticism that "Aftermath" exhibits particularly well:

1. A focus on nature.

"Aftermath" is quite literally about the changing of the seasons. The speaker conjures up images of all four seasons, mentioning snow, fields, birds, flowers, and seeds. The poem portrays nature with solemn respect and careful observation. Here are some example lines to reveal this attitude toward nature:

"When the birds are fledged and flown,

And the dry leaves strew the path;"

Here, the speaker observes how birds have grown their feathers and started to fly, and that there are not just leaves on the ground but dry ones strewn all over. This kind of minute focus on nature characterizes "Aftermath" as well as Romanticism in general.

2. A feeling of melancholy.

As you read "Aftermath," you pick up on the speaker's tone of gravity and sincerity. You can hear the serious weight of his words especially in these lines:

"With the falling of the snow,

With the cawing of the crow,"

And the poem reaches its height of melancholy as it comes to a close:

"Where the poppy drops its seeds

In the silence and the gloom."

Notice how the speaker observes snowfall and a crow's call with an almost mournful seriousness in tone and syntax, and notice how he mentions the "silence" and the "gloom" even though he's just talking about a flower dropping its seeds. The speaker seems to be sadly perceiving the changes that take place in nature, the passing of time, and of course, the sense of loss and death that come with the winter.

Take note, also, of the title. An aftermath generally happens after a tragedy: by picking that word for the title, Longfellow implies the melancholy seriousness of the changing of the seasons.

It's also worthwhile to look for an exploration of emotions in general, aside from just melancholy, when you're looking to see if a work should be categorized as Romantic. Because "Aftermath" is so short and so focused, we don't see a lot of emotional exploration besides the melancholy brought on by the changing of the seasons.

Which topics could I discuss from Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House?

In A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen, there are many themes that could be written about, and those themes are wrapped up in the larger topics which they explain. Although the words topic and theme are sometimes used interchangeably, they can indicate differing degrees of meaning within any subject.

The play highlights various issues that could be present in any household, issues which revolve around a lack of meaningful conversation, and therefore stem from poor...

In A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen, there are many themes that could be written about, and those themes are wrapped up in the larger topics which they explain. Although the words topic and theme are sometimes used interchangeably, they can indicate differing degrees of meaning within any subject.

The play highlights various issues that could be present in any household, issues which revolve around a lack of meaningful conversation, and therefore stem from poor communication. Nora does not get the response she expects from Torvald when he discovers her secret. A loving and loyal husband would rally to her support, and so she feels betrayed and recognizes Torvald's hypocritical behavior. The fact that there is no depth to her marriage is suddenly so apparent to her that she takes drastic steps. Her now-developing self-awareness and her realization that she allowed herself to be managed, first by her father and, immediately thereafter, her husband, forces Nora to face the reality of her situation. She feels like she is nothing more than a "doll-wife." She is never involved in any serious decision-making. She can no longer behave like a "little squirrel... a featherhead... or a spendthrift...," and she is ready to take control for the first time in her life. The theme could be betrayal within the topic of marriage.

This is an ideal area to focus on in this play as the story hinges on the dysfunctional relationship between Nora and Torvald and their mutual dependency on it, Torvald to make him feel like he is providing for and protecting his family, and Nora to promote her husband's value and remain dutiful.

If considering themes and topics separately, other possible themes include sexism and women's rights within the topic of society's views and possible discriminatory practices. There is also the theme of self-discovery within the broader topic of identity.

What is the effect of the many small scenes in Woyzeck? What role does religion play in this work? What was Buchner's purpose in inserting folk...

Let's take the questions one at a time:

1. What is the effect of the many small scenes in Woyzeck?

First, it's interesting to know that this play's author died before he really finished it, and other people had to make their best effort at cobbling together the ending. So by its very nature, the play is a hodgepodge of content!

We notice the many small scenes that seem to pile on top of each...

Let's take the questions one at a time:

1. What is the effect of the many small scenes in Woyzeck?

First, it's interesting to know that this play's author died before he really finished it, and other people had to make their best effort at cobbling together the ending. So by its very nature, the play is a hodgepodge of content!

We notice the many small scenes that seem to pile on top of each other, so different from the typical narrative style of most plays.

The effect, first, is that the whole story comes together like a mosaic or a kaleidoscope. Through this story's segmentation into tiny scenes, we understand more deeply the fragmented, chaotic, bewildering, dreamlike, nonsensical nature of not just Woyzeck's life and mind but also of the human condition. It's just like Woyzeck says to his friend: "Everything's spinning before my eyes."

Second, the fragmented scenes help build tension and serve to accelerate the action as the story reaches its climax with Woyzeck's murder of his girlfriend. With every switch to a new scene, we're anxiously accelerating through Woyzeck's life, eager to see how it all will inevitably end in disaster.

2. What role does religion play in this work?

Religion provides a frightening tone of doom and guilt to the play, amplifying the characters' experience of shame and bewilderment. We notice biblical quotes and imagery throughout. For a good example of this, check out the bizarre, preaching speech made by the first apprentice in Scene 11 while Marie is dancing and the narrator is watching. 

3. What was Buchner's purpose in inserting folk songs and parables?

Besides adding to the mosaic-like, fragmented nature of the play, these songs and parables vaguely hint at the action of the play as well as giving a Romantic tinge to the story. For example, take a look at Scene 18, toward the end of the play. The young girls sing about a parade on a holiday, and then the grandmother tells a sad parable with a totally different mood about a child searching for companionship and meaning only to find absolutely nothing. These two snippets together (the happy song and the sad story) prepare the reader to see the main character's once-happy relationship end in a violent murder.

In what section does Michael Pollan begin to talk about agribusiness?

The entire book The Omnivore's Dilemmais really about agribusiness and how humans eat in relation (or without relation) to this subsistence strategy. From the first page of text, Michael Pollan begins to talk about the changes of the last century or so which have affected the way Americans eat. Much of this change was in favor of big-business agriculture, which promises more food, more efficiently. Though he does not use the word "agribusiness," Pollan...

The entire book The Omnivore's Dilemma is really about agribusiness and how humans eat in relation (or without relation) to this subsistence strategy. From the first page of text, Michael Pollan begins to talk about the changes of the last century or so which have affected the way Americans eat. Much of this change was in favor of big-business agriculture, which promises more food, more efficiently. Though he does not use the word "agribusiness," Pollan begins to discuss industrialized food culture in the introduction.

Pollan looks much more deeply into industrialized food or agribusiness within Part I. He looks at the history of Zea mays, or corn, and follows corn on the journey it often takes in the United States today. Historically, corn was grown throughout the Americas on small-scale subsistence farming plots. Today, much of the corn grown in the United States is grown on a massive scale, in fields miles wide. The corn may wind up on your dinner table, be fed to livestock, or even be turned into fuel. This one plant fuels much of the rest of the engine of agribusiness.

Did you enjoy reading the short story "Thank You M'am"? Explain why or why not?

The question of whether you enjoyed reading Langston Hughes’ story “Thank You, M’am” asks you to state an opinion. You would consider the emotions the story invokes in you while reading it before deciding whether you found the story enjoyable. After forming and stating your opinion, you would note story details you found pleasing. If you do not like the story, you would state your negative opinion and support it.

In my opinion, the story...

The question of whether you enjoyed reading Langston Hughes’ story “Thank You, M’am” asks you to state an opinion. You would consider the emotions the story invokes in you while reading it before deciding whether you found the story enjoyable. After forming and stating your opinion, you would note story details you found pleasing. If you do not like the story, you would state your negative opinion and support it.

In my opinion, the story is enjoyable because it shows human compassion and understanding. After Roger attempts to steal Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones’ pocketbook she could have chosen to seek police intervention, instead she sees something of herself in Roger. She sees a young man who is a product of his difficult upbringing and environment, which she can identify with. She takes it upon herself to teach Roger a lesson in trust by confiding in him, feeding him, and giving him chances to prove himself to be trustworthy. For the short time they spend together, Roger meets Mrs. Jones’ expectations.

She shows Roger the ultimate kindness when she hands him the money for the shoes he wants so badly he reduced himself to stealing. Although Roger’s future is not revealed to the reader, it is evident Mrs. Jones would like to see her kindness carry over in his future decision making. For his part, Roger is rendered nearly speechless in his gratitude. The idea that one act of kindness can make a change in someone’s life makes this story appealing to me.

The boy wanted to say something else other than “Thank you, m’am” to Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones, but he couldn’t do so as he turned at the barren stoop and looked back at the large woman in the door. He barely managed to say “Thank you” before she shut the door. And he never saw her again.

According to Fromkin in "A Peace to End all Peace" what were the key decisions made, who made them and why did they make the decision they made?

David Fromkin's “A Peace to End All Peace” chronicles British politics in the Middle East, i.e., the Ottoman Empire, during and following World War I. It is important to remember that the Middle Eastern countries we know today as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. did not exist before the First World War. Those territories and their Arab inhabitants were controlled by and subject to the Ottoman Empire. The decisions made by the British, primarily, but also the French, and Russians during WWI followed by the post war decisions made by the Big Three powers — Britain, France, United States — at the peace notations in Versailles constituted a new map of the region. 

Fromkin focuses on the British policy decisions at the Cabinet level as well as Sir Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner in Egypt and Sharif Hussein of Mecca. There was much confusion and deception in the years between 1914 and 1922. Many, including Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith, deferred to Secretary of State for War Herbert Kitchener, who had had spent man years (from the early 1880s in the late 1890s) serving the British Crown in Palestine, Egypt, and the Sudan, as the expert on the Middle East. The British also relied heavily on the advice of a Arab “defector” named Muhammed Sharif al-Faruqi who claimed Arab officers were ready to revolt if the British made a deal with them. Al-Faruqi turned out to be a fraud. 

Two conflicting arrangements were made for control of Arab-speaking territories in the Middle East. One, known as the McMahon Letters (between Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein of Mecca), promised Arab independence from the Ottomans in return for support of the British/Allies in the war. And the other, in March 1916 the Sikes-Picot Agreement (or Asia Minor Agreement), was a secret agreement produced by the Allied Powers in Europe to divide Asia Minor into spheres of influence (not independent sovereign entities as the McMahon letters promised) for the benefit of Britain and France with assent from Russia. (Keep in mind, this did not include the UnitedStates who had not yet entered the war; in fact, the agreement was in direct opposition to one of then U.S.President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points—no secret treaties—which were presented to Congress in January 1918.) According to Sikes-Picot, the British were to control northern regions along the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River into Jordan, southern Iraq and Haifa and Acre; the French were to control southeastern Turkey, Syria, Lebanon and northern Iraq; and the Russians got Istanbul, the Turkish Straits and Armenia. 

Following changes in leadership in Britain and France, and Russia’s exit from the war, a third agreement, the 1919 Balfour Declaration based on a letter written by Arthur James Balfour in 1917, became a further, and probably greater, source of conflict. The Balfour Declaration promised Jewish people a homeland in Palestine with British backing. At the same time, the Palestinians were given private/secret promises to uphold their sovereignty that would not materialize.

Negotiations at the Paris Peace Conference in the spring of 1919, were complicated as the Big Four powers—now Britain, France, The United States and Italy—pressed for their own concerns in the Middle East, i.e., to divide up the spoils between the winners of the Great War. The more neutral negotiating party, U.S. President Wilson, called for colonial claims to be revoked and for self-determination for the inhabitants of former colonial territories. The Mandate system won the day and divided specific spheres of influence between Britain and France. It was signed into international law as of June 22, 1919, by the League of Nations Charter in Article 22. 

From the beginning of his text, Fromkin asserts that the British were responsible for and forced the settlement upon the Middle East in 1922. He saw the giant in the room, the British Empire, making the decisions. Later in the war, especially after the failed Battle of Gallipoli, the devastating results of the Battle of the Somme, and Russia's abrupt departure from the war in a secret treaty with Germany, only Britain's new Prime Minister David Lloyd George eyed the Middle East with great desire. The new French Premier, Georges Clemenceau, showed less interest in the territory than his 3 WWI predecessors as he felt France was already overextended internationally. Russia, of course, now alined with Germany in the Treaty of Brest Litovsk, was in no position to demand their fair share of the Middle East. Nevertheless, David Lloyd George tried to play on Europe's innate desire for colonial control against Wilson’s call for peace without victory and self-determination for former colonies in the region during peace negotiations at Versailles.

Why did Andrew Jackson get elected President?

There are several reasons why Andrew Jackson got elected as President in 1828. One factor was his determination and his persistence. Andrew Jackson believed he had the election of 1824 stolen from him. He had received more electoral votes than any other candidate but not a majority of the electoral votes. He believed a deal was made by Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams to swing the election to John Quincy Adams. This deal, called...

There are several reasons why Andrew Jackson got elected as President in 1828. One factor was his determination and his persistence. Andrew Jackson believed he had the election of 1824 stolen from him. He had received more electoral votes than any other candidate but not a majority of the electoral votes. He believed a deal was made by Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams to swing the election to John Quincy Adams. This deal, called the Corrupt Bargain, allowed Henry Clay to become the Secretary of State if his supporters would vote for John Quincy Adams. Andrew Jackson was extremely determined to win the next election after these events unfolded in the election of 1824.

In his one term as President, John Quincy Adams had a very difficult time with Congress. John Quincy Adams began to support ideas that the old Federalist Party had supported. These ideas were contrary to what the Democratic-Republicans believed. For example, John Quincy Adams wanted a stronger federal government. The Democratic-Republicans didn’t want the federal government to be too strong. Thus, John Quincy Adams didn’t have much support in the election of 1828. Andrew Jackson won that election easily.

There was another factor that helped Andrew Jackson win the election of 1828. Between 1800-1828 changes were being made to our political system allowing more people to vote. The property requirement was being dropped as a qualification for voting. This allowed more and more common people to vote. Jackson portrayed himself as a common man. With more common men voting, Jackson got more votes.

There were several factors that helped Andrew Jackson win the election of 1828, making him President of the United States.

In Athol Fugard's play The Road to Mecca, how is conflict built up to create dramatic tension between Elsa and Helen? How are Elsa and Helen both...

As Athol Fugard's play The Road to Mecca progresses, the more we learn about the conflicts between Elsa and Helen. Plus, the more these conflicts develop, the more dramatic tension is developed. One source of conflict between the two is that Elsa objects to the religious and racist influencesHelen surrounds herself with, having lived all her life in New Bethesda, a village established by the Dutch Reformed Church in 1875. One religious influence Elsa...

As Athol Fugard's play The Road to Mecca progresses, the more we learn about the conflicts between Elsa and Helen. Plus, the more these conflicts develop, the more dramatic tension is developed.

One source of conflict between the two is that Elsa objects to the religious and racist influences Helen surrounds herself with, having lived all her life in New Bethesda, a village established by the Dutch Reformed Church in 1875. One religious influence Elsa objects to is the village's stance on drinking. A member of the village, Old Getruida, has decided to rise up against the village by opening up her own liquor store. She plans to use the profits to help fund the native Africans' project to build their own school. However, the pastor, Marius, has risen up against the idea and has even given a sermon warning against the "evils of alcohol and how it's ruining the health and lives of our Coloured folks" (p. 12). When Elsa protests against Helen's support of her pastor's view, Helen points out that the situation of their African friend and servant, Katrina, who suffers at the hands of an alcoholic husband, would only worsen. When their conversation continues into the domain of apartheid, Elsa shows just how much she objects to the village's religious and racist views by asking Helen the following:

Why do you always stand up and defend this bunch of bigots? Look at the way they've treated you? (p. 14)

The second and greatest source of conflict between the two is that Helen is beginning to submit to the village's notion that she should be put in an assisted living facility, whereas Elsa staunchly objects to the idea. Elsa sees Helen as being successful at living her life independently and that she still has a great deal of living to do because she still has a great deal of art to create. This conflict reaches its pinnacle when, out of frustration, while in Marius's presence, Elsa breaks down and yells to Helen to command her to sign the application form for the assisted living facility. At first, when she hears Marius explain about the accidental fire, she relents and begins to feel that Helen really should be in the assisted living facility; however, as Marius continues the argument, Elsa returns to her former belief that Helen needs to keep living a life that will allow her to freely express herself. The intensity of the conflict creates quite a lot of dramatic tension, not just between Elsa and Helen but between Elsa and Marius as well.

Explain the line "lake water lapping with low sounds" from William Butler Yeats' poem, "The Lake Isle of Innisfree."

In William Butler Yeats' poem "The Lake Isle of Innisfree," the speaker is in the city, "stand[ing] on ... the pavements gray," but is imagining his favorite place, which he calls Innisfree. The "lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore" is both a memory and a call to the speaker. He has been there in his past, but now as a city dweller, he misses the quiet sound of the lake's waves gently...

In William Butler Yeats' poem "The Lake Isle of Innisfree," the speaker is in the city, "stand[ing] on ... the pavements gray," but is imagining his favorite place, which he calls Innisfree. The "lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore" is both a memory and a call to the speaker. He has been there in his past, but now as a city dweller, he misses the quiet sound of the lake's waves gently brushing against the land. Unlike the sound of the crashing sea against the rocks, the sound of the peaceful lake is quiet, like a humming in the background. One could almost forget it is there, yet it creates that soothing kind of background noise that makes it easier for some people to think and sleep.

You may have heard the term "white noise." People today purchase sound machines that make a constant sound of static. However, you may not have heard of "pink noise." With pink noise, the higher sound frequencies have been eliminated, and only the "low sounds" are used. You can listen to both kinds of noise at the link below to see which one seems more soothing to you. Doubtless the speaker would have preferred pink sounds because they would more closely simulate the sounds of the lake he remembered.

The low sounds were not just a memory to the poem's narrator; they were also a call. Because his memory of the "lake water lapping" was so strong and persistent, something he heard "always night and day," he felt as if it was calling him to go back there. It created in him a deep longing and desire to return to the part of the world where "peace comes dropping slow." That longing came from deep inside of him, from "the deep heart's core," causing him to say, "I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree." 

The poem was autobiographical for Yeats. As you can listen to him relate in his own words at the link below, Yeats wrote this poem as a young man of 23 while living in London after he had passed a display fountain in a shop window where a small jet of water was balancing a ball. The sound of flowing water in the display reminded him of how peaceful he felt at Lough Gill, the lake in Sligo, Ireland, where he had spent time as a boy (pictured below [source: www.sligo-Ireland.com]). If you can imagine the quiet, soothing sound a small decorative fountain makes, you will have an idea of the sound that triggered Yeats to write this poem--the sound that Yeats describes as "lake water lapping with low sounds."

The ideals that Europeans espoused at the outbreak of the First World War were very different from those which influenced Europeans during the...

This is a very complex question. The nineteenth century witnessed some of the most significant social, intellectual, and political changes in human history. For the most part, the most relevant changes to this question can be understood as part of what historian Eric Hobsbawm called the "dual revolution" of the early nineteenth century. The two events that initiated the "dual revolution" were the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, and they were important because they ushered in many of the changes that characterized the period. Let us look at a few of these changes.

First, the nineteenth century witnessed the rise of nationalism, which was itself kindled by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. Nationalist movements formed in virtually every region of Europe, most notably in Italy, where Giuseppe Mazzini's "Young Italy" movement advocated Italian nationhood as early as the 1820s. Several new European nations, including Belgium and Greece were formed in the two decades or so after the Napoleonic Wars, and Italy and Germany became unified through wars in 1861 and 1871, respectively. The emerging spirit of nationalism destabilized both the Austrian and the Ottoman Empires, a situation that continued well into the twentieth century, when it played a major role in sparking World War I. 

Another massive change was industrialization. Beginning in England, the Industrial Revolution spread to France and Germany in particular by the mid-nineteenth century. This created a large and disaffected working class in many European nations. It also contributed to national identity through the proliferation of "print capitalism," which tended to give one language priority over other dialects. Industry also helped power the mighty war machines that emerged in European nations, outfitting massive armies with modern weapons.

A side effect of the Industrial Revolution was the emergence of radical ideologies among the workers mentioned in the previous paragraph. These included socialism (both revolutionary and democratic) and anarchism. Many among the traditional aristocracy as well as wealthy industrialists and the comfortable middle classes feared the rise of these movements. Some governments tried to institute moderate reforms to lessen their appeal, while others opted for brutal crackdowns on radicals. 

These changes, I would argue, were the most significant in Europe during the nineteenth century. 

In "The Lottery," what details does Jackson use to foreshadow the end of the story in paragraphs 2 and 3?

In the second paragraph, we see that one child has "stuffed his pockets full of stones," and that other children are copying him and doing the same thing. This is a very direct example of foreshadowing: we see characters taking a certain action that doesn't immediately make sense. But it makes sense later when we see that they use the stones to kill the person chosen in the lottery.

Of course, the more interesting bit...

In the second paragraph, we see that one child has "stuffed his pockets full of stones," and that other children are copying him and doing the same thing. This is a very direct example of foreshadowing: we see characters taking a certain action that doesn't immediately make sense. But it makes sense later when we see that they use the stones to kill the person chosen in the lottery.

Of course, the more interesting bit of foreshadowing in the second paragraph is that the children blindly copy the behavior of Bobby, the first child who starts to gather stones. Why are these kids just doing this behavior because the other kid is doing it? Doesn't that seem like a thoughtless, mindless thing to do? What else would they do if another child did it, or if an adult just told them to do it? This little bit of foreshadowing is more subtle. We might get the impression that the kids' copying behavior speaks to their whole society's willingness to blindly obey what they're told to do, even if it's irrational. And of course at the end of the story, that's exactly what happens.

In the third paragraph, we see how the adults behave: they stand around quietly, talking among themselves, and the women wear "faded" clothes. When we have a story as short as this one, we take every word as a potential bit of foreshadowing, so we might be looking too closely and interpreting things too much--but, by wearing "faded" clothing, these adults may be indicating that they cling too long to things, whether that's clothes that are worn out or traditions that are barbaric and should be abolished.

Although it's excellent advice to pay attention to how weather is described when you're on the lookout for foreshadowing, we don't see any of that here in the second or third paragraph. We're given a description of the warm, sunny weather in the first paragraph, which is not so much a foreshadowing of the story's dark ending as it is a contrast to it.

Provide a quote from the book Lord of The Flies that shows how the author uses symbolism as a technique to communicate that without rules society...

From the first chapter of Lord of the Flies, William Golding sets up the symbolism of the conch. When Ralph blows the large shell, the boys appear because they associate the sound with the "man with the megaphone" who evacuated them away from the war zone. Thereafter Ralph is considered chief because he wields the conch. Jack, who wants to defy the rules to usurp his own power, denigrates the conch several times, first saying it doesn't count away from the meeting place and then in chapter 5 saying, "Conch! Conch! ... We don't need the conch any more" when he tries to stifle the free speech rights rights of the other boys. In chapter 8 Jack tries to get the boys to overthrow Ralph as their chief, and he holds the conch as he makes his speech. When the group won't vote against Ralph, "He laid the conch with great care in the grass at his feet," but then announces that he will not be part of "Ralph's lot" any longer. When he lays aside the conch, he fully lays aside the rules that have been established.

When his group raids Ralph's group at night, Piggy thinks he has come for the conch, but Jack doesn't value the conch, which symbolizes rules, anymore. Instead, he has stolen Piggy's glasses, a "dirty trick" that breaks the rules of any civilized society. When Ralph and Piggy confront Jack on Castle Rock, Jack displays the ultimate disdain for rules. Roger rolls a huge boulder down the hill that kills Piggy and "the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist." Now all respect for rules has shattered, and even murder, the ultimate violation of law, is embraced by Jack's tribe. This passage describing Jack follows the death of Piggy and the destruction of the conch:

"See? See? That's what you'll get! I meant that! There isn't a tribe for you any more! The conch is gone--"

He ran forward, stooping.

"I'm chief!"

Viciously, with full intention, he hurled his spear at Ralph.

Wounded, Ralph runs. He contemplates the situation: "The breaking of the conch and the deaths of Piggy and Simon lay over the island like a vapor. These painted savages would go further and further." In a fascinating scene of great symbolic import, Ralph finds himself in a clearing where the white skull of a pig grins at him from the top of a stick. Presumably this is the same skull that spoke to Simon in his vision as the Lord of the Flies. Golding draws a parallel between the pig's head and the conch, saying it "gleamed as white as ever the conch had done and seemed to jeer at him cynically." Ralph strikes the "filthy thing" so it breaks in two pieces, but this only makes "its grin now six feet across." The conch has been obliterated, but the evil savagery that has been unleashed by the boys' rejection of rules is growing to the point where Jack's tribe hunts Ralph with murderous intent and sets the entire island on fire. 

Golding clearly sets up the conch as the symbol of rules and order, and as the conch loses importance, the boys become more savage, showing that a society that rejects rules will ultimately break down and destroy itself.

Where does it state the internal conflict in the story "To Build a Fire"?

In "To Build A Fire," the main external conflict can be expressed as "man against nature" -- it is simply too cold (75 degrees below zero!) to travel alone. The internal conflict is the man's hubris and self doubt. The root of this conflict is expressed in the third paragraph:

The trouble with him was that he was without imagination. He was quick and alert in the things of life, but only in the things,...

In "To Build A Fire," the main external conflict can be expressed as "man against nature" -- it is simply too cold (75 degrees below zero!) to travel alone. The internal conflict is the man's hubris and self doubt. The root of this conflict is expressed in the third paragraph:

The trouble with him was that he was without imagination. He was quick and alert in the things of life, but only in the things, and not in the significances. Fifty degrees below zero meant eighty-odd degrees of frost. Such fact impressed him as being cold and uncomfortable, and that was all....That there should be anything more to it than that was a thought that never entered his head.

The man, in other words, is not smart enough to know better. His lack of "imagination" is doubly damning -- not only is he incapable of imagining the sheer magnitude of the frozen waste in which he finds himself, he lacks the imaginative foresight to prevent problems from occurring, or to solve them once they happen. In this, London distinguishes him from the dog, who instinctively knows that travel is dangerous and who follows the man out of a (mistaken) faith in his ability to produce fire.

This internal conflict begins to take shape as the man slowly begins to realize the magnitude of his problem, and that the "old timer" back at the camp might have known better than he did about the nature of travelling in extreme cold. While at first he thought the old timer "womanish" for his caution, after his second fire is blotted out he realizes that "Perhaps the old-timer on Sulphur Creek was right. If he had only had a trail-mate he would have been in no danger now."

How did the Lewis and Clark expedition impact westward expansion?

After the United States bought the Louisiana Territory from France, President Jefferson wanted to discover as much as he could about the territory we just received. Thus, he sent Lewis and Clark on an expedition to learn about the land.

Lewis and Clark discovered many things on the trip. They learned about the geography of the area. From this information, accurate maps of the region were developed. They learned that there were gaps in the...

After the United States bought the Louisiana Territory from France, President Jefferson wanted to discover as much as he could about the territory we just received. Thus, he sent Lewis and Clark on an expedition to learn about the land.

Lewis and Clark discovered many things on the trip. They learned about the geography of the area. From this information, accurate maps of the region were developed. They learned that there were gaps in the Rocky Mountains that made it possible to reach the Pacific Ocean. They also learned about the people who lived in the area. They encountered some Native American groups on their voyage. They also discovered scientific and climatic information about the region.

This information was important in furthering our expansion to the West. Because of the information they gathered and the maps that were developed, people had a route to follow. Many people took the Oregon Trail as they headed to the West. They also knew what to expect regarding the weather and the climate of the region. This helped them take the proper supplies they would need for their journey. People knew they might encounter Native Americans who may or who may not be friendly to them. The information they learned was very valuable in helping our country expand westward in the early 1800s.

In the Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex, how does the character of Oedipus fit the typical hero of a tragedy?

Let's first consider the primary characteristics of a 'tragic hero,' as defined by Aristotle in his Poetics. The hero usually possesses excessive pride (hubris); he undergoes a reversal of fortune (peripeteia); this reversal of fortune comes about by the hero's agency; the hero usually has a flaw in judgement (hamartia). The tragic hero is usually a balanced character — one the audience can relate to and pity — who eventually suffers great misfortune because of some 'tragic' flaw. The tragic hero's outcome is inevitable, as is his tragic flaw, but, importantly, he is not responsible for possessing the flaw. The hero suffers greatly and often dies, but all this suffering is not in vain and typically imparts an important lesson. Now let's see how well Sophocles' Oedipus fits these criteria.

Oedipus is a balanced character — he is caring, compassionate, and popular among the people, but he is also short-tempered and impulsive. He is a virtuous man who is not without faults.

His greatest flaws are his impulsiveness and his pride, and these eventually lead to his downfall.

He leaves his adoptive parents after hearing Tiresias' prophecy that he would kill his father and marry his mother — and then goes on to kill an older man and marry an older woman! Had he been less impulsive and less sure of himself, he might have acted differently.

However, he did not knowingly commit patricide and incest; what happened to him was not his own fault, but borne out of ignorance about his identity. Since he is not wicked, he does not deserve the fate that he is given.

Once he learns the truth, he undergoes a reversal of fortune (he was the king of Thebes, happily married) and blinds himself in his misery and shame; he is then exiled.

The prophecy also makes Oedipus' fate inevitable, even though he railed against it.

So, as you can see, he exemplifies quite well Aristotle's characterization of a tragic hero.

Does Scout learn anything from overhearing Atticus's conversation with Uncle Jack in To Kill a Mockingbird?

From overhearing her father and Uncle Jack discussing Atticus's having accepted the role of defense attorney in the case against Tom Robinson, Scout truly comprehends the meaning of Miss Maudie's description of her father as "...the same inside his house as he is on the public streets." Also, she learns of "Maycomb's usual disease" and how her father wants his children to ignore the gossip.

In Chapter 9 Scout listens from around the corner as...

From overhearing her father and Uncle Jack discussing Atticus's having accepted the role of defense attorney in the case against Tom Robinson, Scout truly comprehends the meaning of Miss Maudie's description of her father as "...the same inside his house as he is on the public streets." Also, she learns of "Maycomb's usual disease" and how her father wants his children to ignore the gossip.

In Chapter 9 Scout listens from around the corner as Atticus talks to his younger brother, who asks Atticus if he could not get out of taking the Robinson case. Atticus replies that he really has no choice: "...do you think I could face my children otherwise?" For, if he refused the case when it was given to him by Judge Taylor, Atticus would have displayed hypocrisy as he has always expressed the idea that everyone should be treated fairly.

Then, Jack asks of this forthcoming trial, "...how bad is this going to be?" and Atticus responds,

"It couldn't be worse, Jack. The only thing we've got is a black man's word against the Ewells'....The evidence boils down to you-did--I-didn't. The jury couldn't possibly be expected to take Tom Robinson's word against the Ewells'...."

Atticus expresses his despair of winning, but he believes that he will have "a reasonable chance" on appeal. A little later, Atticus voices his wish that Jem and Scout will not listen to the townspeople's gossip about this trial. In addition, he hopes that they will come to him and trust him.

What shows a struggle for power in Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief?

In this book, when the Olympians had defeated the Titans, Kronos’s children (including Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades) had carved him up into little pieces and cast him down into Tartarus. However, now Kronos is interested in exacting his revenge on his children and taking back his power. Kronos persuaded Luke to steal Zeus’s master lightning bolt and Hades’s helm of invisibility by speaking to Luke in his dreams. He tried to appeal to Percy as...

In this book, when the Olympians had defeated the Titans, Kronos’s children (including Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades) had carved him up into little pieces and cast him down into Tartarus. However, now Kronos is interested in exacting his revenge on his children and taking back his power. Kronos persuaded Luke to steal Zeus’s master lightning bolt and Hades’s helm of invisibility by speaking to Luke in his dreams. He tried to appeal to Percy as well, but Percy sensed his terrible darkness and would not listen to him. Luke has become disillusioned with the Olympians, especially after the death of Thalia, and he believes that his talents are being wasted, and so he wants to work for Kronos and overthrow them.

When Ares caught Luke with the “items of power,” he threatened to take them and burn him alive; however, Kronos’s voice spoke inside Luke’s head and told him what to say to get out of trouble with the god. He baited Ares with the idea of a great war among the gods, and so Ares let him go. It seems, then, that a few gods (and at least one half-blood) are interested in shifting the power dynamic. Luke believes, as Kronos has surely told him, that overthrowing the Olympians and restoring power to Kronos will result in a “Golden Age.”

Why does Kant consider lying wrong? What is wrong with Kant's ethics when applied to the murderer at the door example?

Kant considers lying wrong because it violates the categorical imperative. Kant’s criteria for deciding whether an act is morally right or wrong is to ask oneself whether, “the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle establishing universal law.”

 This question has several components. First, the “maxim of your will” refers to a general rule derived from a specific event. So, if I decide to lie on my employment time card and say that a particular assignment took me four hours when it took me only two hours, the maxim of that decision might be articulated something like, “it is okay to lie when it results in personal gain,” in this case, monetary gain. The second part is that this maxim or rule would become a “universal law,” that is, it would be morally appropriate for everyone to follow in all similar instances. So then everyone should lie when it results in personal gain. Well, now my employer is going to go out of business because suddenly everyone is doubling their hours on their time cards. Clearly most people would not want everyone to take lying so lightly. 

When the categorical imperative is applied to the murderer at the door example, it would appear at first blush that Kant should have created a caveat to allow lying to be morally acceptable in instances where it would save a life. Why then did Kant consider every instance of lying to be morally reprehensible? Why can’t we universalize the maxim that lying is okay if you are lying to save a life? Kant speaks against making maxims so situation-specific that they lose their applicability. For example, he doesn’t permit a maxim to say something like, “If your name is Louis, and you live on the third floor 2B apartment on State street in Brooklyn, then you can lie about being too sick to show up for jury duty.” (This description is random, if there is such a Louis living in such a location, it is a coincidence.) That is, we cannot use a specific maxim to except ourselves from a more generally held moral law. Thus the murderer at the door example is rather esoteric, and makes it difficult to compose a valid maxim from it.

A second reason that Kant claims that it is better to say that lying is wrong at all times is the “slippery slope” notion. If the man at the door explains that he is not going to kill your loved one, he is just going to chop off both her arms, is that a good enough reason to lie? What about if the man at the door tells you he is just going to beat your loved one to a pulp? Well, what if he isn’t going to do her any physical harm, he is just going to take her at knife point and force her to withdraw all of her money from the bank for him? The real question at that point becomes, “what doesn’t justify lying?”

As for what is wrong with Kant’s ethics on this point, I think that most philosophers would agree that Kant is pretty internally consistent with his argument, and so a rebuttal to his application of his ethics to lying may need to be a meta-level argument. You might come up with an entirely different reason that lying is not always wrong, and use that to address his ethics.

I've linked to an study guide about the categorical imperative. The surrounding material on that page is informative as well.

How can Shakespeare's "Hamlet" be understood through a political lens by contrasting the appearance of the ghost in different scenes?

In Shakespeare's Hamlet the title character's father appears three times...as a ghost!

This apparition first appears to a duo of guards and Hamlet's friend, Horatio. But the ghost chooses not to speak to these three. Why?

In the ghost's second scene, he does choose to speak with young prince Hamlet. The spirit tells Hamlet of Claudius' deception. Why would the ghost speak only to Hamlet? What does this say about the politics of the play?

...

In Shakespeare's Hamlet the title character's father appears three times...as a ghost!

This apparition first appears to a duo of guards and Hamlet's friend, Horatio. But the ghost chooses not to speak to these three. Why?

In the ghost's second scene, he does choose to speak with young prince Hamlet. The spirit tells Hamlet of Claudius' deception. Why would the ghost speak only to Hamlet? What does this say about the politics of the play?

We know that Hamlet's kingdom, Denmark, is a monarchy. That means that political rule and power passes from parent to child. In a monarchy, rulers are considered to be divinely chosen. If their rule is broken and the divine will is not carried out, the whole kingdom suffers. Hence, "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (I.iv). Claudius' betrayal has set the kingdom "out of joint" (I.v). 

Who is capable of putting the kingdom back in joint? Only Hamlet. If Denmark is suffering because of the interruption of rightful rule, only rightful rule can restore it. Hamlet, the prince and the murdered king's son, is the only person capable of bringing the kingdom back to political and metaphysical wholeness. 

The ghost brings a supernatural element into this political situation. By speaking only with Hamlet, the ghost puts the whole kingdom's political future solely into the hands of the person who can save it. 

What are the names of Atticus' brother and sister?

Jack Hale Finch is Atticus's younger brother. Ten years younger than Atticus, he is a doctor whose education was paid for by Atticus. He lives in Nashville, and he has a funny demeanor that makes him unlike other physicians. For example, when he removes a splinter from Scout's foot, he makes her laugh the entire time. Uncle Jack is not married and has a yellow cat named Rose Aylmer.

Aunt Alexandra Hancock is Atticus's sister....

Jack Hale Finch is Atticus's younger brother. Ten years younger than Atticus, he is a doctor whose education was paid for by Atticus. He lives in Nashville, and he has a funny demeanor that makes him unlike other physicians. For example, when he removes a splinter from Scout's foot, he makes her laugh the entire time. Uncle Jack is not married and has a yellow cat named Rose Aylmer.

Aunt Alexandra Hancock is Atticus's sister. She lives in Finch's Landing is married to Uncle Jimmy, a taciturn man. Aunt Alexandra has a son named Henry and a grandson named Francis who spends each Christmas with his grandmother. Aunt Alexandra's personality is very different than that of Atticus, and she is a traditional woman who thinks Scout should follow strict gender norms. Scout says of Aunt Alexandra, "she had river-boat, boarding-school manners; let any moral come along and she would uphold it." Aunt Alexandra cares about appearances and seeming proper to the people around her.

1 g of sodium is allowed to react with 15 g of chlorine. Sodium is consumed completely and 2.54 g of sodium chloride is formed. When 1 g of...

Sodium reacts with chlorine to form sodium chloride as per the following equation:

`2Na + Cl_2 -> 2NaCl`

Here, 2 moles of sodium reacts with 1 mole of chlorine to generate 2 moles of sodium chloride.

The molar masses of sodium (Na), chlorine (Cl2) and sodium chloride (NaCl) are 23 g/mole, 71 g/mole and 58.5 g/mole, respectively.

Here, 1 g of chlorine reacts with 15 g of sodium and is consumed completely. 

Using the molar...

Sodium reacts with chlorine to form sodium chloride as per the following equation:

`2Na + Cl_2 -> 2NaCl`

Here, 2 moles of sodium reacts with 1 mole of chlorine to generate 2 moles of sodium chloride.

The molar masses of sodium (Na), chlorine (Cl2) and sodium chloride (NaCl) are 23 g/mole, 71 g/mole and 58.5 g/mole, respectively.

Here, 1 g of chlorine reacts with 15 g of sodium and is consumed completely. 

Using the molar mass of chlorine, 1 g of chlorine = 1/71 moles

Since 1 mole of chlorine generates 2 moles of sodium chloride, 1/71 moles will generate 2/71 moles of sodium chloride.

or, 2/71 x 58.5 g sodium chloride = 1.65 g sodium chloride.

The other information about 1 g sodium being completely consumed to produce 2.54 g sodium chloride is not required for solving this numerical. However, that data can also be tested similarly.

Hope this helps.

What were the concerns in the North once the slaves were freed?

Concerns surrounding freed slaves varied among Northerners. Many, particularly recent Irish immigrants, worried that freedmen would move to Northern cities and compete with them for jobs. These fears lay behind some Northern opposition to emancipation. After the war was over, political leaders and others in the North debated the meaning of freedom as it related to former slaves in the South. Some Democrats asserted that federal obligations to freedmen extended no further than ending slavery....

Concerns surrounding freed slaves varied among Northerners. Many, particularly recent Irish immigrants, worried that freedmen would move to Northern cities and compete with them for jobs. These fears lay behind some Northern opposition to emancipation. After the war was over, political leaders and others in the North debated the meaning of freedom as it related to former slaves in the South. Some Democrats asserted that federal obligations to freedmen extended no further than ending slavery. Other moderates supported some federal action to promote education and to assist former slaves in transitioning to free labor status. So-called "radical" Republicans advocated a robust federal role in securing equality for African-Americans in the South. Their plan included full suffrage for black men, which was established by the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870. It also included the division of the South into military districts, each of which would be charged with providing assistance in securing equality for African-Americans. Only a very few radicals, most of whom had been abolitionists before the war, pushed for land redistribution to benefit the millions of landless slaves. The vast majority of Northerners assumed that blacks would enter into wage labor. These varying concerns about African-American issues contributed to the intense divisions that characterized politics during the Reconstruction era.

What does Thoreau conclude about freedom while he is in jail?

In his essay “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau writes about his overnight jail experience in paragraphs 25-34. He talks about the idea of freedom immediately, in paragraph 25:

I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. … I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was...

In his essay “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau writes about his overnight jail experience in paragraphs 25-34. He talks about the idea of freedom immediately, in paragraph 25:

I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. … I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through before they could get to be as free as I was. I did not for a moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone and mortar.

Here he is playing around with our standard views of freedom, jails, and thick stone walls. Putting a person in jail doesn’t put an end to his freedom to think and to believe in whatever he wishes, Thoreau says. He also sees the townspeople outside as living in a kind of jail of their own choosing, being tied to the duties of daily life and unable to get free from these chains. This is why he uses the metaphor of the wall between them and him, in addition to the granite wall he is now locked up behind. He believes he now, ironically, has more freedom than they do. For a short time, he doesn’t have to make any daily-life decisions.

Later in the essay, in paragraph 40, Thoreau says: “If a man is thought-free, fancy-free, imagination-free … unwise rulers or reformers cannot fatally interrupt him.”  He concludes that the concept of freedom is a matter of perspective and mind-set. Of course, Thoreau was immersed in his new writing life at the time. He had grown used to being able to call up thoughts and emotions on his own, in order to write about them. Maybe this contributed to the sense of freedom he felt as he sat in the county jail.

How could the major conflict of Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman have been prevented?

For the conflict of the work to have been resolved in an effective manner and for Willy's suicide to have been prevented, a possible solution would have been for all the people in Willy's life who cared about him to have staged an intervention. The summary provided accurately points out that Linda is an enabler, or a co-dependent, to Willy in his dysfunctional behaviors. Linda thinks she is helping Willy by constantly propping him up and overlooking his faults. In this way she disrespects him; she helps him remain bound to his unrealistic expectations and to his delusions instead of empowering him to make necessary changes.

Linda herself is bound by years of habit and is blinded by her emotions and sensitivity; she can't bear to hurt Willy's feelings. Thus when Biff tries to speak the truth about things, she shuts him down or scolds him for not caring about his father. Biff is the one who finally begins to see the truth about their family, even though he has known about his father's infidelity for many years. However, when he realizes Willy is planning to kill himself, knowing that his relationship with his father is one of the core issues that is disturbing his father so much, he could have reached out for help outside the family.

Charley would have been a good person to bring into the the situation to provide a less biased and emotional perspective. Charley has shown himself to be a true friend, and he evidently wants to help, but unless he is given permission by the others in the family and joins with them, he can't do much except offer material assistance and try to talk sense into Willy, which only deteriorates into an argument. Happy is content with living in the same false world Willy lives in, but as his respected older brother, Biff could persuade Happy to participate in the intervention.

The solution would be to have a meeting with Charley, Linda, Biff, Happy, and Willy. First they would need to confront Willy about his suicidal ideation and inform him that he was going to get professional help, even if he needed to be committed to a psychiatric facility. This may have been the only thing that could have been accomplished in the meeting because Willy's mind was so far gone he wasn't thinking clearly. At some later point, the family would need to deal with Willy's marital infidelity and all the mixed messages Willy had sent his sons about what it means to be successful. However, the immediate concern would be getting Willy the help he needed for his depression to avoid his committing suicide.

(The links below explain family intervention and information about suicide prevention. It is clear that the family did not respond quickly enough or in the right way when they were aware of the risk of suicide.)

What theme is illustrated by Désirée's acceptance of blame for the baby's skin color?

Kate Chopin leaves many ambiguities in her short story "Desiree's Baby." Whether Desiree does or does not accept that she is the reason her baby has African features is unclear. In fact, initially she protests vehemently when Armand says, "It means that the child is not white. It means that you are not white." She shows Armand her hand and declares that it is whiter than his. She writes to her mother urging her to "tell them it's not true." Madame Valmonde writes back, telling her to come back home to her with the baby. There is no indication that Desiree ever believes she herself is of mixed race. On the contrary, Chopin's word choice seems to reinforce that Desiree continues to believe in her whiteness. When she lays the letter before Armand, she stands there "silent, white, motionless." When she leaves the house with the baby, "Desiree had not changed the thin white garment" that she wore, and presumably had not changed her conviction about her racial heritage. 

The only indication that suggests Desiree accepts Armand's explanation of their child's looks is that Desiree leaves the plantation when Armand says he wants her to go. However, Desiree no doubt has enough pride to not stay with a husband who expressly wants her to leave. In addition, she realizes that if she is not of mixed race, that Armand must be, and that he will never tolerate such a fact to be made known. She will need to be sacrificed for his secret.

Whether Desiree accepts Armand's explanation or whether she merely acquiesces to it, the theme her actions support is the same. The theme Chopin presents is that in a patriarchal society, a woman is powerless even if she is in the right, and she is at the complete mercy of her husband's whims, beliefs, and desires. 

What story do the travelers on the raft hear from the innocent young man they encounter, and how does this information change the king and Huck's...

In chapter 24, the innocent young man on the raft tells the King about a deceased man from the area who is named Peter Wilks. Before he died, this wealthy man sent for Harvey and William Wilks, his two brothers from Sheffield, England.

The "rapscallions," as Huck alludes to the King and the Duke, have taken in hundreds of dollars with their Royal Nonesuch plays, so now they push on down the river with Huck...

In chapter 24, the innocent young man on the raft tells the King about a deceased man from the area who is named Peter Wilks. Before he died, this wealthy man sent for Harvey and William Wilks, his two brothers from Sheffield, England.

The "rapscallions," as Huck alludes to the King and the Duke, have taken in hundreds of dollars with their Royal Nonesuch plays, so now they push on down the river with Huck and Jim. Since they have profited so well from their audiences, the two hucksters feel that they should move on because the news of their fraudulent behavior may have circulated by now. The King orders Huck to head for a steamboat which they can board in order to travel to a village nearby. As the raft skims along a bluff bank in smooth water, they spot an innocent-looking "young country jake" with a couple of carpet-bags, who is resting on a log as he wipes his face.

"Run her nose in shore," says the king.... "Wher' you bound for, young man?"
"For the steamboat; going to Orleans."
"Git aboard," says the king.

Once he is aboard, the King begins to talk with this naive young man, who reveals that a man named Peter Wilks has left a rather sizable fortune to his brother, Harvey Wilks. Immediately, of course, the greedy King encourages the young innocent to tell him more. After being informed of the past of the recently-deceased Peter Wilks, the King learns that their passenger will be going to Rio de Janeiro to visit his uncle. So, after dropping the young man off, the King says no more about Huck's promised ride on the steamboat. Instead, he orders Huck to "paddle up to a lonesome place." Once they go ashore, he tells Huck to summon the Duke to meet him with two new carpet-bags: "Now hustle back, right off.... Shove along now."

When Huck and the Duke return, the King conspires with the Duke, and, as he does, he practices his English accent. Later, he offers to pay the captain of a steamboat a dollar a mile for the short trip he takes with the Duke and Huck. When the boat stops, there are nearly two dozen men waiting for William and Harvey Wilks. Of course, they mistake the King and the Duke for these men, just as the two rapscallions have hoped.

What are some quotes about racial discrimination in Chapters 14 and 15 of To Kill a Mockingbird?

Although some are subtle, there are several remarks in chapters 14 and 15 that are racially biased.

• Chapter 14

After Aunt Alexandra arrives, there are several changes in the order of things in the Finch household. One of these is Alexandra's idea that, with her presence in the home, theFinches no longer need Calpurnia, their black maid. After learning the children have accompanied Calpurnia to her church, Alexandra feels Calpurnia has acted out of her place and is negative influencing the children. When she hears Scout telling Atticus about their visit to the African Methodist Episcopalian Church, she puts down her embroidery and stares at the children. Then, she asks incredulously, "You all were coming back from Calpurnia's church that Sunday?"
Scout asks her father if she goes to Calprunia's church again next Sunday, as Calpurnia invited her to do so. "You may not," interjects Alexandra, clearly indicating her feelings that her niece and nephew should not attend an African-American church.

• Chapter 15

One evening, a group of men stand in the front yard of the Finch home. These men speak uneasily of the upcoming trial of Tom Robinson, wishing there could be a change of venue for this trial. Atticus replies that the trial will be on Monday, only one day from then, asking Sheriff Tate, "You can keep him [Tom] one night, can't you?" Mr. Link Deas expresses anxiety about "that Old Sarum bunch." He then adds that Atticus has "everything to lose from this." Atticus challenges this assumption, which insinuates the black man's life is of little consequence:

"Link, that boy might go to the chair, [implying that Tom may go only because he is an African-American]  but he's not going till the truth's told...And you know what the truth is."

Atticus suggests here that, while Tom may be condemned because he is "just a Negro," Atticus is still going to do his job as an ethical attorney and expose the untruths of the Ewells.

Once again, Aunt Alexandra exhibits her racial bias when she asks Atticus to withdraw from the case and be concerned about the ladies of the community, perhaps suggesting what could happen if the Negroes are "stirred up." Then, Scout overhears Atticus saying to his sister that he is,

"...in favor of Southern womanhood as much as anybody, but not for preserving polite fiction at the expense of human life..."

Later, Jem tells Scout that Aunt Alexandra

"...won't let him [Atticus] alone about Tom Robinson. She almost said Atticus was disgracin' the family."

When the Old Sarum bunch arrive at the jailhouse at night, it is obvious they are a lynch mob when they say,

"You know what we want...Get aside from the door, Mr. Finch."

Luckily, the appearance of the children and Scout's bold move to speak to Walter Cunningham, who had asked Atticus to step aside, diffuses the situation because Cunningham then urges the others to leave without taking Tom.

What are some examples of symbolism used in T. Boyle's short story "Greasy Lake?"

There are three symbols that seem to illustrate the theme of the story (the fraud of being "bad") handily: 

1. The Lake.


2. The Keys.


3. The Car.

Let's examine each of these symbols in greater detail. 

First, the lake. Setting is often an overlooked symbol when considering the theme of a story. But the place where a story happens can tell us much about its content. 

Greasy Lake is "fetid and murky, the mud banks glittering with broken glass and strewn with beer cans." This is a bad place; the kind of place where rough folk hang out. It's a place to "smoke pot" and "watch a girl take off her clothes." Simply being in a place like this sets up the kind of plot that can occur. We're not going to be reading about any tea parties taking place at Greasy Lake. 

But, like everything else in the story, the things that seem bad about it turn out to be totally inconsequential in the face of true horror. Sure, the water is murky. Sure, drugs are exchanged and used on its shores. But all of that cannot compare to the dead body our narrator finds soaking in the water.

In fact, the discovery of the dead body makes even the horrible evening the narrator has experienced seem small--"my car was wrecked; he was dead." 

In this way, the lake serves as a symbol of stark juxtaposition. Its very presence and nature compares what seems bad with actual, true bad. 

Second, the keys. Our narrator thinks himself a bad boy. "We were all dangerous characters then," he says, repeating the phrase "we were bad" as a sort of mantra throughout the text. 

"We wore torn-up leather jackets, slouched around with toothpicks in our mouths, sniffed glue and ether and what somebody claimed was cocaine." 

The boys dress and act as they think a bad person should act. 

And yet, the narrator is very clear that the events of the horrific evening are only the result of an accident...well, two accidents: the dropping of the keys and the misidentification of the car. 

The plot of the story is very much what one would expect from real "bad" people. The three boys get in a fight, they nearly rape a girl, they discover a dead body, their car gets beat up, etc. But our three protagonists are not really all that bad. They are frauds. They only get into this mess because a prank on a friend goes wrong. 

Thus, the boys themselves are a symbol. They highlight the falsity of pretending to be bad. 

Finally, the car. The car is a similar symbol. Late in the story, after the car has been destroyed and the scary men have left, the three boys are alone in their wreck of a car. Two strangers come upon them and see the state of the car. One says, "Hey, you guys look like some bad characters--been fightin', huh?" 

This, of course, is a total mistake. The state of the car is a result of the three boys hiding in the woods. Because they are hiding, the scary men beat the car up instead of the boys. The tragic state of the car actually proves that the boys are cowards at heart, not that they are "bad characters."

The car is another symbol of the fraud present in calling oneself "bad."  

Are we alone in the universe?

Nobody knows the answer to this question beyond a shadow of a doubt.  Right now, with our current knowledge, technology, and view of the universe, yes, we are alone in the universe.  Of course the universe is really big, and we haven't explored all parts of it.  Add to that the fact that we can only observe and study the observable universe.  There's a whole lot of universe out there whose light hasn't reached earth...

Nobody knows the answer to this question beyond a shadow of a doubt.  Right now, with our current knowledge, technology, and view of the universe, yes, we are alone in the universe.  Of course the universe is really big, and we haven't explored all parts of it.  Add to that the fact that we can only observe and study the observable universe.  There's a whole lot of universe out there whose light hasn't reached earth yet.  That's why our view of the universe is always expanding.  The universe itself is expanding.  

We are actively looking for life in other places than on Earth though.  SETI (search for extraterrestrial intelligence) is the astronomy branch whose mission is to seek out and find proof of intelligent beings somewhere other than Earth. So far though, nothing.   

Right now, the only place where humans are not alone in the universe is in fiction.  But I'd like to leave you with a quote from Arthur C. Clarke regarding this topic.  

Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.

What is the difference between the Greasers and the Socs in The Outsiders?

There are many differences between the lifestyles of the Greasers and Socs. The Socs are privileged individuals that come from affluent families. They do not lack material goods and value their possessions. Cherry explains to Ponyboy that Socs are superficial and don't mean half of the things they say. Socs are more worried about keeping up with their physical appearances and portraying themselves as cool individuals. Randy gives Ponyboy insight into the family life of a typical Soc. Soc parents typically do not blame their children for their mistakes and do not set boundaries. This is why many Socs get away with committing crimes and are able to have drunken parties. Socs treat other people with contempt, especially if individuals are of a lower social class. Their self-entitled attitude, affinity for partying, and aggressive behavior are the reasons why the Greasers view them with disdain. Dally also mentions that the police favor Socs and are quick to convict Greasers of similar crimes. Despite their outward appearance, Socs suffer inwardly. They have insincere relationships with their peers, and their families lack the communication necessary for positive bonds to develop.

The Greasers differ from the Socs in many ways. Unlike the affluent Socs, the Greasers are from a lower social class and live in rough neighborhoods. Greasers' parents do not give them material items and fight with their children often. The Greasers wear blue jeans, white tee-shirts, and leather jackets, while the Socs were polos and slacks. Greasers have a bad reputation and have the appearance of troublemakers. Greasers are viewed with disdain by teachers and community members, unlike the Socs who have a good reputation. Although they have terrible family lives, they have sincere relationships with their peers. Unlike the Socs, the Greasers are real with each other and understand one another on a personal level. What they lack in material wealth, they have in personal relationships.

What does Angelou mean when she says, "Out of the hut of history's shame/ I rise. / Up from a past that's rooted in pain/ I rise"?

Maya Angelou is addressing the pain of slavery. She has had to overcome the historically-entrenched oppression and cruelty inflicted on Africans. It is this dark past that her ancestors had to endure, and now she has also found a way to “rise” above the collective pain. In the poem, she has found a new sense of awareness and has become a black woman who has risen above "history's shame." It is a poem of self-discovery...

Maya Angelou is addressing the pain of slavery. She has had to overcome the historically-entrenched oppression and cruelty inflicted on Africans. It is this dark past that her ancestors had to endure, and now she has also found a way to “rise” above the collective pain. In the poem, she has found a new sense of awareness and has become a black woman who has risen above "history's shame." It is a poem of self-discovery and passion as she taunts her readers to come to grips with who she has become. Angelou feels that she will not fall victim to further discrimination because she has found her true worth as a black woman. No one will ever be able to subjugate her again because she has risen above the hatred and pain of history.

What does Bob say about his life in the West compared to Jimmy's in New York in O. Henry's "After Twenty Years"?

The two friends, Jimmy Wells and Bob, have disparate lifestyles, reflecting their contrasting values. These contrasting values are represented by their chosen locales. Jimmy chose to stay in New York, a place where, according to Bob, one "gets in a groove." Bob thinks New York suits Jimmy, who has always been "kind of a plodder." The West, on the other hand, is a place that can "put a razor-edge" on a man, as Bob says,...

The two friends, Jimmy Wells and Bob, have disparate lifestyles, reflecting their contrasting values. These contrasting values are represented by their chosen locales. Jimmy chose to stay in New York, a place where, according to Bob, one "gets in a groove." Bob thinks New York suits Jimmy, who has always been "kind of a plodder." The West, on the other hand, is a place that can "put a razor-edge" on a man, as Bob says, by which he means that he had to be very competitive (and by implication, even cut-throat) to get his "pile," or to become wealthy. When Bob meets the man he thinks is Jimmy, Bob tells him that the West has given him everything he "asked it for." Bob also told the first officer he met, before knowing he was Jimmy, that "the West is a pretty big proposition." He admits he spent a lot of time "hustling around over it pretty lively." Although Bob doesn't realize it, he gives several clues about his life in the West being a life of crime: that he has been cut-throat to gain his "pile," that he has been a hustler, and that the West gave him whatever he asked of it, more than likely because he "asked" people at gunpoint. Although Bob went out West to seek his fortune, his fortune changes when he returns to New York to visit Jimmy, "the truest, staunchest old chap int he world." 

What quotes reveal strong imagery in Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men?

Steinbeck uses language which appeals to the reader's senses of sight and sound throughout the novella Of Mice and Men. Specifically he uses strong imagery in his description of setting, particularly at the beginning of each chapter. He also uses imagery in the various descriptions of the characters.

In the beginning of chapter one he creates a calm setting as he describes the tranquil area between the Gabilan Mountains and Salinas River where George...

Steinbeck uses language which appeals to the reader's senses of sight and sound throughout the novella Of Mice and Men. Specifically he uses strong imagery in his description of setting, particularly at the beginning of each chapter. He also uses imagery in the various descriptions of the characters.

In the beginning of chapter one he creates a calm setting as he describes the tranquil area between the Gabilan Mountains and Salinas River where George and Lennie first camp. Steinbeck writes,

Rabbits come out of the brush to sit on the sand in the evening, and the damp flats are covered with the night tracks of ‘coons, and with the spreadpads of dogs from the ranches, and with the split-wedge tracks of deer that come to drink in the dark. 

At this point in the novel, things are relatively calm for George and Lennie. They are on their way to work and the dream of the "little piece of land" is still in tact.

In the final chapter, Steinbeck uses contrasting imagery to describe the very same setting. Instead of tranquility he portrays violence as a heron feeds on a water snake in the river:

A water snake glided smoothly up the pool, twisting its periscope head from side to side; and it swam the length of the pool and came to the legs of a motionless heron that stood in the shallows. A silent head and beak lanced down and plucked it out by the head, and the beak swallowed the little snake while its tail waved frantically. 

The area is also described as windy and turbulent as Lennie appears on the scene. Steinbeck's imagery is more in line with what will happen next in the chapter when George is forced to kill Lennie.

Imagery is significant in the description of the setting in chapter five. This chapter will end the dream of the farm and will echo the title of the story. No matter what happens, George and Lennie are tied to a specific fate. Their "best laid plans" can never come to fruition. Steinbeck uses the image of the horses tied to the "halter chains" to mirror the plight of George and Lennie:

The horses stamped and snorted, and they chewed the straw of their bedding and they clashed the chains of their halters. 

Like the horses, who can never escape, George and Lennie never break free from Lennie's compulsions which cause the inadvertent death of Curley's wife and destroy the dream.

Steinbeck makes use of onomatopoeia, when words imitate sounds, in beginning of chapter five:

There was the buzz of flies in the air, the lazy afternoon humming. From outside came the clang of horseshoes on the playing peg and the shouts of men, playing, encouraging, jeering. But in the barn it was quiet and humming and lazy and warm. 

Buzz, clang and humming are all examples of strong sense imagery.

Steinbeck again creates a strong image in this chapter when he describes the moment right after Curley's wife dies. It seems as if the world almost stops, presumably to allow Curley's wife's soul to pass. It is a particularly powerful image. Steinbeck writes,

As happens sometimes, a moment settled and hovered and remained for much more than a moment. And sound stopped and movement stopped for much, much more than a moment. 

Steinbeck uses potent imagery to describe each of the characters. Lennie is described in animalistic and metaphorical terms in chapter one:

Behind him walked his opposite, a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, and wide, sloping shoulders; and he walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. His arms did not swing at his sides, but hung loosely. 

Candy is the old swamper character who first greets George and Lennie when they come to the ranch. Steinbeck describes an old, crippled man:

The door opened and a tall, stoop-shouldered old man came in. He was dressed in blue jeans and he carried a big push-broom in his left hand. 

Curley, who is the boss's son and also a major antagonist to George and Lennie is described as edgy and belligerent:

His eyes passed over the new men and he stopped. He glanced coldly at George and then at Lennie. His arms gradually bent at the elbows and his hands closed into fists. He stiffened and went into a slight crouch. His glance was at once calculating and pugnacious. 

Curley's wife is portrayed as young and exuding sexual tension as she comes to the doorway of the bunkhouse:

A girl was standing there looking in. She had full, rouged lips and wide- spaced eyes, heavily made up. Her fingernails were red. Her hair hung in little rolled clusters, like sausages. She wore a cotton house dress and red mules, on the insteps of which were little bouquets of red ostrich feathers. 

Steinbeck even uses potent imagery to describe Candy's old dog whose fate is decided in chapter three. Steinbeck writes:

And at his heels there walked a dragfooted sheepdog, gray of muzzle, and with pale, blind old eyes. The dog struggled lamely to the side of the room and lay down, grunting softly to himself and licking his grizzled, moth-eaten coat.