Explain where Pony, Johnny, Two-Bit, Marcia, and Cherry are going when the Socs arrive in Chapter 3 of The Outsiders.

At the beginning of Chapter 3, Two-Bit offers to walk Cherry and Marcia home. However, they live on the west side of town which is twenty miles away. Ponyboy mentions that Cherry and Marcia wanted to call their parents to come pick them up, but Two-Bit convinced them to let him drive them home in his car. Ponyboy, Johnny, Two-Bit, Marcia, and Cherry are walking to Two-Bit's house to pick up his car when the...

At the beginning of Chapter 3, Two-Bit offers to walk Cherry and Marcia home. However, they live on the west side of town which is twenty miles away. Ponyboy mentions that Cherry and Marcia wanted to call their parents to come pick them up, but Two-Bit convinced them to let him drive them home in his car. Ponyboy, Johnny, Two-Bit, Marcia, and Cherry are walking to Two-Bit's house to pick up his car when the Socs arrive. While they are walking, a blue Mustang pulls up, and two Socs in the front seat get out. The Socs apologize to Cherry and Marcia for getting drunk and then insult Two-Bit, Johnny, and Ponyboy by calling them bums. Two-Bit flicks his switchblade open and hands Ponyboy a broken bottle to threaten the Socs. Before the girls get into the car with their boyfriends, Ponyboy pulls Cherry aside and tells her that he could never cut anyone. Cherry tells Pony that they need to get going and if she ever sees him in school and doesn't say "hi," it's not personal. Cherry then says that she could fall in love with Dallas Winston and hops in the car to leave.

In which way is The Crucible's Rebecca Nurse religious? How does her faith in God differ from Mrs. Putnam's?

There is an obvious and marked difference in the manner in which Rebecca Nurse practices her religious beliefs compared to Anne Putnam. We learn from the outset that Rebecca is an upstanding and respected member of Salem society for her piety, while little can be said for Anne's piety.

In Act One, when Anne's daughter, Ruth, is overwhelmed by the same ailment which is afflicting Reverend Parris' daughter, Betty, Anne quickly blames the dark forces for her daughter's condition.  When Betty sits up screaming in bed, it is Mrs. Putnam who asks the astonished onlookers to mark her actions for she cannot bear to hear the Lord's prayers. This indicates her obsession with the supernatural. 

Earlier in the play, Mrs. Putnam confessed she sent her daughter to speak to Tituba, Reverend Parris' slave from Barbados, to consult the spirits in order to find out why Anne had lost so many children. She admits this much by saying:

Reverend Parris, I have laid seven babies un-baptized in the earth. Believe me, sir, you never saw more hearty babies born, and yet, each would wither in my arms the very night of their birth. I have spoke nothing, but my heart has clamored intimations. And now, this year, my Ruth, my only - I see her turning strange. A secret child she has become this year, and shrivels like a sucking mouth were pullin' on her life too. And so I thought to send her to your Tituba - 

Reverend Parris is horrified by Anne's frankness and warns her that it is a sin to conjure up the dead. Anne declares she would take it on her soul because she believes no one else can tell her what happened to her babies. Her determination to blame demonic forces for her daughter's condition is further emphasized by the following declaration:

They were murdered, Mr. Parris! And mark this proof! Mark it! Last night my Ruth were ever so close to their little spirits; I know it, sir. For how else is she struck dumb now except some power of darkness would stop her mouth? It is a marvelous sign, Mr. Parris!

This makes it obvious that Anne Putnam has more faith in the powers of darkness than in her own religion. She had not consulted Reverend Parris about the matter, and did not call on divine intervention or seek answers through prayer and devotion, either. Ironically, this attitude displays her own inherent wickedness, which is most pertinently revealed later in the play, with tragic consequences.

In contrast, Rebecca Nurse displays a calm and pious demeanor when she enters the room. She has a commanding presence and immediately brings about a peaceful mood. She is clearly faithful for, throughout her speeches, she makes constant references to the divine and the power of prayer. The stage directions give us insight into the power of her presence:

Everything is quiet. Rebecca walks across the room to the bed. Gentleness exudes from her. Betty is quietly whimpering, eyes shut, Rebecca simply stands over the child, who gradually quiets.

Mrs. Putnam can hardly believe her eyes when she notices Rebecca's remarkable effect on Betty and wants to know how she did it. Rebecca, an experienced and wise grandmother, calmly and with authority, advises her audience about how children should be treated. Mrs. Putnam, however, keenly disagrees, saying her daughter cannot eat, to which Rebecca responds by saying that she might not be hungry yet. This silences Anne. 

Rebecca expresses fear that there are rumors of loose spirits around and asks Reverend Parris to request Reverend Hale to return home, for his arrival will just add fuel to the stories about witchcraft. She states that they should rely on the doctor and good prayer. Anne Putnam, however, ignores the recommendation about good prayer and states that the doctor is baffled. Rebecca, who clearly has more faith in divine power, then says:

If so he is, then let us go to God for the cause of it. There is prodigious danger in the seeking of loose spirits. I fear it, I fear it. Let us rather blame ourselves and - 

The contrast between the two women's religious faith is pertinently illustrated when Anne Putnam cries out:

You think it God's work you should never lose a child, nor grand-child either, and I bury all but one? There are wheels within wheels in this village, and fires within fires!

Once again, Anne illustrates her obsession with the dark forces. Her faith is limited to passing blame, instead of acknowledging God's power in determining destiny, as Rebecca does. When John Proctor later expresses his disdain for Reverend Parris, Rebecca admonishes him by saying:

No, you cannot break charity with your minister. You are another kind, John. Clasp his hand, make your peace. 

It is more than obvious that Rebecca practices her faith and lives her life by example. Even Reverend Hale, after his arrival, says as much when he responds to her question about whether he knows her:

It's strange how I knew you, but I suppose you look as such a good soul should. We have all heard of your great charities in Beverly.

The above extracts make manifest the great distinction between the two women and how they exercise their religious beliefs. It is, therefore, tragically ironic that the good in Rebecca Nurse is never given its due and that the evil in Anne Putnam is not recognized and, in an appallingly unfortunate result, evil eventually triumphs.

Why did so many people come to the United States in the late 19th and in the early 20th centuries?

There were several reasons why so many people came to the United States in the late 1800s and in the early 1900s. One reason was to find work. There were more jobs available in the United States. Many people had heard that they could become wealthy in the United States. They had heard the streets were paved with gold. A big reason for many people coming to the United States was for the economic opportunity that they perceived existed in the United States.

Some people came for political considerations. There wasn’t a lot of political freedom in many countries. People with different views were often punished or harassed. In some countries, people were also required to serve in the military. Some people came to escape this required military service. Others came to have more political freedom.

Some people came to have religious freedom. In some countries, there was an official religion. People who practiced different faiths often were persecuted. Thus, they came to the United States to have religious freedom.

A lack of food encouraged people to come to the United States. There were shortages of food in some countries. People left their countries to come to the United States because more food was available. In some cases, leaving their homeland was a matter of survival for these people.

There were many reasons why people came to the United States in the late 1800s and in the early 1900s.

In The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie, how does "The power of expectations"(p.180) apply to Junior?

When the story begins, Junior has a conversation with his math teacher, Mr. P. (whom he threw a book at and from whom he was expecting a lecture).  Mr. P. tells Junior that Junior has potential, but in order for him to get anywhere in life, Junior will have to leave the rez.  One of Junior's cartoons clearly shows Junior's dilemma--if he stays on the rez, he is destined to live in poverty but with...

When the story begins, Junior has a conversation with his math teacher, Mr. P. (whom he threw a book at and from whom he was expecting a lecture).  Mr. P. tells Junior that Junior has potential, but in order for him to get anywhere in life, Junior will have to leave the rez.  One of Junior's cartoons clearly shows Junior's dilemma--if he stays on the rez, he is destined to live in poverty but with familiarity; if he leaves the rez, he journeys toward hope but it is unfamiliar.  

As Junior takes that risk, he begins to understand that when someone is given high expectations, he will achieve them, or at least some of them.  Junior was destined to live as his parents, alcoholics who could not do what they had dreamed of, or his sister, a girl who also had potential but was living in her parents' basement.  But when he transferred to Reardan, he began to achieve.  He made friends, he dated a beautiful girl, and he made the varsity basketball team.  It is when he is reflecting about making the team that he states:

I'd always been the lowest Indian on the reservation totem pole—I wasn't expected to be good so I wasn't. But in Reardan, my coach and the other players wanted me to be good. They needed me to be good. They expected me to be good. And so I became good. I wanted to live up to expectations. I guess that's what it comes down to. The power of expectations. And as they expected more of me, I expected more of myself, and it just grew and grew...

This scene is an example of the hope that Junior journeyed toward in his transfer to Reardan.  Mr. P. was right when he told Junior that there was nowhere left for Junior on the rez.

What are squids used for?

Squid are be used as a study subject to someday create implants that are more comfortable inside a patient's body. Their beak is hard on one end and soft as it nears the mouth where it attaches. It is composed of chitin with protein molecules linking across the structure. When exposed to light, it becomes more rigid. This information can be used to create implants like feeding tubes which can be soft where they attach and progressively more rigid on the other end. The material of the squid's beak is being studied, as that is where this material is found. 

Squid ink is being studied for its properties which can prevent tumor cells from spreading or metastasizing in the body. Its ink can be used to make squid ink pasta which contains antioxidants which are beneficial to the health of people who consume it. It also is purported to have anticancer properties along with antibacterial properties, which are all beneficial to health. Squid ink was used in the past as ink to write with. 

Squid is popular as a food choice--calamari is eaten all over the world and originated in the Mediterranean region. This is fried squid. However, entrees can include squid served as a cold fish salad, in soups, or any number of ways. It is a staple in many cultures.

Squid have been studied for their intricate behaviors, ability to learn, and their advanced brain structure. Usually, one thinks of an invertebrate as not exhibiting a great deal of intelligence. However, squid do have the ability to show learned behaviors. Also, their eyes are quite complex and fascinating to scientists as a research topic.

To conclude, squid can be used in medical research, for culinary purposes and for research regarding animal behaviors. These are very wonderful cephalopods that have unique adaptations to life in the open ocean as a predator.

Would you consider the 2016 election the biggest political election of our lifetime? Why or why not?

“Our lifetime” encompasses quite a few elections. The student who posed the question—is the 2016 election the “biggest” of our lifetime—is probably in his/her twenties. The person writing this response is in his fifties. Whether the 2016 election is more important than the first of my lifetime, the one that featured old-school conservatism in the person of then-Vice President Richard Nixon against a young, confident and attractive liberal senator from New England named John Kennedy, is difficult to say. Kennedy’s election, which ushered in the idealistic notion of American political royalty that became known as “Camelot,” was, in its own way, transformative but for the tragic ending to that brief era. The 1968 contest between Nixon and Hubert Humphrey took place against a backdrop of tremendous social and political turbulence, with protests and riots against the war in Vietnam and for civil rights occurring at the same time that same old-school conservative, Nixon, was to be finally elected to the office of the presidency rather than the liberal Humphrey. That, however, is my lifetime. The campaigns for the presidency of Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter were, in their way, illustrative of the period in which they took place. Carter’s election in 1976 represented the end of an era—the post-World War II consensus on foreign policy that had, to a certain extent, existed among both political parties, and the degradation of American politics represented by the Watergate scandal—while his subsequent defeat by Reagan in his bid for reelection represented a mandate among much of the public for a more vigorous administration that would strengthen the United States militarily after years of relative decline. All of these were important, or “big,” elections. Obviously, the election of the nation's first African American president is more than a little noteworthy, although the actual governing part of the equation is less transformative than the ethnic or racial element of it.

All of that said, the current election process is without a doubt one of the more transformative ones of recent history. The ugliness of the ongoing process is hardly unique in the annals of American political history, with name-calling and “dirty tricks” very much a part of that history. What makes this election “big” is the potential, on the left, for the election of a self-avowed socialist, and the potential, on the right(?) for the election of a populist businessman whose comments on a number of issues have placed him outside the mainstream of American politics—a mainstream that Trump’s popularity may be in the process of upending. Sanders represents a radical transformation in the economics of the most economically-powerful country in the world; Trump represents a somewhat xenophobic, protectionist, ideologically vacuous presence that few can label within the context of this nation’s political history. Whichever of these two prevail would usher in a very new type of administration, one the ramifications of which nobody can confidently predict. Clinton, Rubio and Kasich represent the more pragmatic, traditional perspectives on governing, with Clinton seriously tainted by allegations of corruption and a reputation for dishonesty. The political process, to date, can either be, then, transformative, or represent a rejection of the extremes personified by Trump and Sanders.

For somebody in his or her twenties, this may very well represent the most important election of his or her life. To those of us where are older, however, an answer to that question remains to be seen.

What flaw causes Hamlet and Laertes to end up dead, while Fortinbras succeeds?

This is a very broad question and could be answered in a multitude of different and lengthy ways; not for nothing is Hamlet the most analyzed and interpreted character in Western literature! But since Hamlet is, in the critic Harold Bloom's words, "an experimental thinker rather more than he is Shakespeare's thought experiment," I propose that we try to respond to the question in the spirit of the prince himself, which is to say experimentally, to try to see and think outside the question rather than to accept as legitimate the premises we are given.

For me, part of the experimentalism of Hamlet lies in its dissolution of the traditional definition of "tragedy," which mandates that the great and mighty must be undone by their own flaws. Shakespeare's other tragedies can be said to fit that general definition in a variety of complex manifestations, but I don't really think it adequately explains Hamlet. Does the prince have "flaws?" Absolutely. Perhaps his most objectionable qualities, to my way of thinking, are the toxic misogyny created in him by his disgust at his mother's swift remarriage (which causes him to so cruelly mistreat Ophelia), and his inability to fully free himself from the system of martial values exemplified by his father, the warrior-king, to whose standard he painfully, fruitlessly compares himself--values which hold his mind partly captive even though Hamlet himself is plainly an artist in spirit and temperament, rather than a soldier (despite the cluelessly bitter irony of Fortinbras's concluding lines).

These flaws, which can be said to be the cursed inheritance of Hamlet's mother and father respectively (or even of the male and female principles in general), torment the prince throughout the play and drive many of his fatal errors of morality and judgment. But they are not Hamlet's most salient characteristics, and even they don't seem sufficient to explain, in the most profound and total sense, "why" Hamlet dies. Even less adequate is Hamlet's own brutal self-assessment, in which he ascribes to himself the faults he would like to have: "I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offences at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in." This description is exactly, utterly, even comically antithetical to the truth. Hamlet attributes to himself all the flaws that traditionally destroy "tragic heroes" (pride, vengeance, ambition). And indeed, each of these descriptions can be applied to the hot-headed Laertes, Hamlet's mirror image, who fulfills the arc of the tragic hero to a tee: his completely straightforward and identifiable desire to avenge the deaths of his father and sister cause him to rashly make a deal with the devil, one which leads to his destruction. But these recognizably "tragic" traits are lacking in Hamlet; in fact, the prince has nothing but "thoughts, imagination, and time." Time, that commodity and lie which is his great burden, and everyone's, keeps him from his appointed task by giving too much free play to his thought and imagination. It is only when he suddenly finds himself without time, that brief interval in which he knows with certainty that he is minutes from death, that he is able to act decisively and kill his uncle.

People will try to tell you that Hamlet's "tragic flaw" is his indecisiveness, or his desire for revenge, or his passivity, or any number of things. But the experimental genius of Hamlet is that it proposes a new, existential definition of tragedy: this new tragic hero is not a man ruined by his flaws, but one who suffers in tragic awareness of humanity's flaw, of Creation's flaw. Hamlet's "flaw" is simply that he is too sensitive to the tragic nature of reality. His "flaw" is his genius, which renders him incapable of enacting the prescribed roles of soldier, lover, prince, dutiful son, all of which he perceives deep down to be hollow and ephemeral. Shakespeare radically reinvents the nature of tragedy by imbuing his hero with tragic consciousness. Fortinbras, the consummate soldier, has no such consciousness. He is a much truer heir to King Hamlet than is the prince himself, and so he is able to prevail, at least within the little scope of time encompassed by the play, and to the extent that successfully occupying a castle full of dead nobles can be considered "prevailing." In a tragic universe, all victories are provisional, whether the victor realizes it or not. As in Faulkner's Hamlet-infused The Sound and the Fury, "No battle is ever won... they are not even fought. The field only reveals to man his own folly and despair, and victory is an illusion of philosophers and fools."

In "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell, how does Orwell characterize "every white man's life" in the East?

In his essay, “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell relates not only the experience of shooting an escaped elephant, but also the understanding that he gains while being a police officer in Burma. As a police officer, Orwell is the immediate manifestation of the British colonial government among the Burmese people with whom he interacts. From his experiences, he grows to feel that his main struggle is “not to be laughed at,” a struggle he generalizes...

In his essay, “Shooting an Elephant,” George Orwell relates not only the experience of shooting an escaped elephant, but also the understanding that he gains while being a police officer in Burma. As a police officer, Orwell is the immediate manifestation of the British colonial government among the Burmese people with whom he interacts. From his experiences, he grows to feel that his main struggle is “not to be laughed at,” a struggle he generalizes to other white men in the East.

Early in the essay, Orwell takes pains not only to describe his view of his job, but also to give the reader an overview of how he is received by the Burmese people around him. It is clear that Orwell, a self-confessed critic of imperialism, is struggling with his role, and the meaning of his role, as a representative of the British colonial government in Burma. He knows that he is not really an important piece of the governmental machine, but he also recognizes that he is a prominent face of that government with the people in the district in which he serves. This creates in Orwell a kind of disassociation between what he believes and who he has to be.

This dissociation is highlighted when he decides to shoot the elephant. He decides to shoot the elephant not because the elephant is still a danger at the time he finds it, but rather because he does not want to look foolish. He then understands that he is at the mercy of the crowd around him, and that thus he is governed by them rather than they being governed by him:

[B]ut in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind. I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib. For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the "natives," and so in every crisis he has got to do what the "natives" expect of him. He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it. I had got to shoot the elephant. I had committed myself to doing it when I sent for the rifle. A sahib has got to act like a sahib; he has got to appear resolute, to know his own mind and do definite things. To come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail feebly away, having done nothing – no, that was impossible. The crowd would laugh at me. And my whole life, every white man's life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at.

Orwell projects this lesson he has learned onto other people situated the same as he is. It is, he believes, the fear of looking foolish – the “one long struggle not to be laughed at” – that is the primary burden that white men in the East bear.

What is Abigail's relationship to John and Elizabeth Proctor? What does Betty hear that makes her clap her hands over her ears and whine? Why...

Abigail's relationship to John and Elizabeth Proctor is, from the outside, that of an employee to her former employer.  She used to work for the Proctors in their home (in the position which is currently occupied by Mary Warren), but she was let go seven months prior to the start of the story.  Further, Elizabeth Proctor fired her because she was having an affair with John and Elizabeth found out.  She still loves John and...

Abigail's relationship to John and Elizabeth Proctor is, from the outside, that of an employee to her former employer.  She used to work for the Proctors in their home (in the position which is currently occupied by Mary Warren), but she was let go seven months prior to the start of the story.  Further, Elizabeth Proctor fired her because she was having an affair with John and Elizabeth found out.  She still loves John and seems to believe that he still loves her too.

When Betty claps her hands over her ears, she seems to do so as a result of hearing the words "'going up to Jesus'" being sung below stairs.  Mrs. Putnam assumes that it is because "She cannot bear to hear the Lord's name!" and we don't really get an explanation other than that.  Such a symptom is considered to be a sure sign of someone's being the victim of witchcraft.  Perhaps Betty is simply anxious and the song makes her more so. 

Finally, Parris seems to feel resentful of his parishioners because he believes that a number of them are participating in a "faction that is sworn to drive [him] from [his] pulpit."  Further, he has "fought [...] three long years to bend these stiff-necked people to [him]" and now he feels that it could all come to nothing if they learn of his niece and daughter's activities.  He seems, then, not to have a great deal of respect for the people of Salem -- calling them stiff-necked and implying that they are stubborn and, perhaps, not very intelligent.  Moreover, there is some disagreement about how much he is supposed to earn: sixty pounds plus six for firewood or sixty-six pounds plus firewood.  This seems to be a point of pride for Parris who is "not used to this poverty."  He argues for quite a while with Proctor and Giles Corey over this point.  They will not give him the deed to his home either -- but apparently they never give the minister the deed to this house -- though he believes this shows a lack of confidence in him.

How does Gatsby's character change in chapter five?

Chapter Five is the chapter in which Gatsby finally meets Daisy again, five years after she broke his heart by marrying Tom. The meeting occurs at Nick's house.

While waiting to meet Daisy—and even for the first few minutes after meeting her—Gatsby is so nervous that he's in anguish. He even tells Nick at one point, "This is a terrible mistake, a terrible, terrible mistake." 

After Nick leaves the two of them alone together for...

Chapter Five is the chapter in which Gatsby finally meets Daisy again, five years after she broke his heart by marrying Tom. The meeting occurs at Nick's house.

While waiting to meet Daisy—and even for the first few minutes after meeting her—Gatsby is so nervous that he's in anguish. He even tells Nick at one point, "This is a terrible mistake, a terrible, terrible mistake." 

After Nick leaves the two of them alone together for about half an hour, Gatsby and Daisy are no longer nervous. They have apparently had an emotional reunion. Gatsby is very happy, because it seems to him that his dream of getting Daisy back is finally coming true. As the scene proceeds, with a tour of Gatsby's house, Daisy and Gatsby act increasingly in love; by the end of the chapter, when Nick takes his leave of them, "They had forgotten me. . . Gatsby didn't know me now at all."

Gatsby's character does not really change during the course of this chapter. His goal (winning Daisy back) is what it has always been. His assumptions and abilities are the same. What has changed is his emotional state, and also Nick's state of knowledge about Gatsby. Before the revelations of chapters 4 and 5, Gatsby was a mystery figure to Nick. Now, Nick understands what drives Gatsby. He begins to see Gatsby's nobility, but also his limitations.

In the sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, what does Edwards mean when he says, “The bow of God’s wrath is bent, and the arrow made...

Throughout this sermon, one of the major points that Jonathan Edwards makes over and over again is that God is angry at all people and that all people deserve for God to be angry at them.  Edwards emphasizes that God could (and perhaps should) destroy everyone and send them all to Hell, and that only his mercy prevents him from doing so. This is the meaning of the quote that you have placed in your question.

Here is the whole quote, part of which you cite:

The bow of God's wrath is bent, and the arrow made ready on the string, and Justice bends the arrow at your heart, and strains the bow, and it is nothing but the mere pleasure of God, and that of an angry God, without any promise or obligation at all, that keeps the arrow one moment from being made drunk with your blood.

When Edwards talks about “the bow of God’s wrath” he is using a metaphor.  He is saying that God’s anger is very dangerous.  It is like a weapon that can kill you.  Then, when he says that it “is bent, and the arrow made ready on the string,” he is saying that God is ready to let his anger kill you.  When an arrow is on the string of the bow and the bow is bent, the archer is ready to shoot.  He has put the arrow up against the string and has pulled back.  As soon as he lets go, the arrow will fly at its target.  This is like having a round in the chamber of a gun with the safety off and the shooter’s finger on the trigger.  In other words, this is a very dangerous situation.  The person that Edwards addresses is literally a moment away from death and damnation.

By using this metaphor, and by emphasizing that God is very angry at people, Edwards meant to frighten people and also to make them grateful.  He wanted them to be afraid when they realized that they deserved to be killed and damned.  He also wanted them to be grateful to God for not punishing them in the way they deserved.  This is what this quote means and why Edwards uses it.

In "Thank You, M'am," why doesn't Roger run away when Mrs. Jones lets him loose to wash his face?

In "Thank You, M'am" by Langston Hughes, Roger intends to steal Mrs. Jones's purse. Mrs. Jones, however, is not about to allow him to get the better of her, and she acts quickly to prevent him from taking her "pocketbook." Roger can't believe his bad luck and is concerned that she will now take him to the police station. He struggles to get loose from her tight grip, but Mrs. Jones has already assessed the...

In "Thank You, M'am" by Langston Hughes, Roger intends to steal Mrs. Jones's purse. Mrs. Jones, however, is not about to allow him to get the better of her, and she acts quickly to prevent him from taking her "pocketbook." Roger can't believe his bad luck and is concerned that she will now take him to the police station. He struggles to get loose from her tight grip, but Mrs. Jones has already assessed the situation. She has noticed that his face is dirty and thinks there may be more to this boy than him just being a ruffian. She asks him, "Ain’t you got nobody home to tell you to wash your face?" 

For Mrs. Jones, there are better ways to teach Roger a lesson than taking him to the police, and so she takes him to her home. Roger begins to see that Mrs. Jones, although strict, is different from the average adult. When she loosens her grip around his neck, he cannot make up his mind what to do but decides, rather than run, that he will do as she says and wash his face.

Roger doesn't run because he respects Mrs. Jones's authority and is intrigued by this woman's concern for him and apparent trust in him—despite the fact that he just tried to steal from her. He feels safe with her, and this is a strange feeling for him. Even though he is still not sure what Mrs. Jones intends to do with him, he feels a connection with her and even tells her what he would have done with the money had he managed to steal her purse.

In chapter 14, what did Atticus mean when he said, "Cal's lights are pretty good"? How do readers know Atticus is correct in his judgment of...

In chapter 14, Scout asks Atticus about rape and he gives her a jargon-filled answer as a deterrent. Scout doesn't understand it very well, but she does ask why Calpurnia made her ask her father rather than simply answering her on the day they went to Cal's church.  Aunt Alexandra has a fit when she discovers this and must have told Atticus he should fire Calpurnia when Scout overhears him say the following:

"Calpurnia's not leaving this house until she wants to. . . Besides, I don't think the children've suffered one bit from her having brought them up. If anything, she's been harder on them in some ways than a mother would have been. . . She tried to bring them up according to her lights, and Cal's lights are pretty good--and another thing, the children love her" (137).

The lights Atticus is talking about has to do with Cal's intelligence, loyalty, and motherly experience. For example, it was actually Calpurnia who taught Scout how to write. In chapter 2, when Scout's teacher, Miss Caroline, discovers that Scout can read anything placed in front of her, the teacher gets angry. So, Scout starts to write a letter to Dill and her teacher tells her not to write. Scout responds by thinking the following:

"Calpurnia was to blame for this. It kept me from driving her crazy on rainy days, I guess. She would set me a writing task by scrawling the alphabet firmly across the top of a tablet, then copying out a chapter of the Bible beneath. If I reproduced her penmanship satisfactorily, she rewarded me with an open-faced sandwich of bread and butter and sugar. . . I seldom pleased her and she seldom rewarded me" (19).

The children learn in chapter 12 that Calpurnia taught her son Zeebo to read and write. They also discover that most black folks aren't literate because Zeebo, the church chorister, must lead the singing line by line. Honestly, of all the African American nannies that the Finches could have, they got the best in Cal. She's a great cook, she teaches the kids to read and write, and she takes care of the kids when Atticus is away on business. She should not be fired simply because Aunt Alexandra feels she should leave; and, it's good to know that Atticus stands up for her.

What help does Calypso give Odysseus in The Odyssey?

Calypso helps Odysseus by first agreeing to set him free, and then by promising him a raft and provisions for his journey home.

By way of the messenger Hermes, Zeus orders Calypso to free Odysseus. Calypso rails against the male gods who take mortals for wives, but are angered when the female gods take a mortal man. Nevertheless, she obeys. When she finds the unhappy Odysseus crying as the

                     ...sweet days of his lifetime
were running out in anguish over his exile,
for long ago the nymph had ceased to please.

Calypso approaches Odysseus, telling him to calm himself:

"Here you need grieve no more.... 
                  I have pondered it,
and I shall help you go."

Then, she takes him into her cave, where she has her serving maids bring him food. Still, she tries to convince Odysseus to stay, telling him of the dangers of the sea and offering to make him immortal is he stays. Much like the jealous woman, she asks Odysseus if she is less desirable than the wife for whom he pines. Odysseus calms her by saying that she has no reason for jealousy as Penelope is but a mortal, also. Offering his main desire to leave her as wishing to return home, he says,

                             "...Yet it is true, each day
I long for home, long for the sight of home..."

Thus, able to not offend Calypso by arguing that it is his home he misses more than his wife, he is allowed to construct a raft and set sail, although she watches him depart with great sadness. Moreover, just as Calypso has warned, Odysseus finds himself on a dangerous sea because the god Poseidon has generated a storm that destroys the raft. Fortunately, however, the goddess Ino comes to his rescue, by providing Odysseus with a veil that keeps him safe after his raft is wrecked. After eighteen days at sea, having been flung farther out and against jagged rocks, Odysseus again meets with good fortune as Athena intervenes along with a sea nymph. They, then, direct his course. At last, Odysseus finds a river that flows up to the coast of the island of Scheria. There he hides himself in a pile of leaves. Exhausted by this final effort, Odysseus throws off the protective veil given him by Ino as she has instructed him, and Athena "showered sleep/ that his distress should end." 

In Chapter 4, how did the mask affect Roger's behavior? Why is the mask “a thing of its own”?

In Chapter Four, Maurice and Roger emerge from the forest and, seeing two of the small boys, the bigger boys destroy their creations in the sand. Shortly thereafter, Roger throws rocks that just miss Henry as he plays on the beach. But, when Jack calls him and displays his mask, Roger "understands" that there is something compelling about the mask.

At the beginning of the chapter, Roger and Maurice destroy the sand castles the littluns...

In Chapter Four, Maurice and Roger emerge from the forest and, seeing two of the small boys, the bigger boys destroy their creations in the sand. Shortly thereafter, Roger throws rocks that just miss Henry as he plays on the beach. But, when Jack calls him and displays his mask, Roger "understands" that there is something compelling about the mask.

At the beginning of the chapter, Roger and Maurice destroy the sand castles the littluns have built, causing Percival to get sand in his eyes and cry. Later, Roger watches Henry play in the pool and he throws stones around Henry "...because his [Roger’s] arm was conditioned by a civilization that knew nothing of him and was in ruins" (Ch.4).

Roger has been punished in school for harming others. His society has conditioned him with its values. However, after Henry loses interest and leaves the beach, Jack, who has been watching Roger, eagerly calls the mean boy over to him. Jack explains that when they hunt, the pigs see his face and run off. But, if he disguises himself, then he may be more successful in killing the pigs.

He began to dance and his laughter became a bloodthirsty snarling. He capered toward Bill, and the mask was a thing of its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness. (Ch. 4)

Watching Jack, Roger understands that Jack acts out his natural savage urges when he can hide behind his mask. The mask becomes "a thing of its own" as it liberates those who wear one from the conditioning of their society, and it compels the others to obey. The constraints of society are what has kept Roger from hitting Henry with the stones that he has thrown. Later, when he wears a mask, Roger also liberates his own cruel tendencies and acts upon them with great violence.

What's Brooke's attitude towards the war in "The Old Vicarage, Grantchester"? What's the theme of this poem?

"The Old Vicarage, Grantchester" by Rupert Brooke plays with the genre of the traditional pastoral, adding some elements of humor, while still conveying a traveler's longing for the peaceful environment of his home. There is no obvious war theme in the poem, as it was actually written before the outbreak of World War I. It does display attitudes of anti-Semitism, misogyny, and xenophobia, as well as class prejudice, all components of Brooke's sense of patriotism.

...

"The Old Vicarage, Grantchester" by Rupert Brooke plays with the genre of the traditional pastoral, adding some elements of humor, while still conveying a traveler's longing for the peaceful environment of his home. There is no obvious war theme in the poem, as it was actually written before the outbreak of World War I. It does display attitudes of anti-Semitism, misogyny, and xenophobia, as well as class prejudice, all components of Brooke's sense of patriotism.

Grantchester is a small village outside the great university town of Cambridge. It is approximately a one to two hour walk from Cambridge, along a scenic footpath. Students, professors, and tourists often walk down from Cambridge to Grantchester for tea on weekend afternoons in warm weather and it is a favored place for well-off Cambridge professors to retire. Brooke and his circle often visited Grantchester, where they engaged in various sexual exploits; the nostalgia here has a rather decadent subtext if one reads it in light of Brooke's biography.

In this poem, Brooke draws a parallel to people in the busy town of Cambridge taking refuge in Grantchester with himself dreaming of his home in England while traveling abroad. His brief description of the contrast between his situation as a traveler and the beauties of home appear in the lines: 

Here am I, sweating, sick, and hot, ...

...Temperamentvoll German Jews

Drink beer around ...

His nostalgia for England seems balanced with hatred of Germany and anti-Semitism. One could argue that he would see war as a defense of this idyllic setting of Grantchester and the peaceful pastoral setting as something that would be lost in the war, but it is not certain that when he wrote this poem he was writing with that sort of foresight.

How does sonnet 138 compare with sonnet 61? How do they contrast?

Shakespeare's sonnet 61 and sonnet 138 both offer interesting glimpses into the complicated nature of romantic relationships. Both pieces have similarities and differences, and so it helps to carefully weigh them by comparing and contrasting the two poems.

First, let's compare the similarities. Both poems deal with two romantic partners engaged in some kind of deception, or at least some kind of perceived deception. In sonnet 61, the speaker sits up in bed, worrying about...

Shakespeare's sonnet 61 and sonnet 138 both offer interesting glimpses into the complicated nature of romantic relationships. Both pieces have similarities and differences, and so it helps to carefully weigh them by comparing and contrasting the two poems.

First, let's compare the similarities. Both poems deal with two romantic partners engaged in some kind of deception, or at least some kind of perceived deception. In sonnet 61, the speaker sits up in bed, worrying about where his love might be, as is evidenced by the lines, "Mine own true love that doth my rest defeat/ To play the watchman ever for thy sake" (11-12). This suggests that the speaker is kept up at night jealously worrying about his partner. He goes on to say, "For thee I watch, whilst thou dost wake elsewhere,/ From me far off, with others all too near" (13-14). These lines suggest that the speaker does not trust his partner, and that he suspects she is sleeping with someone else in another bed. Thus, it's clear that there is at least some element of perceived deception at work in this relationship. Likewise, in sonnet 138, the speaker suspects his partner of lying to him, saying, "When my love swears that she is made of truth,/ I do believe her, though I know she lies" (1-2). As in sonnet 61, the speaker is aware of his partner's deceptive ways. As such, both sonnets depict romantic relationships riddled with lies and deception.

There, however, a few differences at work. The main contrast is that, in sonnet 138, it seems as though the narrator is also a lier (8), and his relationship with his partner seems to work. He says, "in our faults by lies we flattered be" (14), and this closing statement suggests that speaker is at peace and accepts a relationship based on mutual deception. In contrast, the speaker in sonnet 61 appears supremely distressed at his partner's deception. He describes his partner's imaging as mocking (4), and says his partner's "image should keep open/ My heavy eyelids to the weary night" (1-2). Thus, unlike the speaker in sonnet 138, the narrator in sonnet 61 seems upset and stressed by his partner's deception. As such, though both poems focus on relationships based on lies, they offer two contrasting ways of dealing with said lies. In sonnet 138, the deception appears to hold the relationship together, while the deception appears to be tearing the relationship apart in sonnet 61. 

When he comes to after fainting, what does the narrator remember?

The answer to your question is found a full paragraph after the narrator tells his readers that he had "swooned."  The reason for that is because the narrator begins philosophizing with the reader about how the body slowly comes to be more alert after fainting.  This is the paragraph that really taxes most of my students.  But after that paragraph the narrator finally gets around to telling his readers about a faint memory.  The memory...

The answer to your question is found a full paragraph after the narrator tells his readers that he had "swooned."  The reason for that is because the narrator begins philosophizing with the reader about how the body slowly comes to be more alert after fainting.  This is the paragraph that really taxes most of my students.  But after that paragraph the narrator finally gets around to telling his readers about a faint memory.  The memory is of being lifted up and being carried down.  Down a long way.  The narrator remembers that he felt the descent was so long that he became dizzy from it.  At the very end of his descent and memory, the narrator then tells his readers that he remembers flatness and dampness.  The flat damp location is his cell with the pit and the pendulum.  

These shadows of memory tell, indistinctly, of tall figures that lifted and bore me in silence down—down—still down—till a hideous dizziness oppressed me at the mere idea of the interminableness of the descent. . . After this I call to mind flatness and dampness.

What do you get when you subtract the atomic number from the atomic mass of an element?

An atom consists of three main type of particles: protons, neutrons and electrons. Protons and neutrons are present within the nucleus, while electrons are outside it. The number of protons in an atom is also known as the atomic number.

Thus, atomic number = number of protons.

The total number of protons and neutrons in an atom is known as the mass number. The atomic mass is the weighted average of mass numbers of all...

An atom consists of three main type of particles: protons, neutrons and electrons. Protons and neutrons are present within the nucleus, while electrons are outside it. The number of protons in an atom is also known as the atomic number.

Thus, atomic number = number of protons.

The total number of protons and neutrons in an atom is known as the mass number. The atomic mass is the weighted average of mass numbers of all the isotopes. Generally an element will not have isotopes, or one dominant isotope. Thus, we generally consider both mass number and atomic mass to be the same.

Therefore, atomic mass = number of protons + number of neutrons

If we subtract the atomic number from the atomic mass:

atomic mass - atomic number = number of protons + number of neutrons - number of protons.

= number of neutrons

Thus we get the number of neutrons present in an atom when we subtract the atomic number from the atomic mass.

Hope this helps. 

Who wrote Hamlet? |

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmarkis a tragic play written by William Shakespeare. It was written in England around 1600-1602. Hamlet is a play about a prince whose father is murdered by his uncle, Claudius. Claudius marries Hamlet's mother and takes possession of the throne. Meanwhile, Hamlet speaks with his father's ghost who tells him that Claudius murdered him by pouring poison down his ear while he was sleeping. The Ghost also bids...

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is a tragic play written by William Shakespeare. It was written in England around 1600-1602. Hamlet is a play about a prince whose father is murdered by his uncle, Claudius. Claudius marries Hamlet's mother and takes possession of the throne. Meanwhile, Hamlet speaks with his father's ghost who tells him that Claudius murdered him by pouring poison down his ear while he was sleeping. The Ghost also bids Hamlet to avenge his death on Claudius, but to let his mother live out her days with the guilt. Thus, Hamlet struggles to accept what his uncle and mother have done, how he can prove that they did it, and how to execute justice. Hamlet's tragic flaw is his indecision to act on what he knows about his uncle. This indecisiveness ultimately leads him to make mistakes and become too emotionally charged to save himself from destruction.

In Maya Angelou’s speech for Coretta Scott King’s funeral, what are the literary and poetic devices used?

In the speech, Maya Angelou uses metaphors to characterize Coretta Scott King. She describes Coretta as a woman who was 'born a cornflower and destined to become a steel magnolia.' Cornflowers are beautiful summer plants; they are hardy and flower abundantly throughout the entire summer season, often bathing whole fields in blue. The magnolia itself is a most impressive and stately flower; it is associated with the vibrant resilience of the South. The term, 'steel magnolia,' popularly symbolizes the inner strength and irrepressible courage inherent in southern womanhood. Maya Angelou uses the metaphor of the cornflower and steel magnolia to characterize the progressive vibrancy, resilience, and courage exhibited by Coretta Scott King throughout her lifetime.

In the speech, Maya Angelou also uses the metaphor of sleeping children to characterize the calm innocence of Coretta Scott King's hands.

In the midst of national tumult, in the medium of international violent uproar, Coretta Scott King’s face remained a study in serenity. In times of interior violent storms she sat, her hands resting in her lap calmly, like good children sleeping.

To reiterate the image of Coretta Scott King's purity of conduct (hands that are as innocent as 'good children sleeping' will never support violence), Maya Angelou uses the literary device of anaphora.

She believed religiously in non-violent protest.

She believed it could heal a nation mired in a history of slavery and all its excesses.

She believed non-violent protest religiously could lift up a nation rife with racial prejudices and racial bias.

Maya Angelou continues to use anaphora (the repetition of the first word/words in succeeding sentences) to emphasize Coretta Scott King's personal belief in the equality of all people.

She loved her church fervently. She loved and adored her husband and her children. She cherished her race. She cherished women. She cared for the conditions of human beings, of native Americans and Latin — Latinos and Asian Americans. She cared for gay and straight people. She was concerned for the struggles in Ireland, and she prayed nightly for Palestine and equally for Israel.

I mean to say I want to see a better world.

I mean to say I want to see some peace somewhere.

I mean to say I want to see some honesty, some fair play.

Maya Angelou also uses parallelism to lend a rhythm and flow to her rhetoric that is indispensable in emphasizing her plea for consensus.

And those of us who gather here, principalities, presidents, senators, those of us who run great companies, who know something about being parents, who know something about being preachers and teachers — those of us, we owe something from this minute on; so that this gathering is not just another footnote on the pages of history. We owe something.

Maya Angelou's use of end rhyme and internal rhyme at the end of her speech lends a unique, musical rhythm to her final words. End rhymes occur when the last syllables/words in two or more end lines rhyme with one another; internal rhyme occurs on the same line.

[Sings: “I open my mouth to the Lord and I won’t turn back, no. I will go, I shall go. I’ll see what the end is gonna be.”]

Hope this helps!

In "Soldier's Home," why does Krebs avoid complications and consequences?

Krebs gets back from the war later than most other soldiers, so he does not receive the hero's welcome that those earlier returners had. In order to be heard, to get some attention and appreciation, Krebs lies about some of his exploits during the war. He tries to portray a heroic persona, so that he might more easily fit back into society.

Eventually, he develops a feeling of nausea about telling these lies. Subsequently, even...

Krebs gets back from the war later than most other soldiers, so he does not receive the hero's welcome that those earlier returners had. In order to be heard, to get some attention and appreciation, Krebs lies about some of his exploits during the war. He tries to portray a heroic persona, so that he might more easily fit back into society.

Eventually, he develops a feeling of nausea about telling these lies. Subsequently, even though he wants a girlfriend, he does not want to put in the work to get to know a girl, let alone reveal things about himself. He doesn't want to have to deal with conflicts or the consequences of his own lies.

He did not want to tell any more lies. It wasn't worth it. He did not want any consequences. He did not want any consequences ever again. He wanted to live along without consequences. 

Using this rationale of avoidance, Krebs prefers to watch girls from a distance rather than interact with them in any personal or intimate way. It was easier for him to engage with French and German girls during the war because talking was not an issue.

Krebs may also have had traumatic experiences during the war, not counting those he lied about. These possibly have affected his ability to engage his feelings upon his return. Krebs lies when he returns as a means of fitting back into a normal social world. His only means of relating to others is by lying. When this lying leads to uncomfortable mental and physical reactions, he simply doesn't want to, or doesn't know how to engage with other people.

Throughout Walden, Thoreau poses questions. To what extent does he answer them? Why might he leave some unanswered or only partially answered?

In chapter two, “Where I Lived, and What I Lived For,” of Henry David Thoreau’s thoughtful memoir Walden, Thoreau poses these specific questions rhetorically in an effort to appeal to his audience and extol the virtues of leisure, meditation, and the pursuit of knowledge. Indeed, in this specific chapter, Thoreau emphasizes his desire to be removed from the hectic pace of the town, and to not devote his life to physical labor, but instead...

In chapter two, “Where I Lived, and What I Lived For,” of Henry David Thoreau’s thoughtful memoir Walden, Thoreau poses these specific questions rhetorically in an effort to appeal to his audience and extol the virtues of leisure, meditation, and the pursuit of knowledge. Indeed, in this specific chapter, Thoreau emphasizes his desire to be removed from the hectic pace of the town, and to not devote his life to physical labor, but instead be intellectually engaged and in tune with the natural world. Thoreau addresses his concerns in the first question that you mention:

“It matters not what the clocks say or the attitudes and labors of men. Morning is when I am awake and there is a dawn in me. Moral reform is the effort to throw off sleep. Why is it that men give so poor an account of their day if they have not been slumbering? They are not such poor calculators. If they had not been overcome with drowsiness, they would have performed something. The millions are awake enough for physical labor; but only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred millions to a poetic or divine life. To be awake is to be alive. I have never yet met a man who was quite awake. ” (Thoreau).

Thoreau laments that being caught up in the grind of societal expectations and physical work prevents individuals from leading rich, intellectual lives. He notes that men who live to work might as well be asleep and disconnected from the truly important components of life. He addresses a similar point with the second quote that you have provided:

“Why should we live with such hurry and waste of life? We are determined to be starved before we are hungry. Men say that a stitch in time saves nine, and so they take a thousand stitches today to save nine tomorrow. As for work, we haven't any of any consequence.” (Thoreau)

Thus, Thoreau answers these questions, but not wholly explicitly. Instead, readers gather his thoughts on the subject from his overall tone and thoughts throughout the chapter. Thoreau poses these questions rhetorically to encourage readers to question the validity of placing such an emphasis on physical labor while overlooking the joys of intellectual and leisurely pursuits, of meditation and thoughtful consideration of one’s surroundings.

In a bag of small balls 1/4 of the balls are green, 1/8 are blue, 1/12 are yellow and the remaining 26 are white. How many balls are blue?

Let's denote the total number of the balls in a bag by x. Then,

the number of the green balls is `1/4x` ,

the number of the blue balls is `1/8x` ,

the number of the yellow balls is `1/12 x`

and the number of the white balls is 26, is given. The total number of balls, x, equals the sum of the balls of all colors:

`1/4x + 1/8x + 1/12x + 26 =...

Let's denote the total number of the balls in a bag by x. Then,

the number of the green balls is `1/4x` ,

the number of the blue balls is `1/8x` ,

the number of the yellow balls is `1/12 x`

and the number of the white balls is 26, is given. The total number of balls, x, equals the sum of the balls of all colors:

`1/4x + 1/8x + 1/12x + 26 = x`

To solve this equation, we can first multiply the both sides by the least common denominator of all fractions. The least common multiple of 4, 8 and 12 is 24. Multiplying both sides by 24 results in

6x + 3x + 2x + 26*24 = 24x

11x + 26*24 = 24x

26*24 = 13x

To find x, divide both sides by 13. Since 26/13 = 2, we get

x = 2*24 = 48.

The total number of the balls is 48. Since the number of the blue balls is 1/8 of the total number, there are 48/8 = 6 blue balls.

There are 6 blue balls in the bag.

What promises are made in Bradbury's story "The Veldt?" Are these promises kept?

"Keeping a promise" means doing what you say you are going to do. The Hadleys are not very good at keeping promises. Or, at least, they are not good at being decisive. It is hard for George to know what the "right" thing is for the children. Perhaps his problem isn't that he can't keep his promises, but he makes the wrong ones.

At any rate, the one time the word "promise" appears in the...

"Keeping a promise" means doing what you say you are going to do. The Hadleys are not very good at keeping promises. Or, at least, they are not good at being decisive. It is hard for George to know what the "right" thing is for the children. Perhaps his problem isn't that he can't keep his promises, but he makes the wrong ones.

At any rate, the one time the word "promise" appears in the story is when George promises Lydia that he will turn the house off. Specifically, Lydia says

"You've got to tell Wendy and Peter not to read any more on Africa."

"Of course - of course." He patted her.

"Promise?"

"Sure."

"And lock the nursery for a few days until I get my nerves settled."

"You know how difficult Peter is about that. When I punished him a month ago by locking the nursery for even a few hours - the tantrum he threw! And Wendy too. They live for the nursery."

"It's got to be locked, that's all there is to it."

"All right."

Reluctantly he locked the huge door.

What follows is a protracted negotiation with the children about turning the nursery off; the children are very upset, and George waffles a bit. When it finally comes down to it, and George has turned the room off, the children plead for just five more minutes. Lydia intercedes for the children, and George reluctantly turns it back on. But the children trick their parents into going into the nursery and lock them inside, with the lions. What happens next is not completely clear: "Mr. and Mrs. Hadley screamed. And suddenly they realized why those other screams had sounded familiar."

One could interpret this as meaning that George, once he had turned the nursery off, should have "kept" his promise and not turned it back on again (note that Lydia, the one that made George promise to turn it off, is the one who pleads with him to turn it back on). At one point in the story, McClean mentions a proverb to the effect that "Children are carpets, they should be stepped on occasionally." Are we to understand the story as a kind of cautionary tale, about what happens when children are not properly disciplined?

I think the "promise" in question is really the promise parents make to care for their children. George and Lydia are completely removed from their childrens' emotional lives; they have replaced real love with the machinery of the house. The promise they broke, and the reason the children fantasize about their deaths, is the promise to love them.

List the steps for building internally consistent compensation systems.

Your question asks about the steps for building internally-consistent compensations systems.  Well-planned compensation systems have multiple aspects and are strategically crucial to successful human-resource management. 

The literature in business strategy and human resource management currently links business strategy and compensation.  The strategic and contextual factors of compensation represent intrinsic and extrinsic motivational outcomes for employees and businesses.  What follows is a summary of the steps for building internally-consistent compensation systems.

1. Gather background information regarding current compensation systems in the specific industry.

2.  Define the compensation philosophy.

3. Create internal, external, and individual equity by doing an internal analysis.  

• Determine benchmark jobs,


• Develop job analyses and evaluations based on work and worker-oriented activities, tools used, tangibles and intangibles, work performance, job context, and personal requirements of each job,


• Rank and group positions, and


• Create benchmark positions.


• Do salary surveys and employee censuses.


• Verify work locations, and 


• Determine direct and indirect compensation for each position: base and merit pay, production programs, pay for time off, employees assistant programs and benefits, incentives, deferred pay, etc.

4. Select data source for external comparisons of step three, factor comparisons and weigh comparisons of the individual, internal, and external data in following areas.

• Skill


• Effort  


• Responsibilities

6. Link surveys and comparisons to compensation philosophy and adjust as necessary.

7. Ensure equity in the analysis by employing a non-biased review of all findings and comparisons.

9. Apply statistical determinants to the adjusted compensation philosophy, and adjust as necessary.

10. Create market pay line for benchmark positions.

11. Develop a pay-structure outline by grading jobs within each benchmark to the compensation philosophy and the market pay line.

12. Calculate pay ranges for benchmark positions.

13. Calculate the gross cost of benchmark positions.

14. Present findings and recommendations to the necessary decisions makers and adjust the compensation as necessary.

15. Implement and evaluate the compensation in the following areas.

• Policy for compensation updates, effective dates, roles and responsibilities, and security and information access to compensation structures.

16. Identify and communicate the revised compensation system to the appropriate stakeholders.

17. Train the appropriate stakeholders on the revised compensation system.

18. Create evaluation benchmarks and comparisons, and timeline for doing each.

18. Review evaluations benchmarks and comparison, and adjust the compensation system as necessary.

While it may seem less complicated to streamline these steps, no business is static, so the compensation system should not be either.  To create an internally consistent compensation system, each step should be completed, further defined, and documented.  As times change, and the business expands, contracts, or stabilizes, so should compensation to create internal, external, and personal equity to reduce attrition and better manage the cost of employ acquisition and retention.

In "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud," how does Wordsworth challenge owning things?

I interpreted the original question in another way. I thought it was asking how the narrator was able to change his own thinking (not things) during the course of the poem. Here’s an answer.

In the opening scene, the narrator is walking by himself and rather aimlessly, since he compares the action to the movement of clouds. The impression is one of solitude with a hint of sadness. You can imagine shades of gray too,...

I interpreted the original question in another way. I thought it was asking how the narrator was able to change his own thinking (not things) during the course of the poem. Here’s an answer.

In the opening scene, the narrator is walking by himself and rather aimlessly, since he compares the action to the movement of clouds. The impression is one of solitude with a hint of sadness. You can imagine shades of gray too, with the cloud simile. Then he comes upon the field of daffodils. The yellow flowers are bright, cheery, and welcoming; and they offer a completely different scene and mood. You can’t help but be happy, just by looking at them (“A poet could not but be gay, / In such a jocund company”). This sight improved the narrator’s attitude immediately.

But Nature had even more inspirational power for him, and one that lasted longer than just that one day. Now he discovered that whenever he felt sad or low or depressed (“In vacant or pensive mood”), he could remember the daffodils and make himself happy again. He could improve his attitude, just by thinking of that yellow landscape. If you were asked to think of a happy scene or time from your past, what would it be? Does it still cause you to smile or laugh? Then you know how this technique can work. For Wordsworth’s character – or for the poet himself – the triggering thought was of the daffodils.

`3 + 6 + 9 + 13 + .... 3n = (3n)/2 (n + 1)` Use mathematical induction to prove the formula for every positive integer n.

You need to use mathematical induction to prove the formula for every positive integer n, hence, you need to perform the two steps of the method, such that:

Step 1: Basis: Show that the statement P(n) hold for n = 1, such that:

`3 = 3*1*(1+1)/2 => 3 = 3*1 => 3=3`

Step 2: Inductive step: Show that if P(k) holds, then also P(k + 1) holds:

`P(k): 3+ 6 + .. + 3k = (3k(k+1))/2 ` holds

`P(k+1):  3+ 6 + .....

You need to use mathematical induction to prove the formula for every positive integer n, hence, you need to perform the two steps of the method, such that:

Step 1: Basis: Show that the statement P(n) hold for n = 1, such that:

`3 = 3*1*(1+1)/2 => 3 = 3*1 => 3=3`

Step 2: Inductive step: Show that if P(k) holds, then also P(k + 1) holds:

`P(k): 3+ 6 + .. + 3k = (3k(k+1))/2 ` holds

`P(k+1):  3+ 6 + .. + 3k + 3(k+1) =  (3(k+1)(k+2))/2`

You need to use induction hypothesis that P(k) holds, hence, you need to re-write the left side, such that:

`(3k(k+1))/2 + 3(k+1) = (3(k+1)(k+2))/2`

`3k(k+1) + 6(k+1) = 3(k+1)(k+2)`

Factor out (k+1) to the left side:

`(k+1)(3k+6) = 3(k+1)(k+2)`

Factor out 3 to the left side:

`(k+1)3*(k+2) = 3(k+1)(k+2)`

`3(k+1)(k+2) = 3(k+1)(k+2)`

Notice that P(k+1) holds.

Hence, since both the basis and the inductive step have been verified, by mathematical induction, the statement` P(n): 3+6+9+...+3n = (3n(n+1))/2 ` holds for all positive integers n.

In the story "By the Waters of Babylon," when does John know he is to be a priest?

John knows that he is going to become a priest early in the story.  To be specific, John knows that he will become a priest in paragraph number three of "By the Waters of Babylon." 

My father is a priest; I am the son of a priest. . . He gave me the metal to hold—I took it and did not die. So he knew that I was truly his son and would be a priest in my time.

The first step to becoming a priest is to be born into the priesthood.  John is the son of a priest, so he has that prerequisite taken care of.  But being the son of a priest doesn't guarantee him becoming a priest.  John has brothers, and none of them have been chosen to be a priest.  Why?  Well, they weren't brave enough to grab a piece of metal.  

. . . my brothers would not have done it, though they are good hunters.

John knows that he has the chance to become a priest, because he is the son of a priest.  But he must pass two tests in order to complete priesthood selection.  He must be brave enough to hold the metal piece offered to him by his father, and John must not die from holding the metal.  Likely nobody would die from holding the metal, but everybody is afraid of holding the metal.  That's likely because the metal used to be irradiated from the nuclear disaster that devastated all of humanity.  John's society has become superstitious about holding metal, so only priests and brave enough sons of priests are allowed to touch metal.  John is one of those people; therefore, he will become a priest.  

How is Clarisse different from Mildred?

Mildred is obsessed with the parlour shows. In other words, she is a television addict. She has no interest in literature, books, or anything that requires critical thinking. She is comfortable with her life and sees no reason to change. In her society, she is a model citizen. She is happy (in ignorance) and does not question or challenge authority. 

Clarisse is Mildred's opposite. Clarisse is curious about everything. Note how engaged she is in...

Mildred is obsessed with the parlour shows. In other words, she is a television addict. She has no interest in literature, books, or anything that requires critical thinking. She is comfortable with her life and sees no reason to change. In her society, she is a model citizen. She is happy (in ignorance) and does not question or challenge authority. 

Clarisse is Mildred's opposite. Clarisse is curious about everything. Note how engaged she is in her conversations with Montag. She asks him question after question and even inquires about something basic, yet meaningful: she asks Montag if he's happy. Afterward, this affects Montag profoundly. He remarks that Clarisse has made him think deeply about himself. He does not get this kind of thought-provoking conversation with Mildred: 

How rarely did other people's faces take of you and throw back to you your own expression, your own innermost trembling thought? 

Clarisse is introspective, socially engaging, and full of life. While Clarisse intellectually and emotionally engages other people, Mildred channels her intimacies with her "family" on the television shows. She takes sleeping pills and places radio pieces ("seashells") in her ears while she sleeps. She is consumed with television, radio, and sleeping drugs. Therefore, she is removed from any real social interaction. Since Mildred is comfortable in this brainwashed state, she is never introspective. Clarisse is the opposite. 

Who does the Nurse say also wants to marry Juliet? What does she say Juliet's feelings are for this other suitor?

In Act II scene IV, Juliet's Nurse and the servant Peter find Romeo with his friends. The Nurse tells Romeo she has come on behalf of Juliet. She mentions to Romeo that Paris wants to marry Juliet. She tells Romeo that Juliet would rather see a toad than Paris.

                                                       O, there

is a nobleman in town, one Paris, that would fain

lay knife aboard. But she, good soul, had as lieve

see a toad, a very toad, as see him. I anger her

sometimes and tell her that Paris is the properer

man. But I'll warrant you, when I say so, she looks

as pale as any clout in the versal world.  (lines 186-190) 

By "fain lay knife aboard" the Nurse means Paris would gladly like her (Juliet's) attention, and by "as lieve see a toad... as see him" the Nurse means that Juliet would rather look at a toad than at Paris. We can see from this quote that the Nurse knows Juliet does not like Paris. She compares Paris to a toad, meaning that in Juliet's eyes, he is ugly. The Nurse goes on to say that when she tells Juliet that Paris is the "properer" or handsomer man, Juliet looks at her "as pale as any clout in the versal world," or as pale as a piece of linen. 

You can read the Nurse's exchange with Romeo on with modern translations and explanations of some key phrases. 

The winners of World War II attempted to avoid what three mistakes made by the winners of World War I?

1. After WWI, the Allies tried to just use laws/treaties to keep Germany from becoming strong again and from causing another war.  This failed. After WWII, they tried to take a different tack.  Now, the Allies occupied both Germany and Japan.  They did not let those countries go back to ruling themselves for years. Instead, they controlled the former Axis powers and tried to remake their societies.  In Germany, they tried to purge Nazis from power. In Japan, the US introduced a new constitution.  In this way, they tried to make sure that Japan and Germany would not disrupt the peace in the future instead of just hoping that laws and treaties would make this happen.


2. After WWI, the Allies created the League of Nations, but did not do a very good job of it.  Most notably, the US failed even to join the League. The League was, therefore, very weak. After WWII, the victors created the United Nations.  This was a much stronger and more effective version of the League of Nations. In other words, the Allies learned from their previous mistakes and understood that they needed to create a body that would be stronger and more effective.


3. After WWI, the victors essentially divided up the territories that had belonged to Germany.  They ostensibly placed those territories under League of Nations mandates, but, in essence, the victors just took the territories for themselves.  After WWII, this did not happen as much.  Korea became independent.  Taiwan returned to China and then became semi-independent.   Parts of China that Japan had held returned to China.  This made it seem less as if the Allies had fought the war as a way to gain territory.

The Allies did all these things because they wanted to avoid making the same mistakes they had made after WWI.

What were the Spanish trying to accomplish in the Americas?

The Spanish had several goals for the Americas. One goal was to try to gain more land. The Spanish wanted to claim this land so they could establish colonies in the Americas. Spain was trying to keep up with the other European powers in terms of having colonies. Spain needed to have more colonies in order to enhance its status as a world power.

Spain also wanted to spread Christianity. They viewed the ownership of...

The Spanish had several goals for the Americas. One goal was to try to gain more land. The Spanish wanted to claim this land so they could establish colonies in the Americas. Spain was trying to keep up with the other European powers in terms of having colonies. Spain needed to have more colonies in order to enhance its status as a world power.

Spain also wanted to spread Christianity. They viewed the ownership of colonies as a way to spread their religion. Missionaries came to the colonies to convert the people who were living there. The Spanish viewed the colonies as a way to help civilize the people living in the Americas. Converting the people to Christianity was one way to do this.

Spain also hoped to claim the riches that were found in the Americas. When they discovered gold and silver in the Americas, they wanted to mine these minerals and send them back to Spain. Spain viewed these colonies as a way to enhance their financial picture.

Spain had several goals as they colonized the Americas.

What is the dramatic importance of Act 1, Scene iii in Shakespeare's Othello?

The scene commences with the Duke of Venice discussing serious military matters with two senators. There is much urgency in their talk since they have been informed of a threat to Cyprus, a property of Venice, by a Turkish fleet that seems intent on invading the island. Reports about the size of this fleet are unclear because various reports provide conflicting information.

The sense of urgency and danger is heightened by the arrival of a sailor who cries out loudly to draw attention. He informs the gathering that reports indicate the Turkish fleet assembled close to Rhodes, which is well-defended. The duke and senators surmise the Turks' strategy is to distract attention from their actual goal -- to attack Cyprus. A messenger confirms their reasoning but informs them the fleet of thirty sails was steering its way to join another fleet in Rhodes. The messenger then says the fleet was making an obvious journey toward Cyprus. The duke then seeks to send a very urgent message to Marcus Luccicos, who is in Florence. We can assume he is an important military strategist whose advice will be needed to fend off the Turks.

At this point, Brabantio, Othello, Iago, Roderigo, and some officers enter. The duke greets Othello by stating that his services are immediately required in Cyprus. He then greets Brabantio, who informs him of a most vile crime that has been committed against his daughter Desdemona. Brabantio says Desdemona has been abducted and abused by someone who used witchcraft and potions to drug her. Upon further inquiry, the duke accuses Othello because Iago and Roderigo convinced him that Othello committed this crime.

The drama revolves around Othello, who must defend himself against such a terrible accusation. When he addresses those gathered, Othello speaks about his soldiership and the fact that he is not good with words. He acknowledges his elopement with Desdemona, but provides reasons for his actions:

Yet, by your gracious patience,
I will a round unvarnish'd tale deliver
Of my whole course of love; what drugs, what charms,
What conjuration and what mighty magic,
For such proceeding I am charged withal,
I won his daughter.

Brabantio insists that Othello drugged his daughter because he believes Desdemona, as a humble and morally upright person, would not willingly submit to Othello. The duke tells Brabantio that making such accusations is not enough proof, whilst a senator asks Othello to defend himself by explaining how he won Desdemona's affection.

Othello requests that Desdemona be summoned so she can speak in the presence of her father. Furthermore, he states that all his titles can be removed and he can be executed if Desdemona should speak ill of him. The duke then sends for Desdemona. Othello asks Iago to accompany the officers because he knows where Desdemona can be found. 

Othello then proceeds to explain how he and Desdemona became so attached. He was a regular guest in Brabantio's house, where he relayed his history to his host. Desdemona eavesdropped on this conversation and was enthralled by Othello's dramatic tales. She later asked Othello to repeat his stories to her alone, which he did. Othello said it was then that Desdemona fell in love with him, because:

She loved me for the dangers I had pass'd,
And I loved her that she did pity them.
This only is the witchcraft I have used:
Here comes the lady; let her witness it.

When Desdemona arrives, she vouches for Othello's claims. In the process, she tells her father:

My noble father,
I do perceive here a divided duty:
To you I am bound for life and education;
My life and education both do learn me
How to respect you; you are the lord of duty;
I am hitherto your daughter: but here's my husband,
And so much duty as my mother show'd
To you, preferring you before her father,
So much I challenge that I may profess
Due to the Moor my lord.

Desdemona's loyalty to Othello is evident here. She clearly states that, just as her mother had been more dutiful to her husband Brabantio than she was dutiful to her father, Desdemona was showing the same preference for her husband, Othello. Brabantio is devastated by Desdemona's honesty and feels betrayed. He bitterly accepts what she has said and tells the duke that he is done.

The duke advises Brabantio not to be overcome by grief over what has transpired since it will not profit him. The utterly distraught Brabantio, who, in his accusation against the Moor, and his belief in Iago and Roderigo's lies, has shown his prejudice and racism, asks the duke to continue discussing affairs of state. At this point, Othello asks that accommodation be provided for Desdemona when he leaves for Cyprus. When the duke recommends her father's place, the embittered Brabantio rejects her outright and refuses to provide her with lodging.

Desdemona declares she will not reside at her father's home because she would continuously face his resentful stares. She asks permission to accompany Othello. Othello promises Desdemona's presence will not distract him from his duties. The duke says Othello must leave at nine the next morning because the matter in Cyprus needs urgent intervention, and says he will decide whether Desdemona can go to Cyprus soon. Until a decision is made, Othello elects to leave Desdemona in Iago's care.

Brabantio tells Othello:

Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see:
She has deceived her father, and may thee. 

These words inadvertently plant a pernicious seed in Othello's mind which will later fester and grow into an insidious and destructive force.

The scene ends with Iago and Roderigo plotting Roderigo's journey to Cyprus in disguise. When Roderigo leaves, the malevolent ancient exclaims that he has formulated a malicious plot that will bring about chaos and death:

I have't. It is engender'd. Hell and night
Must bring this monstrous birth to the world's light.

This scene foreshadows the terrible events which are to follow later. The disruption and threat of the Turks become symbols of the perfidy and malice Iago plans to spread.

What are the major features of functionalism? How different is functionalism from the conflict perspective in the explanation of societal makeup?

Functionalism is a sociological perspective based on the works of classical sociologists such as Durkheim and Spencer. This perspective views society as a collection of systems that interact to create harmony and balance within a society. Major features of this perspective include analyzing social structures as "functional" or "dysfunctional" on the basis of their contributions to social stability, and differentiating between manifest (intentional) and latent (unintentional) functionality. The conflict perspective, which originated with the writing...

Functionalism is a sociological perspective based on the works of classical sociologists such as Durkheim and Spencer. This perspective views society as a collection of systems that interact to create harmony and balance within a society. Major features of this perspective include analyzing social structures as "functional" or "dysfunctional" on the basis of their contributions to social stability, and differentiating between manifest (intentional) and latent (unintentional) functionality. The conflict perspective, which originated with the writing of Karl Marx, views society as a collection of different groups that are constantly in competition for power in their society and access to resources. These perspectives differ in their definitions of what makes up a society; while functionalism views society as a collection of social structures with varying levels of functionality, the conflict perspective understands society as a collection of different social groups in constant conflict with one another.

How are Shakespeare's Othello, Lucifer from Paradise Lost, and Aphra Behn's Oroonoko examples of marginalized characters?

Shakespeare was a master of writing marginalized characters that are incredibly human, especially given the writing done by other playwrights during his life. Examples of this are Shylock from The Merchant of Venice and, functionally, all of his principal women characters. 

Othello is one of the most accessible examples of this because racial prejudice, especially against African Americans, is still a very prevalent part of today's society. 

In the play, Othello is marginalized because of the color of his skin. Here are two ways this occurs:

1. Animal Images: Othello is called an "old black ram" (I.i) by Iago. All of the animal comparisons Iago uses to identify Othello play on the stereotype of the time that black people have wild, animal-like hyper-sexuality. Or, even worse, that they are less than human. Later, Iago will call Othello a "Barbary horse" (I.i).


2. Desdemona's Unnatural Love: Desdemona is a young white woman who has fallen in love with Othello. However, her family cannot accept that she would have fallen in love with a black man! This love, they say, is "against all rules of nature" (I.iii) and a "judgment maimed" (I.iii). How could she have fallen for someone she "feared to look on" (I.iii)?

Despite all the horrible treatment Othello endures, the play is actually quite forward-thinking because it presents these racist opinions as wrong. Othello is actually an upstanding military general, well-respected and deserving of his rank and honors.

Next, Aphra Behn’s Oroonoko.

Oroonoko is an African prince who is captured and becomes a slave. The racial tensions he faces are similar to those faced by Shakespeare’s Othello. The white English view the Africans as total savages. And why not? They hear stories all the time of how the Africans “cut into pieces all they could take, getting into houses and hanging up the mother and all her children about her.”

Behn, much like Shakespeare, does not continue in the stereotyping of her day. She presents Oroonoko as an intelligent, controlled person—a real person. He is described in contrast to the savagery around him, even in his physical features. (“His nose was rising and Roman, instead of African and flat.”) In fact, Oroonoko is such a great example of an English gentleman that the white society around him seems savage by comparison. Oroonoko’s marginalization is largely by this society. He struggles to find a place in it given the color of his skin.

However, it is important to remember that Oroonoko is not as heroic as he seems. He, an African, sold slaves long before he was captured as one.

Lastly, let's examine Lucifer from Paradise Lost.

Lucifer's marginalization is subtler than Othello's or Oroonoko’s. Before he attempted to overthrow God, Lucifer lived in Heaven, where all angels were equally treated and equally loved. How could he have felt marginalized?

The answer is that Lucifer creates his own marginalization. His absolute pride and desire cause him to be cast out of Heaven to Earth, which he originally thinks is more beautiful. If he could have accepted his place in Heaven, Lucifer would not have faced being a literal outcast.

Also examine Lucifer's language. It sets him apart from the character of God. Lucifer speaks in beautiful, almost Shakespearean dialogue. He is interesting and bold, like Iago from Othello or an evil Hamlet. God, by contrast, is a boring authoritarian. Which character are we more likely to sympathize with?

Thus, we’re left to wonder if Lucifer is actually the hero of the story. Was he thrown out of Heaven (quite evocatively marginalized by God) for being interesting? For wanting more than God was willing to offer?

What is the strong insinuation in "Everyday Use" of how the first house burned to the ground?

In "Everyday Use," because the narrator alludes a few times to the house that had burned down, as well as the scars left on Maggie's skin, it's worth taking a look at that event--even though it occurred long before the action of the story takes place and doesn't seem to have much to do with the main struggle over the quilts. However, the fire clearly left Maggie with some emotional scars, too, which might explain...

In "Everyday Use," because the narrator alludes a few times to the house that had burned down, as well as the scars left on Maggie's skin, it's worth taking a look at that event--even though it occurred long before the action of the story takes place and doesn't seem to have much to do with the main struggle over the quilts. However, the fire clearly left Maggie with some emotional scars, too, which might explain why we see her skulking around the house, always timid, while her sister Dee seems to be free-spirited, physically immaculate, and bold.

So let's have a look at the moment the narrator recalls the burning:

“I see [Dee] standing under the sweet gum tree she used to dig gum out of; a look of concentration on her face as she watched the last dingy gray board of the house fall in toward the red-hot brick chimney. Why don’t you do a dance around the ashes? I’d wanted to ask her. She hated that house that much.”

Okay, so we know that Dee hated the "dingy gray" house, that she stood there calmly while it burned, and that Dee's mom knows all of that, too.

So far, those are the facts. If we want to know why the house burned, we have to make a leap in logic (an inference, or a good guess).

If Dee hated the house and stood there watching it burn, then maybe she's the one who set the fire.

The follow-up question, then, becomes why--and if we think of the house as a symbol of the narrator's old-fashioned family values and traditions, then it makes a lot of sense for Dee to want to destroy it, since she's determined to embrace a completely new way of life and leave her family behind.

Is "you should not believe everything you hear or see before you experience it yourself" a good theme for "All Summer in a Day" by Ray Bradbury?

I would say this theme doesn't quite get at the heart of the story. The children are envious of Margot because she remembers having seen the sun and they don't: it rains all the time on Venus and they arrived on the planet when they were younger than Margot. But that really isn't the most important part of the story. What matters is what the children do in response to envying Margot for having witnessing...

I would say this theme doesn't quite get at the heart of the story. The children are envious of Margot because she remembers having seen the sun and they don't: it rains all the time on Venus and they arrived on the planet when they were younger than Margot. But that really isn't the most important part of the story. What matters is what the children do in response to envying Margot for having witnessing something that they haven't. They can't, it is true, really know what the sun is like until they experience it for themselves, but they do believe it is truly a good thing before they see it: as the story opens, they are anxiously looking forward to the hour of sun that comes once every seven years. A better theme would be that we shouldn't bully or treat people cruelly because we envy them or that the children may feel more remorse over locking Margot up after they have experienced the sun, an experience so thrilling that it caused them to forget all about her. 

Is the rule in Chapter 15 of the novel Bud, Not Buddy meant to help Bud survive or thrive throughout the novel?

The rule in Chapter 15 that Bud mentions is "Rule Number 28," which is "Gone=dead" (Curtis 178). In Chapter 15, Bud is having a conversation with Miss Thomas about the little girl's room he is spending the night in. Bud asks Miss Thomas if the little girl would be mad if he stayed in her room and slept in her bed. Miss Thomas responds by telling Bud that he has nothing...

The rule in Chapter 15 that Bud mentions is "Rule Number 28," which is "Gone=dead" (Curtis 178). In Chapter 15, Bud is having a conversation with Miss Thomas about the little girl's room he is spending the night in. Bud asks Miss Thomas if the little girl would be mad if he stayed in her room and slept in her bed. Miss Thomas responds by telling Bud that he has nothing to worry about because the little girl is "gone." Although Bud is naive about certain subjects, he has learned throughout his life that gone, is a polite way of mentioning that someone is dead. Bud uses this rule in the novel to survive, rather than thrive. It is in Bud's best interest to understand the meaning and connotation of words such as "gone," in order for him to better comprehend certain situations. Also, this rule does not allow Bud to "thrive" and flourish in his life. Understanding that "gone" means "dead" is simply useful information that helps Bud understand particular situations.

What can the reader surmise about the Commandant's feelings toward Pavel from Chapter 7?

In Chapter 7, Bruno decides that he will build a tire swing to occupy his time at Out-With. While Bruno is swinging, he kicks his feet against the tree to go higher, but slips and falls off the tire. Bruno scrapes his hands, and there is a nasty cut on his elbow. There is also a gash in Bruno's knee which is bleeding. Pavel, the waiter who was standing by the window, had watched Bruno...

In Chapter 7, Bruno decides that he will build a tire swing to occupy his time at Out-With. While Bruno is swinging, he kicks his feet against the tree to go higher, but slips and falls off the tire. Bruno scrapes his hands, and there is a nasty cut on his elbow. There is also a gash in Bruno's knee which is bleeding. Pavel, the waiter who was standing by the window, had watched Bruno fall and ran outside to help him. Pavel carried Bruno across the lawn and cleaned his wounds when they entered the house. When Bruno's mother sees what happened to him, Bruno tells her that Pavel cleaned and bandaged his wounds. Bruno's mother sends him to his room, and Bruno overhears her tell Pavel that if the Commandant asks, she cleaned Bruno's wounds. The reason Bruno's mother does not want Pavel to tell the Commandant that he cleaned Bruno's wounds is because of the Commandant's negative feelings towards Jewish people. Pavel is Jewish, and the Commandant would be disgusted that a Jew touched his German son. Bruno's father is extremely prejudiced, and he is in charge of the systematic annihilation of the Jews at Auschwitz.

`2(x - 3)^4 + 5(x - 3)^2` Use the Binomial Theorem to expand and simplify the expression.

You need first to factorize `(x - 3)^2` , such that:

`2(x-3)^4 + 5(x-3)^2 = (x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5)`

You need to use the binomial formula, such that:

`(x+y)^n = sum_(k=0)^n ((n),(k)) x^(n-k) y^k`

You need to replace x for x, 3for y and 2 for n, such that:

`(x-3)^2 = 2C0 (x)^2+2C1 (x)^1*(-3)^1+2C2(-3)^2`

By definition, nC0 = nCn = 1, hence `2C0 = 2C2 = 1.`

By definition `nC1 = nC(n-1) = n` , hence `2C1= 2.`

`(x-3)^2 = x^2 -...

You need first to factorize `(x - 3)^2` , such that:

`2(x-3)^4 + 5(x-3)^2 = (x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5)`

You need to use the binomial formula, such that:

`(x+y)^n = sum_(k=0)^n ((n),(k)) x^(n-k) y^k`

You need to replace x for x, 3for y and 2 for n, such that:

`(x-3)^2 = 2C0 (x)^2+2C1 (x)^1*(-3)^1+2C2(-3)^2`

By definition, nC0 = nCn = 1, hence `2C0 = 2C2 = 1.`

By definition `nC1 = nC(n-1) = n` , hence `2C1= 2.`

`(x-3)^2 = x^2 - 6x + 9`

Replacing the binomial expansion` x^2 - 6x + 9` for `(x-3)^2`  yields:

`(x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5) = (x^2 - 6x + 9)(2(x^2 - 6x + 9) + 5)`

`(x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5) = (x^2 - 6x + 9)(2x^2 - 12x +18 + 5)`

`(x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5) = (x^2 - 6x + 9)(2x^2 - 12x +23)`

`(x-3)^2(2(x-3)^2 + 5) = (2x^4 - 12x^3 + 23x^2 - 12x^3 + 72x^2 - 138x + 18x^2 - 108x + 207)`

Grouping the like terms yields:

`2(x-3)^4 + 5(x-3)^2 = 2x^4 - 24x^3 + 113x^2 - 246x + 207`

Hence, expanding and simplifying the expression yields `2(x-3)^4 + 5(x-3)^2 = 2x^4 - 24x^3 + 113x^2 - 246x + 207.`