How can I analyze the meaning of John Proctor’s speech? How does it relate to the central conflict of The Crucible?

In Arthur Miller's play The Crucible, the protagonist, John Proctor, makes a speech at the end which reveals his hidden thoughts and also addresses the central conflict in the play. When he is asked to sign his name on the confession--one he gave that is not true and only to save his wife, Elizabeth--he becomes angry because he believes his word is enough. He says, "Because it is my name! Because I cannot have...

In Arthur Miller's play The Crucible, the protagonist, John Proctor, makes a speech at the end which reveals his hidden thoughts and also addresses the central conflict in the play. When he is asked to sign his name on the confession--one he gave that is not true and only to save his wife, Elizabeth--he becomes angry because he believes his word is enough. He says, "Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life! Because I lie and sign myself to lies! Because I am not worth the dust on the feet of them you have hanged! How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!" Proctor is concerned about his integrity and reputation because that is all he has. A central theme in the play is the loss or preservation of one's integrity. Abigail and the girls call into question the reputation of upstanding citizens by claiming they are in congress with the devil, and these people have no ability to stand up for themselves. Maintaining one's integrity and reputation in the face of slanderous accusations is difficult, especially during those hysterical times, and Proctor's speech illuminates how important it is to maintain it.

What happens in the ballroom dance in "Master Harold". . .and the boys?

In the ballroom dance in "Master Harold". . .and the boys, Sam says that people play out their dream of having a world in which there are "no collisions." Sam and Willie think it funny when Hally asks how many points are deducted in the competition when people bump into each other because they know that the dancers are so polished and professional that a collision would never occur on the dance floor. Metaphorically speaking,...

In the ballroom dance in "Master Harold". . .and the boys, Sam says that people play out their dream of having a world in which there are "no collisions." Sam and Willie think it funny when Hally asks how many points are deducted in the competition when people bump into each other because they know that the dancers are so polished and professional that a collision would never occur on the dance floor. Metaphorically speaking, Sam is encouraging Hally to learn to be one who doesn't "bump" into other people like a beginner would—he wants Hally to learn how to treat others with kindness and respect. And Sam says that sometimes the beginners do bump into each other and when that happens everyone needs to just get up and try again. So the dance works in the play as a metaphor for a world in which people learn how to treat each other humanely.

How do individuals acquire and develop language?

Language acquisition as an area of study has garnered profound interest, more so in the last two to three decades, by linguists and researchers interested in child psychology, cognition and development. Linguists and other researchers interested in child language acquisition from the perspective of phonology, morphology, syntax and even pragmatics, are separated by their theoretical perspectives as well as their understanding of child language data. Broadly speaking, there are at least two different camps that...

Language acquisition as an area of study has garnered profound interest, more so in the last two to three decades, by linguists and researchers interested in child psychology, cognition and development. Linguists and other researchers interested in child language acquisition from the perspective of phonology, morphology, syntax and even pragmatics, are separated by their theoretical perspectives as well as their understanding of child language data. Broadly speaking, there are at least two different camps that explain language acquisition and development.

The nativists believe that the child is endowed with innate linguistic abilities that make highly complex language acquisition and computation possible, that too rapidly and effortlessly within comparatively few years of time. The empiricists, on the other hand, focus on the role of child’s environment and general learning mechanisms and heuristics based on statistical regularities in the language input. In doing so, they pay attention to what the child actually says and how it changes over time, unlike their nativist counterparts who are more driven by theoretical procedures and abstract language learning goals.

The nativism versus empiricism debate has been further complicated by studies that show certain aspects of language development start happening even before birth. Using foetus heartbeat recording tools, it has been shown that especially during the last phases of the third trimester, the foetus can differentiate between mother’s voice and any other voice, familiar and unfamiliar language, and even between familiar and unfamiliar story/syllables. These preferences are recorded in infants as old as one day also.

The role of prenatal syntax acquisition has not been confirmed, however, as aspects of syntax are carried in high frequency acoustic signals that get filtered out (along with high amplitude acoustic sounds) by the amniotic fluid surrounding the foetus. The low frequency signals that do make it to reach the foetus carry prosodic features of the language only.

In any case, when it comes to language acquisition and development, there is a clear, impatient division between the nativist and empiricist school of thoughts. In my view, a complete, exhaustive study on acquisition and the course of language development should invoke both innate and input-driven accounts, and, thence, would be incomplete if one overlooks either the child’s genetic, species-specific capacity to acquire language or the role of experience and language input during language acquisition.

What is the meaning of the vacuum story that Nicodemus tells Mrs. Frisby in the book Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH?

The aim of the vacuum story was to inform Mrs. Frisby about the risks of taking the easy way out. This was with regards to the stealing culture of the rats. Nicodemus realized that by over-relying on the resources available to the people, the rats were exposing themselves to conflicts with the humans. He believed that taking the provisions from the people was going to be unsustainable in the long run because the resources were...

The aim of the vacuum story was to inform Mrs. Frisby about the risks of taking the easy way out. This was with regards to the stealing culture of the rats. Nicodemus realized that by over-relying on the resources available to the people, the rats were exposing themselves to conflicts with the humans. He believed that taking the provisions from the people was going to be unsustainable in the long run because the resources were limited and a significant reduction would force the people to capture or exterminate them. In this regard, Nicodemus sought to establish a self sufficient community for the rats to safely exist in, far from the threat posed by the humans.

In the vacuum cleaner story, Mrs. Jones substituted her traditional use of the broom and the mop for the more effective vacuum cleaner. The other women followed suit much to the detriment of their environment. The power company, in their attempt to supply the much needed electricity, polluted the environment because of the soot produced by the plant. This forced the women to work twice as hard and long and they still did not achieve the same levels of cleanliness that they did when they used the broom and mop.

The meaning of the story to the rats was over-reliance on shared resources (stealing) was risky but easy, while on the other hand, self sufficiency needed more effort but offered safety in return.

Why is Hally's outlook on the world so negative in "MASTER HAROLD". . .and the Boys?

In MASTER HAROLD. . .and the Boys, Hally's negative outlook on the world largely has been informed by the poor relationship that he has with his father.  Growing up, Hally felt abandoned by his father whose alcohol abuse negatively colored his home life.  Hally did not have a stable father, so he looked to Sam to provide this stability for him.  And Sam did just that--he acted more like a father to Hally than Hally's...

In MASTER HAROLD. . .and the Boys, Hally's negative outlook on the world largely has been informed by the poor relationship that he has with his father.  Growing up, Hally felt abandoned by his father whose alcohol abuse negatively colored his home life.  Hally did not have a stable father, so he looked to Sam to provide this stability for him.  And Sam did just that--he acted more like a father to Hally than Hally's own father did.  But Sam and Hally's relationship is complicated because the strict racial stratifications in South Africa prohibit an outwardly close relationship between Sam and Hally.  As a young boy, Hally did not really understand the distance that Sam was required to keep from him, and as Hally ages, he internalizes the feelings of superiority that the racial landscape of privilege affords him.  So Hally is particularly torn by the nature of relationships in his life.  As a result, he has a negative worldview.

How does Shakespeare show that Lord Capulet has changed over the course of the play?

When we first meet Lord Capulet he is discussing with Count Paris the potential marriage between his daughter Juliet and the Count. Paris is very interested in marrying Juliet. While it would be a good match because they are both from the upper class of Verona society, Capulet is hesitant because his daughter is still very young and she is his only living offspring. Capulet says in Act I, Scene 2,

My child is yet...

When we first meet Lord Capulet he is discussing with Count Paris the potential marriage between his daughter Juliet and the Count. Paris is very interested in marrying Juliet. While it would be a good match because they are both from the upper class of Verona society, Capulet is hesitant because his daughter is still very young and she is his only living offspring. Capulet says in Act I, Scene 2,

My child is yet a stranger in the world.
She hath not seen the change of fourteen years.
Let two more summers wither in their pride
Ere we may think her ripe to be a bride.

Paris reminds Capulet that even younger girls are already married and have borne children. Capulet is well aware of this and it is precisely why he thinks Juliet is not ready. Capulet has many excellent qualities in the beginning of the play. He wants what is best for his daughter.

Although Capulet is ready to fight in the opening scene during the street brawl caused by Tybalt, he is not inclined to fight at his party. When Tybalt discovers Romeo and wants to fight, Capulet urges restraint and even compliments Romeo. He says in Act I, Scene 5:

Content thee, gentle coz. Let him alone.
He bears him like a portly gentleman,
And, to say truth, Verona brags of him
To be a virtuous and well-governed youth.
I would not for the wealth of all this town
Here in my house do him disparagement.
Therefore be patient. Take no note of him.

Once again Capulet shows redeeming qualities in his patience and praise of the son of his mortal enemy.

Unfortunately, Capulet loses patience later in the play. He changes his mind about Juliet marrying and, in the wake of Tybalt's death, arranges the marriage between Juliet and Paris. He thinks it a good idea to bring a "day of joy" to make up for the loss the family feels. When Juliet is obviously against the idea he loses his temper in Act III, Scene 6:

How, how, how, how? Chopped logic? What is this?
“Proud,” and “I thank you,” and “I thank you not,”
And yet “not proud”? Mistress minion you,
Thank me no thankings, nor proud me no prouds,
But fettle your fine joints ’gainst Thursday next
To go with Paris to Saint Peter’s Church,
Or I will drag thee on a hurdle thither.
Out, you green-sickness carrion! Out, you baggage!
You tallow face!

Rather than show patience, Capulet insults his daughter. He has drastically changed his mind. A few days ago she was too young, but now she must marry Paris or face being disowned. This change in Capulet's personality may be more a vehicle of Shakespeare's plot than a true condemnation of Juliet's father. Shakespeare needed the plot twist to set up Juliet's fake death and the eventual double suicide.

Upon finding Juliet supposedly dead in Act IV, Scene 5 he expresses his profound grief:

Despised, distressèd, hated, martyred, killed!
Uncomfortable time, why cam’st thou now
To murder, murder our solemnity?
O child! O child! My soul and not my child!
Dead art thou! Alack, my child is dead,
And with my child my joys are burièd.

In the end, we have sympathy for Capulet and the role he plays in the death of his only daughter. The feud he and Montague engaged in led to final tragedy.

A rock of weight 17.5 N is immersed in a beaker of water while suspended from a spring scale with a reading of 9.00 N. The weight of the beaker and...

The answer is;

The net force on the beaker table  = 23.5N

In this system the weight of beaker and the weight of water are the only forces that acts on the beaker table. The other forces in this system are the weight of stone. But this does not cater the weight on the beaker table because it is suspended from a spring scale. The weight of the stone is cancelled by the force...

The answer is;

The net force on the beaker table  = 23.5N

In this system the weight of beaker and the weight of water are the only forces that acts on the beaker table. The other forces in this system are the weight of stone. But this does not cater the weight on the beaker table because it is suspended from a spring scale. The weight of the stone is cancelled by the force on spring scale and the up-thrust caused by the water in the beaker table. This is related to Archimedes principle. They are internal forces and it doesnot affect the force on beaker table.

How ever we need to make and assumption in this situation;

When immersing stone in the beaker water of the beaker does not flow out and it will remain in the same volume.

I need a thesis statement on how Romeo changes throughout the play Romeo and Juliet.

Thesis: Throughout the Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, Romeo goes from a young man who wallows in his own sexual frustrations to a man who is willing to die for the woman he loves.

At the beginning of the play, Romeo cannot function because Rosaline, a woman he loves, has told him she has decided to live a chaste life. With this knowledge, Romeo does not accept this woman's dedication to her Lord, but decides...

Thesis: Throughout the Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, Romeo goes from a young man who wallows in his own sexual frustrations to a man who is willing to die for the woman he loves.

At the beginning of the play, Romeo cannot function because Rosaline, a woman he loves, has told him she has decided to live a chaste life. With this knowledge, Romeo does not accept this woman's dedication to her Lord, but decides that since "She hath forsworn to love, and in that vow / Do I live dead to tell it now." This level of self-pity is common in teenage boys.

But as the play progresses and Romeo finds himself in love with Juliet after seeing her only a short time, Romeo is completely willing to sacrifice himself. He tells Juliet that his name, because it is the name of her family's enemy, "is hateful to myself, / Because it is an enemy to thee; Had I it written, I would tear the word."

And finally, when Romeo faces off against Paris and mortally wounds him, Romeo is strong enough to see beyond his pride, the same pride he could not see beyond at the beginning of the play, and promise Paris to lay him in the tomb with Juliet. In addition, Romeo sees his dead wife as something beyond himself and decides to die with her.

Overall, Romeo changes from a passionate, yet selfish boy, to someone who is willing to die as a martyr for love.

(You can also make the opposite argument that )

Using evidence from the story, prove this statement: The theme of "The Necklace" concerns the danger of attaching importance to wealth.

The theme of "The Necklace" most definitely concerns the danger of attaching too much importance to material things.

The way in which this premise is evidenced in the story is by showing how the greediness of Mathilde Loisel has grown so disproportionately throughout the years, that all it took was one event--one very simple event-- to cause her ruin.

This ruin stems from another very simple fact: While Mathilde feels that she deserves everything, she simply does not know how to be happy with anything she has. It is her insistence in having "this or that" what fuels her behavior. Deep inside, she does not even really know what she is searching for, exactly. 

The first danger of attaching too much importance to material things is that it makes us oblivious to the smaller things that could make us just as happy.  

Mathilde had everything, albeit, in genteel poverty. She had a home, a husband, food on the table, and even a maid! No matter how low in the social food chain Mathilde felt that she was unfairly placed, there would always be someone else in an even lower echelon. However, Mathilde was not happy. In fact, she was "suffering".

Mathilde suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born to enjoy all delicacies and all luxuries. She was distressed at the poverty of her dwelling, at the bareness of the walls, at the shabby chairs, the ugliness of the curtains. 

She felt that she deserved more and, as such, she wanted more. Unfortunately, the things that she wanted were just that: wants. Mathilde had everything she needed. This fact renders her, both, unhappy and ungrateful. 

A second danger of attaching too much importance to material things is that those who do it are in danger of letting objects define who they are as people.

Mathilde never gives a second thought to being just "Mathilde". She wants to be "looked at", recognized by how she is dressed, and admired by her looks. An opera dress with flowers on her head is not enough, despite of the suggestions of her husband. No. A dress worth 400 francs, her husband's personal savings, and some flashy piece of jewelry, are the factors that Mathilde chooses to define her.

Granted, Maupassant does make subtle statements regarding the ornamental nature of women throughout the story. Showing off her looks is, perhaps, Mathilde's only choice in her society. Yet, she embraces this notion and runs to her friend to borrow the flashiest necklace she can find. She does not pick the classiest nor the more reasonable: She wants to shine way too brightly. Her greed is akin to lust

Suddenly she discovered, in a black satin box, a superb diamond necklace, and her heart throbbed with an immoderate desire. Her hands trembled as she took it. She fastened it round her throat,outside her high-necked waist, and was lost in ecstasy at her reflection in the mirror.

Finally, if Mathilde had been less greedy, and her fantasy world less powerful, she would have talked more about the necklace, and she may have discovered its true nature: it is fake.

Instead, Mathilde gave so much importance to its looks, and its potential to "wow" others, that she made it her center of attention. When she eventually loses the necklace, and spends a lifetime paying back for a new one, she does this not knowing that she is doing all of this out of the mere thought of the necklace being real and worthy of all those sacrifices.

That is yet another allusion to the dangers of placing too much importance on the artificial and ornamental: things have price tags and remain around forever. Humans need to have values, and life is too short to waste them on things that add nothing to our personal growth. 

What would be 3 good adjectives for the policemen in this story "Lamb to the Slaughter"?

The first adjective that bests describes the police officers who are at the house of Patrick Maloney investigating his murder is easily led.

Although it took persuasion from the part of Mary Maloney, the policemen at the crime scene yield twice to the woman's requests for them to take either food or drink right in the middle of the fresh investigation of her husband’s cold-blooded murder.

This shows that they are easily led and manipulated based on how they set their priorities.  Although the reader knows what happened, what the policemen know is that a member of their own police department has been murdered in his own home, and under mysterious circumstances. The fact that a police officer has presumably been the victim of crime is a really serious matter that could affect the entire police department.  Yet, rather than putting into place the protocols that are necessary to preserve the purity of the crime scene, they accept Ms. Maloney’s invitations to share food and drink in the same scene of the crime.  Soon enough, they are all drinking whiskey and having dinner. Unbeknownst to them, the main dish is the murder weapon: the leg of lamb with which Mary hit her husband over the head after snapping.

One by one the others came in and were persuaded to take a little nip of whiskey. They stood around rather awkwardly with the drinks in their hands, uncomfortable in her presence, trying to say consoling things to her.

They even acknowledge the awkwardness of the situation, and yet do nothing about it. They slowly start to lose their inhibitions, a side effect of alcohol, and will end up feasting on the leg of lamb.

The woman stayed where she was, listening to [...] their voices thick and sloppy because their mouths were full of meat.

"She wants us to finish it. She said so. Be doing her a favor."

"Okay then. Give me some more."

A second word that could help describe them is shortsighted.

Their actual eyesight may be working well, but their observation and analytical skills are not. The synonyms used for the word “shortsighted”, according to Encarta, are: “thoughtless”, “limited”, and “restricted”.The reason why these descriptors fit the policemen at the scene is because the men’s sense of perception, their sleuth mentality, and their ability to look further than the immediate clues in front of them, seem to be null. Moreover, they are quickly satisfied with what they can get instantly, and then become blinded to everything else around them. They are satisfied with just the quick information that Mary provides, and then get distracted with the shot of whiskey that she offers, and the dinner that she invites them to eat. Have they so quickly forgotten what had just taken place at that very house?

Additionally, there is no sign of them employing any sophisticated methods to test the area, nor do they come up with viable theories. Even when the policemen are eating at the table, not one of them offers anything of importance to the investigation. Moreover, the food and drink in front of them seems to be of higher importance than the tragic event. Their lack of brilliance and poor observation of facts will help Mary to, literally, get away with murder.

One final adjective that can be used to describe the policemen is inefficient.

The meaning of this word, according to Encarta is

performing tasks in a way that is not organized or fails to make the best use of something, especially time.

The men start to waste time when they accepted the drink of whiskey. Rather than focusing on hard and circumstantial evidence, they limit themselves to ask a few questions, make some observations, and then yielded to the invitation to have a drink. That is a major waste of time and resources because, once alcohol is involved, any professional activity should immediately cease, as alcohol consumption during work hours is against work ethics.

It's not strictly allowed, but I might take just a drop to keep me going.

Therefore, in a typical investigation, the drinking and eating would have taken time and efforts away from the investigation, and so this would be a failure that shows inefficiency.

Imagine for one moment that Patrick Maloney was actually killed at the hands of a stranger, while his heavily-pregnant wife, who could be any woman, was away at the market. Imagine being that wife. Imagine finding out that, during the search of the crime scene that holds the key to what happened to your husband, the investigators sat down to have dinner and drink whiskey right there where the crime took place. This is crassly unprofessional, whether they were persuaded to do it or not.

Doing this type of procedure could potentially ruin an entire investigation, especially if the weapon is still around the house. It was worse in this case: the policemen ate the leg of lamb, at the request of Mrs. Maloney, not knowing that the leg of lamb is the murder weapon! It is no wonder that Mary is giggling away in the room next door as she heard them speculating what could have happened to Patrick.

What is the historical and/or cultural value of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice with respect to the time period in which it was written?

Jane Austen was born and raised during the Industrial Revolution, which began in England between 1760 and 1785. Austen herself was born in 1775 and died during the Regency period, which spanned from 1811 to 1820. The Industrial Revolution refers to the time in which England transitioned from a mostly agricultural economy to a mostly manufacturing economy, a transition that created many social changes. One of those social changes was the emergence of the middle class. The new mass production methods of the Industrial Revolution allowed many of the merchants and shopkeepers, who prior to the Industrial Revolution were part of the poor lower class, to increase in wealth and rise in social class. Suddenly, many merchants and shopkeepers had as much money as the landed gentry, enough to purchase their own estates and rub shoulders with the landed gentry, thereby creating a brand new social class--the middle class. Austen witnessed that the rise in the middle class created brand new prejudices and brand new social problems. Austen uses her novel Pride and Prejudice to satirize these prejudices and social changes, showing us the historical and cultural value of the novel in the period in which it was written.

Austen uses such characters as the Bingleys and Bennets, as well as others, to reflect the social changes brought on by the Industrial Revolution. Early on in the novel, Austen makes a point of informing the readers that Mr. Bingley's fortune "had been acquired by trade," specifically through the business of his late father (Ch. 4). She further notes that Mr. Bingley's sisters have conveniently forgotten their fortune was earned by trade in favor of remembering that they are only very handsome women and of a "respectable family in the north," which makes them feel they have the right to look down their noses at others, even if other people are technically speaking of higher social rank than they are. For example, they snub the Bennets because, even though Mr. Bennet is a member of the landed gentry, a higher social class than the Bingleys are in, Mr. Bennet married a tradesman's daughter. Hence, Bingley's sisters conveniently forget that they are also daughters of a tradesman in order to snub Elizabeth and Jane, daughters of a gentleman. The Bingley sisters' treatment of others shows us the extent to which members of the new middle class developed their own ridiculous prejudices, all on account of their newly acquired wealth.

Not only did members of the new middle class develop their own prejudices, members of the landed gentry and aristocracy acted upon prejudices against the middle class. As members of the middle class acquired new wealth, they also began marrying members of the landed gentry and aristocracy, an act some in England's aristocracy found to be repulsive. Austen uses Lady Catherine de Bourgh to illustrate the aristocracy's reaction against members of the middle class and higher classes marrying, a reaction that was due to the aristocracy's prejudices.

When Lady Catherine finds out there is a possibility that her nephew, Mr. Darcy, will propose to Elizabeth, a gentleman's daughter with tradespeople connections, she promptly pays Elizabeth a visit to attempt to force Elizabeth to promise not to marry Mr Darcy should he ask. Austen satirizes the ridiculousness of Lady Catherine's prejudices against Elizabeth, as well as the prejudices of all the aristocracy, in Elizabeth's following response:

In marrying your nephew, I should not consider myself as quitting that sphere. He is a gentleman; I am a gentleman's daughter; so far we are equal. (Ch. 56)

Hence, all in all, Austen's novel is much more than just a love story. It's a social satire that draws moral conclusions about Austen's society relevant to Austen's historical culture and even still relevant today.

The writer addresses "you" several times in the poem. Who is meant by "you," and how can we tell?

Maya Angelou is speaking on behalf of all African-Americans in this poem, addressing the white people who have subjugated African-Americans in innumerable ways since they came to this county as slaves.  The poem recounts the damage done, the response of white people who are offended by any African-American insistence on being treated as equals, and the ways in which the African-American will triumph in spite of it all. Let's look at a few passages from the poem to show this.

First, Angelou says this:

You may write me down in history

With your bitter twisted lies,

You may trod me in the very dirt...(lines 1-3)

In fact, this is a fair description of how African-Americans have been and in some instances are still treated. Some states have insisted, for example, in changing history textbooks so as to minimize the horror and impact of slavery.   

She also says,

You may shoot me with your words,

You may cut me with your eyes,

You may kill me with your hatefulness... (lines 21-23)

In fact, African-Americans have been literally shot, cut, and killed, not just in the days of slavery and Jim Crow, but also in America now. So this poem is not mere rhetoric. 

The second point she makes is that she is an African-American female with pride who sees that her pride offends white people, who persist in the belief that she should stay in her proper place, beneath that of white people.  Here is one example:

Does my sassiness upset you?

Why are you beset with gloom?

'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells

Pumping in my living room (lines 3-8).

In other words, anyone who acts as though she is entitled to be treated as a regular person is considered to be "sassy" and disrespectful.

But the nearly constant refrain through the poem is "Still I'll rise" (12), which is varied slightly from one stanza to the next.  Angelou is saying to white people that no matter what they do to her, she will continue to rise and insist upon her dignity, her value, and her equality.

Which of the following is NOT an epoch of the Tertiary period? Paleocene Pliocene Eocene none of the above

None of the above; all three listed are Epochs of the Tertiary Period. There are five all together, and they make up the first part of the Cenezoic Era. The Cenezoic Era is the current era; it began 66 million years BCE (before common era) and continues today. We are in the Quarternary Period, which began 2.6 million years ago. The first half of the Cenezoic is called the Tertiary Period, the subject of your...

None of the above; all three listed are Epochs of the Tertiary Period. There are five all together, and they make up the first part of the Cenezoic Era. The Cenezoic Era is the current era; it began 66 million years BCE (before common era) and continues today. We are in the Quarternary Period, which began 2.6 million years ago. The first half of the Cenezoic is called the Tertiary Period, the subject of your question. In order, the five epochs of the Tertiary Period are from the furthest back in time to the most recent:

1. The Paleocene 66--55.8 million years BCE


2. The Eocene  55.8--33.9 million years BCE


3. The Oligocene  33.9--23 million years BCE


4. The Miocene  23--5.3 million years BCE


5. The Pliocene  5.3--2.6 million years BCE

The Quarternary Period follows, 2.6 million years BCE  to the present. If you are looking for information on the plants and animals of the Quaternary please see the links below.

What importance does Wittenberg University have in Hamlet?

Shakespeare seems to be presenting a contrast between the secluded, idealistic academic world of Wittenberg and the real world as represented by the court at Elsinore. Hamlet must have been a student for many years. He would like to go back to Wittenberg, but his uncle specifically forbids it.

For your intent
In going back to school in Wittenberg,
It is most retrograde to our desire;
And we beseech you, bend you to remain
Here in the cheer and comfort of our eye,
Our chiefest courtier, cousin,and our son.

Claudius wants to keep Hamlet under close scrutiny. The wicked usurper naturally believes that Hamlet is bitterly resentful about being passed over for succession and could be plotting a coup. Hamlet could do this much more easily if he could get out of Denmark. He could find young supporters at the university, and he could also contact foreign rulers for military assistance.

Hamlet is a fish out of water at Elsinore. He is an introspective, scholarly man in the midst of a bunch of schemers, hypocrites, and one double-dyed villain. Hamlet forms an extremely unfavorable view of humanity in general as a result of the contrast between real humanity and the world he has read about in books, including religious books. At one point in the play he expresses his jaundiced view of humanity in a striking metaphors.

O God! God!
How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable
Seem to me all the uses of this world!
Fie on't! ah, fie! 'tis an unweeded garden
That grows to seed; things rank and gross in nature
Possess it merely.      I.2

Hamlet knows three of the important characters in the play because of meeting them at Wittenberg. They are Horatio, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Horatio becomes his good friend, companion, and helper. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern become spies for the king, and Hamlet will later have to have them beheaded by the English in order to keep from getting beheaded himself. 

Wittenberg was responsible for turning Hamlet into a recluse, an idealist and a scholar. This is a handicap at Elsinore. He has to evolve into a man of action because of circumstances thrust upon him. It turns out that he can't even trust the girl he loves. Ophelia is being used by both Claudius and her own father Polonius to get Hamlet to reveal his secret thoughts. She is a little like Delilah in the biblical story of Samson and Delilah. But Hamlet is like a young man who has graduated from college and is just beginning to understand that the real world is a lot different from school! Shakespeare never went to a university. He graduated from the School of Hard Knocks.

Wittenberg serves as a sort of foil to Elsinore. Although Wittenberg is never actually shown, it is referred to many times, and we can imagine how it looks and feels. It is isolated, designed for meditation and religious worship. After all, it was the place where Martin Luther became a professor of theology. At Elsinore, Claudius sets the tone of behavior by spending much of his time drinking large quantities of wine. When Hamlet first encounters Horatio at Elsinore, he tells him:

We'll teach you to drink deep ere you depart.

This is Hamlet's way of saying that Elsinore has nothing else to offer to refined, intellectual men like Horatio and himself. Hamlet is a captive at Elsinore. Before he encounters his father's ghost, he would like very much to get back to Wittenberg. Once he realizes that he is duty-bound to revenge his father's murder, he must realize that his academic career is at an end. He has graduated into the ugly world of reality. At the very end of the last scene of Act 1, he says:

The time is out of joint. O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!

Why does Jimmy Valentine ask for the rose Annabel was wearing?

When Jimmy fell in love with Annabel Adams at first sight, that was the beginning of his reformation. When he opened his suitcase in the bank and used his specialized safecracking tools to free the little girl trapped inside the bank vault, that was where his reformation no longer seemed possible. It was obvious to all the people who had witnessed his seemingly impossible feat that he was not a legitimate small-town businessman but a master criminal. He assumed that Annabel could no longer love him once she had found him out.

When he asked for the rose she was wearing, it was a sentimental request. He wanted something to remember her by. At that point he did not seem to know that Ben Price was waiting in the outer room of the bank to arrest him for the three burglaries he had committed in Indiana right after being released from prison. But when he leaves Annabel and all her relatives behind, with the intention of also leaving his business and the town of Elmore behind, he runs into his old nemesis and knows he is under arrest.

At the door a big man stood somewhat in his way.

“Hello, Ben!” said Jimmy, still with his strange smile. “Got around at last, have you? Well, let's go. I don't know that it makes much difference, now.”

Jimmy hadn't known where he was going or what he was going to do for the rest of his life. But once he sees Ben Price he knows what he will be doing for a long time. He is still carrying the rose Annabel gave him. It is a symbol of his love and also a symbol of the reformation which was the result of his love. He expects to take it with him to prison, where he will keep the faded flower for perhaps the next twelve years. But Ben surprises him--and surprises the reader--by saying:

“Guess you're mistaken, Mr. Spencer,” he said. “Don't believe I recognize you. Your buggy's waiting for you, ain't it?”

O. Henry doesn't tell us whether Jimmy is reunited with Annabel, but it seems likely that he will be. O. Henry plants a bit of evidence that Annabel still loves him and wants to marry him in spite of everything.

As he went he thought he heard a far-away voice that he once knew call “Ralph!” 

This is intended to foreshadow a future reunion between the loving couple. Annabel may be dismayed by the fact that her fiance had been a criminal, but his heroism in sacrificing everything to save the little girl, as well as her belief that he is completely reformed, should make up for his past.

How does Macbeth change throughout the play? What influences him to change?

Shakespeare needed to have Macbeth change into a tyrant for the purposes of his plot. Macbeth's tyranny and rule by terror makes many Scottish nobles and commoners flee to England. This unrest in Scotland is seen as a threat to the stability of his own realm by the English king, and this is what motivates him to go to the expense of raising a big army to overthrow the tyrant. If Macbeth had been a kind and efficient ruler, the English king would probably not have interfered in Scottish politics in spite of the pleas of Malcolm and Macduff. The fact that Malcolm was the heir apparent to the Scottish throne would not have been sufficient in itself to move the English king to help him.

King Edward knows nothing about what really happened when Duncan was murdered. The story Macbeth tells is that Malcolm and Donalbain bribed Duncan's two grooms to kill the old man in his sleep so that Malcolm could become king and Donalbain could become next in line of succession and also profit by getting all sorts of endowments from his older brother. Then, according to Macbeth's story, the two brothers fled because they were afraid of being found guilty of murdering their father. King Edward would have no idea whether or not the story was true. For all he knew, Malcolm might have had his father killed so he could succeed him. But in any case, Edward would not feel justified in invading Scotland with what was then a huge army if Macbeth had turned out to be a wise and worthy ruler.

Macbeth's descent into tyranny is hard to explain. No doubt he had no intention of being a wicked ruler when he murdered Duncan. He probably hoped to salve his conscience by at least trying to be as good a king as Duncan had been. He says in a soliloquy in Act 5, Scene 3:

I have lived long enough. My way of life
Is fall'n into the sear, the yellow leaf,
And that which should accompany old age,
As honor, love, obedience, troops of friends,
I must not look to have; but, in their stead,
Curses, not loud but deep, mouth-honor, breath,
Which the poor heart would fain deny and dare not.

That must have been what he had hoped for if he became king--honor, love, obedience, troops of friends. He certainly couldn't have been hoping for what he actually got. The only plausible explanation for why he became such a hateful tyrant is that everybody knew he had committed the worst sort of treason and were recalcitrant because he was not the legitimate ruler. This then compelled him to rule by force and terror. Otherwise he could not get obedience. But the force and terror only made everyone hate him all the more.

In William Shakespeare's Macbeth, would you consider Macduff a hero or a coward for his actions in Act IV? Some people view him as both. Explain...

There are very pertinent reasons why some would consider Macduff both a coward and a hero. To understand this perception, one needs to look at the circumstances in which he did what he did. The context provides greater clarity.

Firstly, one should understand that Macduff is very loyal to both his king and country. In Act 2, scene 3, it is he who discovers Duncan's most foul murder and when Macbeth later declares:

... Against the undivulged pretence I fight
Of treasonous malice.

Macduff retorts: 'And so do I'. This makes it quite clear that he will do everything in his power to fight the treasonous evil that has reared its ugly head in Scotland, just as he did when he fought against the traitors MacDonwald and the thane of Cawdor as well as Sweno and the Norwegian forces.

When Macbeth explains why he, in a moment of overwhelming passion, had killed Duncan's supposed murderers, one notes Macduff's skepticism, for he asks Macbeth why he did so. He is clearly not satisfied by Macbeth's explanation, for he later declares that he will not attend Macbeth's coronation, but would rather travel to Fife, his castle. He also makes the following statement Ross tells him that he will attend the coronation at Scone:

Well, may you see things well done there: adieu!
Lest our old robes sit easier than our new!

The fact that he does not attend the coronation and expresses his concern that their new leader (Macbeth) might be a greater discomfort than the previous one (Duncan) conveys his suspicion that Macbeth had a hand in king Duncan's murder.

Macduff disappears and we only hear of him in Act 4, scene 2, when Lady Macduff asks Ross why he had fled. Macduff's actions might seem cowardly in this regard, for he had left his wife and family unprotected, vulnerable to Macbeth's murderous spree. He seemingly was thinking only of himself when he hurriedly left Scotland.

Lady Macduff is deeply upset about her husband's actions and even when Ross asks her to not be as harsh in her judgment of him, she refuses to budge, seeing Macduff's actions as a betrayal of his family. She is so disturbed that she tells her son that his father is dead, not physically, but dead to them since he has abandoned them. This then, can be deemed as extreme cowardice. His entire family is later murdered by Macbeth's assassins.

We learn later however, that Macduff has gone to England to join Malcolm, the true heir to the Scottish throne (so named by his father, when he gave him the title, Prince of Cumberland) to raise an army against Macbeth. They have already received the support of king Edward and would march against Macbeth with troops led by Siward. Malcolm tests Macduff's loyalty by saying that he will be a far worse king than Macbeth could ever be and that Macduff should tell him if one such as he would be fit to rule Scotland. Macduff, in a moment of deep despair, passionately cries out:  

Fit to govern!
No, not to live. O nation miserable, ...

... Fare thee well!
These evils thou repeat'st upon thyself
Have banish'd me from Scotland. O my breast,
Thy hope ends here!

Macduff says that such a ruler should rather be killed. He would, instead, suffer self-imposed banishment than serve under such a corrupt ruler. He is clearly loyal to his country and refuses to serve a king that would lead it to its doom. He declares that his hope of setting things right in his beloved Scotland ends at this moment. He is clearly deeply distraught. Malcolm however, assures him that all he said has just been a test to see where Macduff's real loyalties lie.

The reason why Macduff fled Scotland now becomes pertinently clear. He wants to rid his country of the tyrant Macbeth as soon as possible. There was not a moment to lose. If he should have tarried, he might have been found by Macbeth's killers and been assassinated, just as Banquo and others had been. Macduff realised that he would leave his family vulnerable, but he sacrificed their safety for the greater good - the rescue of his beloved Scotland.

Macduff had made a desperate choice: Stay behind and ensure your family's safety and be killed in the process, or go to find help to destroy the malignant tyrant and ensure a life free of tyranny for you and your family. He possibly naively believed that the depth of Macbeth's evil would not be so great as to slaughter his entire family in their fragile state and that he would grant them some mercy.

In this sense then, Macduff's actions were heroic. 

What are three characteristics of the Ewells as described in Chapter 17 in To Kill a Mockingbird?

In Chapter 17 of To Kill a Mockingbird, we get a good description of the Ewell's background and living conditions during their testimony at the trial and through Scout’s narration.  As Scout is watching the proceedings, she gives the readers a little information about the Ewells.  She tells us that they are always on welfare, and they live near the black shanty town behind the town dump.  She also says that they forage for...

In Chapter 17 of To Kill a Mockingbird, we get a good description of the Ewell's background and living conditions during their testimony at the trial and through Scout’s narration.  As Scout is watching the proceedings, she gives the readers a little information about the Ewells.  She tells us that they are always on welfare, and they live near the black shanty town behind the town dump.  She also says that they forage for food, water, and furniture in the dump.  We also learn through Heck Tate’s testimony that Mayella shows signs of being beaten when he investigates the crime in which Tom Robinson is accused.  Sheriff Tate asks her who beat her, and she identifies Tom Robinson.  As readers, we know that Tom didn’t do it; it is Bob Ewell who abuses her and forces her to lie. 

Scout also gives us insight into the Ewell’s living conditions by describing how the children have worms and diseases caused by their poverty and filthy house.  Scout even notes that one time when she went with Atticus to discard their Christmas tree in the dump, she noticed how clean and neat the black homes were but how dirty and untidy the Ewell property was.  She remembers seeing a row of dirty faces pressed against the window as they passed the house.  The Ewell children live a terrible existence with horrific living conditions and an abusive father who does not care if they are educated.  The children never get the opportunity to attend school, much like Burris Ewell shows at the beginning of the novel. 

In the chapter, Scout also describes Bob Ewell as a “little bantam cock of a man.”  This description implies that Ewell is a mean, uncaring man who feels he is better than everyone else.  The Ewells are the epitome of “white trash” in the town of Maycomb.

What advice does Polonius give to Laertes in Hamlet and how does this advice still hold true today?

POLONIUS

Yet here, Laertes? Aboard, aboard, for shame!

The wind sits in the shoulder of your sail

And you are stayed for. There, my blessing with thee.

And these few precepts in thy memory

Look thou character. Give thy thoughts no tongue,

Nor any unproportioned thought his act.

Be thou familiar but by no means vulgar.

Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,

Grapple them unto thy soul with hoops of steel,

But do not dull thy palm with entertainment

Of each new-hatched, unfledged comrade. Beware

Of entrance to a quarrel, but being in,

Bear ’t that th' opposèd may beware of thee.

Give every man thy ear but few thy voice.

Take each man’s censure but reserve thy judgment.

Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,

But not expressed in fancy—rich, not gaudy,

For the apparel oft proclaims the man,

And they in France of the best rank and station

Are of a most select and generous chief in that.

Neither a borrower nor a lender be,

For loan oft loses both itself and friend,

And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.

This above all: to thine own self be true,

And it must follow, as the night the day,

Thou canst not then be false to any man.

Farewell. My blessing season this in thee. (I.iii.55-82)

Let us examine the above speech, full of excellent fatherly advice. He begins with "Give thy thoughts no tongue," which is advice not to always say what you're thinking, and then goes on to urge him not to always act on his thoughts. He then advises his son to keep the friends he has, and now make a bunch of new acquaintances willy-nilly, because loyalty can be hard to come by. He then urges him not to get into a fight -- "Beware of entrance to a quarrel" -- but then tells him to stand up for himself once he is in a fight. He urges him to speak little, but listen often; hear every man's opinion and reserve judgement. Then he gets a little more practical: Don't spend too much money on clothes, but what you do spend money on, make sure it is of excellent quality, because clothes are definitely important in France. Don't lend or borrow money from a friend, because you may often lose the money and the friendship.

But this above all: Be true to yourself. Be who you are. And if you are genuinely who you are, you will not be false to anybody else.

All of this is excellent advice and all of it holds true today, but particularly the last few lines: To thine own self be true. This is advice we constantly give our children and loved ones, because we know that it is the best path to happiness and self actualization. 

How does Benét use setting to create a mood of suspense and hold our interest in "By the Waters of Babylon"?

Benet's setting in "By the Water's of Babylon" is able to create a suspenseful mood, because the setting is vaguely familiar while at the same time being unsettling.  Normally, familiarity brings calm feelings, but that isn't the case with this story.  It's unclear at the beginning if this story is in the past or in the future, and not being able to pin it down is unsettling.  Then the narrator drops hints about "The Great...

Benet's setting in "By the Water's of Babylon" is able to create a suspenseful mood, because the setting is vaguely familiar while at the same time being unsettling.  Normally, familiarity brings calm feelings, but that isn't the case with this story.  It's unclear at the beginning if this story is in the past or in the future, and not being able to pin it down is unsettling.  Then the narrator drops hints about "The Great Burning" and metal that can kill.  That sounds immediately ominous and suspenseful.  Then, as the story progresses, the reader begins figuring out that John's society is a future society that has been completely wiped out.  The people have reverted to practically cavemen status, and everything about the nature and the Place of the Gods seems ready to kill John.  It's an interesting thing that Benet was able to do with the setting.  He was able to give more and more detail to his reader while at the same time ramping up the suspense by causing the reader to always have more questions than answers.  

What did the doctor tell Janie after he examined Tea Cake?

Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston details the life and struggles of a woman named Janie Crawford.  In the novel, Janie has three significant relationships with men.  Each one helps her to grow in some way, and become more complete and comfortable with herself.  Her final relationship, with a man named Tea Cake, serves as the most important of the three, as it comes the closest to being a mutually respectful, loving relationship.  However, it ends tragically. 

In Chapter 18, the Florida Everglades where Janie and Tea Cake have made their home gets hit with a terrible hurricane.  The two have the opportunity to leave the area, also known as "the muck," but they opt to stay and try to wait out the storm.  Lake Okechobee overruns the seawalls, and the entire area is destroyed by a deadly flood.  Janie and Tea Cake attempt to get to safety, but along the way Janie is caught in the floodwaters, and saves herself only by grabbing onto the tail of a cow swimming by.  Unfortunately, on the back of the cow is a ferocious dog.  She can't let go or she will drown, but if she holds on, the dog will attack her.  Tea Cake sees Janie's plight, and dives into the water to save her.  He gets to her just before the dog can reach her, but as he struggles to kill the animal he is bitten on the cheek.  However, he manages to kill it, and the two survive and continue on together.

About a month later, Tea Cake begins to feel ill.  In Chapter 19, Hurston writes,

About the middle of the fourth week, Tea Cake came home early one afternoon complaining of his head.  Sick headache that made him lie down for a while.  He woke up hungry.  Janie had his supper ready but by the time he walked from the bedroom to the table, he said he didn't b'lieve he wanted a thing.

The days progress, and Tea Cake's condition grows worse and worse.  Soon he can't tolerate the taste of water.  Janie goes to get Doctor Simmons, a "white doctor who had been around so long he was part of the muck," who quickly makes a house call to diagnose Tea Cake.  While he is there, Janie recalls the events since the hurricane; she tells the doctor how taxed Tea Cake had been with swimming, walking, and "fightin' wid dat big old dawg and de dawg bitin' 'im in de face and everything."  The doctor questions Tea Cake about the dog bite, and Tea Cake downplays the severity of the event.  Shortly thereafter, the doctor tells Tea Cake that he has some pills in the car, and asks Janie to come out with him to get them.

At the car, Doctor Simmons reveals the truth of the situation to Janie,

"I'm pretty sure that was a mad dawg bit yo' husband.  It's too late to get hold of de dawg's head.  But de symptoms is all there.  It's mighty bad dat it's gone on so long.  Some shots right after it happened would have fixed him right up."

Janie is horrified to find out that Tea Cake has rabies and the disease has been left untreated for weeks.  When she asks if Tea Cake will die, the doctor says that he is likely to.  A bad situation is made worse when the doctor tells Janie "de worst thing is he's liable tuh suffer something' awful befo' he goes" and "'Bout the only thing you can do, Janie, is to put him in the County Hospital where they can tie him down and look after him."  To make matters worse, he also tells Janie that Tea Cake "is liable to bite somebody else, specially you, and then you'll be in the same fix he's in."  Concerned for the life of the only man she has ever truly loved, Janie protests.  She says that she has a lot of money in the bank, pleading with the doctor to find a way to save Tea Cake.  Doctor Simmons says that he'll phone into Palm Beach for the serum but it looks like it is too late.

Shortly thereafter, Tea Cake is driven mad by the rabies and attempts to kill Janie.  Janie manages to save herself, but only by killing Tea Cake.  After a short trial in which Janie is found innocent, she leaves the muck to return to Eatonville, where she first met Tea Cake, and where her story begins and ends.

What are five social and economic effects overpopulation can have on a family?

Overpopulation can create several social and economic effects on the family unit.  Several of these effects are described below.

1.  Quality of life:  As the planet becomes more populated, we are seeing shortages in the water and food supply in various areas.  These shortages may create hardships for families, who may require additional resources and time to collect and gather goods needed for survival. 


2. 
   Habitual behaviors: Due to an increase in concerns about global warming and climate change, more pressure will be put on family members to change their daily routines.  Families will be asked to conserve more resources and change many of their typical day-to-day practices.


3. 
   Economic hardships: Due to a limited supply of many resources, prices for goods and services will increase substantially, creating new hardships for the average family.


4. 
   Housing:  Overpopulation will result in less living space for individuals.  This trend will change how families live and interact socially within our communities.


5. 
   Illness:  Closer living quarters, along with shortages in water, food and medical supplies will increase the rate of illness in the population.  Pandemics and epidemics will be more common.


6. 
   Crime:  When goods become inflated because of a limited supply, communities will see the increase of crime. 


7. 
   Freedom:  Within a more populated world, societies will need to regulate individuals more rigorously in regard to the use of limited resources.  Rations will eventually be implemented to ensure the fair and even distribution of goods.  This will result in fewer freedoms for the typical family.  More laws will be instituted due to the increase in crime. 

As our world continues to increase in population, we as a society will begin to see more and more effects on our lives. 

How did Soviet plans for Eastern Europe differ from those of the other allies?

The Soviet Union and the Allies had different opinions about what should happen in Eastern Europe after the end of World War II. We made some agreements with the Soviet Union that ultimately weren’t followed and led, to some degree, to the Cold War.

One area of difference was in Poland. Before World War II began, Poland had its own government. At the end of World War II, there was a Soviet-backed government in place....

The Soviet Union and the Allies had different opinions about what should happen in Eastern Europe after the end of World War II. We made some agreements with the Soviet Union that ultimately weren’t followed and led, to some degree, to the Cold War.

One area of difference was in Poland. Before World War II began, Poland had its own government. At the end of World War II, there was a Soviet-backed government in place. We had agreed with the Soviet Union to have free elections in Poland after the end of World War II. We expected some of the members from the pre-war Polish government to be members of the newly created post-war Polish government. However, there was little evidence of free elections and most the new officials in the new post-war government were from the Soviet government at the end of the war.

We agreed with the Soviet Union to let the people of Eastern Europe choose their form of government after World War II ended. However, the King of Romania indicated he received a great deal of pressure from the Soviet Union to have a communist government. This violated the Declaration of Liberated Europe agreement we had with the Soviet Union.

As a result of these actions and subsequent ones, the Cold War began and then intensified after World War II ended. 

What were some key character traits that Joan of Arc possessed?

Joan of Arc was a young woman of deep religious conviction. As a young girl, she was a devout Catholic who went to church often receiving the sacraments. People from her small provincial town tell of her upbringing as uneventful until she started seeing visions from St. Michael, St. Catherine, and St. Margaret who told her that it was her duty to help France defeat the English, which would put an end to the Hundred...

Joan of Arc was a young woman of deep religious conviction. As a young girl, she was a devout Catholic who went to church often receiving the sacraments. People from her small provincial town tell of her upbringing as uneventful until she started seeing visions from St. Michael, St. Catherine, and St. Margaret who told her that it was her duty to help France defeat the English, which would put an end to the Hundred Years War. She was tenacious and persistent as she convinced King Charles that God sent her to his aid. Being a young woman who believed that this was her duty, she courageously led the French army into battle. From these actions, one can gather that she believed deeply that her faith would carry her through battles and that her prophecies would be truthful. After the French defeated the English, Joan of Arc was captured, tried, and put to death. Throughout her imprisonment, she remained stoic, and during her trial, she showed her conviction in the voices of the saints who sent her into battle. Maintaining her faithfulness until the end, she remained silent when she was martyred by being burned at the stake. Her belief in the Catholic faith and unwavering courage in battle, and her stoicism in death ultimately lead to her sainthood.

What household items could represent Benjamin in Animal Farm?

Benjamin, the donkey, is presented as a somewhat aloof and reticent character who is just as intelligent as any of the pigs. He is also painted as stubborn and not very communicative. He rarely speaks and only comments in very conspicuous situations. Because he is so intelligent, it is easy for him to make astute observations about events unfolding or which are due to unfold around him. He hardly ever offers an opinion, although we...

Benjamin, the donkey, is presented as a somewhat aloof and reticent character who is just as intelligent as any of the pigs. He is also painted as stubborn and not very communicative. He rarely speaks and only comments in very conspicuous situations. Because he is so intelligent, it is easy for him to make astute observations about events unfolding or which are due to unfold around him. He hardly ever offers an opinion, although we are aware that he has as many opinions as any intelligent character would have. A few quotes which give us further insight into his character are the following:

Old Benjamin, the donkey, seemed quite unchanged since the Rebellion. He did his work in the same slow obstinate way as he had done it in Jones's time, never shirking and never volunteering for extra work either. About the Rebellion and its results he would express no opinion. When asked whether he was not happier now that Jones was gone, he would say only "Donkeys live a long time. None of you has ever seen a dead donkey," and the others had to be content with this cryptic answer.

Benjamin was the only animal who did not side with either faction. He refused to believe either that food would become more plentiful or that the windmill would save work. Windmill or no windmill, he said, life would go on as it had always gone on—that is, badly.

Benjamin was clearly indifferent and did not care much bout giving any opinion or support anyone, which also means that he was neutral about things.

In this regard, then, Benjamin can easily be compared with a cupboard which only gives up its contents when they are needed, much as Benjamin only offers an opinion or delivers an insight when it is needed, such as when he warned the animals that Boxer was being taken to the knacker or when he realized that the windmill was going to be blown up. A cupboard stores everything, just as Benjamin stores all his memories. It is quiet but carries much, as Benjamin does. It is neutral and has only that which it has been given, as with Benjamin, who judges on the basis of what he has experienced or seen.

Who is the main character in Wintergirls? What is she like physically? What is her personality like?

The novel Wintergirls by Laurie Halse Anderson is narrated by the main character, Lia Overbrook. She is an 18-year-old girl, a senior in high school, and has been anorexic since middle school, when she made a bet with her best friend Cassie over who could become the skinniest girl in the school. As the years went on, Cassie and Lia both strengthened and hurt one another by this wager. The wager and the secret of their eating disorders kept them close and allowed them to confide in one another. At the same time, they were supporting each other's self-destruction. 

Lia's physical appearance is slight, and very, very skinny. For most of the novel, she weighs less than 100 pounds. As a result of her lack of body fat, she is constantly cold, bundling up in lots of layers and bulky clothing. These clothes serve the dual purpose of hiding how much weight she's lost from her family (who are constantly worried about her and urging her to seek help) and keep her body warm.

To most readers who have wanted to be slimmer, Lia's wardrobe seems odd. Why lose all that weight if not to show off your body? The answer to that question gets at some more of Lia's psyche. For one thing, Lia does not see herself as thin. Even when she can count her ribs, she remains disgusted by her body, imagining globs of fat clinging to her body, picturing herself as far larger than she is. Secondly, her physical appearance is only a small part of why she is anorexic. Most of the disease is a psychological problem.

According to WebMD, 

"Certain needs, fears, family dynamics, and ways of communicating, thinking, and feeling put a person at greater risk of developing an eating disorder such as anorexia, bulimia, or binge eating. Some of these include:

• Low self-esteem.


• Difficulty communicating negative emotions, such as anger, sadness, or fear.


• Difficulty dealing with conflict.


• A need to please others.


• Perfectionism or always striving to be the best at whatever he or she does.


• A need to be in control.


• A need for attention.


• Troubled relationship with parents (although it may seem that the relationship is close).


• Problems separating from or being independent of the family.


• High expectations from family.


• Fear or ambivalence about growing up or developing sexually—including changes to the body during puberty.


• Struggles or fears with demands to be more independent and self-sufficient.


• Problems with identity—not certain of who he or she is or where he or she is going in life.

However irrational, an eating disorder brings a sense of identity, achievement, and power to certain people who have these personality traits."

Several of these traits fit with Lia. Because her eating disorder develops after her parents' divorce, it could be seen as what she does to cope with the emotional confusion and pain of her family breaking up. While her family life and her parents' choices are out of her power, her eating is something she can control completely. In addition, she is able to keep her parents' love and attention on her due to the disorder, something that many children of divorced parents fear losing.   

Readers can also clearly see the perfectionist in Lia when she talks about her body and anorexia. While coming up with her next goal weight, she says, "This body has a different metabolism. This body hates dragging around the chains they wrap around it. Proof? At 099.00 I think clearer, look better, feel stronger. When I reach the next goal, it will be all that, and more" (p. 52). "099.00" doesn't represent a certain way of looking for Lia—it's a goal that promises much, much more. She is absolutely success-driven and goal-oriented—excellent traits that are focused on one of the worst activities imaginable.  

Lia also reveals through her narration how much of her sense of worth is tied up in staying thin. It isn't just about looking good—it's about being good, for her. The mantra that runs through her head demonstrates this: "stupid/ugly/stupid/bitch/stupid/fat/stupid/baby/stupid/loser/stupid/lost." Lia doesn't just hate her body—she hates everything about herself. Striving to be thin is one way to combat that self-hatred. 

Why does Jem scream "Why can't she leave me alone?" after Mrs. Dubose dies?

In Chapter 11, Jem ruins Mrs. Dubose's camellia bush after losing his temper, and is forced to read to her each day, including Saturdays, as his punishment. Towards the end of the chapter, Mrs. Dubose passes away and leaves a candy box with one white camellia inside of it. Atticus explains that Mrs. Dubose was terminally ill and became a morphine addict to numb her pain. He tells Jem that his reading distracted her between...

In Chapter 11, Jem ruins Mrs. Dubose's camellia bush after losing his temper, and is forced to read to her each day, including Saturdays, as his punishment. Towards the end of the chapter, Mrs. Dubose passes away and leaves a candy box with one white camellia inside of it. Atticus explains that Mrs. Dubose was terminally ill and became a morphine addict to numb her pain. He tells Jem that his reading distracted her between doses of morphine which helped her overcome her addiction. When Jem opens the candy box and sees the "Snow-on-the-Mountain" flower, he says, "Old hell-devil, old hell-devil!...Why can't she just leave me alone?" (Lee 148) Jem misinterprets the purpose of her gift and Atticus explains that it was her way of telling Jem that everything is alright. Jem is a naive child who doesn't understand the duality of human nature. Jem can only view Mrs. Dubose as a mean old lady, and lacks the ability to understand her softer side. Jem asks the important question, "After all those things she said about you, a lady?" (Lee 149) This question illuminates Jem's innocent psyche. Things are black and white in Jem's mind. When he opens the candy box, he automatically assumes Mrs. Dubose is playing a dirty trick on him "from the grave." Everything he associates with Mrs. Dubose is negative which is why he reacts indignantly towards her gift. 

In A Christmas Carol, where did the first spirit take Scrooge?

As you read Chapter 2, “The First of the Three Spirits,” in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, you travel with the Ghost of Christmas Past and Scrooge  to his childhood boarding school. Scrooge was the solitary student left at the school while all of the other students, who ignored his welfare, left for Christmas break. In the next scene, the Spirit of Christmas Past shows Scrooge the time when his kind, younger sister comes to bid him...

As you read Chapter 2, “The First of the Three Spirits,” in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, you travel with the Ghost of Christmas Past and Scrooge  to his childhood boarding school. Scrooge was the solitary student left at the school while all of the other students, who ignored his welfare, left for Christmas break. In the next scene, the Spirit of Christmas Past shows Scrooge the time when his kind, younger sister comes to bid him to come home. The spirit reminds Scrooge that his sister died, leaving one child, the nephew, whom Scrooge treated poorly just that day.

Their next stop was the warehouse where Scrooge apprenticed under Mr. Fezziwig. They watch a party scene in which Fezziwig and his wife throw a party for family, friends, service providers, and their employees. Scrooge fondly remembers his fellow apprentice, Dick, and learns a lesson in gratitude and sharing one’s wealth.

Finally, the Ghost takes Scrooge to the home of his former fiancé. She is a mature woman with a loving husband and a daughter of her own. Scrooge endures a sense of loss and begs the Spirit to take him away.

How can I write a comparative analysis of Aristotle's notion of the tragedy and Sophocles' Oedipus the King?

In Aristotle's definition of tragedy, he defines six characteristics that all tragedies must have: plot, characters, diction, thought, spectacle, and melody. For each characteristic, Aristotle offers specific defining traits (see the hyperlink offered below). Here are some comparative elements that posit Oedipus Rex as a definitive tragedy.

First, under "character," the tragic hero is meant to be one of noble birth who displays a fitness of character. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus, as the tragic hero,...

In Aristotle's definition of tragedy, he defines six characteristics that all tragedies must have: plot, characters, diction, thought, spectacle, and melody. For each characteristic, Aristotle offers specific defining traits (see the hyperlink offered below). Here are some comparative elements that posit Oedipus Rex as a definitive tragedy.

First, under "character," the tragic hero is meant to be one of noble birth who displays a fitness of character. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus, as the tragic hero, is certainly one of noble birth, being the king of Thebes, and as a king he displays the decision-making qualities of one who is of kingly status. Aristotle says, however, that this character must suffer hamartia, and Oedipus falls to his hubris. Next, Aristotle says under "melody" that the chorus should serve as an integrated part of the play, one that arouses pity and fear in the audience, and in Oedipus Rex the chorus serves this role as they comment on the actions of characters, namely Oedipus, and try to suggest to the audience the ethical underpinnings of events during the play. So these are a few characteristics of the play that compare to Aristotle's definition.

Explore the significance of outsiders in the novel 'Of Mice and Men'; consider the context of the novel and provide quotes in support of the...

The idea of the outsider is very important in Of Mice and Men.  The outsider concept is very significant in the novel.  George and Lennie fight it, while all of the ranch hands live it.  Outsiders abound from Candy, who is an outsider because of his age and physical condition, to Crooks, who finds himself to be an outsider due to race. 

Much of the novella is about the outsider in American society.  It is defined by people who exist on the margins of society and who have next-to-no significant power, influence or importance.  The Great Depression helped to make millions of Americans live as outsiders, without economic, political, or social power. The migrant lifestyle George and Lennie experience is one of the best examples of the outsider because they have no larger, stable social and economic group that they are part of: the only group they are part of is the marginalized, powerless, drifting laboring group.  They move from ranch to ranch and hope to find work.   When the work is gone, so are they.  Steinbeck captures the feeling of being a drifting outsider when describing the bunkhouse  in Chapter 2.  He describes signs of transient of life that are representative of the outsider since nothing reflects permanence.

George and Lennie understand what it's like to be passing through society without belonging and to not have anyone or anything to hold to.  Part of the familiar story that George tells Lennie concerns what it is like to be an outsider:

“Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no fambly. They don’t belong no place. They come to a ranch an’ work up a stake and then they go into town and blow their stake, and the first thing you know they’re poundin’ their tail on some other ranch. They ain’t got nothing to look ahead to.”

George's story captures the importance of the outsider in Of Mice and Men.  The ranch hands live the life of one who has "got no fambly" and "don't belong to no place."  When Lennie exclaims to George that he must "tell about us," George speaks to the dreams of both men:

With us it ain’t like that. We got a future. We got somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. We don’t have to sit-in no bar room blowin’ in our jack jus’ because we got no place else to go. If them other guys gets in jail they can rot for all anybody gives a damn. But not us.

George and Lennie want to break the reality of the outsider.  They seek to build a "future" and to belong where there is "somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us."  It is for this reason that Lennie interjects "because I got you to look after me, and you got me to look after you, and that’s why.” 

Even ranch hands like Bill Tenner are outsiders because they work and then move on, only to be heard of in some random letter to a magazine read with joy by another outsider, namely Whit.  The young ranch hand is excited to see someone he knows in print.  The fact that an isolated letter would bring meaning to Whit's life reflects the extent to which he is an outsider.  Steinbeck writes a novella where the main characters are outsiders in the hopes of, just for a moment, bringing them from out to in, from margin to center.

What is an example of assimilation in Arthur Miller's play The Crucible?

As most people familiar with the play are aware, Arthur Miller wrote this play as an allegorical commentary on the McCarthy hearings and the so-called "Red Scare" sweeping through the United States in the 1950s. Many people in the entertainment and media industries were suspected of being Communists, even if they had only attended a meeting or were acquainted with someone who was one. The hearings before Congress were seen as a "witch hunt" because of their similarity to what happened at Salem Village, i.e. baseless accusations and assumptions being equated with guilt, hence Miller's setting for the play.

Communism in and of itself was not dangerous but Senator McCarthy was one of a number of government officials who believed Communists or Communist-sympathizers might become spies and "aid and abet" the enemy. Assimilation means absorbing or adapting to ideas or behaviors, usually in a cultural context. In the context of Communism, "assimilation" means to absorb and practice the principles and ideologies of the party, to try and transform the state into a Communist society. 

It would seem that the concept of assimilation in terms of The Crucible would, therefore, refer somehow to those being accused of witchcraft. But in an interesting ironic twist, assimilation in the play has to do with the accusers. Those who did not want to cooperate with the court's investigation, or who denied the legitimacy of the proceedings (including people like Giles Corey and John Proctor), were in danger of being accused themselves, because the larger socio-political context of the accusations was one of ideology and control, and not necessarily a belief in actual witchcraft. Thus, the assimilation that took place was one of convincing people that there was in fact an epidemic of witchcraft in Salem Village.

The route this took was largely based in what has now been called the "mass hysteria" experienced by the young girls who were the main accusers. It is clear that the young women enjoyed being the center of attention (as when Mary Warren says she is not able to complete her serving duties because she is now "an official of the court"), and thereby have an interest in prolonging the situation. Even when Mary understands things have gone too far, and wants to tell the truth, Abigail manipulates her in open court and convinces her to play-act along with the rest of the girls; this can be seen as a form of assimilation, or an effort to absorb the ideas or behaviors of a group, motivated by the belief that anyone not willing to "follow the party line" will be ostracized.

`y = x^3, y = x, x=>0` Find the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by the given curves about the specified line....

You need to evaluate the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves `y = x^3 , y = x, x =0` ,  about x axis, using washer method, such that:

`V = int_a^b (f^2(x) - g^2(x))dx, f(x)>g(x)`

You need to find the next endpoint, since one of them, x = 0 is given. The other endpoint can be evaluated by solving the following equation:

`x^3 = x...

You need to evaluate the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves `y = x^3 , y = x, x =0` ,  about x axis, using washer method, such that:

`V = int_a^b (f^2(x) - g^2(x))dx, f(x)>g(x)`

You need to find the next endpoint, since one of them, x = 0 is given. The other endpoint can be evaluated by solving the following equation:

`x^3 = x => x^3 - x = 0 => x(x^2 - 1) = 0 => x = 0, x = 1, x = -1`

You may evaluate the volume

`V = pi*int_(-1)^0 (x^6 - x^2)dx + pi*int_0^1 (x^2 - x^6)dx`

`V = pi*int_(-1)^0 (x^6)dx - pi*int_(-1)^0 x^2 dx + pi*int_0^1 x^2 dx - pi*int_0^1 x^6 dx`

`V = pi*((x^7)/7 - x^3/3)|_(-1)^0 + pi*(x^3/3 - x^7/7)|_0^1`

`V = pi*((0^7)/7 - 0^3/3 - 1/7 + 1/3 ) + pi*(1^3/3 - 1^7/7 - 0)`

`V = (4pi)/21 + (4pi)/21`

`V = (8pi)/21`

Hence, evaluating the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves `y = x^3 , y = x, x =0` ,  about x axis, yields `V = (8pi)/21.`

In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, why does Granger read Plato's Republic?

If one actually reads the final pages of Ray Bradbury's classic novel of a futuristic dystopian society in which books are banned, Fahrenheit 451, then the context in which Plato's Republic is discussed provides the answer to the student's question. Plato's Republic, of course, is one of the philosophical pillars of Western democratic thought. Plato's contemplations on the nature of a just society have been interpreted as condoning autocratic forms of government, but his writings on justice emphasize the importance of individual liberty, including freedom of thought and expression. As Bradbury's fictional totalitarian society is antithetical to the Platonic concepts of liberty and justice, his words would carry great importance to those, such as Granger, who seek to preserve such vital works of literature. Not for nothing, after all, does Montag, midway through Fahrenheit 451, ask a highly suspicious Professor Faber during their brief phone conversation, "How many copies of Shakespeare and Plato?" This early reference to Plato proves prescient when, following his flight from the city to the country, where he encounters Granger and the others, Granger notes that each of these intellectual rebels have taken responsibility for memorizing the great works of literature. Such tactics, they know, are the only remaining way to ensure that the knowledge contained in such volumes will survive the destruction of the autocratic system they have fled. Note, in the following exchange between Montag and Granger, the latter's explanation of this primitive but effective system for retaining the contents of the great works of literature:

"All of us have photographic memories, but spend a lifetime learning how to block off the things that are really in there. Simmons here has worked on it for twenty years and now we've got the method down to where we can recall anything that's been read once. Would you like, some day, Montag, to read Plato's Republic?"

"Of course!"

"I am Plato's Republic. Like to read Marcus Aurelius? Mr. Simmons is Marcus."

"How do you do?" said Mr. Simmons.

"Hello," said Montag.

"I want you to meet Jonathan Swift, the author of that evil political book, Gulliver's Travels! And this other fellow is Charles Darwin, and-this one is Schopenhauer, and this one is Einstein, and this one here at my elbow is Mr. Albert Schweitzer, a very kind philosopher indeed. Here we all are, Montag. Aristophanes and Mahatma Gandhi and Gautama Buddha and Confucius and Thomas Love Peacock . . ."

The point is that Plato's Republic is not mentioned in isolation. It is but one of many important volumes these individuals hope to preserve through memorization. All of these works of literature, in some way, address the relationships of man to his society and to the natural world. That is the significance of the references to Plato. The Republic is a work of literature worth preserving. It addressed the relationship of man to society and argued for the imperative of individual liberty. Such liberty was sublimated by the now-destroyed regime that Montag, Granger and the others fled. If these survivors hope to rebuild, and to rebuild a more just society, then Plato's thoughts were essential to their efforts. 

Someone once said "It is the human lot to try and fail." How can I interpret this quote using a reference from Fahrenheit 451 and a literary...

The narrative of Fahrenheit 451 demonstrates that books are testimony to man's attempt to make his "reach exceed his grasp" as the poet Robert Browning wrote, while wars are testimony to his failure to do so by assigning technology the role that the heart and mind must play.

Literature is the recording of the human experience, man's attempts to find meaning in life and to establish communication with others through the connections of thought. To detach oneself from the recordings of the human heart is to alienate oneself, and to destine oneself to the repetition of failures, and to be in constant war between the emptiness of a technological world and the enrichment of the world of thought.

When Montag catches the books in midair from the conflagration of the woman's house of books, he does so on an impulse; however, he almost intuitively senses that there is a profound force of the human heart recorded on the pages of these burning tomes, and he is curious to learn what lies within them. So, he carries some out and hides them in his house. Shortly thereafter, Montag, tries but fails as he reads Dover Beach to his wife and her friends; however, they react irrationally.

Mildred kicked at a book. "Books aren't people. You read and I look all around, but there isn't anybody!....my 'family' is people. They tell me things; I laugh, they laugh! And the colors!"

Further in the narrative, after Montag kills Beatty and escapes the police search for him, he learns from Granger that books and other forms of art are tools of communication with future generations:

Something your hand touched some way so your soul has somewhere to go when you die.... (This is figurative language—"something your hand touched" means something you created, something that was meaningful to people.)

So, Montag joins the community of living books (an implied metaphor for the people who memorize books), keeping them alive in the hope that people will realize the importance of these words. Granger touches Montag's arm as he says, "Welcome back from the dead." Alienation is overcome in this community in which each person is a book as the war between the emptiness of a technological world and the enrichment of the world of thought is resolved.

What are the two ways to fix carbon dioxide on earth?

The increasing carbon dioxide concentration in our atmosphere is causing enhanced greenhouse effect, thus resulting in global warming. A number of steps are being currently taken or have been proposed to tackle this problem. One of the key steps is to decrease our dependence on fossil fuels (such as, coal, natural gas, petroleum, etc.). These compounds fulfill most of our energy requirements, in the form of electricity, heating and are also primary transportation fuels. The...

The increasing carbon dioxide concentration in our atmosphere is causing enhanced greenhouse effect, thus resulting in global warming. A number of steps are being currently taken or have been proposed to tackle this problem. One of the key steps is to decrease our dependence on fossil fuels (such as, coal, natural gas, petroleum, etc.). These compounds fulfill most of our energy requirements, in the form of electricity, heating and are also primary transportation fuels. The enormous amounts of carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases) released by their combustion can be reduced by adopting renewable energy sources and increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel combustion and energy transmission. These methods are aimed at reducing carbon dioxide generation. Carbon sequestration is a method aimed at removing the carbon dioxide (already generated) from our atmosphere. Carbon dioxide can be sequestered in underground reservoirs (such as old mine shafts, etc.) or undersea (deep sea burial). A known and commonly used method, afforestation, can also be employed for removing the carbon dioxide from our atmosphere.

Hope this helps. 

Explain the difference between scalar and vector quantities.

A scalar quantity is a quantity that can be represented by one number. For example, a mass of a block could be 2 kilograms. Or, temperature could be -5 degree Celsius.

A vector quantity is a quantity that needs to be represented by at least two numbers. For example, velocity is a quantity that helps describe the motion. It indicates how fastsomething moves and in whatdirection. Another example of a vector quantity is force...

A scalar quantity is a quantity that can be represented by one number. For example, a mass of a block could be 2 kilograms. Or, temperature could be -5 degree Celsius.

A vector quantity is a quantity that needs to be represented by at least two numbers. For example, velocity is a quantity that helps describe the motion. It indicates how fastsomething moves and in what direction. Another example of a vector quantity is force. Force, by definition, is a push or pull: to know the force, we need to know how hard the push or pull is and where it is directed. Other examples of vector quantities include acceleration, torque, and electric field.

Typically, a vector quantity is represented by magnitude and direction, usually given as an angle. Alternatively, it can be represented by the projections on the coordinate axis. In two dimensions, such as when an object is moving on a plane, the velocity vector `vecv` can be given by its components along x- and y- axes: `(v_x, v_y)` (Please see the reference link to read how these components describe the vector.) In a more general example of motion in three dimensions, you would need three numbers to describe the velocity `vecv` : its components along x-, y- and z-axes, `(v_x, v_y, v_z)` .

You construct a topographic profile for a 1:25,000 map with no vertical exaggeration. A 100 ft change in elevation would be represented by a...

The map has a scale of 1:25,000. That is, each feature would be shown reduced by a scale of 25,000. In other words, a feature that has an actual dimension of 25,000 m, will be shown by a size of 1 m.

Here, the elevation change (to be shown on map) is 100 feet. Given the scale of the map, this feature would be reduced by a factor of 25,000 on the map. 25,000th part...

The map has a scale of 1:25,000. That is, each feature would be shown reduced by a scale of 25,000. In other words, a feature that has an actual dimension of 25,000 m, will be shown by a size of 1 m.

Here, the elevation change (to be shown on map) is 100 feet. Given the scale of the map, this feature would be reduced by a factor of 25,000 on the map. 25,000th part of 100 feet can be calculated by dividing the actual dimension by the scale. In other words,

The size of feature on the map = 100 ft/ 25,000 = 0.004 feet

A feet has 12 inches. Thus the size of the feature on the map would be 0.004 x 12 = 0.048 inches. 

Thus, the 100 feet change in elevation will be represented by a change of 0.048 inches on the profile.

Hope this helps. 

What are some reasons the colonists wanted to separate from Great Britain?

When the American colonists declared independence from Britain in 1776, it was the product of tensions which had steadily risen over the last decade. Britain's taxation policywas one of the reasons why the colonists wanted independence: they had introduced the Sugar Act in 1764, to levy money on molasses, and the Stamp Act in 1765, to raise taxes on printed products. When the colonists had protested these pieces of legislation, on the grounds of...

When the American colonists declared independence from Britain in 1776, it was the product of tensions which had steadily risen over the last decade. Britain's taxation policy was one of the reasons why the colonists wanted independence: they had introduced the Sugar Act in 1764, to levy money on molasses, and the Stamp Act in 1765, to raise taxes on printed products. When the colonists had protested these pieces of legislation, on the grounds of 'no taxation without representation,' the British responded with the Declaratory Act, which stated that Britain had supreme power over taxation. 

The Great Awakening, a religious movement which swept through the colonies in the 1730s, also encouraged the colonists to pursue independence. This religious revival emphasised equality: ministers did not have to be ordained, no single denomination was more important than another and this was one of the first 'national' movements of the era. It united all the colonists and helped to break down the differences between them. More importantly, it highlighted the differences between the colonists and Britain, therefore helping to create the revolutionary spirit. 

What is the relationship between Art and Politics in Roman art?

This is a very broad question! It's slightly difficult to answer without more context, but here's what I think you're looking for:

When I think of the connection between art and politics in the Roman Empire, the first person I think of is the Emperor Augustus, Rome's first Emperor. He was a master of propaganda, and during his long reign commissioned many gorgeous works of art, some of which live on until this day, that...

This is a very broad question! It's slightly difficult to answer without more context, but here's what I think you're looking for:

When I think of the connection between art and politics in the Roman Empire, the first person I think of is the Emperor Augustus, Rome's first Emperor. He was a master of propaganda, and during his long reign commissioned many gorgeous works of art, some of which live on until this day, that broadcast his political message loud and clear. Here are a few examples:

The Aeneid

The Aeneid was an epic poem written by the poet Virgil, commissioned by Augustus. The work tells the story of Aeneas escaping the fall of Troy and travelling to Italy to found what would later become Rome. The poem is chock full of references to Augustus' greatness. He claimed descent from Aeneas and the goddess Venus, several characters predict his coming greatness, and Aeneas even carries a shield that depicts Augustus' victories in battle, hundreds of years before they even happened!

Don't misunderstand, the Aeneid is a BRILLIANT piece of literature, but it is impossible to divorce it from its political connections.

The Ara Pacis

The Ara Pacis was (and is—it's still there!) a public altar built by Augustus to celebrate the peace he brought to the Roman Empire. It is covered in images that he wanted connected with himself—goddesses representing peace, Rome, fortune, his family protecting the well-being of the state, and all kinds of things he wanted people to think of when they thought of him.

All of Augustus' buildings in some way display the symbols and messages he wanted broadcast to Roman society.

Statues of Livia and Octavia

Augustus was also very big on morality, and he passed a great deal of legislation trying to make Rome more moral in his eyes. A bit part of the propaganda surrounding this movement were his wife, Livia, and his sister, Octavia. In statues they are always portrayed as super virtuous, even occasionally as goddesses like Juno.

As you see, Augustus used art to further his political message. He wasn't the only Emperor to do this, but he did it first and, I would argue, best.