In Julius Caesar, how does Antony change after his funeral oration?

Brutus sees Antony as non-threatening, as nothing more than Caesar’s right-hand man who can do no harm once Caesar is gone. Cassius thinks they should kill both Antony and Caesar, but Brutus argues against it. “And for Mark Antony, think not of him;/For he can do no more than Caesar’s arm/When Caesar’s head is off”(II.i.801-803). Because of this, the readers may trust that this characterization of Antony is true. After all, he acts humble before...

Brutus sees Antony as non-threatening, as nothing more than Caesar’s right-hand man who can do no harm once Caesar is gone. Cassius thinks they should kill both Antony and Caesar, but Brutus argues against it. “And for Mark Antony, think not of him;/For he can do no more than Caesar’s arm/When Caesar’s head is off”(II.i.801-803). Because of this, the readers may trust that this characterization of Antony is true. After all, he acts humble before Brutus and the conspirators, shaking their hands above Caesar’s dead body. “I doubt not of your wisdom./Let each man render me his bloody hand”(III.i.1405-1406). Then he goes on to ask for permission to speak at Caesar’s funeral, and Brutus grants this to him.

At Caesar’s funeral, Antony proves a great orator, something Brutus and the conspirators are not expecting, which leads us to believe no one quite knew the depths of Antony’s character. Antony begins his speech by calling Brutus and the conspirators honorable men, yet he goes on to tell the people of Rome all the good that Caesar did for them while he was alive and the land and money Caesar left to them in his will. By the end of his speech, the people have been moved so much that they go from praising Brutus to calling the conspirators traitors. Thus begins Antony’s war against the traitors, ending in the conspirators’ deaths.

It’s not so much that Antony changes throughout the play as it is that the reader’s perception of him changes. In the beginning he is painted as lacking compared to Caesar, but we quickly see him prove himself not only a great orator, but also the most honorable of men. While he does wage war against the conspirators, he is not brutal or selfish. Upon Brutus’s death, Antony says, “This was the noblest Roman of them all:/All the conspirators save only he/Did that they did in envy of great Caesar;/He only, in a general honest thought/And common good to all, made one of them”(V.v.2754-2758). Antony recognizes that he and Brutus are not much different. They both did what they did for what they believed was the good of Rome.

Antony was loyal to Caesar and Rome in general from the beginning. The change we see is one brought on by Caesar’s death. We see him grow from a man content in his role as the right hand of the king to a powerful ruler in his own right. But his loyalty is steadfast throughout.

In Ralph Waldo Emerson's "Self-Reliance," what does he mean by the passage, "[We are] guides, redeemers and benefactors, obeying the...

In this passage, Emerson is using language with religious connotations to make the point that everyday people aren't meant to be followers or passive bystanders on the sidelines. Everyone should take up the roles we usually reserve for a few, special leaders — the roles of

• guides (showing others the way),


• redeemers (helping themselves and others break free from sins and oppressive moral constraints), and


• benefactors (doing deeds that benefit the world).

By taking these active roles, people are doing God's work ("obeying the Almighty effort") and making spiritual progress ("advancing on Chaos and the Dark").

By itself, that may not sound like a very unusual message, especially to the modern reader. It's common nowadays to hear that everyone should be an activist and try to improve the world. But if you look what precedes this statement, you can see that Emerson is talking about something more radical.

He is telling the reader, in effect, "Don't take direction from anyone else, not even people who are regarded as intellectual or spiritual authorities." If men like Moses, Plato, and Milton are great, it's because they were true to their own beliefs and spoke their minds. We should be doing the same.

The temptation is that we will be intimidated by authority, tradition, or public opinion. We'll decide that our personal intuitions aren't trustworthy, and therefore we'll defer to the judgment of others — act as if we are "minors and invalids in a protected corner."  But that's the opposite of the lesson we should take from the likes of Moses, Plato, and Milton. Instead of ceding our own judgment to great men, we should learn from their example and trust in our own instincts:

"They teach us to abide by our spontaneous impression with good-humored inflexibility then most when the whole cry of voices is on the other side."

What was the rise of cotton belt and the slave system?

The cotton belt was a region of the United States where much cotton was grown. Slavery was tied to the growth of the cotton belt. Prior to the invention of the cotton gin, most cotton was grown along the coast. This cotton, called long staple cotton, could have its seeds easily separated by machines. The limitation with long staple cotton was that it could only be grown along the coast. This limited how much land was...

The cotton belt was a region of the United States where much cotton was grown. Slavery was tied to the growth of the cotton belt. Prior to the invention of the cotton gin, most cotton was grown along the coast. This cotton, called long staple cotton, could have its seeds easily separated by machines. The limitation with long staple cotton was that it could only be grown along the coast. This limited how much land was available for growing cotton.

Once the cotton gin was invented, cotton could be grown anywhere in the South where the land would support its growth. This area of the Deep South where much  cotton could now be grown was called the cotton belt. Cotton grown away from the coast was called short staple cotton. With this cotton, it was hard to separate the seeds from the cotton. It had to be done by hand. Once the cotton gin was invented, short staple cotton could now be separated by this machine. This opened up much more land in the South for growing cotton. Because so much more land could now be used for growing cotton, slavery grew significantly. More slaves were needed to tend to the fields and to work on the growing of cotton. The cotton gin made slavery more essential to the South. By 1860, cotton was the main export of the South, and the southerners believed more than ever that slavery was necessary.

What are some quotes from To Kill a Mockingbird that specify locations in chapters 1-6?

In Chapter 1, Scout gives a brief history of her family and how they came to settle in Maycomb. She traces their ancestors back to Simon Finch, who had come from England: 

In England, Simon was irritated by the persecution of those who called themselves Methodists at the hands of their more liberal brethren, and as Simon called himself a Methodist, he worked his way across the Atlantic to Philadelphia, thence to Jamaica, thence to Mobile, and up the Saint Stephens. 

The homestead that Simon Finch settled on became known as Finch's Landing. Most family descendants would live here as well. When Atticus returns from Law School in Montgomery, he settles in Maycomb which is twenty miles east of Finch's Landing. 

Also in Chapter 1, Scout describes Dill's fascination with Boo Radley. Here, she describes where the Radley house is: 

The Radley Place jutted into a sharp curve beyond our house. Walking south, one faced its porch; the sidewalk turned and ran beside the lot. 

That Radley place is a focal point for the children (Scout, Jem, and Dill). Scout mentions two oak trees on the edge of the Radley lot. In Chapter 4, she notices something in the knot-hole of one tree: 

Some tinfoil was sticking in a knot-hole just above my eye level, winking at me in the afternoon sun. I stood on tiptoe, hastily looked around once more, reached into the hole, and withdrew two pieces of chewing gum minus their outer wrappers. 

This was Boo's secret way of interacting with the children. 

In the same chapter, Scout talks about Miss Maudie's yard and porch as a sort of safe haven: 

In summertime, twilights are long and peaceful. Often as not, Miss Maudie and I would sit silently on her porch, watching the sky go from yellow to pink as the sun went down, watching flights of martins sweep low over the neighborhood and disappear behind the schoolhouse rooftops. 

What is the difference between compound, mixture and element?

An element consists of exactly same atoms, that is, no atom can be distinguished from the other. This means that an element cannot be further divided and hence is a pure form of matter. An example of an element is oxygen. Two or more elements combine in a fixed ratio to form a compound. Hence, a compound has atoms of two or more different types and hence can be divided into individual fragments or other...

An element consists of exactly same atoms, that is, no atom can be distinguished from the other. This means that an element cannot be further divided and hence is a pure form of matter. An example of an element is oxygen. Two or more elements combine in a fixed ratio to form a compound. Hence, a compound has atoms of two or more different types and hence can be divided into individual fragments or other proportions. An example of a compound is water, which has hydrogen and oxygen in a 2:1 ratio. All the individual constituents of a compound lose out on their individual properties and hence a compound can have properties that are different from that of its constituents. A mixture is made up of two or more elements in any ratio. However, the difference between a mixture and compound is that the constituents can be easily differentiated in case of a mixture. An example is trail mix, from which we can pick out raisins, nuts, etc. easily. The individual components of a mixture retain their individual properties (for examples, raisins will still taste the same when in trail mix, etc.).

Hope this helps. 

In the story "Sredni Vashtar" by Saki, what makes the ending powerful?

The ending of Shredni Vashtar is so powerful because it illustrates the horrific glee and the quiet satisfaction of a child at his guardian's death. The resolution is made even more poignant when we realize that Conradin views his guardian's death (at the hands of his pet ferret) as the means to his liberation and self-autonomy. 

When Mrs. de Ropp retrieves the key to the hutch, Conradin prays to his sole champion and protector, the...

The ending of Shredni Vashtar is so powerful because it illustrates the horrific glee and the quiet satisfaction of a child at his guardian's death. The resolution is made even more poignant when we realize that Conradin views his guardian's death (at the hands of his pet ferret) as the means to his liberation and self-autonomy. 

When Mrs. de Ropp retrieves the key to the hutch, Conradin prays to his sole champion and protector, the polecat-ferret, for relief from the machinations of his meddling guardian. However, the author tells us that, even as he prays, Conradin fears that his prayers will go unanswered. This is because his guardian has always prevailed over his childish will in past skirmishes.

However, as time continues and his guardian does not emerge from the shed, Conradin is hopeful. We do not know what he is hopeful for until the author describes the emergence of Shredni Vashtar with 'dark wet stains around the fur of jaws and throat' from the shed. Presumably, the wet stains represent the bloody aftermath of a skirmish between a human and an animal, with the animal emerging as the clear victor. The text states that 'Conradin dropped on his knees' at this sight. This clear indication of relief and happiness at answered prayer shocks us. Did Conradin pray for his guardian's death?

The author doesn't confirm this, but the story ends with Conradin calmly making himself another piece of toast. This is a powerful ending illustrating that anyone (even a child), when pushed to his limit, may respond in an uncharacteristic and malicious fashion.

Does education bring down political corruption?

Education is a powerful thing. It is most often viewed as a positive endeavor in itself. However, it does matter what is being taught and who is teaching it. After all, the Nazis and fascists all employed education to actually teach organized corruption. After one defines proper education and what comprises political corruption, one can use education through critical thinking to help bring down political corruption.

Let’s assume education with its positive connotations as delivering...

Education is a powerful thing. It is most often viewed as a positive endeavor in itself. However, it does matter what is being taught and who is teaching it. After all, the Nazis and fascists all employed education to actually teach organized corruption. After one defines proper education and what comprises political corruption, one can use education through critical thinking to help bring down political corruption.

Let’s assume education with its positive connotations as delivering objective information about a subject; educators and students engage in a free exchange of ideas for the purpose of edification. Then, education can be used to teach subjects in a way that may enable people entering a political, legal, or journalistic career to fight political corruption.

There are many examples of political corruption, which news organizations provide Americans nightly. One example that people might not immediately consider is the corruption of how American government is supposed to function as delineated by the U.S. Constitution. Many American political representatives appear ignorant or dismissive of the very document they have sworn to uphold and defend.

Consider this: one can better understand the nature of political corruption in America by becoming educated about the constitutional foundations of the American government and political system. For instance, if one understands the nature of the separation of powers embedded in the American political system, the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, one can better realize when one branch impedes or infringes on another branch’s function or authority, which is a form of political corruption.