In Chapter I of The Great Gatsby, what distinguished club is Nick talking about?

Nick's reference, actually, is to a "secret society," and
it is found in a passage while Nick and Daisy are talking alone. Daisy has explained to
Nick the various ways her life is quite awful; her outburst seems heartfelt and filled
with emotion. However, as soon as she stops speaking, Nick feels "the basic insincerity
of what she had said." He is suddenly uneasy in Daisy's company, feeling "the whole
evening had been a trick" to manipulate his emotions:

readability="9">

I waited, and sure enough, in a moment she looked
at me with an absolute smirk on her lovely face as if she had asserted her membership in
a rather distinguished secret society to which she and Tom
belonged.

Nick's reference to
"a rather distinguished secret society" is not clarified at this point in the novel, but
it is important because it represents the first time he becomes aware of Daisy's shallow
and disingenuous personality and the bond that holds the Buchanans together--Tom and
Daisy both "belong" to an as yet unnamed group of "distinguished" people who are set
apart from society at large. The connotation of "secret society" suggests limited
membership and special rules of behavior. In spotting Daisy's phoniness and
manipulation, Nick feels a very distinct difference between her (and Tom) and himself.
As the novel develops, this difference becomes clear to Nick. He develops contempt for
the Buchanans and their "secret society," the idle, snobbish, selfish upper class of
inherited wealth and amoral, destructive behavior.

Oxygen will react with the metal copper. It will also react with the nonmetallic compound butane (C4H10). Which of these reactions is a combustion...

In order to solve this question, you must understand the
concept of combustion and corrosion. Both involve reactions with oxygen, but corrosion
involves oxygen reacting with a metal such as copper and iron. On the other hand, a
combustion reaction involves oxygen with a fuel; fuels in this sense, refers to organic
compounds (mostly hydrocarbons), compounds that contain carbon
atoms.

Thus in this question, compound butane reacting with
oxygen is a combustion reaction. This is because compound butane (C4H10) is an organic
compound. For more information about organic compounds, refer to the links
below.

Also in answering the other two questions, you must
remember that a combustion reaction is an exothermic reaction. This is because it emits
heat during the reaction. This is an easy concept if you think of the butane gas burning
in reaction. When the butane gas burns, the surroundings get warm and this is an
indication that the reaction is an exothermic reaction.

For
question C, the oxidizing agent is a compound that reduces the other compound in
reaction. In the combustion reaction, however, oxidation does not occur since the
oxidation number for carbon in the reactants and the products is the same. (C4H10 +
excess O2->4CO2 + 5H2O)

Describe the 8 examples of techno-crime below, identifying in each case whether it would constitute an act of sabotage, and why?The 8 examples of...

     A virus is a computer program that uses an executable
code to replicate itself in a target computer. When this executable code is integrated
into an email or program, the virus will be liberated and attack the new host computer.
A virus could be sabotage because it is the exploitation of the rights of others under a
malicious intent. Sending out viruses to crash dowh computers is indeed an act of
sabotage because it indicates the malicious intent and the planification of the act. It
also ruins the personal, private, financial, and academic projects of others who are
inocent victims.

Phishing is a criminal act in
which hackers infiltrate websites to get information of people using the internet such
as their usernames and passwords. This would be also sabotage because again it is
infiltrating in the protected information of other people with the intention of
obtaining sensitive information. It is also sabotage because it is maliciously intended
and planned ahead with the purpose of engaging in further criminal
activity.

A trojan horse-is a form of malware (see
definition of malware below) that is designed for hackers to access information from
other computers. Trojans are often hidden in applications such as bans, ads, even online
forms. Once the trojan horse is "let out", a hacker has officially entered the threshold
of a victim computer. This is indeed another way to maliciously steal information and
would constitute malicious activity, but to call it a sabotage would be a bit too much.
To a point, hackers know that people can protect themselves against trojans and all, so
many hackers do not do it to sabotage, but just to "have something to talk
about."

 Spyware is another form of malware (malicious
software) that is installed to secretly obtain information about the user such as credit
card numbers, location, and much more. This is sabotage because it totally is
intentional, has a malicious intent to steal very important and delicate information,
and can lead to crashing down a computer.

Hacker- A hacker
is the jargon name given to the person or persons who preoigram malware and implant
trojan horses and spyware on the internet with the purpose of stealing information.
Hackers can also program viruses. Only if the hacker creates malware or viruses that are
impossible to be protected from would be the time to call them "sabotagers". However, as
stated before, many hackers do it for fun, and not with the malicious intent to crash a
system or rob a bank.

Spamming is the action of overusing
emails and advertisements and attaching them to mass and bulk addresses. It is an abuse
of emailing privileges. Spamming is not sabotage because all it aims to do is to send
advertisements or sell a product, not to steal your information nor try to get personal
information.

Malware is a programmed computer application
or software which is designed to infiltrate into unsuspecting computers to obtain user
information. Sending out malware is an act of sabotage because it exploits the personal
information of individuals and it is done maliciously and with criminal
intent.

Logic Bombs are malware programs that are placed
into games, software, or any other application and are programmed to disrupt the
application, or to disrupt the function of the computer after a certain number of
activity has occurred. For example, after 10 uses or accesses of a certain application,
the malware will be released. It is called a "logic" bomb because it operates under a
specific plan of action. They are sabotage because they cause public fears, put
companies on extra heightened alerts, and basically put the world in a waiting game
which is unfair and silly to do. Since it is interrupting the basic lives of others and
affecting them negatively, it constitutes
sabotage.

All these constitute sabotage in one
way or another. Sabotage is the intention to disrupt. All these examples of techno-crime
are meant to disrupt programs that help people. This infringes in the personal rights
and freedoms of individuals. It is very much a case of sabotage.

In Chapter 8, Watson reproduces the letter he wrote to Holmes. Why does he do that?

Right at the beginning of this chapter, Dr. Watson gives
his reason for why he is reproducing this letter that he wrote to Holmes.  He says that
he is doing it because it will be a better record of what happened.  He wrote it right
when the stuff was happening and so it will be more accurate than later
memories.

If you are asking why the author chooses to have
Watson do this, I would say it is to drag out the suspense of the story.  If Holmes were
at Baskerville Hall, he would surely be able to figure out the mystery quite quickly. 
By having Watson just reporting the facts, Doyle lets us try to figure the mystery out
for ourselves and he makes it last longer.

What is the simplified form of : [(-1+ i*sqrt(3))^3] / 2

We need to find the value of (-1+ i
*sqrt(3))^3 / 2

To solve this we use
(a + b)^3 = a^3 + 3a^b + 3ab^2 + b^3 and the fact that i*2 =
-1.

(-1+ i *sqrt(3))^3 /
2

=> (1/2)[ (-1)^3 + (i*sqrt 3)^3 + 3*(-1)(i*sqrt
3)^2 + 3*(-1)^2 * i*sqrt 3]

=> (1/2)[ -1 - i*3*sqrt
3 + 3*3 + 3*i*sqrt 3]

=>
(1/2)*8

=>
4

The required result is
4

What is Friar Laurence saying about love in Act 2? What metaphor is he using to make his point?Now Romeo and Juliet want to go to him to perform...

In Act II, scene III, the Friar is shocked by Romeo’s
sudden change of heart. The scene involves several figures of speech, including
metaphors and other figures of speech.

After watching Romeo
pine for Rosaline for so long, he finds it incomprehensible that the young man now
claims to love another girl. “Is Rosaline, whom thou didst love so dear,/So
soon forsaken?” (ll 66-67). If so, he continues, then young men love only
with their eyes (lust), and not their hearts (genuine
love).

He goes on to note that Romeo has shed
innumerable tears (“brine”, “saltwater” =
tears) for Rosaline, apparently for no reward: “How much salt water was thrown
away in waste, To season love, that of it doth not taste!” (71-72). Here,
Romeo’s tears are compared to salt that a person would use to season a dish of food—in
this case the dish of food is Rosaline. Why go to all the trouble of seasoning the food,
the Friar argues, that you are not going to “taste”?

In the
same tone of surprise and rebuke, the Friar says that Romeo’s sorrow was so heavy that
his sighs still fog the air, and that Romeo’s “old groans” still ring in his ears. He
even states that he can still see the stain of a tear on Romeo’s face that is so fresh
that it has not been washed off: all of which would seem proof of his purported love for
Rosaline.

Now the Friar comes to the heart of his argument:
if Romeo was being himself and speaking truly, his terrible sadness was caused by his
unrequited love for Rosaline. So how could it possibly vanish so quickly?
If what Romeo is telling the Friar is true, the Friar has a lesson for
him, which he demands Romeo repeat: “Pronounce this sentence then:/Women may
fall when there’s no strength in men” (79-81). Most of us would agree that
one cannot expect loyalty from women when men are as fickle as
Romeo.

Romeo argues that the Friar had often scolded him
for loving Rosaline, but this strategy won’t work either. The Friar corrects Romeo,
clarifying that he only scolded Romeo for “doting” on Rosaline (having a one-sided
crush; being obsessed with her), not for loving her
genuinely.

Still Romeo tries to argue that the Friar had
told him to “bury” his love for Rosaline. The Friar responds with another metaphor:
“Not in a grave to lay one in, another out to have” (83-84)—not to
simply cast aside one love and replace it with another. Romeo then tries to convince the
Friar that Juliet is different from Rosaline, in that she actually returns his love,
while Rosaline did not.

Here, the Friar again corrects
Romeo, defending Rosaline’s perceptiveness: “She knew well/ Thy love did read
by rote, which could not spell” (87-88). In perhaps his most difficult
metaphor, the Friar compares Romeo’s love for Rosaline to a student who can read from
memory (“by rote”), but has no understanding of what he was reading (one who cannot
spell). In other words, Rosaline knew that Romeo’s “love” was simply infatuation, and
not the real thing.

It is perplexing, then, that the Friar
suddenly has a change of heart, and decides to marry the two. Apparently, the prospect
of uniting the feuding families through this marriage must have entered his mind with
such force that it cast all of his doubts away—at least for the time
being.

Did Martin Luther King Jr. make the revolution, or did the revolution make him? Why?

Martin Luther King, Jr. had many great qualities. He was a
great leader, speaker, organizer, very passionate, etc. I do not think he made The
Movement but I do think he had a great deal to do with its
success.

Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated non-violence and
peacefulness. I think this is very important because if he had not done so many of the
protests, sit ins, marches, etc. may have been violent. This could have destroyed
everything. Violence is not the message he wanted to get out, rather he wanted the
issues of equally brought out into the open. He was very successful in doing
this.

How does the setting, when it comes to the time, affect the characters in To Kill a Mockingbird?My teacher explained how it could have something to...

The setting in the book To Kill a
Mockingbird is the south during one of the poorest periods.  There is mention
in the book of the programs that were initiated to try and help Americans.  No one
hardly had any money.

If you look at the character of Mr.
Cunningham, you see a poor but proud man who can not make a living.  Yet, he refuses to
take handouts.  Even when Atticus helps him with legal issues Mr. Cunningham has self
pride and pays Aticus through bartering with whatever he can give to
him. 

Character was a significant part of the lie in the
south during the era.  Mr. Cunningham demonstrates honest character by his pride and
actions of repaying Atticus.

Another thing that time
affects is the people's reaction to the children that are mulatto, biracial.  They have
a very hard time and so their father sends them north where they will have it a little
easier.

The laws and the freedom of taking matters into
one's own hands when it came to justice for black people was still allowed during the
era.  Therefore, the threats of the lynch mob are very real and scary.   Tom Robinson
was considered a second class citizen back then and he really was hung before he ever
went to trial.

Why did the Big Three (Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin) distrust each other?

I am not sure if the relationship between Churchill,
Roosevelt, and Stalin was essentially that of mistrust. After all they were
collaborating and cooperating for achieving the common objective of defeating Germany
led by Hitler.

Most certainly, in international politics,
heads of governments of countries are not expected to absolutely open in disclosing
their thinking and long terms objectives. In spite of their common interests, the
different countries and their leaders do have other independent objectives, which may
conflict with the common agreed objectives.

For example,
while Stalin may not openly disclose his resolve to support communism, Roosevelt may not
have disclosed his resolve to oppose communism.

However we
can say that whatever differences existed between the three were because of the
conflicting long term interest of the three countries, and the difference in their
political ideologies. But such things are often known to people fairly well, and because
of that some distrust to exist between people with conflicting interests and approaches
is quite natural.

Character of Hamlet is a blend of idealism and futility, how is this presented through his speeches in Hamlet?

If you are looking for Hamlet speaking positively, even
hinting at the immortality or perfection of a human, you need look no further than his
description of or discussion of his father.  In Act I, scene ii he refers to his father
as being like Hyperion or Hercules.  Though he is often very down on himself, Hamlet
does at times suggest that people are capable of great acts.  He also suggests great
possibility in men at the end of Act IV, when he speaks
thusly:

Sure
he hath made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that
capability and godlike reason to fust in us
unused

Clearly Hamlet
believes we have great powers, we are more than beasts.

But
he also discourses at length about the futility of life, in the same speech where he
lionizes his father he debates whether or not to kill himself and laments that he cannot
even make that decision.

Later he also regrets his
inability to act, unsure of whether his father was murdered for sure, and he recounts
this futility with great passion repeatedly.

What is the authorial purpose in A Farewell to Arms?

One of Hemingway's more constant themes is a disgust and
even contempt for war and the way that it appeared to become a constant fixture of life,
both in Europe and elsewhere in the world.  In the book he tries to bring out the
pointless and stupid aspects of this particular war while also demonstrating the
individual lives of people caught within it and the effects the war has on them
personally.

In order to accomplish this, Hemingway presents
the war in a more realistic fashion than many earlier and even contemporary authors. 
The horror and tragedy of it are presented to the reader in the gruesome description of
battle, of the men's wounds and of the honest descriptions of men in their most depraved
and most noble states, both of which are brought to the forefront during
war.

Which animal lived by the beliefs of animalism in Animal Farm?Explain with examples.

Benjamin is a cynic who doesn’t adhere to any “ism.” He
doesn’t believe any change in power will lead to significant change in the conditions of
life.

Since Napoleon, via Squealer, frequently changed the
tenets of Animalism to suit his personal and political needs, it is tough to say who
lived by the philosophy of Animalism. But, as far as the original idea of Animalism,
which was to give power to the animals, I would argue that Old Major, Snowball and
Clover lived most faithfully to the original idea.

As
Napoleon changed the commandments of Animalism, the one who stayed completely loyal was
Boxer. He did not have any philosophical interest in the ruling ideology. His heart was
in the right place and he wanted conditions to improve, but I think his loyalty was to
the other animals: not Animalism in its beginning or eventual corruption. He remained
loyal to the initial idea of Animalism but his strong loyalty prevented him from seeing
Napoleon’s increasing corruption of Animalism.

If you mean
the original idea of Animalism, analogous to Marxism, then I would say Old Major,
Snowball and maybe even Clover lived closest to that philosophy. The original idea of
Animalism was to clearly separate Animals (Marxists) from humans (Capitalists),
primarily to give power to the animals (workers). Napoleon, Squealer and their entourage
eventually became more "human" by taking all the power for themselves.

Old Major provided the initial philosophy and motivation.
Snowball put it into action. Clover questioned things when Napoleon began to change the
commandments. To me, these three characters did the most to start and sustain that
original idea of Animalism.

In the end, Napoleon
essentially changed Animalism into its opposite. By the end, he physically and
politically resembled humans. Napoleon was the least faithful to that original
philosophy of Animalism.

Can someone please check my grammar?Ferry spoke about three order of ideas. Frist, the economic benefit, he said that France needs foreign markets...

Below, I have bolded my changes, as well as a question I
have to clarify the sentence in question. Some changes reflect a word change or the
corrected spelling of a word, so compare your original the
the adjustments carefully. If the first letter of a sentence is bolded, it means it must
be capitalized. The first paragraph, noting the three orders of ideas, has several
changes (and there are a few later in your piece) that changes the verb tense. If you
are speaking of the past, it is best when reporting facts (as opposed to writing a
creative piece: poem, short story, etc.) to stick to the past
tense.

Pay special attention to punctuation that is bolded:
it may not show up as clearly as the words do.  Good luck! Hope this
helps.

GRAMMAR

Ferry
spoke about three orders of ideas. Frist, the economic
benefit: he said that France
needed foreign markets to which it
could sell its industrial products because the U.S had taken a position
of protectionism. At this time, France had no more markets to expand in Europe because
the competition was fierce. Second,
expand civilization and its highest
sense: he believed that Europeans
were a superior race and they
had a duty to spread their supreme civilization. Third,
political patriotism: he said that in order to protect the
interest of the nation, France needed to expand
its military power. He also believed that France should not
be just a free country but a great country.

Roosevelt's
argument on imperialism was that in order to become a great
nation, the U.S needed to get involved in world politics.
Otherwise the U.S. would be recolonized.
He also said that it
was America's duty to civilize the "savage anarcist" living
in the land that they had gained from
Spain.

Opponents of the Roosevelt's arguments believed that
becoming an imperial power
clashed with the nation's
commitment to liberty and freedom. Roosevelt argued that if they were
adopting such doctrine at its (whose core?)
core, it would be like condemning the United States'
founding fathers for ever having settled in the
U.S.

Can you please discuss and explain Sir Francis Bacon's essay "On Truth"?

A helpful discussion of Sir Francis Bacon’s essay “Of
Truth” might begin by simply paraphrasing the argument of the essay.  Essentially, Bacon
argues as follows:

• Although there are few
  philosophical skeptics left, many human beings still seem to prefer the freedom to adopt
  their own views over the hard work of pursuing truth, since they consider truth
  constricting.


• Human beings seem to have a natural
  disposition to want to lie.


• To many people, simple truth
  never seems as attractive as appealing falsehoods.


• People
  seem to take pleasure in lying.


• The worst lies are those
  that take deep root in people’s minds.


• The pursuit of
  truth is, or should be, “the sovereign good of human nature.” After
  all,

readability="5">

The first creature of God . . . was the light of
the sense; the last was the light of
reason.

• To possess
  truth is like standing on a tall hill and observing the follies and errors of mankind
  below.


• Yet we should pity those who lack truth rather
  than being proud of our superiority to them. Love of our fellow creatures is the true
  companion of truth.


• Truthfulness should especially be
  valued in daily conduct; no sin is more shameful than
  lying.


• Those who lie to others show their fear of other
  humans but their misguided bravery and foolish defiance in dealing with
  God.

Bacon’s essay is a typical reflection of
Renaissance thought in a number of ways, including the
following:

• It draws both on Christian scriptures
  and on classical literature and classical philosophy to make its points. Since one of
  the main purposes of the Renaissance was to reconcile Christian truth with truths also
  apparent in the classics, Bacon is here writing as a typical “Renaissance
  man.”


• Bacon clearly assumes that "truth" should be
  identified with the "truths" of Christianity.


• It
  emphasizes that reason is one of the earliest and most important of all the gifts God
  gave to man, and it implies that reason should be used properly – that is, as a means of
  discovering truth.


• It assumes, as most Renaissance
  Christians did, that humans are corrupt by nature (ultimately as a result of the
  original sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden).
  


• However, it also assumes that humans have a moral and
  spiritual obligation to struggle against that corruption in order to pursue truth and
  thus discover and love God.


• It emphasizes another of the
  key Christian virtues: charity, or love of other creatures as creatures made and loved
  by God.


• It doesn’t merely discuss truth in the abstract,
  as a simple philosophical concept, but also discusses the importance of truth-telling
  and truthful behavior in daily life.  In other words, a main purpose of the essay is an
  ethical purpose, so that truth is linked with practical
  goodness.


• It ends by implying that the ultimate judge of
  human conduct is and will be God, and that humans should always think of God first in
  forming their thoughts and behavior.

How are the themes of sexism and sexual harassment expressed in the drama play Oleanna?

David Mamet's three-act play 'Oleanna' is essentially
about the destructiveness of miscommunication, with its emphases on academy politics,
teacher-student relationship and sexism & sexual
harassment.

Concerned about her failure in the course,
Carol, a college student, meets her professor, John. Carol alleges that she doesn't
understand the verbose lectures of her professor. During the most part of act 1, the
professor appears as callous and interruptive, engaged in telephonic conversation with
his wife regarding real estate matters, while Carol is unable to speak out her mind. But
John then expresses 'empathy' for her, and wants to bend the rules to give Carol an 'A'
grade if she agrees to meet him to discuss the matter. John touches Carol's shoulders on
several occasions asking her to sit down or to stay on in the
office.

Later, Carol writes a letter of complaint against
her professor alleging that John is lewd and sexist. She claims that his intention was
not good when he touched her shoulder. She believed it was a case of sexual harassment.
In the final act of the play, John is fired and he is about to leave. It is further
known that Carol has filed criminal charges of battery and attempted
rape.

There is no real serious sexual harassment in the
play, and both the student and the teacher are deeply flawed. Carol shows an underlying
deviousness, using the plea of physical contact as a means to take revenge on her
teacher. The teacher is pompous and foolish.

Mamet handles
the theme of sexual harassment and sexism in a curious, critical light. It is not a
simple case of the harassment of the female by the male, but the callous, dubious,
pompous foolishness of the male power vis a vis the intriguing appropriation of male
power by the female by using the ploy of sexist bias and sexual
harassment.

What role do you think religion plays in the society depicted in this part of the novel?

I do not believe that religion plays any role in this
society.  I do not think that the values of this society are really compatible with
religion.

This society is based on the idea that you live
your life without thinking.  It says that people should keep themselves entertained at
all times by watching the parlour walls or by going to amusement parks or things like
that.

Religion is something that really requires people to
be still and contemplative at times.  You cannot have religious experiences with the
White Clown yelling at you.  So I do not think that this society can really have much of
a real religion.

What are clear examples that connect Goethe's Faust to Rousseau's romantic ideals?

Since Rousseau didn't publish his first work,
New Heloise, until 1760 and Goethe finished what is called the
Urfaust in 1775, following The Sorrows of Young Werther,
it must be stated that any connection between the two would not correctly
reflect influence. In other words, Rousseau cannot be assumed to have influenced
Goethe's work even though Goethe only completed and published Faust Part
I in 1808, and this he only did at friends urgent promptings. The reason is
that, having begun Romanticism with Werther, Goethe soon renounced
Romanticism, after having written the Urfaust, as a result of
seeing the end of a young woman's suicide; as she was pulled out of a frozen river,
Goethe saw a copy of Werther in her pocket. Thus he abandoned the
Romanticist Faust until urged to complete it, which he did in a
neo-classical style, not a Romantic style. Yet it may be possible to say that the two
connect because Goethe countered the tenets of Romanticism in Faust Part
I.

Having said this, some commonalities between
Faust and Rousseau's ideas relate to (1) emotionalism and (2)
nature.

1. At first, Faust
tells Mephistopheles that he can't be tempted by human emotions. Then he switches to the
position that he has exhausted academic study therefore will immerse himself in the
passions that make people so earnestly moved and motivated. As a result of this switch,
Faust demands Mephisto procure Margarete for him. 

One of
Rousseaus's prominent ideas is that people are good in
their innate emotions and passions and that it is civilizing forces of society and
uniformizing forces in education that corrupt these emotions and passions. Thus there is
a direct connection between Rousseau's ideas and the sensations Faust pursues in Part I.
In addition, this connection is dramatized by Margarete/Gretchen's ravings in the
dungeon and her exchange with Faust there. The connection may not be viewed as a
supportive one, however. Goethe is calling this sort of emotionalism and passion into
question, especially as pursued by Faust (less so that natural emotion and passion
demonstrated by Gretchen).

2. Another connection is in
"Gloomy Day" in which Faust is in a nature setting after
his seduction of Gretchen. Mephisto has orchestrated events so that Faust slays
Gretchen's brother Valentine. As a result, Faust has to flee to escape arrest. Mephisto
deliberately acted to leave Gretchen abandoned, pregnant and unmarried. Thus Faust is
living contentedly in nature, knowing nothing of the harm and tragedy that is unfolding
in the city--from Gretchen's pregnancy to her mother's death to, eventually, her baby's
death. Here Goethe seems to be suggesting that while nature is restorative and peaceful,
it is an escape from the realities of human life, which of necessity includes
interactions and community.

One of
Rousseau's ideas is that nature is good and simple while
city life is corrupt and artificial. He believed that people should leave the towns and
leave behind the laws and institutions and return to a state of living peacefully in
nature. His idea that nature is kindly and good had a powerful effect on European and
English Romanticism as is evidenced by its emphasis on the pastoral lifestyle. This idea
connects to Faust because Faust is sent by Mephisto to nature to
escape the institutions and laws of towns and to regenerate from his ordeal with
Valentine. Yet the connection fails when Faust learns of Gretchen's
plight.

Human resource planning is a crutial process in an organization. Explain what is HRP? And list how 10 internal and external factors affecting HRP?

Human resource planning is the term used to describe how
companies ensure that their staff are the right staff to do the jobs. Sub topics include
planning for staff retention, planning for candidate search, training and skills
analysis and much more.

External
factors:

.supply and
demand

.labour
market

.image/goodwill

.political-social-legal
enviroment

.unemployment
rate

.Housing: costs, availability; housing assistance
package

.Child care: costs, availability,
quality  

.competitors

.Spouse/partner
career

.Location

(Internal
Factors):

.Recruitment
policy

.Human resource
planning

.size of the
firm

.cost of
recruitment

.Travel
TIME

.Recognition (after tenure, promotion, awards,
etc.)

.Temporary and part time
employees

.Work
Culture

.growth and
expansion

.Timeliness (in recruitment processes) Reporting
Relationships

What is an example of word choice in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?

In Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry
Finn, word choice is especially important in order to convey the realistic
tone of the South. Whereas a writer will make sure to use word choice in an especially
careful way (using action verbs, avoiding slang and cliches), Twain is trying to present
dialogue that sounds realistic.

Example of word choice in
Huck Finn are found throughout the novel. In Chapter Thirty-Four,
"We Cheer Up Jim," the conversation is as follows:

readability="20">

We stopped talking, and got to thinking. By and
by Tom says:

'Looky her, Huck, what fools we are to not
think of it before! I bet I know where Jim is.'

'No!
Where?'

'In that hut down by the ash-hopper. Why, looky
here. When we was at dinner, didn't you see a...man go in there with some
vittles?'

'Yes.'

'What did you
think the vittles was for?'

'For a
dog.'

'So 'd I. Well, it wasn't for a dog...It shows how a
body can see and don't see at the same
time.'

In the discussion, the
Southern vernacular is necessary in order to provide a sense of the people who are
speaking and the setting of the novel. It is also appropriate when the Duke and Dauphin
try to pass themselves off as royalty. The language Twain employs sets the tone of the
novel by creating more realistic characters.

What is the significance of Grass in Walt Whitman's Song of myself?

The significance of Grass, in American poet Walt Whitman’s
“Song of Myself”, as part of his epic work “Leaves of Grass” is that a single blade of
grass represents an individual in society. The man in the poem is “…observing
a spear of summer grass.” This causes him to ponder the human condition and
the thoughts and actions of human beings. This blade or spear of grass is amongst an
innumerable host of leaves of grass. It is a representation of this grass, as well as
distinct and separate (as an individual blade) from this
multitude.

This is the same with people. We are
all part of the human family. We are also distinct, unique individuals of this group.
When the man ponders the blade of grass he is thinking about man (exemplified by the
blade) and his purpose on the earth.

Right off
the bat, in this section of “Leaves of Grass”, Whitman alludes to the fact that we come
from the dust of the earth. Spears of grass arise from the dirt. Man is created of the
dust of the earth and Whitman states in this poem that, “My tongue, every atom
of my blood, form’d from this soil, this air, …” He sees some similarities
here between flora and human beings. The soil begets a multitude of grass; the soil
begot human beings through a creative act. This is definitely alluded to here,
regardless of one’s belief system.

It seems that
Whitman is relating the life of a blade of grass to a human life. Grass strives to
survive daily and eventually meets its end. So does man. Grass, so-to-speak, greets each
day and exists and functions. So do we, as living beings. Whitman notes “… the
song of me rising from bed and meeting the sun.” This is what spears of grass
do each morning – awake and meet the
sun.

Whitman is satisfied with what he sees of
himself – internally and physically. A fine blade of grass also has its inherent beauty
and wonderfulness of form. Whitman is celebrating himself, and by extension all humans,
as he celebrates the blade of grass that is causing him to think deeply. He is satisfied
and says so, “I am satisfied – I see, dance, laugh,
sing.…”

Grass represents all humans,
collectively and individually, and what each faces in life. Whitman talks of all that
one can worry about. This includes, among others listed, inventions, societies, dress,
associates, love of others, sickness of loved ones, and lack of money. The difference
being that the grass carries on unworried, while people do not have that
luxury.

People must face life differently than
unthinking grass and deal with issues. People must carry on and create and produce, and
do the things they are accustomed to doing, despite challenges. There will always be
grass. There will always be people living; “…the book-keeper counts at his
desk, the shoemaker waxes his
thread,…”

Life, in its complexities,
as well as mundane acts, continues on its survival plan, just like leaves of
grass.

Images:

class="qaImageInner">

Image (1 of 1)

href="/jax/index.php/images?eventHandler=Answer&uploadID=3314&answerID=675027"
class="greybox" id="image-float" gb_title="Image" gb_width="1000" gb_height="650"
title="Click to Enlarge">
itemprop="image"
src="http://user-content./b8a0b924ea847d779aee8757ceb297213e03c1ad_thumb.jpg"/>

If we accept Romeo's love for Juliet as immature, how does it affect our predisposition that this play is an archetypal love story?This question...

In studying Shakespeare's Romeo and
Juliet, I do not believe that it serves as an archetypal love story. I
believe it is archetypical of the "star-crossed lovers" love
story.

In terms of Shakespeare and prevalent themes in his
plays, change plays an enormous role in providing his plays with in-depth and believable
characters, and these changes drive the plot. The protagonists, for example, in
Macbeth and Hamlet, go through extensive
changes based upon who they are, their journeys of self-discovery, and their interaction
with the other characters.

Romeo is a young man, and his
experience of life is limited. It would appear that he has never truly been in love, but
has been infatuated with Rosaline, another member of the Capulet household. We never
meet the object of his affection, but certainly see enough of his
immaturity—perhaps a "puppy love"—that has no real substance; but we see a great deal of
"suffering" on the part of Romeo. The fact that he transfers his affections so quickly
to Juliet may be the clearest, and perhaps the last, indicator of his immature outlook
on love, and life.

Once Romeo commits himself to Juliet,
every step seems sincere, and the very adult world around him brings clarity where there
has been none before. Mercutio, Romeo's close friend, is killed by Tybalt; Romeo kills
Tybalt, Juliet's cousin. The casual nature of Romeo's existence, once spent mooning over
Rosaline, has altered forever. It could be argued that these things, as well as Juliet's
total acceptance of him regardless of his family's name, force him to turn a distinct
corner in "growing up." The fact that he takes his own life when he believes Juliet is
dead could be an indication of the depth of his dedication, but
this is debatable: is it mature to commit suicide in the face of
loss?

I personally see no difficulty in perceiving Romeo as
an immature young man at the start of the play. However, I do not believe an audience is
predisposed to see this as an archetypal love story—there are many doomed romances in
Shakespeare's tragedies. Romeo and Juliet are seen as archetypical sweethearts whose
fate is predestined—they are doomed before they meet, their ending "written in the
stars." (See the Prologue.) There is much discussion, in fact, as to whether the lovers
could have done anything to change the outcome of the
play.

The archetypical love story, in general, does not, I
believe, require death and/or unrequited love. If we look at this love story as
archetypical of Shakespearean love in his tragedies, where there
are no happy endings, perhaps there is validity to the concept. The Bard's happy endings
seem reserved (obviously) for his comedies. However, in general
terms, I don't see Romeo and Juliet's tragic relationship as the model for an
archetypical love story.

What is the final result of (x^2-4x+4)^2 - (x-2)^2 ?

We recognize a difference of two squares and we'll apply
the formula:

a^2 - b^2 =
(a-b)(a+b)

We'll put a= x^2-4x+4 and b =
x-2

 (x^2-4x+4)-(x-2)^2 =
(x^2-4x+4- x+2)( x^2-4x+4+x-2)

We'll combine like terms
inside brackets:

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

The roots of the first factor, x^2 - 5x +
6, are:

x1 = 2 and x2 = 3

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

The roots of the second factor,
x^2-3x + 2, are:

x1 = 1 and x2 =
2

x^2-3x + 2 =
(x-1)(x-2)

(x^2-4x+4)^2 - (x-2)^2 =
(x-2)(x-3)(x-1)(x-2)

The final result of the
difference of 2 squares is: (x^2-4x+4)^2 - (x-2)^2 =
(x-3)*(x-1)*(x-2)^2.

Determine the area bounded by the curves y=(x-1)^2+1 and y=x^2+6?

To determine the area bounded by the given curves, we'll
have to calculate the definite integral of the difference between the expressions of the
given curves.

First, we need to find out the intercepting
points of the curves. The intercepting points represent the limits of
integration.

For this reason, we'll
equate:

x^2-2x+2 =
-x^2+6

We'll shift all terms to the
left side:

2x^2 - 2x - 4 =
0

We'll divide by 2:

x^2 - x -
2 = 0

We'll apply quadratic
formula:

x1 = [1 + sqrt(1 +
8)]/2

x1 = (1+3)/2

x1 =
2

x2 = (1-3)/2

x2 =
-1

We'll choose a value for x, between -1 and 2, to verify
what curve is above and what curve is below.

We'll choose x
= 0.

f(x) = x^2-2x+2

f(0) = 
2

g(x) =  -x^2+6

g(0) =
6

We notice that g(x) > f(x), between -1 and
2.

We may calculate the definite integral of g(x) - f(x),
having as limits of integration x = -1 and x = 2.

g(x) -
f(x) = -x^2+6-x^2+2x-2

g(x) - f(x) = -2x^2 + 2x +
4

We'll calculate the indefinite
integral:

Int [g(x) - f(x)]dx = Int (-2x^2 + 2x +
4)dx

We'll apply the property of integral to be
additive:

Int (-2x^2 + 2x + 4)dx = Int -2x^2dx + Int 2xdx +
Int4dx

Int (-2x^2 + 2x + 4)dx = -2x^3/3 + 2x^2/2 +
4x

Now, we'll apply Leibniz Newton
formula:

Int (-2x^2 + 2x + 4)dx = F(2) -
F(-1)

F(2) = -16/3 + 4 +
8

F(2) = (36-16)/3

F(2) =
20/3

F(-1) = 2/3 + 1 - 4

F(-1)
= (-9+2)/3

F(-1) = -7/3

F(2) -
F(1) = 20/3 + 7/3

F(2) - F(1) =
27/3

F(2) - F(1) =
9

The area enclosed by the given curves is A
= 9 square units

How did the book Silent Spring change American History?

With the kinds of environmental abuses and neglect that
was taking place in the 1950s and 60s, it was inevitable that a green movement of some
sort would start, just as in the 1850s, it was inevitable that an abolition movement
would grow.  In that time period, the book Uncle Tom's Cabin sold
hundreds of thousands of copies and changed minds, increasing the size and momentum of
the anti-slavery movement.

Silent
Springdid something similar.  It took a fledgling movement and an unknown
debate topic and brought it into specific relief.  It made it into a national
discussion, and there were magazine and journal and scientific and political responses
to it.

Did it change history?  Yes it did.  Just not all by
itself.  The car was already running, her book just stepped on the
gas.

How does the ending of The Kite Runner create a lasting effect on the reader?

While some readers reported being disappointed with
The Kite Runner's ending because of its lack of complete
resolution, many critics have interpreted Hosseini's ending to be a portrait of
Afghanistan's future--tentatively optimistic.  Sohrab does not speak to Amir and Soraya
at the book's end, but he does show a faint smile, a sign of future healing.  Similarly,
the country of Afghanistan (when the book was first published) was showing signs of
finally being able to choose its own leaders and establishing the type of nation that it
wanted to be, not what others tried to impose upon
it.

This concept of hope leaves a lasting impression with
readers as does the tidiness of Amir's redemption.  At last, he has sacrificed for
Hassan instead of sacrificing someone for his own sake, and he takes on the role of kite
runner for Hassan's son Sohrab.

What was the effect of competition among European powers on empire building in Asia? Basically how does competition affect the building of an...

There are two, somewhat contradictory, effects of
competition on empire building.  Competition between European countries made it somewhat
harder for them to each build an empire, but it also made them want the empires more. 
So competition led to more of a push to create empires but also made it harder for any
one country to make its empire.

Look, for example, at what
happened in India.  France and Britain were, at first, competing for influence in
India.  The conflict between the two countries made it harder for either of them to gain
a foothold in India because they were each trying to destroy the other's
gain.

At the same time, however, competition between the
countries accelerated the pace of empire building.  The two countries each felt they
needed to increase the size of their empires so as not to fall behind the other in the
race for power and prestige.

In this way, competition
between European countries had somewhat contradictory effects on empire building in
Asia.

What is a summary for the story "Love" by Guy de Maupassant?

There is not a lot of plot to this
story.

The narrator reads the story of a murder-suicide and
that reminds him of a time that he went hunting with his cousin who lives out in the
country.

The narrator spends a lot of time talking about
the marshlands where they are going hunting and about how that landscape makes him
feel.  Then he describes their duck hunt.  The narrator shoots a female duck.  The male
duck will not leave the area because he misses his mate.  When he comes to investigate,
the cousin shoots it.

The narrator then puts the ducks in
the game bag and says that he goes back to Paris the same
evening.

How does Scout react when Atticus explains to her why he has decided to defend Tom Robinson?I know Atticus explains he does it because he wouldn't...

Scout is young and doesn't understand everything her
father is telling her--yet.  In fact, Harper Lee often uses Scout's youthful ignorance
as an opportunity for the adults to explain what she wants the readers to hear about
prejudice and hate and other harmful stereotypes.

In this
case, Atticus does explain his position, as you noted.  He tells Scout, in answer to her
question, that they will probably not win this case.  He then asks her for one thing--to
keep her cool and not pick a fight over this matter.  Her reaction is pretty basic,
considering she really doesn't understand what her father is asking her to do--to accept
that others will be ignorant and cruel and hurtful because they have not learned
better.  She is capable of being the bigger person, and that's what he asks of her. She
promises. 

She tries, she really does. but when her cousin
Francis calls her father names she simply has to haul off and whack him--prompting
Atticus to let Scout overhear a conversation in which he admits his fears for the summer
ahead and his hope that his children will come to him first rather than try to fight. 
She doesn't make another promise, but she does better the next time she is
tempted.

In the book October Light by John Gardner, what is a characteristic example of James Page, including the page number where it occurs?

Two good characteristic examples of James Page in
October Light are right at the beginning of the novel, where author
John Gardner introduces the character and shows the reader what he is like. The first
example is narrated on page 2. James is so disgusted with his widowed sister's TV set
and the "endless, simpering dramas they put on, now indecent, now violent," that he
loads his shotgun and from behind her--without any warning--shots the TV: "he'd blown
that TV screen to h***, right back where it come from."

The
affect of his action was definitive: There was no more TV in his home; there was very
nearly no more widowed sister. She had understandably bolted with fright right straight
out of her chair, "fainted dead away," and turned a terrible blue all over. James
managed to revive her after ministering to her with ice-water for an
hour.

The second characteristic example of James Page is
narrated soon afterward on page 3. His sister was scolding him about the equal rights of
men and women as decreed in "the Equal Rights Amendment." James is said to have been
"shocked and flabbergasted" by all that she said, which he considered pure
"foolishness." He made his case for that foolishness by saying to
her:

"Why, a
woman ain't even completely human ....Look how weak the are! Look how they cry like
little children!"

James was
absolutely serious about what he'd said, "he'd never been more serious in his life," and
his sister was as shocked and flabbergasted by his opinion as he'd been by her
lecture--and she could lecture! The author uses this incident to introduce the notion
that James Page might be able to change and redeem his life--even though he is
seventy-three--when the narrator describes James' fleeting self-doubt in his reaction to
his sister's shock and astonishment. The third-person narrator
says:

She's
seemed as astonished by it all as he was, so astonished to discover what he thought that
he almost came to doubt it.

In the book "The Giver" what are some adjectives for Jonas' father?

In the book The Giver Jonas father
works in the nursery taking care of the infants but one of the deeds that he has to do
is to put them to death sometimes.  He refers to the act as
releasing the infants.  I can think of
quite a few adjectives that would describe his father in the
story.

Nurturing, ignorant, caring, trustworthy, parental,
dutiful, obedient, friendly, helpful, unengaged, and
bland.

Some of the traits are evident because he has no
memories of how to have real emotions like the rest of the members in the community.  I
can not call him a murderer because he does not "kill" according to the communications
of his society.

What is the tone of Shakespeare's Sonnet 14?Who is speaking? What is the speaker's tone? What evidence do you have that this is the tone?

The tone in Shakespeare's Sonnet 14 is one of loving
reverence. The speaker tells us that he has studied astronomy and can understand the
stars in their physical sense, but he cannot read them as an astrologer would. He
cannot 

readability="11">

...tell of good or evil luck,
Of
plagues, of dearths, or seasons' quality;
Nor can I fortune to brief minutes
tell,
Pointing to each his thunder, rain and
wind.

After admitting this to
his subject, the speaker says that he can read the stars in
her eyes:

But
from thine eyes my knowledge I derive,
And, constant stars, in them I read
such art
As truth and beauty shall together
thrive.

Here is where
he illustrates his reverence. Having studied the stars, he reveres her, because he
sees "truth and beauty" in her eyes and not where he really should see it - in the
stars.

In the last three lines the speaker adds a sense of
love to his words. He says:

readability="6">

If from thyself to store thou wouldst convert;

Or else of thee this I prognosticate:
Thy end is truth's and
beauty's doom and date.

He's
saying that her "end" would be the end of truth and beauty. If she does not live on,
through children, truth and beauty will die with her. These are the very loving words
that add to the reverence of the opening lines.

 
 

In The Stranger, what are some ways in which Meursault seems normal and in conformity with society and ways in which he seems non-conformist?

Meursault conforms by engaging in human relationships
(Marie and Raymond) even though he tries to stay as emotionally removed as possible. He
also goes to a job every day. This is perhaps his most conformist practice since it
occurs every day and serves two main purposes: to benefit a company and to sustain
Meursault’s own way of life, which by his standards, is arbitrary. This shows that he is
not completely indifferent. He does certain things to continue his way of life. So, he
does find some significance even if it is to make arbitrary choices. Melville’s Bartleby
had a much greater (and less selfish) degree of scorn for conformity because he refused
everything.

So, I think you are correct. On the outside,
Meursault goes about his daily life as most people do. Although he is indifferent to his
mother’s death, he does the socially accepted thing by attending the funeral. He does
not mourn but he goes through the motions that society expects of
him.

Interpretations of this novel often point out that
Meursault exhibits the Absurd hero through his actions. But this isn’t always the case.
It really isn’t until the murder and the trial that Meursault’s outward actions begin to
represent his philosophy of Absurdity. In other words, this is when Meursault’s
indifference affects his external world. Then the external world threatens his
indifferent existence and he is forced to defend and explain himself. His testimony in
court and dialogue with the priest are the final examples where he actually shows his
nonconformity to the external world.

If the Cullen Family moves around, how does Carlisle continue to practice medicine w/o having a doctorate that's 100 years old in Twilight?

If you read Breaking Dawn, they mention that they use J.
Jenks to get paperwork illeagaly. Prehaps J. Jenks has made him illegal, but more recent
medical school degree papers.

EDIT:
I'm sorry I just realized the person above me, posted the same idea, but written much
better. But the person they get their illegal documents from is named J. Jenks and they
talk about him in breaking dawn.

In Elie Wiesel's novel, Night, Ikek, the Kapo, beats Elie and his father: how can we compare the two beatings ?

In Elie Wiesel's novel, Night, Idek,
the Kapo ("a prisoner put in charge of a barracks"), beats both Elie and his father,
Shlomo.

On the first occasion, Elie is working in the
warehouse, and he happens to draw the notice of a furious Idek who begins to beat
him.

...I
happened to cross [Idek's] path. He threw himself on me like a wild beast, beating me in
the chest, on my head, throwing me to the ground and picking me up again, crushing me
with ever more violent blows, until I was covered in
blood.

As Idek ferociously
beats him, Elie bites his lips so that no sound of pain will come from his mouth. Idek,
getting no response, seems displeased—as if Elie is being defiant because he does not
cry out. And so Idek continues to pound on Elie harder and harder. Seeming to have
exhausted his fury, he calmly sends Elie back to work as if nothing had happened. Elie
had done nothing to aggravate Idek, but was simply in the wrong place at the wrong
time.

Another time, while Elie's work group is working
under the direction of some German soldiers, an "on-edge" Idek once again loses control,
however instead of going after Elie, this time he turns his attention to Elie's father.
Rather than using his fists, he beats the older man with an iron
bar.

At first,
my father simply doubled over under the blows, but then he seemed to break in two like
an old tree struck by
lightning.

Once again, it
would seem that Idek is the problem: Elie's father had done nothing
but find himself unfortunate enough to draw Idek's attention—and wrath—down on him
simply by being there at that moment in time. Strangely, though, even while Elie has
experienced Idek's unwarranted rage himself, Elie does not blame the
Kapo, but his father instead.

readability="6">

Why couldn't  he have avoided Idek's wrath? That
was what life in a concentration camp had made of
me...

Elie and his father are
both beaten for no reason. In this way the beatings are the same. What is different is
that, besides the fact that Idek beats Elie with his hands and Elie's father is beaten
with an iron bar, Elie knows he was not to blame for being beaten—but he cannot be
sympathetic when the same thing happens to his father. Perhaps it is the pain and
humiliation of not being able to do anything, but Elie displaces
his anger and unfairly blames his father. It's as if he expected, unfairly, that his
father find a way to be invisible. At the same time, however, Elie
is aware of how wrong he is, and recognizes that the horrors of the concentration camp
continue to change him and there is nothing he can do to stop it—and still
survive.

What were the Jim Crow laws?

After the end of the United States Civil War in 1865, the
country was united again and slavery was made illegal in all states. Unfortunately,
while blacks were legally free men on paper, common prejudice and discrimination
continued as whites -- especially Southerners, who were angry about losing the war and
their bid for sovereignty -- placed blacks into a lower social class. To this end, the
Jim Crow laws were invented to keep blacks from aspiring to
a higher social position, or considering themselves equal with whites. The landmark
legal case of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) cemented the acceptability of "separate but
equal" in many people's minds.

The most common example was
segregation, which kept blacks from mingling with whites in most public places,
including restaurants, churches, offices, bathrooms, and places of business. Segregation
continued in one form or another until the 1950s. Examples of "whites-only" or
"blacks-only" signs can still be seen in historic, refurbished, or abandoned buildings.
Blacks were also prohibited from voting, which meant that they could not support
candidates sympathetic to civil rights.

The main focus of
the Jim Crow was to prevent blacks from mingling with whites, especially in marriage or
politics. This stemmed both from the scientific beliefs of the time -- which were slowly
proven wrong -- and from standard prejudice. Most whites shared these beliefs, and had
no reason to doubt them aside from moral or ethical concerns. Because blacks were almost
never involved with politics, there was no push to overturn the laws until after World
War II, when the Civil Rights Movement began to gain real
momentum.

Why does Gatsby view Daisy's child with surprise?

A child is often a product of love, which he hopes is not
really going on with Daisy and Tom. A child means at least 18 years of permanence
between a man and a woman even if they separate.

Daisy also
lives a life apart from her child. He's seen Daisy in many situations, but not ever with
a child. This child suggests Daisy is not just a wife to be separated, but a mother. I
think if there was any moral bone in Gatsby's body a child would give cause to think
twice about what he intends to do.

I think he also would
have liked to contribute to the children that Daisy would
have.

Nick says that Gatsby likely never believed in the
child's existence. The reasons above, to me, are likely why.

Regarding the Vietnam War, what were the United States' interests or reasons for becoming involved in the war?

The reason that the US wanted to get involved in the
Vietnam War was that the US wanted to prevent the spread of
communism.

The US believed in a theory called the "domino
effect."  This theory argued that, if South Vietnam feel to communism, other countries
in the region would become communist as well.  When this happened, key American allies
such as Japan and the Philippines would have been threatened.  This would reduce the
security of the US.

So the basic reason for US involvement
was the US Cold War strategy of containment.

Describe the Duke’s character in Browning’s “My Last Duchess.”

In this dramatic monolog, the Duke shows a portrait of his
late wife to a visitor. As he talks of her, demeaning her character, he reveals that she
in actuality had been a lovely, sensitive woman, full of joy, while he himself is cruel,
jealous, proud, and arrogant.

He felt great jealousy
because the duchess found joy all around her and favored others besides himself with her
smiles:

. . .
. Sir, 'twas not

Her husband's presence only, called that
spot

Of joy into the Duchess'
cheek;

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -

. . . . She had

A
heart--how shall I say?--too soon made glad,

Too easily
impressed; she liked whate'er

Whe looked on, and her looks
went everywhere.

The Duke's
jealousy and his arrogance are shown in his attitude toward his family name,
representative of his social station. He resents that the duchess appreciated a sunset
or a cherry bough as much as she valued taking his
name:

. . . as
if she ranked

My gift of a nine-hundred-years-old
name

With anybody's
gift.

The Duke clearly
believed that his wife had not given him the respect he deserved simply for being who he
was; his sense of superiority and his haughty attitude are
obvious.

Although his wife displeased him, the Duke
explains, he would never "stoop" to express his feelings in order to correct her
behavior. Ruled by pride, he chooses another way of dealing with her
imperfections:

readability="14">

Oh sir, she smiled, no
doubt,

Whene'er I passed her; but who passed
without

Much the same smile? This grew; I gave
commands;

Then all smiles stopped together. There she
stands

As if
alive.

When the Duke's
jealousy and wounded pride became unbearable, he "gave commands" stopping "all smiles,"
strongly implying he ordered the duchess be killed. He is both cold and
cruel.

An interesting passage concludes the poem. As he
shows his visitor downstairs, the Duke directs his attention to a sculpture of Neptune
taming a seahorse. It is an ironic metaphor for the Duke's relationship with the
duchess. Like the seahorse, his duchess had evinced a free spirit; rather than lower
himself to "tame" her, he simply had her
destroyed.

He resented
that the duchess

What is the universality of the book "The Secret Life of Bees"?I'm not fully sure what Universality means.

Another way of saying “universality” is “applicable” or
“relatable.”  The question could be asked in this way, “What makes this book applicable
and relatable to many readers?” In other words, even though the reader may not have much
in common with Lily or the other characters, how come readers still connect to the ideas
in this book?

Readers connect to the text
because of themes that apply to many readers’ lives, regardless of race or age or
gender. Lily is lost in many ways, never having known her mother and not having a very
emotionally present father. Partly because of these factors, Lily questions who she is
and blames herself for many things, believing she is a bad person. This theme of self
discovery and questioning is something that many people go through in life. Most people
ask themselves, “who am I?” and “What do I want to do with my life?” Lily is asking
herself these questions constantly throughout the novel. She is also searching for a
place to belong. Like many adolescents, Lily often feels awkward and unsure of herself.
And like many adolescents, she is looking for people she feels understand and accept
her. She also experiences a crush on a boy, and admiration for older female figures, all
of which most people experience in life. There is also an idea of family that people can
connect to in the novel. Lily is looking for a family, and finds one in the Boatwright
sisters and Rosaleen. Even though it is an unconventional family, they support each
other and love one another. Most families are not the typical nuclear family with
father, mother, and two children anymore, and readers can identify with having a family
that is not traditional. Regardless of how a family is constructed, love is the most
important factor, and Lily learns this. All of these are reasons why readers can connect
to this book and find the themes universal. 

In The Kite Runner, Hosseini compared kite fighting to going to war. Identify how the two are similar.

It is in chapter six that this analogy is drawn between
kite flying and war. Note how Amir describes himself the night before the
competition:

I
felt like a solder trying to sleeep in the trenches the night before a major battle. And
that wasn't so far off. In Kabul, fighting kites was a little like
going to war.

As we
understand more about the cultural significance of fighting kites, we see Amir's point
of view. Fighting kites was a savage competition, where only the merciless and resolute
triumph. It was also a way to gain honour and kudos by defeating your opponents.
Remember how Amir hopes to win the favour of his father by triumphing in this
competition. Reputations are gained and lost, and during the battle, great sacrifice is
needed to ensure that you triumph. Note how Hassan's hands bleed with handling the cord.
This analogy is not stretched very far at all.

Who has jurisdiction over mistreated minors in your community?law enforcement

There are several government agencies in charge of
mistreated minors in most communities.  Though many of these agencies work
collaboratively with one another, the primary agency responsible in different cases
usually depends on the specific situation.

American
Agencies which could possibly be involved
include:

• Department of Social Services:
  responsible primarily in cases of abuse or neglect, also involved in cases of criminal
  activity by a minor.


• Guardian ad Litem: primary
  responsibility of this agency is to work for the "best interest" of the minor.
  


• The Public School System: often the first contact for a
  minor when a teacher, coach, or administrator, for example, suspects
  abuse/neglect.


• The Department of Juvenile Justice: even
  though this agency seems most responsible for the "punishment" of criminal activity in
  minors, like Guardian ad Litem, judges and attorneys often fight for "the best interest"
  of a child criminal, especially when circumstances mitigate logical reasons for illegal
  behavior.  An example here might be a judge sentencing a student to spend time at a
  rehabilitation wilderness camp rather than spend time in juvenile detention (or
  jail).

The link below is the home page of the
Department of Health and Human Services in my home state, North Carolina, but every
state has a similar website for this government agency.

Is the following a slander case?My daughter is in second grade. She has to use the bathroom alot during the day. She drinks a lot of water. ...

No, this is not a slander case.  I am assuming that the
meeting that you attended was specifically meant to address your daughter's issues (as
opposed to a public meeting on other issues).  In this context, the teacher's statements
are presumably not being made with malicious intent and are part of her duties as a
teacher.

When a parent asks to meet with teachers and
administration about a student's problems, the teacher has to give her professional
opinion about the student.  If a teacher knowingly says something false and malicious,
there could be grounds for a slander case.  However, the teacher presumably cannot
know that her statement about your daughter's intentions is
false.  Teachers do have to make professional judgements about what students are doing
all the time.

Unless the teacher knew that her statement
was false and unless she was making those statements for a malicious reason, she has not
slandered your daughter.

Of course, that does not mean that
she handled the meeting well.  She could have said things in a nicer way, perhaps.  But
being rude or thoughtless is not the same as slander.

In Act I Scene 1 do you think Egeus is justified in being angry with his daughter? Why or why not?

The answer to this question is wholly dependent on
perspective. In the eyes of the law, Hermia is Egeus' daughter, therefore she is his
property until he hands her off to a husband. As such, he is allowed to do with her as
he wishes and she is not to have any say in the matter. However, from a modern
perspective, we view this as repressive and controlling behavior because, as an American
society, we do not accept the concept of arranged marriages. It is important, however,
to acknowledge that some cultures do still view arranged marriages as the norm, so again
the potential justification for his anger is largely dependent on the
reader.

Hermia has defied her father. We do accept that
children should not defy their parents as long as their parents requests or demands are
reasonable. The question, then, is is Egeus' demand that Hermia marry Demetrius
reasonable?

This is a matter of perspective, but it can
also be argued that Shakespeare, given his resolution in this work as well as his tragic
outcome in Romeo and Juliet, had his own opinions about parental involvement in their
children's relationships. From the writer's perspective, therefore, it is arguable that
his anger is not justified.

Can the two triangles be proved congruent? If so, by which method: sss, sas, asa, aas, or hl. Please help me with this problem.Can the two...

Triangles are congruent if they have three equal sides and
three equal internal angles.  Congruent triangles can be exact copies or mirror
images.

Here are the rules for congruent
triangles:

1.  SSS:  all three sides are
equal

2.  SAS:  two sides and their included angle are
equal

3.  ASA: a pair of angles and their included side is
equal

4.  AAS: a pair of corresponding angles and a
non-included side is equal

5.  HL:  two right triangles are
congruent if their hypotenuse and 1 leg are equal

In image
1, the triangles are congruent (although mirror images) because they have three equal
sides (shown by the 1, 2 and 3 hash marks).  Thus their congruency is proved by
SSS.

In image 2, both triangles have their shortest sides
equal (indicated by double hash marks).

Both triangles
share the marked angle.

This angle is shared by the
shortest sides already mentioned, plus equal longer sides the lengths of which are the
sum of a single and a double hash mark.

Thus, the triangles
in image 2 are congruent based on SAS.  As in image 1, the congruent triangles are
mirror images.

How does Steinbeck use settings to show the characters circumstance in Chapter 6 in Of Mice and Men?In the Salinas River and the government camp of...

The references to Weed are brief and conveyed by George to
illustrate the dangers inherent in travelling with Lennie, and also foreshadowing the
events after the death of Curley's wife. George explains how they were'run out' of Weed
after Lennie was accused of attacking a girl.

The setting
in Chapter 6 returns us to the opening of the novel, indicating the cyclical nature of
George and Lennie's lives. Lennie is still described as 'a creeping bear' and he returns
to drink from the pool - an action he was reprimanded for by George in Chapter 1. We see
the pathetic fallacy of the sunset around the Gabilan's as Lennie's life nears its close
-

Lennie
turned his head and looked off across the pool and up the darkening slopes of the
Gabilans. 'We gonna get a little place,' George
began.

We also see the
imagery of the heron and the water snake reminding us of the brutal nature of the lives
of the characters as they fight for survival in the midst of the Depression. Similarly,
the ripples in the pond remind us of the effect that the two men have had on the
communities in which they have been a part -

row
on row of tiny-wind waves flowed up the pool's surface.

What was Nixon's plan to "win" the Vietnam War? How did this plan involve Cambodia?

President Nixon had a three parts to his plan to end the
war.

First, he wanted the North Vietnamese to withdraw
their military from the South.

Second, he wanted to end the
kind of domestic unrest that was causing the protests against the war at home.  He did
this by making the draft fairer and eventually ending
it.

Third, he wanted to fight the war more aggressively. 
This included bombing Cambodia because there were places in that country where communist
troops would set up bases in safety (because the US would not attack them in a neutral
country.)

Is there any hint of incest in Hamlet between Ophelia and Laertes?Like Webster's The Duchess of Malfi, does Shakespeare's Hamlet portray an...

Yes, I believe there are subtle overtones of incest
between the pair in Hamlet.  Remember, Laertes is a foil for
Hamlet, a more passionate double of the Prince.  What one says or does speaks also for
the other.  Before he leaves for Paris, Laertes tells his sister, regarding Hamlet's
advances:

readability="0">

Or lose your heart, or your chaste
treasure open
To his unmaster'd
importunity.
Fear it, Ophelia, fear it, my dear
sister,
And keep you in the rear of your
affection,
Out of the shot and danger of
desire.
The chariest maid is prodigal
enough,
If she unmask her beauty to the
moon:
Virtue itself 'scapes not calumnious
strokes:
The canker galls the infants of the
spring,
Too oft before their buttons be
disclosed,
And in the morn and liquid dew of
youth
Contagious blastments are most
imminent.
Be wary then; best safety lies in
fear:
Youth to itself rebels, though none else
near.

Leartes sees
all young men as out for eros (physical love) because, well, he's a
young man himself.  By speaking about Hamlet, he is also speaking for himself.  Perhaps
Leartes wants Ophelia to spurn Hamlet's advances while he is gone because Laertes wants
her to himself when he returns--a kind of sexual jealousy.  Psychologically, Laertes may
well be harboring an incestuous desire for his sister.  By acting like a protective
older brother, Laertes may only be sublimating his real
desire.

Another curious scene is when Leartes jumps into
Ophelia's grave.  He shows more anguish over her death than Hamlet.  Before leaping in,
he yells:

readability="0">

Hold off the earth
awhile,
Till I have caught her once more in mine
arms:

Laertes takes
his dead sister in his arms the way a married man would his wife.  Hamlet jumps in as
well in order to chastise Laertes' deviant, excessive behavior.  Doesn't Hamlet notice
the unnatural relationship here?  This is why they duel at the end: Hamlet must rid
Denmark of both incestuous brothers Claudius and Laertes.

In the story "Geraldo No Last Name" by Sandra Cisneros, how would you describe Cisneros’s diction and its effect on the story’s tone?

The diction that Cisneros uses in "Geraldo No Last Name"
is casual in order to make the story feel close to home.  For example, Cisneros uses
colloquialisms to relate the reader to the experience:  "hit and run," "cumbias and
salsas and rancheras," "ain't it a shame." Yet, although the reader may relate to the
experience, the tone created by the words suggests that events like these are all too
common in communities like Marin's and Geraldo's.  The air of sarcasm in the line,
"Ain't it a shame" points to the notion that no one really does think it is a shame that
Geraldo is dead.  Using another form of diction would move the story out of the realm of
the community, and Cisneros is asking the reader to consider his/her position on events
like the one happening in the story.

Is the poem, "To Daffodils," by Robert Herrick, a Cavalier poem? Explain.

Robert Herrick's poem entitled, "To Daffodils," is a
Cavalier poem. Cavalier poems are known for their "carpe diem" (seize the day) theme:
making the most of the time we have because it flies by so
quickly.

In "To Daffodils," the speaker is praising the
beautiful flowers, but also speaking as to how quickly they fade. Herrick's description
of the life of daffodils, in his poem, parallels the brief life of
man.

The first stanza relates the sadness that comes with
the swift passage of the daffodils of spring: they arrive in all their glory, but seem
to die too soon and return to the earth. The speaker talks of the time of day, which is
also symbolic of the stages of life. He says:

readability="8">

As yet the early-rising sun
Has not
attain'd his noon.
Stay, stay,
Until the hasting day
Has
run
But to the
even-song...

"Early-rising
sun" is youth; noon is middle age. The speaker finishes the stanza by saying that when
"we" have prayed with the daffodils, "we will go with you
along."

The second stanza provides the "extended metaphor"
to the descriptions provided in the first stanza. The speaker verbalizes the swiftness
of man's time on the earth:

readability="11">

We have short time to stay, as you,
We
have as short a spring;
As quick a growth to meet decay,
As you, or
anything.
We die
As your hours do, and
dry
Away...

The
speaker points out that, like the daffodils, humans have a short spring (youth); and
like dead plants, we decay as quickly as plants, to rejoin the soil. Plants, like
people, lose the hours to eventual death—just like the
daffodils.

Finally, the speaker points out with a simile,
that human life is like a summer rain or the "pearls" of dew: in the blink of an eye,
both are gone—forever.

In
summary:

The
over-riding message of Herrick’s work is that life is short, the world is beautiful,
love is splendid, and we must use the short time we have to make the most of
it.

In The Kite Runner, why is Amir afraid to be Hassan's true friend?

Amir and Hassan basically grew up together and share a lot
of good memories, but Amir still does not consider Hassan, as you say, a "true friend". 
This is most likely due to their different ethnicities: Amir is a Pashtun, people who
have a history of persecuting Hazaras; Hassan is a Hazara.  Amir mentions, "In the end,
I was a Pashtun and he was a Hazara, I was Sunni and he was Shi'a, and nothing was going
to change that.  Nothing" (25).

Aside from their ethnic
differences, Amir might not want to admit that they are friends because admitting this
might possibly mean that he'd have to stand up to those who condemn him - namely, Assef,
the "bully" and main antagonist of the story.

Amir himself
is conflicted about this topic as well: "But he's not my friend!  I
almost blurted.  He's my servant!  Had I really thought that?  ...I
treated Hassan well, just like a friend, better even, more like a brother"
(41).

How would someone best describe the change over time in the "founding Era" (1763-1815)?Trying to get all aspects of the change in that Era such...

So are you looking for one way to describe changes in all
those areas?

Overall, I would say that the word
"democratization" might be the best one to describe the overall changes.  The word
certainly does not cover all the areas you mention (for example, it doesn't describe
economic change much and it doesn't apply much to racial minorities) but overall it does
kind of fit.

The word "democratization" at least applies to
government structures, class structures and voting rights.  The government under the
Constitution was without doubt more democratic, and voting rights were more widely given
than they had been in colonial times.  Class became much less of an issue during this
time, especially as you get later in this era and the Democratic-Republicans come to
power.

I can't think of any other word or idea that can
describe more of what happened in this era, even if my choice does not cover everything
that was going on.

The avowed purpose of alliances is to provide for national defense.However, entangling alliances led to a world war in 1914.Could alliances...

International relations theorists call this the "security
dilemma."  It is the idea that things that a country does to make itself secure really
make it less secure.  Country A acts to protect itself (say by making an alliance) but
Country B thinks that the alliance is meant to harm it and it becomes more likely to
attack Country A.  So definitely yes -- this can happen.

I
do not really think that current alliances are likely to lead to war.  I think current
alliances are much looser than previous ones, mostly because there is no major threat to
the larger countries of the world.  The US is not afraid of Russia, for example, and is
not likely to be pulled into war because of its NATO alliances with Eastern European
countries.

Explain the effect of Polonius' interruption of the royals in Act Two, scene two, in Shakespeare's Hamlet.

When Polonius interrupts Gertrude and Claudius in
Shakespeare's Hamlet, Act Two, scene two, the audience learns of
his true character. Although he serves the King, he is simply
the...

readability="6">

...elderly and long-winded courtier and chief
counselor in the Danish court. Polonius demonstrates a propensity for hypocrisy and
spying...

Polonius is a
master at href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/double-speak?s=t">double-speak:
saying a lot that may sound important, but really means nothing. He
is self-serving, and trying hard to show himself as indispensable to the new King. He is
also convinced of his own self-importance. He provides excellent advice to his son
Laertes in Act One, but cannot follow his words of wisdom himself. Polonius sets the
stage by allowing the newly arrived ambassadors from Norway to speak first, saving the
best (himself) for last:

readability="7">

POLONIUS:

Give
first admittance to the ambassadors.

My news shall be the
fruit to that great feast.
(54-55)

When he
begins, Polonius  href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pontificate?s=t">pontificates,
going on a nonsensical tirade regarding majesty, night and time. He notes that to try to
explain these things would be a waste of time...exactly what he is
doing.

readability="19">

POLONIUS:

My
liege, and madam, to expostulate

What majesty should be,
what duty is,

Why day is day, night night, and time is
time.

Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time.
(92-95)

Ironically,
he says that it is wisest to be brief, but is unable to
be brief. He claims that Hamlet is
mad, but to explain madness would be insane. Speaking in circles, Gertrude grows weary
of his pointless babbling, telling Polonius to give them
details and stop playing with
words:

readability="6">

QUEEN:

More
matter, with less art.
(102)

With a great
deal more rambling, the old man tries to convince Gertrude and Claudius that he has
answers they need, and in doing so he involves his daughter—he tells the royal couple
that he is certain Hamlet's love for Ophelia is responsible for
Hamlet's unusual behavior. He reads a love letter Hamlet wrote to Ophelia as proof that
what he says is true.

In truth, Hamlet is feigning madness
to discover if Claudius murdered Hamlet's father. Everything Hamlet does with regard to
his mother, Claudius, the rest of the court, and even Ophelia, is to lull everyone into
a sense that Hamlet is not a threat because he is crazy. In this way, Hamlet hopes
Claudius will mistakenly expose his guilt.

Polonius'
bumbling convinces the audience that Polonius is actually a fool. Gertrude seems
impatient with his nonsensical blathering, yet Claudius listens to it all, even agreeing
to spy with Polonius on Hamlet and Ophelia. This shows not only that Polonius is silly,
but also that Claudius may be ignorant as to how one who is King
should act—Old Hamlet (we can assume) would have done so by showing
Polonius the door. Preoccupied with what he has done, we might infer that Claudius is
more interested in guaranteeing his place on the throne. Gertrude has the experience of
being a queen; Claudius (as far as we know) has no idea of how to act with kingly grace.

Polonius draws the attention of the King away from
international relations (with Norway), focusing things squarely on Hamlet, but including
Ophelia so that Polonius himself will still be involved in what is taking place, feeding
his need to be essential in what is to follow.

All of
these things become apparent with Polonius' ridiculous behavior, introduced as he
interrupts the royal court.