find square roots of -1+2i

We have to find the square root of `-1+2i` i.e. `\sqrt{-1+2i}`

We will find the square roots of the complex number of the form x+yi , where x and y are real numbers, by the following method:

Let `z^2=(x+yi)^2=-1+2i`

i.e. `(x^2-y^2)+2xyi=-1+2i`

Comparing real and imaginary terms we get,

`x^2-y^2=-1 -------> (1)`

`2xy=2` implies `xy=1 ------>(2)`  

So from (2) we get,  y=1/x . Substituting this in (1) we have,

`x^2-\frac{1}{x^2}=-1`

i.e. `x^4+x^2-1=0`

implies `x^2=\frac{-1\pm\sqrt{5}}{2}`

               `=0.62, -1.62`

Therefore, `x=\pm\sqrt{0.62}=\pm 0.79` ``

`x^2=-1.62` is discarded since it gives imaginary value.

hence,

When x=0.79,  y= 1.27

         x=-0.79 , y= -1.27

i.e we have,  `\sqrt{-1+2i}=0.79+1.27i or -0.79-1.27i`

                                `=\pm (0.79+1.27i)`

Hence the square roots of -1+2i are:  `\pm` (0.79+1.27i)  

Why do people from different races look different?

Great question! Actually, it's not so much that people from different "races" look different, but that people who look different were categorized into races. I think it's really important for people to understand the historical and social context of the idea of race in order to fully make sense of how it impacts our lives today. Because I am most familiar with racial categories in the United States, I will use this as my central frame of reference. 

Race, as it is thought of in the Western world, describes categories of physical attributes like color of eyes, skin, and hair. In some parts of the world, race is quite different. Historically, Japan has been quite ethnically and phenotypically (the way people look) homogenous, so there wasn't really much of a concept of race until Europeans and Mainland Asians began to visit. In Brazil, racial categories are far more flexible and may take into account factors like socioeconomic status and who you hang out with-- not just appearance! Comparing understandings of race from around the world should tip us off to the fact that race is a cultural phenomenon rather than a physical one.

The truth is that there is no biological reality of race. There is no one gene, or even a collection of genes, which determine that a person is White or Black or Asian. Even trying to lump people into these categories leaves a lot out of the picture. Within one "racial category" and even within one nation or city, there's a lot of variation in how people look. Let's imagine you have a bag full of jellybeans of every possible flavor and color, and I asked you to sort them into distinct categories. You could try to sort them into categories like blue, red, green, and so on-- but what about the purple jellybeans, the light blue, or the red with orange spots? You'd probably do your best to sort these with the jellybeans they look most similar to, right? Our understanding of race is the same way-- we try to sort people into groups based on how they look in comparison with stereotypes of race.

Though race is not a biological reality in the sense that there is one gene or one phenotype for how people of a certain race look, our stereotypes of race are based on actual physical characteristics. Color of skin, hair, and eyes, facial bone structure, and the texture of hair all may play a part in how we intentionally or unintentionally categorize someone. That physical categorization on its own isn't necessarily a bad thing-- humans love to categorize things, even each other! When we treat these categorizations as being fixed realities, creating a sense of "either-or," it can cause a lot of conflict about physical appearance. Even worse, historically and to this day, many people assign value to certain characteristics or associate a physical appearance with social behavior.

This is why race is a damaging social construct. The idea of race and racial categories takes the full spectrum of human appearance, our mixed bag of jellybeans, and tries to push them into a handful of boxes that leave out a lot of information. Prior to European colonialism, the idea of race wasn't very fixed. In fact, prior to and during the 16th century, most people used the term "race" to refer to people of differing nationalities. With increasing exploration and colonization of the world, race came to refer to the many different ways people looked in addition to nationality. With the international slave trade, the idea that people from a particular place look a certain way transformed into a very rigid hierarchy of phenotype as justification for human cruelty.

In the 17th and 18th centuries, explorers and scientists tried to devise a system of neat categories of race. The most popular and persistent of these systems was that devised by John Friedman Blumenbach, who argued that there was a biologically real hierarchy of humans categorized as Caucasian, Mongoloid, Malay, Negroid, and (Indigenous) American. This hierarchy was primarily based on skin color, with the lightest (European) skin being favored, and the darkest (African) skin being considered lowest. Though it was outwardly based on appearance, this hierarchy took on all sorts of connotations of physical and mental capabilities. Much of the racial oppression and human injustice caused by the international slave trade was "justified" because light-skinned Europeans genuinely believed that people of darker skin tones were not as smart and possibly couldn't even feel pain. Some people went as far as believing that it was their duty as a light-skinned person to rule over, exploit, and "shepherd" darker-skinned people. 

As for why people from different parts of the world have different appearances, it's all about adaptation! Our species, Homo sapiens, first arose in Southeast Africa around 200,000 years ago. Since then, our ancestors have been busy spreading out around the globe. Though this journey was most likely motivated by a search for food, people eventually settled in every possible habitable environment. With exposure to these many variable environments, the general appearance of a population began to shift in response to environmental pressure. Our first Homo sapiens ancestors were likely dark-skinned, but those who migrated out of the high-sun environment of Sub-Saharan Africa did not require as much melanin to be present in the skin. Skeletal features like nose shape, height, or jaw shape may be a response to the air quality and diet of a particular region. 

Today, we know that the social connotations of race aren't true. Especially as genetic evidence expands, we know that there is no real, fixed, biological basis for racial identities. However, beliefs about race are so deeply ingrained in society that it takes active and critical thinking to undo the things we have been taught (implicitly and explicitly) about race. 

What does Bryon mean when he says "that was then, this is now"?

In Chapter 4, Bryon and Mark are reminiscing about playing as children and getting into trouble with their friends when they were young. Mark then asks Bryon if he ever gets the feeling that things are coming to an end because something new is about to begin. Bryon tells Mark that he understands how he is feeling. Mark then mentions how they used to be very close with their other friends, but recently things have begun to change. They don't get to see their friends anymore because everyone is in a relationship or doing their own thing. Bryon agrees with Mark that things have changed and says that it is kind of a good thing. Mark then sighs and comments, "but there's a difference. I wonder what the difference is?" (Hinton 69). Bryon responds by saying,

"The difference is...that was then, this is now" (Hinton 69).

Bryon essentially means that as time progresses, people change and grow apart from one another. Bryon realizes that their childhood has come to an end and that the present stage of their lives is not the same as it once was. He is saying that the past is the past, and one must accept the ever-changing course of life.

In Shakespeare's Macbeth, what are the obstacles to Lady Macbeth's plan?

One major obstacle to Lady Macbeth's plan is Macbeth himself.  She initially fears that he is "too full o' th' milk of human kindness" to consider killing the king in order to take the throne (1.5.17).  She turns out to be wrong -- he is willing to consider it -- but after Macbeth has had time to consider all the reasons he has not to kill Duncan, he tells her, "We will proceed no further in this business" (1.7.34).  Lady Macbeth must then convince him to overcome his scruples.

Lady Macbeth's own scruples and feelings present another obstacle to her plan.  She actually prays to be "unsex[ed]" because she wants to rid herself of any "remorse" she might have; likewise, she wishes to squash any compassion or womanly feelings that might prevent her from acting brutally (1.5.48, 1.5.51).  Then, when she goes to kill Duncan, she cannot.  Alone on stage, she says, "Had he not resembled / My father as he slept, I had done 't" (2.2.16-17).  So, it seems that Lady Macbeth is not quite as hard-hearted as she'd like to be, and her compassion -- however small -- presents another obstacle to her plan.

What are the conflicts in the story "A & P" by John Updike?

There are three main conflicts in John Updike's "A & P": Man vs. Society, Man vs. Man, and Man vs. Self.

• Man vs. Society

As Sammy, who narrates, checks out an older woman's groceries, he notices three girls who enter the store wearing "nothing but bathing suits." Because he becomes so distracted by these scantily-clad girls, Sammy rings up a box of HiHo crackers twice and the "witch about fifty with rouge on her cheekbones and no eyebrows" is able to catch him making an error. She complains to Sammy.
Further in the narrative, Sammy is critical of some of the customers, calling them names, such as "houseslaves in curlers." Then, he begins to feel defensive of the girls.

• Man vs. Man 

Sammy comes into conflict with the store manager, Mr. Lengel, because he wants to defend the three girls that Lengel has accosted and told, "We want you decently dressed when you come in here." Lengel adds that they must have their shoulders covered, as it is "policy." 
All the time that Lengel talks with the girls, Sammy watches them until he becomes infatuated enough--"scrunchy inside"--to feel that he must defend them. He tells Mr. Lengel that he did not have to embarrass the girls, and in an act of bravado, he quits.

"Sammy, you don't want to do this to your Mom and Dad," he [Lengel] tells me. It's true, I don't. But it seems to me that once you begin a gesture it's fatal not to go through with it....

"You'll feel this for the rest of your life," Lengel says, and I know it's true.

• Man vs. Self

Having acted against his better judgment, Sammy narrates that he keeps thinking of how Lengel made the pretty girl blush. After he has quit, Sammy searches for the girls, but they are gone. He looks through the window of the store, and realizes that he has defended the girls of his generation against the older generation only to find himself in some kind of limbo between the two. For, he does not know if he has acted as a fool or as a hero. Nevertheless, Sammy knows life will be harder: "I felt how hard the world was going to be to me hereafter."

What are examples of figurative language used in Act III, Scene 2 of King Lear?

Act III, Scene 2 of Shakespeare's King Lear is absolutely central to the play, and it accordingly employs some of the story's most lyrical language. The most extensive example of figurative language in this scene is personification, as Lear personifies the storm and raging elements by giving them human qualities. 

The first example of personification comes in the first line of the scene, when Lear urges the storm to "crack your cheeks; rage, blow" (1). The stormy elements of nature do not actually have cheeks, nor do they literally "rage." As such, we can see Lear is giving the elements human qualities and thus heightening our ability to imagine the intensity of the storm. Later in the scene, Lear advances his personification of the storm by calling the elements "servile ministers" (21), and so he directly imagines the storm having a human profession. 

It's also worth mentioning that this scene employs an apostrophe. In terms of figurative language, an apostrophe is an address to an absent character, or to a thing or abstract idea. In this scene, Lear very clearly addresses the storm as if it were a thinking being, saying "I tax not you, you elements, with unkindness" (16). Since the weather is not a thinking being or an actual character, Lear's direct address of the storm as "you" is an apostrophe.  

What are the names of important characters in Heidi by Johanna Spyri?

The protagonist is Heidi, a Swiss girl who lives with her aunt, Dete (also called "Detie"), in the mountains. Her aunt regards Heidi as an imposition, as she has to raise Heidi after her sister and brother-in-law die. Dete takes Heidi to live with Heidi's grandfather, Alm-Uncle, who is the father of Heidi's father. Her grandfather lives in Dorfli, where he maintains his distance from others and grazes livestock ("Alm" refers to the mountain ranges where he grazes his flock). Alm-Uncle grows to love Heidi, and she also gets to know Peter, a goatherd, and Peter's blind grandmother, Bridget (also called "Grannie"). 

Heidi later goes to Frankfurt to work as a companion to Clara Sesemann (spelled "Klara" in German), a sick girl who can't walk and who lives with her father, Mr. Sesemann. Heidi charms Clara with her friendliness and country manners. Fraulein Rottenmeier, Clara's housekeeper, is a strict woman who dislikes Heidi. Doctor Classen diagnoses Heidi with homesickness and sends her home to the mountains. 

Do you think coalition governments can be effective? What are some of the benefits and drawbacks of the coalition governing model?

Coalition governments, also known as consociational, or power-sharing governments, can be effective in the right circumstances. 

This type of government is popularly seen in Europe, in countries such as Switzerland and Ireland. The main benefit is that it gives members of the government from different ideologies the opportunity to work together in order to represent a larger portion of the population.

A strong example to back up the use of a coalition government is the case of India. India is comprised of 29 states, each representing a distinct culture, language, and history. In order to respect these differences, each state has some autonomy in its ability to create laws and establish an official state language and education system, among other factors. This has eased tensions between the states and the federal government, and the representatives of each state in India have the ability to speak for their states in the national government as well. This has all resulted in a stable Indian government where there is generally great pride in not only the home state of Indians but also in the idea of being "Indian" in a national sense as well.

Drawbacks to coalition government can often be seen when there are great ethnic or religious divides. One type of coalition government is that of "proportional representation." This is when, for example, there are two ethnic groups in a country--one has a larger population than the other: the group with a larger population will have a larger representation in the government (proportional to its population size). When there is already hostility between the two groups, this type of representation can spark outcry and often violence from the smaller and less represented group. In response to this initial upset, the other group will often react with violence as well, leading to war and/or a complete breakdown of the government. 

An example of a failure in a coalition government is the case of Lebanon. The power was divided between Christian, Sunni Muslim, and Shi'a Muslim populations in the 1940s. This arrangement unfortunately ended in civil war.

So in some cases, coalition governments can be effective, but there is always the risk, especially when forming a coalition between sensitive divisions, that the end result will be violence and war.

What are the differences between conceptual skills, human skills, and technical skills?

These are all valuable skills to have in any organization, and a good manager will have all three.  Let's go over them one at a time.

Conceptual skills are "thinking" kinds of skills. Our ability to look at the big picture is a conceptual skill. Our ability to see how all the parts make the whole is a conceptual skill, an understanding of relationships.  Our ability to generate and assess solutions to problems is sometimes a kind of conceptual skill.  Logic is a conceptual skill.  We need to understand cause and effect and analogy, which are two forms of logical analysis.  Critical thinking is a kind of conceptual skill in which one questions and assesses what one is presented with, rather than taking it as given.  Planning is a conceptual skill. 

Human skills are interpersonal and intrapersonal skills. That is, they are the skills we use to get along with other people and to understand ourselves, too.  Everyone needs needs both to get along in any social setting, but managers need them more than most because managers are responsible for motivating people to be as productive as possible and also for managing any conflict in the workplace.  The person who has no insight into others and him or herself will not do very well with this. Empathy is one very important kind of interpersonal skill. We can succeed better with people if we understand how they feel. Understanding oneself is equally important, to know one's weaknesses and strengths, so as to work on the weakness and capitalize on the strengths.  If I know that I am not at my best in the morning before my second cup of coffee, I would not want to hold an important meeting.  On the other hand, some people do their very best work very early.  If I am more introverted than extroverted, there are some more "social" tasks I might delegate to someone extroverted.  To be an effective manager, you must understand yourself and others.

Technical skills are sometimes thought of as mechanical skills, which embrace not only the nuts and bolts of traditional mechanics, but also today's technological skills.  Having these does not necessarily mean that a manager can fix the copier or get rid of the technology help desk. It does mean the manager needs to have a clue. A manager, for example, might be responsible for choosing new software for a company, in which case, the manager needs to have some idea how such software works and what it does.  A breakdown on the production line might not find the manager tightening the screw that worked itself loose, although there are many who would and do, but the manager has to have at least enough mechanical sense to know if the workers should be sent home or if the line can be operational in an hour.  It is difficult to manage any kind of mechanical or technological operation if one has no skills whatsoever in this area.

A good manager has many tools in the toolbox to draw upon, and these are the most important kinds of skills to have.  The manager who can excel in all three areas should be successful.

What does this mean: "Given a sizable tract in which to determine the optimum soil resistivity, some intuition is in order."

What this means is that you have an area of soil that is large enough to be mixed thoroughly, so that it can be considered uniform. In addition, the soil's resistivity means how much electrical resistance the soil loads in relation to a geometric constraint. 

Where it implies "intuition is in order," what it is looking for is some intelligence on your part. You must conjure a way in your mind to determine this resistivity. This may mean you need to devise an experiment to determine resistivity, or if the question is a real life application rather than theoretical, ask a proper authority for data on the soil.

If you must run an experiment, you can build a rig pretty easily at home for imprecise measurements by making a small box with electric contacts at both ends, measuring the base resistance across with a multimeter, and then filling the box with soil to take another measurement. More measurements can be made to build a data set. Finally, just measure the cross sectional area and box length to calculate the resistivity from the resistance and dimensions.

What is a weakness with the legislative branch?

One weakness of the legislative branch is that it could be difficult to pass a law. We are seeing that scenario play out to some degree today. Because there are two houses of Congress, an issue may arise if a different political party controls each house of Congress. If those parties differ significantly over many issues, little might get accomplished. Additionally, if the President is from a different party than both houses of Congress, little might get done in this situation.

President Obama is from the Democratic Party while the Republicans control both houses of Congress. Because there isn’t a great working relationship between the President and the Congress, the threat of a presidential veto is always present. Since the Republicans don’t control two-thirds of both houses of Congress, it would be hard to override a veto. As a result, there has been some difficulty in reaching an agreement with proposed laws. At times, the President wanted to see a certain concept be put into a law. However, since Congress is controlled by the Republicans who didn't agree with the President about this concept, no action was taken and the idea never became a law. After the election in 2012, the Democrats controlled the Senate while the Republicans controlled the House of Representatives. Since these parties had very different opinions on various issues, there wasn’t a lot of agreement on bills, and many bills never got passed.

There are circumstances where the legislative branch is split between the parties that control each house, or the President is from a different party than the party that controls both houses of Congress. As a result, it becomes more difficult to a pass a law, which is one weakness of the legislative branch.

Describe a fad that has come and gone during your lifetime, such as Beanie Babies. Did you take part in the fad? Why or why not? How long did...

Back in the 1970's, there was a brief fad where people were buying "Pet Rocks." They came in a cardboard box that looked like the kind of thing you would carry a hamster home in from a pet store. They had an instruction booklet with tips for "training" the pet rock. 

While I was aware of the fad--I was a teenager--I did not take part in it. They sold for $4 and that was actually a decent amount of money. Also, I had very skeptical parents who would have pointed out that it was just a rock and I could pick up a rock anywhere for free. I knew better than to ask!

The Wikipedia article on Pet Rocks, cited below, says that the fad lasted about six months. They were really hot and well-known very suddenly and they dropped out of consciousness for the most part equally suddenly. 

Truly, this fad was unsustainable. After all, people began to recognize, as my parents did, that they were buying essentially nothing. The hot Christmas gift in 1975 began to gather dust in 1976. 

In actuality, I have seen lots of fads come and go, including Beanie Babies, Cabbage Patch Dolls, Elmo, and other things I can't even remember. These fads tend to play on people's emotions, which leads to them fighting each other at McDonald's for a Happy Meal prize, in the case of Beanie Babies. Eventually, logic starts to kick in and the "investments" people make in their collections of whatever become mostly worthless. 

What does Catherine want to show by pressing the electric bell?

The general answer to the question is that Catherine wants to show that she is a high status, cultivated person. If the question refers to her specific use of the bell in Act III, the answer is that she wants to summon a servant, and show herself to be cool, powerful, and unperturbed by the controversy of the coat.

Here are the particulars.

First, Catherine wants to be counted among the most cultured, civilized people. So while her husband, Petkoff,  is away at war, she has had an electric servant bell installed in her home. It's a complete novelty to Petkoff; he hasn't even heard of these devices, and asks her what it's for. Her answer clarifies what it means to her: It's an important act of conforming to ways of cultural elites.

CATHERINE. You touch a button; something tinkles in the kitchen; and then Nicola comes up.

PETKOFF. Why not shout for him?

CATHERINE. Civilized people never shout for their servants. I've learnt that while you were away.

Second, regarding Catherine's use of the bell in Act III, Catherine presses the button to summon Nicola so she can tell him to retrieve the coat from the blue closet. Using the bell allows Catherine to create a more dramatic effect -- highlighting her apparent calm and confidence. She might have called out for Nicola instead, or left the library to get the coat herself. But it seems clear that she is interested in making an impression as the cool, regal mistress of the house. After she presses the bell, and her husband questions her about it, the stage directions describe her confident, grand air:

She looks at him majestically and silently resumes her chair and her needlework.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of a long chain of command?

A long chain of command certainly does have advantages and disadvantages. Let's go over the most extreme example, the military.  A military organization has a general at the top and at the bottom is a private. It is the best example there is, I think, of a long chain of command. 

A few advantages come quickly to mind.  One advantage to this is that the span of control is not too wide. The general does not have to give direct orders to tens of thousands of privates at the bottom, just to the lieutenant general beneath him or her and so on down the line until a lieutenant or captain gets the orders, transmits them to a sergeant, who then tells the troops what to do.  Each person is responsible for a smaller number of people, which makes for much better management and control.  Another advantage is that the person at the top in such an organization is able to have a clear mind to think about the big picture, and strategize about what troops to deploy where, or how to eliminate the culture of sexual harassment.  At each level in a long chain of command, the responsibilities are delineated in a way that affords the person responsible the time and energy to focus on just those delineated responsibilities.  The Major does not worry about whether the cook is doing a good job or how many medics are attached to a particular unit. Someone below him or her has this concern.  Another advantage is in the way communication works. Privates who have complaints or suggestions do not call the general with them. They go through the chain of command.  This reduces the "clutter" at the top and is meant to ensure that the person at the top does not use all of his or her time putting out small fires, not the best use of time for a general. In the military, at least, this very long chain of command seems to instill discipline in the ranks quite effectively, perhaps because of the span of control and the communications mechanisms.

Disadvantages there certainly are, though. There is almost a complete lack of autonomy at the lower levels, so that decision-making is seldom localized.  This means that the people on the spot, closest to the facts, are usually unable to act.  They must await disposition from a higher level, which means that the best decisions are not always being made. Another disadvantage is in the long line of communication. There probably are some times that it would be good for a private to tell a general something, and this chain of command makes that a virtual impossibility.  Another disadvantage is that the people at the top can feel so removed from the people below that the people below are not as motivated as they could be.  Most people like to know whom they are working for, I think, and to see that person at least occasionally.  This is why generals do go around talking to troops, but it is unlikely that they ever get around often enough to really motivate people. 

These advantages and disadvantages exist just as much in civilian organizations as they do in the military, and if you think about a very large company, you will be able to see their application easily. 

Why does Eckels want to travel back in time?

Eckels wants to travel back in time to hunt and kill a dinosaur.  

Eckels is paying ten thousand dollars to be a part of a safari group going back in time.  The company that does this is Time Safari, Inc., and the expedition is being led by Mr. Travis.  

Eckels is not a character that readers are meant to like.  From the moment that we are introduced to him, it is clear that he is pompous and arrogant.  He waves around his check like it's a talisman of power and privilege.  

The muscles around  his mouth formed a smile as he put his hand slowly out upon the air, and in that hand waved a check for ten thousand dollars to the man behind the desk.

Eckels doesn't seem to realize that he will not be the only paying customer on the safari, because he uses "I" a lot instead of "we."  At one point, rules are being explained to Eckels about what he does and does not have to worry about.  He rudely interrupts the other man and says the only thing he (Eckels) has to worry about "is shooting my dinosaur."  Notice how Eckels believes that his check guarantees himself shooting rights.  

Of course as the reader comes to learn, Eckels is all talk.  Despite his brave bravado, he is the only safari member that runs in fear back to the time machine.  The T. rex is simply too scary for him.  

"Get me out of here," said Eckels. "It was never like this before. I was always sure I'd come through alive. I had good guides, good safaris, and safety. This time, I figured wrong. I've met my  match and admit it. This is too much for me to get hold of." 

He's so scared in fact, that he steps off of the path, kills a butterfly, and changes the future/present forever.  

In what ways does the narrative depict how Mrs. Sommers misses her life before she was married in "A Pair of Silk Stockings" by Kate Chopin?

In her story "A Pair of Silk Stockings," Chopin depicts how much Mrs. Sommers misses her former life by the delight she displays when she treats herself to personal luxuries.

Having lived under the constraints of motherhood, Mrs. Sommers is constantly worried about money and has had to sacrifice her desires for the necessity of providing for her children. Even then, she has had to compromise on many of the necessities for them, causing her life to seem banal. But, when she becomes the "unexpected possessor" of fifteen dollars, for the first time in a long time, Mrs. Sommers experiences a sense of freedom from having to budget this money. Nevertheless, she feels that she must spend this money for practicalities, such as hats for the children, shoes, and material for new shirts for the boys, and a new gown for her daughter.

On the day that she goes shopping, Mrs. Sommers has forgotten to eat; so, because she feels rather faint, she takes a seat at a lunch counter in a department store. There her hand brushes against "something very soothing, very pleasant to touch." It is a pile of silk stockings, and she cannot resist running her hand along them, feeling the soft, smooth material that glides through her fingers. When the clerk asks if she may help Mrs. Sommers, her resistance is gone; she asks for her size. 

After she purchases the stockings, Mrs. Sommers's hunger for small luxuries waxes and she goes to change out of her cotton stockings in the ladies' waiting room. "How good was the touch of the raw silk to her flesh!"

Admiring how pretty her ankles appear now, she goes to the shoe department and purchases new boots. And, after doing this, she moves to yet another counter where she fits her hands with kid gloves.

Having completely surrendered to her own pleasure, Mrs. Sommers spends the afternoon luxuriating in her new possessions, as well as attending a matinée. When the play is over and Mrs. Sommers must catch the trolley for home, "it was like a dream ended." But, she will treasure the memory of the day that she was again carefree.

What views on marriage does Charlotte Bronte present in her novel Jane Eyre?

Bronte (and Jane Eyre) believed that marriage should be a match between intellectual and spiritual equals. One of the things that made marriage difficult for Jane was the power (legal and sexual) it gave the husband over the wife. You can see these issues at work in the section towards the end of the book where Jane has to decide if she will marry St John: on the one hand, St John appeals to her sense of duty and self sacrifice, but ultimately she rejects him because of his evident pride, arrogance, and sense of superiority. Rochester, in contrast, has actually been trapped in a bad marriage; Bertha's power over him -- her existence! -- ruins his hope for "true love" with Jane. Rochester clearly does not consider Bertha to be his wife in any real way, but is unable to escape the legal and moral bonds of marriage. In a sense, Rochester has lived the experience Jane avoids with St John -- servitude to an unloving spouse. Jane ultimately marries Rochester because she believes that they are spiritual and intellectual equals -- Rochester, in his crippled state at the end of of the book, requires Jane's care, but Jane, for her part, requires Rochester's understanding. 

What is the setting of the Watson's home in The Watsons Go to Birmingham--1963 by Christopher Paul Curtis?

The Watsons live in Flint, Michigan. As the story opens, as Kenny says, "it was about a zillion degrees below zero" (page 1). The family turns up their thermostat, but the furnace is making noises and seems like it's going to "blow up." To keep warm, the family is huddled together on the couch under a blanket. They are wearing scarves and other winter clothing. Outside is their car, a 1948 Plymouth (which is 15 years old), which they have named the Brown Bomber. The family is clearly close, and the father helps the family keep their minds off the cold by making jokes. Later, the family travels to Birmingham, Alabama, to bring their oldest son, Byron, to the house of Momma's mother, Grandma Sands, in an attempt to teach Byron how to show respect and manners. 

What do you think is the most interesting thing about 19th century European history? Why?

There would be several topics that you could consider in determining what might be the most important or most interesting event in Europe or affecting Europe in the 1800s. These topics could include the loss of colonies, the unification of countries, the planting of the seeds for the start of World War I, and wars in general.

One topic I would consider would be how some European countries lost some of their colonies in the 1800s. Both Spain and Portugal lost much of their empire in Central and South America. You certainly could highlight the revolutions that occurred in Brazil and Mexico to use as prime examples of lands Spain and Portugal lost. You could also add how the United States issued the Monroe Doctrine to keep the Europeans from returning to Central and South America. I would also mention how Great Britain used its navy to enforce the Monroe Doctrine since the enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine would weaken their rivals.

Another topic to consider would be the steps taken in the 1860s to allow Germany and Italy to unite their states into a unified country. You could focus on the actions of Otto von Bismarck in Germany and Cavour in Italy to help with or facilitate the unification process. I would also tie this topic in with how the unification of Italy and Germany helped plant the seeds for the start of World War I. Both countries wanted colonies, and there were few lands left to colonize. Thus, each country began to build up their military as they planned to attack the countries that had colonies. You could also mention how Germany got control of Alsace-Lorraine as a result of the Franco-Prussian War. France vowed to get this land back in the future.

There are many examples of wars that were fought in Europe in the 1800s from which you could draw your answer. In addition to the Franco-Prussian War, you could write about Napoleon’s plan to conquer Europe in the early 1800s. You could write about his many military successes and then focus on his crushing defeat in Russia and his final defeat at Waterloo. You could write about the Austro-Prussian War that gave Prussia control over the process of the unification of Germany.

There are many topics about which you could write to answer this question. Each of these events played a major role in European history in the 1800s. These events not only affected Europe, but also they affected the world.

In Animal Farm, what do the pigs sleeping in the beds represent?

In Chapter 6, the pigs move into Mr. Jones's home, and rumors begin to circulate that the pigs have been sleeping in Mr. Jones's bed. Disturbed, Clover thinks she remembers one of the Seven Commandments forbids animals from sleeping in beds. When Muriel reads the Fourth Commandment, it says, "No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets" (Orwell 27). Squealer goes on to explain that it is perfectly okay for animals to sleep in beds, but the rule actually forbids animals from using sheets, which are a human invention. Squealer then explains it is essential for pigs to sleep in comfortable beds because they need rest to do all the "brainwork" needed to run Animal Farm. After hearing Squealer's explanation, the animals passively accept the Fourth Commandment and feel reassured.

The pigs sleeping in Mr. Jones's beds represents the pigs' lazy personalities, ongoing corruption, and creation of a widening inequality gap on the farm. Unlike the other animals on the farm who have to sleep outside or on bales of hay, the pigs sleep lavishly and comfortably inside the farmhouse. Orwell is depicting how the lower class is forced to suffer while the upper class lives in luxury. With the addition of "with sheets" written into the Fourth Commandment, Orwell portrays how language can be manipulated to benefit the ruling class. Beds are also associated with rest, and Orwell is suggesting the pigs are lazy. The pigs sleeping in Mr. Jones's bed represents their lethargic personalities that contrast with the work ethic of the other farm animals.