Poseidon would be the correct answer ;)
Answer:
It shows that Parris is only concerned about his ministry and though he cares for his daughter, his reputation is more important to him.
He is not a good father for he gives more importance to his image than his daughter, when he said to Abigail in Act 1, that his "ministry's at stake", and that his "enemies will ruin (him) with it".
Explanation:
In Act 1 of "The Crucible" by Arthur Miller, we see the character of Parris, the Reverend of the church in Salem, Massachusetts kneeling in front of his daughter's bed. His daughter Betty had been accused of being under the spell of witchcraft. She and some girls had been found dancing at night in the woods, accused of indulging and practicing witchcraft. Reverend Samuel Parris is worried that this accusation will ruin his family and also since Betty is still unconscious with the doctors unsure of what is wrong with her.
The actions of Rev. Parris in asking Abigail about the occurrence and trying to settle the issue shows that he is more concerned about how the people of the town will think of him. Though he may be the respected reverend in the church, this witchcraft accusation may have a negative impact on his image and may even ruin his ministry. Instead of focusing on the welfare of his daughter, who by the way is still unconscious, he kept telling Abigail how this whole issue will be the ruin of him. He implores her to tell her everything, for he fears that "<em>my enemies will, and they‘ll ruin me with it…</em>", adding "<em>my ministry‘s at stake</em>". This only indicates his poor parenting skills, instead thinking of saving his own skin even when his daughter is sick.
Only something the writer has experienced.
Answer:
The author means that now the tools are more important that the message itself.
Explanation:
The excerpt belongs to Small Change: Why the Revolution Won't Be Tweeted, an article written by Malcolm Gladwell, a Canadian journalist and writer. There, he discusses the impact of social media and other new tools in different movements across the world.
In this sentence, Gladwell means that the vehicle the message uses to travel is more important than the message itself. He uses as an example the case of Iran, where people got enough courage to uprise because of social media like Twitter. Even though it is an interesting idea, I don't totally agree with this. I think how the message travels is important, otherwise it could be really important but sterile. There's where the tools take more relevance; sometimes, due to different factors, the tools are faster and more efficient to use communication, but if the message is not relevant, then there are no good reasons to use the tools.
The conflict wich come after
