Answer:
Smith wrote A Tree Grows in Brooklyn to inform others about what it was like growing up in a small neighborhood in Brooklyn in the early 1900s. In one chapter, she recalls "with a peculiar tenderness" how Brooklynites celebrated Thanksgiving (Smith 1). Smith's use of cultural terminology, such as "ragamuffin" or "slamming gates," helps the reader better understand the language used by children in the Williamsburg neighborhood at that point in history. Her detailed description of the children's selection of costumes reveals the popular culture of the time and tensions between the poor and rich of the town (1). Smith dwells not only on the cultural details of early Brooklyn, but she also describes emotional experiences of growing up poor. Although the children in Francie's classroom are hungry, they are "too proud to accept charitable food. . . . ," even when that food is about to be thrown away (3). For these children, dignity is more important than satisfying hunger pangs. Smith's careful attention to cultural, historical, and emotional details informs the reader of what it was like to grow up in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, in the early 1900s.
Answer:
to suggest and support an interpretation of literature
Explanation:
<em>to suggest and support an interpretation of literature</em> – <u>this is the correct answer. The literal analysis is careful reading and interpretation of the written piece.</u><u> The analysis should examine carefully characters, settings, atmosphere, imagery, and plot. </u>The full and scientific analysis should explore the meaning and the ideas behind the written piece, and use the literary theory that fits the work.
<em> to summarize a work of literature in great detail</em> – this is not the correct answer. Literary analysis is not just a summary of the piece.
<em />
<em> to evaluate how well a work of literature is written</em> – this is not the right answer. The analysis doesn’t grade up the quality of the piece.
<em />
<em> to suggest how a work of literature should be revised </em>– this is not the correct answer. Review or edit are the ones that suggest the revisions.
In the article "Saudis Expand Regional Power as Others Falter" the author David D Kirkpatrick discusses the associate degree ironic shift from a democracy mentality back to a lucid autarchy comfort. it's believed that this paradigm shift is predicated on 2 distinctive contributors; foremost the "feebleness or near-collapse of the states around them, together with Asian nation, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Bahrain and Tunisia" and second the perseverance as well as significant funding of the recent Saudi order (Kirkpatrick D).
It is simply an entire<span> mess." For an</span><span> absolute </span>autarchy<span> tracing its </span>family<span> roots back </span>three hundred<span> years, </span>the Asian nation<span> is taking </span>a number one<span> role </span>within the<span> struggle to reshape that mess.</span> The surprising<span> outcome of the Arab Spring, </span>that<span> once stirred hopes for the rule of law and </span>trendy<span> democracy.</span>
<span>The analysts and diplomats say, is that the </span>ascendency<span> of the Saudis </span>is essentially<span> a byproduct of the feebleness or near-collapse of </span>such a lot of<span> the states around them, </span>together with Republic of Iraq<span>, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Bahrain, and </span>Tunisia.
<span>The Saudis </span>are shoring<span> Bahrain, and </span>are<span> fighting </span>aboard to<span /><span> support </span>the govt.<span> in </span>national capital.
<span>Billions of </span>bucks<span> from Saudi coffers </span>are<span> sustaining friendly governments in Egypt and Jordan.</span>
I believe the answer is a.)
