A explaining the benifits of following the viewpoints
To be reticent is to not reveal one's thoughts readily. In this case, it is the reticence of the author. The author does not reveal their thoughts readily. If the narrator or author refuses to do something, it is made known that he is doing something. The something here is him refusing. If he acts as if the situation is normal, I'd assume he is acting in such a way that would be nonreactionary of the actions from the provoker. I would safely choose the last option as sorrentino's exercising of authorial reticence.
<span>Blacks didn't get a fair deal in court because there were no black jurors, that meant that the jury was all white, and that kind of jury would not ever give a not guilty verdict to a black man, especially if a crime was committed against a white, it didn't matter how trashy and despicable the white guy was.
The jurors are from the country and not town to ensure that they were not "biased" against any of the parties involved.(they were from the town)</span><span>
</span>
Answer:
just like that but with juicy details and convo between them be creative!
Explanation:
Answer:
Enkidu is a strong and uncultured “wild man created by the gods. He is as powerfull as Gilgamesh.
However Gilgamesh represents culture and education, Enkidu was raised in the wild, live in the forest with animals.
The gods sent Enkidu to help in Gilgamesh behaviour.
Enkidu's death changed completely Gilgamesh's life.
