The "subversiveness" of the characters can be presented with real-life examples that show how children behave and think. These characters were portrayed too unreal and innocent before the publication of "Where the Wild Things Are."
The question above does not show the article to which it refers, but it is possible to see that it refers to the works of writer Maurice Sendak. Accordingly, we can answer the questions with the following information:
- Maurice Sendak wrote children's books that revolutionized the children's literature market.
- Their books featured characters with realistic behaviors that can be found in any real-life children.
- That's because Maurice Sendak wrote characters that children could identify with, not characters that showed what adults expected of children.
Although praised by critics, Maurice Sendak had his work considered controversial, because it showed subversive and rebellious characters, in some ways. That's because, before he released his most famous work, "Where the Wild Things Are," the characters in children's books were quite innocent, obedient, without much personality.
More information:
brainly.com/question/404382?referrer=searchResults
Answer:
I'll try to make it as simple as possible so
Explanation:
The play starts with three witches that predict and tell Macbeth he will soon become king of Scotland. He tells his wife who encourages him to kill the king because of what the witches said. He does and therefore becomes the new king, given the two sons of the king flee, scared that they will also be killed, the country: Donalbain to Ireland and Malcolm to England. With the power Macbeth acquires he is filled with paranoia so he kills more people. Meanwhile, Lady Macbeth becomes ill because of the guilt eventually dying. In the end a war erupts to overthrow Macbeth, resulting in his death Malcolm is crowned as the new king of Scotland.
Answer:
true
Explanation:
because they use a cliff hanger to intise you in to read more
No, the sentence given:
_________________________
"<span>i came home late; therefore, i didnt see aunt matildia" — is NOT punctuated correctly.
____________________________________________
The word: "didnt" should be replaced with: "didn't" (note the added "apostrophe")—or rewritten as two word: "did not".
Furthermore, there should be a "period" at the end of the sentence.
___________________________
As far as other grammar errors are concerned, the second instance of the use of the personal pronoun, "I"—is incorrectly written in the lower case: "i"—and should be replaced with the capital letter, "I". Furthermore, "</span>aunt matildia" should be rewritten with a capital letter "A" replacing the word: "aunt" [the word: "aunt" should be changed to "Aunt"], and the name: "matildia" should be rewritten with a capital "M" replacing the name: "matildia" [the name "matildia" should be replaced with "Matildia"]. Also, if "Aunt Matildia" is, in fact, really spelled that way, than the spelling of the name should be retained. On the other hand, if the aunt's name is actually spelled: "Mathilda"—or some variant, then the proper spelling should be used—and the first letter should be capitalized.
__________________
--Edit--- your question should read as follows: "Is this sentence punctuated correctly?"
