Answer:
A feminist analysis would focus on how the men discuss Mrs. Ochuba. A historical analysis would focus on whether using a native doctor was considered superstitious at the time and place the story depicts.
Explanation:
In order to answer this we need to define the terms "feminist analysis" and "historical analysis". While both of them are types of analysis of literary work, they differ in goals.
Feminist analysis focuses on analyzing in what manner women are presented in literature and also the role of gender in the character's actions and development.
On the other hand, historical analysis is the method used to help us understand the past. It focuses on examining a literature work and by doing so, learning about everyday life, tradition, customs and connecting it to a certain place and period in time.
It would help to read the poem, but based simply on the word, I would say it is used either in a negative way or inspiring way.
If you could let me know what poem it is, I may be able to help better :-)
No, because as you said it "does NOT contain fact-based details" therefore it is not reliable. If something doesn't contain fact-based details, it isn't reliable.
Smells, sight, sounds, tastes, feel, and what you'd hear would count so:
the taste of the food (bland, delicious, yummy
the steam off the plate (if the food was warm)
smell of the food
beeping of an oven
feel of the hot plate
warmth from the oven
if there is tv and/or music in the background
maybe sounds from a sibling and/ or pet in the background
temperature in the house
how did the food look (bright, dull, colorful)
the sound of a microwave timer
these would all count as the sensory details of a dinner
The growing amount has caused the native species in the area to shrink, and is threatening the endangered species, due to the fact that it eats anything and everything it can catch. it also competes with the alligators, which are a key part of the ecosystem
