Answer:
C. by removing the commentary that the professor is most likely involved in the gambling ring
Explanation:
Got it right
I would help you out, if you had included the excerpt.
<span>i think it would be:
fluffy as the eiderdown
</span><span>rumbling of his snores
</span><span>people tumbled like mad acrobats</span>
Answer:
Explanation:
The musical or the book?
I don't see much of him no matter what basis you use -- book or musical. Do you?
He flourished in a time when knights were bound by a code of honor and the results were not good if you broke that code of honor. He had no intention of doing anything that was wrong. He was so high minded that Sancho Panza had to keep on reminding himself that the Don was either a great saint or an unholy fool and throughout the entire production of both he never really made up his mind. Don Quixote was far too remote, far too idealistic, far too much of a man seeking the world not as it was, but as he wanted it to be. Sancho could never bring himself to see the world that way. And yet, he stuck with him. If his understanding did not increase, his wonder did. The more he saw, the less he really knew, but that was only part of it. Every person must make up their own mind about Sancho. I've spent so much time on him because he is more like modern man. The difference is that he hung around to see if he could come to some understanding of the Don.
Dulcinia is a different person that both of them, but she sees more clearly who Don Quixote is and she tries to push him away but she's not fully successful. I'm a guy and in general, I like that kind of woman. She tried to see him through a different set of lenses. His code prevented him from doing anything about it. We modern people would show no such hesitancy. Dulcinia may give us what we want but she respects the Don. She will never forget him whereas in a year's time, she could not remember anything about the rest of us.
