Answer:
A.) It symbolizes that Ozymandias's kingdom has crumbled with time.
Explanation:
"Ozymandias" is a poem written by<em> Percy Shelley</em>, an English romantic poet. She started writing it in 1817. It is said that she was inspired by the statue of Rameses II<em> (in fragments)</em> that the British museum acquired.
The poem clearly shows that there was once a powerful race in Egypt, but <em>has been forgotten with time</em>. The stone talked about Ozymandias being the "King of Kings" and how glorious his city was. However, <em>it has already crumbled with time</em> because it is no longer there.<em> </em>There were only a few evidence of it, such as the fragments found.
<u>Answer:</u>
<em>Antigone’s plan, to bury the corpse of Polynices but Ismene thinks Antigone is crazy and should not do it
.</em>
<em></em>
<u>Explanation:</u>
Antigone wants to bury Polynices according to the Greek tradition because she will not do that she will be carrying the guilt entirely in her life
However, despite their differences, both characters have a universal character that drives them towards pursuing their goals. The determination is linked to the asset that floes and the character traits they possess. The plan of Antigone demonstrates the power of girls that she expresses by sacrificing her life and standing for patriarchal society.
Answer:allows her to share her personal thoughts and ideas
Explanation:
"The prince" was the first book that didn't take politics as something ethical or philosophical. Machiavelli wrote it to Lorenzo di Medici as a "guide" to maintain his power. Ancient philosophers were focused on constucting the ideal state. That means, they mentioned the characteristics of a succesfull monarchy for example, but did not considered the things as they were at that moment. Readers find disturbing the tactics that Machiavelli describes to gain or maintain power as they include making people fear you or destroying your enemies. This book is always resumed with the phrase "The end justifies the means", making it clear that the rulers can do anything to maintain their power.
The controversy is understandable, this books shows how cruel can reality be and how politics scrifice ethics in the name of power. The discussion is still relevant nowadays. How far can politicians go to win an election?
