Answer:
Taken from the ending part of the short story "The Black cat" by Edgar Allen Poe, the lines tell of the alcoholic protagonist's happiness in finding that the cat responsible for the incidental murder of his wife is nowhere to be seen in his house anymore.
Explanation:
Edgar Allen Poe's short story "The Black Cat" tells the story of an unnamed protagonist who is an alcoholic. His drunken act of killing his pet cat Pluto and then later on even his accidental murder of his wife leads to the situation he is in the start of he story- convicted to death.
The given excerpt is form the ending part of the story where he had successfully walled in his wife's corpse. He could't find the cat, he second pet cat, who had been the initial cause of the act. The lines show just how relieved he was to see that he could no longer find "<em>the monster</em>" in is house. But with this admission, he seems to be implying that he was free of the moral obligations in he society in general. This speech gave him he all clear in the murderous act, but which will in fact, return to haunt him and bring him to justice.
Minimal eye contact would not help establish a strong ethos, as it gives the impression you are not confident in what you are talking about.
Answer:
The scene is similar in that they both took Winnie Foster away from her safety zone, displacing her from her own comfortable place.
But then again, the situations are different as Mae had no evil intention behind her decision to take Winnie. But the man, on the other hand, had far more sinister ideas in mind behind the 'offer' to 'rescue' Winnie from the Tucks.
Explanation:
Natalie Babbitt's children novel <em>Tuck Everlasting</em> tells the story of how a family came to be immortal from their accidental drinking of water from a stream in the forest. And it is this 'immortality' that led to the disastrous event which led to the loss of a good friend Winnie.
When the<em> "man in the yellow suit"</em> took Winnie against her will to return her back to her family, Mae/ Mother Tuck took her husband's shotgun. She fired and killed the man, for she knows that the man wanted nothing but evil intentions. When asked why she did what she did, she replied that <em>"he was taking the child against against her will"</em> which is also exactly what she did.
These two situations of Winnie being taken away against her will are similar in that the two adults took advantage of her, without asking for her approval. Winnie had no choice but do what she is told to do so.
But for Mae, she had no evil intention except reveal the truth about her family's immortality and also provide a chance for her family to have an interaction with a real, living <em>"natural child"</em>. But the man had wanted to 'trade' on the water, trying to get it t more deserving people. That is how different the two situations are.
Answer:
A. The The nuclear reactor
Explanation:
False because it’s like math 5 can’t go in to 2
