My answer would be:
the destruction wrought when ambition goes unchecked by moral constraints—finds its most powerful expression in the play's two main characters.
The logical inference a person can make about the “good lesson” the narrator wants to teach the American artist is:
- <u>He would have shown him how there was no freedom in China twenty years ago</u>
<u />
According to the given question, the narrator says that the American artist is making unnecessary protests about having so little freedom.
This shows an irony that he does not appreciate the freedom he enjoys and feels he lacks freedom.
As a result of this, we can see that the logical inference we can make about the good lesson which he wants to teach the American artist is that he would show him how little freedom there was in China twenty years ago and how he enjoys freedom.
Read more here:
brainly.com/question/8369124
Answer:
4.The jar was gray and bare.
5.It did not give of bird or bush,
Explanation:
Impersonality and objectivity seem to be crucial in modernist culture. The idea of emptiness can be clearly seen on those two lines since being "gray and bare" means something is boring and forgettable. The idea of barrenness can be seen in not giving bird or bush. The ground had nothing on it or for it.
Answer:
main ff yu bang mau kagak
