Answer:
While separate from the body of work preceding it due to the nature of an epilogue, it is an integral part of the work. It provides resolution to an otherwise unresolved piece, and the piece actually prepares for the epilogue by mirroring it throughout the play.Throughout the play, themes of power and magic develop, complementing each other so that ultimately, the nature of Prospero’s power can be either revered, or reduced to smoke and mirrors. Prospero’s power to administer pain gives him control over Ariel and Caliban. However, with many of the other characters, control is gained by illusions – sometimes pleasant, and sometimes upsetting. Prospero makes Ferdinand follows Ariel’s music’s “sweet air,” but he confounds Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo by adding a faceless voice, which disturbs them, and makes them quarrel. Prospero doesn’t actually make anyone do anything; he appeals to their senses in either a positive or negative way, and their response to these sensations brings about an action Prospero required. However, by the play’s end, it is never resolved whether Prospero had any real power, or was simply manipulative enough to get what he wanted. This will be resolved in the epilogue.The epilogue is a monologue delivered by Prospero.
Explanation:
Answer:
The main difference between past simple and past continuous tense is that:
- we use<u> past simple tense</u> when something happened at some time in past. We also commonly use this tense with past time adverbs (yesterday, last night, two days ago, etc.)
For example: John called his friend yesterday.
- we use <u>past continuous tense</u> if an action occurred in the past and <u>lasted for a period of time.</u>
Example: I was reading a book all day yesterday.
We used past continuous tense because the action of reading lasted for some time (a whole day in this case).
Answer:
a
Explanation: they both develop inequality theme
just took the test
Answer:
The man loved her with great passion, but the feeling was not mutual.
Explanation:
Since the <em>Romantic </em>literature had set as its goal the "victory" or predominance of Man over Nature, its language tended to be somewhat triumphalistic (some would say hyperbolic) when it was about how human beings were deployed. Romanticism introduced an long-term project at a time when important scientific milestones were achieved, and also when most of modern nations and States were being founded, thus taking a voice which was very proud of national virtues, some of them legendary, part of folklore or popular culture (but belonging to a national heritage rather than coming from a more traditional stem). Neoclassicist literature was a new take on the Greek-Roman Classics, intending to bring them back into the mainstream and most of the times not fulfilling the feat. Based on this, Neoclassicist language could be felt as overblown. In a way, Romanticism was a look into the future (let us think of <em>Frankenstein </em>a very experimental novel for its time) whereas Neoclasicism very much represented a reaction to such future.
