Cask of amontillado rising action

1 answer:

8 0

The correct answer is when Montresor brings fortunate to his catacombs to taste his Amontillado, an expensive type of wine.

Short and simple story, Cask of amontillado, by Edgar Alan Poe, is the narrative of the story of a man imbued with the desire for revenge and to wall his alive adversary, Fortunato. The beginning of the story already shows the determined character of the narrator: I endured the best I could with Fortunato's injuries, but when he dared to insult me, I swore revenge. This economy of words that sometimes suppresses details and descriptions ends up simplifying the narrative, creating tension in the reader and surprising him with the rapidity of the plot's development. In Cask of amontillado the focus is on the facts themselves and the psychological conditioning of the characters. The reader's curiosity and involvement with the dynamic text make the story have a "unique effect" when the storyline reaches its climax. The reader goes through a catharsis, experiences the feelings of the characters and identifies with them.

You might be interested in

Which of the following is NOT one of the common types of caught-in or caught-between hazards

sukhopar [10]

the answer is: B.Drowning in underground water

According to OSHA, caught-in or Caught between hazards refers to fatalities that resulted in workers being trapped between two or several things. When you are drowned, you the rescue workers could technically still move around the water area without worrying any collapse might happen, which is why it is categorized differently from caught in or caught between hazards.

3 0

3 years ago

For my Bible class:

tigry1 [53]

I think it depends on the person, but in my experiences with my very religious family, honestly I think people choose to trust in Christ AND obey God because, mostly, out of love.

6 0

3 years ago

In 1754, Britain and France went to war over lands in the Ohio River Valley. This was called the French and Indian War. Colonist

laila [671]

Answer:

Native Americans

Explanation:

In 1754, Britain and France went to war over lands in the Ohio River Valley. This was called the French and Indian War. Colonists supported Britain, while the NATIVE AMERICANS allied themselves with the French.

This is evident from the common name given to the war which is "French and Indian War" (sometimes it is called Seven Years war because it officially lasted for seven years between 1756 to 1763)

Also, there is evidence from the fact that during this period, it is only French colonists that have better relations with the Native Americans compared to other European settlers in America.

6 0

3 years ago

Do you think Theodosius made the right decision in splitting the empire in two? Why or why not?

zmey [24]

Answer:

He made a terrible decision.

Explanation:

By splitting the empire in two, the Barbarians easily collapsed Rome, which lead to the death of the Roman Empire. It also led to the rise of the Byzantine Empire and the Frankish Empire. Over all, it was a terrible decision that changed European, perhaps even world history entirely.

4 0

3 years ago

How many major systems of philosophy exist in Buddhism. I need long answer

Leto [7]

As we have seen, several periods of thought emerged in the process of Buddhist development. At least two major systems of thought, roughly speaking, closely related to what we call the primitive Buddhism and the developed Buddhism. The first is the Buddhist history of thoughts, as defined by Buddhologists such as academician Theodor Stcherbatsky (1866-1942); this division relied on different periods in the whole process of development of Buddhist thoughts. Second is the history of thoughts of Buddhist Schools, which includes several Buddhist schools; thus, you need to have time to study doctrines of each single school (e.g., Zen, Pure Land, or Tendai). Buddhism in China, for example, includes at least ten different schools, and each school also has its own system of thoughts and exclusive methods of practice.

We may generally divide the first major system, the Buddhist history of thoughts, into two major categories based on history: a) Buddhist thoughts in the primitive period and b) Buddhist thoughts in the periods of development. Buddhist thoughts in the primitive period were established on the foundational teachings of Dependent Origination and non-self, which were taught directly by the Buddha after his attainment of ultimate enlightenment. The central content of these teachings explain that all existences (dharmas) in the three worlds—senses-sphere realm, fine form realm, and formless realm[3]— are nothing but the products of inter-beings from multi-conditions. They appear in either cosmic mode (e.g., institution, existence, transformation, and destruction) or in the flux of mental transformation (e.g., birth, being, alteration, and death). In this way, all things—both the physical and the mental—are born and die endlessly, dependent on multiple conditions in the cycle of samsāra. All that is present through this Law of Dependent Origination is, therefore, impermanent, ever-changing, and without any immortal entity whatsoever that is independent and perpetual__. This is the truth of reality through which the Buddha affirmed that “whether the Buddha appears or not, the reality of dharmas is always as such.” Based upon this fundamental teaching, Buddhists built for themselves an appropriate view of personal life and spiritual practice: the liberated life of non-self—the end goal of the spiritual journey.

Although Buddhist thought in periods of development were gradually formed by various schools, two prominent systems of philosophy emerged: the Mādhyamika and the Yogācāra. Both these two philosophical systems related strictly to the primitive thought of Paticcamūpāda; however, each system has its own approach to interpretations and particular concepts. The Mādhyamika developed the doctrine of Emptiness (Śūnyatā), while the Yogācāra instituted the teaching of Mind-only (Vijñapati-mātratā), emphasizing the concept of Ālaya (store consciousness). The doctrine of Emptiness focuses on explaining that the nature of all dharmas is emptiness of essence and that all dharmas are non-self by nature and existences are but manifestations of conditional elements. Thus, when a practitioner penetrates deeply into the realm of Emptiness, he or she simultaneously experiences the reality of the non-self. However, you should remember that the concept of Emptiness used here does not refer to any contradictory categories in the dualistic sphere, such as ‘yes’ and ‘no’ or ‘to be’ and ‘not to be.’ Rather, it indicates the state of true reality that goes beyond the world of dualism. For this reason, in the canonical languages of Mahāyāna Buddhism, the term Emptiness is used as a synonym for Nirvāna. In the Yogācāra philosophy, the concept of Ālaya—the most fundamental issue of this system of thought—points out that all problems of both suffering and happiness are the very outcomes of mental distinctions (vikalpa) between subject (atman) and object (dharma), or between self and other. This mental distinction is the root of all afflictions, birth-death, and samsāra. Thus, in the path of spiritual training, a practitioner must cleanse all attachments to self as it embodies what we call the ‘I’, ‘mine’, and ‘my self’ in order to return to the realm of pure mind, which is non-distinct by nature.

Based on what has been discussed here, clearly the consistency in Buddhist thoughts—whether origin or development—is that all teachings focus on purification of craving, hatred, and attachment to self in order to reach the reality of true liberation: the state of non-self or Nirvāna.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers