Answer:
<em>Omniscient third person.</em>
Explanation:
The omniscient third-person point of view is characterized by a narrator that always knows everything - what is happening, what the characters in the story think and do, he has an answer to any possible question because he is a know-it-all. This perspective in writing is very useful when the storyline is complicated and there is a lot of characters that need to unite that story and all of its events.
In the given example, the narrator not just sees what the character is doing, but also what she is thinking, planning, etc, so it matches the characteristics of the omniscient third-person point of view.
Hey there,
B, Write neatly using a No. 2 pencil. You should no longer be using a pencil when publishing unless you are still stuck with the draft.
Hope this helps :))
~Top
Answer:
D. Jonas raises an army to violently overthrow the industry leaders.
Explanation:
A contrived ending to the story is one created in a way that seems artificial and unrealistic. The most contrived ending would be the one where Jonas raises an army to violently overthrow the industry leaders.
The rest of the options seem more or less possible. Jonas' supporters could turn their back on him, the industry leaders' plan could backfire, or they could ruin Jonas' reputation. These endings would seem believable. However, it would be impossible for Jonas to raise an army. An individual wouldn't be able to do that in real life, which is why this type of ending wouldn't make sense.
I think that out of courtesy for Shakespeare the original quote from the play Julius Cesar could be mentioned but since it is a paraphrase of the quote and not the exact words spoken by Mark Anthony then I think it is not absolutely necessary to cite the source.
