1) D
He himself was the protagonist so he examined the antagonist.
2) D
This is coherent with the basic definition of irony.
stood there waiting for his friend to come up to him.
“They tied me up, then, plumb / amidships, back to the mast, lashed to the mast, / and took themselves again to rowing.”
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.
