Answer:
Since the narrator did this as an act of selfishness, he should be blamed guilty for Doodle's death.
Explanation:
During the course of the story, we could see many moments where the inner thoughts and feelings of the narrator are described to the reader. We also get a character named Doodle, which we know has a disability and was different. We know that the narrator had pride, and didn't want to be ashamed for having a brother different from others. We also notice that the narrator was sometimes cruel to Doodle, like when he threatened to leave him unless he touched his own coffin, made when he was expected to die at birth.
The narrator was selfish and prideful and wanted Doodle to be capable, and like others before going to school. When walking, he would quicken his pace or make Doodle swim till he turned blue, or run till he turned red.
In the last scene (which is the scene where Doodle dies), the narrator quickens his pace and runs through the pouring rain, despite Doodle's fear and tiredness. This shows us that the Narrator doesn't appreciate Doodle as he is, and wants Doodle to be someone normal, to not be ashamed.
Therefore, since the narrator did this as an act of selfishness, he should be blamed guilty for Doodle's death.
<em>-kiniwih426</em>
<span> don't think either are desirable alone or if the question is to an extreme where if one were extremely beautiful, they would also be extremely idiotic, or extremely smart but extremely ugly. </span><span>Smart is also a very broad adjective. People can have collective knowledge of just about anything. If I choose beauty, would I lack common sense or rationality? or would I just learn at a slower rate? If I choose smarts, would I just contain information without the understanding or ability to use and apply it? Knowledge without wisdom and understanding is useless.</span>
THEY look much better than the others - would be appropriate if you were referring to both a person and an object.
THOSE look much better than the others - would be appropriate if you were referring to an item not a person.
I am not sure but hope this helped.
Answer:
the fourth one, what happened and to whom?
- Why do you think Shakespeare shows Macbeth taken in by the witches prophecy?
Firstly, Shakespeare makes a point in Macbeth's confidence, due to his full trust in the witches' prophecy he believed that he was invencible. So, when he sees that he can actually be defeated this is something that the audience is expecting to see, so it adds to the dramatic effect of the play. Secondly, I believe that tragic heroes, no matter what they do, we always feel some sort of sympathy for them. In this case, I believe that Shakespeare is trying to show his weakness (he trusted someone he shouldn't, he was way too confident, all of this was the result of his ambition that completely blinded his judgement)
- What might Shakespeare be applying by Macbeth's character?
As it has been previously stated, Shakespeare was trying to show Macbeth that he placed his trust in the wrong place (this had also a didactic purpose for the audience). Moreover, I believe that this is when his eyes are unfolded, ambition falls, and he realized that he was a puppet of the witches. He didn't question her words and he did everything they expected him to do. Bear in mind that in elizabethan/jacobean times, Witches were believed to be plotting agaist the king (since the king was the representation of God on earth, and witches the loyal servants of the devil).
- What might be Shakespeare be applying to the witches' power?
It is shown that they don't actually have power, rather they know a lot of information and they use that information to manipulate people like Macbeth.
- Is he suggesting that Macbeth might be a victim of mysterious evil forces?
Defenitly, although he is guilty because he did everything he shouldn't, but still we can see that the witches manipulated him. They kindle the fire and Macbeth did the rest. So the fault is equally diveded, in my opinion.
