Paul’s wife knows Paul loves to read cookbooks. She decides to
get him one for his birthday. Paul tells her he will try to make a new recipe
for three days in a row. On Monday, Paul makes blueberry pancakes for
breakfast. He gets the blueberries from the farmers’ market. On Tuesday, Paul
makes beef soup for dinner. He puts in cubes of beef, carrots, and onions. The
recipe calls for cream, but Paul does not cream. He uses water instead. On Wednesday,
Paul makes a tomato salad with cucumbers and onions. He picks the cucumbers and
tomatoes from his garden. He likes this dish best. It was also the easiest for
him to make.
What does Paul say he will do?
Each nation has its own peculiar character
which distinguishes it from others. But the people of the world have more
points in which they are all like each other than points in which they are
different. One type of person that is common in every country is the one who
always tried to do as little as he possibly can and to get as much in return as
he can. His opposite, the man who is in the habit of doing more than is
strictly necessary and is ready to accept what is offered in return, is rare
everywhere.
Both these types are usually unconscious of
their character. The man who avoids effort is always talking about his ‘rights’;
he appears to think that society owes him a pleasant easy life. The man who is
always doing more than his sheer talks of ‘duties’ feels that the individual is
in debt to society, and not society to the individual. As a result of their
view, neither of these men thinks that he behaves at all strangely.
Which of the following thinks that the individual
is in debt to the society?
At the time Jane Austen’s novels
were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any
academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain
religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so-called
immoral characters so interesting that young readers would identify with them;
these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even
Coleridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when the asserted
that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s powers.”
These attitudes towards novels help
explain why Austen received little attention from early nineteenth-century
literary cities. (In any case a novelist published anonymously, as Austen was,
would not be likely to receive much critical attention.) The literary response
that was accorded to her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth-century
criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience,”
for example. Scott made an insightful remark about the merits of Austen’s
fiction.
Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to
the reader an accurate and exact picture of ordinary everyday people and
places, reminiscent of seventeenth-century Flemish painting.” Scott did not use
the word ‘realism’, but he undoubtedly used a standard of realistic probability
in judging novels. The critic Whately did not use the word ‘realism’, either,
but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities
for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s ‘realistic method’ her
characters, wrote Whately, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are
ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that we feel an interest in their fate as
if it were our own.” Moral instruction, explained Whately, is more likely to be
effective when conveyed through recongnizably human and interesting characters
than when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whitely especially praised Austen’s
ability to create character who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and
virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whitely concluded his remarks by
comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Dickens’, starting his preference
for Austen’s.
Yet, the response of
nineteenth-century literary critics to Austen was not always so laudatory, and
often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century literary critics. An
example of such a response was Lewes complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of
subject and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added
that, nonetheless her focus was too often only upon the unlofty and the
commonplace. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain
about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper middle class.)
In any case having being rescued by literary critics from neglect and indeed
gradually lionized by them, Austen steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth
century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.
It can be inferred from the passage
that Whately found Dickens’ characters to be
Democratic societies from the earliest times have expected
their governments to protect the weak against the strong. No ‘era of good
feeling’ can justify discharging the police force or giving up the idea of
public control over concentrated private wealth. On the other hand, it is
obvious that a spirit of self – denial and moderation on the part of those who
hold economic power will greatly soften the demand for absolute equality. Men
are more interested in freedom and security than in an equal distribution of
wealth. The extent to which Government must interfere with business, therefore,
is not exactly measured by the extent to which economic power is concentrated
into a few hands. The required degree of government interference depends mainly
on whether economic powers are oppressively used, and on the necessity of
keeping economic factors in a tolerable state of balance.
However, with the necessity of meeting all these dangers and
threats to liberty, the powers of government are unavoidably increased,
whichever political party may be in office. The growth of government is a
necessary result of the growth of technology and of the problems that go with
the use of machines and science. Since the government in our nation, must take
on more powers to meet its problems, there is no way to preserve freedom except
by making democracy more powerful.
The growth of government is necessitated to
In the early 1920's,
settlers came to Alaska looking for gold. They traveled by boat to the coastal
towns of Seward and Knik, and from there by land into the gold fields. The
trail they used to travel inland is known today as the lditarod Trail, one of the
National Historic Trails designated by the congress of the United States. The
Iditarod Trail quickly became a major thoroughfare in Alaska, as the mail and
supplies were carried across this trail. People also used it to get from place
to place, including the priests, ministers, and judges who had to travel
between villages down this trail was via god sled.
Once the gold rush ended, many gold-seekers
went back to where they had come from, and suddenly there was much less travel
on the lditarod Trail. The introduction of the airplane in the late 1920's
meant dog teams were mode of transportation, of course airplane carrying the
mail and supplies, there was less need for land travel in general. The final
blow to the use of the dog teams was the appearance of snowmoniles.
By the mid 1960's most Alasknas didn't even
know the lditarod Trail existed, or that dos teens had played a crucial role in
Alaska's early settlements. Dorothy G.Page, a self-made historian, recognized
how few people knew about the former use of sled dogs as working animals and
about the Iditarod Trail's role in Alaska's colorful history. To she came up
with the idea to have a god sled race over the Iditarod Trail. She presented
her idea to an enthusiastic musher, as dog sled drivers are known, named Joe
Redington, Sr. Soon the pages and the Redintons were working together to
promote the idea of the Iditarod race.
Many people worked to make
the first Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race a reality in 1967. The Aurora Dog
Mushers Club, along with men from the Adult Camp in Sutton, helped clear years
of overgrowth from the first nine miles of the Iditarod Trail. To raise
interest in the race, a $25,000 purse was offered, with Joe Redington donating
one acre of his land to help raise the funds. The short race, approximately 27
miles long, was put on a second time in 1969.
After these first two
successful races, the goal was to lengthen the race a little further to the
ghost town of Iditarod by 1973. However in 1972, the U.S. Army reopened the
trail as a winter exercise, and so in 1973, the decision was made to take the
race all the way to the city of Nome-over 1,000 miles. There were who believed
it could bot be done and that it wad crazy to send a bunch out into vast,
uninhabited Alaskan wilderness. But the race went! 22 mushers finished that
year, and to date over 400 people have completed it.
Based on information in
the passage, it can be inferred that because the U.S. Army reopened the
Iditarod Trail in 1972,
The year 2006 was the golden
anniversary, or the 50th birthday, of the Dwight D. Eisenhower
National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. This system, usually
referred to as The Interstate Highway System, is a system of freeways named
after the U.S. President who supported it. The system is the largest highway
system in the world, consisting of 46,876 miles (75,440 km) of freeways. The
construction of the interstate highway system is an important part of American
history. It has played a major role in preserving and maintaining the America way of life.
The interstate highway system has
several major functions. One of its major functions is to facilitate the distribution of US good. Because the
intestate passes through many downtown areas, it plays an important role in the
distribution of almost all goods in the United States.
Nearly all products travel at least part of the way to their destination on the
Interstate System. Another major function of the interstate is to facilitate
military troop movement to and from airports, seaports, rail terminals and
other military destinations. The Interstate highways are connected to route in
the Strategic Highway Network, which is a system of highways that are vital to the U.S. Department of Defense.
Today, most of the Interstate system
consists of newly constructed highways. The longest section of the Interstate
system runs from Boston, Massachusetts to Seattle, Washington. It covers
3,020.54 miles. The shortest two-digit interstate is from Emery, North Caroline
to Greensboro, North Caroline. It covers only 12.27 miles. All state capitals
except five are served by the system. The five that are not directly served are
Juneau, AK, Dover, DE, Jefferson City, MO, Carson City, NV, and Pierre, SD. The
Interstate Highway System serves almost all major U.S. cities.
EACH Interstate highway is marked
with a red, white, and blue shield with the word “Interstate,” the name of the
state, and the route number. Interstate highways are named with one or
two-digit numbers. North-south highways are designated with odd numbers; east-west highways are
named with even numbers. The north-south Interstate highways begin in the west
with the lowest odd number; the east-west highways begin in the south with the
lowest even numbers. There all mile markers at each mile of the interstate
system, starting at the westernmost or southernmost point on the highway. Every
Interstate highway begins with the number “0”. Interchanges are numbered
according to their location on the highway in relation to mileage; an exit
between milepost 7 and milepost 8 would be designated “Exit 7.” This system
allows drivers estimate the distance to a desired exit, which a road is leading
off the highway. Despite the common acceptance of the numbering system on the
Interstate highways, some states have adopted different numbering systems. For
example, a portion of the Interstate 19 in Arizona is measured in kilometers
instead of miles since the highway goes south to Mexico.
Since the Interstate highways are
freeways-highways that do not have signs and cross streets – they have the
highest speed limits in the nation. Most interstate highways have speed limits
between 65 – 75 miles per hour (105 – 120 kilometers per hour), but some areas
in Texas and Utah have an 80 mile-per-hour (130 kilometer-per-hour) speed
limit.
The federal government primarily
funds interstate highways. However, they are owned and operated by the
individual states or toll authorities in the states. The federal government
generally funds up to 90% of the cost of an Interstate highway, while the
states pay the remainder of the cost.
If something is designated, it is
I am writing in response to response
to the article “Protecting our public spaces” in issue 14, published this
spring in it, the author claims that “all graffiti is public spaces.” I would
like to point out that many people believe that graffiti is an art from that
can benefit our public spaces just as much as sculpture, fountains, or other,
more accepted art forms.
People who object to graffiti
usually do so more because of where it is, not what it is. They argue, as your
author does, that posting graffiti in public places constitutes an illegal act
of property damage. But the location of such graffiti should not prevent the
images themselves from being considered genuine art.
I would argue that graffiti is the
ultimate public art form. Spray paint is a medium unlike any other. Though
graffiti, the entire world has become a canvas. No one has to pay admission or
travel to a museum to see this kind of art. The artists usually do not receive
payment for their efforts. These works of art dotting the urban landscape are
available, free of charge, to everyone who passes by.
To be clear, I do not consider
random words or names sprayed on stop signs to be art. Plenty of graffiti is
just vandalism, pure and simple. However, there is also graffiti that is
breathtaking in its intricate detail, its realism, or its creativity. It takes
great talent to create such involved designs with spray paint.
Are these creators not artists
just because they use a can of spray paint instead of a paintbrush, or because they
cover the side of a building rather than a canvas?
To declare that all graffiti is
vandalism, and nothing more, is an overly simplistic statement that I find out
of place in such a thoughtful publication as your magazine. Furthermore,
graffiti is not going anywhere, so might as well find a way to live with it and
enjoy its benefits. One option could be to make a percentage of public space,
such as walls or benches in parks, open to graffiti artists. By doing this, the
public might feel like part owners of these works of art, rather than just the
victims of a crime.
According to the writer, random
words sprayed on stop sings are not