Answer:Their tail and speed
Explanation:
What are basically the same in the text and you get your answer
Answer:
"The petrified man" by Eudora Welty uses grotesque imagery to establish the most significant themes through the characters of the story, there are two main characters and the whole story goes around the conversation between them, who in a very dark, twisted and unpleasant way criticize and diminish the life of others, pretending to be worrying about them and their whereabouts, all the people that are being cynically analyzed in this piece of work are the clients of Leota, a beautician, her and her customer, Mrs. Fletcher are representations of the most despicable "qualities" of the human beings, the sense of grotesque in the story is created in the atmosphere by the way these two characters interact and how they personalities seem to be built only over darker shades of selfishness, irony, and sarcasm. These characters feel that they are morally superior somehow, which gives them the right to scrutinize the clients' lives
Explanation:
"The petrified man" has not been considered as a beautiful piece of written work for many experts because of it's obscure and despicable nature. For other, the use of this technique represents something worthy of analysis and it in fact became a representative story of the darkness inside of the human soul.
You would highlight burns against them and the fire is made ready, the furnace is now hot, ready to receive them, the flames do now rage and glow.
You would highlight those things because God's wrath is being personified as, or compared to, a fire, as revealed in the line the wrath of God burns against them. The fire is made ready... seems like an extended metaphor.
A foil is the near complete opposite of the main character (whichever character they want you to find a foil for).
Rainsford and Whitney were good hunting friends with numerous similar interests. They could not be foils because of how close in similarity they were. Even when they disagreed on how animals felt about being hunted, Whitney seemed open to and intrigued by Rainsford's points and way of thinking.
Ivan is a near irrelevant character, being a mere Cossack who follows whatever General Zaroff says. He is mindless and has almost zero traits to even compare to Rainsford, let alone any traits aside from a mindless follower to begin with.
The answer would be General Zaroff. This is almost like the cliche protagonist vs antagonist foil. Both of them are hunters, but different kinds. Zaroff got bored with animals and wanted to hunt human people instead, whereas Rainsford had enjoyed the thrill of an animal hunt and thinks that the hunting of people is murder. Zaroff is more heartless and cold, a killer, if you will. Rainsford seems to think highly of actual people, and had no interest in playing Zaroff's game.
by praising the efficiency of modern-day Internet research doesn't relate to anything regarding "Choreographers of Matter, Life, and Intelligence" when it comes to argumentation. Comparing scientific knowledge to grains of sand on a beach is poetic, but it is no argument either. Proving names of modern scientists and their contributions also shows nothing but the scientists and their contributions themselves. It doesn't work as proof for <em>"an impending scientific revolution".</em>
What Michio Kaku does, as the good scientist that he is, is to show evidence. And he does so "by providing quantitative proof of recent scientific progress"
