B because the reader already knows what is about to happen to the characters while the others run in chronological order
This builds tension rather than shock as it would if it were in chronological order
When, in 1759, Voltaire published his Candide: Ou, L’Optimisme (Candide: Or, All for the Best, 1759), Michel-Guillaume Jean de Crèvecur was already planning to cultivate his garden hewn out of the Pennsylvania frontier. Like Voltaire’s naïve hero, Crèvecur had seen too much of the horrors of the civilized world and was more than ready to retire to his bucolic paradise, where for nineteen years he lived in peace and happiness until the civilized world intruded on him and his family with the outbreak of the American Revolution. The twelve essays that make up his Letters from an American Farmer are, ostensibly at least, the product of a hand unfamiliar with the pen. The opening letter presents the central theme quite clearly: The decadence of European civilization makes the American frontier one of the great hopes for a regeneration of humanity. Crèvecur wonders why people travel to Italy to “amuse themselves in viewing the ruins of temples . . . . half-ruined amphitheatres and the putrid fevers of the Campania must fill the mind with most melancholy reflections.” By contrast, Crèvecur delights in the humble rudiments of societies spreading everywhere in the colonies, people converting large forests into pleasing fields and creating thirteen provinces of easy subsistence and political harmony. He has his interlocutor say of him, “Your mind is . . . a Tabula rasa where spontaneous and strong impressions are delineated with felicity.” Similarly, he sees the American continent as a clean slate on which people can inscribe a new society and the good life. It may be said that Crèvecur is a Lockean gone romantic, but retaining just enough practical good sense to see that reality is not rosy. The book is the crude, occasionally eloquent, testimony of a man trying desperately to convince himself and his readers that it is possible to live the idealized life advocated by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. With a becoming modesty, appropriate to a man who learned English at age sixteen, Crèvecur begins with a confession of his literary inadequacy and the announcement of his decision simply to write down what he would say. His style, however, is not smoothly colloquial. Except in a few passages in which conviction generates enthusiasm, one senses the strain of the unlettered man writing with feeling but not cunning. Thus in these reasons, Enthusiastic as this description is, it is not as extravagant as it might seem. He describes Colonial America as a "a new continent; a modern society ", "united by the silken bands of mild government " where eveyone abides by the law " without dreading their power, because they -Americans- are equitable". To his mind, America is a place where "the rich and the poor are not so far removed from each other as they are in Europe" (Letter III) In contrast, Europe seems to him a land "of great lords who possess everything, and of a herd of people who have nothing" where its citizens "withered, and were mowed down by want, hunger, and war" as well as exposed to "nothing but the frowns of the rich, the severity of the laws, with jails and punishments"(Letter III). He lightheartedly embraces the nickname "farmer of feelings" his admired English correspondant gives him (letter II) as he explains with emotional rhethoric how it feels living in America; a place where "individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labours and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world"(letter III)
hope this helps
Whats the choices cant see them<span />
Fiction is used to teach History because it increases the curiosity of the kids and also presents multiple perspectives. But the disadvantages of using fiction to teach History are it might lead to inaccuracy, biasedness and incompetence.
<u>Explanation:</u>
Using Fiction for teaching History can help the children to understand History and build up curiosity. It can help them experience a complex truth and put them back into History and past times. It presents the complexity of the issues and promotes multiple perspectives.
But it can be dangerous to fictionalize History because it can lead to inaccuracy, biasedness and incompetence. This can also lead to the destruction of the civilization of that time and the personality trashing because of fictionalizing History.
By definition, a gerund is a verb that ends with -ing.
With this in mind, we can see that "dancing" and "writing" are gerunds. If we need to change them into infinitives, then we need to know what infinitives are.
An infinitive is the basic for of a verb with the word "to" in front of it. If you look at the end of your sentence where you have "to paint," you have an example of an infinitive.
To change our two gerunds, we need to drop the -ing and make each for basic: "dance" and "write". Then, we just need to add the word "to" in front of it, making it "to dance" and "to write."
Thus, our sentence should now read "I keep telling people that I love to dance, to write, and to paint.
