I can answer this question if you tell me what Eva you mean?
Answer:
<h2>C. laughed loudly at the story</h2>
Explanation:
The complete predicate is made up of the verb (simple predicate) and all the modifiers. In this sentence, the verb is laughed. Because loudly at the story modifies laughed, the answer is C. laughed loudly at the story.
I'm always happy to help :)
Literature and the Holocaust have a complicated relationship. This isn't to say, of course, that the pairing isn't a fruitful one—the Holocaust has influenced, if not defined, nearly every Jewish writer since, from Saul Bellow to Jonathan Safran Foer, and many non-Jews besides, like W.G. Sebald and Jorge Semprun. Still, literature qua art—innately concerned with representation and appropriation—seemingly stands opposed to the immutability of the Holocaust and our oversized obligations to its memory. Good literature makes artistic demands, flexes and contorts narratives, resists limpid morality, compromises reality's details. Regarding the Holocaust, this seems unconscionable, even blasphemous. The horrors of Auschwitz and Buchenwald need no artistic amplification.
Answer: It provides a unique and personal perspective on a significant historical event.
There are several advantages and disadvantages to writing about an event in the form of a memoir. Some of the disadvantages are that the author can lose objectivity about an event, and he can present a biased view of the events. Another problem could be that our memories are not perfect, and the author might remember events differently from the way they happened.
However, there are also several advantages. The most obvious one is likely why Gelissen decided to tell her story as a memoir. And this is that a memoir can provide a unique and personal perspective on a significant historical event.
This idea enhances Wollstonecraft’s argument by suggesting that women’s natural curiosity will lead to trickery if it is not nurtured through education.
<em>A Vindication of the Rights of Woman</em> is an exposition on overcoming the oppression and denial of the women in the society. It is a dedication to <em>Charles. M. Talleyrand</em> whose views on women education to Wollstonecraft were repugnant. She blamed the condition of adult women due to the negligence of girl's education. The women in the society only care about being attractive, modest and elegant. They are deprived to defend their fundamental rights and are treated as subordinates.
In her argument, she describes ways in which women combine their silliness. Their silliness includes visiting fortune tellers, reading a stupid novel, rivalries with women, and so forth. Due to women's low status and no education results in women's faults and not due to natural deficiency.