Answer:
Brutus creates closure, whereas Antony stimulates anger.
Explanation:
The two monologues in question are from Act III scene ii of the play "The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare. The two monologues are from the scene where Brutus had addressed the people after the death of Caesar and Antony had also came to view the body. He then addressed the people right after the exit of Brutus.
The last remarks of the two monologues are-
Brutus remarks that he wants the people to pay their respects to Caesar and told the, that Antony will address the people. After giving his leave, he exit and from there Antony began his speech.
Whereas, Antony's speech details the goodness and wholehearted sacrifice of Caesar for his people. The "over ambitious" nature that Brutus accused Caesar of, was what led him to be a great leader for his whole acts and aims was for the good of his people. He even mentioned that Caesar had written in his will that the people of Rome are to be his inheritors.
Thus, the two monologues that the two leaders gave after the death of Caesar are quite different in that, Brutus' monologue creates closure for everyone, not only himself. He accepts the death of Caesar and implores the people to do so too. But Antony's monologue rather stimulates anger in the people.
The word vindicated, which comes from the Latin word vindicatus, originally meant "to avenge or revenge" but its meaning soon shifted to "clear from censure or doubt, by means of demonstration." When you are vindicated, your name is cleared. You might also prove that you're right about something.
I feel like it's implying that, Britannia is in a very very weary deep thought process.
I mean, droops can be referred to weary, and pensive means thought, or a deep thought.
However, weary could be tired. This is completely an assumption.
The correct answer is B.
Literary nonsense refers to a categorization of literature that balances elements that make sense with some that do not.
In this excerpt, Sandburg combines real places like Massachusetts, Soth Hadley and Northampton with the flongboo, an imaginary animal that has a yellow torch for a tail.
The writer of "The Instinct that Makes People Rich" interprets the Midas myth as the story of a man who could not fail.
Chesterton, however, says that Midas DID fail. He starved because he could not eat gold.
Chesterton says that success always comes at the sacrifice of something else, something "domestic." (By this he means that, yes, a millionaire has money but will lack something else, like love or friendship, etc.) He says that people who think Midas succeeded are just like the author of the article -- both worship money.
Chesterton says that worshipping money has nothing to do with success and everything to do with snobbery.
