Inperpreter of maladies

#2 The story illuminates the differing cultural viewpoints of Mr. Kapasi and of mr an mrs Das by talking about the backround of each character. When Mrs. Das talks about her marriage and her early life. The cultural viewpoint with the is presented with greater sympathy would have to be Mr. Das.
#8 The ending suggests that Mr. Kapasi will not be with Mrs. Das in the future. Yes his encounter with the Das family has changed his outlook on life or his view of himself. I think the ending is happy.

the destructors

#1 The protagonist in the story was Trevor. Trevor would always tell the gang what to do to the house and other things. The antagonists in the story would have to be Blackie because he is asking Trevor what to do. The conflicts are when Trevor gets the notes and wants to burn them.

#5 The story could take place in Blitzed London. There is an out side shed. No the story doesn't say anything about the consequences of war. But it does deal with the consequences of war. It doesn't say anything about the causes of war. But it deal causes of war when the man tells them not to bounce the ball against his wall.

hunters in the snow

#3 The most sympathetic of the three characters would have t be frank. Even though nun of the characters are really sympathetic because they are hunters. No single character has all the power all the time. But each has most of the power at a giving time. Kenny had most of the power in the begging because he was driving the truck. Then tub had the power at the end of the story. Yes the balance of power and alliances between characters shifts as the story goes on.

#7 The purpose of the scene when they leave kenny in the back of truck as they go to the tavern is to show that they don't care what happens to kenny. Franks insights aren't remorse or genuine because if they were he be out there in the cold trying to help his friend survive.

#8 The appropriate conclusion to the story is that Kenny dies at the end. The final statement being made about the characters is that they don't really care what happens to their friend.

question #4

Connell includes the "philosophical" discussion between Whitney and Rainsford to show that Rainsford doesn't care about animals. This reveals that Rainsford cant think how it would feel to be the hunted. Rainsford major transformation in the story is going from the hunter to the hunted. Yes we do get to know Rainsford better as the story goes on.

question #3

General Zaroff is portrayed in the book as the mentally off guy that goes arund killing humans that crash onto his island and that he leads onto his island. Hes a general from the army that still wants to kill people. Rainsford is portrayed as the general from the army that hunt but isn't mentally off in the brain. Rainsford is more fully characterized because the story is more about him. Yes both characters a plausible but one more than then the other. Rainsford is more plausible though.

Welcome

Welcome to your blog, Evan.