In an interview, Faulkner described the conflict of Miss Emily: she “had broken all the laws of her tradition, her background, and she had finally broken the law of God too… And she knew she was doing wrong, and that’s why her own life was wrecked.” According to New Criticism, authorial intent is irrelevant, that only what is in the text is applicable, so just because Faulkner himself said this about his own piece doesn’t make it correct. Do you agree or disagree with his interpretation? Why or Why not?

Read this excerpt from mohandas gandhi's "banaras hindu university speech." what is the speaker's purpose a. to persuade his audience to struggle for self-governance through peaceful means b. to urge wealthy indians to act instead of merely talk about poverty c. to inform the audience that the british colonial power is stealing indian resources d. to persuade his audience to renounce materialistic wealth and pursue spiritual wealth

Where can you a sample mla style document

Which is the main claim in "say no to library cuts"? a. the most important effects of the library cuts will not be limited to children, senior citizens, or other specific groups. b. the budget cuts at the library also mean the end of the children's story hour. c. according to library director sarah tomlinson, whom i interviewed on may 6, the budget cuts will force the library to discontinue many popular programs and services. d. the funding of the public library should be protected because the library offers important programs and services that benefit the whole community.