Skip to main content

Can we determine the characters in Charlotte's web by their appearances? Please explain and give examples from the book?(250-300words)

It is possibly true that at least some of the human characters in Charlotte's Web can be determined by their appearances. Fern's family: her brother, parents, and extended family who live nearby, behave and speak pretty much the way one would expect farmers of that era and place to behave.


The animal characters in Charlotte's Web, however, cannot necessarily be determined by their appearances.


One would not expect that a spider, a pig, and a rat would have much intelligence and emotion (at least intelligence and emotion as we humans perceive it) Yet, they do! 


Charlotte's physical appearance as a spider, is so inconspicous, that humans would hardly notice her. Yet, she was capable of great things, especially for Wilbur, the pig.


Wilbur, the pig, while certainly big enough to be noticed by animals and humans alike, was helpless to change his situation. Until Charlotte took pity  intervened for him, he was destined to become bacon and pork roasts by the time the first snowflake would fall in the coming winter.


Charlotte, by expertly spinning her webs, and supernaturally knowing how to spell the words used in her webs, defied her physical appearance. 


To the humans in the story, it was nothing short of magic that Charlotte could spell out the words "Some Pig" in her webs as a description of Wilbur. 


Another thing that shows that the characters cannot be defined by their physical appearances is that the animals in this story converse freely. Fern, although a human girl, witnesses and understands this, her family and community members do not.


Ultimately, Charlotte saves Wilbur from being slaughtered because she let the world know that he was extraordinary, and because of that Fern's family allowed Wilbur to live out a natural life and was not slaughtered for meat to sell and feed their family.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more