Please write this with a quote and explanation.
MODERNITY AND ANONYMITY
Early in The Devil in the White City, Erik Larson writes that it is easy to disappear in Chicago in the late 19th century. At the time of the World’s Fair, Chicago is modernizing at a rapid pace: the city limits keep increasing, workers build huge, technologically advanced structures like the Ferris Wheel, and trains connect far-away parts of the city to one another. One important consequence of the rapid modernization in Chicago is that people move to Chicago from across the country, and even the world. Some come looking for employment and success, some come to admire the World’s Fair, but both of these groups are responding to Chicago’s reputation as a “modern” city. Because of the rapid influx of people, Chicago becomes bigger, more crowded, and more impersonal. The police can’t investigate all the women who go missing — amazingly, Holmes’s serial murders are only a drop in the bucket compared to all the crimes in the city he lives in. Also, people are less emotionally connected to one another; thus, when guests go missing from Holmes’s building, the other lodgers don’t do anything other than express a vague curiosity. Larson says this is because they don’t trust the police, but more broadly, it’s because the new inhabitants of Chicago don’t feel any deep connection with each other. As Chicago grows bigger, more prosperous, and more technologically advanced, it also grows more anonymous, and individual lives matter less and less. Larson suggests that anonymity may be an inescapable part of modern life.
The Devil in the White City
Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair that Changed America
By Erik Larson
Evils Imminent (a note)
In Chicago at the end of the nineteenth century amid the smoke of industry and the clatter of trains there lived two men, both handsome, both blue-eyed, and both unusually adept at their chosen skills. Each embodied an element of the great dynamic that characterized the rush of America toward the twentieth century. One was an architect, the builder of many of America’s most important structures, among them the Flatiron Building in New York and Union Station in Washington, D.C.; the other was a murderer, one of the most prolific in history and harbinger of an American archetype, the urban serial killer. Although the two never met, at least not formally, their fates were linked by a single, magical event, one largely fallen from modern recollection but that in its time was considered to possess a transformative power nearly equal to that of the Civil War. In the following pages I tell the story of these men and this event, but I must insert here a notice: However strange or macabre some of the following incidents may seem, this is not a work of fiction. Anything between quotation marks comes from a letter, memoir, or other written document. The action takes place mostly in Chicago, but I beg readers to forgive me for the occasional lurch across state lines, as when the staunch, grief-struck Detective Geyer enters that last awful cellar. I beg forbearance, too, for the occasional side journey demanded by the story, including excursions into the medical acquisition of corpses and the correct use of Black Prince geraniums in an Olmstedian landscape. Beneath the gore and smoke and loam, this book is about the evanescence of life, and why some men choose to fill their brief allotment of time engaging the impossible, others in the manufacture of sorrow. In the end it is a story of the ineluctable conflict between good and evil, daylight and darkness, the White City and the Black.
Prologue: Aboard the Olympic
The date was April 14, 1912, a sinister day in maritime history, but of course the man in suite 63–65, shelter deck C, did not yet know it. What he did know was that his foot hurt badly, more than he had expected. He was sixty-five years old and had become a large man. His hair had turned gray, his mustache nearly white, but his eyes were as blue as ever, bluer at this instant by proximity to the sea. His foot had forced him to delay the voyage, and now it kept him anchored in his suite while the other first-class passengers, his wife among them, did what he would have loved to do, which was to explore the ship’s more exotic precincts. The man loved the opulence of the ship, just as he loved Pullman Palace cars and giant fireplaces, but his foot problem tempered his enjoyment. He recognized that the systemic malaise that caused it was a consequence in part of his own refusal over the years to limit his courtship of the finest wines, foods, and cigars. The pain reminded him daily that his time on the planet was nearing its end. Just before the voyage he told a friend, “This prolonging of a man’s life doesn’t interest me when he’s done his work and has done it pretty well.”
The man was Daniel Hudson Burnham, and by now his name was familiar throughout the world. He was an architect and had done his work pretty well in Chicago, New York, Washington, San Francisco, Manila, and many other cities. He and his wife, Margaret, were sailing to Europe in the company of their daughter and her husband for a grand tour that was to continue through the summer. Burnham had chosen this ship, the R.M.S. Olympic of the White Star Line, because it was new and glamorous and big. At the time he booked passage the Olympic was the largest vessel in regular service, but just three days before his departure a sister ship—a slightly longer twin—had stolen that rank when it set off on its maiden voyage. The twin, Burnham knew, was at that moment carrying one of his closest friends, the painter Francis Millet, over the same ocean but in the opposite direction.
As the last sunlight of the day entered Burnham’s suite, he and Margaret set off for the first-class dining room on the deck below. They took the elevator to spare his foot the torment of the grand stairway, but he did so with reluctance, for he admired the artistry in the iron scrollwork of its balustrades and the immense dome of iron and glass that flushed the ship’s core with natural light. His sore foot had placed increasing limitations on his mobility. Only a week earlier he had found himself in the humiliating position of having to ride in a wheelchair through Union Station in Washington, D.C., the station he had designed.
The Burnhams dined by themselves in the Olympic’s first-class salon, then retired to their suite and there, for no particular reason, Burnham’s thoughts returned to Frank Millet. On impulse, he resolved to send Millet a midsea greeting via the Olympic’s powerful Marconi wireless.
Burnham signaled for a steward. A middle-aged man in knife-edge whites took his message up three decks to the Marconi room adjacent to the officer’s promenade. He returned a few moments later, the message still in his hand, and told Burnham the operator had refused to accept it.
Footsore and irritable, Burnham demanded that the steward return to the wireless room for an explanation.
Millet was never far from Burnham’s mind, nor was the event that had brought the two of them together: the great Chicago world’s fair of 1893. Millet had been one of Burnham’s closest allies in the long, bittersweet struggle to build the fair. Its official name was the World’s Columbian Exposition, its official purpose to commemorate the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus’s discovery of America, but under Burnham, it’s chief builder, it had become something enchanting, known throughout the world as the White City.
It had lasted just six months, yet during that time its gatekeepers recorded 27.5 million visits, when the country’s total population was 65 million. On its best day the fair drew more than 700,000 visitors. That the fair had occurred at all, however, was something of a miracle. To build it Burnham had confronted a legion of obstacles, any one of which could have—should have—killed it long before Opening Day. Together he and his architects had conjured a dream city whose grandeur and beauty exceeded anything each singly could have imagined. Visitors wore their best clothes and most somber expressions as if entering a great cathedral. Some wept at its beauty. They tasted a new snack called Cracker Jack and a new breakfast food called Shredded Wheat. Whole villages had been imported from Egypt, Algeria, Dahomey, and other far-flung locales, along with their inhabitants. The Street in Cairo exhibit alone employed nearly two hundred Egyptians and contained twenty-five distinct buildings, including a fifteen-hundred-seat theater that introduced America to a new and scandalous form of entertainment. Everything about the fair was exotic and, above all, immense. The fair occupied over one square mile and filled more than two hundred buildings. A single exhibit hall had enough interior volume to have housed the U.S. Capitol, the Great Pyramid, Winchester Cathedral, Madison Square Garden, and St. Paul’s Cathedral, all at the same time. One structure, rejected at first as a “monstrosity,” became the fair’s emblem, a machine so huge and terrifying that it instantly eclipsed the tower of Alexandre Eiffel that had so wounded America’s pride. Never before had so many of history’s brightest lights, including Buffalo Bill, Theodore Dreiser, Susan B. Anthony, Jane Addams, Clarence Darrow, George Westinghouse, Thomas Edison, Henry Adams, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, Nikola Tesla, Ignace Paderewski, Philip Armour, and Marshall Field, gathered in one place at one time. Richard Harding Davis called the exposition “the greatest event in the history of the country since the Civil War.”
That something magical had occurred in that summer of the world’s fair was beyond doubt, but darkness too had touched the fair. Scores of workers had been hurt or killed in building the dream, their families consigned to poverty. Fire had killed fifteen more, and an assassin had transformed the closing ceremony from what was to have been the century’s greatest celebration into a vast funeral. Worse had occurred too, although these revelations emerged only slowly. A murderer had moved among the beautiful things Burnham had created. Young women drawn to Chicago by the fair and by the prospect of living on their own had disappeared, last seen at the killer’s block-long mansion, a parody of everything architects held dear. Only after the exposition had Burnham and his colleagues learned of the anguished letters describing daughters who had come to the city and then fallen silent. The press speculated that scores of fairgoers must have disappeared within the building. Even the street-hardened members of the city’s Whitechapel Club, named for the London stalking grounds of Jack the Ripper, were startled by what detectives eventually found inside and by the fact that such grisly events could have gone undiscovered for so long. The rational explanation laid blame on the forces of change that during this time had convulsed Chicago. Amid so much turmoil it was understandable that the work of a young and handsome doctor would go unnoticed. As time passed, however, even sober men and women began to think of him in less-than-rational terms. He described himself as the Devil and contended that his physical shape had begun to alter. Enough strange things began happening to the men who brought him to justice to make his claim seem almost plausible.
For the supernaturally inclined, the death of the jury foreman alone offered sufficient proof.
Burnham’s foot ached. The deck thrummed. No matter where you were on the ship, you felt the power of the Olympic’s twenty-nine boilers transmitted upward through the strakes of the hull. It was the one constant that told you—even in the staterooms and dining chambers and smoking lounge, despite the lavish efforts to make these rooms look as if they had been plucked from the Palace of Versailles or a Jacobean mansion—that you were aboard a ship being propelled far into the bluest reaches of the ocean.
Burnham and Millet were among the few builders of the fair still alive. So many others had gone. Olmsted and Codman. McKim. Hunt.Atwood—mysteriously. And that initial loss, which Burnham still found difficult to comprehend. Soon no one would remain, and the fair would cease to exist as a living memory in anyone’s brain.
Of the key men, who besides Millet was left? Only Louis Sullivan: embittered, perfumed with alcohol, resenting who knew what, but not above coming by Burnham’s office for a loan or to sell some painting or sketch.
At least Frank Millet still seemed strong and healthy and full of the earthy good humor that had so enlivened the long nights during the fair’s construction.
The steward came back. The expression in his eyes had changed. He apologized. He still could not send the message, he said, but at least now he had an explanation. An accident had occurred involving Millet’s ship. In fact, he said, the Olympic was at that moment speeding north at maximum velocity to come to her aid, with instructions to receive and care for injured passengers. He knew nothing more.
Burnham shifted his leg, winced, and waited for more news. He hoped that when the Olympic at last reached the site of the accident, he would find Millet and hear him tell some outrageous story about the voyage. In the peace of his stateroom, Burnham opened his diary.
That night the fair came back to him with extra clarity.
Use this discussion board to briefly describe how you would fix the “drug problem.” Your posts should adhere to the following requirements: Your answer (i.e., your opinion) should be based on what you argumentative essay help: argumentative essay help
Your posts should adhere to the following requirements:
Your answer (i.e., your opinion) should be based on what you have learned up to this point. Do not plagiarism.
Your proposed solution cannot involve making new laws.
Use proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Responses should be at least 100 words in length, and should not exceed 200 words
Please dont plagiarism uses your own summary.
Choose one of the 4 prompts, develop a thesis, write an essey college admission essay help
Gothic literture. Choose one of the 4 prompts, develop a thesis, write an essey
About 2500 words (work cited does not count) PMLA format Please read the instruction in the word file I uploaded Reading: 1):” The Oxford Book of Gothic Tales.” Oxford, 2009. , Chris Baldick 2): “Dracula” by Stoker (oxford) 3): Macbeth ( Oxford 2011) You do not need to read them all, But you need to know at least 2 of these stories to be able to write. ( A very famous one in the first book is “The yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Stetson” Please choose ONLY ONE OF THE 4 prompts in the instruction. You do not need to write about all. As you understand, I will check as many times as I can to make sure the paper is plagiarism free. Thank you in advance and let me know if you have any questions. I will try to upload more power points to help
Scholars closely study the works they write about, and familiarize themselves with other critics’ interpretations. They’re knowledgeable, and they scholarship essay help: scholarship essay help
Scholars closely study the works they write about, and familiarize themselves with other critics’ interpretations. They’re knowledgeable, and they base their opinions on evidence. However, different critics see different things in the same text. They often disagree.
For this assignment, you will consider three critical essays and explore the scholars’ ideas. You will use their ideas to expand your own understanding of one of the major themes in Fences.
Choose one of the major themes of the play:
fathers and sons
Explore the way August Wilson carries the theme through the play. What does he say about the lives of his characters through this theme? What does he want us to think?
Provide evidence for your thesis and your supporting arguments: in other words, quote dialogue from the play and refer to specific events in it.
Incorporate insights from the critical essays provided to you. Briefly summarize these key points, and respond. Do you agree with the other scholars’ insights, or disagree? Provide evidence to support your assertions.
Advice: How to Proceed
[We’ll be doing many of these steps in class or for homework. Don’t skip any of the steps; if you do, your job will be harder and your essay won’t be as good.]
Read the critical essays; take notes on the ideas that you find interesting, enlightening, or unconvincing.
Choose the theme you’ll write about.
List the different ways in which Wilson explores the theme; find the most important places in the play where the theme is mentioned.
Take notes on what you think Wilson is trying to say through this theme.
Utilize 2-3 sources for your paper
Refine those notes and turn them into a rough draft of your thesis.
Plan supporting arguments.
[Or, if you need to write a rough draft of the essay in order to discover ideas, then do that. After you’ve done it, decide what your thesis seems to be.]
Plan your evidence: which passages from the play will you quote? Which excerpts from the essays will you comment on?
Draft your essay.
Plan major revisions.
Here are the critical essays: (You can also search and find your own sources) _Fences_ – 3 sources .pdf
Byerman, “America’s Passed Time” –
Wessling, “Wilson’s Fences” – on Canvas Files [a 1-page excerpt]
Koprince, “Baseball as History and Myth in Fences”
You can also use these sources:
Failure of the American Dream in Fences-1.pdf
Baseball as History and Myth in August Wilson’s Fences-1.pdf
The Fences They build Blk Women in Fences-1.pdf
If you can, print out the articles, do a close read and mark them up. You’ll notice that they all focus mainly on the theme of baseball; but they also touch on the other themes.
Note: This is a challenging assignment—the most challenging one of the semester. It will require you to read and understand sophisticated critical essays. It will require you to summarize and evaluate the ideas of scholars. Please accept the challenge!
Length: final draft, 5-6 pages (typed, double‐spaced, 12 point font)
MLA Format, with Works Cited list.
What conditions are necessary for the Miranda rule to apply? How is “custody” defined for Miranda purposes? What factors argumentative essay help
What conditions are necessary for the Miranda rule to apply?
How is “custody” defined for Miranda purposes? What factors do courts consider in deciding whether a suspect, who has yet to be arrested, is in custody for warning purposes?
Are the Miranda warnings required to be given in the exact words?
Florida v Powell, 559 U.S. 50 (2010)
Are warnings required during routine traffic stops? When would they be required during a traffic stop? Berkemer v McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984)
What conditions are required for the “public safety” exception to the Miranda right? Give an example. New York v Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984)
What are the four required Miranda warnings that must be given?
What are the requirements for a valid waiver?
Once a suspect has waived his Miranda right and started answering questions, under what circumstances can he/she invoke the right to remain silent again? What is required? Davis v United States, 512 U.S. 452 (1994) (Attorney)
Berghuis v Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010) (Remain silent)
Maryland v Shatzer, 559 U.S. 98 (2010) (Break in custody)
Under what circumstances can the police restart the interrogation after the suspect has made a clear and unambiguous request to speak to an attorney?
(See Edwards v Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981) and
Maryland v Shatzer, 559 U.S. 98 (2010)
Are Miranda warnings required when requesting booking information after an arrest?