Yesterday i my parents make dinner.

Read the passage from sugar changed the world. sugar is different from honey. it offers a stronger sweet flavor, and like steel or plastic, it had to be invented. in the age of sugar, europeans bought a product made thousands of miles away that was less expensive than the honey from down the road. that was possible only because sugar set people in motion all across the world—millions of them as slaves, in chains; a few in search of their fortunes. a perfect taste made possible by the most brutal labor: that is the dark story of sugar. how does the comparison of sugar to honey reveal the authors’ purpose? it persuades readers that sugar tastes better than honey. it informs readers that there is a connection between slavery and sugar. it informs readers that honey had a major impact on society. it persuades readers that sugar is as important an invention as steel.

What does the author see as the main cause for why students don’t really see shakespeare as a real, flawed human being? we shouldn’t shy away from discussing our literary heroes’ flaws. if nothing else, the knowledge of their failures us appreciate what success and greatness these authors did achieve. often our hero-worship keeps us from truly seeing the complexity of a great author. thus, i would argue, nothing would be better for high school students than to take shakespeare down a peg or two. a) the fact that students never learn enough about shakespeares biography b) the fact that students only read shakespeare’s comedies while in school c) the fact that students are never assigned to read any shakespeare while in high school d) the fact that students only read shakespeare’s greatest works in school and thus never see his weaknesses

Which statement is most clearly objective?