h.g wells was brought up in poverty so how did he write a book in a society where classes were set in stone?
916253
H G wells was not brought up in poverty, in fact his father was a shop keeper so he was of the professional class.  He was born in 1866 and his father did lose his business in 1880 and he went working for a draper for three years before becoming a teacher student.
23906
Lack of education and understanding. I feel our schools and society fail miserably to prepare students for life on the outside. When I finally got out on my own I didn't have a clue how to obtain an apartment, phone or utilities. I didn't know how to shop for bargains, balance a checkbook or manage my money. I was raised to beleive that if you work hard you will do well. That is not necessarilly the case. Life is competitive. You either choose to compete or you don't, however, we are not all endowed with equal abillities. Handicaps are not always visible. Some people seem to have been born with everythiong going for them. Others seem to never get a break. I am a healthy middle aged individual. All I have ever wanted is to be able to earn a moderate living. This I have accomplished but it is not a secure living nor is it moderate to everyone's standards. According to most people I have a moderate house, 2 used cars and the abilities to pay the bills and still have a little left over however I make twice as much as the average individual. There are many things I could do without, such as the second car and all expenses incured by it, my multimedia system including my computer, tv's, vcrs'dvds, cell phones... And then, there's all my other belongings such as boats, bikes, fancy clothes, toys, gadgets, dining out, nightclubs and all the expenses incurred therein as well. All this and I live alone! I know many familys with four generations living under the same roof just to survive. Now, here is the point, would I be willing to share it all if I knew I could get a family or even an individual off the street? Would you?\n I think the biggest cause of poverty is a lack of understanding, a willingness to turn a blind eye.\n Laziness? Yes, I feel laziness is the root cause of poverty, not on behalf of the impoverished but on behalf of all of us who continue to allow it to go on, all of us who feel someone else will do something about it.\n How do we fix it? Seek those who have not, find out why not and help them to overcome.\n Put and end to beurocracy, pork barrel programs, illicit foreign aid, tax evaders and gougers so we can have the money it will take to help.\n Teach our schools to focus more on 'Life Economics' and make it a requirement. Identify the individual talents of children and guide them along the right path for them. Don't penalize and ridicule them because they may not be good at math, taking tests or sports. Stop being so damned two dimensional and realise there is a universe of possibilities awaiting all of us if we could only recognise the abillities of all individuals istead of a stereotyped few. Please forgive my longwinded answer but your's was a question worthy of the time. May we all prevail.
132703
Look on the web for info. Then right an introduction paragraph leading into ther next. Maybe you can write a paragraph on ther daily work habits, both the men and the women. Then write one about there struggles with the government ( how did the gov. treat them, taxes, ect.) Write one on there daily life. What did they live in, what did they eat, what did they do for fun and entertainment? What did there children do to help out. Did they have education? I could write a book if you let me go on. What did the peasants do that was important for there people and the country. It just keep going and going. Hope this helps a little.
1184246
The two writers, who are approximately of the same period, write in a very special way. They are called Naturalists. They Describe their character as they are, they do not try to make them look better to the eyes of the reader. Usually, for both writers, the protagonists come from disadvantaged background and are not to improve socially - although they actually do. Life is often - if not laways- portrayed as hard and doomed. The stories take place in an industrial and poor background. Life is unfair and is full of misery for both writers.
29158
Poverty of adults in western civilisations is often a state of mind where the individual can not visualise the steps necessary to gain an education, and/or employment to escape their poverty.
729046
=the poor working class tends tends to be more generous because life has always been a tougher challenge for them and the can relate to the needy whereas the wealthy walk on by or read about it.
390769
First of all, it's an allegory to the fall of Russia, not an alliteration. Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. As for what Orwell is saying, the story is about communism. In communism, the individual makes sacrifices for the society; rather than working for his own good, he works for the good of everyone, and takes no more than his fair share. The hard-working horse (I forgot his name) does everything he can for the society, and gives all he can. Going the other way, society has an obligation to keep each individual at an equal standard of living - nobody is lower than anybody else.
754066
What age?  Read Paulo Freire's _Pedagogy of the Oppressed_ or anything written by Peter McLaren or Henry Giroux.
918960
Anthropologists tend to classify different societies according to the degree to which different groups within a society have unequal access to advantages such as resources, prestige or power. (Useful definitions.) Virtually all societies have developed some degree of inequality among their people through the process of social stratification-the division of members of a society into strata (or levels) with unequal wealth, prestige or power. Differences lie in how societies treat the inequalities. Some may downplay them so they become transparent and insignificant (egalitarian societies) while others will accent inequalities (ranked and class-based societies). Three different types of societies can generally recognized: egalitarian societies, ranked societies and class-based societies.\n\nEgalitarian societal members tend to treat each other as equals. Wealth differences are few as is the amount of power available to any individual or group. The people possess norms that emphasize sharing and ideals of interpersonal equality. This is not to say that stratification is non-existent in these societies. In comparison with nonegalitarian societies, however, stratification is relatively insignificant. Even when someone like a bigman is present, prestige is important and linked to redistribution. However, the bigman gives more than he receives as his role as a redistributor is defined. If he hordes or possesses too much, he will lose the recognition as a bigman. In effect, he is a member of society as an equal who has a defined role that carries prestige but not wealth and recognition but not status. (See reading on egalitarian hierarchies.)\n\nIn ranked societies people are divided into hierarchically ordered groups that differ in terms of prestige, but not significantly in terms of access to resources or power. Within this context it is possible to identify persons we can label as chiefs whose inherited position and prestige is often linked to the redistribution of goods.\n\nIn class-based societies people are divided into hierarchically ordered groups that differ in terms of access not only to prestige, but also to resources and power. Western capitalist societies have distinct classes (e.g. upper class, middle class, poor), but mobility amongst the classes sometimes occurs through activities such as education, marriage or hard work. For similar reasons to those mentioned above, it is not appropriate to describe the Net as a class-based society.\n\nEconomics\nCultures can be characterized, in part, by the type of economic systems that they support. Three forms of economic exchange systems are typically recognized by anthropologists: reciprocity, redistribution and market exchange.\n\nReciprocity is the simplest form of economic exchange. It involves giving a product or service to another person in the expectation of receiving something of similar value in return. Reciprocal transactions are economic exchanges, but they are also personalized; they take place between people who have a bond, and they serve to strengthen these ties.\n\nIn a redistributive economy goods or labor are accumulated by a specific person, or at a particular place, and are subsequently redistributed back throughout the society. Such economies are found in all societies, to some extent, but they are "an important mechanism only in societies that have political hierarchies-that is, chiefs and other specialized officials and agencies" (Ember and Ember, 1990, p. 129).\n\nMarket exchange economies are associated with capitalist societies. In such economies producers send or take their goods to a marketplace where they are bid for by purchasers. The main feature of market exchanges is that goods and services are bought and sold at money prices determined by the impersonal forces of supply and demand.\n\nThere is one aspect of human economic systems that we should recognize. There are societies where it is more important to give everything away rather than a
405406
I believe the caste system is very much like the system of society in Aldous Huxleys book 'Brave New World'.  The seemingly logical way Huxley describes the way society works in the brave new world leads me to believe that in the caste system everyone has they're pre-determined lives already set before them and in the brave new world everything worked for everybody(almost).  But practically speaking I think that it would be better to let everyone decide their own lives and that would create much more growth in edjucation.  So no the caste system is not going to influence more people towards higer educational goals.
320589
He grew up under strict British racism and rule, and lived in poverty. When he had gotten an opportunity to have education from the Catholic missionaries was when he started to defend the rest of his people from the Tyrants.
30460
The people who are consider royality or in the upper class lived in castles, and have servants. They wear bright colors to show that they are rich, and they also wear jewlers.(which is not to common for lower class people. They would have tutors come to their castle, and they will have dancing class, and others...... And of course, you wouldn't have to do any work, cause u got servants..
151045
The natives didn't necessarily have social classes.  There was a division of labor, and people did what they were good at or born to do, but everyone contributed to the society.  There were priests or shamans or medicine men, a number of chiefs-war chiefs as one example, warriors, hunters, and the women.  No one was really higher than anyone else.
129661
Haven't heard of it - there was a book called "A Stone for Danny Fisher" by Harold Robbins. Pretty good, as I recall.\n\nPer Wikipedia:\nA Stone For Danny Fisher is a very serious, early novel by Harold Robbins that looks at the effect of the Great Depression on a lower-middle class Jewish family. Written in 1952 it is actually set in the period up to 1944.
917549
Try asking this same question in the education department, not society and culture. Good Luck!
837179
Hey! I'm doing that book in school too! \n\nFirst note the difference between the people in East Egg and the people in West Egg. The people of East Egg are the ones that were born rich (aristocrats) and the ones in West Egg are the people of new money, like Gatsby and Nick himself. Daisy and Tom are of East Egg. Being of old money they are used to being rich and live elegantly and have a good, well-known family background so they don't have to show it off. They are therefor referred to as members of "... a rather distinguished secret society." But Gatsby, being new to wealth, shows it off with lots of parties. He lacks the knowledge built up over generations, of how to speak correctly, how to dress with taste and how not to show off his immense wealth. Gatsby can never be anything more than lower class in manners, speech and behaviour, because people with 'old money' will not give away the secrets of their social code. Note that Gatsby holds his parties to attract Daisy. Funny, isn't it??!! Hope this helps!
632508
Actually f. Scott fitgerald was influenced a lot in his life to write the great gatsby. For example daisy's character is based on his wife zelda who was also very materialistic.Society at the time also influenced him the prohibition,materialism and living the american dream.other of his characters are also based on friends and people of that era.