Please fast I need it

The difference between point of view and choice of person in a story is that "person" is the literary name given to main characters in a story, and "point of view" is the perspective from which we view the story "person" is part of a term used to describe the type of narrator (as in first-person or third-person); "point of view" is how the antagonist understands the events of a story the terms are interchangeable; there is really no difference between them "point of view" refers to the perspective from which the story is told; "person" is part of a term used to describe a type of narrator (as in first-person or third-person)

1. at the conclusion of chapter 13, the monster realizes that he has none of the qualities or possessions that human beings value, and so he worries the he will be forever miserable. he says, “oh, that i had for ever remained in my native wood, nor known nor felt beyond the sensations of hunger, thirst, and heat! ” this statement recalls one made by victor frankenstein in chapter 10: “if our impulses were confined to hunger, thirst, and desire, we might nearly be free; but now we are moved by every wind that blows, and a chance word or scene that that word may convey to us.” questions: what do these two statements suggest about the impact of knowledge? how do the statements affect the way readers view the monster and victor?

In just over one hundred years, between 1701 and 1810, 252,500 enslaved africans were brought to barbados—an island that occupies only 166 square miles (making it, today, one of the smallest countries in the world). the english then set out to conquer more sugar islands, starting with jamaica, which they took from spain in 1655. in the same period that the 252,500 africans were brought to barbados, 662,400 africans were taken to jamaica. thus, sugar drove more than 900,000 people into slavery, across the atlantic, to barbados and jamaica—and these were just two of the sugar islands. the english were eagerly filling antigua, nevis, saint kitts, and montserrat with slaves and sugar mills. they took over much of dutch guiana for the same reason. seeing the fortunes being made in sugar, the french started their own scramble to turn the half of the island of hispaniola that they controlled (which is now haiti), as well as martinique, guadeloupe, and french guiana (along the south american coast near dutch guiana), into their own sugar colonies, which were filled with hundreds of thousands more african slaves. by 1753, british ships were taking average of 34,250 slaves from africa every year, and by 1768, that number had reached 53,100. –sugar changed the world, marc aronson and marina budhos how do the authors use historical evidence to support their claim? x(a) they use secondary sources to show how french and english monarchs were indifferent to enslaved people. x(b)they use secondary sources to show that enslaved people often fought for their freedom after arriving in the caribbean. the answer is: (c)they use facts from primary sources to show how countries increased the number of enslaved people to produce more sugar. x(d)they use primary source interviews to show that countries could make more money in trading sugar without using enslaved people.