Read the excerpt from fitzgerald’s the great gatsby. my own house was an eyesore, but it was a small eyesore, and it had been overlooked, so i had a view of the water, a partial view of my neighbor's lawn, and the consoling proximity of millionaires—all for eighty dollars a month. across the courtesy bay the white palaces of fashionable east egg glittered along the water, and the history of the summer really begins on the evening i drove over there. the contrast created between east egg and west egg suggests that the main character feels comfortable in all social situations. nick will experience a series of financial pitfalls as the story unfolds. the story’s conflict will be based on wealth and appearances. the story will be presented from a number of differing perspectives.

The story’s conflict will be based on wealth and appearances.

Explanation:

Francis Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby" is the tragic story of Jay Gatsby and his attempts to reignite a relationship with his old lover Daisy Buchanan. This story also plays a contrasting picture of the rich and the poor people's differing world.

Considering the passage given in the question, it is evident that the narrator is referring to the differing worlds of West Egg and East Egg. He said that though his house was an eyesore, it was near "the consoling proximity of millionaires". This refers simply to the fact that being in close proximity to the rich gives the place a far more better advantage than the other houses. This contrast created between East Egg and West Egg suggests that the story's conflict will be based on the wealth and appearances of the characters living in both sides of the city.

read this passage from the crisis. what rationale is paine using for going to war with great britain? my own line of reasoning is to myself as straight and clear as a ray of light. not all the treasures of the world, so far as i believe, could have induced me to support an offensive war, for i think it murder; but if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in it, and to "bind me in all cases whatsoever" to his absolute will, am i to suffer it? what signifies it to me, whether he who does it is a king or a common man; my countryman or not my countryman; whether it be done by an individual villain, or an army of them? if we reason to the root of things we shall find no difference; neither can any just cause be assigned why we should punish in the one case and pardon in the other.

it is waged war against an army of countrymen

it would lead to independence from britain

it would be an offensive war

it would be a defensive war