Which statement best describes the similarities between the feminist and historical approaches to literary analysis?

If it is this question than maybe it's this

Explanation:

Read the passage from "Marriage Is a Private Affair" by Chinua Achebe.

"I shall not call in a native doctor.” Nnaemeka’s father was known to be obstinately ahead of his more superstitious neighbours in these matters. "I will not be another Mrs. Ochuba. If my son wants to kill himself let him do it with his own hands. It is not for me to help him.”

"But it was her fault,” said Madubogwu. "She ought to have gone to an honest herbalist. She was a clever woman, nevertheless.”

"She was a wicked murderess,” said Jonathan who rarely argued with his neighbours because, he often said, they were incapable of reasoning. "The medicine was prepared for her husband, it was his name they called in its preparation and I am sure it would have been perfectly beneficial to him. It was wicked to put it into the herbalist’s food, and say you were only trying it out.”

Which statement bestdescribes how a feminist analysis and a historical analysis of this excerpt would differ?

A. A historical analysis would focus on how the men discuss Mrs. Ochuba. A feminist analysis would focus on whether using a native doctor was considered superstitious at the time and place the story depicts.

B. A feminist analysis would most likely focus on the characters in the story, and a historical analysis would most likely focus on the plot.

C. A feminist analysis would focus on how the men discuss Mrs. Ochuba. A historical analysis would focus on whether using a native doctor was considered superstitious at the time and place the story depicts.

D. A feminist analysis would most likely focus on the positive aspects of the story, and a historical analysis would most likely focus on the negative aspects.

i think sylvia like her but she not trying to show it and i think rainbow will forgive her.

explanation:

answer: buck is a dog living a charmed life on the estate of judge miller, during the time of the klondike gold rush in 1897. he is the king of all the animals on the estate and as such enjoys special privileges, such as the run of the estate and the admirable position of being the judge's favorite dog.

this all ends the day he accompanies manuel on a walk through the orchard to a flag station, where manuel sells him to a stranger. manuel sells buck, because he has gambling debts he needs to pay and a family to support.

this one act changes buck's life irrevocably. it is the catalyst for the rest of the story about buck and his transformation from domestic pet to wild animal.

explanation: read thoughroly ! and u will find your answer and the mean time i will be keeping my eye on you !