After doing a close reading, why should you analyze the figurative language in a text? a. to reveal the author's background b. to reveal hidden meanings c. to understand characterization d. to understand the setting e. to understand the tone

After doing a close reading, you should analyze the figurative language in a text for the following reason:

b. to reveal hidden meanings.

Explanation:

If a reader relies only on what is denotative, that is, on what is on the surface, he or she will certainly be missing out on a lot of messages that can only be perceived and understood with an open mind and thorough eyes which also attain to what is connotative, that is, to what is between the lines and goes way beyond the core meaning of words.

In Voltaire's "Candide", the main character starts to lead a farmer's life and his friend Pangloss suggests they are living in the best of possible worlds, to which Candide responds with the classic line:

“That is very well put . . . but we must cultivate our garden.”

The author is certainly not literally talking about a garden; he is rather symbolically referring to something that is much more profound and meaningful and lies within the very essence of mankind. Therefore, there is indeed a hidden meaning in those words, and it must be analyzed and interpreted so the reader can better profit from the text.

Explanation:

DID ON PLATO

just to , the answer is b on edge

"character is what you are in the dark." dwight lyman moody, in this very witty quotation of his, states we act and think differently when we are "in the dark", that is, when the spotlight is not on us and everyone can see us and consequently judge us. when reading, we tend to be sympathetic to some characters and their dilemmas. by being so, we are saying to ourselves that we agree with those characters' acts and choices, even if they are morally questionable if we have common sense in mind. dwight lyman moody's quotation applies very well to "crime and punishment", by   19th century russian writer fiodor dostoyevsky. raskolnikov, the main character, a former law student who spends his days reflecting upon life and its misery, draws a fatal conclusion: mankind is divided in two main categories: ordinary and extraordinary people. the first are the ones who lead a run-of-the-mill existence and are full of imperfections; the latter are the ones who are spiritually superior, the ones who always know better, and have the right to judge the ordinary ones, as well as eliminate them if for common good. raskolnikov considers himself as belonging to the extraordinary category and decides to kill an old lady who is a money lender and in whose house he rents a small room. raskolnikov compares himself to napoleon, who had the undeniable right to execute tons of people during the war in order to save his nation. of course what the main character decides to do is a horrendous crime, but as readers we feel it is the right thing for him to do, since the victim is a mean old woman who only thinks about money and keeps humiliating her younger sister. what one experiences is a mixture of sympathy and empathy for the character, even though he decides to commit homicide, which is not at all accepted or tolerated by civilized citizens. however, since readers are "in the dark", they allow themselves to feel in ways they would probably never dare to confess to anyone, no matter how nasty or vicious a character can be. after all, they are just reading and doing no harm. in other words, readers are in the dark and can be who they are without being judged.