How does author Elie Wiesel use symbolism to contribute to the meaning of Night?

In his book Night, Elie Wiesel uses symbolism throughout to enhance the text. First of all, the title itself is symbolic. The word "night" is repeated several times in different contexts. Night is death. Night is when one cannot see what is coming. It is a frightening time, especially for the Jews in concentration camps. They never know what is going to happen next. Some examples:

"Night fell." (Wiesel 10)

"An endless night." (Wiesel 24)

"As soon as night fell, she began to scream." (Wiesel 24)

"Never shall I forget that night, the first night in camp, which has turned my life into one long night, seven times cursed and seven times sealed." (Wiesel 32)

Another symbol in Night is fire. Early on, Madame Schacter sees fires burning in a vision she experiences as the Jews are transported on the train. The other Jews think she has lost her mind, but when they arrive at Auschwitz, there it is. The fire that burns people alive is right in front of them. Fire also symbolizes Wiesel's feelings about God.  God is gone--burned up like a fire and no longer present as far as Wiesel is concerned. And most significantly, fire is symbolic of the living Hell in which the Jews barely exist.

These are just two of the many symbols found in Night; each has an important meaning and gives Wiesel's story power.

In his last battle Beowulf fights against?

Beowulf's final battle is against a dragon who has invaded Geatland and has begun to ravage the countryside. It has been fifty years since Beowulf defeated Grendel and his mother, and the old king suits up for battle one final time. Beowulf and his kinsman, Wiglaf, enter the dragon's tower and assault the beast. Beowulf's sword, Naegling, breaks as he strikes the dragon; the dragon capitalizes on this and bites Beowulf. Wiglaf lands a blow on the dragon, and Beowulf uses his dagger to wield a mortal strike on the dragon. Beowulf was again victorious; unfortunately, the dragon's bite was poisonous, and the valiant king soon dies. Before he dies, Beowulf appoints Wiglaf his successor. Wiglaf and his men give their king a glorious funeral.

What is Yeats' claim about the Second Coming?

In "The Second Coming," W.B. Yeats explores the Second Coming, a traditional Christian idea that prophesies the return of Christ and the salvation of all true believers. However, Yeats turns this idea on its head by claiming that the Second Coming will be a violent apocalypse, rather than a sign of salvation.

To understand Yeats' main claim in "The Second Coming," it's first important to understand the historical context in which the poem occurred. The poem was published in 1920, a significant year for all Europeans, and especially for the Irish. The chaos of World War I had recently ended, leaving Europe in a state of previously unimaginable ruin. To make matters worse, Ireland was in the middle of a war for independence that began in 1919 and would last until 1921. As such, it's easy to imagine that, for an Irishman like Yeats, the world must have appeared to be crumbling.

When Yeats envisions the Second Coming, he imagines a "blood-dimmed tide" (5) and a monstrous, beastly "nightmare" (20), a "rough beast" (21) slouching "towards Bethlehem to be born" (22). This vision is a far cry from Christianity's traditional vision of peace and salvation. Indeed, Yeats is basically claiming that the Second Coming will embroil the world in a bloody, apocalyptic event. In the face of the unprecedented chaos and violence of Yeats' day, such a grim assertion would have made sense, as it must have seemed as if the world was ending.

Why does Atticus visit the Radley house?

In Chapter Eight, Atticus visits the Radley house to offer his condolences to the Radley family after Mrs. Radley passes away.

Although Jem and Scout both think that Mrs. Radley died at the hands of Boo Radley, Atticus dispossesses them of this entertaining theory. He tells the children that Mrs. Radley died of natural causes. When she was alive, Mrs. Radley seldom appeared in public; she was only seen when she came out to water her flowers.

Despite Atticus' words, Jem and Scout are still curious about a particular member of the Radley family. They proceed to ask their father the one question that is uppermost in their minds: Did Atticus see Boo Radley when he went to pay his respects at the Radley home? Atticus answers in the negative, however, and this disappoints the siblings.

Although Scout is tempted to ask Atticus to clarify his statement, Jem discourages her from doing so. He thinks that it's wise not to antagonize their father. After all, Atticus may possibly suspect that they weren't actually playing strip poker near Miss Rachel's fish-pool on that fateful night Mr. Radley shot off his gun in his collard patch. Jem doesn't want Atticus to discover that he, Dill, and Scout were on the Radley property trying to get a glimpse of Boo that night.

Does density affect the evaporation rate of a liquid?

Density does affect the rate of evaporation. Liquids with a higher density have a lower rate of evaporation. This means that honey will have a lower rate of evaporation as compared to water, which will have a lower rate of evaporation as compared to alcohol. This is because honey is more dense than water, and water is more dense than alcohol.

One way to think about how density affects the rate of evaporation is to consider the relationship between density and intermolecular forces. Denser substances have higher intermolecular forces, which causes molecules to be closer to each other. This means that more heat needs to be supplied to overcome these strong intermolecular forces. Hence the rate of evaporation is slow for denser materials as compared to less dense materials. 

Apart from density, other features such as the molar mass also impact the rate of evaporation.

Hope this helps. 

What do you see as some important pros and cons of both primary and secondary research?

Primary research can be a very good way of getting information, but you have to be careful. The first potential problem applies to translated texts; translators always put some of themselves in the works they do by translating certain words or phrases in their own way, which can change the meaning of the work drastically. But you also have to be wary of the original author's bias, so even the original language is risky. Reading a primary work allows you to make your own conclusions, to read between the lines to try to figure out what the author and/or translator meant; that is very helpful because you know you'll get exactly what you're looking for without it being affected by the input or bias of someone else. Primary sources can be exhausting because you have to take everything they say with a grain of salt; you have to question everything they write, think about why they wrote what they did. And yet they are the purest form of information.

Secondary research can be easier to read, and it makes less work for you because someone else has already gone through the painstaking effort of analyzing the primary source. It is also a good way to back up your own claims because it shows that someone else agrees with you. However, it can be difficult to find secondary sources on exact topics, particularly if you are researching something very specific. You also have to worry about yet another layer of potential bias that you have to take into account.

Overall, I have always preferred primary sources because they are the least removed from whatever you are studying, the closest you will get to an eyewitness account. I tend to come up with my own claims based on my primary research, and then do the secondary research to find others to back up my opinions. But you can also do it the other way around.

Who are Romeo and Juliet?

Romeo and Juliet, the titular characters of William Shakespeare's play, are the children of two wealthy families of Renaissance Verona. Though they are only in their teenage years, these two are considered full adults and both are expected, by their parents, to be married soon. 

Romeo is a very introspective and dramatic young man. He is, "in love with love," or wishes to be in love. Early in the play, we learn that he is infatuated with a girl called Rosaline. Nonetheless, he falls in love with Juliet upon sight. Perhaps his wish is really to appear to be in love without genuinely establishing a relationship with someone.

Juliet is a little naive, having little social experience outside her own family. Over the course of the play, she grows more sure of herself, but her desire to be with Romeo leads her to making hasty decisions.

The most important thing to know about Romeo and Juliet as characters is that they are the only children of two feuding families. They are expected to be sworn enemies, but they fall in love before ever learning one another's names. This is what makes their relationship so difficult- they can never tell their families that they are in love with the enemy! This conflict drives the play and ultimately leads to the two lovers taking their own lives.

Is wood a compound, element, or mixture?

A material can be classified as either an element, compound or mixture. An element is composed of identical atoms bound together. A compound is composed of two or more elements in a certain ratio and can be broken into individual elements by breaking the bonds between them. Mixtures contain two or more elements in non-specific ratios and can be easily separated into individual elements.

Wood is composed of a number of compounds such as lignin, cellulose, water, hemicellulose, etc. The relative composition of wood varies from plant to plant. Unlike a compound, wood does not have a fixed chemical formula. Hence, wood is a mixture. In fact, wood is a heterogeneous mixture, since these constituent compounds are mixed unevenly in a given wood sample.

Hope this helps. 

What historical, philosophical and religious paradigms influenced T.S. Eliot to write "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock?

"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T. S. Eliot was first published in June 1915 issue of Poetry magazine. Although the narrative is that of a middle-aged man worried about whether he should begin an affair with a woman, it responds more generally to what Eliot would have considered the problems of the modern, secular world.

Prufrock is not just an individual adrift, but rather emblematic of a period and generation. He is a moderately wealthy and successful member of the upper middle classes who is imbued with the social conventions of his time and period, and is inordinately concerned about how he appears to others. His obsession with how he appears and how people react to him signal the absence of an internal compass. He seems to care about conventions but to lack certain values. Politeness has become a substitute for morality. 

Several great certainties had been undermined. First, the social class system was shifting, leaving class identity uncertain and the bourgeois in particular undermined by Marxism, no longer secure and assured in their position. Next, Darwin had undermined the notion of humanity as somehow special and separate from nature. Freud had undermined the notion that we can know our own motives and desires, suggesting instead that much of our acts and beliefs are grounded in the unconscious mind. Higher Criticism had undermined the old certainties of religion. 

As modernity undermined the great certainties of the Victorian age, Eliot worried that it has not created anything that could substitute for them. The manners which were once grounded in a complete belief system seem to Eliot to have lost their ideological grounds and become empty and the people like Prufrock without purpose. Prufrock states:

I am no prophet — and here’s no great matter;

I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,

And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker,

And in short, I was afraid.

In other words, the lack of grand, prophetic certainties leaves people adrift and afraid. For Eliot, the eventual answer to this was a return to the Anglican Church and literary tradition. 

In Cofer's "American History," what is Mr. Depalma's way of having kids exercise?

Elena is the protagonist in Cofer's short story "American History." Her Physical Education teacher is Mr. DePalma at Public School Number 13 in Paterson, New Jersey in 1963. The majority of the students are African American and they enjoy playing double-dutch jump rope or basketball. The majority of the female students would rather jump rope, so that includes Elena. Since double-dutch jump rope requires the use of two ropes being twirled in opposite directions while one or more jumpers maneuver in between them, it requires a lot of energy and strength.

The setting takes place in November, so it is very cold outside. Mr. DePalma doesn't seem to care about the students being out in the cold, though, because he makes them "keep moving" by requiring them to play outside while he stays warm in the school building. He says that he will "keep an eye" on the students in order to motivate them to exercise continually, but Elena doesn't seem to see him from her place outside.

In the Cyclopes, how many men go ashore with Odysseus?

In Book 9 of the Odyssey, protagonist Odysseus relates to the Phaeacians his encounter with Polyphemus the Cyclops. He took twelve men ashore with him to the land of the Cyclopes and told the rest to remain on the boat. As he relates to his listeners:

"I told my men to draw the ship ashore, and stay where they were, all but the twelve best among them, who were to go along with myself.

Polyphemus discovers Odysseus and his men hiding in his cave; he eats two of them and imprisons the rest. Odysseus uses cunning to intoxicate Polyphemus with wine and then stab him in the eye, rendering him blind. Moreover, Odysseus tells Polyphemus his name is "Nobody," so the giant's neighbors are not alarmed when he yells "Nobody is killing me!"

Odysseus and his men escape on their ship, but Odysseus' pride gets the best of him. As he leaves, he tells Polyphemus his real name. Polyphemus tells his father--the god Poseidon--how Odysseus treated him, and the god responds by shipwrecking Odysseus.

In Macbeth, what are the three prophecies from the witches?

In Macbeth, the witches offer three prophecies to Macbeth at the beginning of the play.  In Act 1 Scene 3, Macbeth and Banquo are returning from battle, and they meet the three witches on the road.  The witches tell Macbeth that 1) he is the Thane of Glamis, 2) he will be the Thane of Cawdor, and 3) he will be king hereafter.  Technically, however, the witches give four prophecies because they also offer Banquo a prophecy.  They tell Banquo that he will be lesser than Macbeth but greater, and that although he will not be king, he will be father to a line of kings.  Both Macbeth and Banquo leave the witches joking about the prophecies because they do not put great stock in those events coming true—but later as the prophecies start to come true, they reassess their position.

I need two quotes that are significant from chapter 9 of "Lord of the Flies" and can you please give me an explanation for them?

The main things that happen in chapter 9 are Simon's death and Jack's emergence as a leader. The first quote is the boy’s chant of "Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood! Do him in!" The boys are yielding to their baser instinct of savagery and when Simon stumbles into the center of the horseshoe arrangement he conveniently becomes the beast and is murdered. We are told that he was on his knees with his arms folded over his face. The second quote is when Jack says "We shan't hear it" in reference to Ralph's blowing the conch. Jack is refusing to acknowledge the conch as a symbol of authority and is challenging Ralph to leadership of the clan of boys.