10 Tips About How to Write a Caption

10 Tips About How to Write a Caption 10 Tips About How to Write a Caption 10 Tips About How to Write a Caption By Mark Nichol If you contribute to production of a print or online publication that includes photographs or illustrations, you’re likely, at some point, to write captions. Here’s some advice about how to write good ones. 1. Caption copy must match the tone of the running text (the general written content, as opposed to display type such as headlines and captions). Determine whether captions should be formal or informal, or serious or humorous, or whether the tone can vary depending on circumstances. 2. Caption format will depend on various factors. Portraits (often referred to as headshots), or images of places or products can simply be captioned with a name: â€Å"John Smith,† for example, or â€Å"Deluxe Dual-Purpose Widget,† without terminal punctuation. (If the product caption is a description rather than an official product name, capitalize only the first word and proper names.) Captions for photos or other images showing events or occurrences can consist of incomplete sentences (â€Å"Taking the Inchworm personal-transportation device for a test drive†), but it’s generally better to use one or more complete sentences. (â€Å"John Smith takes the Inchworm personal-transportation device for a test drive.†) Avoid eliding words, as in â€Å"John Smith takes Inchworm personal-transportation device for test drive†; write the caption as if you were speaking it aloud, not as if you were writing a headline or dictating a telegram. Some publications use a lead-in phrase to establish the caption; these are either straightforward or may be conceptual and might be humorous and/or alliterative as well. They are often formatted in boldface and followed by a colon, and they generally are capitalized like headlines. (â€Å"Wiggle Wagon: John Smith takes the Inchworm personal-transportation device for a test drive.†) 3. A brief article can be formatted as a caption; it’s best to distinguish such special features with a box around the photo and caption and/or a different font treatment. (A headline is optional.) The extent of the block of type shouldn’t be less than the space taken up by the photo, and the caption should be broken up into paragraphs if it’s more than a few lines long, and perhaps divided into columns if the image is more than one column wide. 4. Use context to determine how thoroughly to identify photographic subjects. Because a person, place, or thing shown in a photo is almost invariably identified in accompanying running text, titles, affiliations, and other additional information, for example, are rarely required in captions. Subsequent photos of the same subject can be simplified (as when a person’s full name is used only in the first of several captions for photos featuring that person). 5. Avoid replicating content from the running text in a caption. The caption should allude to the running text’s topic, but the specific wording should at most paraphrase the running text. 6. Captions should not use judgmental or facetious language or make assumptions about, for example, a subject’s state of mind. (Of course, a publication that features humorous or satirical content is an exception.) 7. If more than one person is featured in the photo, use directional or other targeting terms (for example, â€Å"left,† â€Å"standing,† or â€Å"holding aardvark†) only if the distinction between the photo’s subjects is not obvious. If you must use such wording, be consistent about style and format. Here are some alternatives (the first of which trusts readers to assume left-to-right orientation): â€Å"Security guards Winken, Blinken, and Nod stand watch.† â€Å"Security guards Winken (left), Blinken, and Nod stand watch.† â€Å"Security guards Winken, left, Blinken, and Nod stand watch.† â€Å"Security guards (from left) Winken, Blinken, and Nod stand watch.† â€Å"Security guards (left to right) Winken, Blinken, and Nod stand watch.† 8. Avoid tired terminology. If, in a photo accompanying an article about a cash donation, a person is pictured pointing at an oversized mockup of a check, don’t write, â€Å"Charity Goodheart gestures at a giant check as Greedco chairman Rich Moneybags looks on.† (And ask yourself why your company or organization is publishing such a tired visual clichà © in the first place.) Simply write, â€Å"Charity Goodheart acknowledges a donation from Greedco chairman Rich Moneybags.† 9. Fact-check all quantitative information such as spelling, names (of people, places, and things) and titles, and data, and double-check that you describe action or procedures accurately. 10. Don’t forget to include credits, and be consistent in style and format. Acknowledge the photographer or stock-photography source with the name alone; there’s no need to write â€Å"photo by† or the like. (However, if a photo is provided without charge by another source, credit, for example, â€Å"Courtesy Lookatthis.com.†) Distinguish the credit from the caption by using another font or point size and/or placing it vertically along the right-hand edge of the image. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Freelance Writing category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:When to Use â€Å"That,† â€Å"Which,† and â€Å"Who†Driver License vs. Driver’s License150 Foreign Expressions to Inspire You

Corporations and its affect on the world Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Corporations and its affect on the world - Essay Example Democracy, in its turn, is an ideal medium for the development and growth of businesses and corporations. Democracy and capitalism, in this sense, are the systems that consciously and lawfully encourage and allow so-called â€Å"free market† and â€Å"market competition† where the strongest wins. The strongest now means the richest. Those, who have got their influential and powerful positions in the global marketplace, will never let anyone new in. They play in democracy and in competition. They are more likely to agree on each one’s market share, than to share the market with one more pretender to wealth. As for the overall concept of democracy, it is the system which is supposed to provide each citizen with an opportunity to influence the politics of the country and take part in the legislative practice of the state. On practice, however, we have a system which imposes the will of the elite to the general public, making people think the way they are supposed to think. With the help of the media the strong of the world can influence people’s thinking and opinions. As a result, we get a nation that is taught to believe in its government and not to question the government’s decisions. According to the research conducted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (Huang and Stone), nowadays the largest income concentrates in hands of 0.1% of income receivers. Inequality between high- and middle-income Americans has been rising since 1990. The tax returns data of 1917-2004 shows a U-shaped trend in the percentage of income received by the top 10% of income recipients (Burtless and Haskins 497). In 2005 the rich got 18% of the nation’s income (Colson). Consequently, the rates of economic and, as a result, political inequality reinforce each other and compromise democracy (Jencks). Furthermore, the richest Americans not only avoid high taxation, but enjoy an enormous political influence in

Philosophy class Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Philosophy class - Essay Example This foundational belief is no other than the cogito, i.e. the â€Å"I†. But how does Descartes arrive at the cogito? On what grounds is Descartes certain that this â€Å"I†, which he claims to be the foundation of all his knowledge, is invulnerable from any deceiver? These are the questions that I shall systematically address throughout this essay. Let me begin with Descartes’ vision. Descartes had a vision, a plan to establish a unified physical science wherein all sciences would form into one systematic whole. This unified science was, for Descartes, a rationalistic one. For, it ought to be based on the methods and principles of mathematics. Why mathematics? For mathematics is the only reliable means for arriving at genuine knowledge of reality, i.e. truth. Indeed, truth was Descartes’ passion. He sought to find this truth even if it means overthrowing all his existing beliefs. For, he realized that all his ideas were doubtful and all his beliefs are fa lse. Of course, how can one claim to have knowledge if the very foundations for my knowledge are either doubtful or false? It is in this regard that he decided to overthrow all these existing beliefs and ideas and use only reason as his sole basis for establishing a permanent truth. Herein, mathematics was Descartes solution. He will use mathematics as his model for his use of reason, in achieving absolute certainty. What is so special about the methods of mathematics? Mathematics uses two principal mental operations: intuition and deduction. It is in this regard that Descartes’ goal as a philosopher is to build a system of philosophy based on intuition and deduction. For, his ultimate goal was to do a total reconstruction of human knowledge. He was determined to find his self-evident or foundational principle, which will serve as his first principle, from which absolutely certainty can be deduced. But what are the requirements for such a foundational belief? First, it has to be clear and distinct insofar that it cannot be doubted. Second, It should be absolute and independent, and should not be based on any other belief. And third, it should be something that exists. So given these said requirements, how then will Descartes establish his foundational belief? Descartes will use the method of doubt, which he terms methodological skepticism. He defines this as the use of doubt methodologically, in order to arrive at true knowledge (Lavine, 1984). So, in doubting all his beliefs and ideas, he classifies then into categories, starting with his beliefs on sense perception. Why? Descartes says that these are by nature, deceptive, and that we cannot tell whether we are dreaming or not. Next, he doubted his beliefs in material objects. Why? For material objects and the physical world are based upon sense perception, which we have established to be deceptive. Third are his beliefs on natural sciences. Why? For it uses objects that are based on sense perception, which we have already established to be deceptive and thus untrustworthy. And fourth, Descartes surprisingly doubted his belief in mathematics. Herein, he invented a malevolent demon that conditions his mind and deceives him with his mathematical ideas. For, even if mathematics is his sole basis for clear and distinct ideas, he sometimes falls into error. One may wonder, why does he have to create a demon to doubt his belief in mathematics? Mathematics was just one of Descartes’ reasons for inventing this demon. For, he uses this

Murals of Mexico Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Murals of Mexico - Essay Example It is also after the Mexican revolution that a group of Mexican muralist formed an art movement known as the Mexican Muralism. The Mexican Muralism which I earlier told you about began in the period around the 1920s and it only lasted for approximately 2 decades before the Mexican mural could be taken over by the modern mural artists. It is through these murals in this museum and in other buildings out there that our lovely country-Mexico enhanced its image globally especially in the developed world where most of the renowned Mexican muralists paid a visit and exhibited their artistic potential. Certainly, these murals bring about revolutionary themes to the mind of people whenever you came across them. The murals were also important tools of championing the social cause of the oppressed in the society. They expressed strong post revolutionary statements and positions at personal, social, artistic and political levels considering that the artists used the murals to express their opinions, beliefs, and position in relation to a particular issue at hand. These murals were also used for upholding the Mexican culture and religious stance considering that they tell stories about the gods, significant ceremonies as well as scenes experienced in the early life of the Mexicans. One of the greatest mural works in the Museum of Modern Art involves Diego Rivera frescos of the Agrarian Leader Zapata. Diego Rivera is renowned for transforming the Mexican art industry and his work on the Emiliano Zapata was an exceptional masterpiece.

The United States Presidential Election Essay Example for Free

The United States Presidential Election Essay The recent victory of Barack Obama in the United States Presidential Election of 2008 is one of the biggest issues among many other big events that have occurred in America this year. Early on, even during the presidential primaries, the topic of whether or not then Presidential candidate Obama would be influential enough to win the electoral vote was an issue. It was undoubted that the Democratic Party enjoyed the support of the popular vote yet the bigger was issue was whether or not they would be able to gain enough of the Electoral College votes. The events and debates leading up to the election have also brought about a controversial election topic which is that of Electoral College reform. This brief discourse shall tackle the issue of Electoral College Reform and whether or not a different method for the selection of the United States president should be used. To arrive at a better understanding of the issue, it is important to first discuss the pros and cons of the current system. As such, there will be a discussion into the historical antecedents and the impact of such electoral changes. Finally, this discourse will highlight the reasons why the method used by Maine and Nebraska is more effective. Electoral College Reform In 1888, the election of Benjamin Harrison was controversial because for the first time in American History the winner of the Electoral College lost the popular vote. This raised a lot of questions because it was thought to symbolize the lack of support for the President by the American public. It would also mean that the mandate of the public was not for the President and it would make it very difficult to pass reforms and laws. This is because the United States has a democratic government. It must be remembered that a democratic system is often mistakenly characterized as the rule of the majority (Davenport 380). While there is usually a large group of middle class individuals that comprise this democratic system, it does not necessarily mean that the majority rule. This only means that the majority usually elects the representative to office but the hallmark of any democracy is still the protection of the rights of the minority. As such, the system of Electoral College ensures that while the majority may influence the outcome of an election it also makes sure the people are able to freely select their representation at all levels, most especially at the level of the presidency. Most recently, the issue of Electoral College Reform once again made the headlines as President George W. Bush narrowly won the electoral vote but had lost the popular vote. This victory raised a lot of questions and even the former Senator Hillary Clinton called for a constitutional amendment that would allow for the selection of the President to be through popular vote and not the electoral vote. It is clear that this measure did not pass yet it certainly did bring to the consciousness of the public the necessity of reviewing the issue of Electoral College Reform. Pros and Cons It stands to reason why such a system, which has been in place for so long and been the reason for the election of several Presidents, should be replaced with an antiquated election style. In order to arrive at a better understanding of the issue, it is important to first discuss the concerns of the Electoral College system. This is with the goal of proving that there is a need for Electoral College Reform and the adoption of the Congressional District method which is being used in Maine and Nebraska. The first reason is that it is argued that the system of Electoral College Reform does not accurately reflect the sentiment of the public. This is because as the examples in the recent elections have shown an individual can still be declared as the President of the United States even if he or she does not have the support of the majority or the popular vote. Under the Electoral College system, as long as the candidate enjoys the support of the States with the heaviest weight, he is virtually assured of victory. This is because of the fact that the framers of the Constitution sought for equality in representation and wanted to ensure that the voters in the sparsely populated states would have more weight as compared to those in the more densely populated states. This was done to ensure that those in smaller states would be able to be heard and have representation. This was also done to ensure that the majority would not overwhelm the minority. Another peculiar aspect of the Electoral System is that a candidate can win the election if he so happens to accumulate wins in many states that are relatively small in size even if his opponent is able to get larger wins in smaller states. The reason for this is that the Electoral System also features the â€Å"winner take all† system which rules that the proportion of the electoral vote often bears little resemblance to the popular vote. The winner take alls system also creates a few problems because the smaller number of electoral votes creates a discrepancy with the amount of random round offs which has been stated as an error. The presence of this error is also problematic because most studies have shown that it reduces voter turn out in areas and states where there are dominant parties. Seeing that they are not able to swing the vote either way, certain voters do not even attempt to exercise their right to vote for fear that it will all be for naught because of the numbers involved. Being the minority party in the state, they are aware that if their state uses the Electoral College System they will be unable to sway the outcome of the election either way. This is the reason why there is a voter apathy problem in most of these states. Perhaps the main problem with the Electoral College arises from the fact that in case there is no candidate who gets the majority of the electoral votes, it falls upon the House of Representatives to settle the issue. From this point alone, it is clear that there are several ramifications from such a method. The first is that the results of the election will not matter in any case because it will be the House of Representatives that will determine the winner. This may also be interpreted as a situation wherein the party which is able to get the most number of seats in Congress will decidedly determine the outcome of the election. The resulting partisan battle is no longer representative of the will of the public but rather the will of a representation that does not effectively carry the approval of the majority of the voting public. The second reason is because it often results in horse trading in order to determine the next President of the United States. Since the House of Representatives is composed of several congressmen, it boils down to trading votes for concessions when determining the leadership of the country. This totally disregards the electoral process and in a way can be construed as frustrating the will of the voting public. As such, the entire electoral process boils down to which side is able to gain more support for their candidate and which candidate is able to give more concessions to the parties. This is similar to events that transpired in 1824 and 1876. The leadership of a country boils down to tax measures and funding instead of what it is really supposed to be about, the will of the voting public. This system also creates another problem by limiting the choices of the public. Since it has been determined that the party which has a better network generally wins, the Electoral System leaves out the alternative parties such as the liberals. In the past elections, it has been shown that it is only the Republican or the Democratic Party that is able to field the candidates. While the liberal party has shown more strength, the realistic candidates are generally from the two party systems which in effect limit the choices of the voting public. One of the other problems in an Electoral College comes from the fact that there is a necessity for primary elections. This means that the long drawn out process of Elections is really simply just a process that was already more or less decided when the primaries were cast. As the recent elections have shown, when there are primary elections it already becomes clear where the popular votes are and where the electoral strengths are. This also results in a frustration in the vote and the will of the electorate because having the primaries means that in most cases the votes of the last states does not really matter, except when it is a really close election but in most cases this is not often the case. The reason for this is that the results of the elections have been decided because most of the candidates have conceded even before all the votes have been cast due to the projections of certain candidates having insurmountable lead. The end impact of all of these negative aspects is quite simple. It means that the electoral process is frustrated and the right of the voters to be heard and make a difference with their vote is disregarded. This is based on the fact that when the electoral process is determined before it is over it sends the signal that the vote of those who have not voted is no longer necessary in determining the results. This may, in the long run, lead to voter apathy and lack of support from certain states. From the point of view of the electoral process, it is not a real electoral process because it does not allow for the real sentiments of the public to be reflected. Through the electoral process, the foundations of a democratic system become all the more evident. The right of the people to vote and to choose who they will elect as president is one of the important foundations of a representative democratic system (Lijphart 139). Without these foundations in place, there would be no way to ensure that the rights of the people are protected. The right to select a representative ensures that everyone has a chance to be heard. In the wise words of Abraham Lincoln, Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Final Solutions by Benjamin Valentino

Final Solutions by Benjamin Valentino This research paper discusses the main problem of â€Å"Final Solutions† by Benjamin Valentino. It also considers theories of mass killing origin. The stimulus for mass killing usually initiates from a relatively little groupings of forceful leaders and is often realized without any approval of society. When the average American is asked to name the conventional reasons for genocide and mass killing he is certain to indicate ethnic enmity or accuse the contradictory society. But in Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century (Cornell University Press), author Benjamin A. Valentino claims that ethnic harassment and the dysfunction of out society are unequal elucidation. Though Valentino considers these elements as factors, he notices that pervasive intentional cruelty is typically stimulated by small minorities of military or political leaders, their intentions and plans are realized without the approval of the community. There is something strangely tender about Benjamin Valentino’s book, on the wholly distenderless topic of genocide and mass killing in the twentieth century. If the Valentino is right about the crucial role of relatively small ethnic or military groupings in the cruelest offences of the twentieth century, then genocide/mass killing may appear not to be the secret it would seem. And if its nature can be seen in lucid terms that refer to a wide range of examples, then maybe something can be carried out to avert it. This is, first of all, the real aim of all genocide scientists. By the way, they care about the pragmatic consequences of their work in stopping the killing as they are with its purely scientific value (Miller). Summing up all phenomena connected with human activity especially genocide all over the world in the twentieth and nineteenth century – one can surely feel blue and disappointed. Though in a sarcastic manner, Valentino has evaded this partially by incl uding in his work what he calls mass killing, or the intentional killing of a massive number of noncombatants (Valentino). You are surely interested how massive these killings are? Here Valentino gives the definite figure of at least fifty thousand intentional deaths over the course of five or fewer years, though if his theory is proved to work, he claims, this figure should reduce as well (Valentino). The main point is not in definite number (and one of the cunnings of the UN’s Genocide Convention is that it does not require any researches revealed in specific numbers on a genocide studying). The main point is to understand how the mass killing of guiltless, defenseless people becomes the policy of some states. Valentino is surely not the only scientist who researches the causes of genocide/mass killing origin. His profound studying, nevertheless, allows him to make some rather well-reasoned and sensible refutation of earlier explanations such as social segmentation and raw governmental power. Opposing the plural society theory that Leo Kuper and others have suggested to explain genocide, for instance, he shows us that in Cambodia trespassers and sufferers belong to the same social and ethnic layers, and that many sufferers, actually, referred to dominant ethnic groups (Valentino). Similarly, Valentino catches reader’s attention by describing such examples as French behaviou in Algeria to refute the mind that genocide/mass killing depends on government. He appoints that democracy stimulates and gives a push to violence. He is also uncertain of scapegoating as the main motivating reason, quoting Michael Mann’s recent research of Holocaust offenders as evidence that private comp laints were rarely necessary to sketch behavior. Considering these researches, Valentino says they have strong intuitive appeal they are simply too common to serve as accurate indicators of this relatively rare kind of violence (Valentino). The author next opposes another overall presumption concerning the reason of genocide/mass killing: that it is sought after and supported by the major part of the society. Most scientists, I believe, won’t argue with the author in the chapter The Perpetrators and the Public,(Valentino) which views such classic works in this area as Christopher Browning’s â€Å"Ordinary Men†(compared very graciously with Daniel Goldhagen’s critically different consequences for the same grouping of men); the despotic individualism experiments of psychologists Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo; and explores of what makes warriors readily risk their lives for things that don’t influence them in a direct way (Miller). Valentino as sumes that the course of mass killing lies in situational elements and the plans of relatively small but forceful groups, but not in wide public backing and deep-seated ideological odium. This is well proved by the chapter’s variable number of evidences. Actually, this chapter could be titled as a representation of the wide range of scientists theories about the question what makes people kill. But the main question is why people kill each other. In order to answer this, during the left three quarters of the book, the author provides thorough studying of the specific situations, goals, and conditions that lead political and/or military leaders to embark upon a policy of genocide/mass killing (Valentino). In chapter three, the author, defines six main courses of mass killing and genocide: communist, ethnic, territorial, counterguerrilla, terrorist, and imperialist (Miller). Considering communist, ethnic, and counterguerrilla mass murdering as the most dominant and fatal, his work then dedicates chapter to each reason. Moreover, as regards the common examples of ethnic genocide such as Armenia, the Holocaust, and Rwanda. Valentino devotes the whole chapter to the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia, as well as the guerrillas’ mass murders in Guatemala and Afghanistan. In addition to this, in order to give profound reasoning, he finishes every chapter by studying duties t hat were much less cruel and never turned into genocidal such as Cuba, South Africa, and the Philippines during its counter revolt against the Huk rebellion of 1947-1953 (Miller). The outcome of all these examples, some of which could make up deserving abstracts for university or school teaching, is that, with the exclusion of Cambodia, genocide/mass killing is rarely a policy of first resort (Valentino). It is better to say that it is a deliberate and expedient strategy chosen to reach a definite goal. The Fascists made several attempts to vanish Jews from their captured territories, including compulsory emigration and deportation. In some time this methods were substituted by extirpation. The famous soviet ruler Stalin released the famine in Ukrainian. He did it by keeping to the policy of agricultural collectivization. And the author describes a parallel process with reference to the Guatemalan regime’s increasing violence against its village people considering the villag es population rising for the riot. The average reader is not familiar with Guatemalan example, but historians claim and approve the accuracy of the stated events. The main point of the book is that the leaders exploit genocide/mass killing in order to achieve their political or ethnical goals. Valentino contends that, assassinating innocent people in wide numbers is clarified as a tactical step based on a lucid vision of the end outcome. Indeed, Valentino leads us beyond the limits of what prompts people to kill other people, to the more important question of what moves their leaders to command them to act this way. It is an insuperable, profound and, of course, significant argument. Nevertheless, like most arguments it assumes some examples that cannot be brought into correlation with the author’s six motivational range. View, for instance, the often fatal behavior of the soldiers who act in accordance with the command of Bosnian Muslim Naser Ori in the Serb villages surroun ding Srebrenica. Now on trial in The Hague for war crimes, Ori was operating without the authority of the Bosnian leadership in Sarajevo and very much in response to the aggression of the Bosnian Serb army (which was receiving aid and directives not only from their civilian leadership in Pale, but from Belgrade itself) (Miller). Valentino may contradict that Ori’s deeds, as those of similar insurgents will never achieve the level of mass killing that is appropriate in their opinion. Moreover these rebels act only in accordance with their leader policy and views. They did, nevertheless, intimidate the Bosnian Serb people near Srebrenica. Similarly, the Guatemalan villagers intimidated by their own authorities. And despite that the Bosnian Serbs certainly did not need any additional motivation for their clearly conceived program of ethnic cleansing and genocide, Ori’s actions were, we know now, on their minds when they entered Srebrenica in July 2005 (Miller). Valentino’s research is not limited by the seven motives definition, it goes deeper. It does, nevertheless, point out that profound and deep reasons such as vengeance or simply terror, can also stir up cases of genocide/mass killing, especially when a current government is absent or does not have the real power. I have mentioned this because Valentino’s proofs can sometimes seem abundantly positive in effort to describe policies that forecast and avert genocide/mass killing. I understand that author tries to consider genocide not as something scheduled, but rather as the thoroughly chosen tools to reach goals that are desired for the state or certain group. Surely Valentino’s work is based on the investigation of others. Though his sources belong to scientific ones and his work is fully footnoted, his conclusions are based on impressive mixture of investigations that were carried out during the past half century, but not on any original reviews, original works, o r other investigation programs. For instance in chapter three he considers some rather intuitional causes that make genocide/mass killing more likely, including: the higher the priority that communist leaders assign to the radical transformation of society; the more rapidly ethnic cleansing is carried out; and the greater the physical capabilities for mass killing possessed by the perpetrators (Valentino). Similar example can be referred to the author’s believe the Holocaust was unique because each of the millions of lives it extinguished was unique, never to lived again â€Å"(Valentino). I cannot agree with this statement because every person in our world is unique. And one will not become unique only for the reason of being killed during the Holocaust. According to Nazi world view the Jews belonged to the lowest group of the human rung hierarchy. Actually the Hitler’s ideology regarding conceived of Jewish people was carried through the ages. Fascists were afraid o f their Aryan blood being contaminated. Valentino’s book has prospered in providing readers not only with a reasonable interpretation for genocide/mass killing, but also with many valuable proposals for what we should do to prevent it. Benjamin A. Valentino thinks that ethnic enmity or harassment, anti-democratic policy of government in community do not influence mass killing and genocide that is generally accepted. He affirms that the stimulus for mass killing usually initiates from a relatively little groupings of forceful leaders and is often realized without any approval of society. Mass killing, to the author’s mind, is a savage political or martial plan worked out to achieve leaders most significant goals. Leaders use this technique to overcome menace to their power, and resolve their most complicated problems. Valentino does not confine his research to mass killing aimed against ethnic groups. He characterizes mass killing as the intentional killing of 50,000 or more innocent people during five years. The book concentrates on three kinds of mass killing: communist mass killings like the ones carried out in the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia; ethnic genocides as in Armenia, Nazi Germany, and Rwanda; and counter-guerrilla campaigns including the brutal civil war in Guatemala and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (Miller). Valentino finishes the book by disputing that attempts to prevent mass killing should be aimed on disarmament and shifting from governing the leaders and small groups in charge of initiating and arranging the killing. As for me the main conclusion of this book has been the clear gospel truth in all times. The problem that I consider the main – is contradiction of society. There will always be those leaders, and small groups that are aimed to reach their personal goals. But these leaders are the children of society. But on the other hand people need somebody to manage them, that is why they agree to all leaders requirements. All in all, Valentino has r aised a very important problem that alarms people all over the world. The author sets very vivid and arresting examples that simply catch your attention. But one thing I can say with certain that this book was not written for the average reader. To develop one’s reasonable mind on this book one should be good at history, sociology and psychology. Bibliography Miller, P. â€Å"Final Solutions.† H-Genocide 14.09 (2005): 34-38 Valentino, Benjamin. Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20-th Century. Cornwell University Press, 2004.

The Solitaire Metaphor in John Steinbecks Of Mice and Men :: Steinbeck Of Mice and Men Essays

The Solitaire Metaphor in Of Mice and Men In Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, George Milton is shown many times playing the game of Solitaire, a card game which requires only one man and a pack of playing cards. His companion, Lennie Small is never asked to play cards or other games because George knows emphatically that Lennie is incapable of such a mental task. Although Lennie and George are companions, George has the idea of being "solitaire" to be no longer burdened by Lennie's company. Solitaire, meaning alone, is a metaphor for the loneliness that many of the characters feel in the novel. John Steinbeck shows in Of Mice and Men, that all human beings are essentially alone. "I ain't got no people. I seen the guys that go around on the ranches alone. That ain't no good. They don't have no fun. After a long time they get mean. They get wantin' to fight all the time... 'Course Lennie's a God damn nuisance most of the time, but you get used to goin' around with a guy an' you can't get rid of him" (45). George proclaims his view on loneliness to give a reason for his connection with Lennie. This connection George has with Lennie makes the two of them unique to the rest of the characters. Many of the men on the ranch have a dream, but only Lennie and George have a chance of obtaining it. Essentially, John Steinbeck wants to show that although George and Lennie have the advantage of being a team, they will never accomplish it because all human beings are in essence, alone. Thus, George's constant playing of the game of solitaire foreshadows his eventual decision to become a solitary man. John Steinbeck demonstrates loneliness of Crooks, the black handicap. He has a strong difference from the rest of the crew, as he must live in a separate room from the rest of the workers. He attempts to explain this to Lennie, "S'pose you didn't have nobody. S'pose you couldn't go into the bunk house and play rummy 'cause you was black. How'd you like that? S'pose you had to sit out here an' read books.