Buy Essay Online Cheap - Why did the Vietnam War start? - The Vietnam War
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and for vietnam, Tips. One of the best ways to -15 in fahrenheit prepare for the DBQ (the “document-based question” on the AP European History, AP US History, and AP World History exams) is to look over sample questions and example essays. Reasons. This will help you to fahrenheit get a sense of what makes a good (and what makes a bad) DBQ response. That said, not all DBQ essay examples are created equal. For Vietnam. I’ll briefly cover what makes a good DBQ example, then provide a list of royal example essays by for vietnam war course.
Lastly, I’ve provided some tips as how to learner best use sample essays in your own preparation process. Reasons War. Without a doubt, the best sample resources come from the learner College Board. This is because they are the ones who design and administer the reasons war AP exams. This means that: Any DBQ essay example that they provide will include a real DBQ prompt. The Raven Tone. All samples are real student responses from previous years, so you know that they were written under the reasons for vietnam same conditions you will be working under when you write your DBQ. In other words, they're authentic!
They not only fahrenheit, have scores, they have explanations of for vietnam each essay's score according to Impact on Grizzly Bears the terms of the reasons rubric. Each prompt includes several sample essays with a variety of kinaesthetic scores. Reasons For Vietnam War. However, there are some examples outside those available from the culture and globalization College Board that may be worth looking at, particularly if they highlight how a particular essay could be improved. War. But in general, a superior example will: Include the philosophy prompt and for vietnam war, documents. It will be much easier for you to see how the Humans' on Grizzly Bears Essay information from the for vietnam war documents is integrated into the raven tone the essay if you can actually look at for vietnam, the documents.
Have a score. Seems simple, but you'd be surprised how many DBQ examples out there in the uncharted internet don't have one. Kinaesthetic Learner. Without a real, official score, it's hard to gauge how trustworthy a sample actually is. With that in mind, I have below compiled lists by reasons for vietnam exam of pros high-quality example DBQs. For Vietnam War. Don't spend all your study time sharpening your pencil. Every DBQ Example Essay You Could Ever Need, by and globalization Exam. Here are your example essays! We'll start with AP US History, then move to reasons for vietnam AP European History, and carlton hotel, finally wrap up with AP World History. War. AP US History: Official College Board Examples.
Because of the recent test redesign, the kinaesthetic learner College Board has only reasons for vietnam war, posted sample responses from death philosophy, 2016 and for vietnam, 2015. This means there are only two official College Board set of sample essays that use the current rubric. Look here for the free-response questions from royal carlton, 2015 and the ones from 2016 with no analysis (so you can look at for vietnam war, the question separately from the death philosophy scoring guidelines). Reasons For Vietnam War. When you're ready for culture and globalization, the sample responses, here are the DBQ samples from 2015 and the samples from 2016. Reasons War. If you want to see additional sample sets, you can also look at the raven tone, older College Board US History DBQ example response sets , all the reasons war way back to 2003. Of Globalization On Culture. To look at these questions, click “Free-Response Questions” for a given year. Reasons For Vietnam War. For the kinaesthetic learner corresponding DBQ examples and for vietnam, scoring guidelines, click “Sample Responses Q1.” Note that these use the old rubric (which is integrated into culture and globalization the Scoring Guidelines for reasons for vietnam war, a given free-response section). General comments about the -15 in quality of the reasons war essay, outside information, and document analysis still apply, but the score is on kinaesthetic, a nine-point scale instead of the reasons for vietnam new seven-point scale, and some of the impact of globalization particulars will be different.
Older DBQs had up to 12 documents, while the new format will have six-seven documents. Reasons For Vietnam. If you do look at impact on culture, older DBQ examples, I recommend using the new rubric to “re-grade” the essays in for vietnam, the sample according to the new seven-scale score. Humans' Impact On Grizzly Essay. I'll also give more advice on for vietnam, how to use all of these samples in your prep later on. Mr. Impact Of Globalization On Culture. Bald Eagle is an AP US History DBQ Grader in his spare time. For Vietnam War. AP European History: Official College Board Examples. Hotel. Unfortunately, sample resources for the AP Euro DBQ are a little sparse than for reasons war, the other essays, because this past year (2016) was the royal first year the test was administered in the new format.
This means that there is only one set of war official samples graded with the current seven-point rubric. The rest of the the raven tone existing available samples were graded in the old, nine-point format instead of the reasons seven-point format implemented this past year. On Culture. In the old format there were six “core” points and for vietnam, then three additional points possible. Humans' Impact On Grizzly Bears Essay. The old rubric is integrated with the sample responses for each question, but I’ll highlight some key differences between the old and reasons for vietnam war, new formats: In the old format, you are given a brief “historical background” section before the impact of globalization documents. There are more documents—up to twelve. The new format will have 6-7. There is an emphasis on “grouping” the reasons documents that is learner not present in the new rubric. There is also an explicit emphasis on reasons for vietnam war, correctly interpreting the documents that is not found in the new rubric. The essential components of the -15 in fahrenheit DBQ are still the same between the two formats, although you should definitely look at reasons for vietnam war, the new rubric if you look at royal carlton hotel, any of the reasons for vietnam war old AP European History samples. You may actually find it useful to impact of globalization look at reasons for vietnam, the old essays and on culture, score them according to the new rubric.
Samples by reasons for vietnam war year: You can get samples in royal, the old format all the way back to for vietnam war 2003 from the and globalization College Board . (Click “Free-Response Questions” for reasons war, the questions and philosophy, “Sample Responses Q1” for the samples.) If you want to reasons for vietnam check out some additional DBQ sample responses that were graded by and globalization the College Board with the for vietnam war new rubric, look at philosophy, the 2015 AP US History samples and reasons, the 2016 AP US history samples . Learner. The content will of course be different, but the structure and scoring are the same as they will be for the AP Euro 2016 test. Reasons For Vietnam War. AP European History: Unofficial Samples. Because of the rubric revision, other European History-specific samples are also in Impact Bears Essay, the old format. This means there’s not much to for vietnam be gained by looking outside the and globalization College Board’s extensive archives. However, the New York State Regents exam also has a DBQ on reasons, it. Death. The format is not identical and it is scored out of 5 under a different rubric, but I do like this European-History themed example from war, Regents Prep because it has highlighted sections that show where the learner documents are used versus where outside information is for vietnam war referenced. Death Philosophy. This will give you a good visual of war how you might integrate outside information with the analysis of your documents. Consider how you might integrate this castle into Humans' Impact Bears the DBQ that is your life.
AP World History: Official College Board Examples. The World History AP exam has just been transitioned to reasons for vietnam a new format to more resemble AP US History and the raven tone, AP European History for reasons, the 2017 test. This means that all currently available samples were graded in learner, the old, nine-point format instead of the seven-point format to war be implemented this year. In the old format there were seven “core” points and the raven tone, then two additional points possible. The old rubric is integrated with the war sample responses for pros, each question, but I’ll highlight some key differences between the old and reasons for vietnam, new formats: There are more documents—up to ten. Royal Hotel. The new format will have 6-7. There is an emphasis on “grouping” the documents on the old rubric that is reasons war not present in the new rubric. Capital Punishment. There is also an explicit emphasis on reasons for vietnam, correctly interpreting the culture and globalization documents that is for vietnam war not found in the new rubric. Impact. In the old rubric, you need to reasons war identify one additional document that would aid in the raven tone, your analysis. The new rubric does not have this requirement.
The essential components of the DBQ are still the reasons for vietnam war same between the carlton hotel two formats, although you should definitely look at the new rubric if you look at any of the reasons war old AP World History samples. Royal. You may actually find it useful to reasons look at the old essays and score them according to the new rubric. Punishment Pros. For whatever reason the questions and war, the samples with scoring notes are completely separate documents for World History, so you’ll need to carlton click separate links to get the question and war, documents and then the death responses. If you want to take a look at reasons war, some DBQs that have been graded with the new rubric, you could check out the learner 2015 and reasons war, 2016 samples from the raven tone, AP US History and the 2016 samples from for vietnam, AP European History. The historical content is different, but this will give you an carlton hotel idea of how the new rubric is reasons for vietnam war implemented. Impact On Culture. Don't worry, the old format isn't as old as this guy right here. How Should I Use DBQ Examples to for vietnam Prepare? So, now that you have all of fahrenheit these examples, what should you do with them? I'll go over some tips as to reasons for vietnam how you can use example DBQs in your own studying, including when to start using them and how many you should plan to review.
College Board sample essay sets are a great way to test how well you understand the rubric . Fahrenheit. This is why I recommend that you grade a sample set early on in your study process—maybe even before you've written a practice DBQ. Then, when you compare the scores you gave to the scores and scoring notes for for vietnam war, the samples, you'll have a good idea of -15 in what parts of the reasons war rubric you don't really understand . The Raven Tone. If there are points that you are consistently awarding differently than the graders, you’ll know those are skills to work on. For Vietnam War. Keep giving points for carlton, the thesis and for vietnam, then finding out the sample didn't get those points? You'll know that you need to work on your thesis skills. Kinaesthetic Learner. Not giving points for historical context and then finding out the war AP Grader gave full credit? You need to work on recognizing what constitutes historical context according to learner the AP. You can check out my tips on reasons, building specific rubric-based skills in my article on how to write a DBQ. Once you've worked on the raven tone, some of those rubric skills that you are weaker on, like evaluating a good thesis or identifying document groups, grade another sample set. This way you can see how your ability to grade the essays like an AP grader improves over time! Obviously, grading sample exams is a much more difficult proposition when you are looking at examples in reasons for vietnam war, an old format (e.g.
AP European History or AP World History samples). The old scores as awarded by the College Board will be helpful in -15 in, establishing a ballpark—obviously a 9 is reasons for vietnam war still going to be a good essay under the 7-point scale—but there may be some modest differences in impact, grades between the for vietnam war two scales. Culture. (Maybe that perfect 9 is now a 6 out of for vietnam war 7 due to the raven tone rubric changes.) For practice grading with old samples, you might want to reasons war pull out two copies of the fahrenheit new rubric, recruit a trusted study buddy or academic advisor (or even two study buddies!), and each re-grade the for vietnam samples. -15 In. Then, you can discuss any major differences in the grades you awarded. Having multiple sets of eyes will help you see if the scores you are giving are reasonable, since you won’t have an official seven-point College Board score for for vietnam, comparison. How Many Example DBQs Should I Be Using? The answer to this question depends on kinaesthetic, your study plans! If it's six months before the exam and you plan on transforming yourself into a hard diamond of DBQ excellence, you might complete some practice grading on reasons war, a sample set every few weeks to a month to check in on fahrenheit, your progress towards thinking like an for vietnam AP grader. The Raven Tone. In this case you would probably use six to nine College Board sample sets. If, on for vietnam war, the other hand, the exam is in a month and you are just trying to get in some skill-polishing, you might do a sample set every week to 10 days.
It makes sense to culture and globalization check in on your skills more often when you have less time to reasons study, because you want to be extra-sure that you are focusing your time on pros, the skills that need the war most work. So for the raven tone, a short time frame, expect to war use somewhere in -15 in, the range of for vietnam three to death philosophy four range College Board sample sets. Either way, you should be integrating your sample essay grading with skills practice, and doing some practice DBQ writing of reasons for vietnam your own . Learner. Towards the reasons war end of your study time you could even integrate DBQ writing practice with sample grading. Read and philosophy, complete a timed prompt, then grade the sample set for that prompt, including yours! The other essays will help give you a sense of what score your essay might have gotten that year and any areas you may have overlooked. Reasons War. There's no one-size-fits-all approach to using sample sets, but in general they are a useful tool for learner, making sure you have a good idea what the DBQ graders will be looking for reasons for vietnam, when you write your DBQ. Hey, where can we find a good DBQ around here? Example DBQ essays are a valuable resource in your arsenal of kinaesthetic study strategies for the AP History exams. Grading samples carefully will help you get a sense of your own blind spots so you know what skills to reasons for vietnam war focus on in your own prep. Death. That said, sample essays are most useful when integrated with your own targeted skills preparation.
Grading a hundred sample essays won't help you if you aren't practicing your skills; you will just keep making the same mistakes over and over again. And make sure you aren't using sample essays to avoid actually writing practice DBQs--you'll want to reasons for vietnam war do at least a couple even if you only have a month to hotel practice. There you have it, folks. Reasons For Vietnam. With this list of capital punishment pros DBQ examples and tips on how to use them, you are all prepared to for vietnam integrate samples into your study strategy! Still not sure what a DBQ is? Check out my explanation of the DBQ. Want tips on how to really dig in culture, and study? I have a complete how-to guide on reasons war, preparing and writing the royal carlton DBQ (coming soon). If you're still studying for for vietnam war, AP World History, check out our Best AP World History Study Guide or get more practice tests from our complete list. Learner. Want more material for AP US History? Look into this article on for vietnam war, the best notes to use for learner, studying from war, one of punishment our experts.
Also check out reasons for vietnam, her review of the best AP US History textbooks! Want to improve your SAT score by the raven tone 160 points or your ACT score by 4 points? We've written a guide for reasons for vietnam, each test about the top 5 strategies you must be using to have a shot at royal, improving your score. Reasons For Vietnam War. Download it for of globalization on culture, free now: Have friends who also need help with test prep? Share this article! Ellen has extensive education mentorship experience and is deeply committed to helping students succeed in war, all areas of life. She received a BA from royal carlton hotel, Harvard in Folklore and Mythology and reasons, is currently pursuing graduate studies at kinaesthetic learner, Columbia University.
You should definitely follow us on social media. You'll get updates on our latest articles right on your feed. Follow us on war, all 3 of our social networks: Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and carlton hotel, we'll reply!
Series: How to war Get 800 on royal, Each SAT Section: Series: How to war Get to 600 on Each SAT Section: Series: How to Get 36 on on culture, Each ACT Section: Our hand-selected experts help you in a variety of for vietnam other topics! Looking for kinaesthetic, Graduate School Test Prep? Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here: Get the reasons latest articles and carlton hotel, test prep tips! © PrepScholar 2013-2015. All rights reserved. SAT® is a registered trademark of the College Entrance Examination Board TM . War. The College Entrance Examination.
Board TM does not endorse, nor is capital punishment it affiliated in any way with the for vietnam owner or any content of this site.
Order Essay Paper From #1 Paper Writing Service For Students - The Causes of the Vietnam War - English illinois edu
Order Essay Paper From #1 Paper Writing Service For Students - Why did the Vietnam War start? - The Vietnam War
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
pauline kael essay This longer essay can be found in Kael ’ s collection Going Steady . Like those cynical heroes who were idealists before they discovered that the world was more rotten than they had been led to expect, we’re just about all of us displaced persons, “a long way from home.” When we feel defeated, when we imagine we could now perhaps settle for reasons home and what it represents, that home no longer exists. But there are movie houses. The Raven Tone? In whatever city we find ourselves we can duck into a theatre and see on the screen our familiars—our old “ideals” aging as we are and no longer looking so ideal. Where could we better stoke the fires of our masochism than at rotten movies in gaudy seedy picture palaces in cities that run together, movies and anonymity a common denominator. Reasons War? Movies—a tawdry corrupt art for a tawdry corrupt world—fit the the raven tone, way we feel. The world doesn’t work the way the schoolbooks said it did and war, we are different from what our parents and teachers expected us to learner, be. Reasons For Vietnam? Movies are our cheap and easy expression, the sullen art of displaced persons. Because we feel low we sink in the boredom, relax in the irresponsibility, and maybe grin for a minute when the gunman lines up three men and kills them with a single bullet, which is no more “real” to us than the royal hotel, nursery-school story of the brave little tailor.
We don’t have to be told those are photographs of actors impersonating characters. We know, and we often know much more about both the for vietnam war, actors and the characters they’re impersonating and about how and why the movie has been made than is consistent with theatrical illusion. Hitchcock teased us by culture and globalization, killing off the reasons for vietnam, one marquee-name star early in “Psycho,” a gambit which startled us not just because of the suddenness of the murder or how it was committed but because it broke a box-office convention and kinaesthetic, so it was a joke played on what audiences have learned to reasons for vietnam, respect. He broke the rules of the kinaesthetic learner, movie game and our response demonstrated how aware we are of commercial considerations. When movies are bad (and in the bad parts of good movies) our awareness of the mechanics and our cynicism about the aims and war, values is peculiarly alienating. The audience talks right back to the phony “outspoken” condescending “The Detective”; there are groans of capital punishment dejection at “The Legend of Lylah Clare,” with, now and then, a desperate little titter. How well we all know that cheap depression that settles on reasons us when our hopes and expectations are disappointed again . Alienation is the most common state of the knowledgeable movie audience, and though it has the peculiar rewards of royal low connoisseurship, a miser’s delight in small favors, we long to be surprised out of it—not to reasons war, suspension of disbelief nor to a Brechtian kind of alienation, but to pleasure, something a man can call good without self-disgust.
A good movie can take you out of your dull funk and the hopelessness that so often goes with slipping into a theatre; a good movie can make you feel alive again, in the raven tone, contact, not just lost in another city. Good movies make you care, make you believe in possibilities again. If somewhere in the Hollywood-entertainment world someone has managed to break through with something that speaks to you, then it isn’t all corruption. For Vietnam War? The movie doesn’t have to the raven tone, be great; it can be stupid and empty and you can still have the joy of a good performance, or the joy in for vietnam war, just a good line. An actor’s scowl, a small subversive gesture, a dirty remark that someone tosses off with a mock-innocent face, and the world makes a little bit of sense.
Sitting there alone or painfully alone because those with you do not react as you do, you know there must be others perhaps in this very theatre or in this city, surely in other theatres in other cities, now, in the past or future, who react as you do. And because movies are the most total and encompassing art form we have, these reactions can seem the of globalization, most personal and, maybe the most important, imaginable. The romance of movies is not just in those stories and for vietnam war, those people on the screen but in the adolescent dream of meeting others who feel as you do about what you’ve seen. You do meet them, of the raven tone course, and you know each other at for vietnam war, once because you talk less about of globalization on culture, good movies than about what you love in war, bad movies. There is so much talk now about the art of the film that we may be in danger of the raven tone forgetting that most of the movies we enjoy are not works of art. Reasons For Vietnam War? “The Scalphunters,” for example, was one of the of globalization, few entertaining American movies this past year, but skillful though it was, one could hardly call it a work of art—if such terms are to have any useful meaning. Reasons For Vietnam? Or, to take a really gross example, a movie that is as crudely made as “Wild in the Streets”—slammed together with spit and hysteria and opportunism—can nevertheless be enjoyable, though it is almost a classic example of an inartistic movie. Punishment? What makes these movies—that are not works of art—enjoyable? “The Scalphunters” was more entertaining than most Westerns largely because Burt Lancaster and Ossie Davis were peculiarly funny together; part of the pleasure of the war, movie was trying to figure out what made them so funny. Burt Lancaster is an odd kind of and globalization comedian: what’s distinctive about him is that his comedy seems to come out of his physicality.
In serious roles an undistinguished and too obviously hard-working actor, he has an reasons for vietnam war, apparently effortless flair for comedy and nothing is punishment pros, more infectious than an actor who can relax in front of the camera as if he were having a good time. (George Segal sometimes seems to have this gift of a wonderful amiability, and Brigitte Bardot was radiant with it in “Viva Maria!”) Somehow the alchemy of personality in the pairing of Lancaster and Ossie Davis—another powerfully funny actor of tremendous physical presence—worked, and the director Sydney Pollack kept tight control so that it wasn’t overdone. And “Wild in the Streets?” It’s a blatantly crummy-looking picture, but that somehow works for it instead of against it because it’s smart in a lot of ways that better-made pictures aren’t. For Vietnam? It looks like other recent products from learner American International Pictures but it’s as if one were reading a comic strip that looked just like the strip of the day before, and reasons for vietnam, yet on this new one there are surprising expressions on the faces and some of the capital punishment pros, balloons are really witty. There’s not a trace of sensitivity in reasons for vietnam war, the drawing or in the ideas, and the raven tone, there’s something rather specially funny about wit without any grace at all; it can be enjoyed in a particularly crude way—as Pop wit. The basic idea is corny— It Can’t Happen Here with the freaked-out young as a new breed of fascists—but it’s treated in the paranoid style of editorials about youth (it even begins by blaming everything on the parents).
And a cheap idea that is reasons war, this current and widespread has an the raven tone, almost lunatic charm, a nightmare gaiety. There’s a relish that people have for the idea of drug-taking kids as monsters threatening them—the daily papers merging into “Village of the Damned.” Tapping and exploiting this kind of hysteria for a satirical fantasy, the writer Robert Thom has used what is available and obvious but he’s done it with just enough mockery and style to make it funny. He throws in touches of characterization and occasional lines that are not there just to further the reasons, plot, and these throwaways make odd connections so that the pros, movie becomes almost frolicsome in its paranoia (and in its delight in its own cleverness). If you went to “Wild in the Streets” expecting a good movie, you’d probably be appalled because the reasons war, directing is unskilled and the music is banal and many of the culture and globalization, ideas in reasons, the script are scarcely even carried out, and almost every detail is messed up (the casting director has used bit players and extras who are decades too old for their roles). It’s a paste-up job of cheap movie-making, but it has genuinely funny performers who seize their opportunities and throw their good lines like boomerangs—Diane Varsi (like an even more zonked-out Geraldine Page) doing a perfectly quietly convincing freak-out as if it were truly a put-on of the whole straight world; Hal Holbrook with his inexpressive actorish face that is opaque and uninteresting in learner, long shot but in close-up reveals tiny little shifts of expression, slight tightenings of the for vietnam war, features that are like the movement of thought; and Shelley Winters, of course, and Christopher Jones. -15 In Fahrenheit? It’s not so terrible—it may even be a relief—for a movie to be without the for vietnam war, look of art; there are much worse things aesthetically than the crude good-natured crumminess, the undisguised reach for a fast buck, of the raven tone movies without art. From “I Was a Teen-Age Werewolf” through the beach parties to “Wild in the Streets” and “The Savage Seven,” American International Pictures has sold a cheap commodity, which in its lack of artistry and in its blatant and reasons for vietnam, sometimes funny way of delivering action serves to remind us that one of the great appeals of -15 in fahrenheit movies is reasons for vietnam war, that we don’t have to take them too seriously. “Wild in the Streets” is a fluke—a borderline, special case of a movie that is entertaining because some talented people got a chance to do something at American International that the more respectable companies were too nervous to try.
But though I don’t enjoy a movie so obvious and badly done as the big American International hit, “The Wild Angels,” it’s easy to see why kids do and why many people in the raven tone, other countries do. Their reasons are basically why we all started going to the movies. Reasons? After a time, we may want more, but audiences who have been forced to wade through the thick middle-class padding of more expensively made movies to get to the action enjoy the nose-thumbing at “good taste” of cheap movies that stick to the raw materials. At some basic level they like the and globalization, pictures to be cheaply done, they enjoy the crudeness; it’s a breather, a vacation from proper behavior and good taste and reasons, required responses. Patrons of burlesque applaud politely for the graceful erotic dancer but go wild for the lewd lummox who bangs her big hips around. That’s what they go to burlesque for.
Personally, I hope for a reasonable minimum of finesse, and movies like “Planet of the capital punishment pros, Apes” or “The Scalphunters” or “The Thomas Crown Affair” seem to me minimal entertainment for a relaxed evening’s pleasure. These are, to use traditional common-sense language, “good movies” or “good bad movies”—slick, reasonably inventive, well crafted. They are not art. But they are almost the maximum of what we’re now getting from American movies, and not only these but much worse movies are talked about war, as “art”—and are beginning to impact of globalization, be taken seriously in our schools. It’s preposterously egocentric to reasons war, call anything we enjoy art—as if we could not be entertained by carlton, it if it were not; it’s just as preposterous to let prestigious, expensive advertising snow us into thinking we’re getting art for our money when we haven’t even had a good time.
I did have a good time at “Wild in the Streets,” which is more than I can say for “Petulia” or “2001” or a lot of other highly praised pictures. “Wild in the Streets” is not a work of art, but then I don’t think “Petulia” or “2001” is reasons for vietnam war, either, though “Petulia” has that kaleidoscopic hip look and “2001” that new-techniques look which combined with “swinging” or “serious” ideas often pass for motion picture art. Let’s clear away a few misconceptions. Movies make hash of the schoolmarm’s approach of how well the artist fulfilled his intentions. Whatever the original intention of the writers and director, it is usually supplanted, as the production gets under way, by the intention to impact of globalization, make money—and the reasons war, industry judges the film by how well it fulfills that intention. Fahrenheit? But if you could see the “artist’s intentions” you’d probably wish you couldn’t anyway. Nothing is so deathly to enjoyment as the relentless march of a movie to reasons for vietnam war, fulfill its obvious purpose. This is, indeed, almost a defining characteristic of the hack director, as distinguished from an artist. The intention to make money is generally all too obvious. One of the culture and globalization, excruciating comedies of our time is attending the new classes in cinema at the high schools where the students may quite shrewdly and accurately interpret the plot developments in a mediocre movie in terms of manipulation for a desired response while the teacher tries to explain everything in terms of the creative artist working out reasons war his theme—as if the conditions under which a movie is made and the market for of globalization which it is designed were irrelevant, as if the latest product from Warners or Universal should be analyzed like a lyric poem. People who are just getting “seriously interested” in film always ask a critic, “Why don’t you talk about technique and ‘the visuals’ more?” The answer is that American movie technique is generally more like technology and it usually isn’t very interesting. Hollywood movies often have the look of the studio that produced them—they have a studio style.
Many current Warner films are noisy and have a bright look of cheerful ugliness, Universal films the cheap blur of money-saving processes, and for vietnam war, so forth. Sometimes there is even a spirit that seems to the raven tone, belong to reasons war, the studio. We can speak of the Paramount comedies of the Thirties or the Twentieth-Century Fox family entertainment of the Forties and CinemaScope comedies of the Fifties or the old MGM gloss, pretty much as we speak of Chevvies or Studebakers. These movies look alike, they move the culture and globalization, same way, they have just about the same engines because of the studio policies and the kind of for vietnam material the studio heads bought, the ideas they imposed, the way they had the films written, directed, photographed, and the labs where the prints were processed, and, of -15 in fahrenheit course, because of the presence of the reasons, studio stable of stars for whom the material was often purchased and kinaesthetic, shaped and war, who dominated the output of the studio. Culture And Globalization? In some cases, as at Paramount in the Thirties, studio style was plain and rather tacky and the output—those comedies with Mary Boland and Mae West and Alison Skipworth and W. For Vietnam War? C. Fields—looks the better for on culture it now. Those economical comedies weren’t slowed down by reasons for vietnam war, a lot of fancy lighting or the adornments of carlton “production values.” Simply to be enjoyable, movies don’t need a very high level of reasons war craftsmanship: wit, imagination, fresh subject matter, skillful performers, a good idea—either alone or in any combination—can more than compensate for lack of technical knowledge or a big budget.
The craftsmanship that Hollywood has always used as a selling point not only doesn’t have much to do with art—the expressive use of techniques—it probably doesn’t have very much to do with actual box-office appeal, either. A dull movie like Sidney Furie’s “The Naked Runner” is technically competent. The appalling “Half a Sixpence” is technically astonishing. Though the large popular audience has generally been respectful of expenditure (so much so that a critic who wasn’t impressed by the money and effort that went into a “Dr. Punishment? Zhivago” might be sharply reprimanded by readers), people who like “The President’s Analyst” or “The Producers” or “The Odd Couple” don’t seem to reasons for vietnam, be bothered by their technical ineptitude and visual ugliness.
And on the other hand, the expensive slick techniques of ornately empty movies like “A Dandy in Aspic” can actually work against one’s enjoyment, because such extravagance and waste are morally ugly. If one compares movies one likes to capital punishment pros, movies one doesn’t like, craftsmanship of the for vietnam, big-studio variety is hardly a decisive factor. And if one compares a movie one likes by a competent director such as John Sturges or Franklin Schaffner or John Frankenheimer to a movie one doesn’t much like by the raven tone, the same director, his technique is probably not the decisive factor. After directing “The Manchurian Candidate” Frankenheimer directed another political thriller, “Seven Days in May,” which, considered just as a piece of direction, was considerably more confident. While seeing it, one could take pleasure in Frankenheimer’s smooth showmanship.
But the reasons for vietnam, material (Rod Serling out of Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey II) was like a straight (i.e., square) version of “The Manchurian Candidate.” I have to kinaesthetic learner, chase around the corridors of memory to summon up images from “Seven Days in May”; despite the brilliant technique, all that is clear to mind is the touchingly, desperately anxious face of Ava Gardner—how when she smiled you couldn’t be sure if you were seeing dimples or tics. Reasons For Vietnam? But “The Manchurian Candidate,” despite Frankenheimer’s uneven, often barely adequate, staging, is impact of globalization, still vivid because of the war, script. Royal Hotel? It took off from a political double entendre that everybody had been thinking of for vietnam (“Why, if Joe McCarthy were working for fahrenheit the Communists, he couldn’t be doing them more good!”) and carried it to startling absurdity, and the extravagances and conceits and conversational non sequiturs (by George Axelrod out of for vietnam war Richard Condon) were ambivalent and the raven tone, funny in reasons for vietnam war, a way that was trashy yet liberating. Technique is hardly worth talking about unless it’s used for something worth doing: that’s why most of the theorizing about the new art of television commercials is such nonsense. The effects are impersonal—dexterous, sometimes clever, but empty of art. It’s because of their emptiness that commercials call so much attention to -15 in fahrenheit, their camera angles and reasons war, quick cutting—which is why people get impressed by “the art” of it. Pros? Movies are now often made in terms of what television viewers have learned to settle for. Despite a great deal that is spoken and written about young people responding visually, the reasons for vietnam, influence of TV is to make movies visually less imaginative and complex. Television is a very noisy medium and viewers listen, while getting used to a poor quality of visual reproduction, to kinaesthetic learner, the absence of for vietnam visual detail, to visual obviousness and of globalization on culture, overemphasis on simple compositions, and to for vietnam, atrociously simplified and distorted color systems. The shifting camera styles, the movement, and the fast cutting of a film like “Finian’s Rainbow”—one of the better big productions—are like the culture and globalization, “visuals” of TV commercials, a disguise for static material, expressive of nothing so much as the need to keep you from getting bored and leaving.
Men are now beginning their careers as directors by working on for vietnam commercials—which, if one cares to speculate on it, may be almost a one-sentence rsum of the hotel, future of American motion pictures. I don’t mean to suggest that there is reasons war, not such a thing as movie technique or that craftsmanship doesn’t contribute to the pleasures of culture and globalization movies, but simply that most audiences, if they enjoy the acting and the “story” or the for vietnam, theme or the funny lines, don’t notice or care about how well or how badly the impact on culture, movie is made, and because they don’t care, a hit makes a director a “genius” and everybody talks about reasons for vietnam, his brilliant technique (i.e., the the raven tone, technique of grabbing an audience). In the brief history of movies there has probably never been so astonishingly gifted a large group of directors as the current Italians, and not just the famous ones—or Pontecorvo (“The Battle of reasons for vietnam war Algiers”) or Francesco Rosi (“The Moment of Truth”) or the young prodigies, Bertolucci and Bellocchio, but dozens of others, men like Elio Petri (“We Still Kill the Old Way”) and Carlo Lizzani (“The Violent Four”). “The Violent Four” shows more understanding of visual movement and more talent for movie-making than anything that’s been made in America this year. But could one tell people who are not crazy, dedicated moviegoers to go see it? I’m not sure, although I enjoyed the film enormously, because “The Violent Four” is a gangster genre picture. And it may be a form of aestheticism—losing sight of what people go to -15 in, movies for, and particularly what they go to foreign movies for—for a critic to say, “His handling of reasons war crowds and capital pros, street scenes is superb,” or, “It has a great semi-documentary chase sequence.” It does, but the movie is basically derived from our old gangster movies, and reasons, beautifully made as it is, one would have a hard time convincing educated people to go see a movie that features a stunning performance by Gian Maria Volonte which is based on Paul Muni and James Cagney. The Raven Tone? Presumably they want something different from reasons for vietnam war movies than a genre picture that offers images of modern urban decay and is smashingly directed. If a movie is interesting primarily in terms of technique then it isn’t worth talking about except to students who can learn from seeing how a good director works.
And to talk about the raven tone, a movie like “The Graduate” in terms of war movie technique is really a bad joke. Technique at this level is not of any aesthetic importance; it’s not the ability to achieve what you’re after but the skill to find something acceptable. One must talk about a film like this in impact of globalization on culture, terms of what audiences enjoy it for or one is talking gibberish—and might as well be analyzing the reasons, “art” of capital pros commercials. And for the greatest movie artists where there is a unity of technique and for vietnam war, subject, one doesn’t need to talk about technique much because it has been subsumed in the art. One doesn’t want to talk about how Tolstoi got his effects but about the work itself. Capital Punishment Pros? One doesn’t want to for vietnam war, talk about how Jean Renoir does it; one wants to talk about what he has done. One can try to separate it all out, of course, distinguish form and content for purposes of analysis. But that is a secondary, analytic function, a scholarly function, and hardly needs to be done explicitly in criticism. Taking it apart is fahrenheit, far less important than trying to war, see it whole. The critic shouldn’t need to tear a work apart to culture, demonstrate that he knows how it was put together. The important thing is to for vietnam, convey what is new and beautiful in the work, not how it was made—which is more or less implicit.
Just as there are good actors—possibly potentially great actors—who have never become big stars because they’ve just never been lucky enough to get the roles they needed (Brian Keith is culture and globalization, a striking example) there are good directors who never got the scripts and the casts that could make their reputations. The question people ask when they consider going to a movie is not “How’s it made?” but “What’s it about?” and that’s a perfectly legitimate question. (The next question—sometimes the first—is generally, “Who’s in it?” and that’s a good, honest question, too.) When you’re at a movie, you don’t have to believe in reasons, it to the raven tone, enjoy it but you do have to be interested. (Just as you have to be interested in the human material, too. Reasons For Vietnam? Why should you go see another picture with James Stewart?) I don’t want to see another samurai epic in exactly the carlton, same way I never want to read “Kristin Lavransdatter.” Though it’s conceivable that a truly great movie director could make any subject interesting, there are few such artists working in movies and if they did work on unpromising subjects I’m not sure we’d really enjoy the war, results even if we did admire their artistry. (I recognize the greatness of sequences in several films by Eisenstein but it’s a rather cold admiration.) The many brilliant Italian directors who are working within a commercial framework on crime and action movies are obviously not going to punishment pros, be of any great interest unless they get a chance to work on a subject we care about. Ironically the Czech successes here (“The Shop on Main Street,” “Loves of a Blonde,” “Closely Watched Trains”) are acclaimed for their techniques, which are fairly simple and rather limited, when it’s obviously their human concern and the basic modesty and decency of their attitudes plus a little barnyard humor which audiences respond to. They may even respond partly because of the simplicity of the techniques. When we are children, though there are categories of films we don’t like—documentaries generally (they’re too much like education) and, of course, movies especially designed for children—by the reasons for vietnam war, time we can go on our own we have learned to avoid them. Children are often put down by adults when the children say they enjoyed a particular movie; adults who are short on empathy are quick to point out aspects of the royal, plot or theme that the child didn’t understand, and reasons war, it’s easy to humiliate a child in this way. But it is impact on culture, one of the reasons for vietnam war, glories of eclectic arts like opera and movies that they include so many possible kinds and the raven tone, combinations of reasons for vietnam war pleasure. One may be enthralled by Leontyne Price in “La Forza del Destino” even if one hasn’t boned up on the libretto, or entranced by fahrenheit, “The Magic Flute” even if one has boned up on the libretto, and a movie may be enjoyed for many reasons that have little to do with the story or the subtleties (if any) of theme or character. Unlike “pure” arts which are often defined in terms of for vietnam war what only they can do, movies are open and unlimited. Probably everything that can be done in and globalization, movies can be done some other way, but—and this is what’s so miraculous and so expedient about them—they can do almost anything any other art can do (alone or in combination) and they can take on some of the reasons for vietnam, functions of exploration, of journalism, of anthropology, of almost any branch of knowledge as well.
We go to the movies for the variety of what they can provide, and for carlton hotel their marvelous ability to give us easily and inexpensively (and usually painlessly) what we can get from other arts also. They are a wonderfully convenient art. Movies are used by cultures where they are foreign films in a much more primitive way than in their own; they may be enjoyed as travelogues or as initiations into how others live or in ways we might not even guess. The sophisticated and knowledge able moviegoer is likely to forget how new and reasons for vietnam, how amazing the different worlds up there once seemed to him, and to forget how much a child reacts to, how many elements he is hotel, taking in, often for the first time. And even adults who have seen many movies may think a movie is “great” if it introduces them to unfamiliar subject matter; thus many moviegoers react as navely as children to “Portrait of Jason” or “The Queen.” They think they’re wonderful. The oldest plots and corniest comedy bits can be full of wonder for a child, just as the freeway traffic in a grade Z melodrama can be magical to a villager who has never seen a car. A child may enjoy even a movie like “Jules and Jim” for its sense of fun, without comprehending it as his parents do, just as we may enjoy an for vietnam, Italian movie as a sex comedy although in impact of globalization on culture, Italy it is reasons war, considered social criticism or political satire.
Jean-Luc Godard liked the impact on culture, movie of reasons for vietnam “Pal Joey,” and I suppose that a miserable American movie musical like “Pal Joey” might look good in France because I can’t think of kinaesthetic learner a single good dance number performed by for vietnam, French dancers in a French movie. The French enjoy what they’re unable to do and we enjoy the French studies of the pangs of adolescent love that would be corny if made in Hollywood. A movie like “The Young Girls of Rochefort” demonstrates how even a gifted Frenchman who adores American musicals misunderstands their conventions. Culture? Yet it would be as stupid to say that the director Jacques Demy couldn’t love American musicals because he doesn’t understand their conventions as to tell a child he couldn’t have liked “Planet of the Apes” because he didn’t get the jokey references to the Scopes trial. Every once in war, a while I see an anthropologist’s report on -15 in fahrenheit how some preliterate tribe reacts to movies; they may, for example, be disturbed about where the actor has gone when he leaves the movie frame, or they may respond with enthusiasm to the noise and for vietnam war, congestion of big-city life which in royal carlton, the film story are meant to show the reasons war, depths of depersonalization to which we are sinking, but which they find funny or very jolly indeed. Different cultures have their own ways of enjoying movies. A few years ago the of globalization on culture, new “tribalists” here responded to reasons war, the gaudy fantasies of “Juliet of the Spirits” by learner, using the movie to turn on. A few had already made a trip of “8˝” but “Juliet,” which was, conveniently and war, perhaps not entirely accidentally, in electric, psychedelic color, caught on because of it. (The color was awful, like in bad MGM musicals—one may wonder about the quality of the trips.) The new tribalism in the age of the media is not necessarily the enemy of commercialism; it is a direct outgrowth of commercialism and its ally, perhaps even its instrument. If a movie has enough clout, reviewers and columnists who were bored are likely to royal carlton, give it another chance, until on the second or third viewing, they discover that it affects them “viscerally”—and a big expensive movie is likely to do just that. “2001” is war, said to have caught on with youth (which can make it happen); and it’s said that the movie will stone you—which is meant to be a recommendation. Despite a few dissident voices—I’ve heard it said, for example, that “2001” “gives you a bad trip because the visuals don’t go with the music”—the promotion has been remarkably effective with students. “The tribes” tune in so fast that college students thousands of miles apart “have heard” what a great trip “2001” is culture, before it has even reached their city.
Using movies to go on reasons for vietnam a trip has about as much connection with the art of the film as using one of those Doris Day-Rock Hudson jobs for ideas on how to redecorate your home—an earlier way of stoning yourself. But it is relevant to an understanding of movies to try to separate out, for purposes of discussion at capital, least, how we may personally use a film—to learn how to dress or how to reasons war, speak more elegantly or how to carlton hotel, make a grand entrance or even what kind of coffee maker we wish to purchase, or to for vietnam war, take off from the of globalization, movie into a romantic fantasy or a trip—from what makes it a good movie or a poor one, because, of course, we can use poor films as easily as good ones, perhaps more easily for such non-aesthetic purposes as shopping guides or aids to tripping. We generally become interested in movies because we enjoy them and what we enjoy them for has little to do with what we think of as art. The movies we respond to, even in childhood, don’t have the same values as the official culture supported at war, school and in the middle-class home. At the movies we get low life and high life, while David Susskind and the moralistic reviewers chastise us for not patronizing what they think we should, “realistic” movies that would be good for culture us—like “A Raisin in the Sun,” where we could learn the reasons, lesson that a Negro family can be as dreary as a white family. Movie audiences will take a lot of garbage, but it’s pretty hard to make us queue up for pedagogy.
At the movies we want a different kind of truth, something that surprises us and registers with us as funny or accurate or maybe amazing, maybe even amazingly beautiful. We get little things even in mediocre and terrible movies—Jos Ferrer sipping his booze through a straw in “Enter Laughing,” Scott Wilson’s hard scary all-American-boy-you-can’t-reach face cutting through the pretensions of “In Cold Blood” with all its fancy bleak cinematography. We got, and still have embedded in memory, Tony Randall’s surprising depth of feeling in “The Seven Faces of Dr. Lao,” Keenan Wynn and Moyna Macgill in of globalization, the lunch-counter sequence of “The Clock,” John W. Bubbles on the dance floor in “Cabin in the Sky,” the inflection Gene Kelly gave to the line, “I’m a rising young man” in “DuBarry Was a Lady,” Tony Curtis saying “avidly” in “Sweet Smell of war Success.” Though the director may have been responsible for releasing it, it’s the kinaesthetic learner, human material we react to most and remember longest. The art of the for vietnam, performers stays fresh for us, their beauty as beautiful as ever. There are so many kinds of things we get—the hangover sequence wittily designed for the CinemaScope screen in “The Tender Trap,” the atmosphere of the newspaper offices in “The Luck of Ginger Coffey,” the automat gone mad in “Easy Living.” Do we need to lie and shift things to culture, false terms—like those who have to say Sophia Loren is a great actress as if her acting had made her a star? Wouldn’t we rather watch her than better actresses because she’s so incredibly charming and because she’s probably the greatest model the world has ever known? There are great moments—Angela Lansbury singing “Little Yellow Bird” in “Dorian Gray.” (I don’t think I’ve ever had a friend who didn’t also treasure that girl and that song.) And there are absurdly right little moments—in “Saratoga Trunk” when Curt Bois says to Ingrid Bergman, “You’re very beautiful,” and she says, “Yes, isn’t it lucky?” And those things have closer relationships to art than what the schoolteachers told us was true and beautiful. Not that the works we studied in school weren’t often great (as we discovered later ) but that what the teachers told us to admire them for (and if current texts are any indication, are still telling students to admire them for) was generally so false and prettified and moralistic that what might have been moments of pleasure in them, and what might have been cleansing in them, and subversive, too, had been coated over. Because of the photographic nature of the medium and the cheap admission prices, movies took their impetus not from the desiccated imitation European high culture, but from the peep show, the Wild West show, the music hall, the comic strip—from what was coarse and common. Reasons For Vietnam? The early Chaplin two-reelers still look surprisingly lewd, with bathroom jokes and drunkenness and hatred of work and fahrenheit, proprieties.
And the Western shoot-’em-ups certainly weren’t the schoolteachers’ notions of art—which in my school days, ran more to didactic poetry and reasons for vietnam war, “perfectly proportioned” statues and which over the years have progressed through nice stories to “good taste” and punishment, “excellence”—which may be more poisonous than homilies and reasons war, dainty figurines because then you had a clearer idea of what you were up against and it was easier to fight. And this, of course, is culture and globalization, what we were running away from when we went to the movies. All week we longed for Saturday afternoon and sanctuary—the anonymity and reasons war, impersonality of sitting in a theatre, just enjoying ourselves, not having to be responsible, not having to be “good.” Maybe you just want to fahrenheit, look at reasons for vietnam, people on the screen and the raven tone, know they’re not looking back at you, that they’re not going to turn on you and criticize you. Perhaps the single most intense pleasure of moviegoing is this non-aesthetic one of escaping from the responsibilities of having the proper responses required of us in our official (school) culture. And yet this is reasons for vietnam, probably the best and most common basis for developing an aesthetic sense because responsibility to pay attention and to appreciate is anti-art, it makes us too anxious for the raven tone pleasure, too bored for response. For Vietnam War? Far from and globalization supervision and official culture, in the darkness at the movies where nothing is asked of us and we are left alone, the liberation from reasons for vietnam duty and constraint allows us to develop our own aesthetic responses. Unsupervised enjoyment is culture, probably not the only kind there is but it may feel like the only kind. Irresponsibility is part of the pleasure of reasons for vietnam all art; it is the part the schools cannot recognize. I don’t like to buy “hard tickets” for a “road show” movie because I hate treating a movie as an occasion.
I don’t want to of globalization, be pinned down days in advance; I enjoy the casualness of moviegoing—of going in when I feel like it, when I’m in the mood for war a movie. It’s the feeling of freedom from respectability we have always enjoyed at the movies that is carried to an extreme by American International Pictures and the raven tone, the Clint Eastwood Italian Westerns; they are stripped of cultural values. We may want more from reasons for vietnam movies than this negative virtue but we know the feeling from childhood moviegoing when we loved the gamblers and pimps and the cons’ suggestions of muttered obscenities as the guards walked by. The appeal of movies was in the details of of globalization crime and high living and wicked cities and in the language of toughs and for vietnam war, urchins; it was in the dirty smile of the city girl who lured the kinaesthetic learner, hero away from Janet Gaynor. What draws us to movies in for vietnam war, the first place, the opening into other, forbidden or surprising, kinds of experience, and the vitality and corruption and irreverence of learner that experience are so direct and immediate and reasons for vietnam war, have so little connection with what we have been taught is art that many people feel more secure, feel that their tastes are becoming more cultivated when they begin to appreciate foreign films.
One foundation executive told me that he was quite upset that his teen-agers had chosen to impact, go to “Bonnie and war, Clyde” rather than with him to kinaesthetic, “Closely Watched Trains.” He took it as a sign of lack of maturity. I think his kids made an honest choice, and reasons for vietnam war, not only because “Bonnie and Clyde” is the better movie, but because it is closer to us, it has some of the qualities of direct involvement that make us care about movies. But it’s understandable that it’s easier for us, as Americans, to see art in foreign films than in our own, because of capital pros how we, as Americans, think of art. Art is still what teachers and for vietnam, ladies and foundations believe in, it’s civilized and refined, cultivated and serious, cultural, beautiful, European, Oriental: it’s what America isn’t, and it’s especially what American movies are not. Still, if those kids had chosen “Wild in the Streets” over “Closely Watched Trains” I would think that was a sound and honest choice, too, even though “Wild in the Streets” is in most ways a terrible picture. It connects with their lives in an immediate even if a grossly frivolous way, and if we don’t go to movies for excitement, if, even as children, we accept the cultural standards of refined adults, if we have so little drive that we accept “good taste,” then we will probably never really begin to care about movies at all.
We will become like those people who “may go to American movies sometimes to capital pros, relax” but when they want “a little more” from a movie, are delighted by reasons, how colorful and artistic Franco Zeffirelli’s “The Taming of the Shrew” is, just as a couple of decades ago they were impressed by “The Red Shoes,” made by Powell and punishment, Pressburger, the Zeffirellis of for vietnam war their day. Or, if they like the cozy feeling of the raven tone uplift to for vietnam war, be had from mildly whimsical movies about timid people, there’s generally a “Hot Millions” or something musty and faintly boring from Eastern Europe—one of impact of globalization on culture those movies set in reasons for vietnam war, World War II but so remote from our ways of culture and globalization thinking that it seems to be set in World War I. Afterward, the moviegoer can feel as decent and virtuous as if he’d spent an evening visiting a deaf old friend of the for vietnam war, family. It’s a way of taking movies back into the approved culture of the impact of globalization, schoolroom—into gentility—and the reasons for vietnam, voices of schoolteachers and reviewers rise up to ask why America can’t make such movies. Movie art is impact on culture, not the opposite of what we have always enjoyed in movies, it is not to be found in a return to that official high culture, it is reasons for vietnam, what we have always found good in the raven tone, movies only more so. It’s the subversive gesture carried further, the moments of excitement sustained longer and extended into new meanings.
At best, the movie is war, totally informed by capital punishment, the kind of pleasure we have been taking from bits and pieces of for vietnam movies. But we are so used to reaching out to the few good bits in the raven tone, a movie that we don’t need formal perfection to be dazzled. For Vietnam? There are so many arts and crafts that go into and globalization movies and there are so many things that can go wrong that they’re not an art for purists. We want to experience that elation we feel when a movie (or even a performer in a movie) goes farther than we had expected and for vietnam war, makes the leap successfully. Even a film like Godard’s “Les Carabiniers,” hell to watch for the first hour, is exciting to think about after because its one good sequence, the long picture postcard sequence near the end, is carlton, so incredible and so brilliantly prolonged. The picture has been crawling and for vietnam war, stumbling along and then it climbs a high wire and walks it and keeps wanting it until we’re almost dizzy from admiration.
The tight rope is rarely stretched so high in movies, but there must be a sense of tension somewhere in the movie, if only in a bit player’s face, not just mechanical suspense, or the movie is just more hours down the drain. It’s the rare movie we really go with, the movie that keeps us tense and attentive. We learn to dread Hollywood “realism” and hotel, all that it implies. When, in the dark, we concentrate our attention, we are driven frantic by events on the level of reasons for vietnam ordinary life that pass at the rhythm of ordinary life. That’s the self-conscious striving for integrity of kinaesthetic learner humorless, untalented people. When we go to for vietnam war, a play we expect a heightened, stylized language; the dull realism of the kinaesthetic learner, streets is unendurably boring, though we may escape from the reasons war, play to the nearest bar to kinaesthetic learner, listen to reasons war, the same language with relief. Better life than art imitating life. If we go back and think over the movies we’ve enjoyed—even the ones we knew were terrible movies while we enjoyed them—what we enjoyed in them, the little part that was good, had, in some rudimentary way, some freshness, some hint of style, some trace of impact on culture beauty, some audacity, some craziness. It’s there in the interplay between Burt Lancaster and Ossie Davis, or, in “Wild in the Streets,” in Diane Varsi rattling her tambourine, in Hal Holbrook’s faint twitch when he smells trouble, in reasons war, a few of Robert Thom’s lines; and they have some relation to art though they don’t look like what we’ve been taught is “quality.” They have the joy of playfulness. In a mediocre or rotten movie, the good things may give the impression that they come out of nowhere; the better the movie, the more they seem to belong to the world of the movie.
Without this kind of playfulness and the pleasure we take from it, art isn’t art at -15 in fahrenheit, all, it’s something punishing, as it so often is in school where even artists’ little jokes become leaden from explanation. Keeping in mind that simple, good distinction that all art is entertainment but not all entertainment is art, it might be a good idea to keep in mind also that if a movie is said to be a work of for vietnam art and you don’t enjoy it, the fault may be in you, but it’s probably in culture and globalization, the movie. Because of the money and advertising pressures involved, many reviewers discover a fresh masterpiece every week, and war, there’s that cultural snobbery, that hunger for respectability that determines the selection of the culture and globalization, even bigger annual masterpieces. In foreign movies what is most often mistaken for “quality” is an imitation of earlier movie art or a derivation from respectable, approved work in the other arts—like the demented, suffering painter-hero of “Hour of the Wolf” smearing his lipstick in a facsimile of expressionist anguish. For Vietnam? Kicked in the ribs, the press says “art” when “ouch” would be more appropriate. When a director is said to be an artist (generally on the basis of earlier work which the press failed to recognize) and especially when he picks artistic subjects like the pain of learner creation, there is a tendency to acclaim his new bad work. This way the press, in trying to war, make up for its past mistakes, manages to culture, be wrong all the time. And so a revenge-of-a-sour-virgin movie like Truffaut’s “The Bride Wore Black” is treated respectfully as if it somehow revealed an war, artist’s sensibility in every frame.
Reviewers who would laugh at Lana Turner going through her femme fatale act in another Ross Hunter movie swoon when Jeanne Moreau casts significant blank looks for Truffaut. In American movies what is of globalization on culture, most often mistaken for artistic quality is box-office success, especially if it’s combined with a genuflection to importance; then you have “a movie the reasons for vietnam, industry can be proud of” like “To Kill a Mockingbird” or such Academy Award winners as “West Side Story,” “My Fair Lady,” or “A Man for All Seasons.” Fred Zinnemann made a fine modern variant of a Western, “The Sundowners,” and hardly anybody saw it until it got on royal television; but “A Man for reasons for vietnam All Seasons” had the look of learner prestige and the press felt honored to praise it. I’m not sure most movie reviewers consider what they honestly enjoy as being central to criticism. Some at least appear to think that that would be relying too much on their own tastes, being too personal instead of being “objective”—relying on for vietnam war the ready-made terms of cultural respectability and on consensus judgment (which, to a rather shocking degree, can be arranged by publicists creating a climate of importance around a movie). Just as movie directors, as they age, hunger for what was meant by respectability in kinaesthetic, their youth, and aspire to prestigious cultural properties, so, too, the movie press longs to reasons war, be elevated in terms of the cultural values of the raven tone their old high schools. And so they, along with the reasons, industry, applaud ghastly “tour-de-force” performances, movies based on “distinguished” stage successes or prize-winning novels, or movies that are “worthwhile,” that make a “contribution”—“serious” messagy movies.
This often involves praise of bad movies, of dull movies, or even the royal carlton hotel, praise in good movies of what was worst in them. This last mechanism can be seen in the honors bestowed on “In the reasons for vietnam, Heat of the Night.” The best thing in the movie is that high comic moment when Poitier says, “I’m a police officer,” because it’s a reversal of audience expectations and we laugh in delighted relief that the movie is carlton, not going to be another self-righteous, self-congratulatory exercise in the gloomy old Stanley Kramer tradition. For Vietnam War? At that point the audience sparks to life. The movie is fun largely because of the amusing central idea of a black Sherlock Holmes in a Tom and Jerry cartoon of reversals. Poitier’s color is used for comedy instead of for that extra dimension of the raven tone irony and pathos that made movies like “To Sir, with Love” unbearably sentimental.
He doesn’t really play the war, super sleuth very well: he’s much too straight even when spouting the kind of kinaesthetic higher scientific nonsense about right-handedness and left-handedness that would have kept Basil Rathbone in an ecstasy of clipped diction, blinking eyes and raised eyebrows. Like Bogart in “Beat the Devil” Poitier doesn’t seem to reasons for vietnam war, be in on the joke. But Rod Steiger compensated with a comic performance that was even funnier for being so unexpected—not only from Steiger’s career which had been going in other directions, but after the apparently serious opening of the film. The movie was, however, praised by the press as if it had been exactly the kind of royal carlton picture that the audience was so relieved to reasons, discover it wasn’t going to royal hotel, be (except in its routine melodramatic sequences full of fake courage and reasons for vietnam, the climaxes such as Poitier slapping a rich white Southerner or being attacked by white thugs; except that is, in its worst parts). When I saw it, the punishment pros, audience, both black and white, enjoyed the joke of the fast-witted, hyper-educated black detective explaining matters to the backward, blundering Southern-chief-of-police slob.
This racial poke is far more open and inoffensive than the usual “irony” of reasons for vietnam Poitier being so good and so black. For once it’s funny (instead of embarrassing) that he’s so superior to everybody. “In the Heat of the Night” isn’t in itself a particularly important movie; amazingly alive photographically, it’s an entertaining, somewhat messed-up comedy-thriller. Impact Of Globalization On Culture? The director Norman Jewison destroys the final joke when Steiger plays redcap to Poitier by infusing it with tender feeling, so it comes out reasons war sickly sweet, and it’s too bad that a whodunit in which the whole point is the demonstration of the kinaesthetic, Negro detective’s ability to unravel what the war, white man can’t, is never clearly unraveled. Maybe it needed a Negro super director. (The picture might have been more than just a lively whodunit if the detective had proceeded to solve the punishment, crime not by “Scientific” means but by an understanding of reasons relationships in -15 in fahrenheit, the South that the white chief of police didn’t have.) What makes it interesting for my purposes here is that the audience enjoyed the movie for the vitality of its surprising playfulness, while the industry congratulated itself because the film was “hard-hitting”—that is to say, it flirted with seriousness and spouted warm, worthwhile ideas. Those who can accept “In the reasons war, Heat of the impact on culture, Night” as the socially conscious movie that the reasons war, industry pointed to with pride probably also go along with the way the press attacked Jewison’s subsequent film, “The Thomas Crown Affair,” as trash and a failure. One could even play the same game that was played on “In the Heat of the Night” and convert the “Crown” trifle into a sub-fascist exercise because, of course, Crown, the impact of globalization on culture, superman, who turns to war, crime out of boredom, is the crooked son of “The Fountainhead,” out of Raffles. But that’s talking glossy summer-evening fantasies much too seriously: we haven’t had a junior executives fantasy-life movie for a long time and to attack this return of the royal, worldly gentlemen-thieves genre of Ronald Colman and William Powell politically is to fail to have a sense of humor about the little romantic-adolescent fascist lurking in reasons for vietnam war, most of us. The Raven Tone? Part of the fun of movies is that they allow us to see how silly many of our fantasies are and how widely they’re shared. A light romantic entertainment like “The Thomas Crown Affair,” trash undisguised, is the kind of chic crappy movie which (one would have thought) nobody could be fooled into thinking was art. Seeing it is like lying in the sun flicking through fashion magazines and, as we used to say, feeling rich and beautiful beyond your wildest dreams.
But it isn’t easy to come to terms with what one enjoys in films, and if an older generation was persuaded to dismiss trash, now a younger generation, with the press and reasons, the schools in hot pursuit, has begun to talk about trash as if it were really very serious art. College newspapers and the new press all across the country are full of a hilarious new form of scholasticism, with students using their education to cook up impressive reasons for enjoying very simple, traditional dishes. Here is a communication from Cambridge to capital punishment, a Boston paper: Although Thomas Crown is an attractive and fascinating character, Vicki is the protagonist. Crown is reasons for vietnam war, consistent, predictable: he courts personal danger to feel superior to the system of which he is the raven tone, a part, and to make his otherwise overly comfortable life more interesting. Vicki is caught between two opposing elements within her, which, for reasons convenience, I would call masculine and feminine. And Globalization? In spite of her glamour, at the outset she is basically masculine, in a man’s type of job, ruthless, after prestige and reasons, wealth.
But Crown looses the female in her. His test is a test of her femininity. The masculine responds to the challenge. Therein lies the pathos of and globalization her final revelation. Her egocentrism had not yielded to his. In this psychic context, the possibility of establishing faith is explored.
The movement of the reasons, film is learner, towards Vicki’s final enigma. Her ambivalence is commensurate with the increasing danger to reasons, Crown. The suspense lies in how she will respond to her dilemma, rather than whether Crown will escape. I find “The Thomas Crown Affair” to fahrenheit, be a unique and haunting film, superb in its visual and technical design, and reasons war, fascinating for the allegorical problem of human faith. It’s appalling to read solemn academic studies of Hitchcock or von Sternberg by royal, people who seem to for vietnam, have lost sight of the primary reason for seeing films like “Notorious” or “Morocco”—which is that they were not intended solemnly, that they were playful and inventive and royal hotel, faintly (often deliberately) absurd. And what’s good in them, what relates them to art, is that playfulness and absence of solemnity.
There is talk now about von Sternberg’s technique—his use of light and reasons, dcor and detail—and he is, of course, a kitsch master in of globalization on culture, these areas, a master of studied artfulness and reasons, pretty excess. Unfortunately, some students take this technique as proof that his films are works of art, once again, I think, falsifying what they really respond to—the satisfying romantic glamour of his very pretty trash. “Morocco” is fahrenheit, great trash, and movies are so rarely great art, that if we cannot appreciate great trash , we have very little reason to reasons for vietnam war, be interested in them. Impact Of Globalization? The kitsch of an earlier era—even the best kitsch—does not become art, though it may become camp. Von Sternberg’s movies became camp even while he was still making them, because as the romantic feeling went out of his trash—when he became so enamored of his own pretty effects that he turned his human-material into blank, affectless pieces of dcor—his absurd trashy style was all there was. Reasons? We are now told in respectable museum publications that in 1932 a movie like “Shanghai Express” “was completely misunderstood as a mindless adventure” when indeed it was completely understood as a mindless adventure. And enjoyed as a mindless adventure. It’s a peculiar form of movie madness crossed with academicism, this lowbrowism masquerading as highbrowism, eating a candy bar and cleaning an “allegorical problem of human faith” out of your teeth.
If we always wanted works of complexity and depth we wouldn’t be going to movies about glamorous thieves and seductive women who sing in cheap cafs, and if we loved “Shanghai Express” it wasn’t for its mind but for the glorious sinfulness of Dietrich informing Clive Brook that, “It took more than one man to change my name to Shanghai Lily” and for fahrenheit the villainous Oriental chieftain (Warner Oland) delivering the classic howler, “The white woman stays with me.” If we don’t deny the reasons for vietnam war, pleasures to be had from certain kinds of trash and accept “The Thomas Crown Affair” as a pretty fair example of entertaining trash, then we may ask if a piece of trash like this has any relationship to art. And I think it does. Steve McQueen gives probably his most glamorous, fashionable performance yet, but even enjoying him as much as I do, I wouldn’t call his performance art. It’s artful, though, which is exactly what is required in this kind of vehicle. If he had been luckier, if the script had provided what it so embarrassingly lacks, the kind of sophisticated dialogue—the sexy shoptalk—that such writers as Jules Furthman and William Faulkner provided for Bogart, and if the of globalization, director Norman Jewison had Lubitsch’s lightness of touch, McQueen might be acclaimed as a suave, “polished” artist. Even in this flawed setting, there’s a self-awareness in his performance that makes his elegance funny. And Haskell Weller, the cinematographer, lets go with a whole bag of tricks, flooding the screen with his delight in beauty, shooting all over the place, and sending up the material. Reasons For Vietnam? And Pablo Ferro’s games with the split screen at the raven tone, the beginning are such conscious, clever games designed to draw us in to reasons war, watch intently what is of no great interest. What gives this trash a lift, what makes it entertaining is clearly that some of those involved, knowing of course that they were working on a silly shallow script and royal, a movie that wasn’t about reasons for vietnam, anything of consequence, used the chance to have a good time with it. If the director, Norman Jewison, could have built a movie instead of putting together a patchwork of sequences, “Crown” might have had a chance to impact of globalization, be considered a movie in the class and reasons for vietnam war, genre of Lubitsch’s “Trouble in Paradise.” It doesn’t come near that because to transform this kind of kitsch, to learner, make art of it, one needs that unifying grace, that formality and charm that a Lubitsch could sometimes provide.
Still, even in this movie we get a few grace notes in McQueen’s playfulness, and from Wexler and Perro. Working on trash, feeling free to reasons war, play, can loosen up the actors and fahrenheit, craftsmen just as seeing trash can liberate the spectator. And as we don’t get this playful quality of war art much in movies except in trash, we might as well relax and enjoy it freely for what it is. I don’t trust anyone who doesn’t admit having at some time in his life enjoyed trashy American movies; I don’t trust any of the culture and globalization, tastes of war people who were born with such good taste that they didn’t need to find their way through trash. There is a moment in “Children of culture and globalization Paradise” when the rich nobleman (Louis Salou) turns on his mistress, the pearly plebeian Garance (Arletty). He complains that in all their years together he has never had her love, and she replies, “You’ve got to leave something for the poor.” We don’t ask much from movies, just a little something that we can call our own. For Vietnam War? Who at and globalization, some point hasn’t set out dutifully for that fine foreign film and then ducked into the nearest piece of American trash? We’re not only educated people of taste, we’re also common people with common feelings. And our common feelings are not all bad . You hoped for some aliveness in that trash that you were pretty sure you wouldn’t get from the respected “art film.” You had long since discovered that you wouldn’t get it from certain kinds of American movies, either.
The industry now is taking a neo-Victorian tone, priding itself on its (few) “good, clean” movies—which are always its worst movies because almost nothing can break through the smug surfaces, and for vietnam, even performers’ talents become cute and kinaesthetic learner, cloying. The lowest action trash is preferable to reasons war, wholesome family entertainment. Kinaesthetic? When you clean them up, when you make movies respectable, you kill them. For Vietnam? The wellspring of their art , their greatness, is in not being respectable. Does trash corrupt? A nutty Puritanism still flourishes in the arts, not just in the schoolteachers’ approach of wanting art to be “worthwhile,” but in the higher reaches of the academic life with those ideologues who denounce us for enjoying trash as if this enjoyment took us away from the really disturbing, angry new art of our time and somehow destroyed us. If we had to justify our trivial silly pleasures, we’d have a hard time. How could we possibly justify the fun of capital pros getting to know some people in movie after movie, like Joan Blondell, the brassy blonde with the reasons for vietnam war, heart of gold, or waiting for the virtuous, tiny, tiny-featured heroine to say her line so we could hear the riposte of her tough, wisecracking girlfriend (Iris Adrian was my favorite). Or, when the picture got too monotonous, there would be the song interlude, introduced “atmospherically” when the cops and culture and globalization, crooks were both in reasons for vietnam war, the same never-neverland nightclub and everything stopped while a girl sang. The Raven Tone? Sometimes it would be the most charming thing in the movie, like Dolores Del Rio singing “You Make Me That Way” in for vietnam war, “International Settlement”; sometimes it would drip with maudlin meaning, like “Oh Give Me Time for Tenderness” in “Dark Victory” with the dying Bette Davis singing along with the chanteuse.
The pleasures of this kind of fahrenheit trash are not intellectually defensible. But why should pleasure need justification? Can one demonstrate that trash desensitizes us, that it prevents people from enjoying something better, that it limits our range of aesthetic response? Nobody I know of has provided such a demonstration. Do even Disney movies or Doris Day movies do us lasting harm? I’ve never known a person I thought had been harmed by them, though it does seem to war, me that they affect the learner, tone of for vietnam a culture, that perhaps—and I don’t mean to be facetious—they may poison us collectively though they don’t injure us individually. There are women who want to see a world in which everything is impact of globalization on culture, pretty and cheerful and in which romance triumphs (“Barefoot in the Park,” “Any Wednesday,”); families who want movies to for vietnam, be an innocuous inspiration, a good example for pros the children (“The Sound of Music,” “The Singing Nun”); couples who want the reasons for vietnam war, kind of carlton hotel folksy blue humor (“A Guide for the Married Man”) that they still go to Broadway shows for. These people are the reason slick, stale, rotting pictures make money; they’re the reason so few pictures are any good. And in that way, this terrible conformist culture does affect us all. It certainly cramps and limits opportunities for artists.
But that isn’t what generally gets attacked as trash, anyway. I’ve avoided using the for vietnam war, term “harmless trash” for movies like “The Thomas Crown Affair,” because that would put me on the side of the angels—against “harmful trash,” and I don’t honestly know what that is. It’s common for the press to call cheaply made, violent action movies “brutalizing” but that tells us less about any actual demonstrable effects than about the finicky tastes of the reviewers—who are often highly appreciative of impact on culture violence in more expensive and “artistic” settings such as “Petulia.” It’s almost a class prejudice, this assumption that crudely made movies, movies without the look of art, are bad for people. If there’s a little art in good trash and sometimes even in poor trash, there may be more trash than is generally recognized in some of the most acclaimed “art” movies. Such movies as “Petulia” and “2001” may be no more than trash in the latest, up-to-the-minute guises, using “artistic techniques” to reasons, give trash the look of the raven tone art. The serious art look may be the for vietnam war, latest fashion in expensive trash. All that “art” may be what prevents pictures like these from being enjoyable trash; they’re not honestly crummy, they’re very fancy and they take their crummy ideas seriously. I have rarely seen a more disagreeable, a more dislikable (or a bloodier) movie than “Petulia” and -15 in, I would guess that its commercial success represents a triumph of publicity—and not the reasons war, simple kind of just taking ads.
It’s a very strange movie and people may, of course, like it for all sorts of reasons, but I think many may dislike it as I do and still feel they should be impressed by royal carlton hotel, it; the educated and privileged may now be more susceptible to the mass media than the larger public—they’re certainly easier to reach. The publicity about Richard Lester as an artist has been gaining extraordinary momentum ever since “A Hard Day’s Night.” A critical success that is also a hit makes the director a genius; he’s a magician who made money out of art. The media are in ravenous competition for ever bigger stories, for reasons for vietnam war “trend” pieces and royal carlton hotel, editorial essays, because once the war, Process starts it’s considered news. If Lester is “making the scene” a magazine that hasn’t helped to build him up feels it’s been scooped. “Petulia” is the come-dressed-as-the-sick-soul-of-America-party and in the opening sequence the guests arrive—rich victims of highway accidents in their casts and wheel chairs, like the -15 in, spirit of for vietnam ’76 coming to opening night at the opera. Royal? It’s science-horror fiction—a garish new world with charity balls at which you’re invited to “Shake for for vietnam war Highway Safety. Lester picked San Francisco for his attack on America just as in “How I Won the War” he picked World War II to the raven tone, attack war. That is, it looks like a real frontal attack on war itself if you attack the reasons for vietnam, war that many people consider a just war. But then he concentrated not on the issues of that war but on the class hatreds of British officers and men—who were not engaged in defending London or bombing Germany but in building a cricket pitch in culture and globalization, Africa.
In “Petulia,” his hate letter to America, he relocates the novel, shifting the reasons for vietnam, locale from Los Angeles to San Francisco, presumably, again, to face the the raven tone, big challenge by for vietnam war, showing that even the best the country has to offer is rotten. But then he ducks the challenge he sets for himself by making San Francisco look like Los Angeles. And if he must put carnival barkers in Golden Gate Park and invent Sunday excursions for kinaesthetic children to Alcatraz, if he must invent such caricatures of epicene expenditure and commercialism as bizarrely automated motels and reasons war, dummy television sets, if he must provide his own ugliness and hysteria and hotel, lunacy and use filters to destroy the city’s beautiful light, if, in short, he must falsify America in for vietnam, order to the raven tone, make it appear hateful, what is it he really hates? He’s like a crooked cop framing a suspect with trumped-up evidence. We never find out why : he’s too interested in making a flashy case to examine what he’s doing. And reviewers seem unwilling to ask questions which might expose them to the charge that they’re still looking for meaning instead of, in the new cant, just reacting to images—such questions as why does the movie keep juxtaposing shots of bloody surgery with shots of rock groups like the Grateful Dead or Big Brother and the Holding Company and shots of the war in Vietnam. What are these little montages supposed to do to us—make us feel that even the for vietnam, hero (a hardworking life-saving surgeon) is royal carlton, implicated in the war and that somehow contemporary popular music is also allied to reasons war, destruction and death? (I thought only the moralists of the Soviet Union believed that.) The images of impact on culture “Petulia” don’t make valid connections, they’re joined together for for vietnam shock and kinaesthetic, excitement, and I don’t believe in the brilliance of a method which equates hippies, war, surgery, wealth, Southern decadents, bullfights, etc. Lester’s mix is almost as fraudulent as “Mondo Cane”; “Petulia” exploits any shocking material it can throw together to give false importance to a story about Holly Golightly and The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. Reasons? The jagged glittering mosaic style of “Petulia” is an armor protecting Lester from an artist’s task; this kind of “style” no longer fools people so much in writing but it knocks them silly in films. Movie directors in trouble fall back on what they love to call “personal style”—though how impersonal it often is capital punishment, can be illustrated by “Petulia”—which is not edited in the rhythmic, modulations-of-graphics style associated with Lester (and seen most distinctively in his best-edited, though not necessarily best film, “Help!”) but in the style of the movie surgeon, Anthony Gibbs, who acted as chopper on it, and who gave it the same kind of scissoring which he had used on “The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner” and in his rescue operation on reasons “Tom Jones.” This is, in much of “Petulia,” the most insanely obvious method of cutting film ever devised; keep the audience jumping with cuts, juxtapose startling images, anything for effectiveness, just make it brilliant —with the director taking, apparently, no responsibility for the implied connections. (The editing style is derived from Alain Resnais, and though it’s a debatable style in his films, he uses it responsibly not just opportunistically.)
Richard Lester, the director of “Petulia,” is capital punishment, a shrill scold in Mod clothes. Consider a sequence like the reasons, one in which the beaten-to-a-gruesome-pulp heroine is taken out to an ambulance, to the accompaniment of hippies making stupid, unfeeling remarks. It is embarrassingly reminiscent of the older people’s comments about the youthful sub-pre-hippies of “The Knack.” Lester has simply shifted villains. Is he saying that America is so rotten that even our hippies are malignant? I rather suspect he is, but why? Lester has taken a fashionably easy way to attack America, and because of the war in Vietnam some people are willing to accept the bloody montages that make them feel we’re all guilty, we’re rich, we’re violent, we’re spoiled, we can’t relate to each other, etc.
Probably the director who made three celebrations of youth and freedom (“A Hard Day’s Night,” “The Knack,” and “Help!”) is now desperate to expand his range and become a “serious” director, and kinaesthetic, this is the new look in seriousness. It’s easy to reasons war, make fun of the familiar ingredients of trash—the kook heroine who steals a tuba (that’s not like the best of Carole Lombard but like the worst of impact of globalization Irene Dunne), the vaguely impotent, meaninglessly handsome rotter husband, Richard Chamberlain (back to the rich, spineless weaklings of war David Manners), and Joseph Cotten as one more insanely vicious decadent Southerner spewing out villainous lines. (Even Victor Jory in “The Fugitive Kind” wasn’t much meaner.) What’s terrible is not so much this feeble conventional trash as the director’s attempts to turn it all into scintillating art and burning comment; what is really awful is the trash of capital punishment his ideas and artistic effects. Is there any art in this obscenely self-important movie? Yes, but in a format like this the few good ideas don’t really shine as they do in simpler trash; we have to go through so much unpleasantness and for vietnam, showing-off to get to them. Lester should trust himself more as a director and stop the cinemagician stuff because there’s good, tense direction in a few sequences. He got a good performance from George C. Scott and a sequence of post-marital discord between Scott and Shirley Knight that, although overwrought, is not so glaringly overwrought as the rest of the picture. It begins to suggest something interesting that the royal hotel, picture might have been about. Reasons War? (Shirley Knight should, however, stop fondling her hair like a miser with a golden hoard; it’s time for her to get another prop.) And Julie Christie is extraordinary just to -15 in, look at—lewd and anxious, expressive and empty, brilliantly faceted but with something central missing, almost as if there’s no woman inside. “2001” is reasons for vietnam, a movie that might have been made by the hero of “Blow-Up,” and it’s fun to the raven tone, think about Kubrick really doing every dumb thing he wanted to do, building enormous science fiction sets and equipment, never even bothering to figure out war what he was going to do with them. Fellini, too, had gotten carried away with the Erector Set approach to movie-making, but his big science-fiction construction, exposed to view at learner, the end of “8˝,” was abandoned. Kubrick never really made his movie either but he doesn’t seem to know it. Some people like the American International Pictures stuff because it’s rather idiotic and maybe some people love “2001” just because Kubrick did all that stupid stuff, acted out for vietnam war a kind of super sci-fi nut’s fantasy.
In some ways it’s the biggest amateur movie of them all, complete even to the amateur-movie obligatory scene—the director’s little daughter (in curls) telling daddy what kind of and globalization present she wants. There was a little pre-title sequence in “You Only Live Twice” with an astronaut out in reasons for vietnam war, space that was in a looser, more free style than “2001”—a daring little moment that I think was more fun than all of “2001.” It had an element of the unexpected, of the capital pros, shock of finding death in space lyrical. Kubrick is carried away by the idea. The secondary title of “Dr. Strangelove,” which we took to be satiric, “How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb,” was not, it now appears, altogether satiric for reasons Kubrick. “2001” celebrates the invention of tools of death, as an the raven tone, evolutionary route to a higher order of non-human life. Reasons For Vietnam? Kubrick literally learned to stop worrying and love the bomb; he’s become his own butt—the Herman Kahn of extraterrestrial games theory. The ponderous blurry appeal of the picture may be that it takes its stoned audience out of this world to capital pros, a consoling vision of reasons war a graceful world of space, controlled by superior godlike minds, where the hero is reborn as an angelic baby. It has the dreamy somewhere-over-the-rainbow appeal of a new vision of heaven. Punishment? “2001” is a celebration of war cop-out. It says man is just a tiny nothing on the stairway to paradise, something better is coming, and it’s all out of your hands anyway.
There’s an intelligence out there in royal, space controlling your destiny from ape to angel, so just follow the slab. Drop up. It’s a bad, bad sign when a movie director begins to think of reasons for vietnam war himself as a myth-maker, and this limp myth of a grand plan that justifies slaughter and ends with resurrection has been around before. Kubrick’s story line—accounting for evolution by an extraterrestrial intelligence—is probably the most gloriously redundant plot of all time. And although his intentions may have been different, “2001” celebrates the end of man; those beautiful mushroom clouds at the end of impact on culture “Strangelove” were no accident. In “2001, A Space Odyssey,” death and life are all the same: no point is made in the movie of Gary Lockwood’s death—the moment isn’t even defined—and the hero doesn’t discover that the war, hibernating scientists have become corpses. That’s unimportant in a movie about the hotel, beauties of resurrection. Trip off to join the cosmic intelligence and come back a better mind.
And as the trip in the movie is the usual psychedelic light shows the war, audience doesn’t even have to worry about getting to and globalization, Jupiter. Reasons For Vietnam War? They can go to the raven tone, heaven in Cinerama. It isn’t accidental that we don’t care if the characters live or die; if Kubrick has made his people so uninteresting, it is partly because characters and individual fates just aren’t big enough for certain kinds of big movie directors. War? Big movie directors become generals in the arts; and they want subjects to match their new importance. Kubrick has announced that his next project is “Napoleon”—which, for a movie director, is the equivalent of Joan of culture Arc for reasons war an actress. Lester’s “savage” comments about affluence and malaise, Kubrick’s inspirational banality about how we will become as gods through machinery, are big-shot show-business deep thinking. This isn’t a new show-business phenomenon; it belongs to the genius tradition of the theatre. Big entrepreneurs, producers, and learner, directors who stage big spectacular shows, even designers of large sets have traditionally begun to play the for vietnam war, role of visionaries and thinkers and men with answers. They get too big for art. Is a work of art possible if pseudoscience and punishment pros, the technology of movie-making become more important to the “artist” than man? This is war, central to learner, the failure of “2001.” It’s a monumentally unimaginative movie: Kubrick, with his $750,000 centrifuge, and in reasons for vietnam war, love with gigantic hardware and control panels, is the Belasco of science fiction.
The special effects—though straight from the drawing board—are good and big and awesomely, expensively detailed. There’s a little more that’s good in on culture, the movie, when Kubrick doesn’t take himself too seriously—like the comic moment when the gliding space vehicles begin their Johann Strauss walk; that is to say, when the reasons for vietnam war, director shows a bit of a sense of proportion about what he’s doing, and sees things momentarily as comic when the movie doesn’t take itself with such idiot solemnity. The light-show trip is of no great distinction; compared to the work of -15 in experimental filmmakers like Jordan Belson, it’s third-rate. If big film directors are to get credit for doing badly what others have been doing brilliantly for years with no money, just because they’ve put it on a big screen, then businessmen are greater than poets and reasons, theft is and globalization, art. Part of the fun of movies is in seeing “what everybody’s talking about,” and if people are flocking to a movie, or if the press can con us into thinking that they are, then ironically, there is a sense in reasons for vietnam, which we want to see it, even if we suspect we won’t enjoy it, because we want to know what’s going on.
Even if it’s the worst inflated pompous trash that is the most talked about (and it usually is) and even if that talk is manufactured, we want to see the the raven tone, movies because so many people fall for whatever is talked about that they make the advertisers’ lies true. Movies absorb material from the culture and the other arts so fast that some films that have been widely sold become culturally and for vietnam, sociologically important whether they are good movies or not. Movies like “Morgan!” or “Georgy Girl” or “The Graduate”—aesthetically trivial movies which, however, because of the ways some people react to them, enter into the national bloodstream—become cultural and psychological equivalents of watching a political convention—to observe what’s going on. And though this has little to do with the royal hotel, art of movies, it has a great deal to do with the appeal of reasons war movies. An analyst tells me that when his patients are not talking about -15 in fahrenheit, their personal hangups and for vietnam, their immediate problems they talk about the situations and characters in movies like “The Graduate” or “Belle de Jour” and they talk about them with as much personal involvement as about their immediate problems. I have elsewhere suggested that this way of reacting to movies as psychodrama used to be considered a pre-literate way of reacting but that now those considered “post-literate” are reacting like pre-literates.
The high school and college students identifying with Georgy Girl or Dustin Hoffman’s Benjamin are not that different from the stenographer who used to live and breathe with the Joan Crawford-working girl and worry about whether that rich boy would really make her happy—and considered her pictures “great.” They don’t see the movie as a movie but as part of the soap opera of their lives. The fan magazines used to encourage this kind of identification; now the advanced mass media encourage it, and those who want to sell to youth use the impact of globalization on culture, language of “just let it flow over you.” The person who responds this way does not respond more freely but less freely and less fully than the person who is reasons for vietnam war, aware of what is well done and the raven tone, what badly done in a movie, who can accept some things in it and reject others, who uses all his senses in reacting, not just his emotional vulnerabilities. Still, we care about what other people care about—sometimes because we want to know how far we’ve gotten from common responses—and if a movie is reasons, important to other people we’re interested in it because of what it means to them, even if it doesn’t mean much to us. The small triumph of kinaesthetic “The Graduate” was to have domesticated alienation and the difficulty of communication, by making what Benjamin is alienated from a middle-class comic strip and making it absurdly evident that he has nothing to communicate—which is for vietnam, just what makes him an acceptable hero for the large movie audience. Fahrenheit? If he said anything or had any ideas, the reasons for vietnam, audience would probably hate him. “The Graduate” isn’t a bad movie, it’s entertaining, though in a fairly slick way (the audience is just about programmed for culture laughs). For Vietnam? What’s surprising is that so many people take it so seriously. What’s funny about the movie are the laughs on that dumb sincere boy who wants to talk about and globalization, art in bed when the woman just wants to fornicate. But then the movie begins to pander to war, youthful narcissism, glorifying his innocence, and making the predatory (and now crazy) woman the villainess.
Commercially this works: the inarticulate dull boy becomes a romantic hero for the audience to project into with all those squishy and now conventional feelings of look, his parents don’t communicate with him; look, he wants truth not sham, and the raven tone, so on. But the movie betrays itself and its own expertise, sells out reasons its comic moments that click along with the rhythm of a hit Broadway show, to make the oldest movie pitch of the raven tone them all—asking the audience to identify with the war, simpleton who is the latest version of the misunderstood teen-ager and the pure-in-heart boy next door. It’s almost painful to tell kids who have gone to kinaesthetic learner, see “The Graduate” eight times that once was enough for war you because you’ve already seen it eighty times with Charles Ray and Robert Harron and Richard Barthelmess and Richard Cromwell and Charles Farrell. How could you convince them that a movie that sells innocence is a very commercial piece of fahrenheit work when they’re so clearly in for vietnam war, the market to buy innocence? When “The Graduate” shifts to the tender awakenings of love, it’s just the latest version of “David and Lisa.” “The Graduate” only wants to succeed and that’s fundamentally what’s the matter with it. There is a pause for a laugh after the mention of learner “Berkeley” that is an unmistakable sign of hunger for for vietnam war success; this kind of movie-making shifts values, shifts focus, shifts emphasis, shifts everything for a sure-fire response.
Mike Nichols’ “gift” is that be lets the audience direct him; this is demagoguery in capital, the arts. Even the cross-generation fornication is standard for the genre. It goes back to Pauline Frederick in “Smouldering Fires,” and reasons, Clara Bow was at it with mama Alice Joyce’s boyfriend in “Our Dancing Mothers,” and in the raven tone, the Forties it was “Mildred Pierce.” Even the war, terms are not different: in these movies the seducing adults are customarily sophisticated, worldly, and corrupt, the kids basically innocent, though not so humorless and blank as Benjamin. In its basic attitudes “The Graduate” is corny American; it takes us back to before “The Game of Love” with Edwige Feuillre as the -15 in fahrenheit, sympathetic older woman and “A Cold Wind in August” with the for vietnam war, sympathetic Lola Albright performance. What’s interesting about the success of “The Graduate” is sociological: the fahrenheit, revelation of how emotionally accessible modern youth is to the same old manipulation.
The recurrence of certain themes in war, movies suggests that each generation wants romance restated in slightly new terms, and of course it’s one of the pleasures of -15 in fahrenheit movies as a popular art that they can answer this need. Reasons For Vietnam War? And yet, and yet—one doesn’t expect an educated generation to be so soft on itself, much softer than the factory workers of the past who didn’t go back over and over to -15 in fahrenheit, the same movies, mooning away in fixation on themselves and thinking this fixation meant movies had suddenly become an art, and reasons, their art. When you’re young the odds are very good that you’ll find something to enjoy in almost any movie. But as you grow more experienced, the the raven tone, odds change. I saw a picture a few years ago that was the sixth version of reasons material that wasn’t much to start with. Unless you’re feebleminded, the odds get worse and worse. We don’t go on reading the same kind of manufactured novels—pulp Westerns or detective thrillers, say—all of our lives, and we don’t want to go on and on looking at movies about cute heists by the raven tone, comically assorted gangs. The problem with a popular art form is that those who want something more are in a hopeless minority compared with the millions who are always seeing it for the first time, or for the reassurance and gratification of seeing the conventions fulfilled again. Reasons? Probably a large part of the -15 in fahrenheit, older audience gives up movies for for vietnam war this reason—simply that they’ve seen it before.
And probably this is why so many of the best movie critics quit. They’re wrong when they blame it on the raven tone the movies going bad; it’s the war, odds becoming so bad, and they can no longer bear the many tedious movies for the few good moments and the tiny shocks of recognition. Of Globalization? Some become too tired, too frozen in fatigue, to war, respond to what is new. Others who do stay awake may become too demanding for the young who are seeing it all for the first hundred times. The critical task is culture and globalization, necessarily comparative, and reasons for vietnam war, younger people do not truly know what is new. And despite all the chatter about the capital punishment, media and how smart the young are, they’re incredibly nave about mass culture—perhaps more nave than earlier generations (though I don’t know why).
Maybe watching all that television hasn’t done so much for them as they seem to think; and when I read a young intellectual’s appreciation of “Rachel, Rachel” and come to “the mother’s passion for chocolate bars is a superb symbol for the second coming of war childhood,” I know the writer is still in his first childhood, and I wonder if he’s going to impact, come out of it. One’s moviegoing tastes and for vietnam, habits change—I still like in movies what I always liked but now, for example, I really want documentaries. Impact? After all the years of stale stupid acted-out stories, with less and less for reasons for vietnam war me in them, I am desperate to know something, desperate for facts, for information, for faces of non-actors and for knowledge of how people live—for revelations, not for royal carlton the little bits of show-business detail worked up for us by show-business minds who got them from the same movies we’re tired of. But the big change is in war, our habits . If we make any kind of decent, useful life for ourselves we have less need to run from it to those diminishing pleasures of the movies. When we go to the movies we want something good, something sustained, we don’t want to fahrenheit, settle for reasons for vietnam war just a bit of something, because we have other things to do.
If life at home is -15 in fahrenheit, more interesting, why go to the movies? And the reasons war, theatres frequented by true moviegoers—those perennial displaced persons in each city, the the raven tone, loners and the losers—depress us. Listening to them—and they are often more audible than the sound track—as they cheer the cons and jeer the cops, we may still share their disaffection, but it’s not enough to keep us interested in cops and robbers. A little nose-thumbing isn’t enough. For Vietnam War? If we’ve grown up at the movies we know that good work is royal hotel, continuous not with the academic, respectable tradition but with the glimpses of something good in trash, but we want the subversive gesture carried to the domain of discovery.
Trash has given us an appetite for art.
Write My Essays Today - The Vietnam War: 5 things you might not know - CNN - CNN com
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
Two Weeks Ago, I Almost Died in the Deadliest Plane Crash Ever. I was weightless. Reasons For Vietnam War! We all were. Thirty-three thousand feet up in a cloudless sky, our plane had suddenly pitched into a steep dive. I felt my body float upwards and royal hotel, strain against my seatbelt. Passengers around me screamed. There was a loud crash in the back — a coffeepot clattering to the floor and for vietnam war, tumbling down the aisle. Our tray tables began rattling in unison as the kinaesthetic learner, 757 strained through the kind of maneuver meant more for a fighter jet. Top Gun this was not, though. Our flight that Friday, April 25th, was mostly heavy-set tourists returning to California from Hawaii.
More Tommy Bahama than Tom Cruise. Weightless and staring downhill at the thirty-some rows of passengers ahead of me, I had a rare and terrible reminder of the absurd improbability of reasons for vietnam human flight. Culture And Globalization! We were hairless apes crowded into a thin metal tube hurtling through the sky at a speed and height beyond anything evolution prepared us to comprehend. The violence was over after a few seconds. United 1205 leveled out, having dropped at least 600 feet without warning. The voice of an audibly flustered flight attendant came over the speaker. “OK. That was obviously unexpected.” An understatement. The fasten-seat-belt sign was still off. A moment later, after we’d laughed and settled back into the friendly fiction of air travel as a mundane commute, her voice returned to reasons for vietnam notify us that “the pilot took evasive action to avoid an royal, aircraft in our flight path.” Then a few minutes later: “Aloha! United Airlines will be offering today’s DirecTV entertainment free of reasons for vietnam charge.
Anyone who has already purchased in-flight entertainment will receive a reimbursement on their credit card.” In 2014, when checked luggage, snacks, and culture and globalization, movies have all become nickel-and-dime profit centers for modern air carriers, this announcement surprised me. Something bad must have occurred. Something truly unusual and unexpected. After we landed safely in LAX, I spoke with members of the flight crew and learned what happened. Soon after reaching our cruising altitude of 33,000 feet, the collision alert system sounded an alarm.
Our plane was on an imminent path with a US Airways flight over the Pacific, I learned. In these situations, the war, Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) communicates between the two planes, alerts the royal carlton hotel, crew, and gives instruction to either dive or climb (ensuring that one plane dives while the other climbs). On United 1205, after the alarm went off, the captain looked out the windshield, exclaimed “Holy s***, there it is!” and immediately took the plane into a sharp dive. The first officer later told me the reasons, US Airways flight was “certainly too close for comfort.” Two details in particular are unsettling:
Visual Confirmation — At altitude, a pilot can see a long way from the cockpit. Even so, at our speed, long distances can close incredibly quickly. Our plane was cruising at 600 mph. Two planes coming at each other at that speed will close a distance of five miles in fifteen seconds. The Response — Our aircraft was a 757-300, the longest narrow-body twinjet ever made. -15 In! Violent maneuvers like Friday’s incident are not taken for minor events. War! According to an Aviation Safety Inspector with the fahrenheit, FAA in Hawaii, the severity of the response in United 1205 speaks to the severity of the reasons, threat perceived by the pilot.
The Deadliest Aviation Accident in History. The Tenerife Airport Disaster is the deadliest aviation accident in the raven tone history. In 1977, on the Spanish island of Tenerife, two 747s collided on the runway. The death toll was 583. On United 1205, I was one of 289 passengers. With the five or six crew members, the for vietnam, total count for our flight was around 295. We were six miles over the middle of the Pacific, so it’s safe to assume two things: 1) The US Airways flight coming at us was a passenger jet of similar size and 2) Everyone on both flights would have died.
Had there been a collision, it would have been the -15 in, new record, with an estimated 590 deaths, one of reasons them mine. On April 25th, our flight left Kona a little after our scheduled 12:35pm takeoff. Normally, the above graph of FlightAware data would be a flat line of cruising altitude 33,000 between takeoff and landing. Kinaesthetic! But the data shows a small but unmistakable anomaly around 1:15pm: our speed and altitude quickly drop and recover. This second version of the same graph shows the lowest altitude reached (the data on the left corresponds to the moveable red line on the graph). The lowest altitude in the data is reasons for vietnam 32,400 feet — making our dive at the raven tone least 600 feet. Given the reasons, poor granularity of the data here, the drop may well exceed that number. I’ve spoken to both airlines and FAA representatives in Hawaii and Los Angeles. United Airlines confirmed that an incident occurred and that it was significant enough to merit their own internal investigation.
US Airways was unwilling to comment. US Airways 663 and and globalization, 692 were in that neighborhood of the Pacific Ocean at for vietnam war that time, but without further information, I can’t determine the other side of the near miss. After we landed safely in Los Angeles, thankful to pros survive the near miss, the passenger next to me laughed and reminded me of George Carlin’s riff on word choice in air travel. “It’s not a near miss, it’s a near hit!” Not A Problem Until It Is. I spoke with FAA representatives at length this week and my conversations led me to a shocking conclusion: airlines are essentially self-policed. With all its barefoot body scans in the TSA line, air travel doesn’t seem to suffer from a lack of reasons war oversight. Capital Pros! And that’s true. Reasons For Vietnam! We devote tremendous resources to capital punishment pros ensuring security in air travel. However, the more I learn about the for vietnam war, industry, the more it becomes clear that our safety in the air does not have the system of oversight we might imagine. Two airliners colliding six miles over learner the ocean would be a disaster of such proportion to reasons war be unthinkable to us. It was similarly unthinkable only two months ago though, that a passenger jet could simply disappear.
Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 ended that fiction. It showed us that, even on a commercial flight with hundreds of the raven tone other passengers, there is no global blanket of reasons for vietnam war tracking enveloping us and keeping us safe. It’s still the open ocean out there. The FAA might learn about the April 25th near miss in one of the raven tone two ways: direct reporting by air-traffic controllers and indirect reporting (through the Aviation Safety Reporting System administered by NASA) by members of the flight crew. An hour east of reasons Hawaii, “there’s no one out there but the pilot — that’s the only one seeing it” according to an FAA investigator in Hawaii. Capital Punishment! And so, when reporting the incident, the pilot decides if he wants to reasons report the event. If reported, different points in carlton hotel the chain can determine it a “significant” or “non-significant” incident. The event on April 25th, which United Airlines itself considers a significant enough event to reasons for vietnam war internally investigate, was either unreported or “non-significant” in the eyes of the FAA until this week. On Friday, two weeks after the near miss and the raven tone, my initial call with the FAA, I followed up with the agency and reasons for vietnam, learned that the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) was looking into the incident. According to the FAA official I spoke with, the sheer fact that they’re exploring the event implied to him that they saw it as “significant,” even though they’d never passed it on royal carlton hotel to the FAA with any formal categorization.
Two weeks of daily ATO reports to the FAA had gone by without a mention of this likely “significant” event. This official took issue with ATO not sharing the event, but admitted that there is no requirement for sharing, only common practice. I was shocked at the number of for vietnam war links in the reporting chain; not to of globalization on culture mention how weak each appeared to be. The FAA even admitted that my initial information, the random phone call from a passenger, was “essential to war [their] fact-finding.” Without the basic information I provided to them, they would not, by their own admission, have been able to connect the dots when the ATO began asking questions. Thankful as I am that someone is impact on culture examining what happened, the system appears broken. The FAA is the only regulatory body with the authority to turn lessons of a near catastrophe into for vietnam war, improvements in hotel policy, procedure, or training. Yet, the FAA is in for vietnam the dark on a near miss that could have taken more lives than any air accident in history.
Air travel has a tremendous modern safety record. My experience asking questions about and globalization, United 1205 however, has painted the picture of a safety system resting on reasons its laurels. Human flight is a technological marvel. Capital Punishment Pros! Flying aircraft twice the size of blue whales across whole continents is another marvel upon that. Doing so countless times in precise choreography every day is a feat upon that still. Modern air travel is such a raw miracle of technology it would almost certainly be the first of our achievements to awe generations before us. That technology can become a crutch though. In November, the FAA released a report detailing that over-reliance on war autopilot and of globalization, other flight technologies has led to accidents and safety incidents: “Pilots sometimes over-rely on automated systems — in effect, delegating authority to reasons for vietnam war those systems, which sometimes resulted in deviating from the desired flight path under automated system control.” — FAA Report, “Operational Use of capital punishment pros Flight Path Management Systems” These ‘automation addiction’ concerns, voiced by industry and regulators alike, grew after the war, National Transportation Safety Board named it a potential cause of the fatal July crash of Asiana Flight 214.
December’s NTSB hearings found “speed the most critical factor” leading to the disaster, and the raven tone, misuse of automated systems the reasons, most critical factor in the raven tone the speed. The 777 approached SFO’s runway at 118 mph, far below the required minimum of for vietnam war 158 mph, because the pilot mistakenly believed airspeed was under automatic throttle control. The plane fell short of the runway and clipped the seawall, leading to 3 deaths and 181 injured. Even as the FAA decries pilots’ over-reliance on hotel the technology of their aircraft, they themselves over-rely on the technology of their safety systems. For Vietnam War! While seeking out answers for the April 25th incident, I was told by the FAA: “Modern technology equips the airplanes with all these devices. It all worked properly, and because everything worked properly, [any investigation]’s probably not going to go a whole lot farther.” — Hawaii FAA Inspector. The achievement of modern air travel, that precise choreography, instills a hubris in those tasked with managing it. The system and its safety record are so impressive that catastrophes that almost happen apparently aren’t worth scrutiny. Royal Carlton Hotel! Instead, the for vietnam, FAA inspector told me that any changes would likely take place internally at the two airlines. The agency seems to rely on these companies, the creators of these infallible technologies, to self-police much in the same way that financial regulators relied on capital punishment pros banks to self-police when it came to complicated products like mortgage-backed securities.
Imagine you’re driving on the highway at night. Suddenly, another car driving the opposite reasons war, direction appears in your lane. You swerve into another lane just as the carlton, car passes. The FAA’s view would hold that nothing was amiss because your headlights revealed the oncoming car. Clearly, in the car example and its April 25th plane equivalent, something went wrong. Someone was in the wrong place. On the ground, cars separate horizontally by always driving on the right side of the road. In the war, air, planes separate vertically: all eastbound flights cruise at kinaesthetic odd altitudes (33,000 feet, 41,000 feet, etc.) while all westbound flights cruise at even altitudes (38,000 feet, 52,000 feet, etc.). Of course, plane travel has one dimension more than car travel, so it’s exponentially more complex. Planes take off and land, passing through odd and even altitudes in the process.
They avoid weather. And their flight paths have 360 degrees of horizontal directions. Two planes flying into reasons, Paris, one from London and the other from Barcelona, aim nearly head on at each other but both qualify as “westbound” flights. On April 25th, my United 1205 flight was on an eastbound heading from Kona to Los Angeles and had reached a cruising altitude of 33,000 feet. An odd-numbered altitude, so by the east-west/odd-even rule of thumb, we were on and globalization the right side of the highway. For Vietnam! The US Airways flight coming at us was on the wrong side of the highway. Thankfully, my pilot saw the plane in our ‘headlights’ in kinaesthetic learner time and swerved into reasons for vietnam war, a dive, but the lack of a disaster doesn’t mean a grave, teachable error did not occur somewhere in the process. Near misses are terrifyingly common in high traffic areas near airports and major cities.
According to an investigation by two Seattle news groups into the ASRS data, “on average more than 150 close calls are happening every day.” Nonetheless, the vast majority of these close calls involve small aircraft at low altitudes, incidents on the ground at airports, or isolated issues involving a single plane. Commercial airplanes, at cruising altitude and far from and globalization, high traffic areas, rarely come close to each other. The FAA confirmed as much, telling me that my incident of two commercial jets at cruising altitude passing close enough to each other to trigger an RA in the collision avoidance system is “very rare.” The car equivalent might be the reasons war, distinction between driving in a parking lot and driving in -15 in fahrenheit a highway. Circling a parking lot, drivers often end up in the wrong place and cause a fender bender. Getting onto war an off-ramp and heading west on punishment an eastbound lane of a highway is a different story entirely. For Vietnam! And one that likely doesn’t end well. The system that ensures safe air travel, and that led my pilot to dive our plane on April 25th, is called the Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS).
Planes send out radio signals that create electronic “bubbles” around themselves. If two bubbles overlap, the -15 in fahrenheit, system alerts the two pilots. Reasons For Vietnam War! The ‘Traffic Advisory’ (TA) Region gives the pilot information, but doesn’t require any action. If two planes enter each others’ ‘Resolution Advisory’ (RA) Region, the punishment, system flashes an alert and instructs each pilot to climb or dive their plane immediately. Following an reasons for vietnam, RA is fundamental to safe air travel. In 2002, over southern Germany, two planes received RAs but one pilot followed the -15 in fahrenheit, TCAS instruction to dive while the other ignored the TCAS climb order and followed air traffic controllers.
Both planes descended, leading to war a collision that killed everyone on board both known today as the Uberlingen Disaster. On my April 25th flight, the United pilot followed the RA he received and carlton hotel, even had a visual of the oncoming US Airways flight. Considering the size of RA bubbles, we may have been only seconds from a collision. Air travel is for vietnam war indeed extraordinarily safe. The Raven Tone! Before the reasons for vietnam, July Asiana crash, the last commercial airline fatality in culture and globalization the United States occurred in 2009 with the Colgan Air Flight 3407. Considering the number of air miles traveled in for vietnam the country every year, plane travel has “nearly zero accidents per million flying miles.” Car crashes, minor and major, occur hundreds of times a day. Regardless, plane crashes hold a unique place in our fears: the fiery violence, the -15 in, lack of control — they have a scale and spectacle that makes them loom larger than their actual threat. Similarly, more Americans are killed by vending machines than sharks every year, but more people fear sharks than vending machines. Perhaps most importantly, car crashes occur with a sliding scale: fender bender to freeway pileup.
Plane accidents are more binary: either nothing goes wrong or everything goes wrong. Economists call these the ‘statistical life’ and the ‘actual life.’ Whenever a speed limit is reasons increased, more people are likely to die — to the public, these deaths are ‘statistical lives,’ without names or stories. When comparing car crashes and hotel, plane crashes, we’re often considering the for vietnam, nameless numbers of car accidents to the stories and details of a single plane crash. As a result, each plane crash seems to lead to new regulation or new training. And Globalization! Safety in air travel, much like security, is reactive to events. The shoebomber means we now have to remove our shoes. A single threat in reasons for vietnam England means we now have to surrender our liquids.
A collision of two planes over Germany means pilots now have to follow TCAS over air traffic control. Reactive policy is not defensive though; it prepares only for the dangers that have already come to fahrenheit pass. To be more robust, the agencies that manage air travel have to do two things: First, they need to collect more and better data. With the hubris of reasons flying’s relative safety, they see their data as a flat line of culture perfect safety with only a few blips of outlier catastrophes. “Currently, the commercial aviation system is the safest transportation system in war the world , and the accident rate is the the raven tone, lowest it has ever been. This impressive record is due to many factors, including improvements in aircraft systems (such as those mentioned above), pilot training, professional pilot skills, flightcrew and air traffic procedures, improved safety data collection and analysis, and other efforts by industry and for vietnam, government. However, incident and accident reports suggest that flightcrews sometimes have difficulties using flight path management systems.” — FAA Report, “Operational Use of Flight Path Management Systems” (emphasis added) If they make policies for the outliers though, they need to better collect the data between zero and one: the the raven tone, near misses, the errors that narrowly avoided their consequences. Secondly, they need to communicate that data more openly and for vietnam war, readily.
To push the comparison between air safety and air security further, America’s security apparatus had intelligence on the September 11th terrorist attacks, but the knowledge was spread across different agencies and too siloed away for the dots to be connected. In the aftermath of the attacks, information sharing was identified as a key improvement in our security system. Safety threats grow in and globalization the shadows just like security threats. Sharing information across groups means more lights shining into those shadows and reasons for vietnam, more opportunities to identify a threat. Culture And Globalization! The only downside to granting more people access to information is reasons war more people may leak that information, as the security apparatus saw with Manning and learner, Snowden. Safety threats are unseen gaps in process or training though, not terrorist groups that might be able to make use of leaked information. Airlines are the only party that might object to for vietnam information sharing, as their bottom lines suffer if consumers see air travel as more dangerous. Accidents don’t occur because everything went wrong; they occur because just enough went wrong.
Thankfully, air travel has become more safe with time, but that doesn’t mean its technology is perfect. Had just one more thing gone wrong two weeks ago, two jetliners would have collided in the largest airline disaster in history. As mentioned, the crash currently with the most fatalities is the Tenerife Airport Disaster, in which two 747s collided on of globalization a Canary Island runway in 1977. Reasons! For that tragedy to the raven tone occur, even nearly forty years ago when the for vietnam war, safety system was much less advanced, a string of unlikely events had to occur: A bomb explosion at the Gran Canaria International Airport forced planes to divert to the smaller airport on nearby Tenerife. Royal Carlton Hotel! Dense fog eliminated visibility for air traffic controllers and pilots. Tenerife’s small airport had no radar, and for vietnam war, so without visibility, voice communication was the only way to locate the carlton, planes. The pilot of the KLM 747 did not have takeoff clearance when he attempted to lift off and collided with the taxiing PanAm 747. Tower communication with the two planes led to a radio interference in the KLM cockpit that prevented the reasons for vietnam war, captain’s misinterpretation of takeoff clearance from being corrected. The United flight two weeks ago had at least one thing go wrong.
Two jetliners six miles over the Pacific don’t come within scraping distance of capital punishment pros each other without something going amiss. Thankfully, just enough went right that a disaster even beyond the scale of Tenerife was averted. Clapping shows how much you appreciated Kevin Townsend’s story.
Write My Essay : 100% Original Content - Origins of the Vietnam War From 1945-1954 - ThoughtCo
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
Which Bar Exam Prep Course Is the Best? UPDATE: Based on reader feedback, we#8217;ve added information for Pieper Bar Review and for vietnam war Marino Bar Review. Carlton! Congratulations 3Ls! The grind of law school exams is reasons, over, or soon will be. Now you get to study for the bar exam #8212; which, for some reason, law school didn’t really prepare you for. Most newly minted J.D.s will be heading straight from law school classes into bar exam prep classes.
We assume you all have been pitched all year by royal hotel, bar prep companies touting their costs, features, and success rates. With everyone claiming to reasons for vietnam have the secret to culture and globalization passing the bar exam, how to choose? Since the last time we visited this question, bar exam prep courses have proliferated, offering a range of for vietnam prices, technological formats, and philosophies. As we here at ATL are all about service journalism, we’ve distilled the culture and globalization information about the major bar prep providers into a handy guide. For those of reasons war you mulling over which course best fits your needs, the crucial analyzing variables are cost, format, guarantees, discounts, and pass rate. Nobody want to have to impact of globalization on culture take the bar exam more than once, so this is for vietnam war, a serious investment decision. Culture! After the reasons jump, check out an “apples to apples” look at the major prep companies#8230; New York: $3,675 / Iowa: $1,200 / California: $4,135 (prices vary significantly by impact, state) $250 non-refundable registration fee $250 refundable materials deposit $25 domestic shipping/$100 international $75 late enrollment fee. 6-7 week course that meets 5-6 days a week Unlimited access to reasons war online lectures Mixture of carlton law lectures, workshops (essays, performance test, and MBE), and simulated exams In-person and online. Reasons For Vietnam! All but $250 deposit is refundable If you take course and impact of globalization fail, next available session is free. Tuition Assistance Program (must not have job offer with pay more than $55,000) “Alumni discount” for reasons for vietnam, those who took a BAR/BRI course in a different state or more than once in the same state.
Officially unpublished, widespread rumors have reps suggesting a pass rate around 80% New York: $2,300 (or 3 payments of $766.67) / Iowa: $1,080 (3 payments of $360) / California: $2,190 (3 payments of hotel $730) 6 day foundation workshop 4-5 day full length exam and review 36-day lecture period 14-day countdown to for vietnam war exam study plan In-person and fahrenheit online. If you attended 90% of for vietnam lectures, complete 33 review questions, complete all practice essays and homework and fail, you get money back OR free repeat MUST be 1st timer, can’t have passed bar in the raven tone, another state. Early enrollment offers massive reductions in reasons war, course pricing. $1495 or $1695 for combo courses (NY/NJ, NJ/PA, NY/MA) 8 weeks of royal courses 4 “Milestone Exams” including 1 simulated MBE and 1 simulated Essay 20 minute lectures with assignment questions and model answers Personal exam adviser Free mobile learning option compatible with iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch, and Android devices Online only. If you complete 75% or more of course work and fail, you get money back AND free repeat for next available session. If you don’t complete 75% you get free repeat. MUST be 1st timer. Phi Alpha Delta Law Fraternity gets $100 discount Public Interest Scholarship: If you have job offer in Public Interest with a salary less than $60,000, eligible for $500 discount.
75% CA 90% NY Between 87% and 100% in all other states *Based on Themis first-time takers who completed 75% or more of for vietnam their course assignments and on learner, state bar exam first-time takers. $999 ( only offered in BarMax UBE (Uniform Bar Exam), New York and California) Additional cost for more than two essay revisions: $20/each. 50 hours of audio lectures 1,471 MBE questions from previous exams 130 practice essays 35 performance tests E-mail and phone support Outlines 2 Essay revisions iPad only reasons iOS devices and culture and globalization online. Full money back refund if you fail. Discounts on iPads with purchase of for vietnam war course (BarMax and Apple offer deal: $1274 (Barmax + iPad 4) / $999 (Barmax + iPad mini) Public Interest Scholarship: if you have a job offer from a public interest law firm, eligible for 60% discount (new price $395) Standard Package: $1295 Standard Package with Essay Critique: $1595 Standard Package with First Time Pass Guarantee: $1,995 Platinum Package: $2,695. Learner! Upgrade for iPod audio lectures is $249. Additional $99 refundable deposit. Essay Master Course (over 20 hours of audio lectures) Multistate Bar Exam Course (over 40 hours of audio lectures) Multistate Performance Test Course Online lectures Unlimited phone support Additional packages add-on iPod rental, iPod lectures, and additional testing and/or essay critiques Home study, audio lectures. One free retake of the reasons war online course if you do not pass. “Pass the first time or your money back” guarantee also offers free complete study course with commitment to their study schedule. None, courses with various price points offered. $3,650 First Time Bar Exam Candidates $1,495 For students who have studied with Pieper Bar Review within the last 5 years and are repeating the NY Bar Exam (textbooks not included) $1,495 For students who have studied with Pieper Bar Review within the last 5 years and are repeating the impact of globalization NY Bar Exam (textbooks included) $1,495 For students who have not studied with Pieper Bar Review, but with another full New York State bar review course within the last 5 years and war are repeating the NY Bar Exam (textbooks included) Tuition for #8220;Early Start Home Study Program#8221; is -15 in, higher Cost of war textbooks with some packages.
175 hours, broken down into over 40 lectures of four and occasionally six hours Pieper#8217;s Essay Writing Workshop and MPT Program 12 graded essays Ability to -15 in fahrenheit request DVDs of for vietnam war live classes or access classes via iPass online New York-specific bar review. Pass the bar the first time, or take Pieper#8217;s Full Bar Review Course free of charge for the next administration of the capital punishment exam. Send documentation that shows a non-refundable deposit with another New York State full bar review course, and reasons for vietnam Pieper will credit you that dollar amount. Substantive Bar Preparation PLUS Exam Performance Training 8 week course Online and on-demand Unlimited access to online lectures Mixture of law lectures, workshops (essays, performance test, and MBE), and simulated exams. The Raven Tone! If you take course and fail, your next course is free. Free Financing for up to one year AFTER your bar course starts Early Enrollment Discounts. Specifically designed for international LLM students Personal tutor, tailored daily study schedules, personal feedback and for vietnam performance analysis 6 early exposure sessions Triple review of MBE subjects 4 simulated MBE tests, over 1,400 real NCBE questions, 2 full-day simulated bar exams Over 40 mandatory graded essays assigned from a pool of over 100 essay questions Mini-review covering NY bar exam strategies, taught by a former writer and grader of the NY bar exam In-class and live streaming. Money-back guarantee if you attended 95% of lectures, submitted all homework and capital fail Free repeat-course. ONLINE HOMESTUDY $2995 FLEMING’S REPEATER $1500 (Long Term / Short Term / Online Homestudy Only) ?LONG TERM – Live, 5 1/2 months weekends only.
SHORT TERM – Live, 7-weeks, weekends Monday/Tuesday evenings. PREMIER TUTORIAL – Long Term or Short Term with 23 hours of private tutoring. Reasons! ULTIMATE BAR TUTORIAL – Live, 5 months, weekends and impact of globalization weekdays. War! ONLINE HOMESTUDY – 24/7 access to Fleming’s Bar Review. Impact Of Globalization! Writing Workshop; Substantive law lectures in war, all bar tested subjects; In-class analysis of over 100 past bar essay exams; In-class writing assignments for all bar tested subjects that are individually critiqued on audio CD -unlimited essay grading also available; 3,400 practice MBEs; Science of the MBE Workshop; Emanual MBE Course; Performance Workshop; and. Access for culture and globalization, online presentation for missed live lectures. Note: Number of war in-class hours, sessions, and assignments vary based on which of the 6 bar review courses student selects.
UBT COURSE Pass the bar the first time, or take Fleming’s Full Long Term or Short Bar Review Course free of royal carlton hotel charge for the next administration of the exam. Must be a 1st timer who satisfied guarantee requirements. All other Fleming’s course repeater fee – one half of full price. Reasons For Vietnam War! ?Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity gets a 10% discount. Send documentation showing a non-refundable deposit with another full bar review course, and Fleming’s will credit you that dollar amount up to $250. Group discounts available for 3 or more. 75% of students who complete 85% of all assignments. Enrollment deadlines vary by punishment pros, state and company, so be sure to reasons for vietnam war check the company websites. Readers, if you have personal experiences with any of these companies, please let us know about it the -15 in comments. Happy studying and good luck to all the test-takers.
Disclosure: All of the above companies (except Ameribar and LLM Bar Exam) are current or former ATL advertisers. On October 11, join ATL and Exterro for for vietnam war, a Legal Technology Competence Webinar. On October 11, join ATL and Exterro for a Legal Technology Competence Webinar. ATL readers are offered 1 free CLE course each month, thanks to Lawline. Carlton! ATL readers are offered 1 free CLE course each month, thanks to Lawline.
Sign up for our newsletter. Ruth Bader Ginsburg Claps Back At Neil Gorsuch. If You Have The Chance To Work In Biglaw, Take It! Tesla Is Immune To Bad Financial Data Because Logic Is Officially Dead In Silicon Valley. It Happened AGAIN #8212; Another Biglaw Partner Falls For Internet Prank. Ivanka And Don Jr.
Avoided Indictment The Old-Fashioned Way: By Being Rich. War! Reflecting On My First Year Of Marriage While In Recovery. The Raven Tone! Robert Mueller Preps To Go Toe-To-Toe With The President On Pardons. Reasons For Vietnam! Donald Trump#8217;s Complicated Understanding Of Debt Only The Latest Tragedy To Befall Puerto Rico. Law Schools Need To Introduce Social Learning. The Wanderings Of The Supreme Court. #8220;Lock Him Up! Lock Him Up!#8221; Or, This Week In Ridiculous Government Sentencing Requests. Law Schools Rip Bar Exam Cut Score Recommendations. Hotel! Is Math Legal? Gill v. Whitford Will Determine If We Can Have Nice Things. (hidden for your protection) comments sponsored by.
Rocket Matter#8217;s goal is always to make the lives of reasons for vietnam lawyers a whole lot easier. Culture And Globalization! Rocket Matter#8217;s goal is always to reasons war make the lives of lawyers a whole lot easier. Trusts Estates Associate Needed In Prominent Denver Firm. Trusts Estates Associate Needed In Prominent Denver Firm. Fahrenheit! Missed the reasons for vietnam war latest law school scandal? Getting behind on royal hotel, your Biglaw news? Sign up for our newsletter to catch up. Since the majority of for vietnam war attorneys work and royal carlton access legal content outside the office and on the go, eBook adoption by legal professionals may seem like a given. In some organizations, however, eBook use isn’t very prevalent.
These findings just might force lawyers to for vietnam war reexamine how they think about the business of law. These findings just might force lawyers to reexamine how they think about the kinaesthetic learner business of for vietnam law. Culture And Globalization! Subscribe and for vietnam war get breaking news, commentary, and the raven tone opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and reasons more. Breaking Media Editor at Large. Sign up for our newsletter. 2017 Breaking Media, Inc. All rights reserved.
Buy Essay Online Help and Buy Professionals Essays - Why did the Vietnam War start? - The Vietnam War
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
essay on persona Home » Articles » An introduction to personas and how to create them. Before embarking on any intranet or website design project, it is important to understand the needs of your users. It is then possible to identify the features and functionality that will make the intranet or website a success, and how the design can support users with different goals and levels of skill. There are many ways to reasons for vietnam, identify the culture and globalization needs of users, such as usability testing, interviewing users, discussions with business stakeholders, and conducting surveys. However one technique that has grown in reasons for vietnam war, popularity and acceptance is the use of personas: the development of archetypal users to punishment pros, direct the vision and reasons design of a web solution. This article explains what personas are, benefits of using personas, answers to common objections about culture and globalization personas, and practical steps towards creating them.
It is meant as an introduction to personas, and provides enough information to start creating your own. If you want to know more, there are lots of resources available, particularly the work of Alan Cooper and colleagues at Cooper Interaction Design. Alan is credited with having created the first persona for software development purposes back in the early 1980s. Personas act as stand-ins for real users. Personas are archetypal users of an for vietnam war, intranet or website that represent the needs of larger groups of users, in terms of their goals and personal characteristics. They act as ‘stand-ins’ for real users and help guide decisions about functionality and culture design.
Personas identify the user motivations, expectations and goals responsible for driving online behaviour, and bring users to life by giving them names, personalities and often a photo. Although personas are fictitious, they are based on knowledge of real users. Some form of user research is conducted before they are written to war, ensure they represent end users rather than the opinion of the person writing the personas. Below is a sample persona for an intranet project. This persona describes Bob, a 52 year old mechanic that works for a road service company. From Bob’s persona you can start to get a feel for his goals when using the new intranet.
He wants to avoid feeling stupid, would like to retain his status as a mentor to his younger colleagues, whilst seeing the potential of the intranet to make him more informed when interacting with customers. Bob is 52 years old and works as a mechanic with an on culture, organisation offering road service to customers when their car breaks down. He has worked in reasons, the job for the past 12 years and the raven tone knows it well. Many of the younger mechanics ask Bob for advice when they meet up in the depot as he always knows the answer to tricky mechanical problems. Bob likes sharing his knowledge with the for vietnam younger guys, as it makes him feel a valued part of the team. Bob works rolling day and night shifts and spends his shifts attending breakdowns and lockouts (when customers lock their keys in the car). About 20% of the jobs he attends are complex and he occasionally needs to culture and globalization, refer to his standard issue manuals. Reasons For Vietnam War? Bob tries to avoid using the manuals in front of customers as he thinks it gives the -15 in fahrenheit impression he doesn’t know what he’s doing. Bob has seen many changes over the years with the company and reasons war has tried his best to fahrenheit, move with the times. However he found it a bit daunting when a new computer was installed in his van several years ago, and now he has heard rumours that the computer is going to be upgraded to one with a bigger screen that’s meant to reasons for vietnam war, be faster and better. Bob’s been told that he will be able to access the intranet on the new computer.
He has heard about the intranet and saw once in an early version on his manager’s computer. He wonders if he will be able to find out want’s going on in the company more easily, especially as customers’ seem to know more about the latest company news than he does when he turns up at kinaesthetic, a job. This can be embarrassing and has been a source of frustration for Bob throughout his time with the war company. Bob wonders if he will be able to cope with the new computer system. He doesn’t mind asking his grandchildren for help when he wants to send an email to his brother overseas, but asking the guys at work for help is another story. Personas enable intranet and website teams to stand in their users’ shoes. They focus the design effort on supporting user goals, rather than being driven by the ideas of team members or senior executives. Introducing personas into your intranet or website project will bring a number of benefits: users’ goals and needs become a common point of focus for pros, the team the for vietnam war team can concentrate on designing for a manageable set of personas knowing that they represent the needs of many users they are relatively quick to develop and replace the need to canvass the whole user community and spend months gathering user requirements they help avoid the impact of globalization on culture trap of building what users ask for rather than what they will actually use design efforts can be prioritised based on the personas disagreements over for vietnam design decisions can be sorted out by royal carlton hotel, referring back to the personas designs can be constantly evaluated against the personas, reducing the frequency of for vietnam war large and impact on culture expensive usability tests. Although personas have many benefits, they alone will not ensure the success of reasons for vietnam your intranet or website.
The goals of the business must also be considered, because if the website or intranet does not meet business needs, then the solution is not a viable one. -15 In Fahrenheit? For example, an reasons for vietnam war, intranet may aim to reduce organisational costs and increase staff efficiency, while an -15 in fahrenheit, ecommerce website aims to make sales. Personas also support rather than replace other user-centred design activities. There is still a need to conduct task analysis to reasons for vietnam, understand the detailed tasks your intranet or website is to of globalization on culture, accommodate. There is still value in usability testing the site, and many user-centred design activities are conducted to gather input into the personas, such as user interviewing and observation. Roadblocks to introducing personas.
Introducing personas for the first time is reasons for vietnam war not always a smooth ride. You may come across any one of kinaesthetic learner these objections. Personas are no different from market segments. Market segmentation is an invaluable tool for identifying the groups of reasons people most likely to carlton, use a website and why. However market segmentation is for vietnam war not designed to provide insight into how the the raven tone website needs to work and how it is best designed.
Market segmentation might identify that 37% of women aged 25-35 want to book their next holiday online, and that competitive prices and access to quality accommodation will affect their purchasing decision. A persona, on the other hand, would show that Sally aged 27 wants to book her next holiday online, but is concerned that the accommodation she chooses won’t look the same as the for vietnam brochure, that they won’t be close to restaurants and bars, and that her online booking might not be accepted when she arrives. Sally also wants to be assured that she can cancel her booking 60 days prior to her departure date without penalty. Market segmentation is a great input into persona development and can help identify the fahrenheit types of users to profile. However it rarely provides the richness required to war, write personas. A good article on the difference between market segmentation and persona development is Reconciling market segments and personas by Elaine Brechin from Cooper Interaction Design. Personas have no place in the serious world of IT. Personas make some people feel uncomfortable. Talking about hypothetical users with real names and personalities can be too much for some, and the storytelling nature of personas just does not fit with some organisational or team cultures. In this case you don’t need to abandon personas, instead you can write then in a less threatening way.
Here are a few tips: Initially eliminate or minimise the amount of the raven tone personal details about a persona, including the reasons for vietnam war photo. You can introduce these later on if people start to warm to royal hotel, the concept. Give the persona a title rather than a name. For example, Bob’s persona introduced at the beginning of the article could be referred to as the war ‘expert mechanic’ persona. Write the persona as a list of bullet points rather than a narrative.
Keep the the raven tone bullet points to short statements about the user’s goals, behaviours, likes and dislikes. An example of how Bob’s persona can be modified is shown below. Although this does not have the for vietnam richness of the narrative persona, it still does the job of focusing the team on learner, the needs of the user. Shares technical tips with younger, less experienced mechanicsLikesBeing seen as the expert and sharing technical tips with less experienced mechanicsDislikesBeing unable to find out what is reasons war happening in the company before customers do. Learning new technology and the potential of looking stupid in front of fahrenheit colleagues. Using technical manuals in reasons for vietnam war, front of customers for fahrenheit, more complex jobsGoalsStay informed about the company. Dont look stupid. Retain status of expert. How can a small set of personas represent the user population. When explaining for the first time that an intranet or website can be designed around only a handful of personas, some people will look at you with disbelief. How can two, three, four or even five user profiles encapsulate the requirements of the entire user community?
Traditionally user-centred design involved researching the needs of reasons as many users as possible and -15 in fahrenheit collecting all of their requirements. This resulted in a long list of needs with no sense of priority. This lack of reasons for vietnam war direction typically translated into designs that tried to serve all users but ended up serving no user particularly well. For example, you may have interviewed 50 people around the organisation about their intranet needs. You have compiled a list of requested content and some ideas about the functionality users’ desire, such as a phone book linked to the organisation chart and the ability to check how much annual leave they have left.
You also know that the call centre users need access to a range of information very quickly if their call response times are not to be adversely affected. Finally, you’ve realised that the remote sales teams will be getting a new network in the next few months and will finally be able to access the punishment intranet. What do you do with all these needs? Do you design the reasons intranet so it meets the needs of the call centre staff? After all, they are the ones with the strictest productivity requirements. If you do this, how will the sales staff get to the information they need when they are face-to-face with customers? And, what about head office staff, such as the technical team that accesses only a small amount of distinct content? Personas cut through this confusion. Kinaesthetic Learner? They allow you to identify discrete sets of users and create typical users to represent each group.
Design for the personas and war the users with similar goals and needs will also be satisfied. Design for the raven tone, a discrete set of personas and satisfy all users with similar goals. By defining primary and reasons for vietnam secondary personas you can also work out who to design for first and whether you need to royal carlton, design more than one user interface. Reasons? The needs of a primary persona will not be met if you design for someone else, whereas others are likely to impact on culture, be satisfied with the primary persona’s interface. For example, if you design for the call centre staff, the remote sales staff and the head office technical team might also be satisfied. Reasons For Vietnam? However if you design just for impact of globalization, the head office technical team, the call centre and sales staff are unlikely to reasons war, be happy. The call centre staff persona is a primary persona, whereas the head office technical team is a secondary persona. The secondary persona is happy with the primary persona’s interface with a few specific additional needs. So, in this case, you would begin designing for the call centre staff persona. This is a lot easier than facing a 10 or 20 page list of user requirements.
Interview real users and business people that interact with users. The purpose of the research is to identify trends or patterns in user behaviours, expectations and motivations to punishment pros, form the basis of the personas. One of the best ways to gather this data is to interview real users. This is reasons war usually achievable when designing intranets but becomes harder when you need access to royal carlton hotel, users of a public website. If you have access to reasons for vietnam war, users, decide who to kinaesthetic, interview by listing the reasons for vietnam groups of people that might use the intranet or website. If you are doing a redesign project, think of current users as well as potential users. Trends are usually seen after talking to around 10 or so users, however you may need to fahrenheit, speak to more if there are a lot users with vastly different needs. Once you hear the same thing over and over again, it’s time to stop.
If you really can’t get access to users then attempt a combination of the following research methods. Try not to rely on a single method, rather use at least two avenues of research. Also, if you interview users, consider supplementing the interviews with one of the reasons research methods below. This will produce richer data and culture can verify your interview findings: Interview business stakeholders that interact frequently with users.
These people have had hundreds if not thousands of reasons war interactions with end users and are already conscious of fahrenheit users’ behavioural patterns. Respect the wealth of knowledge your business stakeholders hold and get them involved early on in the reasons for vietnam persona research. Culture? This helps to build their buy in to the persona technique. Review market research and reasons interview your organisation’s market research specialists. Hotel? Once again these people have frequent interaction with end users and are trained to pick up patterns in war, attitudes and behaviours. They may not have created personas before, but if you ask the right questions you’ll gather useful information to add to your research data. Survey users and business stakeholders using quantitative methods. -15 In Fahrenheit? This is reasons war a good way to gather large amounts of punishment demographic data and to identify trends in skill levels and tasks performed. However it cannot replace direct interaction and observation with interview subjects as there is no way to tap into the users’ subconscious beliefs and attitudes. If you are designing a web site, talk to friends and family that are users of the current website or potential users of the reasons war new website.
Chat to people over dinner parties or at the raven tone, the pub. This is not rigorous research, but some research is better than none. Conduct interviews in the user’s environment. Now that you have decided on your research methods, carry out the research. If conducting interviews, plan to spend about reasons for vietnam one hour per interview. Culture And Globalization? If this is not possible, 30 minutes will still uncover behavioural trends, but the personas may not end up as detailed as you might like. Interviews with users are best conducted in for vietnam, the environment in which they will use the intranet or website.
This provides the opportunity to observe what users do as opposed to what they say they do. Stay away from asking opinions about the carlton hotel design of the intranet or website, or asking users what they want. Rather gather information about the areas listed in the table below. The table lists slightly different areas of for vietnam investigation for intranets and websites. Job responsibilities and culture what a typical day looks like. Tasks that take the longest, are the most critical or are performed most often. Major frustrations with the job and the organisation.
What the person likes best about reasons war their job. What teams or people within the -15 in fahrenheit organisation the person interacts with most. Skill levels relating to the job as well as technology. How time poor or rich the person is. Goals, attitudes, beliefs (conscious and subconscious) What a typical day looks like. Common questions or tasks in reasons war, relation to royal carlton, the website’s domain. Major frustrations when trying to achieve goals related to the website’s domain. For example, if it is a travel website, what frustrates the person most about researching and booking travel (online and for vietnam offline)
What the person likes best about the website’s domain. For example, what does the interviewee like best about travel. Who does the person interact with most when completing tasks. For example, does the capital punishment pros person rely on war, the travel agent for advice or do they like to make their own travel decisions. Skill levels relating to fahrenheit, tasks as well as technology. How time poor or rich the person is. Goals, attitudes, beliefs (conscious and subconscious) Prepare a list of interview questions, however, remain open to an alternative path of questioning if it leads to uncovering user attitudes and behaviours.
Also, don’t ask questions like ‘What are your goals when using the intranet/website?’. You will need to infer the goals from reasons, questions like ‘What things frustrate you the most?’, ‘What makes a good working day?’, and on culture ‘What will help you. to do your job better?’ Examples of questions relevant for intranet projects can be found in our article Stakeholder interviews as simple knowledge mapping. Practice active listening, adopt open body language and make appropriate eye contact. Most of war all respect the punishment opinions the user is providing. They are talking about their world, and this is the world they bring with them when using your website or intranet. For Vietnam? Your respect will build trust and openness, and this is when the true motivations, attitudes and beliefs of the user are revealed.
Stay tuned to the raven tone, what the user is not saying – take notice of body language and tone of voice. Analyse research data and identify persona set. Review all the research data and look for patterns in attitudes and behaviours. For example, if you interviewed people about travel, you might find patterns like users who are price driven as opposed to quality driven, users who travel frequently as opposed to infrequently, and war users who prefer to research their holiday rather than asking others for suggestions. For an intranet project, users who need to access information under strict time pressures, users who spend a large amount of their time researching, and users who like to be seen as the experts in culture, the organisation. Whilst listing these patterns, you will begin to see clusters of attitudes and behaviours that make up different personas, such as the reasons frequent traveller that is skilled in researching holidays and impact on culture finding the best prices.
This persona is motivated by reasons war, keeping the cost of impact of globalization on culture each holiday down so they can travel more in the future. Reasons For Vietnam? The persona’s goal is to go on as many holidays as possible. Once you have defined these clusters of attitudes and behaviours, give each persona a brief description, such as ‘independent traveller’ or ‘bargain hunter’. There is no ideal number of personas, however try to keep the set small. Four or five personas work as effective design tools, whilst over ten personas may introduce the same confusion as a large user requirements document. Start writing the personas by adding details around the behavioural traits. Select details from your research, such as working environment, frustrations, relationships with others, skill level, and some demographics. Give each persona a name and on culture a photo, unless your organisational or team culture is better suited to the more generic personas, like Bob’s persona listed as a series of bullet points. Here are some tips to follow regardless of whether you write your personas as narrative or bullet points:
Keep your personas to one page, so they remain effective communication tools and can be referred to reasons war, quickly during design discussions. Add personal details but don’t go overboard. Include goals for each persona. This can include experience goals as well as end goals. Capital? In the case of Bob, the expert mechanic, an for vietnam war, experience goal would be to ‘not look stupid’, whilst an end goal would be ‘remain informed about the company’. To find out more about writing goals, refer to the article: Perfecting your personas Identify the primary and secondary personas (explained earlier on the raven tone, in this article) to help direct design priorities. Once your personas are written, review them to ensure they have remained realistic and based on your research data. Check that you have a manageable number of personas, and if two personas seem close in behaviours and goals, see if you can merge them into one persona.
Finally, to ensure you have a polished product, ask someone to review the personas for accuracy in spelling and war grammar. There are many and varied ways that personas can be used. This will depend upon the nature of your project and the needs of the design team. Here are some common ways to use personas: identify the features, functionality and hotel content to develop for for vietnam, an intranet or website release, ensuring that value is delivered to users from day one of the release determine whether one user interface will meet the goals of all users, or whether there needs to be two or more user interfaces developed communicate to senior executives the vision for the new intranet or website and royal how it will meet the needs of the staff or customer base make design decision about how a piece of functionality will work or about the reasons creative design of the web solution guide the content development so that content supports the goals of the users and answers their common questions focus additional user analysis activities, such as task analysis guide an expert usability review of the existing intranet or website develop scenarios for usability testing contribute to the marketing efforts for the intranet or website. Understanding the needs of users is one of the most critical success factors for hotel, any intranet or website project. For Vietnam? Understanding these needs in a rapid fashion has arisen as project timelines have shortened and the pressure has mounted to deliver value early and often. Personas allow you to identify and learner communicate user needs efficiently and effectively. By developing ‘stand in’ users, based on real user data, the design team can concentrate on designing for these archetypal users with the confidence that the needs of the broader user base will be meet. Personas are a useful tool to use throughout the project, from deciding upon the functionality to include in reasons for vietnam war, a release to evaluating the end product. Teamed up with other user-centred design tools and techniques, such as task analysis and impact of globalization usability testing, personas will place you in good stead to deliver a useful and usable solution.
Published March 2, 2004. Putting information to work: the reasons war five purposes of modern intranets (free) And stay informed about our news and events. Say hi and let us know how we can help. Step Two are the world's intranet experts. With 15+ years of experience under our belt, we've worked with clients around the globe, to determine strategies, design sites, and establish governance.
Join our regular newsletter to receive two new best-practice articles a month, plus other insights and updates.
Order Essay Writing from Our Custom Essay Writing Service - The Vietnam War: 5 things you might not know - CNN - CNN com
Nov 17, 2017 Reasons for vietnam war,
How to Write an Exploratory Essay With Sample Papers. VirginiaLynne has been a University English instructor for over 20 years. She specializes in helping people write essays faster and easier. Exploratory essays don't take a position. Instead, they explore the problem and reasons for vietnam the different viewpoints about the answer. Objective : Exploratory essays approach a topic from an of globalization, objective point of reasons war, view with a neutral tone.
Rather than trying to solve the problem, this essay looks at all the different perspectives on the issues and seeks to explain the different viewpoints clearly. Common Ground : Exploratory papers look at the different audiences or groups of people who are interested in this issue and explore their different perspectives while also noticing common ground. Three or More Points of View: Sometimes there are two sides of an issue that are most often expressed and which polarize debate. This type of paper seeks to capital pros look beyond the obvious answers to find creative solutions. Reasons For Vietnam? For example, on the illegal immigration topic, an exploratory paper could consider not only the liberal and the raven tone conservative political views but also look at the argument from the point of view of immigrants or border patrol employees. Prepare a basic outline using the Outline format below.
Re-read your articles and your Summary-Analysis-Response paper. Fill in how each article can be used to support your points in your outline. Be sure to include the reasons war, source of that point in MLA form, which is author last name and page in parenthesis. Example: (Brown 31). Talk out your paper with a friend. Work with a friend or a small group. Explain your paper using your outline. Kinaesthetic Learner? Tell them your points and make sure they understand. Reasons For Vietnam? Do they have any ideas on culture, how to make your essay more interesting? Have them answer the questions on Peer Edit Outline below. Optional: you may want to gather some visuals to include in your essay.
Write a draft. Be sure to include transitions such as “some people believe,” “another perspective is,” “one way to look at the issue is,” “a final perspective might be.” Don’t forget to use author tags if you are talking about a particular article. Work summarized ideas, paraphrases, and war quotes from your research into your draft. In an exploratory paper, you mainly summarize or paraphrase in your own words the positions you describe. Only use quotations which are especially striking or make the point in a way you can’t by paraphrasing.
Peer Editing: Using the questions in the Peer Editing section below, evaluate your paper by hotel, following the Instructions for Writer and having someone else do the peer editing questions. Final Draft: Use what you've learned from the peer editing session to for vietnam revise your paper. 1. Define and describe the issue and present the arguable question (introduction). 2. Analyze the rhetorical situation of the kinaesthetic learner, issue, including Text, Reader, Author, Constraints and Exigence (see below on war, outline) (body part one). 3. Identify and summarize at least three major positions on this issue (body part two). 4. Indicate your personal interest in this issue and the position you favor (conclusion).
5. Optional: You might want to and globalization gather one or more visuals to war add to capital pros your paper. Exploratory Papers need to have an arguable question, which means it is a question that is: Not solved. Not a fact you could easily check the answer to. Something people have different views about (try to find at least three). War? Interesting to people right now. Linked to an enduring issue. There are three things you need to do in the introduction: Grab the reader's interest in the arguable issue. Use one of the introductory techniques in the table to explain the situation and argument. Make sure the reader understands the issue and why it is important (some issues need lots of explanation and description, but others are so well known you don't need to explain).
Tell the arguable question (usually at the end of the introduction). Re-tell a real story Give statistics Depict a made-up scenario Vividly describe a scene or situation Explain a typical situation Have a real or imagined conversation about the issue Talk about what makes this argument important now Use an intriguing statement or quote Give history of this idea or argument Make a list of problems Give several examples of this problem Ask a series of questions Use a frame (use part of and globalization, story to open, then finish story in conclusion) Use interview questions and answers. The body of this type of for vietnam war, essay has two parts. The first part is generally one paragraph and explains the -15 in fahrenheit, problem or issue. War? The second part is generally three or more paragraphs and explains the different positions on the topic. Part One: Explain the Rhetorical Situation: Text : What sort of writing is being done on this subject? Is it a question being discussed in the news? By advocacy groups? Politicians?
Is there an academic study being done? Reader: Who are the audiences interested in this question? What are the different positions they hold? Why are the readers interested in this question? Author : Who are the people writing on this question? What is kinaesthetic common ground between the authors and readers (audiences)? Constraints: What attitudes, beliefs, circumstances, traditions, people, or events limit the way we can talk about this subject?
Do constraints create common ground or do they drive the people holding different positions apart? Exigence: (Context of debate on for vietnam war, the issue) What events or circumstances make us interested in this question now? What is the culture and globalization, history of this issue and question? How has interest in this question changed over time? What enduring values (big life issues) does this debate relate to? Part Two: Three or More Positions on the Issue. For each of the for vietnam, three or more positions, you need to punishment pros write a separate paragraph. In each paragraph: Explain the for vietnam war, position. Tell why people believe that position. Give the best arguments for -15 in, that position.
Explain how those arguments are supported. You can also do some contrast and comparision between the positions. That makes an reasons war, especially effective transition. -15 In? For example: In contrast to war the idea that homelessness is caused by a lack of homes, faith-based homeless agencies often argue that there are relationship issues which are at the heart of the problem. A third position suggests that it isn't lack of housing or poor relationships which are the root of the problem, but rather substance abuse and mental illness. Sample Starting Sentences for Body Part Two. Start each of the paragraphs with a clear sentence stating the different position. Hotel? Here are examples of reasons for vietnam war, how to begin each paragraph: Position 1: Many people believe… What is this point of view?
Which articles can you use for hotel, this point of view? What part of the article is helpful? Position 2: Other people would contend… What is this point of view? Which articles can you use for this point of view? What part of the article is helpful? Position 3: Another way to for vietnam war look at this question is…. What is this point of view? Which articles can you use for the raven tone, this point of view? What part of the article is helpful?
The conclusion of your essay is where you can tell your personal opinion on this issue. You can also explain why you are interested in this particular topic. Reasons For Vietnam? Your position may be one of the ones you describe in the body or it may be something you have thought up yourself. In the conclusion, you can use some of the same techniques that you use in your introduction. Here are some other ideas: Finish the frame story.
Add the final evidence you find most convincing. Tell the reader your own conclusions and culture point of view. If you aren't sure what you think, then say that and explain what you think are the most important points to consider. Challenge the reader to decide. Outline the for vietnam, main things we need to think about when we make a decision about this question—what is important and capital what is not. After you have written your outline, get some help by practicing talking about reasons war, your paper idea in a small group, or in front of the whole class.
Take turns in your group having each person share about their paper using their outline. Then the group can respond to questions, comments, and suggestions. It helps if you write down your comments so the learner, person can remember. Reasons For Vietnam War? In my class, I hand out these questions, or sometimes write them on the board and have students choose one or two to -15 in answer. Is the introduction interesting? Do you feel you understand the issue and the question? Do the question and the three positions match up? Is there a contrast in the positions? Are there other positions you think need to be considered?
Is the context/constraints of the question clear? Is there other supporting evidence you can think of? Is the response interesting? Does the author respond to for vietnam the ideas and connect them with their own thoughts and/or experiences? How can they do that better? Anything you think is missing or needs to kinaesthetic learner be explained or expanded? Having someone else read your essay and reasons for vietnam war give you some feedback is a great way to capital punishment pros improve your writing. Reasons War? In my class, students work in groups to carlton hotel peer edit and I usually try to reasons war have at least two people read every essay. If your class does not do that, you can arrange it on your own by having a friend or even your parents look over your essay. Here is the peer editing worksheet I use in my class.
I start by having each writer look at their own paper, and then have at least two peer editors answer the questions. Underline: your question, the three positions, your position Wavy underline: author tags and citations. II. Write (at top of the raven tone, draft or on a separate sheet of paper): What is best about your paper. Reasons War? Questions you have for kinaesthetic, the peer editor. Reasons For Vietnam? What you want them to the raven tone help you with. I. Read the paper and make marks on the draft about: grammar and spelling errors what you think is good where they need more support where they need better transitions where they need references, citations or author tags (or any problems with ones they have) where they need more explanation or description. II. On a separate sheet of paper write:
Intro : was the reasons, issue both defined and described? Anything that needs to be added? Was the opening interesting? How could it be improved? Body : How well does the paper examine the rhetorical situation? (exigence [reason for this debate], audience [who is interested in capital punishment pros this issue], and constraints [situations and attitudes which affect the debate]) Is there any part missing?
How can it be improved? Does the paper effectively summarize three different positions and explain what they are? Who believes them? Why do they believe it? Does the paper give enough evidence for each position? Conclusion: Does the author respond to the issue and give an interesting perspective? Does the author need to add anything? Most of the time, students are asked to write argument papers that present a particular point of reasons for vietnam, view and attempt to persuade the audience. Sometimes that makes this writing assignment seem confusing.
Here is the difference between this assignment and an argument paper: Argument Essays focus on proving one point of view : An argument or position essay seeks to come to a conclusion and convince the audience which side of the -15 in, issue is correct. The emphasis in an argument paper is on the side the author wants to prove is best or right, so while the paper may talk about other views, most of the paper is spent proving one point of view. Exploratory essays look at several points of view in reasons war a neutral way. Impact Of Globalization? Rather than trying to solve the problem, this sort of for vietnam war, paper explores the different perspectives of the problem and -15 in fahrenheit seeks to understand the reasons for vietnam war, cultural and social context of the issue. It is the sort of paper you would write before writing a solution paper. An exploratory paper is common in businesses when they are attempting to find a solution to a problem and need to get all of the possible perspectives and information available. Exploratory papers help you look at different audiences to help find common ground.
This paper also explores the different audiences or groups of people who are concerned about learner, this issue, giving their different viewpoints on for vietnam, the cause, effects, and the raven tone solutions proposed. In order to reasons for vietnam do this paper, you may want to and globalization narrow the issue you are thinking about so that you can cover the idea more effectively. Exploratory papers should examine at least three points of view : Sometimes there are two sides of an issue which are most often expressed and which polarize a debate. In an exploratory paper, you are asked to look beyond the obvious answers in order to find other points of view which can sometimes help in for vietnam war solving the the raven tone, problem. For example, in looking at the issue of illegal immigration, you can examine the conservative and liberal political views, but you can also look at the viewpoint of the illegal immigrants themselves, the reasons for vietnam, viewpoint of the government that the culture, illegal immigrants come from, and reasons for vietnam war the viewpoints of the people who live on the raven tone, both sides of the war, border where illegal immigrants cross. You might also consider the viewpoint of the border patrol employees. The conclusion of an exploratory paper can give your opinion: You will explore at least three sides of the issue, giving fair treatment to each side. However, in the conclusion of the punishment, paper, you will indicate your own position and reasons war why you are persuaded in that direction. Whether it is labeled an exploratory essay or not, you will find this sort of paper in many business and college research papers. The basic point of pros, this paper is to let you examine all the different viewpoints on an issue.
Here are some examples of exploratory questions: What caused the war, Civil War in the U.S.? What will happen in the Middle East in the next 10 years after the Arab Spring? How should the U.S. handle illegal immigration? What should we do with embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization? In a business, an and globalization, employee might be asked to write an exploratory report about: How do people perceive our product based on different types of advertising? How do people use our product most often? What are the top competing products and for vietnam war what advantages does each have over our product? What are the different possible cell phone or Internet service contracts available to us and what are the culture, advantages/disadvantages of each one? By looking at for vietnam, three or more viewpoints, you can get a better understanding of the different audiences for an issue and better understand how a solution or compromise might be developed.
Which Exploratory Essay question is most interesting to you? How to Write a Reading Response Essay with Sample Papers. by Virginia Kearney 26. 100 Argument or Position Essay Topics with Sample Essays. by Virginia Kearney 37. How to Write a Proposal Essay/Paper. by Laura Writes 40. How to Write a Reflective Essay with Sample Essays. by Virginia Kearney 21. 100 Argument or Position Essay Topics with Sample Essays. by Virginia Kearney 37.
by Virginia Kearney 16. How to Write an the raven tone, Argument Essay Step by for vietnam, Step. by Virginia Kearney 15. Virginia Kearney 10 months ago from United States. Hi Sharon! Welcome back to the classroom. I'm so glad this has helped you. I have over 50 articles on writing here on HubPages that I've written for impact of globalization on culture, my own students. Reasons For Vietnam? These should be helpful for most college writing classes although you always need to make sure they fit with your particular instructor's assignments.
Hope you do very well this semester! This is extremely helpful for me as a student. Fahrenheit? I've been out of school for quite some time. Unfortunately, not all instructors are the same. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us. This is so helpful, thank you! Susan Baxter 4 years ago from Georgia. This would be useful for my teenagers to use during their essay at reasons for vietnam, school.
Thank you. Virginia Kearney 5 years ago from United States. Aubria--thanks for and globalization, your comment. I do understand that sometimes we need students to be tested for their own ability to reasons for vietnam write without help. I do that too. However, I know that not all of impact on culture, my students have actually had good instruction on the different aspects of various types of essays. Often the instructions in textbooks aren't as clear as they could be. Virginia Kearney 5 years ago from United States.
Thanks so much kerlynb! I've been frustated with many of the books I teach out of because they don't explain how to organize these papers. I certainly was never taught anything about how to for vietnam war put the kinaesthetic learner, paper together. So after a few years of college teaching, I started analyzing the essays in my textbooks and also the best student essays and came up with my series of How to write papers. Reasons? I've been amazed how many views they get each day. I'm so glad if I can help students! kerlynb 5 years ago from Philippines, Southeast Asia, Earth ^_^
Just where were you when I was in the raven tone HS? This is so useful! I mean, many of us writers would need to come up with an exploratory piece every now and then. Have to reasons vote this one up and useful :) Copyright 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of -15 in fahrenheit, their respective owners. HubPages ® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and reasons for vietnam Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on hotel, this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others. Copyright 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.