Sociology

The main point of this opinionated book concerns a comparative analysis of state-created racial distinctions as these racial distinctions relate to both the processes and the effects of nation-building through exclusion and inclusion.  In order to better understand and analyze the potential connection between racial conflict and the construction of nation-states, the author sets forth his analytical framework in terms of a number of questions that need to be answered.  The first question, framed rather generally, asks the reader to consider what underlying factors may have contributed to race relations in the twentieth century.  These factors are to be determined through a comparative analysis of race relations in South Africa, the United States of America, and Brazil.

A number of further questions are then asked in order to determine the historical origins of race relations in these countries, how racial distinctions arose and became reinforced as a result of specific types of political and economic processes that were integral to nation-building efforts, and how protests from below emerged and affected nation building in these countries (Marx, 2).  These questions are answered with a thesis that adopts a state-centered argument (Marx, 2) in which the states are said to have created racial distinctions in an effort to protect dominant political and economic elites from threats to their privileged positions.  The key actors, however, were more complicated than a simple elite and non-elite.  In effect, as the author argues, there were intra-white struggles in both South Africa and the United States of America that led the political and economic elites in those countries to create or otherwise exacerbate racial distinctions in order to insure social stability while simultaneously warding off white threats to their dominant positions (Marx, 11).

Blacks, in this way, were often caught in the middle of larger struggles and manipulated in a larger battle for political influence, economic power, and social stability.  Social stability, in turn, offered the elites the appearance of legitimacy and contributed to their efforts to further institutionalize policies and structures that would allow them to consolidate their power, claim widespread political legitimacy, and force through the social conditions necessary for their continued economic prosperity.  The central thesis, therefore, is that race relations were an integral feature of nation-building in which race was used a political device to maintain social order by unifying the whites and preserving the privileged positions of the dominant elites.

The political process of creating nations, as set forth by the author, consists of a number of struggles and reactions in which dominant elites continuously struggled to fend off political and economic threats from white challengers and to use racial distinctions as a means of frightening the white population into unity and submission.  Indeed, as stated by Marx, Racial domination had the unintended consequence of consolidating and legitimating subordinated racial identity into a potential base for resistance (20).   The elites, in effect, created their own threat and then used it to persuade others to fall into line.

This political process was essentially state-centered and it was a manifestation of an elite desire to maintain social stability.  When nation-building was able to proceed through a comparatively harmonious process of cooperation and cooperation it did on the other hand, when harmony was displaced through conflict, ideology and coercion were invoked (Marx, 21-22).  Some of these conflicts arose from white on white conflicts as evidenced by the British-Afrikaner conflicts in South Africa and the social divisions leading to the American Civil War.  It was when white loyalties were most dangerously divided, and when the dominant political and economic interests felt that there interests were most seriously threatened, that state race creation became state policy.

The author points out how the elites cleverly, and perhaps immorally, maneuvered in order to stamp out conflicts.  The elites, particularly in South Africa and the United States of America, essentially sold out the blacks by appealing to a larger notion of white nationalism (Marx, 12).  Policies of inclusion and exclusion were created or reinforced.  Nationalism, a racial type of nationalism, was created or reinforced in order to foster notions of unity in order to stave off social conflict.  When protests from the excluded arose, the elites fell back on racial distinctions in order to rally the whites around their particular cause.  In short, in order to avoid having intra-white conflicts devolve into open war, the elites created racial distinctions in such a way as to manipulate both the white challengers and the people being excluded.  The political process articulated is very much like a puppet show in which race relations was the critical string.

Racial distinctions, being so beneficial to the dominant political and social elites, were consolidated and always available for manipulation against perceived threats to social stability or perceived legitimacy.  The manipulation and the racial distinctions were especially pronounced in both South Africa and the United States of America this was because white on white conflict was much more severe in these countries than it was in Brazil where racial distinctions, while made and reinforced, assumed a more moderate form (Marx, 11).  Racial distinctions were not irrelevant in Brazil.  They did, however, assume a more subtle role in nation-building than was the case in either South Africa or the United States.

In the final analysis, the central thesis of this reading is that a state-centered elite both created and reinforced racial distinctions as an integral part of its nation-building tactics and strategies.  The elites primary goals were social stability, white unity, and creating the conditions and institutions necessary for continued political and economic dominance.

At the time of DuBois the African Americans were segregated not just by their color, but also by the caste, white America wanted to keep the African Americans poor and used segregation and discrimination to do it.  Since the 1950s and 1960s discrimination has fallen under attack and has been deemed unlawful and the color line and segregation were no longer an issue, and yet the African Americans are still in the majority at the lower echelons of the caste system. DuBois felt the discrimination of his race on a daily basis.  He was well educated, holding a PhD and spoke several languages and yet could not get a job as a professor because Universities did not hire African Americans to teach their children. The fact is that much of this type of discrimination still lives within the African American culture. DuBois overcame this type of discrimination by serving both race as was deemed appropriate, and yet he never went against his beliefs.  Others tried to be like DuBois in his balancing act, but none were as successful. Today there are more options than ever for the African American but the creation of a separate African American culture by the intellectual African Americans has turned on them and recreated a type of segregation.

The fact that DuBois did so much to give rise to the African American intellectual seems to be ignored by the newly separated African American culture within the United States.  The African American people fought so hard to win the acceptance of the government and their equality only to create a separate culture with their own media, journals and such.  They have isolated themselves after years of trying to gain equality.  The African American intellects have strived to continue on their journey to equality but many of the intellectuals have outgrown their African American culture.  This seems to show that even today the majority of the African Americans are living in their own culture, and yet those African American intellectuals they espouse live them behind and live within the colorblind reality of the rest of America.

Max Weber Summary
Max Weber was a well-known advocate of political economy, and professor at the University of Heidelberg, prior to his breakdown.  He never completely recovered from his breakdowns, but his most spectacular work came after giving up his teaching job and focusing on the religious and social influences on the economy.  In fact, The Protestant Ethics was used to explain the correlation between the Protestant religion and capitalism.  Elizabeth Kolbert, in her essay about Weber, Why Work describes the world of Weber in a way that people were not motivated to work harder if they got paid more money.  In fact it was the opposite.  The workers only worked enough to get the pay that they were accustomed to getting.  Weber knew this and used Martin Luther and John Calvin and their Protestant and Puritan views to explain the motivation of work and earning money.  These two religions believed in working hard and saving money to create their own wealth.  This was the actions that Weber was trying to teach.  He wanted people to be motivated to work and save, but the economy and society of his day was the exact opposite. Unfortunately, Weber lost favor when his ideas took a strange turn and no society could live up to his economic agenda, however, even without following his plan, the economies around the world is succeeding.

It seems that Weber made good use of his time recuperating from his breakdowns, but one must wonder just how much of the work was created during his mental break and how much was truly based on his research through his life.  There are many aspects that seem to be considered logical and rational, however, there are other aspects, such as beau racy being a good thing that leaves the reader wondering just how rational this man truly was.  He obviously was in a loveless marriage and this may have allowed him the time to create his theories, but the questioning of the logical ramifications of the theories leave much to be desired, hence the fact that Weber is no longer considered a viable expert, but a historical view of the religious and economic past.

Charisma Summary
The word charisma has been used through out the 20th and 21st centuries to explain leaders and celebrities. Through the last half of the 20th century the word has be exploited and used incorrectly to the point that the true meaning is lost to the rest of the world.  Philip Rieff began writing about charisma in the 1970s but did not complete the manuscript until just before his death in 2005, meaning that parts are somewhat out of date, but the foundation of the book is as relevant today as it was 30 years ago.  Todays modern definer of charisma, Allan Bloom, follows the thought of charisma being initially a religious idea that was secularized and exploited becoming something that was no longer special, but an every day occurrence. The concept of a religious charisma was based on the obedience of the divine powers.  Max Weber, however, pulled charisma into the secular world by redefining the word to mean a person that has the ability to influence others to their own will.  Rieff used his understanding of the true meaning of charisma being religious in basis and tried to pull the concept back to religion and the people of the world back to faith.  His theory was that everything had become evil and that until all was made right again, and then the evil would win and annihilate the world.

Rieff does seem to be a bit on the apocalyptic side of life, with his threats and warnings about the evil and fallen angels taking over the world.  The fact that charisma is taken into the secular society does take away from its original meaning but it does not mean that the world will end.  Charisma, religiously, means the act of being righteous and following the higher powers rules and orders.  Secularly it means being influenced by another person.  The definition only changed in the who is influencing man rather than what is the theme of the influence.  It would seem that some religious rulers would have used their charisma to get their followers to act in ways that they, as humans, deemed expected by the higher power.  The same thing happens with charismatic leaders today.  They tell society what is needed.  Then society, at least the majority, usually does it.  Understanding this basic and very subtle difference may or may not make a difference, but either way, charisma will continue to influence people and societies.

Working-Day

Summary and Key Points
The article aims at explaining working-day from capital point of view. The working time is the time spent by an individual doing occupational labor. In most of the countries the working time is stipulated allowing the individual to have personal time during the week. But the trend is changing with the time. Now the working hours is calculated on the basis of capital investment done. When working hours are calculated on basis of investment or capital, the value of labor is diminished. It is pushed to an extent where laborers are bound to work for 24 hours a day with essential break time to fuel them to work harder. The integrity and individuality of the laborer has no value when compared to capital.

Response and Critique
In my opinion, the trends have changed with the concept of working-day. In olden days, work was considered as part of human life for sustaining the individual and the family. For some, it was their passion and they did to enhance their talent and knowledge. But, now work and the working-day is the entire life. The laborer has no choice of working hours, shifts or holidays. The laborer works like machines, which is refueled time to time just to enhance the productivity. The effects of this change might be positive on the production levels where quantity matters (increased production due to extended man-hours), but quality of the products cannot be guaranteed. The worker is tired and exhausted due to lack of sleep and unhealthy eating habits.  The long working hours reduces the capacity of the worker to think, react and produce intelligent decisions during the working hours. In short, the long working hours tend to have ill effects on the mental and physical health of the laborer, which in turn will affect the production in terms of quality not the quantity.

Speech at the Graveside of Karl Marx by Friedrich Engels
Summary and Key Points
The article is a speech at the graveside of Karl Marx given by Friedrich Engels (was a German social scientist, author, political theorist, philosopher, and father of communist theory, alongside Karl Marx) on March 17, 1883. It was delivered three days after the demise of Karl Marx. The speech describes the persona, thoughts and ideas, beliefs and work done by Karl Marx in his period. He described Karl Marx as philosopher, political economist, communist and revolutionary whose ideas were the base of modern communism. The speech also gives the list of work done by Karl Marx in his lifetime.
According to Engel, Marx was a man of discoveries. He describes Marx as an investigator, who can develop ideas and question the existing system of caste, religion, and social status.

Response and Critique
This speech gives the general picture of Karl Marx and his life. It also provides the insight into the relationship shared between Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. A speech of this intensity can only suggest that Engels was a close contributor in Marxism along with Marx. While Marx remained an obscure figure in his lifetime, his ideas and ideology began to influence the worker class shortly after his death. Although, there was a great influence of this ideology on Russia, the rest of the world remained untouched. It could have been an eye opener if Engels could narrate the short falls and limitations of the Marxism in his speech. If the ideology of Marx was foolproof, then the success rate of its acceptance in the society should have been greater than what we see today. The speech lacked the information on the work to be completed in future to enhance Marxism. Though it gives the list of work done by Karl Marx, but does not emphasize on the practical implication of his ideology.

Emile Durkheim
Summary and Key Points
The article gives an insight into the ideas and ideology of French sociologist Emile Durkheim. He is the inventor of the idea anomie. The primary concern for Durkheim was how society could maintain their integrity and coherence in the modern era, when shared religion and ethnic background no longer plays a role. He was one of the first people to explain the existence and quality of parts of society with reference to what function they served. His idea was to have a scientific approach to study social phenomena. According to him, unlike the facts studied in natural sciences, a social fact refers to a phenomenon it consists of acting, thinking and feeling. Hence, even the most individualistic subject as suicide was regarded as objective social facts. For him the purpose of sociology was not to recommend political program rather it was to be a sound academic discipline. Unlike Marx the meaning of religion was quite different for Durkheim. He thought it was the way of explaining the level of social and collective consciousness.

Response and Critique
His ideology of collective consciousness of society, which suggests that society is a conscious agent with its own goal above or beside those of its individual members, is very impressive. It has been proved and agreed that psychology of an individual when alone and in a group is varied. Hence, it is not necessarily that society is a sum of its individual members. Social facts are above individual circumstances and have their own existence. These social facts meet us externally, and seem to strike everyone. Durkheim divides them into mechanistic and organic, but did not elaborate on relationship of development and how they functioned. Unlike Marx, he did not want to understand the world but wanted to change it. As social animals, we are growing diverse and individualistic and yet yearn for solidarity and unity.

Twilight of Sociology
Summary and Key Points
With the death of political sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset, the thought that comes to our mind is that almost all the prominent sociologist, who transformed our way of thinking, is no more. The death of Mr. Lipset and other prominent sociologists (Philip Rieff and David Riesman) seems to have left a void as there is no one to replace them. At present, sociology seems to have lost its confidence in the power of its fundamental categories. Sociology ceased to study the profound way of acknowledging difficult truths and substituted activism. Although, there is progressive work in sociology, but the sense of free-wheeling inquiry is diminished. While various sociologists viewed sociology from many different standpoints, such as economics, biology, psychology, and political science, there are writers who see sociology as a general science, and who seek to find single principle on which to base it.

Response and Critique
I have to agree that though there are works going on in different areas of sociology, but there are evidences of influential sociologists drifting away to other departments (Aln Wolfe of Boston College). He would prefer to be associated with the department of political science. The reason for such drift is evident Politics. Sociology as such came under the belief that nothing was grounded in nature, nothing is justified by tradition and customs and nothing is enduring. All could be reshaped along with political lines. It is just not politics, which is interfering with the progress of sociology, but also scientism. The attempt to imitate and follow other natural sciences for precision and status is also hindering the growth of sociology. Since the complexity of the society is far beyond imagination than what it was in earlier days, the study of social interaction and process is utmost priority without the interference of any external factors.

My academic triumph started before it even began. I attained my degree in Bachelor of Arts in English through scholarship at the Fujian Normal University in 2004. For the entire four years, I belonged to the Top 5 of 10,000 undergraduates. Concurrent to this, I also received the Outstanding Student Leadership of the Department of English. In addition, I was able to pass several exams in English proficiency. Although I am not English, I made myself really good, if not excellent, at it.

I became a professional right after graduating. I served as an English teacher for a year at the Fuzhou University in the Fujian Province of China. After which, I became the administrator and expeditor of the UK Weir Pump Shanghai Representative Office in Shanghai, China from 2005 to 2006. Then for the next three years, I was employed at Pacovision Limited still in Shanghai, China. There I assumed three job roles including Assistant Chief Executive Officer, Sales Manager and International Marketing Communication Manager.

In order to do better in my craft, I have also involved myself in professional development trainings in computer proficiency, English, Dutch, German and Japanese languages. Further, I have published an essay compilation on socio-political ideology for the Communist Party of China.

Knowing that Sociology is a social science which deals with human societies, I find it particularly interesting to deal with people as I have experienced in my previous functions. This led me to formalize my passion in human social activities, social structures, diverse cultures and social welfare by applying at the University of New Mexico (UNM) - Department of Sociology.

I believe that UNM can provide my scholastic needs because the mission of its Department of Sociology emphasizes the comprehension of society, human relationships,
social institutions and the dynamics of social change. I have had actual experiences of these social factors and processes and I want to learn more about them at a theoretical, more in-depth level. Since I was also a teacher, the Department can help me a lot because it also highlights research and teaching.

Finally, I want to reiterate my utmost interest to get in at the Department of Sociology of UNM. I would like to express my appeal for a financial aid to support me in this academic intention. I am hoping for a positive response to this application because I am looking forward to new societal experiences in the future. This academic program will facilitate the attainment of my goals and provide new opportunities to make me a true sociologist.

Last night, I came across The Jerry Springer Show. Jerry Springer interviewed a man who has several children in Southeast Asia and South America. His live-in partner erupted in anger, accusing her boyfriend for being conspicuous and immoral. The funny thing was that prior to the show, the girlfriend already knew the sexual adjustments of her boyfriend. Apparently, the girl chose the show to expose the ineptness of her boyfriend. The boyfriend also erupted in anger  directing accusations against he administrator of the lie detector test. The administrator challenged the guy for a fistfight. The shows crew stopped the two from fighting.

It is quite interesting to see how people direct and redirect meaning. The girl used the show to rejuvenate her anger towards her boyfriend  apparently, from her perspective her boyfriend is down bottom bastard, a sexual pervert. When the boyfriend denied the accusations  evidently to please the crowd (that is, to preserve his image as a responsible individual)  the administrator accused him of lying. Now, the guy redirected his anger towards the administrator. At a glance, it seems that the guy only wanted to straighten some things out. Evidently, he wanted to show that the lie detector was lying.

Symbolic interactionism can explain the essence of this incident. People interpret events differently (Ferris and Stein, 2007). This leads to confrontation, discussion, and to some extent, physical fights. It is evident that meanings are not meaningless  they may obtrude feelings and actions (Ferris and Stein, 2007).

Politics had been one of the many aspects that any person would encounter, either he or she knew or oblivious to it. It is not just developed and brewed in the clusters of high-ranking politicians debating what bill should be passed or not. A person may not notice it but each time he chose and made a decision on that very second, was actually an act of politicking. Politics is defined as a study of government of states and other political units or social relations involving intrigue to gain authority or power. To put it simply, anything that is related to power is considered politics. A mere American citizen may try to say he or she is apathetic towards his countrys politics. To deny of being influenced by politics, however, is a very different story. As an undergraduate student, I can truly say my life is influenced by politics in my socialization, territorial standing, belief system and etc. This paper will discuss further on how politics affected the way I live not only as a student but also a citizen.

Politics begins not in the government but in society. A society can run smoothly with the conformity that is followed and practiced by its people. It can be said to be a force of change in society, with the recent war on terror people have started to take sides as to which is the correct path to take in order to preserve American ideals yet safeguard American life. For me politics has created a division in society that surpasses race, culture and ethnicity. Discrimination is no longer due to the color of ones skin or ones origin rather discrimination have become a one of political orientation. Politics has helped to bridge the gap that was present between whites and blacks however it has created another wherein it is white against white and black against black.

Politics has become a growing competition between two ideologies in America with both preaching that their way of thinking is the most effective towards creating a strong country however with this divide in the way things work replacing one party with another and with the previous one in the next election would cause a problem in the way the country is meant to be run especially if both parties are opposed to truly helping one another and are apt to sabotaging the others efforts.

World politics in particular is one wherein it is not only my fate but the rest of the world that is at stake. With the recent conference in Copenhagen by world leaders regarding the recent problems with global warming the resulting catastrophic weather conditions that have happened as a result the direction of world politics will determine not only what might happen to me but consequently the next generation as well. Calamities are also another example that drove on how countries should respond. Just recently, the Haiti earthquake tragedy brought all world leaders together to contribute help to this impoverished developing country. People all over the world were aghast by the insensitive comment made by Rush Limbaugh regarding Haiti by accusing President Barack Obama of taking advantage on that calamity. The reactions from the people are due to being influenced by the politics they experienced. Again, theses examples presented are enough proofs that politics do influence several aspects on the citizens.

Human life is a long and strenuous process of evolution. This evolution can in other words also be termed as aging. Aging is not only a biological process but a social process which has its implications on how a person is viewed in the society by the people as well as how they are treated by the social structure. To commence the debate on ageing, first of all one needs to be aware of the different stages of human life i) Infancy ii) Toddler, iii) Childhood, iv) Adolescence, v) Young Adult., vi) Prime Adulthood, vii) Middle Age, viii) Old Age (Kunkel,2006)

The sociology of aging implies the understanding of ageing from the sociological perspective, whereby the issue of aging is judged against the sociological theories. (Kunkel  Morgan, pp 335) Sociology of Aging looks in to the matter of looking at how the media creates stereotypes of the aged and how the old portion of the population is considered to be rigid and firm in their beliefs. It aims to unearth the reality behind what the actual structure and position of the aged in the society (kunkel  Morgan, pp 335). There have been various television shows, dramas, cartoons as well as movies that have aimed to emphasize the growth and the mood of the sixty-five or old age group people. Included in these movies is the famous hit romance comedy flick of 1993, The Three Grumpy men.

The movie is starring the infamous couple of the movie Odd couple, Jack Lemmon and Walter Mathau who play the role of two elderly neighbors with Ann Margaret starring as the conflicting character in the movie. (IMDB, 2009)The plot of the story revolves around how the friendship of these two old adults is a product of constant bickering and mutual aggravation. The movie shows that even after living as next door neighbors of each other in the dull town of Minnesota, both Lemmon and Matthau have an integrated sense of competition infused in them. This competitiveness is put to test with the arrival of Ann Margaret who moves in to the town and the entire story intrinsically revolves around the by-product of what this ravishing lady does with the two childhood friends.
The novel offers deep insight to the issue of ageing as discussed above in the sociology of ageing. It outlines how the competitiveness, the anger as well as the aggravation like a child of these two old men influences their behavior as well as their personality all through the movie. Before divulging the plot of the story and how that contributes to the issue of ageing, the paper will first and foremost outline the cast that makes up the characters featured in this movie (IMDB, 2009)

Jack Lemmon as John Gustafson  (IMDB, 2009)
Walter Matthau as Max Goldman  (IMDB, 2009)
Ann-Margret as Ariel Truax  (IMDB, 2009)
Burgess Meredith as Grandpa Gustafson (J.W.) (IMDB, 2009)
Daryl Hannah as Melanie Gustafson (IMDB, 2009)
Kevin Pollak as Jacob Goldman  (IMDB, 2009)
Ossie Davis as Chuck (Bait Shop Owner) (IMDB, 2009)
Buck Henry as Elliott Snyder (IRS Agent) (IMDB, 2009)
Christopher McDonald as Mike (IMDB, 2009)
Steve Cochran as Weatherman (IMDB, 2009)
Joe Howard as Pharmacist (IMDB, 2009)
John Carroll Lynch as Moving Man (IMDB, 2009)

The movie outlines the conflicts between Max and John. Apart from the competitiveness which is caused by the arrival of Ariel, Max and John had great rivalry over the issue of fishing, as Max being able to catch a surplus amount of fish while John not being able to exceed two or three. These two grumpy old men also played tricks on each other which included tossing a deceased fish in to Maxs truck or switching the television via Johns window. The impact that these conflicts give rise to the issue of aging that states that as a man gets old he becomes more and closer to acting like a child. This is due to the fact that old people lack the chances of enjoyment that are enjoyed by the young generation. They rely on pensions and are not expected to work at an office as they have exceeded the age specifications for the job. As shown in the motion picture as well, almost all of the arguments of John and Max lead to continuous bickering.

Bickering points to the fact that these two young men try to enforce their superiority over one another. As they lack any other platform whereby they can showcase their authority and power, they find solace in enforcing their power and superiority through such outlets, particularly degrading conversations. (Taylor  Anderson, 363)

Another underlying theme of aging that is present in the movie is that, who is the best man out of the two. This is substantiated by the treatment Max and John give to Ariel, the new lady in the neighborhood. It is for her affection that the two old men are at loggerheads with each other again to the extent that they are ready to actually cause physical harm to the others property and self. Over here a bit of gender bias is also shown as Ariel is shown as initially having feelings for John alone but using Max as a tool to cause further disturbances between the two grumpy men.

Another sociological issue of aging that is discussed in the movie is that of the helping hand or the shoulder in times of need. As exemplified by Maxs treatment of John when he has a heart attack by paying off his debts to IRS and also by giving him Ariel back, we see how in times of distress and turmoil the old stick up for each other putting aside all their differences. Even those that include proving to be the best man out of the group and trying to enforce their authority all such differences are put aside and the strong bond of fraternity is refreshed and reawaken.

The humor as well as the drama in this movie has made it an all time hit of the twentieth century. Apart from serving the purpose of a romantic comedy, the movie is also an all time hit in terms of movies discussing aging issues. The movie has outlined major issues of growing old and its sociology in a light-hearted and comic manner that not only keeps the audience engaged but also lets the message reach the masses. Furthermore, the movie discovers the issues related to aging in a fashion that keeps the viewer involved as the plot is closer to reality and believable. It is a movie many people can relate to while at the same time having a hearty laugh over.

Therefore, needless to say The grumpy old men is a classic case of delineating the character of two old men who are restless of the society around them and want to make a place of their own in their little world. It is a movie that has touched up on even the more serious issues such as that of alienation from the society and the materialism that does not actually bedazzle the old age people and how they deal with this. It shows how conflicts in essence are also to be put aside in times of great trouble, a message that relates not only to the issue of aging of the old age but also aging amongst the youth. The movie covers in detail many important aspects of the sociology of aging.