text:
John Lowther, 1st Viscount Lonsdale

John Lowther, 1st Viscount Lonsdale, PC FRS (25 April 1655 – 10 July 1700 ), known as Sir John Lowther, 2nd Baronet, from 1675 to 1696, was an English politician.

Early life
He was born at Hackthorpe Hall, Lowther, Westmorland, the son of Col. John Lowther of Lowther (the eldest son of Sir John Lowther, 1st Baronet) and his wife, Elizabeth Bellingham, daughter of Sir Henry Bellingham, 1st Baronet, of Hilsington, Westmoreland.

He was educated at Sedbergh School before admission to Queen's College, Oxford, where he matriculated in 1670. He was admitted to the Inner Temple in 1671 and called to the Bar in 1677.

Career
Prior to his creation as a viscount in 1696, Lowther had succeeded his grandfather as a baronet, and was twice member of parliament for Westmorland between 1677 and 1696. In 1688 he was serviceable in securing Cumberland and Westmorland for King William III, and was appointed to the Privy Council in 1689. In 1690, he was first lord of the treasury, and he was Lord Privy Seal from March 1699 until his death. He was badly injured in a duel in 1691.

Lonsdale wrote in 1688 a brief account of events from the accession of James II to the landing of the Prince of Orange at Torbay, which was later printed as Memoirs of the Reign of James II (in 1808, for private circulation) and again in 1857. The Memoirs reveal no more of Lonsdale's part in events than his public utterances.

Personal life
On 3 December 1674, he married Lady Katherine Thynne (1653–1712/3), sister of Thomas Thynne, 1st Viscount Weymouth, and second daughter of Sir Henry Frederick Thynne, 1st Baronet and the former Hon. Mary Coventry (second daughter, by his second wife, of Thomas Coventry, 1st Baron Coventry). Together, they were the parents of:

 * Richard Lowther, 2nd Viscount Lonsdale (1692–1713), who died a few months after reaching his majority in 1713.
 * Henry Lowther, 3rd Viscount Lonsdale (1694–1751), who died unmarried in 1751.
 * Hon. Mary Lowther (c. 1676–1706), who married Sir John Wentworth, 1st Baronet of North Elmsall in February 1692.
 * Hon. Elizabeth Lowther, who married Sir William Ramsden, 2nd Baronet on 6 August 1695.
 * Hon. Margaret Lowther (d. 1728), who married Sir Joseph Pennington, 2nd Baronet on 20 April 1706.
 * Hon. Barbara Lowther (d. 1716), who married Thomas Howard of Corby (d. 1740), a direct descendant of Lord William Howard.
 * Hon. Anthony Lowther (d. 1741)
 * Hon. Jane Lowther (d. 1752), who died unmarried.

He died at Lowther on 10 July 1700 and was buried in Lowther churchyard. His wife Katherine Lowther took over his political influence and she was eventually buried at Lowther in 1713. The tomb is by William Stanton.

His branch of the Lowther family became extinct when his son Henry, the 3rd viscount, died unmarried in March 1751, and the baronetcy and estates went to his cousin, James Lowther, later the first Earl of Lonsdale.

title: John Lowther, 1st Viscount Lonsdale


text:
Babyface (musician)

Kenneth Brian Edmonds (born April 10, 1959), better known by his stage name Babyface, is an American singer, songwriter, and record producer. He has written and produced over 26 number-one R&B hits throughout his career and has won 13 Grammy Awards. He was ranked number 20 on NME 50 of The Greatest Producers Ever list.

Early life
Edmonds was born on April 10, 1959, in Indianapolis, Indiana, to Marvin and Barbara Edmonds. Barbara was a production operator at a pharmaceutical plant. Edmonds, who is the fifth of six brothers (including future After 7 band members Melvin and Kevon Edmonds, the latter of whom went on to have a modestly successful solo career), attended North Central High School in Indianapolis, and as a shy youth, wrote songs to express his emotions. When he was in eighth grade, Edmonds' father died of lung cancer, leaving his mother to raise her sons alone.

Music career
Edmonds later met funk performer Bootsy Collins, who tagged him "Babyface" because of his youthful look. He also performed in the group Manchild (which had a 1977 hit "Especially for You" with band member Daryl Simmons) as a guitarist. He played keyboards and guitar in the light-funk and R&B group the Deele (which also included drummer Antonio "L.A." Reid, with whom he would later form a successful writing and producing partnership). One of his first major credits as a songwriter for outside artists came when he wrote the tune "Slow Jam" for the R&B band Midnight Star in 1983. The tune was on Midnight Star's 1983 double-platinum No Parking on the Dance Floor album. Babyface remained in the Deele until 1988, when both he and Reid left the group.

His album Playlist consists of eight cover songs and two original works. It was released on September 18, 2007. It was the first album on the newly re-launched Mercury Records label.

On February 4, 2014, he released a Grammy Award-winning duet album with Toni Braxton titled Love, Marriage & Divorce on Motown Records.

In April 2024, he announced a Las Vegas residency via an Instagram video, featuring a playful spoof of Kidman's viral AMC Theaters ad.

Writing and producing
From the late 1980s to the early 90s, he wrote R&B and dance songs, writing and producing music for Bobby Brown ("Roni"), Karyn White ("Love Saw It"), Pebbles ("Girlfriend", "Mercedes Boy"), The Whispers ("Rock Steady", "In the Mood"), The Deele ("Two Occasions"), Johnny Gill ("My My My"), After 7 ("Ready or Not"), The Boys ("Dial My Heart"), Damian Dame ("Right Down to It") and Sheena Easton.

In 1989, Edmonds co-founded LaFace Records with Reid. Three of the label's early artists, TLC, Usher, and Toni Braxton, were very successful. TLC's second album CrazySexyCool, for which he wrote and produced some of the hits, became the best-selling album of all time by an American girl group. Under his direction, TLC sold more than 60 million albums worldwide, and a combined total of 75 million records. Toni Braxton's first two albums, Toni Braxton (1993) and Secrets (1996), for which he wrote the majority of the songs, went on to sell a combined total of over 15 million copies.

Babyface helped form the late-1990s R&B group Az Yet. Edmonds also helped to mold and work with some of his then-wife Tracey Edmonds' acts, such as Jon B and producer Jon-John Robinson.

"I'm Your Baby Tonight" (1990), produced for Whitney Houston, was Edmonds' first No. 1 Top 40 hit in the US. He also wrote and produced Boyz II Men's 1992 "End of the Road" and 1994 "I'll Make Love to You", both of which established records for the longest stay at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart. He co-wrote, co-produced, and provided backing vocals on Madonna's 1994 Bedtime Stories, which featured the seven-week No. 1 hit "Take a Bow", and shared billing with Eric Clapton on the chart-topping Grammy winner "Change the World" from the Phenomenon soundtrack. He also wrote and produced the No. 1 hit "Exhale (Shoop Shoop)" for Houston as well as the rest of the 10 million-selling Waiting to Exhale soundtrack in 1995, which spawned additional hits for Houston, Brandy and Mary J. Blige.

Edmonds has produced and written music for Bobby Brown, The Whispers, Pebbles, After 7, Johnny Gill, Deele, Karyn White, The Boys, Damian Dame, Tevin Campbell, Patti LaBelle, Chaka Khan, Aretha Franklin, Madonna, Janet Jackson, Faith Evans, Beyoncé, Diana Ross, Sheena Easton, Toni Braxton, Michael Jackson, Michael Bolton, Paula Abdul, Eric Clapton ("Change the World"), Whitney Houston, Brandy, Mary J. Blige, Tamia, Shola Ama, 3T, Sisqó, Dru Hill, Fall Out Boy, Céline Dion, Samantha Jade, Backstreet Boys, Honeyz, Katharine McPhee, Mariah Carey, Vanessa L. Williams, Bruno Mars, Kelly Clarkson, Chanté Moore, En Vogue, Zendaya, Kenny G, Kristinia DeBarge, Lil Wayne, Kevin Abstract, P!nk, Marc Nelson, TLC, Ariana Grande, Jessica Mauboy, Xscape, K-Ci & JoJo, NSYNC, Jordin Sparks and Phil Collins. He received three consecutive Grammy Awards for Producer of the Year from 1995 to 1997.

Babyface was in the studio for about two years with Ashanti to produce her album The Declaration (2008).

He worked on the Lil Wayne album Tha Carter III (2008), on the Kanye West-produced "Comfortable". He also worked with R&B singer Monica for her sixth studio album Still Standing (2010).

In 2013, Babyface served as producer for Ariana Grande's debut album Yours Truly, producing the majority of her songs, including her second single, "Baby I".

In September 2014, Babyface collaborated with Barbra Streisand on her album Partners, performing a duet on the track "Evergreen" and background vocals for other album tracks.

Babyface also collaborated with Foxes on her second album, All I Need (2016), producing and co-writing "Scar".

In July 2016, Babyface along with Bruce Roberts and Carole Bayer Sager helped write the song "Stronger Together" sung by Jessica Sanchez. The song was played after Hillary Clinton's speech at the 2016 Democratic National Convention. The song's title is named after the slogan that the Clinton campaign used as a show of uniting behind the Democratic nominee. The song was one of the top trending songs on Shazam that week. The song was widely perceived as positive by the listeners, and received praise by celebrities like Jennifer Lopez and Kim Kardashian.

Acting
In 1994, he appeared and performed on an episode of Beverly Hills, 90210, entitled "Mr. Walsh Goes to Washington (Part 2)".

In the mid-1990s, Edmonds and his then-wife Tracey Edmonds expanded into the business of motion pictures. Upon setting up Edmonds Entertainment Group, the company producing the films Soul Food (1997), Josie and the Pussycats (2001), and also the soundtrack for the film The Prince of Egypt (1998), which included contributions from numerous artists, including Mariah Carey and Whitney Houston. They also executive produced the BET reality series College Hill (2004-2009). Edmonds also worked with David Foster to compose "The Power of the Dream", the official song of the 1996 Summer Olympics, performed by superstar Céline Dion. Linda Thompson provided the lyrics.

Babyface also participated as a duet partner on the Fox reality show Celebrity Duets (2006).

He was portrayed by Wesley Jonathan in the 2015 Lifetime biopic Whitney and is portrayed by actor Gavin Houston in the Lifetime biopic based on Toni Braxton entitled Un-Break My Heart, which premiered on the network in early 2016.

In 2016, Babyface competed on season 23 of Dancing with the Stars. He was partnered with professional dancer Allison Holker. He and Holker were eliminated on the fourth week of competition and finished in 11th place along with Vanilla Ice and Witney Carson.

Soda Pop Records
Edmonds founded his record label Soda Pop Records in 2009. Since founding the label he has signed R&B icons K-Ci & JoJo, releasing their first album for the label entitled My Brother's Keeper. In 2013 Babyface secured a distribution deal with E1 Music for the label.

Personal life
In 2007, Babyface began dating his backup dancer Nicole "Nikki" Pantenburg (former backup dancer for and personal friend of Janet Jackson). Babyface and Pantenburg have a daughter, Peyton, born in 2008. The pair married on May 17, 2014. In July 2021, they announced that their marriage would be ending after seven years.

Impact
In 1999, a 25-mile (40 km) stretch of Interstate 65 that runs through Indianapolis was renamed the Kenneth "Babyface" Edmonds Highway.

Babyface was placed at number 20 on NME "50 of the Greatest Producers Ever" list. NME wrote of his impact: "One of the founding fathers of all the best bits of modern US R&B. And so you can't hate him if some of the schlock can be traced back to him also. Babyface was a pioneer of New Jack Swing in the 80s, before setting up LaFace with old mucker Antonio 'LA' Reid to give the world TLC, Usher and Toni Braxton under their guiding hand. There's barely a prominent artist in the genre he hasn't worked with, and as a result he's clocked up a mammoth 26 R&B number ones."

Studio albums

 * Lovers (1986)
 * Tender Lover (1989)
 * For the Cool in You (1993)
 * The Day (1996)
 * Face2Face (2001)
 * Grown & Sexy (2005)
 * Playlist (2007)
 * Return of the Tender Lover (2015)
 * Girls Night Out (2022)

Collaboration albums

 * Power and Love with Manchild (1977)
 * Feel the Phuff with Manchild (1978)
 * Street Beat with The Deele (1983)
 * Material Thangz with The Deele (1985)
 * Eyes of a Stranger with The Deele (1987)
 * Love, Marriage & Divorce with Toni Braxton (2014)

Accolades
In 1999, Babyface received the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement presented by Awards Council member Coretta Scott King at a ceremony in Washington, D.C.

On August 30, 2006, Babyface was honored as a BMI Icon at the 6th annual BMI Urban Awards. Throughout his career, Babyface has won the BMI Pop Songwriter of the Year trophy 7 times, and a total of 51 BMI Awards, which includes Song of the Year for his Toni Braxton hit, "Breathe Again", in 1994.

Babyface was honored with the 2,508th star of the Hollywood Walk of Fame on October 10, 2013. The star is located at 6270 Hollywood Boulevard.

On October 18, 2018, he was conferred with an honorary doctorate degree from Indiana University Bloomington in recognition of his illustrious career in music.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Babyface (musician)


text:
Hard determinism

Hard determinism (or metaphysical determinism) is a view on free will which holds that determinism is true, that it is incompatible with free will, and therefore that free will does not exist. Although hard determinism generally refers to nomological determinism, it can also be a position taken with respect to other forms of determinism that necessitate the future in its entirety.

Hard determinism is contrasted with soft determinism, which is a compatibilist form of determinism, holding that free will may exist despite determinism. It is also contrasted with metaphysical libertarianism, the other major form of incompatibilism which holds that free will exists and determinism is false.

Classical era
In ancient Greece, Socrates initiated the rationalistic teaching that any agent is obliged to pursue the chief good conceived by his or her mind. Strato of Lampsacus speculated that an unconscious divine power acts in the world and causes the origin, growth, and breakdown of things. Diodorus Cronus asserted the identity of the possible and the necessary and inferred that future events are as determined as the past ones. Chrysippus of Soli refuted the "idle argument" invented to discredit determinism as if human efforts were futile in a preordained world; he explained that fated events occur with the engagement of conscious agents.

The Bhagavad Gita, a classical Indian text composed around 4th century BCE, also mentions hard deterministic ideas. Krishna, the personification of Godhead, says to Arjuna in the verse 13.30:

"They alone truly see who understand that all actions (of the body) are performed by material nature, while the self actually does nothing."

Modern era
In the 17th century, both John Locke and Baruch Spinoza argued for strict causality of volitional acts. "Men are deceived because they think themselves free…and the sole reason for thinking so is that they are conscious of their own actions, and ignorant of the causes by which those actions are determined." In the Age of Enlightenment, Baron d’Holbach promulgated the naturalistic interpretation of mental events. Arthur Schopenhauer observed that everyone regards himself free a priori; however, a posteriori he must discover that he had been obliged to make the decisions he actually made. Friedrich Nietzsche noticed that free decisions are graded as causa sui, emerging from non-existence.

Contemporary history
Recently, Daniel Wegner stressed the limitations of free will on grounds of experimental evidence for unconscious choice and action. To prove determinism, the following putative experiment was proposed: all principal differences between the features of an artificial zygote and that developing naturally can be avoided.

Overview
Meeting a challenge, agents make decisions in conformity to the inherited character, life history, and current stimuli. The field of acute attention is limited, and motives partly remain unconscious. From the first person's perspective, we have an intuitive commitment that many options are available. However, if the total of the mental content is considered from the third person's perspective, only a single decision deemed by the agent as the most favorable at the moment turns out real. The validity of causation for any mental event becomes apparent taking into account their neurophysiological correlates. Different causal descriptions correspond to the mental and physical domain. Laws of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics govern the latter. Admitting downright mental causation of physiological impulses would mean surplus determination. The surmise that under identical conditions, alternative decisions and actions are possible is disproved by naturalists as an illusion. Hard determinism is not taken to refer merely to a determinism on earth, but in all of reality (e.g. involving the effects of light from other galaxies, etc.); not just during a certain deterministic period of time, but for all time. This also means that the relation of necessity will be bi-directional. Just as the initial conditions of the universe presumably determine all future states, so too does the present necessitate the past. In other words, one could not change any one fact without affecting the entire timeline. Because hard determinists often support this eternalist view of time, they do not believe that there are genuine chances or possibilities, only the idea that events are 100% likely.

Unlike "law fundamentalists", some philosophers are "law pluralists": they question what it means to have a law of physics. One example is the "Best Standards Analysis", which says that the laws are only useful ways to summarize all past events, rather than there being metaphysically "pushy" entities (this route still brings one into conflict with the idea of free will). Some law pluralists further believe there are simply no laws of physics. The mathematical universe hypothesis suggests that there are other universes in which the laws of physics and fundamental constants are different. Andreas Albrecht of Imperial College in London called it a "provocative" solution to one of the central problems facing physics. Although he "wouldn't dare" go so far as to say he believes it, he noted that "it's actually quite difficult to construct a theory where everything we see is all there is."

The feasibility of testing determinism is always challenged by what is known, or what is thought to be known, about the idea of a final, all-encompassing, theory of everything. Some physicists challenge the likelihood of determinism on the grounds that certain interpretations of quantum mechanics stipulate that the universe is fundamentally indeterministic, such as the Copenhagen interpretation; whereas other interpretations are deterministic, for example, the De Broglie-Bohm theory and the many-worlds interpretation. Chaos theory describes how a deterministic system can exhibit perplexing behavior that is difficult to predict: as in the butterfly effect, minor variations between the starting conditions of two systems can result in major differences. Yet chaos theory is a wholly deterministic thesis; it merely demonstrates the potential for vastly different consequences from very similar initial conditions. Properly understood, then, it enlightens and reinforces the deterministic claim.

Implications for ethics
Hard determinists reject free will. Critics often suggest that, in so doing, the hard determinist also rejects ethics. The key to this argument rests on the idea that holding a person morally responsible requires them to make a choice between two, or more, truly possible alternatives. If choice is indeed impossible, then it would be incorrect to hold anyone morally responsible for his or her actions. If this argument holds, hard determinists are restricted to moral nihilism. This feature, however, is tenable only as far as hard determinists discard responsibility. In a necessitarian world, recourse to merit and blameworthiness is toned down while adherence to ethical and legal values is not ruined. Persons may be appreciated as carriers, executors, and defenders of morality. Alternatively, the choice to be regretful of past misdeeds becomes unreasonable. Nevertheless, one can admonish oneself for one's lapses and resolve to avoid similar behavior in the future. Those hard determinists who defend ethical realism would object to the premise that contra-causal free will is necessary for ethics. Those who are also ethically naturalistic may also point out that there are good reasons to punish criminals: it is a chance to modify their behaviour, or their punishment can act as a deterrent for others who would otherwise act in the same manner. The hard determinist could even argue that this understanding of the true and various causes of a psychopath's behaviour, for instance, allow them to respond even more reasonably or compassionately.

Hard determinists acknowledge that humans do, in some sense, "choose," or deliberate—although in a way that obeys natural laws. For example, a hard determinist might see humans as a sort of thinking machines, but believe it is inaccurate to say they "came to a decision" or "chose". Generalization of event causation should circumvent overstatement of external impulses. Autotelic personalities show a high rate of activities all by themselves. The capacity to resist psychological assault is impressive evidence of autarkic resources. Determinists even admit that with corresponding knowledge, changes in the genetic depository and consequently behavior are possible.

Up to now, the concepts and terminology of legal affairs follow the pre-reflexive belief in alternative possibilities. As scientific insight advances, the juridical attitude becomes increasingly "external": there should be fewer emotions about offender's will and more concern about the effects of offenses on society. The retributive function of punishment should be rejected as irrational and unjustified. "Lex talionis" is discarded already because of deficient correlation between crime and penalty. If the inveterate notion of "mens rea" is used at all, then only to distinguish intentional actions from inadvertent ones and not to designate an autonomous undertaking of the lawbreaker. At the same time, it is justified to require the perpetrator to critically reconsider his intentions and character, to demand apology and compensation in victims' favor. The rehabilitation service should be used to train the risky circle for keeping the norms of social life.

Psychological effects of belief in hard determinism
Research on the psychological effects of a belief in hard determinism, including attitudes towards causal determinism, is ongoing and presents mixed results. While some studies suggest that certain perspectives on free will and determinism can influence moral decision-making, the direct impact of such beliefs on specific behaviors, such as aggressiveness, compliance, or helpfulness, remains a complex and open area of study. The relationship between these philosophical beliefs and changes in self-assessment or behavior is not yet fully understood and requires further empirical investigation.

William James was an American pragmatist philosopher who coined the terms "soft determinist" and "hard determinist" in an influential essay titled "The Dilemma of Determinism". He argued against determinism, holding that the important issue is not personal responsibility, but hope. He believed that thorough-going determinism leads either to a bleak pessimism or to a degenerate subjectivism in moral judgment. He proposed the way to escape the dilemma is to allow a role for chance. James was careful to explain that he would rather "debate about objects than words", which indicates he did not insist on saying that replacing determinism with a model including chance had to mean we had "free will."

The determinist would counter-argue that there is still reason for hope. Whether or not the universe is determined does not change the fact that the future is unknown, and might very well always be. From a naturalist point of view, a person's actions still play a role in the shape of that future. Founder and director of the Center of Naturalism, Thomas W. Clark, explains that humans are not merely the playthings of patterned, natural forces in the universe—but rather we are ourselves examples of those forces. The deterministic view aligns our representations with the faculties and possibilities we actually possess but it should avoid misleading introspection. Admitting agents' dependence on a drastic background can enhance insight, moderate severity and spare unproductive suffering. Insofar as the mind comprehends universal necessity, the power of emotions is diminished.

title: Hard determinism


text:
Afterimage

An afterimage is an image that continues to appear in the eyes after a period of exposure to the original image. An afterimage may be a normal phenomenon (physiological afterimage) or may be pathological (palinopsia). Illusory palinopsia may be a pathological exaggeration of physiological afterimages. Afterimages occur because photochemical activity in the retina continues even when the eyes are no longer experiencing the original stimulus.

The remainder of this article refers to physiological afterimages. A common physiological afterimage is the dim area that seems to float before one's eyes after briefly looking into a light source, such as a camera flash. Palinopsia is a common symptom of visual snow.

Negative afterimages
Negative afterimages are generated in the retina but may be modified like other retinal signals by neural adaptation of the retinal ganglion cells that carry signals from the retina of the eye to the rest of the brain.

Normally, any image is moved over the retina by small eye movements known as microsaccades before much adaptation can occur. However, if the image is very intense and brief, or if the image is large, or if the eye remains very steady, these small movements cannot keep the image on unadapted parts of the retina.

Afterimages can be seen when moving from a bright environment to a dim one, like walking indoors on a bright snowy day. They are accompanied by neural adaptation in the occipital lobe of the brain that function similar to color balance adjustments in photography. These adaptations attempt to keep vision consistent in dynamic lighting. Viewing a uniform background while adaptation is still occurring will allow an individual to see the afterimage because localized areas of vision are still being processed by the brain using adaptations that are no longer needed.

The Young-Helmholtz trichromatic theory of color vision postulated that there were three types of photoreceptors in the eye, each sensitive to a particular range of visible light: short-wavelength cones, medium-wavelength cones, and long-wavelength cones. Trichromatic theory, however, cannot explain all afterimage phenomena. Specifically, afterimages are the complementary hue of the adapting stimulus, and trichromatic theory fails to account for this fact.

The failure of trichromatic theory to account for afterimages indicates the need for an opponent-process theory such as that articulated by Ewald Hering (1878) and further developed by Hurvich and Jameson (1957). The opponent process theory states that the human visual system interprets color information by processing signals from cones and rods in an antagonistic manner. The opponent color theory is that there are four opponent channels: red versus cyan, green vs magenta, blue versus yellow, and black versus white. Responses to one color of an opponent channel are antagonistic to those of the other color. Therefore, a green image will produce a magenta afterimage. The green color adapts the green channel, so they produce a weaker signal. Anything resulting in less green is interpreted as its paired primary color, which is magenta (an equal mixture of red and blue).

Positive afterimages
Positive afterimages, by contrast, appear the same color as the original image. They are often very brief, lasting less than half a second. The cause of positive afterimages is not well known, but possibly reflects persisting activity in the brain when the retinal photoreceptor cells continue to send neural impulses to the occipital lobe.

A stimulus which elicits a positive image will usually trigger a negative afterimage quickly via the adaptation process. To experience this phenomenon, one can look at a bright source of light and then look away to a dark area, such as by closing the eyes. At first one should see a fading positive afterimage, likely followed by a negative afterimage that may last for much longer. It is also possible to see afterimages of random objects that are not bright, only these last for a split second and go unnoticed by most people.

On empty shape
An afterimage in general is an optical illusion that refers to an image continuing to appear after exposure to the original image has ceased. Prolonged viewing of the colored patch induces an afterimage of the complementary color (for example, yellow color induces a bluish afterimage). The "afterimage on empty shape" effect is related to a class of effects referred to as contrast effects.

In this effect, an empty (white) shape is presented on a colored background for several seconds. When the background color disappears (becomes white), an illusionary color similar to the original background is perceived within the shape. The mechanism of the effect is still unclear, and may be produced by one or two of the following mechanisms:

 * During the presentation of the empty shape on a colored background, the colored background induces an illusory complementary color ("induced color") inside the empty shape. After the disappearance of the colored background an afterimage of the "induced color" might appear inside the "empty shape". Thus, the expected color of the shape will be complementary to the "induced color", and therefore similar to the color of the original background.
 * After the disappearance of the colored background, an afterimage of the background is induced. This induced color has a complementary color to that of the original background. It is possible that this background afterimage induces simultaneous contrast on the "empty shape". Simultaneous contrast is a psychophysical phenomenon of the change in the appearance of a color (or an achromatic stimulus) caused by the presence of a surrounding average color (or luminance).

title: Afterimage


text:
Shock (musical)

"SHOCK" (ショック) is a series of musical works starring Domoto Koichi (from the duo KinKi Kids), who is also in charge of the planning, music, story, and production under Johnny Kitagawa’s direction. SHOCK was originally based on the musical "PLAYZONE '91 SHOCK" (1991, starring Shonentai), and premiered at the Imperial Theater in November 2000 under the title "MILLENNIUM SHOCK". It has been performed at the same theater every year since, with different modifications in the title, cast, plot and programs each year. In 2005, it was revamped entirely as “Endless SHOCK”, which has been its title until now. SHOCK's annual performances are greatly anticipated, and it is dubbed “the stage of which tickets are the hardest to get in Japan” by the media.

SHOCK reached its 400th performance in 2006, and its 499th performance in 2007, attracting more than 80,000 audiences up until that point. SHOCK is the solo-starring stage play to achieve this feat in the shortest time at the Imperial Theater.

April 2008, “Endless SHOCK” received the Grand Prize Award at the 33rd "Kikuta Kazuo Drama Award" for high achievements in stage performance. This was the first time a musical starring an idol from Johnny & Associates won such an honor.

March 2009, Domoto Koichi set a new record for the highest number of solo-starring musical performances at the Imperial Theater.

March 21, 2013, 12 years 5 months after its premiere, SHOCK reached its 1,000th performance, became the solo-starring musical play to achieve this in the shortest time in Japan.

In April 2020, Domoto Koichi alone was awarded the Grand Prize of the 45th Kazuo Kikuta Drama Awards for his achievement for leading SHOCK series for twenty years, becoming the youngest single winner of this award.

Until 2021, SHOCK has been performed for more than 1,800 times, becoming the 2nd most-performed musical with the same leading actor in Japan, after Mori Mitsuko's “Hourouki” (performed 2,017 times).

Overview
SHOCK is about the conflicts happening in a theater company, interspersed with the shows performed by said company - a "play within a play". The series focuses on the theme "Show must go on" with KOICHI, the company's leader as the protagonist. Through his collaborations, conflicts, and reconciliations with the company members, the musical portrays a "stage of life" where even life is sacrificed for the ultimate performances. Domoto Koichi said “I'm completely different from KOICHI”, but they both share an unyielding, uncompromising attitude to the stage, even when facing injuries or accidents. Domoto Koichi himself also stated that he was able to cultivate such mindset thanks to continuously performing this play.

The play has a diverse combination of famous musical numbers and original songs in various style, from New York Broadway to traditional Japanese. Aside from difficult choreographies, SHOCK also includes numerous flashy, dangerous acts such as flying, falling down an 8-metre high staircase..., and is said to be able to “surprise the audience every 5 minutes”.

Under Johnny Kitagawa's production, SHOCK was originally intended to be a play that can impress the audiences even if they don't understand the speech. However, as an actor, Domoto Koichi wanted the stage to convey deeper meaning, and asked Kitagawa to make thorough changes, including the plot. With Kitagawa's approval (“Just do what you like.”), Koichi started taking a substantial role in screenwriting, music composing and producing since 2005.

After Endless SHOCK 2006, there were plans to end the SHOCK series and start a new play in 2007, also with Domoto Koichi as the producer and lead actor. However, due to high demand (demand for tickets was 14 times higher than supply), it was decided that the play would be performed again in 2007. SHOCK continues to be performed every year since, and is said to be “the stage of which tickets are the hardest to get in Japan”.

During the noon performance on January 23, 2008, due to electricity failure, the play was cancelled and moved to another date (February 17, 2008) for the first time. Domoto Koichi deeply regretted this, and wrote on the official site: “It is truly regrettable that the performance couldn’t continue like the theme ‘Show must go on’. To the audiences who was looking forward to the stage, I sincerely apologize.” After the cancellation decision was made, all the cast came out to see the audiences off to the last one. The night performance that day still went on as scheduled.

March 11, 2011, the Great Tohoku earthquake occurred during the noon performance's intermission. The audiences and some of the cast were evacuated to Koukyogaien, and the performance - incidentally, also SHOCK's 800th performance - was cancelled. Due to aftershocks and planned power outage, performances could not resume as planned, and the rest of the performances that year were also cancelled. Cancellation announcement was made before the performance on the 13th by Domoto Koichi himself. He then shook hand with and saw all the audiences off.

During the noon performance on March 19, 2015, a 650 kg LED panel used in stage setting collapsed, injured 6 people: Johnny's Jr. Kishi Takayoshi, 2 dancers, 2 acrobat actors, and 1 staff member. The two performances that day were cancelled, and Domoto Koichi came out in full stage costume to apologize to the audiences for the accident and the cancellation. Performance restarted the next day without the use of LED panel and part of the program changed. There were mixed opinions about restarting performances so soon after such a serious accident, but the decision was made with support from the cast and staff, even the injured ones, to convey the theme of the play: continue to move forward despite unfavorable circumstances. May 20, 2015, Toho announced that the accident was caused by an inclination due to partial failure of the stage floor, and that reinforcement work was planned to correct this. Toho also officially prohibit future use of mobile LED panels on its stage for caution's sake.

On September 17 of the same year, during the Osaka tour, the actress who played the owner role, Maeda Bibari, fell and broke her left shoulder while walking to Umeda Arts Theatre from her hotel. She still acted in two performances on the 17th, but was hospitalized after the night performance and was told to rest for 1.5 month for the break to heal. Uekusa Katsuhide from Shonentai, who played the owner during 2009 - 2012, stepped in for Maeda from the performance on the 18th until the last one in 2015. Uekusa received direct appeal from Johnny Kitagawa and Domoto Koichi on the evening of the 17th, arrived in Osaka around noon on the 18th, and only had 4 hours to practice with all the cast. Nevertheless, the performances went on smoothly as usual.

In April 2020, Koichi alone was awarded the Grand Prize of the 45th Kazuo Kikuta Drama Awards for his achievement for leading SHOCK series for twenty years, becoming the youngest single winner of this award.

Until 2021, SHOCK has been performed for more than 1,800 times, becoming the 2nd most-performed musical with the same leading actor in Japan, after Mori Mitsuko's “Hourouki” (performed 2,017 times).

Performance period
November 2–26, 2000 (Imperial Theatre) (38 performances)

Story
KOICHI, leader of a travelling theatre company, decides to carry on performances despite the injuries of fellow member TSUBASA, and this brings about conflicts with other members of the company. At such a time, the company receives an invitation to perform at Broadway - where KOICHI's older brother died 3 years before. Despite opposition from others, KOICHI pushes on to Broadway, and meets a mysterious person who claimed to be his deceased brother's friend...

Cast

 * Domoto Koichi
 * Higashiyama Noriyuki
 * Tsubasa Imai
 * Akasaka Akira
 * Suzuki Honoka
 * Sasai Eisuke
 * Akiyama Jun
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Yara Tomoyuki
 * Ueda Tatsuya
 * Nakamaru Yuuichi
 * Akanishi Jin

Performance period

 * December 1, 2001 - January 27, 2002 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * June 4–28, 2002 (38 performances)

Story
To fulfill his deceased brother's wish, KOICHI continues performing every day with “Show must go on” in mind. His performances are popular, and he receives invitation to perform at the Broadway theatre Imperial Garden Theatre. However, he faces strong opposition from the company because it was where his brother died, and because he wants to leave behind TSUBASA, whose future as a dancer was abruptly cut off due to an accident when performing. Still, KOICHI leaves for New York, leaving behind his brother's ex-wife SAKIHO, SAKIHO's current husband TAKU, and a disappointed TSUBASA. A lot of troubles are waiting for KOICHI there...

Cast

 * Domoto Koichi
 * Juri Sakiho
 * Imai Tsubasa
 * Nishikido Ryou
 * Kon Takuya
 * Akiyama Jun
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Yara Tomoyuki
 * Kamenashi Kazuya
 * Akanishi Jin
 * Ueda Tatsuya
 * Taguchi Junnosuke
 * Hagesawa Jun
 * Totsuka Shouta
 * Toushin Yoshikazu
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koyama Keiichirou
 * Yabu Kota

Performance period
January 8 - February 25, 2003 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)

Story
Almost the same as SHOW 劇・SHOCK, but with some changes in characters’ names (characters are named based on the casts’ real names) and the mastermind.

Cast

 * Domoto Koichi
 * Mii
 * Ikuta Toma
 * Inoue Jun
 * Akiyama Jun
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Yara Tomoyuki
 * Toushin Yoshikazu
 * Kazama Shunsuke
 * KAT-TUN
 * A.B.C.

Performance period
February 6–29, 2004 (Imperial Theatre) (38 performances)

Story
Generally the same as SHOCK is real Shock (different production).

Cast

 * Domoto Koichi
 * Imai Tsubasa
 * Iori Naoka
 * Bitou Isao
 * Toushin Yoshikazu
 * Akiyama Jun
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Yara Tomoyuki
 * Kazama Shunsuke
 * Totsuka Shouta

Endless SHOCK (2005 - 2020)
Plot and characters were significantly changed. Starting 2013, the owner's role was changed to a woman, new songs and programs were added, but the main storyline remains the same.

Performance period

 * 2005: January 8 - February 28 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * 2006: February 6 - March 29 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * 2007: January 6 - February 28 (Imperial Theatre) (81 performances)
 * 2008: January 6 - February 26 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * 2009: February 5 - March 30 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * 2010: February 14 - March 30, July 4 - 31st (Imperial Theatre) (100 performances) (first time the play was performed in summer as Endless SHOCK)
 * 2011: February 5 - March 10 (Imperial Theatre) (48 performances) (performances from March 11 cancelled due to the Great Tohoku earthquake)
 * 2012:
 * January 7–31 (Hakataza) (34 performances) (first time SHOCK was performed in another province outside Tokyo)
 * February 7 - April 30 (Imperial Theatre) (105 performances)
 * 2013:
 * February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * April 8–30 (Hakataza) (29 performances)
 * September 2–29 (Umeda Arts Theater) (35 performances) (first time SHOCK was performed in Osaka)
 * 2014:
 * February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (76 performances)
 * September 8–30 (Umeda Arts Theater) (30 performances)
 * October 8–31 (Hakataza) (30 performances)
 * 2015:
 * February 3 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (73 performances)
 * September 8–30 (Umeda Arts Theatre) (30 performances)
 * October 7–31 (Hakataza) (30 performances)
 * 2016: February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (75 performances)
 * 2017:
 * February 1 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (78 performances)
 * September 8–30 (Umeda Arts Theatre) (30 performances)
 * October 10–31 (Hakataza) (30 performances)
 * 2018: February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (70 performances)
 * 2019
 * February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (70 performances)
 * September 11 - October 5 (Umeda Arts Theatre) (31 performances)
 * 2020: February 4–26 (Imperial Theatre) (26 performances) (performances from February 27 cancelled due to coronavirus pandemic)

Story
The show KOICHI performs at his childhood friend's small off-Broadway theater (starting 2013, the childhood friend setting was removed) receives high acclaim on the newspaper. This opens up a way to go on-Broadway for the theater. KOICHI who sets his heart on Broadway, the owner (name changed depended on the cast) who wants to protect his theater, the fellow company member (name changed depended on the cast) who considers KOICHI as his rival, RIKA who blindly worships KOICHI,... Each of them pursued their own ambition, and the company that used to be so close to each other starts falling apart. One day, the rival member who often clashes with KOICHI switches the prop sword used on stage for a real one to test KOICHI's creed of beliefs “Show must go on”...

Endless SHOCK 2005

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Tsubasa Ima / Nishikido Ryo (double cast as the rival)
 * Kuroki Meisa / Komiyama Mika (double cast as RIKA)
 * Akiyama Jun (the owner)
 * Machida Shingo (MACHIDA)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA)
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi (YONEHANA)
 * Goseki Kouichi
 * Totsuka Shouta
 * Tsukada Ryouichi
 * Kawai Fumito
 * Takaki Yuuya
 * Nakajima Yuuto
 * Arioka Daiki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2006

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Tsubasa Ima / Nishikido Ryo (double cast as the rival)
 * Tabata Aya (RIKA)
 * Akiyama Jun (AKIYAMA - the owner)
 * Machida Shingo (MACHIDA)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA)
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi (YONEHANA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2007

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Ikuta Toma (TOMA - the rival)
 * Matsumoto Marika (RIKA)
 * Akiyama Jun (AKIYAMA - the owner)
 * Machida Shingo (MACHIDA)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA)
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi (YONEHANA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2008

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival)
 * RiRiKA (RIKA)
 * Okura Tadayoshi (OKURA - the owner)
 * Machida Shingo (MACHIDA)
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi (YONEHANA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2009

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival)
 * Satou Megumi (RIKA - the owner's daughter)
 * Uekusa Katsuhide (UEKUSA - the owner)
 * Machida Shingo (MACHIDA)
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi (YONEHANA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2010

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival) (February and March performances)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (July performances)
 * Uekusa Katsuhide (UEKUSA - the owner)
 * Satou Megumi (RIKA)
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2011

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival)
 * Uekusa Katsuhide (UEKUSA - the owner)
 * Harada Natsuki (RIKA)
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2012

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival)
 * Uekusa Katsuhide (UEKUSA - the owner)
 * Kanda Sayaka (RIKA)
 * Machida Shingo
 * Yonehana Tsuyoshi
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2013

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival) (February - April performances)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (September performances)
 * Santos Anna (RIKA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Yamamoto Ryota
 * Kishi Yuuta
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2014

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Mori Kumiko (MORI KUMIKO - the owner)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival) (February - March performances)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (September - October performances)
 * Iriki Mari (RIKA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Yamamoto Ryota
 * Kishi Yuuta (February - March performances)
 * Nishihata Daigo (September - October performances)
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2015

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner) (until the night performance of September 17)
 * Uekusa Katsuhide (UEKUSA - the owner) (since September 18)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival) (February - March performances)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (September - October performances)
 * Miyazawa Ema (RIKA) (February - March performances)
 * Kikuchi Mika (RIKA) (September - October performances)
 * Fukuda Yuuta (February - March performances)
 * Koshioka Yuuki (February - March performances)
 * Tatsumi Yuudai (September - October performances)
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke (September - October performances)
 * Nozawa Yuuki
 * Kishi Yuuta (February - March performances)
 * Morohoshi Shouki
 * Kishi Takayoshi
 * Matsukura Kaito (September - October performances)
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2016

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival)
 * Kominami Mayuko (RIKA)
 * Tatsumi Yuudai (February performances)
 * Koshioka Yuuki (February performances)
 * Fukuda Yuuta (March performances)
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke (March performances)
 * Nozawa Yuuki
 * Morohoshi Shouki
 * Kishi Takayoshi
 * Matsukura Kaito
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2017

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Yara Tomoyuki (YARA - the rival) (February - March performances)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (September - October performances)
 * Matsuura Miyabi (RIKA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta (February - March performances)
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke (February - March performances)
 * Tatsumi Yuudai (September - October performances)
 * Koshioka Yuuki (September - October performances)
 * Hamanaka Bunichi
 * Teranishi Takuto
 * Matsuda Genta
 * Matsukura Kaito
 * Ishikawa Naoki (February - March and October performances)

Endless SHOCK 2018

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Kuno Akiko (KUNO AKIKO - the owner)
 * Nakajima Yuuma (YUMA - the rival)
 * Takimoto Miori (RIKA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Tatsumi Yuudai (September - October performances)
 * Teranishi Takuto
 * Matsuda Genta
 * Matsukura Kaito
 * Kawashima Noeru
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2019

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Uchi Hiroki (UCHI - the rival) (February - March performances)
 * Nakajima Yuuma (YUMA - the rival) (September - October performances)
 * Umeda Ayaka (RIKA)
 * Fukuda Yuuta
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Teranishi Takuto
 * Matsuda Genta
 * Matsukura Kaito
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK 2020

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Ueda Tatsuya (Tatsuya - the rival)
 * Umeda Ayaka (RIKA)
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Teranishi Takuto
 * Takada Sho
 * Tsubaki Taiga
 * Matsui Minatio
 * Ishikawa Naoki

Endless SHOCK -Eternal- (2020 - 2021)
A spin-off of the original Endless SHOCK to comply with the prevention of coronavirus. The musical is shortened to 2 hours, and some of the performances are deleted (such as falling down the staircase and some flying).

Performance Period

 * 2020: September 15 - October 12 (Umeda Arts Theater) (31 performances)
 * 2021: February 4 - March 31 (Imperial Theatre) (60 performance)

Story
Three years after KOICHI's death, the same members gathered again to mourn KOICHI and looked back to what happened during that period.

Cast

 * Domoto Koichi (KOICHI)
 * Maeda Bibari (MAEDA BIBARI - the owner)
 * Ueda Tatsuya (Tatsuya - the rival)
 * Umeda Ayaka (RIKA)
 * Matsuzaki Yuusuke
 * Koshioka Yuuki
 * Teranishi Takuto
 * Takada Sho
 * Tsubaki Taiga
 * Matsui Minatio
 * Ishikawa Naoki

"Play within a play"
Mainly famous scenes from popular works, including:
 * Hamlet
 * Richard III
 * Romeo and Juliet
 * Electra
 * The Love Suicides at Sonezaki
 * Shinsengumi
 * Notre Dame de Paris
 * Yotsuya Kaidan
 * Chushingura
 * Mobydic
 * West Side Story

Musical numbers

 * Take the 'A' Train
 * Carmina Burana
 * BROADWAY MELODY

Endless SHOCK

 * OVERTURE(INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * So Feel It Coming
 * Lyrics: 3 + 3, Composition:  Domoto Koichi, Arrangement:  Sato Yasumasa
 * NEW HORIZON
 * Lyrics: Kubota Youji, Composition: Iida Takehiko, Arrangement: Funayama Motoki
 * Yes we can (Yes my dream)
 * Lyrics: Domoto Koichi, Composition: Chujo Misa
 * ONE DAY
 * Lyrics: Shirai Yuuki, Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * DANCING ON BROADWAY
 * Lyrics: Hasegawa Masahiro, Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * AMERICA
 * Lyrics: 3+3, Composition / Arrangement: Funayama Motoki, Co-arrangement: Chino Yoshihiko
 * Love and Loneliness
 * Lyrics / Composition: Anders Barren / Nina Woodford / Jany Schel, Arrangement: Funayama Motoki / Japanese lyrics: Shirai Yuuki / Arata Mika
 * Solitary
 * 花魁 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * 戦車 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement:Sato Yasumasa
 * 合戦 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * 死闘 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * 罠 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * In the Cemetery
 * Lyrics: Kubota Youji, Composition / Arrangement: Iwata Masayuki
 * 戻れない日々
 * Lyrics: Shirai Yuuki / Arata Mika, Composition: Domoto Koichi
 * Why don't you dance with me?
 * Lyrics: Shirai Yuuki / Arata Mika, Composition: Domoto Koichi　Arrangement: ha-j / Yoshioka Taku
 * Higher
 * Lyrics: Shirai Yuuki, Composition: Kawada Ruka, Arrangement : Funayama Motoki / 中西裕之
 * Flying2 (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * マスク (INST)
 * Composition / Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * 夜の海
 * Lyrics: Shirai Yuuki / Arata Mika, Composition: Domoto Koichi, Arrangement: ha-j / Yoshioka Taku
 * 大桜 (INST)
 * Composition・Arrangement: Sato Yasumasa
 * CONTINUE
 * Lyrics: Kubota Youji, Composition: Domoto Koichi, Arrangement: Takahashi Testuya

DVD / BD

 * KOICHI DOHMOTO SHOCK DIGEST (June 19, 2002)
 * Koichi Domoto SHOCK (January 16, 2003) (recording date: June 25th 2002)
 * Endless SHOCK (February 15, 2006) (recording date: February 22nd 2005)
 * Endless SHOCK 2008 (October 29, 2008) (recording date: February 6th 2008)
 * Document of Endless SHOCK 2012 -明日の舞台へ- (February 6, 2013)
 * Endless SHOCK 2012 (September 18, 2013) (recording date: April 21st 2012)
 * Endless SHOCK 1000th Performance Anniversary (September 17, 2014) (recording date: March 23rd 2013 - the 1,001st performance)

CD

 * KOICHI DOMOTO Endless SHOCK Original Sound Track (January 11, 2006)
 * KOICHI DOMOTO 「Endless SHOCK」Original Sound Track 2 (April 19, 2017)

title: Shock (musical)


text:
User:Ruhrjung/Continuation War

The Continuation War was fought between Finland and the Soviet Union during World War II; from June 25,1941, to armistice September 19, 1944. The United Kingdom declared war on Finland on December 6, 1941, but didn't participate actively. Material support from, and military cooperation with, Nazi Germany was critical for Finland's struggle with the big neighbor. The war was formally concluded by the Paris peace treaty of 1947.

The Continuation War (Jatkosota in Finnish) is so named because it by the Finns is perceived as a continuation of the Winter War (November 30, 1939, to March 12, 1940). Seen from a Russian perspective, it was merely one of the fronts of the Great Patriotic War. The war was, however, considered separate from the World War by Finland and the Soviet Union – an understanding not quite appreciated by Finland's chief supporters, the Nazi leadership of Germany.

Introduction
Although the Continuation War was fought in the periphery of World War II, and the engaged troops were relatively few, the history of this war is intriguing as it challenges many a conventional wisdom on the World War. Not the least, it refutes the popular theory that democratic countries don't wage war against each other.

During the conflict, Finland acted in concert with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union, that in turn was allied to Britain and, for most of the period, the United States. Democratic Finland's association with Nazi Germany was, and remains, controversial in the European democracies threatened and occupied by the Nazis. The issue was less controversial in Finland, and in retrospect a relatively broad Finnish consensus asserts, that the Finns as a people would probably not have survived the war without this cooperation with Nazi Germany.

Major events of World War II, and the tides of war in general, had significant impact on the course of the Continuation War:
 * Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union (Operation Barbarossa) is closely connected to the Continuation War's beginning.
 * The Allied invasion of France (Battle of Normandy) was coordinated with the Soviet conquest of Viipuri, Finland's second largest city, leading to a five week long alliance between democratic Finland and Nazi Germany (June 26 to August 4 1944).
 * The following US/Soviet race to Berlin facilitated the end of the Continuation War by rendering Northern Europe irrelevant.

Aims of war
Finland's principal goal during World War II was, although nowhere literally stated, to survive the war as an independent country, capable to mind its own businesses in a politically hostile environment. Specifically for the Continuation War, Finland aimed at reversing her territorial losses under the March 1940 Moscow Peace Treaty and by extending the territory further east, to guarantee the survival of the Finnic brethren in East-Karelia. Finland's exertion during the World War was, in the former respect, successful, although the price was high in war casualties, reparation payments, territorial loss, bruised international reputation and subsequent adaptation to Soviet international perspectives.

The Soviet Union's war goals are harder to assess due to the secretive nature of the Stalinist Soviet Union. Intelligence, as interrogations of POWs, clearly indicated military control of all of Finland's territory as the immediate military goal in both the Winter War and the Continuation War. This is congruent with a (postulated) Russian long-term strategic goal of securing ice-free harbors at the Atlantic and the North Sea. The Soviet Union of the 1930s was however a militarily weak power, and it can be argued that all of her policies up to the Continuation War best are explained as defensive measures (however by offensive means): The sharing of Poland with Nazi Germany, the annexation of the Baltic states and the attempted invasion of Finland in the Winter War can all be seen as elements in the construction of a security zone between the perceived threat from the Capitalist powers of Western Europe and the Communist Soviet Union – similar to the post-war establishment of Soviet satellite states in the Warsaw Pact countries and the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance concluded with post-war Finland. Accordingly, after Nazi Germany's attack on the Soviet Union (Operation Barbarossa, June 22, 1941), the Red Army's attack on Finland, harboring not yet unleashed German forces, can be seen as a preemptive or preventive attack aiming to protect Russian civilians and troops: Through control of Finland's territory, the threat against Leningrad (i.e. the old imperial capital Saint Petersburg) and the important harbor in Murmansk was to be fended off. The fate of a couple of millions of Finns was, surely, a lesser concern when Leningrad was at stake.

Background
In November 1939 the Soviet Union had commenced an invasion of Finland (the Winter War), allegedly in order to improve her own strategic position in Eastern Europe in preparation for a possible widening of the war. After the Moscow Peace Treaty ending the Winter War, Public Opinion in Finland longed for the re-acquisition of the homes of the 12% of Finland's population who had been forced to leave Karelia in haste. The peace treaty was perceived as a great injustice. It seemed as if the losses at the negotiation table, including Finland's second town Vyborg, had been worse than on the battlefield. A fifth of the country's industrial capacity had been lost. The average Finn had absolutely no trust in the Soviet Union's willingness to settle permanently for less than a wholly occupied Finland – in particular not after the Baltic countries had been sovietized in a way that looked very much like the initial Soviet plan of the Winter War.

The ongoing war between Germany and Western Allies had damaged Finnish industry and blocked Finland's Baltic Sea routes to Great Britain and the Commonwealth, forcing Finland to seek alternate markets in and through Germany. Securing import of foodstuff and fertilizers from Germany was also of great importance.

Then there was a vociferous minority opinion which since the 1920s had advocated the extension of Finland's territory eastwards to incorporate ethnically akin Finnic peoples under Soviet oppression. To advocates of such expansion, Finland's security policy focusing on the League of Nations, the politically akin democratic Western countries, Scandinavia, and particularly Sweden had led to a total failure. In these expansionist circles was commemorated Imperial Germany's role in the "White" government's victory over rebellious Socialists during the Civil War in Finland. Seeing the contemporary brand of European democracy as too soft on Communism, similar to in the defeated Western European countries, made an alliance with Germany all the more appealing; since in Germany Communists were no longer.

The experience from World War I emphasized the importance of close and friendly relations with the victors, why Nazi Germany was intensely courted immediately after the Winter War despite the fact that Germany had been the ally of the invader. Finland got a new Cabinet with a Foreign Minister, Rolf Witting, less British-minded and more in the taste of the Germans; and the energetic Toivo Mikael Kivimäki became ambassador in Berlin. Their mission was to regain the support of Germany, after her abandoning Finland to the Soviet sphere of influence.

Finland was still in a state of war, never revoked from the previous conflict. Field Marshall Mannerheim remained commander-in-chief, censorship was not abolished but rather used to facilitate closer relations with Germany, and the military retained supremacy over civil authorities. Propaganda in the censured press could contribute to Finland's re-orientation with very measured means. Finns in general were bitterly disappointed in the European democracies, who had offered plenty of sympathetic words, but no regular troops, to Finland's support during the Winter War. The feelings towards the remaining democracies Sweden and Britain, which had been hold in very high esteem during the 1930s, cooled off – a process further emphasized by their defeat against the "New Germany" seeming to be only a matter of time.

From August 18, 1940, Finland secretly negotiated with Germany on military cooperation, buying artillery and other badly needed weapons – for Germany this was in breach of the August 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Finland in return facilitated German troop transfers to Finnmark in Northern Norway (occupied by Germany since June-July 1940).

Through the potential presence of German troops on Finnish territory, Finland hoped to deter further Soviet threats, which in turn would threaten to involve Germany on Finland's side. This was also seen to counterbalance USSR's troop transfer right through Finland to the Soviet naval base at the Hanko peninsula in western Finland, which had been handed over as a result of the Winter War.

This secret Finno-German agreement undermined not only the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, but constituted a material breach of the Moscow Peace Treaty (ending the Winter War), which in fact was chiefly targeted against cooperation between Germany and Finland. It has in retrospect been disputed whether the ailing President Kallio was informed. Possibly the then-premier Risto Ryti, in concert with Field Marshal Mannerheim, took it as their responsibility during Kallio's illness.

Adolf Hitler had not been interested in Finland before the Winter War. Now he saw the value of Finland as a base for his forthcoming invasion of the Soviet Union (Operation Barbarossa), and perhaps also the military value of the Finnish army. The German-Finnish agreement negotiated in August 1940 was formalized in September. It allowed Germany the right to send its troops by trucks and busses through Finland, ostensibly to facilitate Germany's reinforcement of its forces in northern Norway.

A further German-Finnish agreement in December 1940 led to the stationing of German troops in Finland (mainly in the vicinity of the northern border to the Soviet Union) and in the coming months they arrived in small but increasing numbers, establishing quarters, depots and bases along the road to Norway, which later would be used for the concentration of troops aimed for Northern Russia.

Although the Finnish people knew only the barest details of the agreements with Germany, the pro-German policy was generally approved, especially among the displaced Karelians who wanted to recover the ceded territory of Karelia.

Coordination with Germany
By the spring of 1941, the German army's standing was at its zenith, and its victory in the World War seemed more than likely.

The Finnish military was aware of the German plans for invasion of Russia, although Hitler's real intentions remained unclear. An uncertainty still prevailed as to whether Hitler really intended to attack the Soviet Union before the Battle of Britain was concluded. Through military contacts, Germans hinted to Finns that they could possibly persuade the Germans to obtain Soviet concessions; and the Finnish general Aksel Airo delivered in late May 1941 five alternate border rearrangement drafts to the Germans, who should then propose the best they could bargain to the Soviets. In reality, the Germans had no such intentions, but the exercise served to fuel the support among leading Finns for taking part in Operation Barbarossa.

However, the Finns had in the past bitterly learnt how a small country can be used as small change in the deals of great powers, and in such case Finland could have been used as a token of reconciliation between Hitler and Stalin, which the Finns had every reason to fear, why the relations with Berlin were considered of utmost priority for the future of Finland.

Race issues were reasons of particular concerns: The Finns were not viewed favorably by the Nazi race theorists. By active participation on Germany's side, Finnish leaders hoped for a more independent position in post-war Europe, through the removal of the Soviet threat and the incorporation of the akin Finnic peoples of neighbouring Soviet areas. This view gained increasing popularity in the Finnish leadership, and also in the press, during the preparations for the awaited outbreak of hostilities between Germany and the Soviet Union.

Voices advocating closer ties with Germany grew stronger and the voices advocating armed neutrality within Finland's new borders (some among the Social Democrats, and some of the more left-leaning in the Swedish People's Party) softened. Contacts with Sweden's Conservative Foreign Minister Günther showed an enthusiasm unusual for the Swedes for the anticipated "Crusade against Bolshevism".

Finland's army under Marshal Mannerheim felt it had a broad political support for increasing cooperation with Germany, and accepted not only to put virtually half of the Soviet-Finnish border under German control, but also to put Finnish army units under German command. Some officers (for instance many of them with background in the Finnish Jaeger troops) were happy with this, others less so. Civilian politicians were not deemed fit for this kind of over-sensitive information.

What began for the Finns as a defensive strategy, designed to provide a German counterweight to Soviet pressure, ended as an offensive strategy, aimed at re-conquest of formerly Finnish Karelia and an invasion of East-Karelia in the Soviet Union. The Finns had been lured by the prospects of regaining their lost territories and ridding themselves of the Soviet threat into becoming a party to Nazi Germany's planned invasion of the USSR.

Outbreak of the war
The signs and rumors of the German assault on Russia heaped up, and on June 9 partial mobilization was ordered, and the northern Finish air defense troops consisting of 30,000 men were put under German command. In practice Germany already held the northern half of the border to Russia. On June 14 the 3rd Army Corps was mobilized and put under German command. On June 17 general mobilization took place, and on June 20 Finland's government ordered 45,000 people at the Soviet border to be evacuated. On June 21, Germany finally informed Finland's General Staff chief, Erik Heinrichs, that the German attack was to begin.

The Finnish government didn't wish to appear as the aggressor; the popular support for such a move was deemed insufficient, and international relations would have suffered in vain. The Finnish government's wish not to appear as the aggressor may explain why Finland took no part in the initial German invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22. Hitler's public statement gave a different impression, however; Hitler declared that Germany would attack the Bolshevists "(...) in the North in alliance ["im Bunde"] with the Finnish freedom heroes". Finland actually had declared herself neutral, but had already before Germany's assault contributed with mines in the Gulf of Finland, in accordance with German wishes.

Three days later, reports of Soviet bombing of the towns of Helsinki, Turku and Porvoo gave the Finnish government the needed pretext to open hostilities, and war was declared on June 26. After Finland's declaration of war, the German troops in Northern Finland started their offensive against the Soviet Union on June 28, a week after the actual start of Operation Barbarossa.

On July 10, the Finnish army began a major offensive on the Karelian Isthmus and north of Lake Ladoga. Mannerheim's order of the day clearly states that the Finnish involvement was an offensive one. By the end of August 1941, Finnish troops had reached the pre-war boundaries. The crossing of the pre-war borders led to tensions in the army, the Cabinet, the parties of the parliament, and domestic opinion. Military expansionism might have gained popularity, but it was far from unanimously championed.

Also international relations were strained - notably with Britain and Sweden, whose governments in May and June confidently had learned from Foreign Minister Witting that Finland had absolutely no plans for a military campaign coordinated with the Germans. Finland's preparations were said to be purely defensive.

Sweden's leading Cabinet members had hoped to improve the relations with Germany through indirect support of Operation Barbarossa, mainly channeled through Finland. PM Hansson and FM Günther found however, that the political support in the Cabinet and within the Social Democratic organizations turned out to be insufficient, particularly after Mannerheim's July 10 Order of the Day, and even more so after Finland by deeds had commenced a war of conquest. A tangible effect was that Finland became still more dependent on food and munitions from Germany.

In December 1941, the Finnish advance had reached the outskirts of Leningrad and the River Svir (which connects the southern ends of Lake Ladoga and Lake Onega). By the end of 1941, the front stabilized, and the Finns did not conduct major offensive operations for the following two and a half years. The fighting morale of the troops declined when it was realized that the war would not end soon.

It has been suggested that the execution of the prominent pacifist leader Arndt Pekurinen in November 1941 was due to fear of army demoralization being exacerbated by such activism.

Diplomatic maneuvers
Germany's eastern campaign was planned as a blitzkrieg lasting a few weeks. British and US observers likewise believed at first that the invasion would be concluded before August. In the autumn of 1941 this turned out to be wrong, and leading Finnish military officers started to mistrust Germany's capacity. German troops in Northern Finland faced circumstances they were not properly prepared for, and failed also badly to reach their targets, most importantly Murmansk. Finland's strategy now changed. A separate peace with the Soviet Union was offered, but Germany's strength was too great. The idea that Finland had to continue the war while putting the own forces at the least possible danger gained increasing support, perhaps in the hopes that the Wehrmacht and the Red Army would wear each other down enough for negotiations to begin or at least to get them out of the way of Finland's independent decisions. Some may also have still hoped for an eventual victory by Germany.

Finland's participation in the war brought major benefits to Germany. The Soviet fleet was blockaded in the Gulf of Finland, so that the Baltic was freed for training German submarine crews as well as for German shipping, especially for the vital iron ore from northern Sweden and nickel and rare metals needed in steel processing from the Petsamo area. Finnish front secured the northern flank of German Army Group North in the Baltic states. The sixteen Finnish divisions tied down numerous Soviet troops, put pressure on Leningrad - although Mannerheim refused to attack - and threatened the Murmansk Railroad. Sweden was further isolated and was increasingly pressured to comply with German and Finnish wishes, though with limited success.

Despite Finland's contributions to the German cause, the Western Allies had ambivalent feelings, torn between residual goodwill for Finland and the need to accommodate their vital ally, the Soviet Union. As a result, Britain declared war against Finland, but the United States did not. There was no combat between these countries and Finland, but Finnish sailors were interned overseas. In the United States, Finland was highly regarded, partly due to having continued to make payments on its World War I debt faithfully throughout the inter-war period.

The Allies often characterize Finland as one of the Axis Powers, although the term used in Finland is "co-belligerence with Germany". Finland later also earned respect in the West for the strength of its democracy and its refusal to allow extension of Nazi anti-Semitic practices in Finland. Finnish Jews served in the Finnish army; and Jews were not only tolerated in Finland, but most Jewish refugees also were granted asylum (less than 20 of the more than 500 refugees were handed over to Germany). The field synagogue in Eastern Karelia was probably unique on the German side during the War.

About 2,600-2,800 Soviet prisoners of war were given to the Germans. Most of them (around 2,000) joined Russian Liberation Army. The rest were mainly army officers and political officers (and a handful of Jewish refugees), most of them dying in Nazi concentration camps while some were given to the Gestapo for interrogation. Sometimes these handovers were demanded in return of arms or food. Sometimes the Finns received Soviet prisoners of war in return. These were mainly Estonians and Karelians willing to join the Finnish army. These, as well as some volunteers from the occupied Eastern Karelia, formed the Tribe Battalion (Finnish: "Heimopataljoona"). At the end of the war, the USSR required that the members of the Tribe Battalion were to be handed over to the Soviet Union. Some managed to escape before or during the transport, but most of them were either sent to the Gulag camps or executed.

In 1941, already before the Continuation War, one battalion of Finnish volunteers joined the German Waffen-SS with silent approval of the Finnish government. It has been concluded that the battalion served as a token of Finnish commitment to cooperation with Germany. This battalion, named the Finnisches Freiwilligen Bataillon fought as part of the 5th SS Wiking Division in the Ukraine and Caucasia. The battalion was pulled back from the front in May 1943 and was transported to Tallinn where it was disbanded on July 11. The soldiers were transferred into different units of the Finnish army.

The end of the war
Finland began actively to seek a way out of the war after the disastrous German defeat at Stalingrad in January-February 1943. Edwin Linkomies formed a new cabinet with the peace process as the top priority. Negotiations were conducted intermittently in 1943-44 between Finland and its representative Juho Kusti Paasikivi on the one side and the Western Allies and the Soviet Union on the other, but no agreement was reached.

Instead, on June 9 1944, the Soviet Union opened a major offensive against Finnish positions on the Karelian Isthmus and in the Lake Ladoga area (it was timed to accompany the Battle of Normandy). On the second day of the offensive, the Soviet forces broke through the Finnish lines, and in the succeeding days they made advances that appeared to threaten the survival of Finland. Finland especially lacked modern anti-tank weaponry, which could stop heavy Soviet tanks, and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop offered them in exchange for a guarantee that Finland would not again seek a separate peace. On June 26 President Risto Ryti gave this guarantee as a personal undertaking, which he intended to last for the remainder of his presidency. In addition to material deliveries, Germany sent some assault gun brigades and a Luftwaffe fighter-bomber unit to temporarily support the most threatened defense sectors.

With new supplies from Germany, the Finns were now equal to the crisis, and halted the Russians in early July 1944, after a retreat of about one hundred kilometers that brought them approximately to the same line of defense Finns were holding at the end of Winter War, Viipuri(Vyborg)-Kuparsaari-Taipale(VKT)-line running from Vyborg to Vuoksi river and along the river to Lake Ladoga, where Soviet offensive were stopped in the Battle of Tali-Ihantala. Finland had already become a sideshow for the Soviet leadership, which now turned their attention to Poland and south-eastern Europe. Although the Finnish front was once again stabilized, the Finns were exhausted and wanted to get out of the war.

Mannerheim had repeatedly reminded the Germans that in case their troops in Estonia would pull back, Finland would be forced to make a peace at even very unfavorable cost. Soviet-occupied Estonia would have provided the enemy favorable base for amphibious invasions, air attacks against Helsinki and other cities and strangled Finnish access to the sea. When the Germans indeed withdrew, Finnish urge to end the war increased respectively. Perhaps because of realizing validity of this point, initial German reaction to Finland's announcement of separate peace was limited to vocal opposition only.

President Ryti resigned, and Finland's military leader and national hero, Carl Gustaf Mannerheim, became president, accepting the responsibility for ending the war.

On September 19 1944, an armistice (practically a preliminary peace treaty) was signed in Moscow between the Soviet Union and Finland. Finland had to make many limiting concessions: The Soviet Union regained the borders of 1940, with the addition of the Petsamo area. The Porkkala Peninsula (adjacent to Finland's capital Helsinki) was leased to the USSR as a naval base for fifty years (but returned in 1955), and transit rights were granted. Finland's army was to demobilize in haste. And Finland was required to expel all German troops from its territory. As the Germans refused to leave Finland voluntarily, the Finns had no choice but to fight their former supporters out of Finland in the Lapland War.

Conclusion
In retrospect the Continuation War might be seen as the result of a series of political miscalculations by the Finnish leadership in which Finland's martial abilities clearly outshone her diplomatic skills. The matter has been thoroughly scrutinized in Finland, and many commentators also hold that Finland was a victim of bad luck in addition to any failings on its own part, being forced to make a choice in a situation when any of the available alternatives would result in being attacked by either side. According to the prior proceedings of war at the time, Finland chose the alternative that seemed back then to provide better chances of post-war survival. The aged Field Marshal Mannerheim might have been responsible for a couple of misjudgments, such as for instance the infamous Order of the Day of July 10, 1941, but at the end of the war he had earned a remarkable reputation among former foes and allies, in Finland as well as abroad, which to a considerable degree eased Finland's extrication from a potentially disastrous undertaking.

In any event, Finland's fate was no worse than any other country struck by the World War - quite the contrary. Finland had defended her territory and her civilians with more success than most other European countries. Only 2,000 Finnish civilians were killed during World War II, and only relatively narrow border regions had been conquered by force. For nearly three years until June 20, 1944, when Vyborg fell, not one major Finnish town was besieged or occupied.

After the war, Finland preserved her independence while adjusting her foreign policy to avoid offence to the USSR, now the world's second superpower, a concession which the Soviet government reciprocated by surrendering part of its gains from the postwar settlement and refraining from too obvious intrusions in Finland's domestic affairs. To Moscow, an independent Finland seemingly was a price worth paying for keeping Sweden formally neutral in the Cold War, a quid pro quo that for forty years safeguarded wider Soviet strategic interests in the region.

title: User:Ruhrjung/Continuation War


text:
Bonnet (headgear)

Bonnet has been used as the name for a wide variety of headgear for both sexes—more often female—from the Middle Ages to the present. As with "hat" and "cap", it is impossible to generalize as to the styles for which the word has been used, but there is for both sexes a tendency to use the word for styles in soft material and lacking a brim, or at least one all the way round, rather than just at the front. Yet the term has also been used, for example, for steel helmets. This was from Scotland (in 1505), where the term has long been especially popular.

Headgear tied under the chin with a string was especially likely to be called a bonnet. Other features associated with bonnets as opposed to hats was that the forehead was not covered, and the back of the head often was. The outdoor headgear of female servants and workers was more likely to be called a bonnet. It was often worn outside over a thinner everyday head covering, which was worn at all times. In summary, hats were often stiffer, worn on the top of the head with the crown and brim roughly horizontal, while bonnets were pushed back, covering the back of the head, with any brim often approaching the vertical at the front. Other types of bonnet might otherwise be called "caps", for example the Scottish blue bonnet worn by working-class men and women, a kind of large floppy beret.

Bonnet derives from the same word in French, where it originally indicated a type of material. From the 18th century bonnet forms of headgear, previously mostly worn by elite women in informal contexts at home (as well as more generally by working women), became adopted by high fashion, and until at least the late 19th century, bonnet was the dominant term used for female hats. In the 21st century, only a few specialized kinds of headgear are still called bonnets, most commonly those worn by babies and the feather bonnets of Scottish Highland regiments, as well as perhaps the war bonnets of North American Plains Indians. In addition, types of headgear called bonnets are worn by women as an outer Christian headcovering in some denominations such as the Amish, Mennonite and Brethren churches among the Anabaptist branch of Christianity, and with Conservative Quakers, mainly in the Americas.

Women

Until the late 19th century bonnet seems to have been the preferred term for most types of hats worn by women, while hat was more reserved for male headgear, and female styles that resembled them, typically either in much smaller versions perched on top of the head, or versions with very wide brims all the way round. In the mid-17th and 18th century house bonnets worn by women and girls were generally brimless headcoverings which were secured by tying under the chin, and which covered no part of the forehead. They were worn both indoors and outdoors, to keep the hair tidy, to keep dust or flour out of the hair while working, and in accordance with the Christian Bible passage 1 Corinthians 11. With society hairstyles becoming increasingly elaborate after 1770, the calash was worn outdoors to protect hair from wind and weather: a hood of silk stiffened with whalebone or arched cane battens, collapsible like a fan or the calash top of a carriage, they were fitted with ribbons to allow them to be held secure in a gale.

From Waterloo, increasingly structured and fashionable bonnets made by milliners grew larger and less functional among the upper classes. A plate in La Belle Assemblée 1817 showed a "Bonnet of vermillion-coloured satin, embossed with straw, ornamented slightly with straw-coloured ribbands (ribbons), and surmounted by a bouquet formed of a full blown damask rose and buds, with ears of ripe corn. This ornament is partially placed on one side: the edge of the bonnet finished by blond [lace] laid on strait."

This was specified as a carriage dress, with the understanding that when "taking the air" in an open carriage, the bonnet provided some privacy—such a bonnet was called an invisible in Paris—and prevent wind-chapping, with its connotations of countrified "rude" health. Straw was available again after 1815: the best straw bonnets came from Leghorn. As a bonnet developed a peak, it would extend from the entire front of the bonnet, from the chin over the forehead and down the other side of the face. Some styles of bonnets between ca 1817 and 1845 had a large peak which effectively prevented women from looking right or left without turning their heads: a coal-scuttle or poke bonnet. Others had a wide peak which was angled out to frame the face. In the 1840s it might be crimped at the top to frame the face in a heart shape. As the bonnet became more complicated, under it might be worn a lace cornette to hold the hair in place.

The lack of a clear distinction between hats and bonnets can be seen in these extracts from Harper's Bazaar in 1874: (On "Paris Fashions", by Emmeline Raymond, 11 April) "There is no change in bonnets. So long as the hair is piled on top of the head, the little device which takes the place of a dress cap must remain as it is. The brims are generally flattened at the sides, swelling above the front, and turned up behind in order to make room for the hair, which would not find room whereon to lodge if the precaution were not taken, here and there, to punch out what is called a brim of what is called a bonnet. It is said, however, that straw hats of the Pamela shape are in preparation, that is, turned up behind, but shading the forehead. It would be so very sensible to wear a bonnet that would protect the face from the sun that I give this news with due caution. For my part, I can not believe it, as little of practical, functional purpose remains in bonnet design." A week before, ("New York Fashions", 4 April): "Strings are now seldom seen, and this does away with the last distinguishing feature between bonnets and round hats; the same head-covering now serves for each, as it is a bonnet when worn far back on the head, and a hat when tilted forward."

Bonnets remained one of the most common types of headgear worn by women throughout most of the 19th century. Especially for a widow, a bonnet was de rigueur. Silk bonnets, elaborately pleated and ruched, were worn outdoors, or in public places like shops, galleries, churches, and during visits to acquaintances. Women would cover their heads with caps simply to keep their hair from getting dirty and perhaps out of modesty, as informed by Christian religious norms. In addition, women in wedlock would wear caps and bonnets during the day, to further demonstrate their status as married women.

Under the French Second Empire, parasols took the place of headgear for protection from sun, and bonnets became smaller and smaller, until they could only be held on the head with hatpins. As hats came back into style, bonnets were increasingly worn by women who wanted to appear modest in public, with the result that bonnets accumulated connotations of dowager wear and were dropped from fashion, except out on the prairies or country wear.

Most middle-class women in the 19th century would have had at least two bonnets, one suitable for summer weather, often made from straw, and one made from heavier fabric for winter wear. This is where the tradition of an Easter bonnet originated, when women would switch from their winter bonnet to their summer bonnet. Wealthier women would have many bonnets, suitable for different occasions.

Women of some religious groups have continued to wear bonnets for worship or everyday clothing. This is especially the case among Anabaptist Christianity (Old Order Mennonites, Schwarzenau Brethren, River Brethren, Amish) and other plain people, such as plain-dressing Conservative Friends (Quakers). Bonnets were adopted by the Salvation Army based on 1 Corinthians 11, as part of uniform for women. Initially, Salvation Army bonnets were introduced as symbolic and representative protection for women and were reinforced with black tar to turn them into physical helmets to protect against the projectiles thrown by pagans. Later versions were smaller when there was no longer any need for protection. The bonnet has now been replaced with a bowler hat.

In France, single women wore elaborate yellow and green bonnets to honor St. Catherine's Day on November 25. The French expression coiffer Sainte-Catherine ('don St. Catherine's bonnet'), an idiom that describes an unmarried woman of 25 years or older, derives from this custom.

Slave women shipped from Africa, who traditionally wore African head dress in their native countries, were given European styles of bonnets. Slaves working household tasks they were often given bonnets of a traditional European maid style, while slaves in the field wore hand-tied sunbonnets. These head bonnets were preferred by the masters for hygiene, while also offering protection from the sun.

Men
The word bonnet for male headgear was generally replaced in English by cap before 1700, except in Scotland, where bonnet and the Scots language version bunnet remained in use, originally for the widely worn blue bonnet, and now especially for military headgear, like the feather bonnet (not to be confused with those worn by Native Americans, for which bonnet was also used), Glengarry, Kilmarnock and Balmoral. The Tudor bonnet remains a term for a component of the academic regalia of some universities, and is not unlike the common male bonnet of the 16th century.

Bonnet is also the term for the puffy velvet fabric inside the coronet of some male ranks of nobility, and "the affair of the bonnets" was a furious controversy in the France of Louis XIV over the mutual courtesies due between the magistrates of the Parliament de Paris and the Dukes of France.

The Scotch bonnet pepper was named for its resemblance to a bonnet worn by men in Scotland in the past, as it had a pom pom at the top which indicates the difference form the men's bonnet and women's bonnet.

Babies
The most common kind of bonnet worn today is a soft headcovering for babies. Its shape is similar to that of some kinds of bonnets that women used to wear: it covers the hair and ears, but not the forehead. While a bonnet may be a fashion choice by caregivers for a baby's headgear, it may also be used for sun protection, since an infant's skin is more vulnerable to sunburn than an adult's.

Modern times
Modern bonnets are often made of silk or satin to preserve one’s hairstyle while asleep or lying down. They maintain a similar shape to bonnets that were popular in the 1960s. But it is more likely that these styles of headdress originated from the use of shower caps due to their appearance and application in salons.

It can also be worn with French maid costumes.

Bonnets are also used in alternative fashion communities such as lolita fashion.

title: Bonnet (headgear)


text:
Frederick Howard, 5th Earl of Carlisle

Frederick Howard, 5th Earl of Carlisle (28 May 1748 – 4 September 1825) was a British peer, statesman, diplomat, and author.

Life
He was the son of Henry Howard, 4th Earl of Carlisle and his second wife Isabella Byron. His mother was a daughter of William Byron, 4th Baron Byron and his wife Frances Berkeley, a descendant of John Berkeley, 1st Baron Berkeley of Stratton. She was also a sister of William Byron, 5th Baron Byron and a great-aunt of George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron, the poet. In 1798, Carlisle was appointed guardian to Lord Byron who later lampooned him in English Bards and Scotch Reviewers.

During his youth Carlisle was mentored by George Selwyn and was chiefly known as a man of pleasure and fashion. He was created a Knight of the Thistle in 1767, and entered the House of Lords in 1770. After he had reached thirty years of age, his appointment on a Commission sent out by Frederick North, Lord North, to attempt a reconciliation with the Thirteen Colonies during the American War of Independence was received with sneers by the opposition. The failure of the embassy was not due to any incapacity on the part of the earl, but to the unpopularity of the government from which it received its authority. He was considered to have displayed so much ability that he was entrusted with the viceroyalty of Ireland in 1780.

The time was one of the greatest difficulty; for while the calm of the country was disturbed by the American War of Independence, it was drained of regular troops, and large bands of volunteers not under the control of the government had been formed. Nevertheless, the two years of Carlisle's rule passed in quietness and prosperity, and the institution of a national bank and other measures which he effected left permanently beneficial results upon the commerce of the island. In 1789, in the discussions as to the regency, Carlisle took a prominent part on the side of the prince of Wales.

In 1791 he opposed William Pitt the Younger's policy of resistance to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire by the Russian Empire; but on the outbreak of the French Revolution he left the opposition and vigorously maintained the cause of war. He resigned from the Order of the Thistle and was created a Knight of the Garter in 1793. In 1815 he opposed the enactment of the Corn Laws; but from this time till his death, he took no important part in public life.

In 1798 he was one of the syndicate who bought the Orleans Collection of paintings, which were housed in Castle Howard.

Family
On 22 March 1770, Frederick married Lady Margaret Caroline Leveson-Gower (died 27 January 1824), daughter of Granville Leveson-Gower, 1st Marquess of Stafford and his wife, Lady Louisa Egerton, herself the daughter of Scroop Egerton, 1st Duke of Bridgewater.

They had ten children:
 * Lady Isabella Caroline Howard (1771–1848), who married John Campbell, 1st Baron Cawdor, on 27 July 1789 and had issue
 * George Howard, 6th Earl of Carlisle (17 September 1773–1848), who married and had issue
 * Lady Charlotte Howard (15 November 1774–1774)
 * Lady Susan Maria Howard (26 February 1776–1783)
 * Lady Louisa Howard (27 March 1778–1781)
 * Lady Elizabeth Howard (13 November 1780 – 29 November 1825), who married John Manners, 5th Duke of Rutland, on 22 April 1799 and had issue
 * William Howard (1781–1843), Member of Parliament
 * Lady Gertrude Howard (1783–1870), who married William Sloane-Stanley on 23 June 1806 and had issue
 * Maj. Frederick Howard (6 December 1785 – 18 June 1815), killed in action at Waterloo, who married Frances Susan Lambton and had two sons, including Frederick John Howard
 * Henry Edward John Howard (1795–1868), who married and had issue

The 5th Earl was also reputedly the natural father of Howard Staunton (1810–1874), an English chess master regarded as having been the world's strongest player from 1843 to 1851, according to information "gleaned" by chess historian H. J. R. Murray from various sources, although record of Staunton's birth or baptism has never been found.

Works
Carlisle was the author of some political tracts, a number of poems, and two tragedies:

 * Poems, London, 1773
 * The Father's Revenge (a tragedy in five acts), London, 1783
 * To Sir J. Reynolds, (verses), London, 1790
 * A Letter to Earl FitzWilliam, London, 1795
 * The Crisis, London, 1798
 * Unite or Fall, London, 1798
 * The Stepmother, (a tragedy), London, 1800
 * The Tragedies and Poems of Frederick, Earl of Carlisle, London, 1801
 * ''Verses on the Death on Lord Nelson, London, 1806
 * Thoughts on the present Condition of the Stage, London, 1808
 * Miscellanies, London, 1820

title: Frederick Howard, 5th Earl of Carlisle


text:
Roy Park

Roy Park may refer to:

 * Roy H. Park (1910–1993), American media executive
 * Roy Park (sportsman) (1892–1947), Australian cricketer and Australian rules footballer

title: Roy Park