Given a document, generate a short title of the document. The title should convey the main idea/event/topic about which the document is being written. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Q: Markle's  former side hustle could come in handy for  her  upcoming nuptials. In fact  in 2013 the actress told Esquire that she used her calligraphy skills to write singer Robin Thicke and actress Paula Patton's wedding invites. She also used her skills to freelance for luxury brands.
As a soon-to-be resident of Kensington Palace   Markle  no longer has to worry about using  her  calligraphy skills to make ends meet.
"It was just an amazing surprise. It was so sweet  and natural and very romantic. He got on one knee "  Markle  said.
The two met for the first time in London in July 2016 through a mutual friend. They were spotted for the first time together last September at the Invictus Games with  Markle 's mother  reports Time. In a Vanity Fair cover story this October   Markle  confirmed  her  relationship with Prince Harry saying  "We're in love."

A: Meghan Markle's former side hustle may be useful at her royal wedding
****
Q: The public schools in gentrifying neighborhoods seem on the cusp of becoming truly diverse  as historically underserved neighborhoods fill up with younger  whiter families. But the schools remain stubbornly segregated. Nikole Hannah-Jones has chronicled this phenomenon around the country  and seen it firsthand in her neighborhood in Brooklyn. âWhite communities want neighborhood schools if their neighborhood school is white â she says. âIf their neighborhood school is black  they want choice.â Charter schools and magnet schools spring up in place of neighborhood schools  where white students can be in the majority. âWe have a system where white people control the outcomes  and the outcome that most white Americans want is segregation â she says. In a recent episode of The Atlantic Interview  Nikole Hannah-Jones and The Atlanticâs editor in chief  Jeffrey Goldberg  discuss how integrated schools are good for white children and black children.
âIf one were to believe that having people who are different from you makes you smarter  that you engage in a higher level of thinking  that you solve problems better  there are higher-level ways that integration is good for white folks â Jones says. For black children  the benefits of attending an integrated school are much more drastic. âItâs literally  will you receive a quality education or not? Will you be a full citizen in the country of your birth?â In a hyper-competitive economy where test scores and college admissions and lifetimes earnings are all linked  Hannah-Jones has seen that the soft benefits of integration  like empathy or compassion  are low on a familyâs priority list. âMost white people are willing to trade that â she has found. An edited transcript of their conversation is below.  Jeffrey Goldberg : You and I have both had these conversations with my colleague Ta-Nehisi Coates about the arc of history and which way it bends. Iâve adopted the viewpoint of Barack Obama  that history is an arrow and the moral arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice. And Ta-Nehisi says that there really is no moral arc  but if there were it would just bend toward chaos. Are you in the camp of people who say that long-term optimism is premature?
Nikole Hannah-Jones: I think it has not a lot of basis in historical fact. I would say the arc is actually a circle. It just perpetually turns back on itself.  Goldberg : But letâs use African-Americans as an example. Life has gotten better  no? Before there was before there was Brown v. Board of Education  there was no Brown v. Board of Education. Before there was a Civil Rights Act  there was no Civil Rights Act. We donât live in a period of history free of lynchings  but the number of lynchings has gone down. There are more African-Americans in the middle class since Reconstruction. Life in America for African-Americans has gotten better. Itâs been stutter stepped  but we ainât in 1866 or 1873. Hannah-Jones: I am not a slave. That's true.  Goldberg : Well â¦ All right. Hannah-Jones: If thatâs the bar.  Goldberg : No  no  no. Hannah-Jones: None of us would argue that there hasnât been progress in a range of things. I guess I get almost offended by people who want us to pause and be congratulatory about forward progress.  Goldberg : I just want it known for the record that I'm offending you already. And we havenât even started. Hannah-Jones: I mean  in a country that has set itself apart as a beacon of democracy  the fact that weâre applauding that black folks now have had  for 40 years  full citizenship rights in the country of their birth  in the country of their grandparentsâ birth  in the country their great grandparentsâ birthâit's just hard to feel a lot of optimism.
 Goldberg : Iâm not arguing for applauding. Obviously there is a long road to go. Iâm just saying that there is a direction to things. Hannah-Jones: Well  thereâs forward progress and then we move back. Weâre clearly right now moving back. So yes  we get the Voting Rights Act and now we get the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. We see a wave of voter suppression. We get Brown v. Board of Education and now black children are more segregated than theyâve been since the 1970s. We never made any real progress on housing segregation outside of the South and the West even though we outlawed housing discrimination in 1968. The wealth gap for black and white Americans is the largest that itâs been since we started really recording this in the 1970s. There are more black men incarcerated than were black men enslaved during slavery. There are more black men killed by police than there were black men lynched in a year.  Goldberg : Okay fine. You win. Hannah-Jones: For small numbers of us  thereâs a lot of progress. And for large numbers of us  I think the progress can be very hard. Itâs still really bad.  Goldberg : Iâm not disagreeing with your analysis on any of those. It just seemed two years ago that we were moving in the right direction. Hannah-Jones: And then what happened?  Goldberg : Well  a reaction. I want you to analyze the root of these continuing dilemmas. Is at the bottom what weâre talking about a lack of understanding on the part of white America about the actual lived lives of African-Americans? I mean  Germany grappled with what it did in a way that Americaâs never grappled with what it did. As Ta-Nehisiâwho can always out-pessimism meâonce said  Germanyâs easy because Germany killed all the people it hated.
Hannah-Jones: I would say weâre not grappling what this country is about. Period. Not for African Americans.  Goldberg : Youâre not one of these people who says  âThis is not who we are.â Hannah-Jones: No  this is clearly who we are. I write about race from the year 1619. The English landed at Jamestown is 1607. Twelve years later  we have imported Africans to be enslaved and determined that they will be a wholly different caste of people with no legal rights in this country. Thatâs one hundred and forty years before we declare independence and decide that we want to be a country. This is embedded in the DNA of this country. I mean  Ta-Nehisiâs claim to fame is âThe Case For Reparations â which says weâve never even repaired the damage that weâve done and we only grudgingly even give legal rightsâon paperâto this group of people.  Goldberg : It is amazing that we are talking about Robert E. Lee and voter suppression as issues in 2017. Hannah-Jones: I mean tell me another country where a group of people break off from a country  try to fight that country  and lose  and those people are glorified and defended by the highest office in the land.  Goldberg : So the South won in one key cognitive wayâin a narrative way? Hannah-Jones: Yes  of course. What we were fighting in the South was a national sin. We want to pretend it was a Southern sin  but it was a national sin. We canât grapple with the South unless we grapple with ourselves.
 Goldberg : Two issues preoccupy you: housing segregation and education segregation. Theyâre linked  obviously. To get to a place where thereâs actual equality in housing and actual equality in educational opportunities for African-Americans  what has to happen? Itâs not just a legislative process. Hannah-Jones: It is not. Though  equal rights for black Americans has always had to be legislated. Itâs never been willingly given. What it would take  if weâre honest  is a fundamental restructuring of society. Our public schools are not broken  but are operating as designed. Our public schools were set up to provide unequal  inadequate education for black children. So thatâs what they do.  Goldberg : But arenât the public schools just a downstream problem of housing segregation policies? Hannah-Jones: No. They are clearly linked  but whether you have integrated communities or segregated communities  we have school segregation. In communities that are gentrifying  the gentrification stops at the schoolhouse door. White communities want neighborhood schools if their neighborhood school is white. If their neighborhood school is black  they want choice. Housing segregation just becomes a convenient excuse. The problemâand I never use the phrase âwhite supremacyâ because itâs a word that people automatically discount as soon as you use it  but that is the problem. We have a system where white people control the outcomes. And the outcome that most white Americans want is segregation. And I donât mean the type of segregation that we saw in 1955. I don't mean complete segregation. I don't think there are very many white Americans who want entirely white schools. What they do want is a limited number of black kids in their schools.
 Goldberg : What do you call âcurated diversity.â Hannah-Jones: I never talk about school inequality in terms of âdiversityâ because I think itâs a useless word. I think itâs a word that white people love. When I say âcurated diversity â it means white parents like a type of diversity so theyâll still be the majority and there wonât be too many black kids. White Americans  in general  are willing to accept about the ratio of black Americans at large: 10 to 15 percent.  Goldberg : But you get into the 20s... Hannah-Jones: When you get into the 20s  white folks start to exaggerate how large the percentage is. So in New York City  one of the most segregated school systems in the country  if youâre a white parent in the public schools  you donât want all-white schools.  Goldberg : Because youâre a liberal? Hannah-Jones: Yeah. But what you want is a majority-white school with a small number of black kids and a good number of Latino  a good number of Asian. That makes you feel very good about yourself because you feel like your child is getting this beautiful integrated experience. The problem is that the public schools in New York City are 70 percent black and Latino. So  for you to have your beautiful diversity  that means that most black and Latino kids get absolutely none. The tolerance for increasing particularly the percentage of black kids is very low  and even lower if those black kids are poor. No white parents in New York City mind having my kid in their school because they feel like Iâm on their level. But if you get too many of kids like mine who are black but poor  thereâs very little tolerance.
 Goldberg : Do most white parents in New York City achieve curated diversity for their children? Hannah-Jones: Yes.  Goldberg : Theyâre winning that? Hannah-Jones: Oh  definitely.  Goldberg : And itâs the black and Latino kids who are not winning because thereâs not enough whites in that sense to go around? Hannah-Jones: There would be. I hear this all the time: âYou canât integrate schools in York City because thereâs not enough white kids.â But that's only based on the premise that you canât expect white kids to be in the minority. The demographics of the New York City public schools are about 40 percent Latino  almost 30 percent black  15 percent Asian  15 percent white. If you picture a classroom like that  that's a beautiful school. Thatâs a beautifully diverse  integrated school. You could have that if you chose. We just donât choose it  because we automatically say  âYou canât expect that a white parent will put their kid in school with all those black kids.â  Goldberg : If you were the dictator of America  would you outlaw private schools? Would you force all the white kids  and all the upper-middle class and upper-class African-American kids  into the public-school system? Youâd have a deep level of parental involvement  right? Are private schools immoral in this context? Hannah-Jones: Interestingly  right after Brown there was consideration of whether or not Brown had to apply to private schools  or whether we should get rid of private schools in the United States altogether  understanding that the way to subvert Brown is to simply withdraw from public schools. Which is what happened all across the Southârather than share a public good with black folks  state legislatures decided to shut down public schools altogether and pay vouchers for white students to go to private segregation academies. We think it sounds absolutely crazy to consider ending private schools  but that was a consideration.
The answer to your question is yes  you would have to. If you truly wanted to equalize and integrate schools  you would have to. But you can go a step shorter than that. New York City public schools are majority black and Latino. But you can go to any of the suburbs around  and theyâre very heavily white. So in New York and all across the North  you could simply move into an all-white community and go to all-white public schools. And thatâs how you avoided desegregation. In the South  most school districts were countywide. So you either paid for private school or you dealt with desegregation. In the North  you didnât have to do that. The key difference between the North and the South is for the vast majority of the history of this country  90 percent of all black people lived in the South. The South responds with Jim Crow  by passing laws that restrict the movement of black people. The North doesnât have to do that. It has a very tiny black population. Itâs only once black people start migrating out of the South in the 1900s that the North shows its true ugly racist head.  Goldberg : Youâve described something that I actually experienced as a kid in the 70s. I was in a school system growing up that was about 60 percent black  35 whiteâthe local system right outside New York City. Very unusual. My experience going from kindergarten through 12th grade in that situation was fairly tension-free. People actually got along. There was mixing  there was interracial datingâ¦
Hannah-Jones: Your first crush was a black girl?  Goldberg : No  weâre not even going there. Hannah-Jones: OK.  Goldberg : But  yes. And the second and the third. Hannah-Jones: Why are you turning red right now?  Goldberg : Because Iâm interviewing you and youâre not interviewing me. But yes. My high-school sweetheart for many years was an African-American woman whoâs a very delightful person. It was an atmosphere where that could happen without consequence. Granted  a lot of the people from the white parts of town went to Catholic parochial schools. If the school district actually took in all of the kids who lived within the boundaries  it probably would have been 30 percent black. For the whites who went  it was a fairly beneficial experience. I can look back on that and say it was better for my intellectual  moral  civic developmentâmy emotional developmentâto do that. That  you argue  is disappearing slowly as an experience for whites and blacks. The country is resegregating. Talk a little bit about the benefits for whites of integration. Hannah-Jones: I think this is where you struggle trying to convince white people they should do this. Thereâs a clear imbalance for black kids. Itâs literally  will you receive a quality education or not? That is what integration means for black kids. Will you be able to transcend poverty? Will you be a full citizen in the country of your birth?  Goldberg : Hitching a ride to the white majorityâ¦
Hannah-Jones: Hitching a ride to the white majority  with the understanding that in a country built on racial caste  they get an inordinate amount of the resources. Things that are acceptable for black children are never acceptable for white children. So if you want what white children get  you have to be where white children are. White kids donât need black kids in the same way. Segregation does benefit white families. That is why the whole institution of segregation comes about.  Goldberg : How does it benefit white families  though  in a practical way? Hannah-Jones: In a practical way  because you get to hoard resources. You get the best of everything. Even in a community where the schools pretty much suck  if thereâs a school with black kids  itâs going to suck worse.  Goldberg : I would disagree with the whole premise. Hannah-Jones: Would you?  Goldberg : Well  going to the second half. The benefits of integration for whites I think outweigh whatever resource hoarding you could do. Hannah-Jones: Itâs soft benefits versus hard benefits. The soft benefits of integration  which I think are also very importantâitâs just a much harder argument. White people understand that theyâre fighting to get into white schools for a reason. It is a benefit. Theyâre going to get the best teachers. Theyâre going to get the best instruction. Theyâre going to get the best curriculum.  Goldberg : With the assumption that itâs a zero-sum game.
Hannah-Jones: With the assumption that there are good teachers and bad teachers.  Goldberg : And that the bad teachers are going to be... Hannah-Jones: ...overwhelmingly put into our schools. Yes. Nothing about the American experiment tells us that we value black kids the same. We just donât. I wrote about school resegregation in Tuscaloosa for The Atlantic. They created an all-black high school and an integrated high school. They promised the all-black high school it would have the same courses  and they just donât do it. There was actually no reason not to do it. The white parents who wanted the integrated school didnât give a damn what courses you offered in the black school. They werenât fighting against giving those kids physics. They just didnât care. In the end  they were poor black kids and they didnât have that much value and no one thought they were going to go to college anyway. Now  if one were to believeâwhich I believeâthat having people who are different from you makes you smarter  that you engage in a higher level of thinkingâand thereâs been research that shows thatâthat you solve problems better  there are all these higher-level ways that integration is good for white folks.  Goldberg : The richness of the human experience. Hannah-Jones: Right. My daughter is in a high-poverty school. Weâre clearly not poor. I think it makes her a better human being. I think she gets to see that these kids arenât any less than her. They just have less than her. But those are all hard soft-arguments to make to people who fundamentally view education as  how my kid will rise to the top above every other kid and get into Harvard. They donât actually give a damn about their kid being a better person.
 Goldberg : You talk about âhardâ benefits and âsoftâ benefits. I don't think they are that soft. Hannah-Jones: Most white people are willing to trade that. There is an explicit racial fear that black kids are more dangerous  that if they put their kids in these schools  their kids are going to be exposed to violence  theyâre going to be exposed to bad culture. Thereâs no longer the belief that black people are racially inferior but that black culture is inferior.  Goldberg : They donât say it in such a blunt way  do they? Hannah-Jones: They said it in a blunt way. In my daughterâs school  when white parents who lived next door to my daughterâs school would come and tour  they would tell the principal  âWe'll bring our kids  but only if our kids are in classroom by themselves and you keep them together through fifth grade.â  Goldberg : You mean  a white class. Hannah-Jones: Yes. This is what is being demanded.  Goldberg : And this is in âprogressiveâ Brooklyn. Hannah-Jones: This is Brooklyn. Hipster Brooklyn. There is this intrinsic racial fear that cannot be mitigated by facts. Thatâs the thing that is really embedded in all of usâthe belief that black children are not as smart. There are exceptional black children  right? âOf course  I know little Johnny is smart  but heâs not like the rest of the black kids that are culturally depraved. That bad culture is going to rub off. We need to protect our kids from large numbers of these kids.â I've had parents tell me  âThe middle-class black parents at the school are fine.â
 Goldberg : Whatâs so interesting here is that you're not talking about stereotypical Trump voters in Alabama. You're talking about hipster Brooklyn. Liberals kind of piss you off? Hannah-Jones: I am only writing and speaking to liberals at this point. I'm trying to get people who say they believe in equality and integration but act in ways that maintain inequality and segregation to live their own values. The most segregated parts of the country are all in the progressive North. If you could just get white liberals to live their values  you could have a significant amount of integration.  Goldberg : You know what group of people who would be really uncomfortable listening to  you  talk? The heads of progressive private schools in New York City  Boston  Washington. Hannah-Jones: But hereâs the thing. Weâre in a capitalist country and if you can pay for something  then so be it. What Iâm dealing with are public schools which are publicly funded for the public good. Every child should walk into a public school and get the same education. Those are the parents that Iâm speaking to. What we are finding are parents who say they believe in a common good but they want a public school that operates like a private schoolâyou can screen out the kids you donât want  you can hoard resources in the school  you can hoard all the best teachers  you can determine what curriculum youâre going to get. And if that means that two miles down the road  another publicly-funded school doesnât get any of that  then so be it. That  to me  is the height of hypocrisy.

A: The Atlantic Interview: Nikole Hannah
****
Q: When the Belgian cartoonist HergÃ© died in 1983 at the age of 75  The New York Times saw fit to run only a brief  182-word obituary  picked up from Reuters. But in the Francophone world  HergÃ©âs death was front-page news  inspiring the kind of orgylike coverage reserved in America for fallen statesmen and overdosed pop stars. Belgian politicians asserted HergÃ©âs greatness  while the French philosopher Michel Serres went so far as to declare that the cartoonist was the author who has had the âmost impact on contemporary French life.â
Granted  many people on this side of the Atlantic are also fans of HergÃ©âs best-loved creation  the tuft-haired boy reporter Tintin  who  along with his trusty dog  Snowy  foiled serial bands of smugglers  gangsters  kidnappers  spies and crude ethnic caricatures across the pages of 24 book-length  Saturday-morning-serial-style adventures. But even Tintinâs most passionate American devotees may choke on the French author Pierre Assoulineâs observation  in his scrupulous but stolid biography  HERGÃ: The Man Who Created Tintin (Oxford  $24.95)  translated by Charles Ruas  that âtoday  some speak with some justification of a âTintin century â signifying the 20th.â American exceptionalist that I am  I had presumed the 1900s belonged to Mickey Mouse or Batman â or maybe to that relative latecomer Bart Simpson. Though I like Tintin too  I wouldnât even give him a decade. A year or two seems about right  alongside other not-quite-epochal worthies like Zonker Harris and the Fantastic Four.
And perhaps that year is the one now ending  which marked the 80th anniversary of Tintinâs inauspicious birth in the childrenâs pages of Le VingtiÃ¨me SiÃ¨cle  an anti-Semitic and pro-Fascist Catholic newspaper. Publishers have taken note: in addition to Assoulineâs biography  originally published in France in 1996  we have an academic study  âThe Metamorphosis of Tintin: Or Tintin for Adults â by Jean-Marie ApostolidÃ¨s  translated by Jocelyn Hoy (Stanford University)  as well as âThe Art of  HergÃ©  â a planned three-volume anthology from Last Gasp press devoted not just to the cartoons but also to  HergÃ© âs impressive  sometimes glorious work as an illustrator and graphic designer. (The second volume will be out in March.) Back in Belgium  a MusÃ©e HergÃ© opened this past June in Louvain-la-Neuve (which should have been the name of a 1920s screen siren)  while in Hollywood Steven Spielberg has been busy directing âThe Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn â set for release in 2011 and the first of a projected series.
Aside from earnestness  an interest in world affairs and a slapstick sense of humor  one doesnât glean much sense of authorial presence in the Tintin books  for all their lively charm.  HergÃ©  is a somewhat remote presence even in Assoulineâs biography â the author himself concedes he is âelusiveâ â though to be fair  the cartoonist seems to have been a tough nut to crack. Like Tintin   HergÃ©  rarely revealed much of  himself  beyond a public facade of wholesome  cheerful industriousness. Of course Tintin  the relentless do-gooder  didnât possess any private life at all  a perpetual adolescent with no family of origin and no hint of angst or hormones â even the Hardy Boys had girlfriends â or anything else that makes real adolescents interesting (if impossible). We donât even know why  he  insists on having  his  hair cut like a blue jayâs.  HergÃ©   born in 1907 as Georges Remi ( his  pen name derives from the French pronunciation of  his  reversed initials â AIR-zhay)  was a darker and more conflicted character: a workhorse who suffered from depression and periodically chucked  his  responsibilities for months at time; a moralist who was also a philanderer; a staunch Catholic who in later life embraced Taoism; an entertainer of children who didnât particularly like them or have any of  his  own  except for an adopted 7- or 8-year-old orphan  he  forced  his  first wife to return after a couple of weeks  which is just about the cruelest thing I can imagine.
Tintinâs adventures began in 1929 with a trip to the Soviet Union  where our hero blew the lid off Bolshevik perfidy. Next up was a jaunt to the Congo  where he instructed childlike natives about the wise and benevolent glories of Belgiumâs colonial system. Full of inner-tube lips and appalling dialogue (âWhite master  you come quick! Lion him get mad!â)  âTintin in the Congoâ has in recent years been quarantined by libraries and purged from the canon by HergÃ©âs American publisher  Little  Brown. It is often cited as a stain on his legacy  as it should be  though I would point out that many other beloved cartoon characters â Bugs Bunny and Popeye come to mind â have similar skeletons in their closets. Years later   HergÃ©  would dismiss his early books by saying  âThey are not very intelligent  I know  and do me no honor: they are âBelgianâ booksâ â meaning  in Assoulineâs explication  that they were âself-satisfied and narrow.â Fortunately  HergÃ©âs skills as an artist and storyÂ­teller waxed as his taste for bourgeois agitprop waned.
But then there is âThe Shooting Star â begun in 1941 under Nazi occupation when  HergÃ©  was working for the collaborationist newspaper Le Soir  in which Tintin faces off against Blumenstein  a greedy  hook-nosed Jewish-American financier. In later years  an apologetic but defensive HergÃ© â he would tone down Blumensteinâs nose in postwar editions and change his name to Bohlwinkel â shrugged off accusations of anti-Semitism by saying âThat was the style thenâ (well  yes)  or comparing his Jewish caricatures to ethnic jokes about âpeople from Marseille  or the Scotch.â As Assouline plainly points out  âHergÃ©âs equations seem willfully obtuse.â Not that he suffered for them or his other wartime sins: he avoided retribution following liberation  and Tintinâs popularity only grew.

A:
Essay
****