Q: Given the below context:  Four battalions of rebel troops moved before dawn from the Mekong Delta towards Saigon, using armored personnel carriers and jeeps carrying machine guns. After cowing several police checkpoints on the edge of the capital with threats of machine-gun and artillery fire, the plotters put rebel sentries in their place to seal off Saigon from incoming or outgoing traffic. They then captured communication facilities in the capital, including the post office, to prevent messages from being sent in or out. As his troops took over the city, Phát sat in a civilian vehicle and placidly said "We'll be holding a press conference in town this afternoon at 4 p.m." He said "This is nothing to worry about. Just a little operation against some politicians." The rebels set up their command post in the Saigon home of General Duong Ngoc Lam, who had been removed from his post as Mayor of Saigon by Khánh. Lam had commanded the Civil Guard during Diệm's presidency and was one of his trusted supporters.The rebels took over the city without any gunfire, and used the national radio station to make a broadcast. Claiming to represent "The Council for the Liberation of the Nation", Phát proclaimed a regime change, and accused Khánh of promoting conflict within the nation's military and political leadership. He promised to capture Khánh and pursue a policy of increased anti-communism, with a stronger government and military. Phát said he would use the ideology and legacy of Diệm to lay the foundation for his new junta. Đức claimed the coup attempt was prompted by "the transfer to the capital of some neutralist elements, and by some pro-communists in the government". According to the historian George McTurnan Kahin, Phát's broadcast was "triumphant" and may have prompted senior officers who were neither part of the original conspiracy nor fully loyal to Khánh to conclude that Phát and Đức would not embrace them if they abandoned Khánh.In contrast to Phát's serene demeanor, his incoming troops prompted devotees at the Catholic cathedral—who...  Guess a valid title for it!
A: September 1964 South Vietnamese coup attempt


Question: Given the below context:  On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.  Guess a valid title for it!
Answer: Rokeby Venus


Question: Given the below context:  The one-act opera genre had become increasingly popular in Italy following the 1890 competition sponsored by publisher Edoardo Sonzogno for the best such work, which was won by the young Pietro Mascagni's Cavalleria rusticana. With Tosca essentially completed by November 1899, Puccini sought a new project. Among sources he considered, before proceeding with Madama Butterfly, were three works by French dramatist Alphonse Daudet that Puccini thought might be made into a trilogy of one-act operas.After Butterfly premiered in 1904, Puccini again had difficulty finding a new subject. He further considered the idea of composing three one-act operas to be performed together, but found his publisher, Giulio Ricordi, firmly opposed to such a project, convinced that it would be expensive to cast and produce. The composer then planned to work with his longtime librettist, Giuseppe Giacosa, on an opera about Marie Antoinette, a project frustrated by the librettist's illness. Puccini wrote in November 1905, "Will we go back to it? [Maria Antonietta] If I find three one-act works that suit me, I'll put off M.A."  Puccini pursued neither project, as Giacosa's illness led to his death in September 1906.In March 1907, Puccini wrote to Carlo Clausetti, Ricordi's representative in Naples, proposing three one-act operas based on scenes from stories by Russian novelist Maxim Gorky. By May the composer had set aside this proposal to concentrate on the project which became La fanciulla del West, although he did not wholly abandon the idea of a multiple-opera evening. His next idea in this vein, some years later, was for a two-opera bill, one tragic and one comic; he later expanded this to include a third opera with a mystic or religious tone. By November 1916 Puccini had completed the "tragic" element, which became Il tabarro, but he still lacked ideas for the other two works. He considered staging Il tabarro in combination with his own early work Le Villi, or with other two-act operas which might be used to round out the evening's...  Guess a valid title for it!
Answer:
Gianni Schicchi