|
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Analysis of Claude Lorraine's "Landscape with Hagar and the Angel"This is not a large picture, primarily 'landscape' with Hagar and the Angel at first seeming little more than features of the foreground. Perhaps it was initially commissioned by a private individual who liked landscape paintings, the biblical subject matter added to elevate the painting to the more respected 'Historical' genre. Remove the foreground characters, and you have a peaceful, almost idyllic country scene. Lush green trees surround a clear, calm river. Around the banks, we see cattle drinking, while on the water is a small rowing boat. The sky is blue, and birds are flying. The scene is well lit, as if by the sun on a clear day. In the middle-distance, we see a town on a hill, (presumably the town from which Hagar has fled), and figures going about their business. Now add Hagar, sitting in the more shadowed foreground, distanced from the goings on of the surroundings. She becomes a lone figure, secluded from the world by shadows and trees, perhaps seeking solitude. Finally, introduce the angel, standing over Hagar and glaring sternly down at her. Hagar cowers (in fear; in shame; or both?) while it scolds with one hand, and points back towards the town with the other, directing her to return and fulfil her destiny. Although the figures do not dominate the picture in the way one would expect from a 'Historical' painting, still they draw the eye. They provide colour and activity in an otherwise empty space. The angel's wings, and Hagar's blue dress stand out against the browns and greens of the background, catching the eye, while the trees on either side form boundaries that help prevent it from straying into the background. This picture successfully combines elements from two genres to produce a work of great depth and subtlety. Analysis of William Wordsworth's "London 1802"This is a poem pleading for the return of the spirit of Milton to a fallen England. Milton is used to represent a certain spirit of revolution (he was a Parliamentarian at the time of the English Civil War) that Wordsworth - an active supporter of the then contemporary French revolution - longed for and felt England was in need of again. The tone and language is quite classical, perhaps attempting to capture the language used by Milton. It is strong in imagery ("a fen of stagnant waters", "heroic wealth of hall and bower") with plenty of simile and metaphor ("thy soul was like a star", "travel on life's common way"). It comes together to form an impassioned plea, filled with feeling and anguish. There is a clear turn between the octet and sestet, where the poet moves from describing the state of England to praising Milton directly. Of the first eight lines only the first can really be read in isolation, providing a summary of the sonnet to come. A single sentence is maintained across six lines. This keeps heightening the tension until the release at the end of the octet. The sestet then relaxes somewhat. Each line is more of a unit. It is easier to read and further emphasises the contrast between the tension of the stagnant England, and the purity that Milton represents. It begins in the style of a Pertrarchan sonnet. There are 14 lines, 10 or 11 syllables per line, often iambic, separated by theme into octet and sestet. The rhyming structure begins as one might expect, with ABBA ABBA, but then wanders into a more unusual CDD ECE, which further serves to separate the two parts. So, while in some ways this is a typical Petrarchan sonnet, its long sentences and unusual rhyming in the sestet serve to illustrate the flexibility of the form. How the musical elements in the jazz piece 'San' combine to create a meaningful performance.This is a piece best performed at a dance. To open, the orchestra plays the main melody in a single harmony, identifying the piece for anyone who wishes to dance. A few bars of strings (the only appearance of these typically orchestral-sounding instruments) gives them time to put down their drinks and get to the dance floor. With the ring of a triangle, the introductions are over and the dance begins. The band launch into a rich, multi-layered texture. A strong beat from the bass instruments keeps the dancers in step, while the lively rhythm of the drums keeps their feet moving. Jazz-style muted trumpets carry the melody, while a wealth of other instruments play contrapuntal tunes that provide depth and embellishment, ensuring every moment is filled with excitement. The dancers are warmed up, and the trombonist stands in a spotlight to begin his solo. Most of the band falls silent, leaving only the rhythm and some discreet accompaniment so as not to distract the audience as the melody leaps from note to note in a dazzling wash of improvisation. As the trombone's moment ends, the band rejoins. The counterpoint and rich texture return, along with the main melody that is a persistent identifying theme throughout the piece. Now the trumpets stand. It is their moment. Again, the texture thins to leave only the clarinet to keep up the main melody as the trumpets delight the crowd with their skills, until they must surrender the limelight to the clarinet. Another soloist is given 30 seconds to keep the dancers moving until finally, when they begin to tire, the whole ensemble returns for a rousing crescendo and finale. A last burst until a cymbal crash signals the end, and the dancers can return to their seats. Discussions on a fair distribution of wealtha) Albert defines a fair distribution of wealth as "Everybody should be given an equal share", and then as "Everyone [should be] given enough money to meet his or her needs". b) Cheryl objects to the first definition because a given quantity of money may be ample for some, yet insufficient for others. She objects to the second by saying that some 'needs' (e.g. tennis and martinis) are less fair than others. The first objection breaks down to: People have unequal needs, so one person may require more wealth than another. It is unfair for one person to have more wealth than is necessary to meet their needs while another has barely enough. This is a valid argument but Cheryl fails to explain what she means by 'unfair', or how it applies here. If everyone in the world had an equal share of the wealth, and that share was sufficient in each case to meet the individual's needs, why is it unfair that one person has more left over? Is it fair that I should sacrifice my wealth, simply because you have chosen to have children? The second objection is: Some needs are more deserving than others. It is unfair for two people to receive equal shares of wealth if their needs are of unequal merit. This suffers the same flaws as the first argument - it is valid, but not supported by explanation. It asserts that needs have varying merit, yet fails to explain how or why. It is as worthy for a professional tennis player to play tennis, as it is for a doctor to study medical texts. If tennis is merely a hobby, then it cannot be considered a 'need'. Therefore, while both objections are valid, their persuasiveness is compromised by little or no reasoning to support the premises. Bibliography
|
|
Except where stated, this site and its contents are copyright ©2009 Alec Harkness and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 License.