Paul Hindemith :: essays research papers fc

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Paul was born in the German town of Hanau in 1895, on December Sixteen. We might assume that Hindemith felt a pull in the musical direction from a very early age; Paul’s father was a painter and did not want his son becoming a musician, so our little composer-to-be ran away at the age of 11, and started his own life. Paul taught himself the violin and viola, and began earning his living by playing at Cafes and other such establishments. Eventually, Hindemith learned the rudiments of all the instruments that mattered, so he could play them at least passably-- but he was surely a virtuoso at his viola and viola d’amore.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Eventually, Hindemith ended up at the Frankfurt Conservatory, where he studied his music performance under the tutelage of people like Arnold Mendelssohn. While there, Hindemith showed increasing interest in the field of composition-- he began writing in earnest around the time he completed his courses at the Conservatory, and began establishing himself in the music culture through chamber music and expressionistic opera.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Paul landed a pretty major job in the Frankfurt Opera Orchestra... he was first concertmaster, and then conductor over the years 1915-1923. After this, he founded his Amar String Quartet, for which he was violist-- the group became pretty celebrated and performed successfully throughout Europe. It’s agreed that 1921 was when Hindemith began to come into his own, and emerge as well-known into the world as a composer and performer. Hindemith appeared regularly at the Donaueschingen Festival starting that year, and in 1922-24 his Chamber Works were performed at the Salzburg Festival (which I assume was a fairly big deal at the time).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Up until about 1925, Hindemith was pretty conventional, going along more or less complacently with the musical norms of his time. But in 1925, he came out with â€Å"Kammermusik†, his first openly atonal composition. The piece was representative of new ideas, and roused lots of talk when it was performed at the Venice Festival of the International Society of Contemporary Music. Before he knew it, Paul was a sort of pioneer, a figurehead of the advancing frontier in â€Å"Modern Music†.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ah-- during these years of his life, Hindemith was working as a professor of Composition at the Berlin Hochschule.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It was around 1934 that Hindemith started having some trouble with the Nazis. For one, they didn’t like his music. In fact, Alfred Rosenberg, who was Chief of Nazi Foreign Affairs, said his musics were the â€Å"foulest perversions of German music.† Obviously, the Nazis gave his career

Essay --

In the poems â€Å"Hawk Roosting† and â€Å"Golden Retrievals,† Ted Hughes and Mark Doty, respectively, portray differing views of the world from the perspectives of two different animals. Hughes depicts a hawk as omnipotent, cunning, and calculating in its actions and motives; whereas Doty conveys the animal perspective through a golden retrieval depicted as carefree and joyful. Through utilization of poetic devices, both authors offer contrasting characterizations of the two animals and distinct perspectives of the world. Through use of poetic devices, Hughes and Doty, respectively, characterize the hawk and the golden retrieval in different lights to ultimately reveal the animals' views on themselves. Hughes’ poem, the â€Å"Hawk Roosting,† features a self-obsessed and demanding Hawk. The author characterizes the hawk through the use of first person point of view. The use of personal pronouns â€Å"mine,† â€Å"my,† and â€Å"I† furthers the author’s point that the Hawk believes the world revolves around it and it alone. It seems oblivious to the importance of the world around it. It takes on the position of a king; the hawk presides over everything. Furthermore, the Hawk never seems to mention any other living creature. As far as it is concerned, every other creature is entirely irrelevant and has no place in the world. Moreover, the hawk sees itself as a God-like creature. The hawk may â€Å"kill where [it pleases]† and in the most gruesome â€Å"ma nner,...tearing off heads.† The hawk seems to have declared itself grim reaper at this point in the poem. The hawk has no one to answer to and thus does and plans accordingly. It almost brags to the audience about its unique ability of killing other creatures in the most brutal way possible; it enjoys the viciousness of... ...ife, demonstrating that humans also calculate and systematically plan for the future, collectively trying to be the best of the best at all times much like the hawk. Hughes’ systematic hawk makes Doty’s golden retrieval seem very much lost and distracted as each day passes. The hawk would like nothing more than to fly alone and dictate the universe, whereas the dog simply travels with his master as nothing more than a companion. The hawk recognizes the world around him with a callous superciliousness and deliberate approach for the future while the dog lives in the present and concentrates on the small, but valuable things in life. Both animals live their lives differently and individually as humans do. The utilization of an animal’s point of view is accomplished completely in both poems as the poets connect the animals’ thought processes to that of the human race.

Ethics, Moral Character and Authentic Essay

The four components of authentic transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) are constrasted with their counterfeits in the dissembling pseudotransformational leadership on the basis of 1) the moral character of the leaders and their concerns for self and others; 2) the ethical values embedded in the leaders’ vision, articulation, and program, which followers can embrace or reject; and 3) the morality of the processes of social ethical choices and action in which the leaders and followers engage and collectively pursue. The literature on transformational leadership is linked to the long-standing literature on virtue and moral character, as exemplified by Socratic and Confucian typologies. It is linked, as well, to the major themes of the modern Western ethical agenda: liberty, utility and distributive justice Deception, sophistry, and pretense are examined alongside issues of transendence, agency, trust, striving for the congruence of the values, cooperative action, power, persuasion, and corporate governance to establish the strategic and moral foundations of authentic transformational leadership. Contracts can be skewed in favor of those with more resources, contacts and â€Å"bargaining power. † People often appreciate leadership which points the way out of dilemmas whether it comes from others within their own collective or from external authority. Leaders as divergent in their politics as Mao Zedong and Shimon Peres agreed that the task of leadership is to sense the problems of their followers and to articulate solutions which satisfied their interests. Rost, reminiscent of Nozick and Rand, asks for leader-follower distinctions be erased to reach true participative democracy. Burns (1998) partially agrees and would substitute for leaders and followers, initiators, supporters and opponents. But the counterarguments are that if everyone in a group is responsible for its leadership, no one is responsible. Furthermore, if a group is initially leaderless, the members compete with each other for leadership. One or more leaders emerge who initiate and propose more than the other members. Followers emerge who are responsive to the leaders, and non-responsive isolated persons remain who are passive (Bass, 1954). If trying to align the values of members of an organization with the good of all stakeholders is unethical , then it is unethical to contingently reward prison inmates with time off for good behavior or for transformational teachers to move pupils to internalize the values of good citizenship for the benefit of society. â€Å"Libertarians would agree that one’s life plans are paramount but they are close to espousing anarchy as are the OD extremists who charge immorality if the transformational leader intervenes in the individual follower’s life plans†(Bass, 1998A, p. 79). With this line of thinking that it is immoral to align the values and behavio

How Is Curley’s Wife Presented †Victim or Villain? Essay

Curley’s wife is the only women at the ranch in Of Mice and Men. She is generally portrayed as a young, lonely, bored and childish girl. â€Å"Baloney!† is her ‘word.’ This single word shows that she thinks she is a movie star. No one really talks like this. All the way through the book, it is evident this is how she sees her life; unreal, like a movie and dramatic. Curley’s wife is talked about before she is seen in the book. The first actual mention of her is ‘wife.’ Already it has been established that she has no name, she is just Curley’s wife. The men see her as a women, not as a real person. The swamper gives his opinion straight away on her. He immediately agrees that she is ‘purty’ but has ‘got the eye.’ This shows that the men see her as just a pretty girl, who means nothing. The fact that they mention she has the eye gives the impression that the men have been watching her, and are curious about her, as they have noticed this. This also shows that the men see her as provocative, and the swamper gets this impression over to George straight away, so all the book he treats her in a biased way, because of what was said then. He then describes her as ‘†¦a tart.’ This is very discriminatory and shows what most of the men think about her. They do not understand her, so she must be a tart! The swamper also invited George to ‘look her over.’ They are treating her like a possession, not a human being. Curley’s wife’s first appearance happens soon after George and Lennie hear about her. She stands in the doorway ‘looking in.’ This puts her immediately in place as the outsider, always looking in, never part of the action. She is described as ‘heavily made up’ and this tells you a lot about her. There is no reason to be heavily made up on a ranch, so she must have to much time on her hands. The fact she is wearing so much makeup tells us that Curley’s wife is bored. Also her hair is in ‘little rolled clusters,’ something which takes an extreme amount of time, pointing further to the fact that she is bored. Her ‘cotton house dress’ and ‘red mules’ are completely inappropriate dress for a ranch, and are actually quite expensive, film star clothes, giving us the impression that she thinks a lot about herself. When she speaks, it is evident she is socially awkward, as she doesn’t introduce herself or even say hello, just states that she is ‘lookin’ for Curley.’ Her voice is ‘nasal, brittle,’ which is not sexy, even though this is how she portrays herself through her makeup and clothes. When George answers her,  she doesn’t leave, but asks â€Å"Your the new fellas†¦ aint you?† This shows that she wasn’t actually looking for Curley, she is just trying to start up a convocation and doesn’t really know how to do it, further pointing at the fact she is socially awkward. Also she moves so her body is ‘thrown forward,’ trying to show off her best assets to the new guys, so she thinks a lot about herself and is a massive flirt! However, this idea as changes when she ‘bridles’ under Lennie’s eyes. This shows that she doesn’t actually like being looked at, and is uncomfortable with men looking at her. Therefore, surely this points to the fact that she isn’t a tart! When she offers to go somewhere else, she says it ‘playfully’ as if she is wishing the men will ask her to stay, as she wants the company and again is flirting. Throughout this, George has hinted that he wants her to go away four times, but she is either ignorant and has not got the message or is just plain lonely and doesn’t care if they want his company or not. Her next sentence, ‘Nobody can’t blame a person for lookin’ is very staged. Again, this wording is only used in the movies and her line sounds fake and practised. It is almost like she is play acting, and unreal. When Slim arrives, and tells her straight that she can’t be looking very hard she turns ‘apprehensive’ and ‘hurries away.’ This shows that she is actually quite scared that the Slim knows what she is up too, and also that she is quite scared of Curley. Her first appearance confirms the stereotypes that were placed on her before we met her. However, these stereotypes do not hold up through the book. Her second appearance is in Crooks’ barn. She straight away gives her usual excuse for being around the men ‘any of you boys seen Curley?’ It is obvious that she again is not really looking for Curley, just wants the company. Also the word boys shows that she doesn’t really considers Crooks Candy and Lennie men, as they both have what she considered bad quality’s therefore they are not rea l men. She again is ‘heavily made up,’ which shows that she is bored and has too much time on her hands. She calls Crooks, Candy and Lennie the ‘weak ones,’ even though Lennie is obviously far from weak. She identifies them as weak because they are the unpopular ones, she knows how to hurt them, but is only doing this as she is angry at being left behind herself. By saying this she is also identifying herself as weak, this is why she really said ‘they left the weak ones behind,’ she is including herself in that. Also by saying she  knows where Curley is, â€Å"I know where they all went,† she is admitting that she is not in Crooks’ room to look for him and that she is just craving company. She regards them ‘amusedly’ showing that she has no respect for these ‘weak’ men, before giving her view on mankind. When Crooks mentioned her husband, she really lets off what she feels for him, â€Å"Swell guy, ain’t he?† She brings up Curley’s hand, as she wants the gossip, as when she asks her face is ‘interested.’ When she doesn’t believe his answer she says her favourite word, â€Å"Baloney!† This, as I said above, is a childish and movie star attitude, showing that she thinks she is living in a fairy tale. Next, she shows us how much contempt she fe els for her life, â€Å"An’ what am I doin’?† She knows that she regrets marrying Curley and feels her life is going nowhere. She then decided the only way to interest is to insult, and called the men ‘nigger,’ ‘dum dum’ and ‘lousy old sheep.’ She is taking out her anger at her man being in the cat house and her life going down the toilet and the men, who can’t do anything about her. She doesn’t even care when Candy tells her where to go, just replies in her film star way with â€Å"Baloney† showing she doesn’t care a jot! She barely flinches when Candy insults her, and turns her attentions to Lennie, where Lennie makes a fatal slip up. The way she just turns her attention to Lennie shows that she is actually hurt by what Candy has said, but is trying to hide it. She is quite sensible with Lennie, but flips her anger on Crooks and threatens to get him ‘strung up on a tree.’ The fact that she needs to throw her anger on to someone shows how reckless she is, and completely not in control of her own emotions. When Lennie threatens to tell she says that â€Å"Nobody’d listen to you.† She knows the men’s weak points and are using their weakness to keep herself safe, a bad quality in a person showing she is selfish. She leaves when Crooks says the guys are back, further showing how scared she is of Curley’s wrath. Her final appearance is in the barn with Lennie, the place where she dies. She came into the barn very ‘quietly,’ showing she is sly and sneaky. She is yet again ‘heavily made-up’ wearing the ‘cotton dress’ with the ‘mules.’ Again, this is completely unsuitable for the ranch and shows she has too much time on her hands and she thinks she lives in a movie, where she always has to be made up. She was ‘quite near’ to Lennie, showing she has no recognition for personal space and is awkward with people. She calls him â€Å"sonny boy† which is again only a thing a movie star  would say, and is very patronising towards Lennie. From this you can tell that she really is selfish, and doesn’t realise how much her words can hurt people. She ‘laughed’ when Lennie refused to talk to her, she is either ignorant, completely stupid, or doesn’t care if Lennie wants her there or not! When he refused again she knelt ‘beside him;’ she will not take no for an answer! She uses emotional blackmail on Lennie, as she says she gets ‘awful lonely,’ which shows she is very crafty and actually cleverer then she is made out to be, though she doesn’t use her intelligence for positive things. When she sees the puppy; â€Å"Why, he’s dead!† we see that she is chocked, and wary of Lennie now. This also shows us that she has got a heart! When she starts telling her story, neither of the two listen to each other. She doesn’t seem to care though, and refuses to see that Lennie isn’t interested. We find out the reason for her movie star addiction, and see her naivety as she actually thinks the man wrote to her; â€Å"I never got that letter†¦I always thought my ol’ lady stole it. We find out she married out of spite; â€Å"So I married Curley.† This explains her constant flirting with men, she does not love Curley in any way. She is very materialistic as she wants â€Å"them nice clothes like they [movie stars] wear† instead of the actual fame. This shows she doesn’t really understand what being famous is and thinks it’s all about nice clothes. When she realises Lennie isn’t listening she turns ‘angrily’ on him. She thinks her story is amazing, and that she really could be famous, and that everyone should think her life is the most interesting thing in the world. She actually ‘moved away from him a little’ when he moves close to her, giving us another view of her, that she is not a tart, and doesn’t actually like men being close to her! Overall, she dies because of her vanity. She invites Lennie to ‘feel’ her hair. She dies of her own stupidity, as she is too scared to shut up. She dies because she is too naive, to trusting, and much too vain. ‘Let go, you let go!’ Steinbeck portrays her as a girl throughout the entire book. Everytime he mentions her he calls her a ‘girl’ giving us a contrast between the sexy arrogant woman and the young naive girl. Much of how he sees her is portrayed in death. He says that all the ‘meanness,’ ‘plannings,’ ‘discontent,’ and ache for attention,’ are all gone. This shows us that all of her bad quality’s have been made by life, life has made her bitter. He says that her ‘rouged cheeks’ and ‘reddened lips’ made her ‘alive’ in away.  This gives the impression that she is innocent in death, that she is almost a sleeping beauty, and that she is now at peace with herself. In death, she is the poster girl she always wanted to be, and this is how Steinbeck sees her. I think he sees her as a victim, as in death we see a poor innocent girl, not a heartless selfish women. I personally think Curley’s wife is a victim in Of Mice And Men. Life has been hard for her, she has been overcome with pride, pity, lies, stupidity and vanity. She actually died because of her own stupidity, and her death was partly her fault. I feel that her victim qualities outweigh her villain qualities. Yes she always found others to blame, found the bad in people, and criticised everyone in sight. She was lonely, and her mistakes in life backfired on her. I think that the part of the book that shows us she was a victim was not where she was murdered, but actually, was before we even met her, when the boys were talking about her in the barn. When George and Lennie immediately believe what Candy says and immediately stereotype her. The sentence which most classes Curley’s wife as a victim were the words â€Å"I think Curley’s married†¦ a tart.†

A Farewell Of Arms, By Ernest Hemingway Essay World War II, World War

Throughout the novel, Ernest Hemingway demonstrates the true horrors and realities of the Great War. At the beginning of the novel, many individuals in the Italian army despise the Great War and its primary objectives, believing that it is not only unnecessary but also unjust. In addition the impact of the war is illustrated when an American soldier decides to take the truss off of his hernia in order to avoid fighting at the front lines. Furthermore, as the war continues to expand and intensify, Rinaldi, a proficient Italian surgeon is significantly affected as he is about his medals, war wounds as well as the promotion that he is about to obtain. Ettore further encourages Henry to join the American army, since it will compensate him much more than the Italian army. Moretti’s moral values are shown in his reasoning for joining the American army since he would rather serve in an army that pays him more for his services. Henry’s own experiences of the Great War ch anges his perspectives and attitudes, leaving him to feel lonely, disgusted as well as disconnected for participating in a warfare that destroys and kills countless of innocent people.Consequently, Ernest Hemingway portrays the First World War as meaningless, gruesome and destructive, which causes detrimental impacts on many individuals physically, morally as well as mentally. He demonstrates that war is senseless and brutal, inflicting mental and physical damage to

Customer Service-Gathering Customer Information-discussion Personal Statement

Customer Service-Gathering Customer Information-discussion - Personal Statement Example The form includes information from your name to financials and a number of other questions demonstrating your likes and dislikes. Then there are â€Å"Enquiries and Complaints† where companies keep record of customer enquires which can be about a specific product or service. â€Å"Customer Reward Programs† is another smart technique of getting customer information by offering them tempting rewards like discounts, promotions, cash backs and reward points. Another way of acquiring information is â€Å"Customer Feedback Surveys† which is of one most used method. From ethical point of view, gathering customer’s personal information is wrong to some extent. We should not forget that people do have the right to privacy according to law but if they are deliberately providing their information to the companies then all the blame cannot be imposed on companies. On the company’s part, they should not collect private information to the extent where customer feels insecure and the worst part is that companies who are gathering data just don’t keep it to themselves; it is usually leaked or sold to other companies specifically in the banking sector. At times companies also track your personal life associated to marital and monetary aspects. In my opinion there should be a limit to invade customer’s personal life and also customers should be careful while providing extensive information about themselves for the sake of rewards which might have unforeseen

History Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

History - Assignment Example The Palestinian partisans were funded and backed by the Arab neighbors. On May 1967, Nassar (Egypt's President) had the UN withdraw from Egypt. He then sent tanks and troops into the Sinai. Israel responded by moving troops as well. On June 5, 1967 Israel attacked the Egyptian air forces. With Israeli air planes protecting their troops and tanks, they easily took the Sinai. If the UN would not have stopped the war, Israel would have gone further into Egyptian territory. Israel also captured Jerusalem and Golan Heights during this war. Israel won the Six Day War. The Yom Kippur War led to Syria and Egypt to attack Israel again. This time after battles and negotiations, Israel gave back the Sinai and parts of other territory taken in the Six Day War. However this war lead to the Camp David Accords and led to Egypt recognizing Israel as a state. I.D. the following terms in paragraph format. Make sure you include ALL INFORMATION from the book: Do NOT just copy from the book. You must put these in your own words. (worth 5 points each) 1. Palestinian refugees Palestinian refugees are Arabs caught on Israeli land or in the Occupied Territories after the wars between Israel and their Arab neighbors. These individuals are waiting to be given citizenship by Israel or liberated by the country Israel took the land from.