Matching Items (664)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Songs (High voice) with piano
ContributorsWasbotten, Leia (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-30
Description
Libby Larsen is one of the most performed and acclaimed composers today. She is a spirited, compelling, and sensitive composer whose music enhances the poetry of America's most prominent authors. Notable among her works are song cycles for soprano based on the poetry of female writers, among them novelist and poet Willa Cather (1873-1947). Larsen has produced two song cycles on works from Cather's substantial output of fiction: one based on Cather's short story, "Eric Hermannson's Soul," titled Margaret Songs: Three Songs from Willa Cather (1996); and later, My Antonia (2000), based on Cather's novel of the same title. In Margaret Songs, Cather's poetry and short stories--specifically the character of Margaret Elliot--combine with Larsen's unique compositional style to create a surprising collaboration. This study explores how Larsen in these songs delves into the emotional and psychological depths of Margaret's character, not fully formed by Cather. It is only through Larsen's music and Cather's poetry that Margaret's journey through self-discovery and love become fully realized. This song cycle is a glimpse through the eyes of two prominent female artists on the societal pressures placed upon Margaret's character, many of which still resonate with women in today's culture. This study examines the work Margaret Songs by discussing Willa Cather, her musical influences, and the conditions surrounding the writing of "Eric Hermannson's Soul." It looks also into Cather's influence on Libby Larsen and the commission leading to Margaret Songs. Finally, a description of the musical, dramatic, and textual content of the songs completes this interpretation of the interactions of Willa Cather, Libby Larsen, and the character of Margaret Elliot.
ContributorsMcLain, Christi Marie (Author) / FitzPatrick, Carole (Thesis advisor) / Dreyfoos, Dale (Committee member) / Holbrook, Amy (Committee member) / Ryan, Russell (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Discovering Puerto Rican art song: a research project on four art song works by Héctor Campos Parsi
Description
Puerto Rico has produced many important composers who have contributed to the musical culture of the nation during the last 200 years. However, a considerable amount of their music has proven to be difficult to access and may contain numerous errors. This research project intends to contribute to the accessibility of such music and to encourage similar studies of Puerto Rican music. This study focuses on the music of Héctor Campos Parsi (1922-1998), one of the most prominent composers of the 20th century in Puerto Rico. After an overview of the historical background of music on the island and the biography of the composer, four works from his art song repertoire are given for detailed examination. A product of this study is the first corrected edition of his cycles Canciones de Cielo y Agua, Tres Poemas de Corretjer, Los Paréntesis, and the song Majestad Negra. These compositions date from 1947 to 1959, and reflect both the European and nationalistic writing styles of the composer during this time. Data for these corrections have been obtained from the composer's manuscripts, published and unpublished editions, and published recordings. The corrected scores are ready for publication and a compact disc of this repertoire, performed by soprano Melliangee Pérez and the author, has been recorded to bring to life these revisions. Despite the best intentions of the author, the various copyright issues have yet to be resolved. It is hoped that this document will provide the foundation for a resolution and that these important works will be available for public performance and study in the near future.
ContributorsRodríguez Morales, Luis F., 1980- (Author) / Campbell, Andrew (Thesis advisor) / Buck, Elizabeth (Committee member) / Holbrook, Amy (Committee member) / Kopta, Anne (Committee member) / Ryan, Russell (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
The present essay addresses the epistemic difficulties involved in achieving consensus with respect to the Hayek-Keynes debate. In particular, it is argued that the debate cannot be settled on the basis of the observable evidence; or, more precisely, that the empirical implications of the theories of Hayek and Keynes are such that, regardless of what is observed, both of the theories can be interpreted as true, or at least, not falsified. Regardless of the evidence, both Hayek and Keynes can be interpreted as right. The underdetermination of theories by evidence is an old and ubiquitous problem in science. The present essay makes explicit the respects in which the empirical evidence underdetermines the choice between the theories of Hayek and Keynes. In particular, it is argued both that there are convenient responses one can offer that protect each theory from what appears to be threatening evidence (i.e., that the choice between the two theories is underdetermined in the holist sense) and that, for particular kinds of evidence, the two theories are empirically equivalent (i.e., with respect to certain kinds of evidence, the choice between the two theories is underdetermined in the contrastive sense).
ContributorsScheall, Scott (Author) / Creath, Richard (Thesis advisor) / Armendt, Brad (Committee member) / French, Peter (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
ContributorsYi, Joyce (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-22
ContributorsCummiskey, Hannah (Performer) / Kim, Olga (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-23
ContributorsEvans, Emily (Performer) / Sherrill, Amanda (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-02
Description
This dissertation is a collection of two essays relating to the dynamic effects of taxation.
In the first chapter, I focus on a key challenge faced by tax reforms: their short-run
welfare consequences. I examine a consumption-based tax reform that, despite the long-run welfare gains it generates, causes the welfare for some groups such as retirees or the working poor to fall during transition between steady states. Using a life-cycle model with heterogeneous households, I show how to devise a transition path from the current U.S. federal tax system to a consumption-based tax system that improves the welfare of current generations as well as those who are born in the long-run steady state. In a nutshell, all households alive at the time of the policy change can choose when they want to switch to the new tax system, or whether they want to switch at all. I find that implementing a tax reform with this feature improves the welfare of 95% of the population in the short run, compared to less than 25% of population in the conventional case with no choice. It takes about 20 years for half of the population to pay their taxes under the new tax code.
In the second chapter, I study the aggregate consequences of the differential tax treatments of U.S. businesses focusing on the role of legal forms of organization. I develop an industry equilibrium model in which the organizational form is an endogenous choice.
This model incorporates the key trade-off that businesses face when choosing their legal forms: the tax treatment of the business income; the access to external capital, and the potential level and evolution of productivity over time.
The model is matched to the firm dynamic features of U.S. businesses and the contributing share of each legal form in total output. Using the model, I study revenue-neutral tax reforms in which legal forms receive the same tax treatments, and
I find that the incentives induced by tax structure for organizational form and external finance are both large. Relative to the benchmark economy, unifying the tax code for all legal forms, can lead to 8% increase in the aggregate output.
In the first chapter, I focus on a key challenge faced by tax reforms: their short-run
welfare consequences. I examine a consumption-based tax reform that, despite the long-run welfare gains it generates, causes the welfare for some groups such as retirees or the working poor to fall during transition between steady states. Using a life-cycle model with heterogeneous households, I show how to devise a transition path from the current U.S. federal tax system to a consumption-based tax system that improves the welfare of current generations as well as those who are born in the long-run steady state. In a nutshell, all households alive at the time of the policy change can choose when they want to switch to the new tax system, or whether they want to switch at all. I find that implementing a tax reform with this feature improves the welfare of 95% of the population in the short run, compared to less than 25% of population in the conventional case with no choice. It takes about 20 years for half of the population to pay their taxes under the new tax code.
In the second chapter, I study the aggregate consequences of the differential tax treatments of U.S. businesses focusing on the role of legal forms of organization. I develop an industry equilibrium model in which the organizational form is an endogenous choice.
This model incorporates the key trade-off that businesses face when choosing their legal forms: the tax treatment of the business income; the access to external capital, and the potential level and evolution of productivity over time.
The model is matched to the firm dynamic features of U.S. businesses and the contributing share of each legal form in total output. Using the model, I study revenue-neutral tax reforms in which legal forms receive the same tax treatments, and
I find that the incentives induced by tax structure for organizational form and external finance are both large. Relative to the benchmark economy, unifying the tax code for all legal forms, can lead to 8% increase in the aggregate output.
ContributorsRaei, Sepideh (Author) / Ventura, Gustavo (Thesis advisor) / Herrendorf, Berthold (Committee member) / Bick, Alexander (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This dissertation consists of two essays with a macroeconomic approach to economic development. These essays explore specific barriers that prevent economic agents from exploiting opportunities across regions or sectors in developing countries, and to what extent the observed allocations are inefficient outcomes or just an efficient response to economic fundamentals and technological constraints.
The first chapter is motivated by the fact that a prominent feature of cities in developing countries is the existence of slums: locations with low housing-quality and informal property rights. This paper focuses on the allocation of land across slums and formal housing, and emphasizes the role of living in central urban areas for the formation of slums. I build a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model to study the aggregate effects of anti-slum policies and use microdata from India for the quantitative implementation. According to my findings, demolishing slums in central urban areas leads to a decrease in welfare, aggregate labor productivity, and urban population. In contrast, decreasing formal housing distortions in India to the U.S. level increases the urban population share by 20% and labor productivity by 2.4%, and reduces the share of the urban population living in slums by 19%.
The second chapter is motivated by the fact that labor productivity gaps between rich and poor countries are much larger for agriculture than for non-agriculture. Using detailed data from Mexican farms, this paper shows that value added per worker is frequently over two times larger in cash crops than in staple crops, yet most farmers choose to produce staples. These findings imply that the agricultural productivity gap is actually a staple productivity gap and understanding production decisions of farmers is crucial to explain why labor productivity is so low in poor countries. This paper develops a general equilibrium framework in which subsistence consumption and interregional trade costs determine the efficient selection of farmers into types of crops. The quantitative results of the model imply that decreasing trade costs in Mexico to the U.S. level reduces the ratio of employment in staple to cash crops by 17% and increases agricultural labor productivity by 14%.
The first chapter is motivated by the fact that a prominent feature of cities in developing countries is the existence of slums: locations with low housing-quality and informal property rights. This paper focuses on the allocation of land across slums and formal housing, and emphasizes the role of living in central urban areas for the formation of slums. I build a quantitative spatial general equilibrium model to study the aggregate effects of anti-slum policies and use microdata from India for the quantitative implementation. According to my findings, demolishing slums in central urban areas leads to a decrease in welfare, aggregate labor productivity, and urban population. In contrast, decreasing formal housing distortions in India to the U.S. level increases the urban population share by 20% and labor productivity by 2.4%, and reduces the share of the urban population living in slums by 19%.
The second chapter is motivated by the fact that labor productivity gaps between rich and poor countries are much larger for agriculture than for non-agriculture. Using detailed data from Mexican farms, this paper shows that value added per worker is frequently over two times larger in cash crops than in staple crops, yet most farmers choose to produce staples. These findings imply that the agricultural productivity gap is actually a staple productivity gap and understanding production decisions of farmers is crucial to explain why labor productivity is so low in poor countries. This paper develops a general equilibrium framework in which subsistence consumption and interregional trade costs determine the efficient selection of farmers into types of crops. The quantitative results of the model imply that decreasing trade costs in Mexico to the U.S. level reduces the ratio of employment in staple to cash crops by 17% and increases agricultural labor productivity by 14%.
ContributorsRivera Padilla, Alberto (Author) / Schoellman, Todd K. (Thesis advisor) / Herrendorf, Berthold (Thesis advisor) / Ferraro, Domenico (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019