Matching Items (761)
ContributorsWard, Geoffrey Harris (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-18
Description
The end of the nineteenth century was an exhilarating and revolutionary era for the flute. This period is the Second Golden Age of the flute, when players and teachers associated with the Paris Conservatory developed what would be considered the birth of the modern flute school. In addition, the founding in 1871 of the Société Nationale de Musique by Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-1921) and Romain Bussine (1830-1899) made possible the promotion of contemporary French composers. The founding of the Société des Instruments à Vent by Paul Taffanel (1844-1908) in 1879 also invigorated a new era of chamber music for wind instruments. Within this groundbreaking environment, Mélanie Hélène Bonis (pen name Mel Bonis) entered the Paris Conservatory in 1876, under the tutelage of César Franck (1822-1890). Many flutists are dismayed by the scarcity of repertoire for the instrument in the Romantic and post-Romantic traditions; they make up for this absence by borrowing the violin sonatas of Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924) and Franck. The flute and piano works of Mel Bonis help to fill this void with music composed originally for flute. Bonis was a prolific composer with over 300 works to her credit, but her works for flute and piano have not been researched or professionally recorded in the United States before the present study. Although virtually unknown today in the American flute community, Bonis's music received much acclaim from her contemporaries and deserves a prominent place in the flutist's repertoire. After a brief biographical introduction, this document examines Mel Bonis's musical style and describes in detail her six works for flute and piano while also offering performance suggestions.
ContributorsDaum, Jenna Elyse (Author) / Buck, Elizabeth (Thesis advisor) / Holbrook, Amy (Committee member) / Micklich, Albie (Committee member) / Schuring, Martin (Committee member) / Norton, Kay (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
ContributorsMatthews, Eyona (Performer) / Yoo, Katie Jihye (Performer) / Roubison, Ryan (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-25
ContributorsHoeckley, Stephanie (Performer) / Lee, Juhyun (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-24
ContributorsMcClain, Katelyn (Performer) / Buringrud, Deanna (Contributor) / Lee, Juhyun (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-31
ContributorsHur, Jiyoun (Performer) / Lee, Juhyun (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-03-01
ContributorsBolari, John (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-10-04
ContributorsOftedahl, Paul (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-09-29
ContributorsZaleski, Kimberly (Contributor) / Kazarian, Trevor (Performer) / Ryan, Russell (Performer) / IN2ATIVE (Performer) / ASU Library. Music Library (Publisher)
Created2018-09-28
Description
The 2016 presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was watched by a total of 71 million people all across the country. Coverage on the country’s three main cable news networks (Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC) drew in 31.4 million of those viewers. While all those networks were covering the same race, the same states, and the same candidates, they didn’t all do it the same way, and they didn’t all do it at the same time.
On the night of any presidential election, cable news networks have access to much of the same data, including exit polls, votes by precinct and votes by county. Still, the order and the time that they make their state-by-state projections often differs. At any given moment during election night, the total electoral votes for a candidate can be different from one network to another.
The question this thesis set out to answer was: why is there difference between when cable news networks call each state, and subsequently the entire election in the race for president? To answer this question, research was broken into three different parts: cable news biases, the methodology behind how the cable news networks produce election night coverage, and finally, an analysis of the actual 2016 election night coverage of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC.
To visualize the analysis of the 2016 election coverage, all of the data collected was put into GIFs that showed minute by minute how the three cable networks called the election, from start to end. The GIFs included a map of the country, and a running total of electoral votes for each candidate.
On the night of any presidential election, cable news networks have access to much of the same data, including exit polls, votes by precinct and votes by county. Still, the order and the time that they make their state-by-state projections often differs. At any given moment during election night, the total electoral votes for a candidate can be different from one network to another.
The question this thesis set out to answer was: why is there difference between when cable news networks call each state, and subsequently the entire election in the race for president? To answer this question, research was broken into three different parts: cable news biases, the methodology behind how the cable news networks produce election night coverage, and finally, an analysis of the actual 2016 election night coverage of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC.
To visualize the analysis of the 2016 election coverage, all of the data collected was put into GIFs that showed minute by minute how the three cable networks called the election, from start to end. The GIFs included a map of the country, and a running total of electoral votes for each candidate.
ContributorsKoufidakis, Anastasia (Author) / Alvarez, Melanie (Thesis director) / Todd, Lori (Committee member) / Walter Cronkite School of Journalism & Mass Comm (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05