Skip to main content

It Has Been 0 Days Since Our Last Reference to Hamilton - Jamie Peters

It is now confirmed that, at our musical roots, puns conquer all. In the main article we read for this weekend, "The English Madrigal", it discusses much of the amusing nuances that these early writers caught on to. In discussing the madrigals of Thomas Weelkes, the article says, "In his score for six unaccompanied voices, the composer revels in every conceivable chance to have the music illustrate the text. The words 'descending' and 'ascending' are predictably set to scales going down and up" (2). I am unsure where I came across this information, but in the modern musical setting, this nuance is still heavily practiced, with many writers trying new, innovative ways to word-paint. In the musical Wicked, much of the chorus of "Defying Gravity" is in, you guessed it, a higher vocal range than the rest of the song. My personal favorite example of word-painting is in the musical Hamilton, when King George is singing "You'll Be Back". Every time that he says "Oceans rise, empires fall", the scale goes the opposite direction, so there is a drop on "rise" and a height in "fall". This ironic type of word-painting connotates a different meaning for these words, possibly either a positive perspective for the fall of an empire or its inevitability with a mindset like King George's (If someone wants to talk about this to me later, hmu).

I commented on Clabo's and Braylan's posts.

Comments

  1. Jamie, I love how we both wrote on the exact same thing but used completely different examples. I wasn’t even thinking musical theatre when I was writing. I think the term word-painting has probably been replaced by another term that I don’t know of or that I’ve heard but simply don’t remember. And of course, you would be the one to reference Hamilton.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...

One shall stand, One shall fall // Ian Blair

      I usually have a little introduction into my thoughts about the reading for this week before I start with the actual blog part of my post, but I can't help but think about the bone-chilling realization that awaits us in Book VIII, so my introduction this time will be brief. It is my personal opinion that if people are imperfect, then we are only capable of imperfect systems and societies consequentially. However, this does not mean that we must not aim for the closest system to perfect that we can achieve.      The realization I wrote of earlier is the suggestion by Socrates that tyranny stems from the system we know as democracy. At first I disagreed, it is anarchism that causes  tyrannical reign as a byproduct of fulfilling its purpose of overthrowing the current power and not establishing another system. All anarchism does is create a power vacuum for another power to take over and the cycle repeats itself, right? ...Right? Quic...