Humanities desk
< November 11	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 13 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 12

Musical works for a younger performer or listner.

There was a question over on the IMSLP forums about works suitable for performance by a younger performer. [1]

I misread this initially as a request list of musical works that would be suitable for a younger audience.

So I thus have 2 questions for the Wikipedia 'arts' desk.

1) A list of musical works that are within the performance range of a younger/novice performer.

2) A list of musical works which would be suited to younger audience, (perhaps if the works suggested are Commons Compatible) someone could make a Concert Programme with appropriate commentary.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For #1, what instrument? The first thing that comes to mind for piano is Mikrokosmos by Béla Bartók, which I cut my teeth on. As for #2, at least part of it depends on the kids. My own 5 year old would love to see Ionisation by Varèse (percussion is fun to watch, and crazy surprising percussion even more, it seems), but most kids might not like it so much... Pfly (talk) 01:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you're already familiar with Vaughan Williams's "Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra" and "Peter and the Wolf"? --TammyMoet (talk) 06:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Benjamin Britten and Sergei Prokofiev respectively, much though I love VW's work. Mikenorton (talk) 08:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That'll teach me to post at some ungodly hour in the morning... now wondering which of RVW's works I was thinking of!

--TammyMoet (talk) 10:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was aware of those. In terms of instruments for #1, the original IMSLP thread didn't say, so it's open. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Carnival of the Animals by Camille Saint-Saëns is another good one. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:33, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Toy Symphony by Leopold Mozart maybe. Speaking for myself, the piece that enthralled me at the age of 11 was Music for the Royal Fireworks by Georg Frederick Handel, played on original instruments, which made a fantastic racket - but then I was a bit of an unusual child. Alansplodge (talk) 17:07, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Along those lines, Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture enthralled me when my grandmother took me to see it played in Birmingham, when I was aged about 5 or 6. It's got cannons firing, bells and all sorts! --TammyMoet (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to qn 1: for piano, Edward Harold Davies' selection, The Children's Bach. It's never been out of print since 1933. (And has both a novel and an opera named after it.) --Shirt58 (talk) 05:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For young listeners, I suggest Peter and the Wolf. StuRat (talk) 06:01, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On #1 again, for piano, Stravinsky's Les cinq doigts, and Bach's Notebook for Anna Magdalena Bach (some of it anyway). Pfly (talk) 08:43, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And on #2, thinking back to things I liked as a little kid, maybe Mozart's Symphony No. 40 (1st movement at least) and Symphony No. 41 ("Jupiter"); Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 (1st movement) and Symphony No. 9 (4th movement). Handel's Water Music (goes along nicely with "Music for the Royal Fireworks" mentioned above. Maybe Ravel's Boléro. As a kid I quite liked the 1st movement of Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No. 3. Also perhaps things that might sound cliché to adult ears, like Mozart's Eine kleine Nachtmusik, Vivaldi's The Four Seasons, Debussy's Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune, etc. Pfly (talk) 10:50, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And the bouncy St Paul's Suite, which is also written to be played by a group of young novice string-players. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

real or fictional committee?

Was there really a "Wake Up America Committee" in 1940? The reason I'm asking is because of that powerful picture of James Montgomery Flagg standing by his 'Wake Up America Committee' poster on August 16, 1940.24.90.204.234 (talk) 09:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't able to find a direct answer, but I believe there was a Wake Up America Committee and that it might have been a subsidiary of the Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies (CDAAA). The reason I think this is because of a finding aid from the Special Collections of Northwestern University Library for documents related to the CDAAA. Under F.9 it lists items the Collection holds from the Wake Up America Committee, including pamphlets and correspondence. It's possible that Wake Up America was a small committee within the larger CDAAA or just a much smaller interventionist organization similar to the CDAAA. Or perhaps it was an advertising campaign of the CDAAA, which might explain the series of different posters with the 'wake up America' slogan. Whether it was part of the CDAAA or not, the fact that Northwestern University Library holds papers from the organization indicates the Wake Up America Committee did in fact exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petitelibrarian (talk • contribs) 15:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

plan of an inn

Wondering if anyone can help me, I need a floor plan for an 18th century english coaching inn, showing the typical room layout of such a building, but there is nothing in the article, or anywhere that links from there, and searching the internet has turned up nothing yet either.

148.197.81.179 (talk) 14:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had no difficulty finding this by Googling "floor plan" "eighteenth century" and "coaching inn", but AFAIK there was really no "typical" floor plan, many of them being adaptations of a huge variety of earlier buildings dating back possibly hundreds of years. Many such inns survive, but the essential stables and back yards would mostly have gone by now of course.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:13, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Men in Shark

How many men can fit in a large shark? I am asking this since the Hawaiian version of the Trojan Horse story involves a giant shark that held the men of a King of Oahu who were used to kill his brother.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably it depends how much they've been chewed, and in what state of digestion they are; surely the blood would go before the bones. I can't quite see how this question could be given a conclusive answer. Nyttend backup (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Live men in a dead shark.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking at the photo in Great white shark#Size, I doubt if you could squeeze in more than two armed warriors (but maybe four ninja Twiggys). Clarityfiend (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the article on the Hawaiian Trojan Shark, it seems that the idea that the men were actually inside the shark was a later embellishment. Was it post-contact? That is, maybe that part was actually influenced by the Trojan Horse story. In any case, the number of men that could fit inside the shark would be exactly the number of men required by the story...I don't think it's supposed to be literally accurate. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it was a whale shark or basking shark it could hold quite a number. Looie496 (talk) 01:33, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have to wonder how they'd be able to breathe in there. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:58, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they brought in a stash of aqualungfish. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:52, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That reminds me of the old joke Q: how does a Rhinemaiden breathe underwater? A: With an aquanibelung.--Shirt58 (talk) 08:53, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Megalodon could hold quite a few people. Regardless, it's a legend. There's no point trying to figure out exactly how tall Babe the Blue Ox was, for instance. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:12, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malicious abuse of parliamentry privelige

Something I never understood... The United States is generally assumed have the strongest legal protection in the world for freedom of speech. Yet even there, it is accepted that pretty much nothing can protect the dissemination of convincingly proven Actual malice. Why should parliamentarians be any different? Would parliamentry proceedings be somehow hindered if MPs could be sued for Clear and Convincingly proven malicious lies? Or are we all helpless before the wrath of a malicious and abusive MP (other than the right of reply, or appealing to the electorate to vote the bum out)? If the Actual malice standard is the highest level of protection for speech offered anywhere else, why an exception for parliamentarians? 58.111.181.220 (talk) 17:20, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The trade-off is with parliamentarians being able to discuss unproven (and possibly uncommitted) crimes in detail. Otherwise rich people like Rupert Murdoch would be able to tie up the debate on pending legislation in the courts. Selery (talk) 19:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who gets to decide what is a "convincingly proven malicious lie"? How would you ensure that an accusation like that is not used for political purposes, considering that parliamentary debate often gets very lively? --140.180.3.244 (talk) 21:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary Privilege protects MPs against action by the courts in order to prevent the courts from being able to influence political debate. MPs can still be held to account for their actions in parliament, but they have to be held to account by Parliament itself, rather than the courts. I'm not sure what punishments Parliament can use (they can certainly suspend MPs from the House), but they can definitely take some kind of action against MPs abusing their privileges. --Tango (talk) 02:00, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no scholar on the privilege, although I've always found it fascinating. There is actually a somewhat similar provision in the U.S. Constitution about questioning of congresspersons for statements made in congress, and other related congressional privileges in the U.S. But due to the Constitution the U.S. has quite a few more absolutes than Britain does, so I always found the parliamentary privilege interesting. No substantive comment on your reasoning, although I think sometimes absolutes in things like this grow institutions around them that ameliorate their ill effects better than legislation could ever hope for. Case in point, ridiculously offensive points of view are protected under the U.S. First Amendment but the answers to these are instantaneous and legion. I think that's how democracies ought to work. Shadowjams (talk) 07:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Takeup of Gay Marriage

In those jurisdictions that have introduced Gay Marriage, what has been the takeup rate? (i.e. how many gays have actually married?) Can someone point me to sources which attempt to measure rates in the different jurisdictions? Differences in the takeup rate between gay male couples vs lesbian ones? Attempts to compare it to the heterosexual marriage rate?

(Of course, when the law is first introduced, you expect a surge of marriages... but afterwards?) 58.111.181.220 (talk) 22:33, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This webpage about Canadian marriages addresses very few of your questions, but it's a start: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/070117/dq070117a-eng.htm. Specifically, about the difference between gay and lesbian marriages, it says "of the 774 same-sex marriages in British Columbia, 422, or 54.5%, were female couples and 352, or 45.5%, were male couples." --140.180.3.244 (talk) 03:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Book about the French Foreign Legion (I think)

I'm trying to remember the title of a book I read a while back. It was an older book, probably published in the early 1900s, and I believe it was about two guys who go off to join the Foreign Legion. They were English, as I recall, and there was a whole passage at the beginning about how they had been sailors but were going to go off and do the most opposite thing they could find, which was join the cavalry in the desert. I can't recall all that happened after that, but the main character ended up in the camp of some... European guy who was posing as a Muslim and he ended up becoming his righthand man.

Before today, I would've sworn it was Beau Geste by P C Wren, but after reading that article, I don't think it is any more, the plot was entirely different. So does this ring any bells for anyone? Thanks in advance for the help! 24.247.162.139 (talk) 22:53, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at our article French Foreign Legion in popular culture, it seems that there were two sequels to Beau Geste; Beau Sabreur and Beau Ideal (both our articles relate to the contemporary films) although neither seem to follow the plot that you describe. Also mentioned is Under Two Flags although this too seems to have a different plot, and mention of "British publisher John Spencer & Co published 23 paperback / pulp novels in the "Foreign Legion Series" in the 1950s. These were written under pseudonyms such as Bruce Fenton, W.H. Fear, Jud Cary and Paul Lafayette.". Sorry, I couldn't find much else. Alansplodge (talk) 17:14, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]