The Emergence of Spanish Impressionism and its Interaction with French Impressionism in Music at the Turn of the Twentieth Century: selections from the solo and collaborative piano repertoire

French Impressionism is a term which is often used in discussing music originating in France towards the end of the nineteenth century. The term Spanish Impressionism could also be used when discussing Spanish music written by the Spanish composers who studied and worked in Paris at the same time as their French counterparts. After all, Spanish music written during this time exhibits many of the same characteristics and aesthetics as French music of the same era. This dissertation will focus on the French and Spanish composers writing during that exciting time. Musical impressionism emphasizes harmonic effects and rhythmic fluidity in the pursuit of evocative moods, sound pictures of nature or places over the formalism of structure and thematic concerns. The music of this time is highly virtuosic as well as musically demanding, since many of the composers were brilliant pianists. My three dissertation recitals concentrated on works which exhibited the many facets of impressionism as well as the technical and musical challenges. The repertoire included selections by Spanish composers Manuel de Falla, Isaac Albéniz, Enrique Granados, Joaquín Turina, and Joaquín Rodrigo and French composers Claude Debussy and Maurice Ravel. The recitals were on April 30, 2013, February 23, 2014 and October 11, 2015. They included solo piano works by Granados and Albéniz, vocal works by Debussy, Ravel, de Falla, Turina and Rodrigo, piano trios by Granados and Turina, instrumental duos by Debussy, Ravel and de Falla, and a two-piano work of Debussy transcribed by Ravel. All three recitals were held in Gildenhorn Recital Hall at the University of Maryland and copies of this dissertation and recordings of each recital may be found through the Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (DRUM).

A Feminist Affective Turn for Public Relations: Mothers, Passionate Publics, and the Childhood Vaccine Debate

This project proposes a feminist intervention in how affect and publics are theorized in public relations research. Drawing from extant literature, I argue that public relations theories of affect and publics have been apolitical and lack depth and context (Leitch & Motion, 2010a). Using the context of the online childhood vaccine debate, I illustrate several theories and concepts of the new feminist affective turn, as well as postmodern theories of affect, relevant to public relations research: (a) Public Feelings, “ugly” feelings, agency, and community (Cvetkovich, 2012; Ngai, 2007); (b) passionate politics (Mouffe, 2014); (c) postmodern assemblages, biopower, and body politics (Deleuze & Guattari, 1988; Foucault, 1984); (d) affective facts and logics of future threats (Massumi, 2010); and (e) affective ethics (Bertleson & Murphie, 2010). Scholarship in the areas of public relations, risk, feminist and postmodern affect theory, and the vaccine debate provided theoretical grounding for this project. My research questions asked: How is feminist affect theory embodied by mothers in the vaccine debate? How do mothers understand risks as affective facts in the vaccine debate (if at all)? What affective logics are used by mothers in the vaccine debate (if any)? And, What are sources of knowledge for mothers in the vaccine debate? Multi-sited online ethnographic methods were used to explore how feminist affect theory contributes to public relations research, including 29 one-on-one in-depth interviews with mothers of young children and participant observation of 15 online discussions about vaccines on parenting websites BabyCenter.com, TheBump.com, and WhatToExpect.com. I used snowball sampling to recruit interview participants and grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) to analyze interview and online data. Results show that feminist affect theory contributes to theoretical and practical knowledge in public relations by politicizing and contextualizing understandings of publics and elucidating how affective facts and logics inform publics’ knowledge and choices, specifically in the context of risk. I also found evidence of suppression of dissent (Martin, 2015) and academic bias in vaccine debate research, which resulted in cultures of silence. Further areas of study included how specific contexts such as motherhood and issues of privilege and access affect publics’ experiences, knowledges, and choices.