The essential problem of politics are ancient general, and persistent. A particular political system, such as that of the United States, can be interpreted as a way of coping with recurring problems. Some of the ways a political system deals with problems may be unique, some commonplace. Because it meets its problems in a particular time and place with a special body of past experiences to go on, each political system is unique; so too the American system is unique. But because some problems have recurred ever since civilized men have tried to live together, every political system has had to deal with enduring dilemmas. Its solutions may be unique, the basic questions are not. The focus of this paper is directed toward one particular problem -- the issue of conflict and consensus, political power and political order, in a changing democratic society with politics seen as the means whereby the community balances the tension between conflict and consensus. The American ancestors chose to live in a community, with its numerous and obvious advantages. But, when strong human beings seek the company of one another, conflict seems to be an inescapable aspect of community and hence of the human condition. While conflict has been the focus of attention by many -- philosophers, historians, social scientists, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Locke -- it is James Madison who perhaps more than any other single individual gave shape to American conflict in his modeling the American constitutional system. He held the conflict is built into the very nature of man, and thus a system must be devised through which it is channeled and controlled. Conflict and consensus, among other things, involve the interaction of power, order, liberty, and flexibility. It is to the Age of Jackson and the political philosophies promulgated by the founding fathers, that this research turns to gain an insight into how "factions" are channeled and controlled in the United States -- to gain insight into basic pluralistic political patterns of the United States.

Paganini's 24th caprice still remains to this day one of the most celebrated themes in classical music history. Many composers have used this theme to create variations and each composer attempted to produce stylistically unique variations on this piece. Hamelin's Variations on a Theme of Paganini stands out because his piece incorporates musical borrowing and many different composers' styles. His variations integrate music from different centuries, using pastiche and musical borrowing from figures such as Beethoven, Liszt, Brahms, Chopin, and Rachmaninoff. More provocatively, Hamelin's variations reach outside of Classical music, even adopting elements from salsa and friska. The spectrum of composers and styles included in this set are so radical and shocking that it creates a parody of not only Paganini's theme, but also the tradition of theme and variation pieces it has inspired. Due to its multiple variations juxtaposing extremely different styles, Hamelin's Variations on a Theme of Paganini presents the listener with a musical puzzle that is designed to invoke surprise. The juxtapositions of extremely different styles in these variations create disjointed variations with polystylism. The polystylism in this work diversifies his variations, while unifying these seemingly unbalanced movements through broad musical references. As such, both performers and listeners stand to benefit from a detailed, critical examination of the piece. I consider not just the musical sources themselves, but also the ways in which they interact, paying close attention to Hamelin's use of parody and humor.

The first three recitals included one recital of chamber music and two recitals of solo piano music. The first recital consisted of music for clarinet and piano, performed with Dr. Lee Gibson of the music faculty of North Texas State University. This program included the Mozart Clarinet Concerto, Five Atonal Pieces by William Latham, Sonata in F minor by Johannes Brahms, and Four Pieces for clarinet and piano by Alban Berg. The second recital contained the D minor Concerto of Marcello, transcribed by J. S. Sach, Sonata No. 1 by Karl Haria von Weber, Sposalizio by Franz Liszt, Sonata in F by Nels Harveland, and Three Fantasies from Opus 116 by Johannes Brahms. The third recital consisted of the F minor Fantasy by Mozart, Variations on a Theme of Rameau by Paul Dukas, Sechs Kleine Klavierstucke by Arnold Schoenberg and Four Preludes by Sergei Rachraaninov. The fourth recital featured a comparison of selected Liszt and Schumann piano transcriptions of Paganini Viol in Caprices. Musical examples comparing the Paganini Caprices and the transcriptions by Liszt and Schumann, in addition to examples comparing the similarities and differences between the transcriptions of Liszt and Schumann, were interspersed throughout the lecture.