About Architect David M. Childs, Design Partner

Architect David Childs (born April 1, 1941 in Princeton, New Jersey) is best known as the designer of the One World Trade Center we see today in Lower Manhattan. His long relationship with Skidmore, Owings Merrill (SOM) has given this senior statesman of American architecture wide-ranging experience and success. David Magie Childs was priviledged to attend the best private schools in the United states — from the Deerfield Academy in Deerfield, Massachusetts to his 1963 Bachelors degree from Yale University. His career as an architect began after completing a graduate degree from Yale School of Art and Architecture in 1967. He began his professional career in Washington, D.C. when from 1968 to 1971 he joined the Pennsylvania Avenue Commission. Fresh out of Yale University, Childs formed a strong relationship with both Nathaniel Owings, a founding partner of Skidmore Owings and Merrill (SOM), and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a future U.S. Senator from New York State. From 1964 until 1973, Childs future employer, Nathaniel Owings, was chairman of President Kennedys Temporary Commission on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC. In the early years of the Kennedy administration, the plan to redesign Pennsylvania Avenue was the most significant redevelopment project in the country, claims the SOM website. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the young Assistant Secretary of Labor in the Kennedy Administration, led the governments plan to revitalize Pennsylvania Avenue and the National Mall. Through this Commissions hard work, negotiations, and consensus, Pennsylvania Avenue is now a designated National Historic Site. One could argue that Childs early experiences on the Commission led the young architect to a lifelong proficiency in public architecture, city planning, and the politics behind construction and design — skills needed to accomplish his goals in the complicated days after September 11, 2011. David Childs has been associated with SOM since 1971, at first working on projects in Washington, D.C. From 1975 until 1981 he was Chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission involved in the 1976 Washington Mall Master Plan and Constitution Gardens. He worked on the 1984 National Geographic Society M Street Building and then the U.S. News and World Report Headquarters, both in Washington, D.C. By 1984 David Childs had moved to New York City, where hes been working on SOM projects ever since. A portfolio of his projects highlights a number of buildings in New York City  Ã¢â‚¬â€ the Worldwide Plaza at 825 8th Avenue (1989); Bertelsmann Tower at Times Square (1990); Times Square Tower at 7 Times Square (2004); Bear Stearns at 383 Madison Avenue (2001); AOL Time Warner Center at Columbus Circle (2004); and, of course, 7 World Trade Center (2006) and 1 World Trade Center (2014). Moynihan Station Redevelopment at the James A. Farley Post Office and 35 Hudson Yards are his latest project for the City of New York. Outside of The Big Apple, Childs was the design architect for the 1998 Robert C. Byrd United States Courthouse in Charleston, West Virginia and the 1999 U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, Canada. In May 2012, David Childs was one of fifteen Architects of Healing receiving a special AIA Gold Medallion for his redesign of One World Trade Center and Seven World Trade Center in New York City. Childs is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects (FAIA). David Childs In His Own Words I like big complicated projects where you have to assemble teams, deal with the down-and-dirty contractors, the marketplace and the leasing agents with an imagination level only as high as what made money last time. — 2003, The New York Times Each of us architects has had mentors and teachers whose work and words have guided us as well. For me they include Nat Owings, Pat Moynihan, Vincent Scully. It is thus been a very collective effort in the fullest sense, and I believe every American can equally take pride in what is and has been accomplished. — 2012 AIA National Convention You know what a Richard Meier building will look like; theres a style. Im more like Eero Saarinen, whom I revere. His buildings all look different. — 2003, The New York Times The U.S. invented skyscrapers, but weve fallen behind. WTC 1 is a solution to many technical problems, and it represents the very best in codes, structure, and safety. Its a concrete core with steel exterior, which is an efficient and safe system, but it had not been done in New York for a host of reasons, mostly because of the arrangement between trade groups. The form tapers on its four corners, which buildings — like trees — want to do anyway. — 2011 AIArchitect What Others Say Throughout his years of practice in Washington, Mr. Childs became noted for his design of appropriate architecture, buildings and spaces that respond to their settings and programs rather than pursue a preconceived architectural image. — U.S. Department of State Your work demonstrates that architecture is the art of compromise and collaboration, that it is a social act, never created by one person working alone and always creating community. As a creative artist successfully negotiating within a world governed by corporate objectives you have shown that aesthetic vision and functional considerations can coexist, that architecture is the art of both the real and the visionary. You compose steel and glass the way a poet constructs phrases and in so doing create physical entities that reflect personal aspirations and a collective self-image. Your buildings grace our environment and enrich our lives. — Colby Collge Sources Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site, National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/wash/dc41.htm [accessed September 2, 2012]Nathaniel A. Owings, FAIA, Architect and Founding Partner, 1903-1984, Skidmore Owings and Merrill (SOM), www.som.com/content.cfm/nathaniel_a_owings [accessed September 2, 2012]The New Ground Zero: The Invisible Architect, Julie V. Iovine, The New York Times, August 31, 2003 [accessed August 15, 2012]Architects of Healing Videos, American Institute of Architects, 2012 [accessed August 15, 2012]AIArchitect Talks with David Childs, FAIA, John Gendall, AIArchitect, 2011 [accessed August 15, 2012]U.S. State Department, http://canada.usembassy.gov/about-us/embassy-information/frequently-asked-questions/embassy-architects.html [accessed September 5, 2012]Citation for David M. Childs, Colby College, May 22, 2005, http://www.colby.edu/news_events/commencement/2005/honorary/citation-childs.cfm [accessed August 15, 2012]

Factors that Influenced Shakespeares Writing of Romeo and...

Factors that Influenced Shakespeares Writing of Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare was clearly influenced by the events of his time, and this is apparent especially in Romeo and Juliet. To dismiss this play as a mere fable is to overlook some very important religious and political changes of the time which are evidently woven into the storyline of the play. Shakespeares religious beliefs are uncertain, but it is known that his father was Catholic, and that he lived in a time of religious stratification across both community and family ties. As a result of the queens toleration for vagueness in this area, people became accustomed to religious tension and confusion at a very personal level. Many†¦show more content†¦The youth of England however, were not content with the Settlement. This applies especially to the Protestant youth who wanted the Reformation to be completed on a model provided by Jean Calvins Geneva. Otherwise known as Puritans, they viewed the Settlement as a kind of intermediate state. This extreme version of Protestantism, as well as the remaining Catholics whose loyalty still belonged only to the Pope, continued to prevent the nation from reaching religious stability. Shakespeare, who was a loyal subject and supporter of the queen, offers a commentary on this situation in Romeo and Juliet. The Queens church reflected her own likings for the externals of Catholic worship and she hated the religious enthusiasm of the Puritan movement. The Settlement also allowed her to stay in control over the state religion, whereas the Puritan belief in independent church government undermined her power and the national unity she tried to reach. Although it would seem that Romeo and Juliet is a criticism of the well-known social rules that regarded marriage as being contradictory to actual romantic love, a closer reading of the text shows that the youth in the play are the ones whose actions result in violence and death. Shakespeare seems to dispute the individualsShow MoreRelatedShakespeare in Love Essay2078 Words   |  9 Pagesworking on, Romeo and Juliet, in which love is not meant to be due to the many obstacles in the way. Shakespeares life in the film is very comparable to Romeos life in Romeo and Juliet. William Shakespeares life in the film and the play he is writing has several similarities and differences. In my opinion, this is one of the best movies and books to compare. Shakespeare in Love is a fairly accurate representation of the life of William Shakespeare at the time he was writing Romeo and JulietRead MorePoe vs. Shakespeare Essay1556 Words   |  7 Pagessimilarities and differences between the two. Each author could lure their audiences by the characteristics of their writing. Their places in society also differed, as each had different ways of dealing with the people in their society. Furthermore, the influences each of them had in literature have molded how many people see them as transcendent and prestigious authors. The types of writing that Poe and Shakespeare wrote can be compared and contrasted in two categories, genre and language. Both Poe andRead MoreThe Renaissance and It’s Affect on William Shakespeare’s Works2369 Words   |  10 PagesOne of Shakespeare’s most famous plays, Julius Caesar, believed to be written in 1599 (Shakespeare, 1998), was based off of the work of Plutarch, a Greek historian, biographer and essayist. Plutarch documented the lives of over 46 notable Greeks and Romans (Blackburn, 2008). Although Shakespeare found use for most of the material through his several Roman plays, for Julius Caesar he focused on Plutarch’s Life of Julius Caesar and Marcus Brutus (Mabillard, 2000). Coriolanus, one of Shakespeares laterRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s A Midsummer Night s Dream Essay2005 Words   |  9 PagesIn William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Shakespeare crafts a play with three very different viewpoints that can be in terpreted in many ways, some with obvious interpretations and other with much less obvious ones. Shakespeare also ends A midsummer Night’s Dream, with an apology that is just as less obvious as some of the play’s interpretation. Yet, If a person looks past the obvious interpretations of the play, one can begin to piece together the possible message, that mortals no matterRead MoreEssay on William Shakespeares Authenticity3166 Words   |  13 PagesWilliam Shakespeares Authenticity Over the past several centuries, many scholars have been debating the authenticity of Shakespeare and his works. Many books have even been published questioning if the legendary playwright from Stratford is the author of his many plays and poems. This theory still remains as a possibility today and much of the evidence stems from Shakespeare’s great literary achievements, his humble beginnings, his inadequate education and the missing chapters in his lifeRead MoreThe Golden Age of Islam2183 Words   |  9 Pagescarpets, magic lamps, etc (John Grant and John Cute, pg.52). When L. Frank Baum proposed writing a modern fairy tale that banished stereotypical elements, he included the genie as well as the dwarf and the fairy as stereotypes to go. Ferdowsis Shahnameh, the national epic of Iran, is a mythical and heroic retelling of Persian history. Amir Arsalan was also a popular mythical Persian story, which has influenced some modern works of fantasy fiction, such as The Heroic Legend of Arslan. A famous example

Adapting Plays Into Movies Free Essays

Adapting Plays Into Movies â€Å"In theatre, you can change things ever so slightly; it’s an organic thing. Whereas in film, you only have that chance on the day, and you have no control over it at all,† These insightful words were once spoken by actress (Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace) and Oscar winner Judi Dench, and they very clearly illustrate one of the biggest differences between theatre and film. However, a small hint of bias seems to be depicted in this point of view. We will write a custom essay sample on Adapting Plays Into Movies or any similar topic only for you Order Now The quote (and many others) seem to suggest that one form of acting is more difficult than the other. It seems the opposite is true; that when taking one of these art forms (i. e. theatre) and transforming it into the other, one would come across a wide array of differences, as well as similarities. When researching a topic such as this, one must go beyond reading. One must not only dive into a script or a periodical or academic journal, one must immerse themselves into the films that have come about as a result of the transformation of turning a play into a cinematic experience. When going about researching this topic, I watched the movie Chicago (Dir. Rob Marshall, 2002) as well as looked over the original Broadway script (By Jon Kander, Fredd Ebb, and Bob Fosse 1975). The original Broadway production opened June 3, 1975, at the 46th Street Theatre and ran for 936 performances. Chicago’s 1996 Broadway revival holds the record for the longest-running musical revival and the longest-running American musical in Broadway history, and is the fourth longest-running show in Broadway history. After all the success, What better way to continue the magic of this thrilling show than create a movie out of it? The story tells of two women (Roxie Hart and Velma Kelley) who live in Chicago and are responsible for murdering their husbands and must fight to get out of prison, in order to pursue their dreams of Broadway stardom. After deciding to delve a bit deeper, I chose to go a bit farther back in history. The story of Romeo and Juliet (William Shakespeare 1591-1595) has been adapted into film over thirty times in one form or another. The original storyline is about two star-crossed lovers that end up tragically committing suicide as a result of their undying love for each other and their families’ undying hatred for the opposing kin. The one adaptation that seemed to stick out to me was director Baz Luhrmann’s rendition that he released in 1996 starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes. The film is an abridged modernization of Shakespeare’s play. While it retains the original Shakespearean dialogue, the Montagues and the Capulets are represented as warring business empires and swords are replaced by guns. With a bit of help from Wikipedia, and the old Romeo and Juliet script I had lying around from a past high school production (in which I portrayed the vivacious, yet dim-witted Nurse) I was on my way to analyzing the differences and similarities of adapting plays into movies. When finding key differences in movies created from plays, it is important that one realize that differences are very necessary. This comes about when dealing with time constraints. The average Broadway musical is about two hours, whereas the average movie is about an hour and a half. It is imperative that movie directors be wary about what parts of the storyline they cut, as to not disappoint the audience or remove an important portion of the play that the story relies on. I found this when watching the Movie Chicago, after looking over the script. In the original play, Velma Kelley and Mama Morton engage in a short and comical musical number entitled â€Å"Class,† soon after Velma discovers that Roxie is rather talented at keeping the paparazzi on her tail. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, Rob Marshall made the decision to cut the number, as it served no real purpose in the plot of the show. As aforementioned, Baz Luhrmann made some very important and possibly story-altering changes in the presentation of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Swords were replaced with guns, in order to bring the story a bit up to date, however he maintained the original Shakespearean language found in the original script. In addition to this change, Luhrmann decided that a more dramatic way to end the tragedy would be to have Juliet awaken, leaving the lovers to see each other one last time before Romeo dies and Juliet commits her infamous suicide. The differences that one encounters when dealing with these adaptations goes far beyond the decisions of the director. The small concrete details that make up how the story is told are vastly different when dealing with on-stage shows versus movies. For example, things as simple as make up and facial expression are very different between the two. When an actor is on stage performing for a live audience, there are no close-ups. The actor must depend on his/her facial expression and gestures. On stage, an actor must become comfortable with over exaggerating their gestures and expressions (often highlighted with heavy stage make up) in order to ensure that the emotions of the scene are adequately conveyed to the audience members in all parts of the house. In film, the cameras are able to do a close up on an actor’s face in order to show these emotions. This means that the actor does not need to wear heavy stage make up (in most circumstances) nor must they â€Å"over act. † This also seems to be the case when it comes to projection of an actor’s voice. On stage, one must be sure to project in order to establish clarity to audience members, whereas in film, it is not necessary due to microphones and audio technology. There are several similarities when converting a play to a film as well. It is obvious that preparation is very similar, in the way that actors must commit to (in my opinion) the most dreaded part of theatre of all types: memorization. In both film and stage shows, actors must memorize things such as lines, blocking, and choreography. Also, actors must establish clear characterization to create a believable person on stage or in movies. This means one must work very hard to establish their characters’ back ground story and tendencies, in order to become one with their role. Also, in both forms of art, there are the same â€Å"roles† backstage as well. There is always need for a director, stage designer, and stagehands, etc. In conclusion, it seems that one art form is no better or worse than the other, as they both have obstacles to overcome when attempting to illustrate a plot for audience members, whether live or recorded. There is a variety of similarities and differences between the two, but it seems one is not easier than the other, considering the two seem incomparable after close analysis. Chicago on stage may be longer than Chicago on a DVD, however both required work and preparation to create a masterpiece. Shakespeare had his own idea of the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, where Baz Luhrmann chose to take a different approach, while still maintaining the original storyline. These wo art forms are both different and similar, but one does not outshine the other; it is when viewing other art forms that we may find this inequality. The gorgeous George Clooney once stated, â€Å"There is a strange pecking order among actors. Theatre actors look down on film actors, who look down on TV actors. Thank God for reality shows, or we wouldn’t have anybody to look down on. † However, one must leave that discussion for another day and realize film and theatre are both equally entertaining, just no t equally done! How to cite Adapting Plays Into Movies, Papers

Obama care free essay sample

â€Å"The Presidential election of the United States of America is behind us (November 2012), and yet US citizens seem to be dealing with the same political debates as last year and the year before. Much of this hinges around ideological, political and intellectual differences over what kinds of policies are right for the American population. The most controversial is the implementation of the Affordability Care Act, popularly known as Obama Care† (see, question). This act was officially signed into law on March 23rd 2010. â€Å"The Affordable Care Act is the result of a joint effort between all sides of the isle, health insurance companies, and law makers and has been in the works for decades. The law itself is based on ‘Romney Care’, The Massachusetts health care insurance reform law, St. 2006, c.58† (www.obamacarefacts.com). Obama Care is useful to the citizens of the United States of America. It regulates the health insurance industry, and helps to increase the quality, affordability, and availability of health insurance. It was projected that Obama Care will enable thirty million uninsured individuals to be able to obtain health insurance. Given the facts I believe that Obama Care is ingenious, thus the thesis of my essay is that Obama Care promotes equality, enables freedom, and creates solidarity in the United States of America. This legislation is needed to make the necessary changes in the United States of America. In order to understand the assertion that Obama Care enables freedom, promotes equality, and creates solidarity, the purpose of the Affordable Care Act has to be understood, the past healthcare system of the United States of America has to be explained, and the scepticism on the Affordable Care Act has to be eradicated. To begin with, Obama Care is also known as the Affordable Care Act, and the Patient Protection Act. It was signed into law on March 23rd 2010. This act affirms the principle that everybody should have some basic security when it comes to healthcare. The purpose of Obama Care is to create new rules for insurers, and to expand medical security to millions of individuals. This is achieved by implementing a health insurance marketplace, where Americans can buy subsidized and regulated health insurance plans in a competitive private market. This Act expands Medicaid and Medicare to many people. It is beneficial to the vast majority of the American population, but most especially the less privileged. The less you  make, the more the Affordable Care Act is of benefit to you. This Act does not constrain the freedom of individuals. Its target audience are those who do not like their current health insurance plan and those who are making fewer than 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. â€Å"The Federal Poverty Level is another way of referring to the Federal poverty guidelines. It is one measure of poverty within the United States, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issues it annually to determine financial eligibility for certain federal programs and benefits†¦ These include but are not limited to Medicare, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Migrant Health Centers, Community Health Centers, Family and Planning Services, [and now Obama Care]. The characteristics used to determine poverty thresholds include family size, number of children and whether or not those in 1- or 2-person units are elderly† (www.healthedeals.com). Before the introduction of Obama Care, the primary source of health protection for the American society was Medicaid. â€Å"Medicaid is the largest source of funding for medical and health related services for people with low income in the United States of America. Medicaid is jointly funded by the state and Federal government, and is available to people who not only have low income but also meet other criteria such as; being a citizen of the United States of America, be a Permanent Resident in the U.S.A, and someone with a disability† (see.www.healthcare.gov). However, Medicaid is no longer capable of providing the citizens with their needs and enough coverage. â€Å"The United States of America seeks to close budget gaps, and it was proposed that Medicaid be put into a block grant or capped program, with significantly reduced funding, which would also result in cuts to eligibility and to services that are covered by Medicaid† (www.familiesusa.org). This means that a vast amount of the population would not have health insurance. Unlike Canada, the United States of America does not have free healthcare, thus such legislative action would endanger the lives of many of its citizens. The Affordable Care Act makes many provisions for people. These include people with the grandfathered plans (â€Å"plans that were in existence up until March 23rd 2010and haven’t been changed in ways that substantially cut benefits or increase costs for consumers† (www.dol.gov.com), those who have a legible insurance plan from work, a legible personal insurance plan, and for cultural and religious reasons. Firstly, Obama Care promotes equality in society. Equality is derived from the term equal. â€Å"To be equal is to have the same as† (www.merriam-webster.com). In this sense, citizens should have the same or a relatively equal amount of healthcare protection. It is accurate to state that not everyone in the American society is equal. People are at different hierarchies; they earn different wages, have different jobs with different benefits, and have different educational backgrounds. Regardless of these disparities, the life of each person should be equally valued and protected. Healthcare insurance can be quite expensive to purchase. â€Å"Different factors influence the price of an individual’s healthcare insurance premium. These include; the medical history of an individual, the location in which the individual resides, the level of coverage, the deductible and co-payments† (see, www.sbis.ca). These factors filter a lot of people who wish to purchase health insurance by making their premium unaffordable, or a strain on their way of life. Although, Medicaid is put in place to provide people who cannot afford health insurance with some coverage, Medicaid offers very basic protection and the majority of Americans do not qualify for Medicaid. In the United States of America, â€Å"about 44 million people have no health insurance, and another 38 million have inadequate health insurance. This means that nearly one-third of Americans face each day without the security of knowing that, if and when they need it, medical care is available to them and their families† (www.pbs.org). It is unfair to exclude people from having equal medical protection most especially if it is based on the fact that their income is not low enough, and (or) they have poor medical conditions. Obama Care reduces this disparity, because â€Å"it prohibits health insurers for charging you more, because of pre-existing health conditions. Insurers can only charge an individual based on whether it is an individual coverage or a coverage for multiple people, where the person lives, the age of the person, and if the person uses tobacco† (www.obamacarefacts.com). The implementation of these criterias is projected â€Å"to enable thirty million uninsured people purchase health insurance† (www.obamacarefacts.com). This creates vast more equality in society, with relation to medical care. Thus, it is evident that Obama Care promotes equality in the American society. Secondly, Obama Care enables freedom. Obama Care places health care insurance on a subsidized, and competitive private market. This provides more citizens with the opportunity to compare and select the type of healthcare insurance plan the need, want and will purchase. Obama Care expands and improves Medicaid. â€Å"It provides citizens with the opportunity to keep their current insurance plan ‘if they like it’ and provided that it complies with the terms of the Affordable Care Act, or it has Grandfathered status†(www.obamacarefacts.com). â€Å"Additionally, if you have government based insurance then you are covered† (www.pbs.org). Therefore, Obama Care enables citizens with not just the freedom to purchase sufficient medical coverage, but also the freedom to keep their healthcare insurance if it already provides them with sufficient coverage. Thirdly, Obama Care creates solidarity. Solidarity is a unity or agreement of feeling or action, especially among individuals with a common interest; mutual support within a group. The implementation of Obama Care means the vast majority of Americans will have medical coverage. Every legal American citizen contributes to Obama Care. New taxes were implemented for the citizens of America because of Obama Care. â€Å"The new tax related provisions in the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care) include tax hikes, limits to deductions, tax credits, tax breaks, and other changes† (www.obamacarefacts.com). This is because, â€Å"Obama Care includes many new benefits, rights, and protections including the requirement for health insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions. It also expands access to affordable health insurance to almost 50 million low-to-middle income men, women, and children across the country by offering reduced premiums via tax credits and expanding Medicaid and CHIP. Expanding the quality, affordability and availability of health insurance (along with other aspects of the law) come at a high cost. Assuming all tax provisions remain in place, the revenue generated from these new taxes help to cover the costs of the program and reduces the deficit. † (www.obamacarefacts.com). This shows that with Obama Care, health insurance is no longer a premium paid based on your age, gender, medical history, and location. This plan ensures that American citizens will be working in unison to make health insurance affordable for one another, and are working together to reduce the deficit and better the American economy. Although the Affordable Care Act appears to be a progressive solution for the United States of America, some people do not agree with the implementation of Obama Care. The most prominent opponent of the Affordable Care Act is the Republican Party of the United States of America. They argue that the implementation of Obama Care will; â€Å"iincrease health care costs, cause insurance premiums to rise, hurts the quality of health care, create nearly $570 billion in tax hikes, and add over $500 billion to the debt† (www.gop.com). Personally, I do not support the argument of the Republican Party. Although Obama Care might cause all of the stated, the benefit is greater than the cost. The change in cost does not seem to be substantial enough to cause great distress to the majority of American citizens, and whatever initial debt Obama Care may cost will be paid off in the long run. Furthermore, this Act is for the benefit of the greater good, and it enables most citizens to live a better lifestyle. In conclusion, the Affordable Care Act promotes equality, enables freedom, and creates solidarity in the United States of America. It is evident that this legislation is democratic, because its founding principles rest on equality, freedom and solidarity. â€Å"No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but equality, freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics since ancient times† (Wikipedia.ca). The United States of America is not only a democratic country, but also one of the superpowers of the world. Such a dignified country should always aim to maximize the comfort and welfare of its citizens. The goal of Obama Care is to maximize the comfort and welfare of American citizens; which is how it should be.