We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter critically examines Palestine’s unsuccessful 2011 UN membership bid. It examines the report of the UN Committee on the Admission of New Members which, under US pressure, could not unanimously recommend Palestine’s membership to the Security Council after examining whether Palestine satisfied the criteria for membership as set out in article 4(1) of the UN Charter. Propelled by this unsuccessful bid, Palestine turned to the General Assembly which upgraded its status to that of a non-Member Observer State in 2012. Although the legal consequences of this upgrade have been considerable, including allowing the State of Palestine to accede to a host of international treaties and multilateral organizations, its juxtaposition against the refusal of the Committee on the Admission of New Members to recommend membership to the Security Council in accordance with the international rule of law is demonstrative, yet again, of the international rule by law principle at work. Although the UN has allowed for a gradual and qualified recognition of Palestinian legal subjectivity over time, its failure to provide the legal and political foundation upon which those rights may actually be realized, namely membership in the Organization, has continued to disenfranchise Palestine and its people.
In 1948, with the end of the British Mandate, Israel declared its independence. Israel based its declaration on the right of self-determination and the fact that the League of Nations and the UN had recognised this right. Israel’s legal position was not that these institutions had granted the right of self-determination of the Jewish people, but that they had recognised an existing right. The Declaration did not refer to the borders of the new State nor to its capital. Whether the Declaration created an independent State as from 14 May 1948 depends on an examination of whether Israel, at the time, fulfilled the Montevideo criteria for statehood.
From the time of their premieres, Carmen was an immediate success both in Portugal (Lisbon, 1885, in Italian) and, before this, in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro, 1881, in French). By 1915, thanks to travelling companies, principally Italian and French, the opera was widely known and popular throughout both countries, reaching not only principal cities on the coast or up river, but also in the interior, accessible through the increasing railway networks, particularly striking in the hinterland of São Paulo. Performance conditions were very variable, with difficulties often experienced in relation to the orchestra and choruses. Audiences in Lisbon had very high expectations, which were rarely met, while in Brazil reception was much more spontaneous and appreciative. Parodies of Carmen, imported and locally produced, were a feature in both countries. In 1911 a travelling children’s company in Rio, São Paulo and the south of Brazil raised questions in the local press about working conditions and particularly child labour.
Carmen made its debut in the Spanish Americas when the local networks of opera were at their apex, with a constant stream of singers from Europe and a desire for new repertoires outside the main staples of Italian opera. In this chapter, considering sources from across the region, we discuss four layers of Carmen’s reception in the Americas. First, the reception of the opera beyond the stage, in the form of vocal scores, arrangements for military bands and isolated numbers. Second, the perception of Carmen as a French opera, and the way it served as a vehicle for French opera companies in the final decades of the nineteenth century. Third, the idea of Carmen as Spanish, and how different countries considered that hispanicity as part of their own culture and theatrical expectations. Finally, we discuss how the habanera in Carmen was perceived as part of a larger contemporary debate on the transatlantic popularity of the habanera as a musical genre, its origins, ethnicity and its moral and musical character.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.