Cuyp ’ s “ van Goyen phase ” can be placed approximately in the early 1640s.

Cuyp probably first encountered a painting by van Goyen in 1640 when van Goyen was, as Stephen Reiss points out “ at the height of powers .” This is noticeable in the comparison between two of Cuyp ’ s landscape paintings inscribed 1639 where no properly formed style is apparent and the landscape backgrounds he painted two years later for two of his father ’ s group portraits that are distinctly van Goyenesque.

The next phase in the development of Cuyp ’ s increasingly amalgamated style is due to the influence of Jan Both.

It is around this same time that Cuyp ’ s style changed fundamentally.

Cuyp ’ s third stylistic phase ( which occurred throughout his career ) is based on the influence of his father.

In addition to the scarcely documented and confirmed biography of Cuyp ’ s life, and even more so than his amalgamated style from his three main influences, there are yet other factors that have led to the misattribution and confusion over Aelbert Cuyp ’ s works for hundreds of years.

Calraet mimicked Cuyp ’ s style, incorporating the same aspects, and produced similar landscapes to that of the latter.

Adding to the confusion is the similar initials between the two and the inconsistent signing of paintings which were produced by Cuyp ’ s studio.

Conversely, paintings which came out of his workshop that were not necessarily physically worked on by Cuyp but merely overseen by him technically, were marked with A. C. to show that it was his instruction which saw the paintings ’ completion.

Cuyp ’ s pupils and assistants often worked on paintings in his studio, and so most of the work of a painting could be done without Cuyp ever touching the canvas, but merely approving its finality.

Common among the mislabeled works are all of the reasons identified for misattributing Cuyp ’ s works: the lack of biography and chronology of his works made it difficult to discern when paintings were created ( making it difficult to pinpoint an artist ); contentious signatures added to historians ’ confusion as to who actually painted the works ; and the collaborations and influences by different painters makes it hard to justify that a painting is genuinely that of Aelbert Cuyp ; and finally, accurate identification is made extremely difficult by the fact that this same style was copied ( rather accurately ) by his predecessor.

Lastly and most importantly, the precision in mimicking Cuyp ’ s style by his follower Abraham van Calraet and their contentious signatures makes it all the more difficult to determine which paintings are genuinely that of Cuyp and which ones are actually accurate reproductions in his style.

It is this reluctance which was felt by the Rijksmuseum to reattribute works to other painters ( Abraham van Calraet does not even appear in a Museum catalogue until 1926, and even then he is not given his own entry ) which shows how important it is to art historians that painters are accurately connected to their works — and this is continuously necessary for those of Aelbert Cuyp, as Dordrecht ’ s most famous painter may not in fact be Dordrecht ’ s most famous painter.

In general it may be said that Cuyp learned tone from the exceptionally prolific van Goyen, light from Both and form from his father.

Cuyp took from van Goyen the straw yellow and light brown tones that are so apparent in his Dunes ( 1629 ) and the broken brush technique also very noticeable in that same work.

His highly influenced style which incorporated Italianate lighting from Jan Both, broken brush technique and atonality from Jan van Goyen, and his ever-developing style from his father Jacob Gerritsz Cuyp was studied acutely by his most prominent follower, Abraham van Calraet.

Jacob van Ruisdael, Aelbert Cuyp, Hendrick Avercamp, Ludolf Backhuysen, Meindert Hobbema, Aert van der Neer.

Adriaen and Isaac van Ostade, David Teniers, Aelbert Cuyp, Johannes Vermeer and Pieter De Hooch were among the many painters specializing in genre subjects in the Netherlands during the 17th century.

The dining room, now decorated with what appear to be Dutch tiles but is in fact trompe l ' oeil, contains a collection of small, mainly Dutch, paintings from the 16th and 17th centuries by such artists as Aelbert Cuyp, Adrian van Ostade and Jan Steen.

It consists of 84 paintings and includes some outstanding works by artists including Hendrick Avercamp, Gerard Ter Borch, Pieter Claesz, Aelbert Cuyp, Frans Hals, Pieter de Hooch, Jacob van Ruisdael, Jan Steen, David Teniers the Younger and Willem van de Velde.

The RKD also lists Jan van Bijlert, the two Boths, the two Honthorsts, Leonaert Bramer, Bartholomeus Breenbergh, Hendrick ter Brugghen, Jacob Gerritsz Cuyp, Willem van Drielenburg, Wybrand de Geest, Nicolaus Knüpfer, Cornelis van Poelenburch, Henrik Schook, Matthias Stom, Herman van Swanevelt, Dirck Voorst, and Jan Weenix.

The development of Aelbert Cuyp, who was trained as a landscape painter, may be roughly sketched in three phases based on the painters who most influenced him during that time and the subsequent artistic characteristics that are apparent in his paintings.

There are landscapes in the collections of the dukes of Bedford and Westminster, in which Cuyp has represented either the frozen Maes with fishermen packing herrings, or the moon reflecting its light on the river's placid waters.

The same feeling and similar subjects are found in Cuyp and Van Der Neer, before and after their partnership, but Cuyp was the leading genius.

We are near Dordrecht in the landscape sunset of the Louvre, in which Cuyp evidently painted the foreground and cows.

They are less valuable in the market than those of Cuyp or Hobbema ; but, possessing a charm peculiarly their own, they are much sought after by collectors.

The AMPAS was originally conceived by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer studio boss Louis B. Mayer as a professional honorary organization to help improve the film industry ’ s image and help mediate labor disputes.

The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences defines psychological altruism as " a motivational state with the goal of increasing another ’ s welfare ".

Psychological altruism is contrasted with psychological egoism, which refers to the motivation to increase one ’ s own welfare.

One way is a sincere expression of Christian love, " motivated by a powerful feeling of security, strength, and inner salvation, of the invincible fullness of one ’ s own life and existence ".

Another way is merely " one of the many modern substitutes for love, ... nothing but the urge to turn away from oneself and to lose oneself in other people ’ s business.

* David Firestone-When Romney ’ s Reach Exceeds His Grasp-Mitt Romney quotes the song

" Swift extends the metaphor to get in a few jibes at England ’ s mistreatment of Ireland, noting that " For this kind of commodity will not bear exportation, and flesh being of too tender a consistence, to admit a long continuance in salt, although perhaps I could name a country, which would be glad to eat up our whole nation without it.

George Wittkowsky argued that Swift ’ s main target in A Modest Proposal was not the conditions in Ireland, but rather the can-do spirit of the times that led people to devise a number of illogical schemes that would purportedly solve social and economic ills.

In response, Swift ’ s Modest Proposal was " a burlesque of projects concerning the poor ", that were in vogue during the early 18th century.

Critics differ about Swift ’ s intentions in using this faux-mathematical philosophy.

Charles K. Smith argues that Swift ’ s rhetorical style persuades the reader to detest the speaker and pity the Irish.

Swift ’ s specific strategy is twofold, using a " trap " to create sympathy for the Irish and a dislike of the narrator who, in the span of one sentence, " details vividly and with rhetorical emphasis the grinding poverty " but feels emotion solely for members of his own class.

Swift ’ s use of gripping details of poverty and his narrator ’ s cool approach towards them create " two opposing points of view " that " alienate the reader, perhaps unconsciously, from a narrator who can view with ' melancholy ' detachment a subject that Swift has directed us, rhetorically, to see in a much less detached way.

Once the children have been commodified, Swift ’ s rhetoric can easily turn " people into animals, then meat, and from meat, logically, into tonnage worth a price per pound ".

Swift uses the proposer ’ s serious tone to highlight the absurdity of his proposal.

In making his argument, the speaker uses the conventional, text book approved order of argument from Swift ’ s time ( which was derived from the Latin rhetorician Quintilian ).

James Johnson argued that A Modest Proposal was largely influenced and inspired by Tertullian ’ s Apology: a satirical attack against early Roman persecution of Christianity.

Johnson notes Swift ’ s obvious affinity for Tertullian and the bold stylistic and structural similarities between the works A Modest Proposal and Apology.

He reminds readers that " there is a gap between the narrator ’ s meaning and the text ’ s, and that a moral-political argument is being carried out by means of parody ".