The sound envelopes you and the notes melt into each other resulting in a seamless sensation of sensuous sound as though living in a cloud of warm beauty and total comfort. In a naturally pure acoustically designed space, sound resonates for several seconds with a slow but deliberate diminuendo of tone to an inaudible state, a long and steady decay into nothing. When a series of notes are produced in such an environment, there is a great and glorious overlapping and layering of sound. Rather than each note interrupting the previous one, it simply adds to the sound as the previous note begins its long decay. This means that a series of notes is not a simply a collection of individual sounds but, instead, becomes a harmonic event of several tones at one time with the most recent being the prominent one.
Thus music and performances take on an entirely different experience for the listeners in a natural acoustic environment. The music becomes warm, complete, deep, rich, and immensely satisfying aurally, and, at some level, perhaps even physically. There are few experiences as impacting as hearing great music in a pure environment, music in an unadulterated state, music for connection, for the melding of sound as it moves gracefully and artfully through musical lines. In such a world, the melodies act independently as lines while remaining absolutely congruent with all other sound around them, all in a joyful expression of polyphony and perfection.
But now I present the problem: where are the architectural spaces for such experiences? They are virtually gone in today's modern world. Like a rare book whose value diminishes to most people while treasured by a few, acoustically pure spaces are rapidly disappearing. The lovers of great choral and instrumental music are hindered by the lack of environments for expression of the music. In the marvelous musical Les Miserables, Fantine tells of the man who stayed by her side through the summer but was gone by Autumn. Such is the case of naturally pure acoustic environments. They once were by the side of great music, but, unlike the rising and the setting of the sun, they seem to be gone forever.
Sure there remain some usable spaces--recital halls, cathedrals, and a few specially designed auditoriums, but most new construction relies on sound enhancement via electronic amplification for its aural environment. Most community auditoriums and churches feel pressured or even driven to provide a space that rejects the old natural acoustical concept and replaces it with advanced technological electronic sound wizardry. Music, then, wisely responds in kind by building a performance that utilizes the amplification. Without the amplification, the music falls flat on ears that cannot adequately hear the total sound due to the space with which it is, in essence, competing. Cushioned seats, carpet, thick drapes, curtains, and even clothing on people add to the challenge of an environment which is destructive to acoustic performances or even verbal communication.
We now have the clash of two cultures--natural acoustics vs. electronic enhancement. The academic community as well as pockets of arts supporters continue to hold on to a rich heritage of great music that demands a natural space for its performance. Choral music, instrumental music, chamber music, symphonic music, solos, church music, and every form imaginable are desperately in need of natural space for the ideal expression of its genre. As individuals, ensembles, leaders, and musical artists of all types spend hours in preparation for a performance, it is likely that the physical place, in anticipation of an upcoming performance, is laughing hysterically at the hopelessness of the situation for the performers. Recognizing this problem, professional musicians who are spending a lifetime preparing for outstanding musical performances, experience great frustration at the lack of regard for their profession. As experts in their discipline, dedicated to excellence, loving their calling as musicians, they seek a forum to express that which is their life--performing outstanding music. But they need a place, a stage, a platform that will treat their gifts with dignity and will allow their expression to find full fruition.
Yet in spite of the need for natural acoustical space, a world has materialized in the last 60 years that recognizes the value of sound enhancement and has subsequently developed its own heritage, its own genres, and its own remarkable identity--that is the world of popular music and all the complexity that accompanies it. This is true in churches, communities, film, the recording industry, and for anyone willing to recognize the vast potential of the electronic industry as it relates to music and sound enhancement. For others holding on to an older model out of sheer devotion to music in its unadulterated state, there is but a slim opportunity for performance. Related to this are the small opportunities for the creative geniuses who prefer to compose music for acoustical instruments and to hear their music in a natural environment.
There are, however, several solutions to solving these problems provided people are willing to compromise a little, bend on their original ideals, and support more inclusivity of multiple musical concepts. Auditoriums have been designed and should continue to be designed as spaces for both natural acoustics and electronically enhanced sound. Musicians can consider the benefits of both approaches and can recognize the value of the heritage of music as well as current music for entertainment. Academically trained musicians should experiment with amplification for their product and the entertainment industry should seek out opportunities for natural performances with less reliance on electronic means. Music listeners and music lovers should seek out all kinds of music in all kinds of spaces, and leaders should strive for artistic expression rather than simply economic solvency.
Regardless of the philosophical clash, in the end the people will speak. At this point, the market for acoustically pure performances is very small and it could be time for the academic world to recognize this truth and try something new without sacrificing the old. Time will tell the story.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Friday, December 28, 2012
Clash of the Theatre
Musical Theatre is one of greatest artistic experiences of modern times. Not only does it combine and blend a wide variety of art forms, including music, theatre, visual art, and communication arts, it also has a direct tie-in to business, marketing, literature, and history. Music theatre remains one of the great collaborative ventures in the arts and perhaps in society, requiring the working together of many different people from many different types of backgrounds with specializations in many fields.
Music Theatre at its finest is grand, personal, dramatic, entertaining, emotionally satisfying, cathartic, and richly artistic at all levels. Regardless of the style or preferred medium, and we will discuss this more later, music theatre has the potential to reach into the soul of a person, shake it up a bit, and rebuild it into a stronger entity. The incongruence of music on stage juxtaposed with drama whether realistic or imagined has the potential to leave an audience member empowered with a sense of how emotions play a major role in our pragmatic existence.
From the comical moments of Papageno in Mozart's Magic Flute to the anguish of the dying Mimi in Puccini's La Boheme, opera gives us an opportunity to laugh at ourselves, to cry at sadness, to sing with joy, or to reflect on sorrow, to be cleansed, to be stricken, and ultimately to be changed through great art. In musicals, and we do need to discuss the difference at some point, we have the same type of emotional experiences. We see events on stage, that when coupled with music, make them easier to deal with while augmenting the emotional impact of the situation. We laugh at the Barbershop Quartet townspeople in Music Man and we quiver in brokenness at the death of Tony in West Side Story. We wonder about Professor Higgins methods in My Fair Lady and we relate to Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof when his world gets turned upside down.
We marvel at the dancing in 42nd street and share a smile with Gene Kelly in Singing in the Rain. We may roll our eyes a little at the sappy return of Brigadoon due to the power of love, but at the same time we are glad it all works out in the end. We rejoice that the Von Trapps escape the Nazis, cheer when Jud is finally gone, and somehow seem saddened at the disappearance of the Phantom who loved but gave up Christine. All these events and more improve our lives and make Music Theatre the medium of choice for so many.
Although I no longer feel confident in differentiating between operas and musicals, mainly due to the inconsistency of the labels, most people define these genres based on various criteria. Some say opera is "old" while musicals are new--absurd idea but I have overheard it. Others say opera is all singing and no dialogue--this is unsupported due to extensive dialog in certain operas and predominant singing in particular musicals. Some discuss style of music including performance practice as determining whether something is an opera or a musical--strange idea easily refuted on many levels. Others like to discuss thematic differences with opera being headier, loftier, and more bourgeois--odd criterion since there are some very lofty themes in musicals. Of course some may refer to the preference of opera being in a foreign language versus musicals in English--makes little sense in today's eclectic world. But in the end, particularly in terms of today's offerings, there is no real difference in a broad sense between opera and musicals. So why is this an issue and where is the problem? There are approximately 15 modern musicals to every 1 older opera being performed in London today.
Let's talk about some current trends and problems. 1) Live musicals are very appealing to many people, 2) They are expensive, 3) Operas are deemed as the preferred musical theatre choice by musicians, 4) Musicals are deemed the preferred choice by actors and actresses. 5) Collaboration between music departments and theatre departments is severely handicapped by a combination of preferences, egos, elitism, and styles. In short, collaboration is nearly a myth.
These truths make music theatre very challenging in academic settings as well as the professional world. Therefore it is not unusual to find music departments focusing on opera (particularly from the late 18th and 19th centuries) and theatre departments bent on doing American music theatre. The result, sadly, is often theatre programs with great acting and poor singing and/or music programs with great singing and poor acting. This complexity is so prevalent and common that it has come to be expected in academic circles.
The elitism of educated musicians who view American musicals as lesser art forms than 19th century operas have actually polarized the art forms into factions that seem insurmountably separate. Add to this the preference, right or wrong, of theatre people who look to acting ability over musical skill and we have a chasm of artistic void that is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to bridge. How do we overcome such mediocre trappings? Is it possible to create an environment of collaboration, mutual respect, honoring the old and the new, creating a theatre production that meets all needs and at a high level? This is yet another example of the cultural clash that exists in music today. This problem is not institutional nor market driven but, instead is a result of cultural differences and musical preferences.
Music Theatre at its finest is grand, personal, dramatic, entertaining, emotionally satisfying, cathartic, and richly artistic at all levels. Regardless of the style or preferred medium, and we will discuss this more later, music theatre has the potential to reach into the soul of a person, shake it up a bit, and rebuild it into a stronger entity. The incongruence of music on stage juxtaposed with drama whether realistic or imagined has the potential to leave an audience member empowered with a sense of how emotions play a major role in our pragmatic existence.
From the comical moments of Papageno in Mozart's Magic Flute to the anguish of the dying Mimi in Puccini's La Boheme, opera gives us an opportunity to laugh at ourselves, to cry at sadness, to sing with joy, or to reflect on sorrow, to be cleansed, to be stricken, and ultimately to be changed through great art. In musicals, and we do need to discuss the difference at some point, we have the same type of emotional experiences. We see events on stage, that when coupled with music, make them easier to deal with while augmenting the emotional impact of the situation. We laugh at the Barbershop Quartet townspeople in Music Man and we quiver in brokenness at the death of Tony in West Side Story. We wonder about Professor Higgins methods in My Fair Lady and we relate to Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof when his world gets turned upside down.
We marvel at the dancing in 42nd street and share a smile with Gene Kelly in Singing in the Rain. We may roll our eyes a little at the sappy return of Brigadoon due to the power of love, but at the same time we are glad it all works out in the end. We rejoice that the Von Trapps escape the Nazis, cheer when Jud is finally gone, and somehow seem saddened at the disappearance of the Phantom who loved but gave up Christine. All these events and more improve our lives and make Music Theatre the medium of choice for so many.
Although I no longer feel confident in differentiating between operas and musicals, mainly due to the inconsistency of the labels, most people define these genres based on various criteria. Some say opera is "old" while musicals are new--absurd idea but I have overheard it. Others say opera is all singing and no dialogue--this is unsupported due to extensive dialog in certain operas and predominant singing in particular musicals. Some discuss style of music including performance practice as determining whether something is an opera or a musical--strange idea easily refuted on many levels. Others like to discuss thematic differences with opera being headier, loftier, and more bourgeois--odd criterion since there are some very lofty themes in musicals. Of course some may refer to the preference of opera being in a foreign language versus musicals in English--makes little sense in today's eclectic world. But in the end, particularly in terms of today's offerings, there is no real difference in a broad sense between opera and musicals. So why is this an issue and where is the problem? There are approximately 15 modern musicals to every 1 older opera being performed in London today.
Let's talk about some current trends and problems. 1) Live musicals are very appealing to many people, 2) They are expensive, 3) Operas are deemed as the preferred musical theatre choice by musicians, 4) Musicals are deemed the preferred choice by actors and actresses. 5) Collaboration between music departments and theatre departments is severely handicapped by a combination of preferences, egos, elitism, and styles. In short, collaboration is nearly a myth.
These truths make music theatre very challenging in academic settings as well as the professional world. Therefore it is not unusual to find music departments focusing on opera (particularly from the late 18th and 19th centuries) and theatre departments bent on doing American music theatre. The result, sadly, is often theatre programs with great acting and poor singing and/or music programs with great singing and poor acting. This complexity is so prevalent and common that it has come to be expected in academic circles.
The elitism of educated musicians who view American musicals as lesser art forms than 19th century operas have actually polarized the art forms into factions that seem insurmountably separate. Add to this the preference, right or wrong, of theatre people who look to acting ability over musical skill and we have a chasm of artistic void that is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to bridge. How do we overcome such mediocre trappings? Is it possible to create an environment of collaboration, mutual respect, honoring the old and the new, creating a theatre production that meets all needs and at a high level? This is yet another example of the cultural clash that exists in music today. This problem is not institutional nor market driven but, instead is a result of cultural differences and musical preferences.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Music as an Academic Discipline
The study of music is a worthy academic discipline on par with other disciplines in universities and deserving of its rightful place among the high arts. It is an essential ingredient for the human spirit and provides a warm release and emotional enhancement for people all over the world. Just like Math, Languages, History, Business, Sciences, and Education, the study of Music is of such value to our lives that we, as a society, cannot seem to function effectively without the constant, glorious sound of music everywhere we go, including movies, television, malls, stores, churches, events, and exercise facilities.
With the constant music in our lives, music that seems to pervade our culture at every turn, we feel a need to elevate it to a high level of study. And I agree that music is deserving of our attention, our study, and our devotion to its heritage, its purpose, its characteristics, and its role in culture. Even one facet of music is an academic discipline in and of itself. As we delve into Music History we discover a wealth of information related to the culture of the time and the region from which the music drew. Learning about French Opera in the late 17th century, for example, reveals a society hungry for theatre, for staged spectacles, for dramatic expressions through music. Of course some of it seems rather silly to our eyes and ears today but there are certainly profound moments that give us insight into the thoughts of the people and the preferences of the royalty. My point of mentioning this is that the study of music history is sublimely related to sociology of the people, thereby providing us today with a greater understanding of the past. When we understand the past, it gives us a basis for understanding our world today.
There is a quality about music that connects to people individually and collectively, and then rises above the problems of the world. As we learn about music from the past, we learn about nations, governments, society, and all classes of people as they struggle and grow through their problems, their dreams, their priorities, and their artistic achievements. When we examine artistry and all the facets of what that means in culture, we get closer to understanding the driving emotional forces of our lives.
When music is examined from the past to the present, it begins to take on a cultural power with far-reaching impact on people from multiple backgrounds. The value of music, however, goes deeper than simply societal influence, and as we study the cultural contributions of music, we begin to recognize a need to understand how music is put together. Thus we get the study of music theory. In music theory, we begin to do a thorough analytical study of how music is formed through sound and into notes, rhythm, harmony, timbre, texture, and structure. It is the study of theory that music is demystified and becomes something tangible for all people. In a way, learning music theory is likened to knowing another language but in other ways music theory simply provides the foundational information for greater music making on many levels.
As we layer the knowledge of music history and theory, we have a need to invoke practical application to the process, preventing the trap of music becoming purely academic. As a student learns the heritage of music and learns the tools for making music, he or she needs to learn to make the music alive through what we call applied study. Applied study includes performance skills on an instrument or voice. The applied study can enhance, supplement, and augment the knowledge gained in history and theory, resulting in an integration of all knowledge that finds fruition in live performance. We then add in collective music making through large and small ensemble experiences, rounding out the education of a musician and resulting in a complete package ready to enter the world.
Yes, there is certainly potential for failure in the prescribed system, but, with many exceptions, the system works and has worked since music was codified many years ago. The academic system allows for freedom of discovery, for diligent application, for specialization, and for thorough understanding of the complexities of music. The system is not intended to relegate a young musician to becoming one type of musician, nor to create clones or imitations of the teachers, but it does encourage a student to use his talents and interest to the fullest and to clear the path toward his personal goals.
Unfortunately there are institutional challenges that are related to the training and education of musicians at the collegiate level. Most of those challenges involve financial inefficiency and often unbridled expenses toward achieving the goals. Because the study of music as an academic discipline has become economically problematic, it is essential to connect to a greater market through public relations. This is one of, and perhaps, the major tension that exists in music programs--music as an academic discipline vs. music as entertainment.
With the constant music in our lives, music that seems to pervade our culture at every turn, we feel a need to elevate it to a high level of study. And I agree that music is deserving of our attention, our study, and our devotion to its heritage, its purpose, its characteristics, and its role in culture. Even one facet of music is an academic discipline in and of itself. As we delve into Music History we discover a wealth of information related to the culture of the time and the region from which the music drew. Learning about French Opera in the late 17th century, for example, reveals a society hungry for theatre, for staged spectacles, for dramatic expressions through music. Of course some of it seems rather silly to our eyes and ears today but there are certainly profound moments that give us insight into the thoughts of the people and the preferences of the royalty. My point of mentioning this is that the study of music history is sublimely related to sociology of the people, thereby providing us today with a greater understanding of the past. When we understand the past, it gives us a basis for understanding our world today.
There is a quality about music that connects to people individually and collectively, and then rises above the problems of the world. As we learn about music from the past, we learn about nations, governments, society, and all classes of people as they struggle and grow through their problems, their dreams, their priorities, and their artistic achievements. When we examine artistry and all the facets of what that means in culture, we get closer to understanding the driving emotional forces of our lives.
When music is examined from the past to the present, it begins to take on a cultural power with far-reaching impact on people from multiple backgrounds. The value of music, however, goes deeper than simply societal influence, and as we study the cultural contributions of music, we begin to recognize a need to understand how music is put together. Thus we get the study of music theory. In music theory, we begin to do a thorough analytical study of how music is formed through sound and into notes, rhythm, harmony, timbre, texture, and structure. It is the study of theory that music is demystified and becomes something tangible for all people. In a way, learning music theory is likened to knowing another language but in other ways music theory simply provides the foundational information for greater music making on many levels.
As we layer the knowledge of music history and theory, we have a need to invoke practical application to the process, preventing the trap of music becoming purely academic. As a student learns the heritage of music and learns the tools for making music, he or she needs to learn to make the music alive through what we call applied study. Applied study includes performance skills on an instrument or voice. The applied study can enhance, supplement, and augment the knowledge gained in history and theory, resulting in an integration of all knowledge that finds fruition in live performance. We then add in collective music making through large and small ensemble experiences, rounding out the education of a musician and resulting in a complete package ready to enter the world.
Yes, there is certainly potential for failure in the prescribed system, but, with many exceptions, the system works and has worked since music was codified many years ago. The academic system allows for freedom of discovery, for diligent application, for specialization, and for thorough understanding of the complexities of music. The system is not intended to relegate a young musician to becoming one type of musician, nor to create clones or imitations of the teachers, but it does encourage a student to use his talents and interest to the fullest and to clear the path toward his personal goals.
Unfortunately there are institutional challenges that are related to the training and education of musicians at the collegiate level. Most of those challenges involve financial inefficiency and often unbridled expenses toward achieving the goals. Because the study of music as an academic discipline has become economically problematic, it is essential to connect to a greater market through public relations. This is one of, and perhaps, the major tension that exists in music programs--music as an academic discipline vs. music as entertainment.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Redesigning Your World
I really do not like spiders in general. Creepy little things with remarkable abilities to survive and spin webs that seem impervious to weather changes. Little ones irritate me and big ones are frightening and poisonous ones are dangerous and mean ones need to be in another universe other than mine. Not only do I not like spiders, but spider webs are nearly horrifying with their sticky, stringy attack on anything near. Walking into a web feels like a thousand whispy, invisible, evil neurons are invading my being, seeking to bore into each pore and expand those wicked tendrils into my blood stream, cutting off all hope of remaining a human being. Just an awful experience for sure.
But my admiration for spiders is quite high as they seem to accomplish so much in a short period of time. Most of them live no more than 2 years and during that time they may build as many as 700 plus webs or more depending on what happens. Of course there are some that build one web and add to it throughout their lifetime, ever changing and growing into a vast world of web (no, not quite the worldwide web!). Others build, destroy, and build again. Some are torn up from storms, others from humans, others from various animals, but most simply relocate and build again, complete their life cycle by making webs and flourishing through their remarkable productivity. No web is exactly like the previous web and the location of the surroundings alters the making of the web each time. Spiders are survivors and are constantly redesigning their world through hard work and diligence.
Such is the way of the world, constantly rebuilding and improving our immediate environment. It is a matter of avoiding stagnation and of treating each day as a new day with new things to learn and to discover. It is a process of thinking of life as an adventure and an opportunity to explore and to build upon that which is known or to build something new and bold, to make it better, to try it again using new methods, to redesign your world and to make your dreams a reality.
To learn something new and give it a whirl and apply some tenacity to the process: that is why I am pursuing my Master of Business Administration. As short as life is, I want to spend it learning and experimenting. I do not wish to make each day the same as the previous day. But regardless of having the heart of an explorer, I will always keep in mind that no step should be made without an unrelenting sense of responsibility, and that spiders may be cool little things in many ways but they also are a little frightening at times!
But my admiration for spiders is quite high as they seem to accomplish so much in a short period of time. Most of them live no more than 2 years and during that time they may build as many as 700 plus webs or more depending on what happens. Of course there are some that build one web and add to it throughout their lifetime, ever changing and growing into a vast world of web (no, not quite the worldwide web!). Others build, destroy, and build again. Some are torn up from storms, others from humans, others from various animals, but most simply relocate and build again, complete their life cycle by making webs and flourishing through their remarkable productivity. No web is exactly like the previous web and the location of the surroundings alters the making of the web each time. Spiders are survivors and are constantly redesigning their world through hard work and diligence.
Such is the way of the world, constantly rebuilding and improving our immediate environment. It is a matter of avoiding stagnation and of treating each day as a new day with new things to learn and to discover. It is a process of thinking of life as an adventure and an opportunity to explore and to build upon that which is known or to build something new and bold, to make it better, to try it again using new methods, to redesign your world and to make your dreams a reality.
To learn something new and give it a whirl and apply some tenacity to the process: that is why I am pursuing my Master of Business Administration. As short as life is, I want to spend it learning and experimenting. I do not wish to make each day the same as the previous day. But regardless of having the heart of an explorer, I will always keep in mind that no step should be made without an unrelenting sense of responsibility, and that spiders may be cool little things in many ways but they also are a little frightening at times!
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Update on Recent Books
Just completed Ian McEwan's latest book called Sweet Tooth. Great writing for sure with a pleasant blend of poetic and personal stylized writing, psychological depth, and mysterious goal-direction. Sort of hints of Reynolds Price and Graham Greene without the excessive confusions of plot or extraneous sentimentality. He captured first person from a woman's perspective as well as I have ever read in a book. Quite a writer and worth a slow, careful read.
Now I am in The King and the Cowboy, a biographical sketch of the relationship between Edward the 7th and Theodore Roosevelt. Very fine book with lots of great information and perception on royalty and the complexity of Germanic roots that occurred during the post-Victoria and Albert years in England. Having read several biographies of Theodore Roosevelt, it is time to dive into the trilogy by Edmund Morris. He will be on the Howard Payne campus in a couple of months and I want to know his writing style well before hearing him speak.
Still working my way through James Lee Burke's Creole Belle. Wonderfully descriptive and full of precision and creativity, the story contains personal depth, amazing characterizations, and a strong sense of good versus evil. Yet I feel as though I have read this story before and am simply reading another James Lee Burke novel. He is one of my favorite thriller writers, but I may need to take a break from his books for awhile.
Strange for me, I have also read several books on management and leadership. Good reading but they all have a similar message to me. Still...I do like learning how to be a better manager and it is sort of fun to imagine making more money!
I continue to be disappointed that I have read every Louis L'amour book, Robert Parker book, Larry McMurtry, Philip Roth, Ian Fleming, John MacDonald, and Donald Hamilton book written. But there are several Graham Greene books I have not read and I am still working my way through Gore Vidal, Cormac McCarthy, and Jeff Shaara books. While I do not enjoy David Morrell quite as much as I used to, he still packs a powerful punch in spite of his quasi-comic book approach to writing of the last few years.
Having enjoyed In the Garden of the Beasts and The Big Burn, I am beginning to enjoy reading non-fiction historical books about certain events. Unbroken continues to occupy my thoughts and I plan to read more about British history in the future. Can't go wrong with a Charles Dickens novel and who can beat Nathaniel Hawthorne?
Of course there is the occasional Jonathan Kellerman, Harlan Coben, Michael Palmer, and David Baldacci. Lee Child is especially popular right now, but I got weary of the constant explosions and fights. I tried to read a Vince Flynn book but after a couple dozen shootings, I decided enough was enough. I probably need to read Nelson DeMille's latest, but I think I will wait awhile. Of course my favorite book remains Les Miserables but I must admit I have only read two abridged versions. One of these days, I intend to read the entire set of books in spite of hearing that the middle book is quite dull!
Addressing digital books: I cannot fully embrace the concept yet. I somehow prefer to hold a book in my hand. The digital idea is fine for trips and for those times I am not near a bookstore, but overall I sure like turning real pages. Audio books are great for running but that is about all. Okay, call me old-fashioned but I just plain old like real books, great stories, smooth writing, and depth of thought. Ah, books...may they always be a valued part of my life!
Now I am in The King and the Cowboy, a biographical sketch of the relationship between Edward the 7th and Theodore Roosevelt. Very fine book with lots of great information and perception on royalty and the complexity of Germanic roots that occurred during the post-Victoria and Albert years in England. Having read several biographies of Theodore Roosevelt, it is time to dive into the trilogy by Edmund Morris. He will be on the Howard Payne campus in a couple of months and I want to know his writing style well before hearing him speak.
Still working my way through James Lee Burke's Creole Belle. Wonderfully descriptive and full of precision and creativity, the story contains personal depth, amazing characterizations, and a strong sense of good versus evil. Yet I feel as though I have read this story before and am simply reading another James Lee Burke novel. He is one of my favorite thriller writers, but I may need to take a break from his books for awhile.
Strange for me, I have also read several books on management and leadership. Good reading but they all have a similar message to me. Still...I do like learning how to be a better manager and it is sort of fun to imagine making more money!
I continue to be disappointed that I have read every Louis L'amour book, Robert Parker book, Larry McMurtry, Philip Roth, Ian Fleming, John MacDonald, and Donald Hamilton book written. But there are several Graham Greene books I have not read and I am still working my way through Gore Vidal, Cormac McCarthy, and Jeff Shaara books. While I do not enjoy David Morrell quite as much as I used to, he still packs a powerful punch in spite of his quasi-comic book approach to writing of the last few years.
Having enjoyed In the Garden of the Beasts and The Big Burn, I am beginning to enjoy reading non-fiction historical books about certain events. Unbroken continues to occupy my thoughts and I plan to read more about British history in the future. Can't go wrong with a Charles Dickens novel and who can beat Nathaniel Hawthorne?
Of course there is the occasional Jonathan Kellerman, Harlan Coben, Michael Palmer, and David Baldacci. Lee Child is especially popular right now, but I got weary of the constant explosions and fights. I tried to read a Vince Flynn book but after a couple dozen shootings, I decided enough was enough. I probably need to read Nelson DeMille's latest, but I think I will wait awhile. Of course my favorite book remains Les Miserables but I must admit I have only read two abridged versions. One of these days, I intend to read the entire set of books in spite of hearing that the middle book is quite dull!
Addressing digital books: I cannot fully embrace the concept yet. I somehow prefer to hold a book in my hand. The digital idea is fine for trips and for those times I am not near a bookstore, but overall I sure like turning real pages. Audio books are great for running but that is about all. Okay, call me old-fashioned but I just plain old like real books, great stories, smooth writing, and depth of thought. Ah, books...may they always be a valued part of my life!
Music Listening
For anyone taking offense at the previous post on Classical Music, I pose a question. What are your music listening habits? If you never listen to music and it has no meaning for you in your life in any sense, then please stop reading since this does not apply to you. But if music has any kind of meaning at all in your life, then I ask the question again, what are your listening habits or preferences? If you are like most people, you listen to different kinds of music depending on your situation or mood. If you have nerd-like qualities, which I do, then you might just listen to music with a critical and analytical ear. You are listening for harmonic changes, interesting melodies, textures, rhythmic alterations, key shifts, non-harmonic tones, chord clusters, and orchestration devices. But, hopefully you are a normal person and most likely you simply listen for enjoyment!
Perhaps at this time of year, you are enjoying Christmas music including carols, songs, and instrumental arrangements--admittedly I get a little weary of Christmas music about this time of the year. Or maybe the recent benefit concert on television sparked your interest in classic rock. Maybe you are digging up those old recordings of Bruce Springsteen, The Who, or Bon Jovi (one of my personal favorites). Or maybe you dig the warm voice of Nat King Cole or Doris Day. Maybe the personal touch of Merle Haggard or Marty Robbins is more your thing. Perhaps you are a modern seeking after the rich but bizarre music of Lady Gaga or the sweetness of Adele. Michael Buble continues to reach people as does the striking ranges of Carrie Underwood and Kelly Clarkson.
I recall in graduate school refusing to listen to anything but Art music, classifying all other music as not serving my greater goals of learning everything I could about the "classical" world. As I listened intently and learned as much as possible, I became curious about the listening habits of my professors at the conservatory. Much to my surprise, many of them preferred jazz over classical. Some even like 60s folk music and many of them listened to Pop and Rock. I did find a few that listened to classical music but most of the preferences were outside of their immediate discipline. In other words, the instrumentalists who listened to classical music, gravitated toward vocal music, whereas the vocalists tended to prefer instrumental music. The professional performers I visited with enjoyed a variety of music and several found meaning in country/western music.
With my eclectic tastes causing me to run the gamut of music that is currently on the radio, I enjoy playing musical ping-pong with Broadway, Jazz, Contemporary Christian, Folk Rock, 70s Rock, 80s Rock, and the occasional symphonic station. I do check the classical stations to see what is being played. I notice quite a bit of Bach, Mendelssohn, Mozart, and occasionally Mahler and Beethoven. I hear very little Schubert, Schumann, Vivaldi, or any of the lesser composers we currently use as models in academia.
I believe that a very small part of the population finds meaning in art music and of that small percentage, most of the appreciation is for the "standard" classical fare of symphonies, concertos, and large works. I do maintain that great music will remain "great" forever and there will always be a place for the wonderful heritage known as classical art music. I trust that my academic training and preference for the classics is not all in vain and there will always be a place for live, classical musical performances.
But as I visit with people and find out their listening preferences, there is no doubt that most people like variety in music and most people enjoy a lighter fare in their listening habits. I suspect this is true about literature, visual art, television viewing, movies, and even in their socializing world. The driving force of the arts in our culture is taking us to places only previously imagined. Ours is an all-encompassing musical world and those who reject the vast eclecticism will be left behind. Time to get aboard the train of variety and take in the spices that make music so great.
Perhaps at this time of year, you are enjoying Christmas music including carols, songs, and instrumental arrangements--admittedly I get a little weary of Christmas music about this time of the year. Or maybe the recent benefit concert on television sparked your interest in classic rock. Maybe you are digging up those old recordings of Bruce Springsteen, The Who, or Bon Jovi (one of my personal favorites). Or maybe you dig the warm voice of Nat King Cole or Doris Day. Maybe the personal touch of Merle Haggard or Marty Robbins is more your thing. Perhaps you are a modern seeking after the rich but bizarre music of Lady Gaga or the sweetness of Adele. Michael Buble continues to reach people as does the striking ranges of Carrie Underwood and Kelly Clarkson.
I recall in graduate school refusing to listen to anything but Art music, classifying all other music as not serving my greater goals of learning everything I could about the "classical" world. As I listened intently and learned as much as possible, I became curious about the listening habits of my professors at the conservatory. Much to my surprise, many of them preferred jazz over classical. Some even like 60s folk music and many of them listened to Pop and Rock. I did find a few that listened to classical music but most of the preferences were outside of their immediate discipline. In other words, the instrumentalists who listened to classical music, gravitated toward vocal music, whereas the vocalists tended to prefer instrumental music. The professional performers I visited with enjoyed a variety of music and several found meaning in country/western music.
With my eclectic tastes causing me to run the gamut of music that is currently on the radio, I enjoy playing musical ping-pong with Broadway, Jazz, Contemporary Christian, Folk Rock, 70s Rock, 80s Rock, and the occasional symphonic station. I do check the classical stations to see what is being played. I notice quite a bit of Bach, Mendelssohn, Mozart, and occasionally Mahler and Beethoven. I hear very little Schubert, Schumann, Vivaldi, or any of the lesser composers we currently use as models in academia.
I believe that a very small part of the population finds meaning in art music and of that small percentage, most of the appreciation is for the "standard" classical fare of symphonies, concertos, and large works. I do maintain that great music will remain "great" forever and there will always be a place for the wonderful heritage known as classical art music. I trust that my academic training and preference for the classics is not all in vain and there will always be a place for live, classical musical performances.
But as I visit with people and find out their listening preferences, there is no doubt that most people like variety in music and most people enjoy a lighter fare in their listening habits. I suspect this is true about literature, visual art, television viewing, movies, and even in their socializing world. The driving force of the arts in our culture is taking us to places only previously imagined. Ours is an all-encompassing musical world and those who reject the vast eclecticism will be left behind. Time to get aboard the train of variety and take in the spices that make music so great.
The Decline of Classical Music
In my lifetime, which my students would say is lengthy, but I say is rather short considering I am 52 and, hopefully, have many more years to go, I have seen the decline of Classical art music in our society. I have written about this problem earlier and maintain the issues are due partly to architecture and partly to electronic amplification. I have mentioned how much of our music listening occurs in automobiles while driving down the road. I want to enjoy the Classical radio station but the dynamic range of the music is not conducive to enjoyable listening. I find myself frequently altering the volume to accommodate the changes in the music. A part of me smiles as I say these words since I do believe the finest music has dynamic changes. Yet from a practical side, I prefer listening to pop, rock, or jazz with its fairly steady dynamic range.
Classical music also suffers from acoustic deprivation. An art music purist demands an "unplugged" environment for the music making. This means that performers and listeners require a well-designed auditorium space for their performance, thus rendering most, but not all, outdoor experiences useless. Music in St. Paul's Cathedral is glorious, sensitive, warm, majestic, personal, and pure. Whereas Classical music at an outdoor festival is nearly a zero without some kind of sound enhancement. Classical performers do not like nor do they generally appreciate any kind of electronic amplification. They often reject music that requires amplification as being "below" that of art music, not worthy of belonging in the bag of sophisticated music. But in spite of the tension, sound enhancement and amplification is here to stay while natural acoustics are diminishing.
Now a moment for the market driven musical economy. Music for entertainment has always garnered greater profits than art music for meaning. Historically, music with harmonic, textual, and melodic depth has rarely fared well in the marketplace. Music with complexity in its design tends to have a longer life but not as immediate an appeal. When we study the operas of Meyerbeer, we find simplistic, fun music that is rarely if ever performed today. Yet a study of the operas of Wagner reveals complex and psychologically moving music that has withstood the test of time. The test of time has traditionally been the litmus test for excellence.
But now we have a problem. The test of time is slowly being eroded, at least to an extent. The artistic truths of complexity and heritage are not as easily passable in today's world. In fact, a look at great music for entertainment demonstrates complexity in harmony, in text, in melody and in general depth. This is not always true, but it is true often enough to wreck the old "test of time" theory of great art. Those classical musicians relying on depth of expression of the great composers from the past are experiencing a steady decline in interest. Fortunately the demand for the classics will never entirely disappear but it could become quite small in today's world of outstanding music for entertainment.
We have no lack of music nor musicians in the world today, but we do have a limited marketplace for musicians only trained or skilled in one genre. The wise and complete musician of the future is the one who can entertain, who can accept sound enhancement, who can perform jazz, classical, pop, and, yes, even rock. The musician of the future has a wide range of ability and is ready to mold himself or herself into the musician needed at the moment. He can communicate on several levels and is outstanding at his craft. He reaches people using all types of music and he is ready to change and to grow when needed. He knows what quality music is in each genre and he is an able articulator of musical excellence and an outstanding practitioner in performance. He may often feel the pressure to be the superman of music, and yet he knows that is the expectation from today's eclectic culture. Rather than being a daunting challenge, he recognizes it all as an opportunity.
Yes, the musician of the future may have trouble being great at everything and may need to specialize to an extent, but in the end his own eclecticism is his strength rather than a burden. He knows music theory of all types of music and he is well-versed in cultural music from around the world. He knows where music has been and he has a strong sense of where it is going. He loves it all and is ready to embrace the challenges of totality in today's complex world.
Classical music in its myopic state may indeed be in decline and orchestras everywhere are trying new approaches to reaching audiences, but perhaps the decline is an opportunity to expand the mission of what Classical music means. For those willing to take a risk, the musical world is ripe for the taking and the people are hungry for something new without sacrificing the heritage of the past.
As I sit in my living room looking at our Christmas tree, I see many ornaments of all shapes and sizes. I see expensive, complicated ornaments that are quite delicate and classy. I see others that are plastic, cheap and rather mundane. I also see old ones, new ones, and many different shapes and sizes. Each ornament is unique but by itself has little meaning. Yet all the ornaments together on the tree form a magnificent structure worthy of great expression and communication. Maybe the same is true for Classical music. When we place it among music of other types, perhaps it grows in stature or perhaps it simply takes its place among all types of music in the world.
Classical music also suffers from acoustic deprivation. An art music purist demands an "unplugged" environment for the music making. This means that performers and listeners require a well-designed auditorium space for their performance, thus rendering most, but not all, outdoor experiences useless. Music in St. Paul's Cathedral is glorious, sensitive, warm, majestic, personal, and pure. Whereas Classical music at an outdoor festival is nearly a zero without some kind of sound enhancement. Classical performers do not like nor do they generally appreciate any kind of electronic amplification. They often reject music that requires amplification as being "below" that of art music, not worthy of belonging in the bag of sophisticated music. But in spite of the tension, sound enhancement and amplification is here to stay while natural acoustics are diminishing.
Now a moment for the market driven musical economy. Music for entertainment has always garnered greater profits than art music for meaning. Historically, music with harmonic, textual, and melodic depth has rarely fared well in the marketplace. Music with complexity in its design tends to have a longer life but not as immediate an appeal. When we study the operas of Meyerbeer, we find simplistic, fun music that is rarely if ever performed today. Yet a study of the operas of Wagner reveals complex and psychologically moving music that has withstood the test of time. The test of time has traditionally been the litmus test for excellence.
But now we have a problem. The test of time is slowly being eroded, at least to an extent. The artistic truths of complexity and heritage are not as easily passable in today's world. In fact, a look at great music for entertainment demonstrates complexity in harmony, in text, in melody and in general depth. This is not always true, but it is true often enough to wreck the old "test of time" theory of great art. Those classical musicians relying on depth of expression of the great composers from the past are experiencing a steady decline in interest. Fortunately the demand for the classics will never entirely disappear but it could become quite small in today's world of outstanding music for entertainment.
We have no lack of music nor musicians in the world today, but we do have a limited marketplace for musicians only trained or skilled in one genre. The wise and complete musician of the future is the one who can entertain, who can accept sound enhancement, who can perform jazz, classical, pop, and, yes, even rock. The musician of the future has a wide range of ability and is ready to mold himself or herself into the musician needed at the moment. He can communicate on several levels and is outstanding at his craft. He reaches people using all types of music and he is ready to change and to grow when needed. He knows what quality music is in each genre and he is an able articulator of musical excellence and an outstanding practitioner in performance. He may often feel the pressure to be the superman of music, and yet he knows that is the expectation from today's eclectic culture. Rather than being a daunting challenge, he recognizes it all as an opportunity.
Yes, the musician of the future may have trouble being great at everything and may need to specialize to an extent, but in the end his own eclecticism is his strength rather than a burden. He knows music theory of all types of music and he is well-versed in cultural music from around the world. He knows where music has been and he has a strong sense of where it is going. He loves it all and is ready to embrace the challenges of totality in today's complex world.
Classical music in its myopic state may indeed be in decline and orchestras everywhere are trying new approaches to reaching audiences, but perhaps the decline is an opportunity to expand the mission of what Classical music means. For those willing to take a risk, the musical world is ripe for the taking and the people are hungry for something new without sacrificing the heritage of the past.
As I sit in my living room looking at our Christmas tree, I see many ornaments of all shapes and sizes. I see expensive, complicated ornaments that are quite delicate and classy. I see others that are plastic, cheap and rather mundane. I also see old ones, new ones, and many different shapes and sizes. Each ornament is unique but by itself has little meaning. Yet all the ornaments together on the tree form a magnificent structure worthy of great expression and communication. Maybe the same is true for Classical music. When we place it among music of other types, perhaps it grows in stature or perhaps it simply takes its place among all types of music in the world.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
My thoughts
With everyone weighing in on the recent tragedy in Connecticut, I feel a need to post some of my thoughts related to the escalating gun violence of our culture. I do not believe my views will be popular nor do I expect them to accepted on any kind of scale by anyone. These are simply my thoughts as related to social and cultural issues in our country. Like all people willing to write their views, my opinions are an amalgamation of my experiences, my education, and my perception, flawed though these may be.
I am a gun owner and at various times have been a hunter of sorts. Not a very good hunter, I have missed more times than I have hit anything, but I do love to be outdoors. Feeling a little silly wearing camouflage and hiking to a deer blind hoping to hit the next big buck, I recently have shifted my attentions from hunting to walking and running. Plus I realized that I did not enjoy gutting a deer and the meat is not particularly inviting to my taste buds any longer. The feeling of loading a gun and pulling a trigger is somewhat cathartic I suppose and in a primitive sense rather masculine, after all we men do tend to enjoy aggressive activities, but at this stage in my life, I have no real need to express my masculinity through a gun or shooting an animal. As far as animal rights, I maintain that we have dominion over the animals and have a right to govern them when necessary. On the other hand, I choose to leave them alone and allow them the privilege of living in my world without interference from me. My ongoing battle with dogs chasing me while running continues to add to my lack of love for animals, and yet, I get no particular joy out of harming an animal and generally prefer to leave them alone unless they are harming me.
I do recall as a young hunter the pleasure of shooting down rabbits, ducks, geese, deer, and the great joy of shooting a coyote. All good stuff for sure. Today when I hit a squirrel or a deer while driving down the highway, I feel a certain amount of sadness for a short length of time. But I soon recover and go on about my business. My point of mentioning these things is to say that I am not an extremist regarding hunting nor animal rights in any sense. If people wish to hunt animals, that is fine and I wish them well. For me, I have mostly but not entirely lost interest in the process (I better not totally shut the door to the idea of hunting again!).
But I should point out that our country has had a long history of conquering, of survival, of rugged individualism as we fought with man, beast, and nature to build our homes, our cities, our highways, and our superstructures. We could not be where we are without knives, guns, and the assertive muscle needed to progress our culture and make our society better. When a plot of land gets cleared, it requires obliteration of certain things that previously existed--top soil, plants, grass, insects, rocks, and anything else in the way. Clearing land is a very aggressive action. But sometimes we have to clear the land completely to start again and build a home--a home for family, for peace, for love, and for comfort. The Pilgrims cleared the land, Daniel Boone cleared the land, our nation did some clearing in the Civil War, Custer tried to clear the land, and the Industrial Revolution cleared the land. Elvis Presley did some clearing when he inadvertently helped integrate the races in the late 50s and early 60s. And although we still have work to do on integration in our country, we have also made great strides in the last 50 years. We are culturally battling our flaws and slowly but surely addressing our philosophical and economic responsibilities with regard to health care, welfare, employment, and equality.
We give lip service to our egalitarian and opportunistic culture but we continue to see our rights infringed upon in many different ways. While we recognize the problems, we are not always sure how much more "clearing" of the land needs to occur. Does clearing involve more governmental interference or less? Does the obesity of our government affect our lives directly and cause us to lose our personal freedoms and our desire for rugged individualism that has defined our civilization in America?
I love freedom and will never let go of the dream for all to be free. Yet freedom is closely related to responsibility and true freedom should never result in the loss of freedom of another individual. When one person's freedom is another person's straitjacket, it is not freedom. When our freedom to own and fire guns affects people's freedom to be alive, it is not freedom. As we examine the issues of gun control, I hope that we do not look to the government to solve our societal ills, but, instead, we look within ourselves for a solution.
In my imagined Utopian civilization (my Platonic city), there is such a high regard for human life, for dignity, for the human spirit of responsibility, for education, and for ubiquitous love, that no thoughts of violence, harm, or damage to anyone can possibly exist. In other words, I desire a sinless, perfect world of beauty, joy, and selfless service. I desire a world where there is no need for a gun and where aggression is unnecessary, where imperialism is a mystery, and tyranny only a myth reserved for science fiction.
Those who battle relentlessly for freedom and for the world I desire are to be commended; and yet it is imperative to keep in mind that humans are inherently selfish, often devoid of compassion, fearful and unforgiving. Our sensitivities are equal to our intolerance and our capacity for love is as great as our capacity for hate. Our history of caring for the indigent is pitiful but our history of perpetuating violence on each other is nearly limitless. Our love of seeing horror, of watching pain, of smashing, pounding, of terror, and violence is astounding and abjectly disgusting at all levels. Based on our history and our fascination with violence on television and in movies, we are a potentially sick society sometimes awash in disdain for human life and lacking in proper behavior and conduct. In summation, it seems as though we want to be good but are bad. We want to love, but we hate. We want to have peace, but we continually go to war. For example, we worry about the injured football player, but cheer when we see a hard hit on the field. We are not a society that fully embraces the rights of people to live safely, equally, and violence-free. We do not teach the sanctity of life. Instead, in the abstract, we tend to glorify death in movies and in entertainment.
Our books, our televisions, our movies, and, sadly, sometimes certain facets of our education reside on the infliction of pain. The more we are exposed to it, the more we accept it. The more we accept it, the more we love it, and the more we treat pain as a normal part of our existence. I like to think that in my Christian world, we consider human life as special and work to love it with all its triumphs and challenges. As Christians, I hope we dedicate ourselves to treating other people with kindness, compassion, love, and redemption. And yet, I have to wonder if we really do?
I recall an instance of an audience member who took great offense at a scene in a theatre production that implied adultery from one of the characters. The teacher wrote a scathing diatribe against the moral position that was being presented to the audience. Please understand that I do not subscribe to nor will I ever condone adultery. And yet, in spite of a certain sensitivity to his feelings, I wondered how he would accept violence on the stage. A few months later, I received my answer when the same audience member watched Medea on stage. In this play, a mother brutally kills her own children to display her feelings of anger toward her husband who had abandoned her. In the play we heard the cries of children and saw the blood on her tunic. Her madness was disturbing but also sadly normal for a tragedy of this type. Curious as to the response of the disgruntled audience member, I awaited the inevitable letter of objection to the violence. But I waited in vain since it never arrived. By his silence, the attender chose death and murder as preferred over adultery. It is considered a strong moral position to be against sexual content while embracing violence, but it truly makes no consistent nor logical sense. Is it fair to make a stand against sexual promiscuity while abusing others with our words or our actions? A moral life is a life of complete goodness, a life of compassion, and a life of giving value to people. A moral life is not one that loves violence but hates promiscuity. It may be time to redefine personal excellence, integrity, and morality. Rather than morality being a cafeteria where we pick and choose those traits we deem as pure, perhaps it is time to think of morals in terms of their effects on the value of life.
We are not robots and we make our own choices in our lives, and yet we are still products of our upbringing and our culture. The history of our country demonstrates a high regard for violence as a solution for all things, and, yes, we are a strong country today because of the violence that occurred in our past. But when is enough, enough? When will we truly make the giant step toward refinement, toward a civilized world, toward egalitarianism, and toward peace? When will we teach the value of the sanctity of life and learn that there is no joy in pain, in horror, in death? When will we put the guns aside and replace them with exercise, with discipline, with wisdom, and with love? Will it take 100 years, 200, 500 years for us to reach a point in our world where there is no place for guns or violence of any kind?
Yes, I do know the arguments and find them to be sound. Those of us who live in the country surrounded by wild animals must have a way for self-protection. I am also sensitive to the need for individual defense and for a man to protect his family. There is also the pure enjoyment factor of firing a gun, and, true, guns don't kill people, people kill people, and, yes, cars kill more people than do guns. I, furthermore, do not plan to destroy my guns nor to sell them, making me a part of the problem and not part of the solution. But I can still imagine a world for my grandchildren and their grandchildren that is free from guns and subsequently violence. We are many generations away from such a world but there are things we can do today. And so...as I sigh a big sigh...guns are here to stay, at least for now.
As I write this controversial essay, I am perusing articles demanding that teachers arm themselves and receive training in handling a gun. There is even talk in our state for mandated arms handling in our education system. Amazing to me that the response to guns is to increase the number of guns. And most people will say that a responsible use of firearms and a nationalized identification system of all those with assault weapons is the solution. As we arm our leaders, we believe we are putting weapons in the hands of those who can be trusted. Maybe we think we are creating a bunch of Wyatt Earps? It is sort of fun to address our primitive side and imagine blowing away the culprit who is trying to harm our children. In fact, I kind of enjoy the idea of the good guys getting the bad guys--great fun and has a positive ending.
And yet, do we truly desire a gigantic O.K. Corral in our world? Is this part of the grand design of being an American? I love our country and feel blessed to be a citizen of this great land, but having lived in the United Kingdom, I must say that I felt safer in England than I feel in the United States. The number of gun-related deaths in the United States compared with the United Kingdom is shocking. While we do not have the highest rate in the world, we are near the top in most categories. Guns usage is very rare and generally forbidden in the United Kingdom, a country with a vast history of violence in its past. The United Kingdom is an older, more established world than the United States and, therefore, a more refined society. They are not "clearing" land any longer. They are done, and their progress is not as industrial oriented but, instead, is economic, technological, and commuter-oriented. Theirs is far from a perfect world, and I could write about plenty of social ills in the United Kingdom; but the facts remain that their gun-free world results in very few violent gun-related deaths.
Back to movies, books, and entertainment in general. The free market drives our preferences (at least that is the way it should work!) and we, as a culture, obviously prefer to read about, to see, to imagine violence on other people. We need to curb our demand within ourselves for violence and replace it with something less harmful. For Christians, I urge a complete understanding and dedication to the teachings of Christ. For others, I posture a profound and propitious regard for the human being, a regard that usurps all others and continually demonstrates the value of life.
But since guns are likely here to stay, what can we do?
1) Have full respect for the sanctity of life, teach others the same respect, start the teaching at birth
2) Let us all stop glorifying violence
3) Stop enjoying movies about killers and death
4) Stop purchasing video games that glorify violence
5) Register all guns and limit their usage, provide full and complete education to owners
6) Be completely and totally aware of the potential for violence in people and watch out for the crazies
7) Recognize that the journey toward human respect and societal refinement is to denounce all violence and work toward egalitarianism.
8) Mostly to protect each other and our children in all situations
This is a call for peace not for governmental action. This is a call for respect, for love, and for a demonstrated regard for the value of life. This is further a call for responsibility for everyone to protect our children, protect our society, and protect the freedoms we all enjoy. While we watch for the demons in our midst, let us consider the possibility that we have inadvertently created the demons through our acceptance of cultural norms. Without overreacting to the situation, I hope to see a society that makes positive strides toward refinement and cultural improvement.
I am a gun owner and at various times have been a hunter of sorts. Not a very good hunter, I have missed more times than I have hit anything, but I do love to be outdoors. Feeling a little silly wearing camouflage and hiking to a deer blind hoping to hit the next big buck, I recently have shifted my attentions from hunting to walking and running. Plus I realized that I did not enjoy gutting a deer and the meat is not particularly inviting to my taste buds any longer. The feeling of loading a gun and pulling a trigger is somewhat cathartic I suppose and in a primitive sense rather masculine, after all we men do tend to enjoy aggressive activities, but at this stage in my life, I have no real need to express my masculinity through a gun or shooting an animal. As far as animal rights, I maintain that we have dominion over the animals and have a right to govern them when necessary. On the other hand, I choose to leave them alone and allow them the privilege of living in my world without interference from me. My ongoing battle with dogs chasing me while running continues to add to my lack of love for animals, and yet, I get no particular joy out of harming an animal and generally prefer to leave them alone unless they are harming me.
I do recall as a young hunter the pleasure of shooting down rabbits, ducks, geese, deer, and the great joy of shooting a coyote. All good stuff for sure. Today when I hit a squirrel or a deer while driving down the highway, I feel a certain amount of sadness for a short length of time. But I soon recover and go on about my business. My point of mentioning these things is to say that I am not an extremist regarding hunting nor animal rights in any sense. If people wish to hunt animals, that is fine and I wish them well. For me, I have mostly but not entirely lost interest in the process (I better not totally shut the door to the idea of hunting again!).
But I should point out that our country has had a long history of conquering, of survival, of rugged individualism as we fought with man, beast, and nature to build our homes, our cities, our highways, and our superstructures. We could not be where we are without knives, guns, and the assertive muscle needed to progress our culture and make our society better. When a plot of land gets cleared, it requires obliteration of certain things that previously existed--top soil, plants, grass, insects, rocks, and anything else in the way. Clearing land is a very aggressive action. But sometimes we have to clear the land completely to start again and build a home--a home for family, for peace, for love, and for comfort. The Pilgrims cleared the land, Daniel Boone cleared the land, our nation did some clearing in the Civil War, Custer tried to clear the land, and the Industrial Revolution cleared the land. Elvis Presley did some clearing when he inadvertently helped integrate the races in the late 50s and early 60s. And although we still have work to do on integration in our country, we have also made great strides in the last 50 years. We are culturally battling our flaws and slowly but surely addressing our philosophical and economic responsibilities with regard to health care, welfare, employment, and equality.
We give lip service to our egalitarian and opportunistic culture but we continue to see our rights infringed upon in many different ways. While we recognize the problems, we are not always sure how much more "clearing" of the land needs to occur. Does clearing involve more governmental interference or less? Does the obesity of our government affect our lives directly and cause us to lose our personal freedoms and our desire for rugged individualism that has defined our civilization in America?
I love freedom and will never let go of the dream for all to be free. Yet freedom is closely related to responsibility and true freedom should never result in the loss of freedom of another individual. When one person's freedom is another person's straitjacket, it is not freedom. When our freedom to own and fire guns affects people's freedom to be alive, it is not freedom. As we examine the issues of gun control, I hope that we do not look to the government to solve our societal ills, but, instead, we look within ourselves for a solution.
In my imagined Utopian civilization (my Platonic city), there is such a high regard for human life, for dignity, for the human spirit of responsibility, for education, and for ubiquitous love, that no thoughts of violence, harm, or damage to anyone can possibly exist. In other words, I desire a sinless, perfect world of beauty, joy, and selfless service. I desire a world where there is no need for a gun and where aggression is unnecessary, where imperialism is a mystery, and tyranny only a myth reserved for science fiction.
Those who battle relentlessly for freedom and for the world I desire are to be commended; and yet it is imperative to keep in mind that humans are inherently selfish, often devoid of compassion, fearful and unforgiving. Our sensitivities are equal to our intolerance and our capacity for love is as great as our capacity for hate. Our history of caring for the indigent is pitiful but our history of perpetuating violence on each other is nearly limitless. Our love of seeing horror, of watching pain, of smashing, pounding, of terror, and violence is astounding and abjectly disgusting at all levels. Based on our history and our fascination with violence on television and in movies, we are a potentially sick society sometimes awash in disdain for human life and lacking in proper behavior and conduct. In summation, it seems as though we want to be good but are bad. We want to love, but we hate. We want to have peace, but we continually go to war. For example, we worry about the injured football player, but cheer when we see a hard hit on the field. We are not a society that fully embraces the rights of people to live safely, equally, and violence-free. We do not teach the sanctity of life. Instead, in the abstract, we tend to glorify death in movies and in entertainment.
Our books, our televisions, our movies, and, sadly, sometimes certain facets of our education reside on the infliction of pain. The more we are exposed to it, the more we accept it. The more we accept it, the more we love it, and the more we treat pain as a normal part of our existence. I like to think that in my Christian world, we consider human life as special and work to love it with all its triumphs and challenges. As Christians, I hope we dedicate ourselves to treating other people with kindness, compassion, love, and redemption. And yet, I have to wonder if we really do?
I recall an instance of an audience member who took great offense at a scene in a theatre production that implied adultery from one of the characters. The teacher wrote a scathing diatribe against the moral position that was being presented to the audience. Please understand that I do not subscribe to nor will I ever condone adultery. And yet, in spite of a certain sensitivity to his feelings, I wondered how he would accept violence on the stage. A few months later, I received my answer when the same audience member watched Medea on stage. In this play, a mother brutally kills her own children to display her feelings of anger toward her husband who had abandoned her. In the play we heard the cries of children and saw the blood on her tunic. Her madness was disturbing but also sadly normal for a tragedy of this type. Curious as to the response of the disgruntled audience member, I awaited the inevitable letter of objection to the violence. But I waited in vain since it never arrived. By his silence, the attender chose death and murder as preferred over adultery. It is considered a strong moral position to be against sexual content while embracing violence, but it truly makes no consistent nor logical sense. Is it fair to make a stand against sexual promiscuity while abusing others with our words or our actions? A moral life is a life of complete goodness, a life of compassion, and a life of giving value to people. A moral life is not one that loves violence but hates promiscuity. It may be time to redefine personal excellence, integrity, and morality. Rather than morality being a cafeteria where we pick and choose those traits we deem as pure, perhaps it is time to think of morals in terms of their effects on the value of life.
We are not robots and we make our own choices in our lives, and yet we are still products of our upbringing and our culture. The history of our country demonstrates a high regard for violence as a solution for all things, and, yes, we are a strong country today because of the violence that occurred in our past. But when is enough, enough? When will we truly make the giant step toward refinement, toward a civilized world, toward egalitarianism, and toward peace? When will we teach the value of the sanctity of life and learn that there is no joy in pain, in horror, in death? When will we put the guns aside and replace them with exercise, with discipline, with wisdom, and with love? Will it take 100 years, 200, 500 years for us to reach a point in our world where there is no place for guns or violence of any kind?
Yes, I do know the arguments and find them to be sound. Those of us who live in the country surrounded by wild animals must have a way for self-protection. I am also sensitive to the need for individual defense and for a man to protect his family. There is also the pure enjoyment factor of firing a gun, and, true, guns don't kill people, people kill people, and, yes, cars kill more people than do guns. I, furthermore, do not plan to destroy my guns nor to sell them, making me a part of the problem and not part of the solution. But I can still imagine a world for my grandchildren and their grandchildren that is free from guns and subsequently violence. We are many generations away from such a world but there are things we can do today. And so...as I sigh a big sigh...guns are here to stay, at least for now.
As I write this controversial essay, I am perusing articles demanding that teachers arm themselves and receive training in handling a gun. There is even talk in our state for mandated arms handling in our education system. Amazing to me that the response to guns is to increase the number of guns. And most people will say that a responsible use of firearms and a nationalized identification system of all those with assault weapons is the solution. As we arm our leaders, we believe we are putting weapons in the hands of those who can be trusted. Maybe we think we are creating a bunch of Wyatt Earps? It is sort of fun to address our primitive side and imagine blowing away the culprit who is trying to harm our children. In fact, I kind of enjoy the idea of the good guys getting the bad guys--great fun and has a positive ending.
And yet, do we truly desire a gigantic O.K. Corral in our world? Is this part of the grand design of being an American? I love our country and feel blessed to be a citizen of this great land, but having lived in the United Kingdom, I must say that I felt safer in England than I feel in the United States. The number of gun-related deaths in the United States compared with the United Kingdom is shocking. While we do not have the highest rate in the world, we are near the top in most categories. Guns usage is very rare and generally forbidden in the United Kingdom, a country with a vast history of violence in its past. The United Kingdom is an older, more established world than the United States and, therefore, a more refined society. They are not "clearing" land any longer. They are done, and their progress is not as industrial oriented but, instead, is economic, technological, and commuter-oriented. Theirs is far from a perfect world, and I could write about plenty of social ills in the United Kingdom; but the facts remain that their gun-free world results in very few violent gun-related deaths.
Back to movies, books, and entertainment in general. The free market drives our preferences (at least that is the way it should work!) and we, as a culture, obviously prefer to read about, to see, to imagine violence on other people. We need to curb our demand within ourselves for violence and replace it with something less harmful. For Christians, I urge a complete understanding and dedication to the teachings of Christ. For others, I posture a profound and propitious regard for the human being, a regard that usurps all others and continually demonstrates the value of life.
But since guns are likely here to stay, what can we do?
1) Have full respect for the sanctity of life, teach others the same respect, start the teaching at birth
2) Let us all stop glorifying violence
3) Stop enjoying movies about killers and death
4) Stop purchasing video games that glorify violence
5) Register all guns and limit their usage, provide full and complete education to owners
6) Be completely and totally aware of the potential for violence in people and watch out for the crazies
7) Recognize that the journey toward human respect and societal refinement is to denounce all violence and work toward egalitarianism.
8) Mostly to protect each other and our children in all situations
This is a call for peace not for governmental action. This is a call for respect, for love, and for a demonstrated regard for the value of life. This is further a call for responsibility for everyone to protect our children, protect our society, and protect the freedoms we all enjoy. While we watch for the demons in our midst, let us consider the possibility that we have inadvertently created the demons through our acceptance of cultural norms. Without overreacting to the situation, I hope to see a society that makes positive strides toward refinement and cultural improvement.
Sunday, December 09, 2012
What Leadership Means to Me
If I answered in one short sentence, I would say leadership
means having the opportunity and responsibility to make a significant difference.
With a constant chess game in my head, I always think several moves ahead and try to anticipate any moves that will have an adverse effect on the game. This process allows me to think in the future before making decisions. It also allows me time to communicate to the personnel involved the projected response the decision will create in other people. While this process of anticipating responses is not without its flaws, it does mean fewer surprises and fewer explosions along the way.
Expanding on this idea, I have felt in my own career a
progressive and driving responsibility to myself, my profession, my Lord, my
family, and the people in my charge. The more authority I am granted, the
higher the expectations and the more responsibility I feel within me. Although
leadership can potentially and often realistically be a burden, in general I enjoy
the responsibility and thrive on the added weight of not just being successful
but on helping others attain success as well. I see responsibility as an
opportunity to grow on many levels.
And yet, while I recognize that leadership is about
responsibility, this does not necessarily help with the process of applying
responsibility to short term and long term accomplishment. What follows is
about application of leadership in a multitude of ways.
Believing strongly that events that happen to us throughout
our lives can and should teach and prepare us for the future, I realize that my
own life has been full of the joys and challenges that make me a complete and
potentially capable leader. Opportunities for leadership in high school
including directing a church musical, leading the high school choir, and
playing solo horn in various orchestras were met with success and the
occasional failure. Looking back, I realize the failures were greater teachers
and provided the impetus for future success.
Onward to college where I excelled in music and assumed
leadership roles at every opportunity including being President of a large
chapter of Phi Mu Alpha and running the All School Sing two consecutive years.
Continuing as a solo horn player in orchestras and bands, I learned how to deal
with people and how to wade through the murky waters of personalities, values,
and human preferences. Little did I know that I would still be learning these
same lessons many years later!
At the advanced age of 24, I was employed in a large state
university in Louisiana where I once again played solo horn, taught music
education, and taught applied lessons. Many mistakes and many achievements
marked my time in Louisiana where I was considered one of the premiere horn
players in the state and where my innovations in music education were gaining
notoriety. But after 5 years and a low salary, I chose to move to Texas to
teach public school. It was in public school teaching that I found my
leadership stride.
Although subject to state rules, school rules, essential
elements, and pressures from many sources, the day to day activity of being a public
school band director is liberating and charged with expectations and
responsibility. When there are 80 junior high faces staring at the leader, with
each person holding an instrument hoping to make an acceptable sound, the
responsibility to help them become successful is tremendous and, aside from
certain variables, is solely dependent on the director in front of them. Each
day I experienced the joys and challenges of teaching and accomplishing goals.
I felt the burden of responsibility to overcome obstacles, to meet all the
objectives, to use individual development that would ultimately enhance and
raise the collective achievement.
This is now a mantra of my leadership style—to help
individuals succeed with the target of guiding the collective whole to high
attainment of overall objectives. When a leader keeps in mind the idea that one
person at a time comprises the organization, then one never loses sight of
responsibility to humans and the recognition of human potential. As a band
director, I learned the essential management skills of meeting deadlines,
watching the dollars and cents, utilizing labor, watching the supplies, taking
care of the physical plant, responding to authority, and working diligently for
excellence in all things.
I have enjoyed reading the differences and similarities
between managers and leaders and am fully confident with my management
abilities. It was as a public school band director that I learned management
skills that have stayed with me in my higher education administration. But it
is in the area of leadership that I continue to need refinement.
Following 5 years of successful public school teaching, I
found myself once again in higher education, this time as a band director. I
immediately sensed a change in the people in front of me. The students were
less dependent on my teaching ability and more dependent on my providing a
learning environment. I began to rethink my own leadership style to an extent
and began to practice a bigger vision for leadership while providing a climate
for others to solve the smaller details.
Eventually moving into college administration, I now believe
and practice a variety of leadership techniques that never sacrifice the broad
vision but demonstrate a willingness to change to fit the circumstances. In a
way, my leadership approach leans on the laissez faire idea of find good people
and create an environment that allows for their success. I do not use a
heavy-handed approach to leadership although there have been times I had to
make a hard decision.
Dedicated to an open door policy, I remain relentlessly
committed to being the kind of administrator who encourages honesty and full
communication with all people. Seeking after significant input in all
decisions, I generally spend 3 days thinking through issues before making any
final decisions. Carefully listening to all sides of situations, I try to weigh
the impact that any decision I make will have on all constituents involved.
With a constant chess game in my head, I always think several moves ahead and try to anticipate any moves that will have an adverse effect on the game. This process allows me to think in the future before making decisions. It also allows me time to communicate to the personnel involved the projected response the decision will create in other people. While this process of anticipating responses is not without its flaws, it does mean fewer surprises and fewer explosions along the way.
As far as determining leadership priorities, I use a process
of prolongation and reduction in my daily practice and in casting the vision
for the programs. The theory is simple and allows for a cleanliness of thought
and identification of potential problems and opportunities. Prolong that which
is essential and which serves the overall vision, and reduce those peripheral
and often elaborate distractions that likely are not essential to the mission
at hand. Loving Baroque art and music and recognizing Baroque style of
excessive and ornamental writing, when it comes to leadership, I prefer a
concise thinking strategy that addresses the goals at hand without unnecessary
complexity except where appropriate or required.
In spite of my lofty and philosophically pure motives as a
leader, I find most decisions and in fact most leaders are steeped in murky
ambiguity and have trouble determining the right and wrong of situations. It is
easy to cast a broad net of vision and mission but much more difficult to apply
all facets of leadership to that large objective. As a President once told me,
when you are dealing with people, nothing is easy.
Learning from my mistakes, most of my leadership is spent
listening to people, earning trust, affirming others, and acknowledging their
expertise and giving them as much shared governance as possible. This system
works quite well when all see the vision in the same way and are determined to
take the steps necessary to accomplish the articulated goals. Unfortunately, in
academia, we often find highly qualified people trained and skilled in singular
disciplines that seem to struggle to fit their personal goals into the
institutional mission. Thus conflict arises, often insurmountable and difficult
to navigate.
Having seen and studied leadership, in academia often the
most effective leadership is that of the “public figurehead” style without excessive detailed management adherence. When a leader is “popular”, it provides a glossy
picture for the institution. Not only is this beneficial, it is ironically
necessary in today’s world. This is not to diminish the importance of a
university President who is the primary public face of the institution, but is
to emphasize the necessity for a President to employ the finest people in
administration that can be found and give them the latitude to be successful.
A heavy-handed approach to leadership is generally
ineffective and antiquated in today’s world of instant information and
multi-levels of communication. Aside from the sluggishness of consensus
building and shared governance, these concepts remain effective tools of
administration. A bit sticky at times and often resulting in a feeling of less
power, this approach results in decisions that serve the organization and allow
for greater commitment to the organization. When a person’s opinion is valued,
honored, and respected, it allows for a greater sense of ownership in the
process. Ownership then is manifested in substantial corporate energy and group
wisdom.
At this point I must say that my desire for leadership
opportunities, my training, and my experience all point to the obvious result
of being an effective leader at the highest level of higher education. Yet,
truthfully, I need to develop all the skills necessary to make this leap.
With much to learn, I anticipate growing in my knowledge and utilizing my gifts
that will allow me to reach my potential as a leader. Taking my responsibilities as a leader
seriously, I recognize this could mean making diligent effort toward becoming a
consistently compassionate and more assertive personality. As scripture states,
“To whom much is given, much is required.” Continuing to relish an opportunity
to provide leadership to a broader sphere of people while remaining in higher
education, I, like most leaders, have much to learn.
Pursuit of the Master of Business Administration
True that I have three college degrees already and do not need a fourth. I am contented and even joyous as a musician and find great satisfaction in the arts, always have and probably always will. Most of my closest acquaintances are in the arts and I have participated in many upper level conversations about music. In addition, I have experienced musical performance in its entirety including rock, jazz, blues, classical, liturgical, contemporary, choral, instrumental, large, small, old, new, solos, ensembles, and everything between all the ones named! I have been a servant performer, a leader performer, a poor performer, a good performer, and a composer. I have spoken about music, read about composers, am knowledgeable in music theory, music history, current trends, past disasters, great successes, analytical techniques, and philosophy of sound. I love it all and plan to remain a musician until the end!
But life is short, less than 100 years for most of us, and I wish to learn something new. I do not desire to subjugate my musical knowledge for something else and I have no desire to discard my years of musical training and artistic sensibilities; yet I feel a burning desire to add to my education, to my experiences, and to give something new a whirl. I could be a dismal failure or a golden success, but how else am I to know than to try?
Learning about the economy, about accounting, about marketing, leadership, and management is a great opportunity not just to improve myself, but to improve all those areas that touch my life. Mostly it is vastly rewarding to be with business-minded people, those interested in the marriage of business and Christianity, people who analyze politics, who understand amortization, depreciation, assets, investing, price to earnings ratios, short selling, puts, calls, T accounts, budgeting, and finance. The conversations around the table (figurative water cooler), range from politics to insurance to entrepreneurship ideas to current events to how to improve ourselves. All exciting stuff.
But lest you start thinking that it sounds dry and inhuman, much of our discussion actually revolves around people and how to give them value. We discuss the co-creation of value through servant leadership, marketing, consumer trends, and excellent management abilities. Of course there is the inevitable sports talk about great players, coaches, teams, and workout techniques--good information but not high in my interest bank. And occasionally we argue about movies (a topic I know very little about) or video games (a topic I know nothing about) or social circles in a younger age bracket (I am the oldest student). Sometimes I feel guarded in offering my leadership experiences and other times I feel overly vulnerable in revealing my ignorance on accounting principles or finance.
In the end, however, I am having a blast in my studies and I am looking forward to reaching a level heretofore never achieved by me. Plus it will be downright cool to have a fourth degree to hang on my wall. Of course all the degrees in the world do not, and should not, change a person, and I will remain the same eclectic, curious, and perplexing personality as usual. But maybe, just maybe, I will gain an understanding of the mysterious and wonderful world of business management.
But life is short, less than 100 years for most of us, and I wish to learn something new. I do not desire to subjugate my musical knowledge for something else and I have no desire to discard my years of musical training and artistic sensibilities; yet I feel a burning desire to add to my education, to my experiences, and to give something new a whirl. I could be a dismal failure or a golden success, but how else am I to know than to try?
Learning about the economy, about accounting, about marketing, leadership, and management is a great opportunity not just to improve myself, but to improve all those areas that touch my life. Mostly it is vastly rewarding to be with business-minded people, those interested in the marriage of business and Christianity, people who analyze politics, who understand amortization, depreciation, assets, investing, price to earnings ratios, short selling, puts, calls, T accounts, budgeting, and finance. The conversations around the table (figurative water cooler), range from politics to insurance to entrepreneurship ideas to current events to how to improve ourselves. All exciting stuff.
But lest you start thinking that it sounds dry and inhuman, much of our discussion actually revolves around people and how to give them value. We discuss the co-creation of value through servant leadership, marketing, consumer trends, and excellent management abilities. Of course there is the inevitable sports talk about great players, coaches, teams, and workout techniques--good information but not high in my interest bank. And occasionally we argue about movies (a topic I know very little about) or video games (a topic I know nothing about) or social circles in a younger age bracket (I am the oldest student). Sometimes I feel guarded in offering my leadership experiences and other times I feel overly vulnerable in revealing my ignorance on accounting principles or finance.
In the end, however, I am having a blast in my studies and I am looking forward to reaching a level heretofore never achieved by me. Plus it will be downright cool to have a fourth degree to hang on my wall. Of course all the degrees in the world do not, and should not, change a person, and I will remain the same eclectic, curious, and perplexing personality as usual. But maybe, just maybe, I will gain an understanding of the mysterious and wonderful world of business management.
Discovered Leadership in Groundhog Day
Film analysis of acquired leadership in Groundhog Day
by Robert Tucker, MBA
student
Leadership qualities acquired—Servant Leadership,
Transformational Leadership, Trust, Extraversion, Self-confidence, Humility,
Enthusiasm, Authenticity, Dignity, Emotional Intelligence, Courage, Social
responsibility, and Adaptability
Directed by: Harold Rains
Produced by Trevor Albert and Harold Ramis
Story by Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis
Starring: Bill Murray, Andie MacDowell, and Chris Elliott
Distributed by: Columbia Pictures
Released: February 12, 1993
The protagonist, Phil Connors played by Bill Murray, begins
the film as a cynical, sarcastic news reporter covering an event he considers
beneath him and generally worthless. It is a reenactment of the legend of the
groundhog on February 2nd. In the film, the city of Punxsutawney,
Pennsylvania has a ritual they perform on Groundhog Day each year. The film
opens with Phil the groundhog seeing his shadow and Phil Connors, the
weatherman, delivers a final few statements that sound vague and uninteresting
with more than a hint of facetiousness. On their way out of the city, they
encounter a snowstorm that forces them to return to the city until the storm
clears. Phil Connors spends the night in a motel only to wake up and begin repeating
the previous day. The nightmare has begun. He repeats the same day over and
over yet remains aware of the previous day’s events unlike everyone else he
encounters.
As his incredulity sets in, he finds himself in anger
blaming everyone else around him. He inflicts violence and despair in an
attempt to share his own pain and discouragement. The outward anger becomes
self-directed and results in a series of suicide attempts only to wake up the each
day alive and well. Meanwhile his relationship with area townspeople and
coworkers begins to develop and he finds himself falling in love with a
coworker named Rita.
He has a kind of psychological journey in the film that
moves through several stages—confusion as to his situation, anger at his
trappings, selfish needs, a sense of hopelessness, and then finally selfless
compassion. One of the classic moments among many occurs in a bowling alley
where Phil Connors is talking to men while drinking beer:
Phil: What would you do if you were stuck in one place, and every day was
exactly the same, and nothing that you did mattered?
Other guy: That about sums it up for me!
A turning point in the film occurs when he finds an old
homeless man dead. His inability to change that event caused a triggering
episode of change. With the change, comes a desire to improve, to help, to lead
others and to make a positive difference in the world. While the city stays the
same each day, he progresses into a solid citizen and leader of other people.
He does not accomplish his goals through speeches or
dramatic events. He does not seek to manipulate, alter, or make a big public
splash. Instead, through individual service and dedication to righteousness, he
begins to impact the people around him. He also develops his personal skills to
the level of admiration and high application. Not as simple as deciding to be a
good person, he recognizes that improved skills in sculpting, music, auto
mechanics, emergency techniques, and commitment to altruistic behavior causes
him to work diligently at his own abilities.
The end of the film he has arrived as a person of selfless
behavior, a leader of people, a sacrificial and contributing member of society,
and a popular public figure. Phil Connors began as a cynical, selfish, arrogant,
and barely restrained anger at his life, and then transformed into a benevolent
and compassionate leader of others. In the process he finds his soul and
ultimately his happiness which is exuded in all that he does.
Groundhog Day
contains many life lessons certainly beneficial for anyone and the depth of the
film makes it a modern classic with a fairly wide and loyal following. It seems
to span generations and withstand the test of time, making it one of the most
enduring films of the last part of the 20th century. But for our
discussion, rather than articulating the many life lessons and the comedic
moments, we will focus on leadership both negatively and positively.
Phil Connors displays virtually all the qualities of a
non-leader early in the film. His selfishness, rude behavior, ubiquitous
sarcasm, despair, and completely uncompassionate attitude toward all represent
the highest in poor leadership. In many ways, Groundhog Day is a study for how not to be a leader. Phil Connors
deplorable treatment of people, while likely a manifestation of his
self-directed hatred, reminds viewers of certain leaders who seem to have no
interest in remaining “people” oriented.
A recurring motive of Ned Ryerson, the obnoxious insurance
salesman, begins with Phil Connors demonstrating no interest in Ned’s sales
pitch and later stepping into a puddle only to be laughed at by Ned. This event
serves as picturesque reminder of Phil’s general apathy toward other people.
The step into the puddle is a form of foreshadowing of the negative events that
will subsequently follow. When he learns to avoid the puddle, it is a type of
leadership of learning from one’s mistakes. By the end of the film, he is eager
to visit with Ned and eventually purchases life insurance.
Phil Connors seems to have no appreciable skills in anything
other than sarcasm and a quick wit. He is obviously intelligent but uses his
intelligence to demean other people and cast disparagement on their interests.
The entire town is beneath him and he has no interest in anybody except
himself. But as the film progresses, Phil decides to learn how to play the
piano. Many piano lessons later, he is able to play on stage and demonstrates
pianistic skill to the great admiration of others. Good leaders have leadership
abilities but they also usually have specific skills they have developed
through discipline.
In Groundhog Day Phil
Connors displays a progression into many of these traits. He moves from pompous
conceit into self-confidence, from sarcastic pride into humility, from harsh
criticism to a sense of humor, from suspicion to trustworthiness, from
negativity to enthusiasm, optimism and warmth, from falsehood to authenticity,
and finally from introversion to a form of extraversion. The journey from
anti-leadership to positive leadership is actually stunning and serves as a
vital lesson for all prospective leaders. But the process itself is not the
whole story.
Blended into this journey is the value of building
relationships. A
careful look at Groundhog Day demonstrates the process of what is called “relationship-oriented attitudes and
behaviors”. The fifth behavior mentioned
is called “Giving emotional support and encouragement.” There is a scene where
Phil encourages a young couple to get married by assuring her that Fred was the
right person for her. He then gives them tickets to Wrestlemania, further demonstrating
his altruism toward others.
By the end of the film, Phil Connors practiced a type of Democratic
leadership as he worked to give authority to the entire city. The trust he
earned in the process came through in a unified support from the townspeople of
the city. He empowered them by sacrificing himself for others, thereby
demonstrating an egalitarian and democratic approach to leadership. In the
errands scene near the end of the film he: 1) Saves a young man from falling
from a tree, 2)Fixes a flat for three ladies, 3) Makes an ice sculpture, 4) Buys
life insurance, 5) Quotes poetry and gives allegorical meaning to Groundhog
Day, and 6) Saves a man from choking, In
other words, he reaches out and allows other people the joy of success and to
have meaning in their lives.
When Phil Connors becomes trapped by the situation which is
out of his control, he becomes shaped by the situation and over time alters his
behavior in response to his situation. He must somehow have recognized that his
escape hatch was to improve his own character and make a difference in lives in
the community. His leadership method found fruition through the application of
social responsibility, personal expectations, and valuing traditions.
We often read about ethical leadership behaviors
that include integrity, paying attention to all stakeholders, building
community, and respecting the individual. In addition we learn about the
entitlement mentality that sometimes pervades the practices of business
executives. Phil Connors works diligently to respect all the individuals in the
community, to unify the people through equal treatment, and to avoid the
trappings of arrogance and power. He gives because it is right to do so, not
out of selfish motivation but rather out of a growing recognition of the human
benefits of selfless leadership. Rather than expecting anything in return, Phil
practices goodness comfortably and frequently, without any motivation other
than feeling responsible for other people.
The byproduct of the practice of ethical leadership behavior
was a kind of infectious attitude that pervaded the community. Phil Connors drew
from the natural compassion of the people and they in turn responded back with
kindness and optimism to him, in a type of sharing the wealth. There are many examples of “socially responsible and ethical”
behavior, and there are many such events in Groundhog Day. Most of
the initiatives are accomplished in the film.
1. Provide strategic leadership of social
responsibility and ethics
a.
Phil Connors desires to help the homeless man by
feeding him and saving his life
b.
Phil supports the ritual of Groundhog
2.
Create a pleasant workplace
a.
He helps prevent a falling tray in the diner
b.
He adds to the social environment in the hotel
3.
Place company interests over personal interests
a.
He provides piano entertainment at a fundraiser
b.
He learns how to do ice sculptures
4.
Provide training in ethics and social
responsibility
a.
He is a model for social responsibility
b.
He serves as a spokesperson for the community
c.
He fixes flats
5.
Engage in philanthropy
a.
He gives money and tickets to others
b.
He supports fundraising events
Two more general events are worth nothing in Groundhog Day. One is to mention all the
suicide attempts. Leadership is neither about nihilism nor despair. Followers
look to leaders for courage, hope, and optimism. When Phil Connors sought to
end his life and end the tragic circumstances of reliving the same
circumstances each day, he in effect represented the highest form of
non-leadership that is available. His transformation includes an eradication of
any hint of self-destruction.
The second event worth noting is the oddly allegorical
legend of the groundhog. The groundhog leaves the ground on February 2nd.
If he sees his shadow, he becomes frightened and returns for 6 weeks of cold
weather. But if he does not see his shadow, he feels liberated and the weather
responds in kind as winter dissipates toward spring. All this represents a nice
legend that has very little application to reality.
But looking at this a different way, we find allegorical
truths with leadership application. In Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, for many years people live in the caves and are shackled
to each other and to the walls. In this condition they can see shadows of the
reality above them as they pass by the light outside of the cave. Over time,
the shackled people come to view the shadows as reality, unaware they are but
shadows of the actual events taking place outside of the cave. When the people
are released and encounter the truth, they are uncomfortable and prefer the
shackled condition where they can live without knowing the truth. Their truth may
not be the reality, but it is truth to them.
Obviously this magnificent but ambiguous story has the
potential for a variety of interpretations. Yet using this idea in Groundhog Day for Phil Connors’
particular situation, we find a man living in his own preferred reality of
happiness. The little groundhog in the movie, comes out of the box, sees his
shadow which then guarantees winter for six more weeks. This is a simple little
story and rather entertaining at the beginning of the film.
Yet what if the groundhog were actually afraid of the shadow
because he preferred the darkness of his previous existence? He was frightened
of the light, of the truth, and enjoyed his life underground in a dark state.
He preferred the world of being shackled by the darkness and avoiding the
reality of light and consequently of shadows. The shadow reminded the groundhog
of what he did not have, which for the groundhog was an unacceptable reality.
For Phil Connors, who was content with his sarcastic,
cynical, self-imposed hatred and general disdain for life, he had lived for so
long with apathy, rudeness, and arrogance, that he actually preferred the
darkness of the world. When he was forced to relive the same day over and over,
he compulsively had to confront his own dark nature, a nature comprised of the
coldness of winter. When he finally recognized the darkness in which he had
lived for so long, he began to desire the light of the world. The light,
however, could only be acquired through selfless conduct, unbridled compassion,
and acts of kindness. As the light shone brighter, his old self was discarded
and replaced by hope and optimism. He accepted and ultimately embraced the new
reality of his world and thus was brought back to the correct passage of time.
But upon his return, he was renewed, never to return to the darkness of the
past.
Although there are some leadership abilities that are
innate, many skills can be acquired either through education or through a
steady process of experience and dedication. Groundhog Day serves as a reminder to all of us that there is no
need to remain in a quagmire of selfish arrogance and steady self-destruction.
There is always room for positive leadership in the world as exemplified by the
transforming power of the life of Phil Connors in Groundhog Day.
Friday, November 23, 2012
My Hindu Moment in London
Although an unabashed Christian with a distinctive Christian worldview, I do enjoy learning what other religions practice and how people from other backgrounds and countries are shaped by their religious beliefs. And, truthfully, we are all products of our backgrounds and our belief system, whatever that may be. People tend to worship something and to place their faith and trust in someone as they seek wisdom and guidance along their life journey. In the final analysis, I find that truth is found in God and in Him rests all wisdom.
And yet, a historical and cultural study of people outside my normal sphere reveals a complex and enchanting world that cannot be and should not be denied nor disparaged in any sense. To denounce a world culture for rejecting God as I know Him is to be unfair to the people who know nothing other than the world in which they reside. But rather than acting superior to them (which I am not), I prefer to learn from them, embracing their culture to an extent, and learning the rhythm of their heartbeat.
Curious about world music and Asian music in particular, I took my Music Appreciation and History of Rock Music class to the Asian Music Circuit in London. A lengthy journey on the tube and a substantial walk through residential areas brought us to the building where we would see and hear the instruments and be treated to a lecture by Asian music scholar and performer Viram Jasani. Expecting great application for the Music Appreciation class, I was pleased later to learn that Viram Jasani had recorded with Led Zeppelin on a Jimmy Page song, providing direct application to the History of Rock class. It was from Viram Jasani that I had a Hindu moment and that I realized the music of a culture cannot be separated from its worldview nor its spiritual heritage.
As mentioned in an earlier essay, the museum within the Circuit is small but complete. Instruments behind glass are described in detail through an advanced educational video for each individual instrument. Organized by country and region, the instruments provide a thorough study of the kinds of sounds and practice of music from across Asian countries. Within this marvelous museum is an interactive sound chamber that allows for creation of Asian music by touching the walls and viewing a video. The video is partly intended to capture the philosophy and religion of the music, two ideals that are interchangeable and connected. The technologically advanced chamber is in contrast with the earthy beauty of the sound, a sound that is both universal and personal.
But as we listened and learned, we did not quite understand the appeal of the music. It seemed soft, simple, gentle at times but not captivating. The sounds were rich but a little one-dimensional at first and the instruments just looked primitive without our advancement of sound or quality. After all, ours is a progressive culture marked by science, math, and technology. What we were hearing seemed rather old and not relevant to our amazing world of great instruments and complex timbres. Our expectations and consequently our interests shaped our immediate judgment of music that did not fit our typical sound culture. Where was the energy? Where was the driving beat? Where was the pushy, emotion-based melody?
Yet the passing of time and the mesmerizing sound caused a change in us. What at first tasted bland, almost sour, became sweet, flavorful, and bursting with quiet joy. The music moved from an external experience to an internal event. From a concrete and obviously unsatisfying response to an abstract depth of thought. We had journeyed through the complex world of our lives and arrived at a form of personal peace through sound. It was a Hindu moment. We had found the juice of life.
Viram Jasani spent some time educating us as to what the Hindu religion (if it is actually a religion) involves and how Hindus practice their philosophy. As I listened to his explanation, it suddenly occurred to me that Hinduism in its practice is not all that distant from Christianity. Our peace is inside us, seeking a window of expression through faith and practice. Our moment occurred from an acceptance of the sound rather than an imposition of our own concepts. Too often we reject that which is different and that which is outside of our experience.
Although I have no emotional desire to embrace Hinduism, I am thankful for the education and for the nearly magical moment where I found inner peace through sound. The vast world of music and sound can provide many great emotional events that can enrich our own lives in mystical and marvelous ways. It reminds me of the requirement to understand the context before reaching a conclusion.
And yet, a historical and cultural study of people outside my normal sphere reveals a complex and enchanting world that cannot be and should not be denied nor disparaged in any sense. To denounce a world culture for rejecting God as I know Him is to be unfair to the people who know nothing other than the world in which they reside. But rather than acting superior to them (which I am not), I prefer to learn from them, embracing their culture to an extent, and learning the rhythm of their heartbeat.
Curious about world music and Asian music in particular, I took my Music Appreciation and History of Rock Music class to the Asian Music Circuit in London. A lengthy journey on the tube and a substantial walk through residential areas brought us to the building where we would see and hear the instruments and be treated to a lecture by Asian music scholar and performer Viram Jasani. Expecting great application for the Music Appreciation class, I was pleased later to learn that Viram Jasani had recorded with Led Zeppelin on a Jimmy Page song, providing direct application to the History of Rock class. It was from Viram Jasani that I had a Hindu moment and that I realized the music of a culture cannot be separated from its worldview nor its spiritual heritage.
As mentioned in an earlier essay, the museum within the Circuit is small but complete. Instruments behind glass are described in detail through an advanced educational video for each individual instrument. Organized by country and region, the instruments provide a thorough study of the kinds of sounds and practice of music from across Asian countries. Within this marvelous museum is an interactive sound chamber that allows for creation of Asian music by touching the walls and viewing a video. The video is partly intended to capture the philosophy and religion of the music, two ideals that are interchangeable and connected. The technologically advanced chamber is in contrast with the earthy beauty of the sound, a sound that is both universal and personal.
But as we listened and learned, we did not quite understand the appeal of the music. It seemed soft, simple, gentle at times but not captivating. The sounds were rich but a little one-dimensional at first and the instruments just looked primitive without our advancement of sound or quality. After all, ours is a progressive culture marked by science, math, and technology. What we were hearing seemed rather old and not relevant to our amazing world of great instruments and complex timbres. Our expectations and consequently our interests shaped our immediate judgment of music that did not fit our typical sound culture. Where was the energy? Where was the driving beat? Where was the pushy, emotion-based melody?
Yet the passing of time and the mesmerizing sound caused a change in us. What at first tasted bland, almost sour, became sweet, flavorful, and bursting with quiet joy. The music moved from an external experience to an internal event. From a concrete and obviously unsatisfying response to an abstract depth of thought. We had journeyed through the complex world of our lives and arrived at a form of personal peace through sound. It was a Hindu moment. We had found the juice of life.
Viram Jasani spent some time educating us as to what the Hindu religion (if it is actually a religion) involves and how Hindus practice their philosophy. As I listened to his explanation, it suddenly occurred to me that Hinduism in its practice is not all that distant from Christianity. Our peace is inside us, seeking a window of expression through faith and practice. Our moment occurred from an acceptance of the sound rather than an imposition of our own concepts. Too often we reject that which is different and that which is outside of our experience.
Although I have no emotional desire to embrace Hinduism, I am thankful for the education and for the nearly magical moment where I found inner peace through sound. The vast world of music and sound can provide many great emotional events that can enrich our own lives in mystical and marvelous ways. It reminds me of the requirement to understand the context before reaching a conclusion.
Saturday, September 22, 2012
The Joys of Walking
Each day for over 3 months I walked 5-6 miles as a regular part of the culture of London. At first it felt unrelenting and painful, almost unfair, why do we have to walk this much when then city of London has one of the greatest public transportation systems in the world? For a few weeks, I spent a great amount of time mapping out my route to include buses and tubes to avoid the excessive walking. And yet, it did not seem to matter what I did, walking was the norm. Eventually, however, I came to tolerate it and finally to love it. Walking London was life, and the joy I felt from walking was impenetrable.
But upon my return to Texas, I stopped walking. My truck smiled when I got in it again and seemed to enjoy my presence, to which I responded in kind by accommodating its happiness. In other words, I returned to my non-walking, drive everywhere world. But I missed my walking world.
Granted, I am a runner of sorts--nothing extreme really, just 3-5 miles every other day. Sometimes more sometimes less. In fact, a run of more than 5 miles leaves me chair bound the rest of the day. Walking any distance at all after running 6 or 7 miles results in pure pain in all parts of the body. Yet, in spite of the running, I felt generally unhealthy due to the sedentary lack of walking. Running is a focused physical activity, not intended for casual contemplation of the joys of the world. Walking is more contemplative, relaxed, and holistic. Yet my Texas life is one of driving without walking, of looking through glass, of changing the radio station, and of searching for parking places. None of the activities are especially satisfying.
Deliberating on this problem, I am now trying a new approach to transportation. I am parking my truck a considerable distance from the target goal, whether that be a grocery store, the postoffice, the bank, or work. And the practice is paying off in ways I least expected. Perhaps it is the hat (few people wear hats other than baseball caps) or perhaps it is the computer case that is often hanging from my shoulder, or perhaps it is just the sight of somebody walking, but for whatever reason, my walking is gaining friendships. Cars slow down (shocking, I know), some honk, most people wave, and I often hear people tell me they saw me crossing the street or walking across the parking lot. Is walking a social engagement of some kind?
Yes it does take a little more time to get places now, and yes I have a harder time convincing those who travel with me of the benefits of this practice, but I still believe the gain is greater than the pain (aside from the occasional hurt feet that is). I love the outdoors, I love the pace of a brisk walk, I love seeing the world around me, and I love the mild endorphin surge that I feel. I may not keep my walking practice indefinitely, but for now, it is fun and I plan to continue.
But upon my return to Texas, I stopped walking. My truck smiled when I got in it again and seemed to enjoy my presence, to which I responded in kind by accommodating its happiness. In other words, I returned to my non-walking, drive everywhere world. But I missed my walking world.
Granted, I am a runner of sorts--nothing extreme really, just 3-5 miles every other day. Sometimes more sometimes less. In fact, a run of more than 5 miles leaves me chair bound the rest of the day. Walking any distance at all after running 6 or 7 miles results in pure pain in all parts of the body. Yet, in spite of the running, I felt generally unhealthy due to the sedentary lack of walking. Running is a focused physical activity, not intended for casual contemplation of the joys of the world. Walking is more contemplative, relaxed, and holistic. Yet my Texas life is one of driving without walking, of looking through glass, of changing the radio station, and of searching for parking places. None of the activities are especially satisfying.
Deliberating on this problem, I am now trying a new approach to transportation. I am parking my truck a considerable distance from the target goal, whether that be a grocery store, the postoffice, the bank, or work. And the practice is paying off in ways I least expected. Perhaps it is the hat (few people wear hats other than baseball caps) or perhaps it is the computer case that is often hanging from my shoulder, or perhaps it is just the sight of somebody walking, but for whatever reason, my walking is gaining friendships. Cars slow down (shocking, I know), some honk, most people wave, and I often hear people tell me they saw me crossing the street or walking across the parking lot. Is walking a social engagement of some kind?
Yes it does take a little more time to get places now, and yes I have a harder time convincing those who travel with me of the benefits of this practice, but I still believe the gain is greater than the pain (aside from the occasional hurt feet that is). I love the outdoors, I love the pace of a brisk walk, I love seeing the world around me, and I love the mild endorphin surge that I feel. I may not keep my walking practice indefinitely, but for now, it is fun and I plan to continue.
Monday, September 17, 2012
MMM from 1975 to today
My enjoyment of Michael Martin Murphey's music and singing dates back to 1975 when as a very thin high school student, I went with a friend to hear the Charlie Daniels Band. Charlie Daniels was one of the "outlaws" of the time and presented a blues/rock style with a western flavor. Over time his style morphed into a Country Western Cowboy style that was suitable for dancing and often contained "pushy" almost rock driven music. But at that concert in 1975, a relatively unknown young singer came out and sang some recent hits. That singer was Michael Murphey (no Martin yet). Geronimo's Cadillac, Carolina in the Pines, and Wildfire had just recently been released.
He was terrific, and I later acknowledged that my preferred part of the event was the Michael Murphey portion. I began to follow his career with some interest but not great zeal, after all two or three great songs do not a legend make. Several years later, Michael Murphey added Martin to his name and took his career another direction--Cowboy music. The strange blend of Country/Western, folk, pop, and now Cowboy seemed to be the right eclectic mix for his voice and style. He produced several albums of Cowboy Songs of which the first is probably the most well-known. His large vocal range, natural phrasing, appropriate text inflection, and personal expression all came together in the collection of Cowboy music.
Murphey's connection to the American Indian and his desire to "ride the range" on a horse completed his package. I became a classically trained symphonic musician steeped in the music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Strauss, and Mahler, but when alone, I sang and still sing folk songs and Cowboy music. Several years ago, it was with great excitement that I did two concerts with Murphey where I played French Horn in the orchestra. He was pleasant, musical, entertaining, and impressive as always.
I need to admit to having some Cowboy roots and as I type these words, I am thinking of my Dad who loved to sing and play guitar. My father's own music is joyous, profound, with a style all his own. Dad was a character. College professor, author, speaker, cowboy, innovator, extrovert, musician, Dad was an unusual articulator of life's joys. With a high regard for the human being, Dad championed the poor, the rich, the educated, the uneducated, the ugly, the pretty, nature, and everything in between. He discussed theology, politics, Beethoven, Steinbeck, movies, rocks, trees, business, and Gene Autry. My father often desired to get on a horse (he always said "harse" for some reason!) and ride off into the sunset singing Happy Trails.
Because we are products of our DNA and amalgamations of our past experiences, I am a trained, classical musician with a love for popular music and a love for music of the people. So it was with excitement that I attended the Michael Martin Murphey concert on Saturday night. The concert was at Hardin-Simmons University and utilized the school orchestra. Although 67 years old, Murphey sang well and reached the mostly older audience. We heard all the favorites plus Streets of Laredo, El Paso, and Tumbling Tumbleweeds. It was a terrific experience and my wife and I enjoyed every minute of the event. But as the concert came to a close and Michael Martin Murphey sang Happy Trails, I felt the tears slide down my face as I remembered my Dad playing guitar and singing. I sure do miss him and I treasure the memories.
Nothing like a little Cowboy music to keep life in perspective. Kind of clears out the stress and reminds us of the joys of the world. Wildfire is still a great song, timeless in style, and mysterious in expression, while Murphey's performance of Streets of Laredo is touching and personal. What's Forever For is also a great song and Tying a Knot in the Devil's Tail is pure fun. All these and more made for a great evening.
He was terrific, and I later acknowledged that my preferred part of the event was the Michael Murphey portion. I began to follow his career with some interest but not great zeal, after all two or three great songs do not a legend make. Several years later, Michael Murphey added Martin to his name and took his career another direction--Cowboy music. The strange blend of Country/Western, folk, pop, and now Cowboy seemed to be the right eclectic mix for his voice and style. He produced several albums of Cowboy Songs of which the first is probably the most well-known. His large vocal range, natural phrasing, appropriate text inflection, and personal expression all came together in the collection of Cowboy music.
Murphey's connection to the American Indian and his desire to "ride the range" on a horse completed his package. I became a classically trained symphonic musician steeped in the music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Strauss, and Mahler, but when alone, I sang and still sing folk songs and Cowboy music. Several years ago, it was with great excitement that I did two concerts with Murphey where I played French Horn in the orchestra. He was pleasant, musical, entertaining, and impressive as always.
I need to admit to having some Cowboy roots and as I type these words, I am thinking of my Dad who loved to sing and play guitar. My father's own music is joyous, profound, with a style all his own. Dad was a character. College professor, author, speaker, cowboy, innovator, extrovert, musician, Dad was an unusual articulator of life's joys. With a high regard for the human being, Dad championed the poor, the rich, the educated, the uneducated, the ugly, the pretty, nature, and everything in between. He discussed theology, politics, Beethoven, Steinbeck, movies, rocks, trees, business, and Gene Autry. My father often desired to get on a horse (he always said "harse" for some reason!) and ride off into the sunset singing Happy Trails.
Because we are products of our DNA and amalgamations of our past experiences, I am a trained, classical musician with a love for popular music and a love for music of the people. So it was with excitement that I attended the Michael Martin Murphey concert on Saturday night. The concert was at Hardin-Simmons University and utilized the school orchestra. Although 67 years old, Murphey sang well and reached the mostly older audience. We heard all the favorites plus Streets of Laredo, El Paso, and Tumbling Tumbleweeds. It was a terrific experience and my wife and I enjoyed every minute of the event. But as the concert came to a close and Michael Martin Murphey sang Happy Trails, I felt the tears slide down my face as I remembered my Dad playing guitar and singing. I sure do miss him and I treasure the memories.
Nothing like a little Cowboy music to keep life in perspective. Kind of clears out the stress and reminds us of the joys of the world. Wildfire is still a great song, timeless in style, and mysterious in expression, while Murphey's performance of Streets of Laredo is touching and personal. What's Forever For is also a great song and Tying a Knot in the Devil's Tail is pure fun. All these and more made for a great evening.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Ah, the Whistler
Walking into the grocery and trying to keep the weight of the day from crushing my generally optimistic spirit, I heard myself whistling. It was a strange sensation since I knew I was not whistling. Yet, it is true, that I am a whistler in general. With a song in my head most of the time, I often whistle or sing wherever I am. An annoying habit to some, pleasant to others, my public expression of music in my head is a normal part of everyday existence. Sometimes Brahms or Mozart, other times rock or pop, folk songs, Christian music, film music, or, most likely, my own made-up composition, I have a high regard for music in its totality and enjoy expressing music at every opportunity.
But this particular evening, I had no music in my head. Bad day all around. Lots of stress, contention, unrest, scowls, anger, needs not met, and selfishness. A day that needed to be over. So I walked into the grocery to buy some bagels and sugar free ice cream bars, and heard a whistler. This time it was not I who was whistling. Near the produce section stood an older gentleman in a white, rumpled shirt and work pants studying the apples and oranges. Perhaps he was a little intoxicated or maybe mentally disturbed or perhaps drunk on the joys of life or maybe masking his emotional pain by whistling. Whatever the reason, his whistle was loud, tuneless, happy, and a little annoying. Everyone in the store avoided the gentleman and seemed uncomfortable with his ebullience.
I, however, partly due to curiosity, partly out of a lack of fear, and partly because I saw myself in thirty years, headed toward the man. As I neared him, I smiled my charming grin and said hello. He stopped whistling, stared at me, and said, "Blessings to you sir!" He then turned away and said something about blessings over and over. He was pleasant, confused, pixillated, joyful, and innocent. His whistle resumed and I felt my stress dissipate. His innocence and joy was infectious and despite his odd behavior, I felt drawn in to his happy world.
He may have been a little unbalanced but his whistle balanced me. Maybe we can find truth, joy, and center in those who are not centered. Perhaps it is the unusual that can fix the broken and perhaps our complex world could use a moment of innocent expression of happiness.
But this particular evening, I had no music in my head. Bad day all around. Lots of stress, contention, unrest, scowls, anger, needs not met, and selfishness. A day that needed to be over. So I walked into the grocery to buy some bagels and sugar free ice cream bars, and heard a whistler. This time it was not I who was whistling. Near the produce section stood an older gentleman in a white, rumpled shirt and work pants studying the apples and oranges. Perhaps he was a little intoxicated or maybe mentally disturbed or perhaps drunk on the joys of life or maybe masking his emotional pain by whistling. Whatever the reason, his whistle was loud, tuneless, happy, and a little annoying. Everyone in the store avoided the gentleman and seemed uncomfortable with his ebullience.
I, however, partly due to curiosity, partly out of a lack of fear, and partly because I saw myself in thirty years, headed toward the man. As I neared him, I smiled my charming grin and said hello. He stopped whistling, stared at me, and said, "Blessings to you sir!" He then turned away and said something about blessings over and over. He was pleasant, confused, pixillated, joyful, and innocent. His whistle resumed and I felt my stress dissipate. His innocence and joy was infectious and despite his odd behavior, I felt drawn in to his happy world.
He may have been a little unbalanced but his whistle balanced me. Maybe we can find truth, joy, and center in those who are not centered. Perhaps it is the unusual that can fix the broken and perhaps our complex world could use a moment of innocent expression of happiness.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Courtesy and the Hummingbird
Walking into the garage, I heard a frustrated, frenetic fluttering followed by a bump. Hearing it again, I looked around and saw a hummingbird frantically trying to fly outside but repeatedly getting stopped by a window. Not so bright and becoming duller by the second, the poor little bird did not understand what was wrong. I slowly lifted the window hoping to coax the little creature outside, but, alas, he simply kept bumping and fluttering without recognizing the open window below him. With only slight hesitation, I gently reached out my hands, and cradled the little thing in my hand. He quickly stopped his natural buzzing, probably wondering what was about to happen. I lowered him to the open window, opened my hand and encouraged him to fly. He did not wait long and took off into the world, free again.
Hummingbirds are fascinating birds having the ability to flap their wings up to 80 times per second for certain species. They are quite small and can fly backwards without hesitation. Their incredibly fast metabolism forces them to seek nectar and insects every few hours to avoid starving to death. With a heart rate of over 1000 beats per minute they move quickly and visit hundreds of flowers every day. They are a gentle animal but also firmly committed to their own survival, demanding rights over their established territory. The sound of several hummingbirds hovering around a feeder is one of the most musical experiences in nature. As the wings increase their speed so also will the pitch rise resulting in a harmonious symphony of energy and joy.
And so it was with great respect and amusement that I helped the little hummingbird survive. Just doing my part to give a little simple courtesy. Speaking of courtesy, why do many drivers lose all sense of thoughtfulness when behind the wheel of a vehicle? In the mornings as the sun is creeping up in the East, I am running 4-5 miles and listening to Moby Dick. Living in the country, we have very little traffic and I enjoy feeling the cool breeze caress my nose and cheeks while trying not to think about my aching legs and fast breathing. Running is both painful and exhilarating, joyful and terrible, fun and difficult. I am not quite a member of the club yet (I suspect you have to do a marathon to be a member), but I can hold my own in a running conversation now. And the experiences are often unpredictable--jumping over a snake, stopping cold to avoid a skunk, smiling at an armadillo, brushing grasshoppers off my legs, wondering about the dead bobcat, and snarling at the rubbish on the side of the road. All these and more add to the joys of running.
But I do not appreciate the cars that drive by without the slightest care of my safety. Many of them seem to speed up almost as though I am infringing on their racetrack. Admittedly, the road was built for vehicles not for runners and I guess if the driver slowed down perhaps he would arrive at his destination 10 seconds later than intended, but all it requires is a little common courtesy. It is disconcerting to see a car coming toward me at a high speed, knowing that a direct hit will put a stop to my running for quite awhile! I usually wave my arms and plan my dive into the weeds while hoping he will move over slightly and slow down. I am asking for a little courtesy and sensitivity to my exercise. Not too much to ask I don't think.
Seems to me that if I take a moment to offer some help and courtesy to a hummingbird, then a driver could offer similar behavior to the runners on the road. Yes, yes I know the events are unrelated, but nevertheless, it is fun to make the comparison for now.
Concluding this brief essay today, I must point out my love and respect for Gershwin's masterful song Bess, You Is My Woman Now. It is one of the greatest songs ever written with a depth of expression and complexity of construction rarely found in the pop world. You can hear the love in the music and can almost sense the anguish of fear of the future. Terrific music.
Hummingbirds are fascinating birds having the ability to flap their wings up to 80 times per second for certain species. They are quite small and can fly backwards without hesitation. Their incredibly fast metabolism forces them to seek nectar and insects every few hours to avoid starving to death. With a heart rate of over 1000 beats per minute they move quickly and visit hundreds of flowers every day. They are a gentle animal but also firmly committed to their own survival, demanding rights over their established territory. The sound of several hummingbirds hovering around a feeder is one of the most musical experiences in nature. As the wings increase their speed so also will the pitch rise resulting in a harmonious symphony of energy and joy.
And so it was with great respect and amusement that I helped the little hummingbird survive. Just doing my part to give a little simple courtesy. Speaking of courtesy, why do many drivers lose all sense of thoughtfulness when behind the wheel of a vehicle? In the mornings as the sun is creeping up in the East, I am running 4-5 miles and listening to Moby Dick. Living in the country, we have very little traffic and I enjoy feeling the cool breeze caress my nose and cheeks while trying not to think about my aching legs and fast breathing. Running is both painful and exhilarating, joyful and terrible, fun and difficult. I am not quite a member of the club yet (I suspect you have to do a marathon to be a member), but I can hold my own in a running conversation now. And the experiences are often unpredictable--jumping over a snake, stopping cold to avoid a skunk, smiling at an armadillo, brushing grasshoppers off my legs, wondering about the dead bobcat, and snarling at the rubbish on the side of the road. All these and more add to the joys of running.
But I do not appreciate the cars that drive by without the slightest care of my safety. Many of them seem to speed up almost as though I am infringing on their racetrack. Admittedly, the road was built for vehicles not for runners and I guess if the driver slowed down perhaps he would arrive at his destination 10 seconds later than intended, but all it requires is a little common courtesy. It is disconcerting to see a car coming toward me at a high speed, knowing that a direct hit will put a stop to my running for quite awhile! I usually wave my arms and plan my dive into the weeds while hoping he will move over slightly and slow down. I am asking for a little courtesy and sensitivity to my exercise. Not too much to ask I don't think.
Seems to me that if I take a moment to offer some help and courtesy to a hummingbird, then a driver could offer similar behavior to the runners on the road. Yes, yes I know the events are unrelated, but nevertheless, it is fun to make the comparison for now.
Concluding this brief essay today, I must point out my love and respect for Gershwin's masterful song Bess, You Is My Woman Now. It is one of the greatest songs ever written with a depth of expression and complexity of construction rarely found in the pop world. You can hear the love in the music and can almost sense the anguish of fear of the future. Terrific music.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)