This would have sounded obnoxious if anyone else had said it, but since he is the most unpretentious person in the world, we were just in stitches.
In rehearsal one day, M was extolling the virtues of Mahler/Brahms, and he said somewhat sheepishly, as if he were a member of Brahmsaholics anonymous, something to the effect of, "I've become one of those people who can't relate to people who can't appreciate Mahler/Brahms."
"It really separates me from some people, you know? B/c I can't talk about (name of some piece that I can't remember, which proves that I'm one of those people he "separates" himself from!) with them."
Well, I recently asked mr. separate-myself-from-others for Mahler recommendations.
me: Do you have a favorite recording of Mahler 3? Also, which of his symphonies do you recommend as a starter? I have his 9th and now his 3rd, and I have not been able to listen to them to completion. I mean, I've listened to both a few times, but they doesn't sink into my brain. It probably doesn't help that I am usually kneading bread or trying to listen to them while multitasking (Mahler SO doesn't work as background music), but I'm finding them both sort of difficult to comprehend. Thus I'm one of those types that you mentioned you separate yourself from, b/c I have no appreciation of Mahler.
So please recommend away.
he-who-separates-himself-from-those-who-don't "comprehend"-Mahler: I would not separate myself from you.....:) (Well, gee, thanks, I think. . ..)
Go for Bernstein. In general (and this is my personal preference)go for older recordings if it is orchestra only. If it is a symphony that involves chorus go for a more modern one (choir probably better) (Gosh, from a virgo, I demand more specificity. Please define "older" versus "more modern".)
I'm not Mahlerite, (yes, he who "separates" himself from others b/c they don't understand Mahler is not a Mahlerite. Whatever. :)) but perhaps listening to Symphony 1 and 2 in that order is the way to begin.
Or if not, listen to some songs first. Ich bin der Welt abhanden is a GREAT song, if you find a Christa Ludwig or Anne Sofie von Otter recording, you'll be in heaven......and no longer separated from me.....:)
15 January 2008
11 January 2008
Music 2.0 Lite
In this area--a mecca of all forms of culture, it's bad enough that we don't have a high-caliber newspaper that rivals the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. But in an area where people are pretty knowledgeable about classical music and the level of music appreciation is high (though not high enough to appreciate the edgy-modern kind of music that our choir performs), we have one classical music station. It therefore has a monopoly on classical music broadcasting, which is a shame, because I wonder if some competition might enliven the repertoire choices a bit.
I have a love-hate relationship with my local classical music station, which prides itself on being "Casual, Comfortable, and Classical." UGH. Normally, my sentiments cancel out so that the end result is closer to indifference. In fact, I don't even classify myself as being knowledgeable enough about classical music to complain about the vapid tuneful do-re-mi dumbed-down version of classical music that this radio station offers to this area, but having to listen to just the last movement of the Dvorak 8th Symphony was my last straw.
I lost it, and hence this posting to get this out of my system.
• First of all, I don't listen to this station that often, because I usually only listen to it when I'm in my car, which is not that often. Maybe 30-60 minutes a week (depending on whether I bike into work, have other places to go to) tops? So at this infrequency of listening, I should not, in a 3 month period, hear Hilary Hahn and whoever else playing the Bach Double three times. Now I love the Bach Double. I have at least 5 or 6 different recordings of it. But a) classical music is not all about Hilary Hahn playing Bach. I'm sure she plays it beautifully, but there are dozens of other people who have played the Bach Double, and some better. In the very least, all different. And more importantly, b)there are tens upon thousands of other songs that constitute classical music. If I'm listening 30 minutes a week, and in a 3 month span, I've heard Hilary Hahn's rendition of the Bach Double 2 or 3 times, you are not playing enough interesting music. And gosh darnit, if you are going to broadcast the Bach Double multiple times, how about Nigel Kennedy or Yehudi Menhuin?
• Rant number two: call me curmudgeonly or contrarian, but this whole "comfortable, casual" "island of sanity" business really does the audience a disservice. It is dumbed down classical music, version 2.0 lite. This is precisely the sort of insipid, mind-numbing version of classical music that gives classical music its bad reputation. A lot of my twenty- and thirty- (and even forty-) something friends don't like classical music. They think it's dull and unhip. It's for winding down at the end of the day, but not for challenging you.
Now again, let me reiterate that I'm no classical music cognescenti. Far from it. I'm still trying to learn to appreciate Mahler and I'm just getting into opera and there are hundreds of symphonies that I haven't heard in their entirety. But it is precisely people of my ilk (not much better than total ignoramus, but interested in learning more and unsatisfied with the offerings of our current radio station) who need to be challenged to listen to things beyond Vivaldi's 4 Seasons or Mozart's Requiem, or other things on the classical music top- 100 list that I have already either sung or played or know of.
Not that there's anything wrong with Mozart's Requiem or Vivaldi's 4 Seasons. There is a reason they are "classics". There's certainly a time and place for appreciating that.
But as Aaron Copland put it so eloquently, why is it that we expect all other art forms to challenge us, and yet, when it comes to classical music, people think we just want to hear the comfortable stuff?
• Rant number three: I love instruments and all, but their programming for the most intimate instrument of all is virtually nil or I keep missing it, because based on my infrequent listening, I'd say that their ratio of instrumental to choral pieces programmed is 20:1, to pick an arbitrary number out of a hat. (Well not really. I really rarely hear choral works or opera presented, though in their defense, I did hear that they will start or have started broadcasting opera.) They used to do some choral music on Sunday mornings and I used to listen to that, but at some point, they got rid of that or moved the time.
But again, even with the choral music, there's more to choral music than Wachet Auf. How about some Veljo Tormis? Alberto Grau? Or something that was written after we were born?
• My final point, and the whole impetus for this long, hopefully not-too-vituperative rant-- Please. Do. Not. Truncate. Great symphonies. It's bad enough that much is lost when you hear it on the radio vs. hearing it live, but when you just present one movement from a larger work, you rob it of all of its context and nuance.
This morning, on my way to work, KDFC played just the last movement of the Dvorak 8th, which granted, is showy and grandiose, and perhaps a crowd-pleaser, but imo, not the most interesting part of the piece. It's unfortunate that I've (sort of) played this piece before, because otherwise, I probably wouldn't have cared so much about KDFC just presenting the last movement.
But this is probably one of these symphonies that to fully appreciate the last movement, you need to listen to the earlier movements. Motifs repeat and come back. He ties three entirely different-sounding movements and brings closure in the last movement. How can you fully appreciate the loud buildup and release of tension in the last movement, when you haven't heard movements 1,2, and 3?
The first movement starts with a cello line that seems to indicate a sense of urgency, but then the tension is cut by a flute section that sounds somewhat naive and meandering. Actually, the first part of the first movement sounds like an exciting trek in the woods to me--with each switchback offering some kind of surprise adventure or excitement. It's got that kind of playful feel. The string part towards the end of this movement is exhilarating. (So exhilarating that I ultimately had to drop out of performing this piece. The first violin part has notes that are 7 and 8 lines above the staff!) Then you've got a(n initially) more pensive-sounding second movement with clarinet the brass in the second movement, whose tone gets more ominous? (urgent? sinister?) sounding towards the last third, before returning to an earlier motif, and ultimately, coming back to its original opening theme, albeit in a different key. However, by now, the theme seems to have taken on an entirely new meaning. After the descending scales, the opening motif sounds more majestic/triumphant to me. Which takes us to the third movement, which sounds entirely different. It sounds waltz-like with its 3/8 tempo and prominently features the strings.
But I'm digressing from my original rant and I don't really know sufficient background about this piece to be writing "program notes" for it. These are just my personal impressions. . ..
To return to my original rant of how this symphony should not be truncated thus-- the point I was trying to make here with my digression was that the final movement of the Dvorak 8th should not be played on its own. Period. I am less irritated when they do this with other pieces, but the more a radio station does this, the more it dumbs down and cheapens the value of classical music. I mean, how do you expect me to learn to appreciate an edgy, modern symphony, if I'm used to hearing only truncated versions of top 100 hits?
Would you read just the last few chapters of a book, no matter how exhilarating the content may be? Part of the exhilaration is the culmination and the journey through the earlier chapters or movements, in the case of music.
Granted, it takes time and concentration, and roughly 38 minutes of your time to appreciate the entire symphony. But wouldn't most people rather hear the full thing rather than the dumbed down "abridged" version?
I have a love-hate relationship with my local classical music station, which prides itself on being "Casual, Comfortable, and Classical." UGH. Normally, my sentiments cancel out so that the end result is closer to indifference. In fact, I don't even classify myself as being knowledgeable enough about classical music to complain about the vapid tuneful do-re-mi dumbed-down version of classical music that this radio station offers to this area, but having to listen to just the last movement of the Dvorak 8th Symphony was my last straw.
I lost it, and hence this posting to get this out of my system.
• First of all, I don't listen to this station that often, because I usually only listen to it when I'm in my car, which is not that often. Maybe 30-60 minutes a week (depending on whether I bike into work, have other places to go to) tops? So at this infrequency of listening, I should not, in a 3 month period, hear Hilary Hahn and whoever else playing the Bach Double three times. Now I love the Bach Double. I have at least 5 or 6 different recordings of it. But a) classical music is not all about Hilary Hahn playing Bach. I'm sure she plays it beautifully, but there are dozens of other people who have played the Bach Double, and some better. In the very least, all different. And more importantly, b)there are tens upon thousands of other songs that constitute classical music. If I'm listening 30 minutes a week, and in a 3 month span, I've heard Hilary Hahn's rendition of the Bach Double 2 or 3 times, you are not playing enough interesting music. And gosh darnit, if you are going to broadcast the Bach Double multiple times, how about Nigel Kennedy or Yehudi Menhuin?
• Rant number two: call me curmudgeonly or contrarian, but this whole "comfortable, casual" "island of sanity" business really does the audience a disservice. It is dumbed down classical music, version 2.0 lite. This is precisely the sort of insipid, mind-numbing version of classical music that gives classical music its bad reputation. A lot of my twenty- and thirty- (and even forty-) something friends don't like classical music. They think it's dull and unhip. It's for winding down at the end of the day, but not for challenging you.
Now again, let me reiterate that I'm no classical music cognescenti. Far from it. I'm still trying to learn to appreciate Mahler and I'm just getting into opera and there are hundreds of symphonies that I haven't heard in their entirety. But it is precisely people of my ilk (not much better than total ignoramus, but interested in learning more and unsatisfied with the offerings of our current radio station) who need to be challenged to listen to things beyond Vivaldi's 4 Seasons or Mozart's Requiem, or other things on the classical music top- 100 list that I have already either sung or played or know of.
Not that there's anything wrong with Mozart's Requiem or Vivaldi's 4 Seasons. There is a reason they are "classics". There's certainly a time and place for appreciating that.
But as Aaron Copland put it so eloquently, why is it that we expect all other art forms to challenge us, and yet, when it comes to classical music, people think we just want to hear the comfortable stuff?
The literary world does not expect Gide or Mann or T.S. Eliot to emote with the accents of Victor Hugo or Walter Scott. Why, then, should Bartok or Milhaud be expected to sing with the voice of Schumann or Tchaikovsky? When a contemporary piece seems dry and cerebral to you, when it seems to be giving off little feeling or sentiment, there is a good chance that you are not willing to live in your own epoch, musically speaking.So KDFC is another one of these stations that serves as a couch or pillow, which I guess fits with their whole "islands of sanity" marketing scheme.Before concluding, I should like to ask a question of my own. Why is it that the musical public is seemingly so reluctant to consider a musical composition as, possibly, a challenging experience? When I hear a new piece of music that I do not understand I am intrigued -- I want to make contact with it again at the first opportunity. It's a challenge -- it keeps my interest in the art of music thoroughly alive.
But sadly I've observed that my own reaction is not typical. Most people use music as a couch; they want top be pillowed on it, relaxed and consoled for the stress of daily living. But serious music was never meant to be used as a soporific. Contemporary music, especially, is created to wake you up, not put you to sleep. It is meant to stir and excite you -- it may even exhaust you. But isn't that the kind of stimulation you go to the theatre for or read a book for? Why make an exception of music?
• Rant number three: I love instruments and all, but their programming for the most intimate instrument of all is virtually nil or I keep missing it, because based on my infrequent listening, I'd say that their ratio of instrumental to choral pieces programmed is 20:1, to pick an arbitrary number out of a hat. (Well not really. I really rarely hear choral works or opera presented, though in their defense, I did hear that they will start or have started broadcasting opera.) They used to do some choral music on Sunday mornings and I used to listen to that, but at some point, they got rid of that or moved the time.
But again, even with the choral music, there's more to choral music than Wachet Auf. How about some Veljo Tormis? Alberto Grau? Or something that was written after we were born?
• My final point, and the whole impetus for this long, hopefully not-too-vituperative rant-- Please. Do. Not. Truncate. Great symphonies. It's bad enough that much is lost when you hear it on the radio vs. hearing it live, but when you just present one movement from a larger work, you rob it of all of its context and nuance.
This morning, on my way to work, KDFC played just the last movement of the Dvorak 8th, which granted, is showy and grandiose, and perhaps a crowd-pleaser, but imo, not the most interesting part of the piece. It's unfortunate that I've (sort of) played this piece before, because otherwise, I probably wouldn't have cared so much about KDFC just presenting the last movement.
But this is probably one of these symphonies that to fully appreciate the last movement, you need to listen to the earlier movements. Motifs repeat and come back. He ties three entirely different-sounding movements and brings closure in the last movement. How can you fully appreciate the loud buildup and release of tension in the last movement, when you haven't heard movements 1,2, and 3?
The first movement starts with a cello line that seems to indicate a sense of urgency, but then the tension is cut by a flute section that sounds somewhat naive and meandering. Actually, the first part of the first movement sounds like an exciting trek in the woods to me--with each switchback offering some kind of surprise adventure or excitement. It's got that kind of playful feel. The string part towards the end of this movement is exhilarating. (So exhilarating that I ultimately had to drop out of performing this piece. The first violin part has notes that are 7 and 8 lines above the staff!) Then you've got a(n initially) more pensive-sounding second movement with clarinet the brass in the second movement, whose tone gets more ominous? (urgent? sinister?) sounding towards the last third, before returning to an earlier motif, and ultimately, coming back to its original opening theme, albeit in a different key. However, by now, the theme seems to have taken on an entirely new meaning. After the descending scales, the opening motif sounds more majestic/triumphant to me. Which takes us to the third movement, which sounds entirely different. It sounds waltz-like with its 3/8 tempo and prominently features the strings.
But I'm digressing from my original rant and I don't really know sufficient background about this piece to be writing "program notes" for it. These are just my personal impressions. . ..
To return to my original rant of how this symphony should not be truncated thus-- the point I was trying to make here with my digression was that the final movement of the Dvorak 8th should not be played on its own. Period. I am less irritated when they do this with other pieces, but the more a radio station does this, the more it dumbs down and cheapens the value of classical music. I mean, how do you expect me to learn to appreciate an edgy, modern symphony, if I'm used to hearing only truncated versions of top 100 hits?
Would you read just the last few chapters of a book, no matter how exhilarating the content may be? Part of the exhilaration is the culmination and the journey through the earlier chapters or movements, in the case of music.
Granted, it takes time and concentration, and roughly 38 minutes of your time to appreciate the entire symphony. But wouldn't most people rather hear the full thing rather than the dumbed down "abridged" version?
10 January 2008
Audiences: Please talk all you want
For those of us who get irritated by people who unwrap candy wrappers at the most hushed moments during performances or glare at people who talk incessantly through an entire performance or movie, it turns out that having such audience disruptions is a more authentic way to experience concerts.
According to this NYT article, during Liszt or Beethoven's time, it was normal to clap between movements or even talk during performances. In fact, according to said article (which is actually quoting a book about 19th century audiences by Kenneth Hamilton. Note to self: add to ever-growing "to read" list.), the pianist Alexander Dreyshcock "was criticized for playing 'so loud that it made it difficult for the ladies to talk'".
Two centuries later, we have an entirely different sort of audience. One that has been "reduced to subversive acts in a fascistic society" according to the same article. Fascistic society?
While people who occasionally cough during performances do not bother me so much, as a performer, I don't think expecting silence from an audience during the most intimate ppp sections in music is necessarily "fascistic".
In my case, whether audience behavior bothers me or not depends on the circumstances. I admit I'm rather inconsistent.
If a 3-year old child of one of my fellow singers happens to yell "mommy mommy mommy" during a performance, this does not bother me in the least. In fact, the last time this happened, the mommy, who stood next to me, looked mortified, but the rest of us couldn't help but smile. I even saw a smile break out from our conductor's lips.
If a 4-year old child is squirming and moving around and whispering loudly during the entire first half of a Cantabile holiday concert, more strongly than my sentiment to want to tell the child to sit still is my urge to strangle the parents who don't do anything about this distracting squirmy child.
If an old-ish gentleman walks out with his walker with much fanfare during our quiet a capella recessional. . . I am momentarily annoyed at his bad timing and will probably wonder why he couldn't have waited another 1 minute and 24 seconds to make his grand exit, but sigh and don't think much of it.
If middle or high school-aged children whisper/talk loudly amongst themselves during a production of San Jose Opera's The Crucible or a performance of Faure's Cantique du Jean Racine, I get violent urges to strangle people. :)
Did reading this article change my attitude?
Well, I'd be willing to put up with more audience distractions, maybe, so long as it's not during really hushed sections of music. Also, no cellphones, whatsoever. There were no cellphones during Liszt's time.
According to this NYT article, during Liszt or Beethoven's time, it was normal to clap between movements or even talk during performances. In fact, according to said article (which is actually quoting a book about 19th century audiences by Kenneth Hamilton. Note to self: add to ever-growing "to read" list.), the pianist Alexander Dreyshcock "was criticized for playing 'so loud that it made it difficult for the ladies to talk'".
Two centuries later, we have an entirely different sort of audience. One that has been "reduced to subversive acts in a fascistic society" according to the same article. Fascistic society?
While people who occasionally cough during performances do not bother me so much, as a performer, I don't think expecting silence from an audience during the most intimate ppp sections in music is necessarily "fascistic".
In my case, whether audience behavior bothers me or not depends on the circumstances. I admit I'm rather inconsistent.
If a 3-year old child of one of my fellow singers happens to yell "mommy mommy mommy" during a performance, this does not bother me in the least. In fact, the last time this happened, the mommy, who stood next to me, looked mortified, but the rest of us couldn't help but smile. I even saw a smile break out from our conductor's lips.
If a 4-year old child is squirming and moving around and whispering loudly during the entire first half of a Cantabile holiday concert, more strongly than my sentiment to want to tell the child to sit still is my urge to strangle the parents who don't do anything about this distracting squirmy child.
If an old-ish gentleman walks out with his walker with much fanfare during our quiet a capella recessional. . . I am momentarily annoyed at his bad timing and will probably wonder why he couldn't have waited another 1 minute and 24 seconds to make his grand exit, but sigh and don't think much of it.
If middle or high school-aged children whisper/talk loudly amongst themselves during a production of San Jose Opera's The Crucible or a performance of Faure's Cantique du Jean Racine, I get violent urges to strangle people. :)
Did reading this article change my attitude?
Well, I'd be willing to put up with more audience distractions, maybe, so long as it's not during really hushed sections of music. Also, no cellphones, whatsoever. There were no cellphones during Liszt's time.
06 January 2008
Nannies with M.A.s--only in this area
I once joked to someone that I want to date someone who is math-literate enough to know that you can't double integrate e^(-x2). This used to be a sort of ongoing joke in undergrad.
It turns out that this isn't as unreasonable as I thought; nowadays in the over-achieving area that I live, they want nannies and babysitters who can speak French, with masters degrees, etc.
I mean, take this person who wants a tutor for their 10 and 11-year olds:
Does this person really think that it takes a master's degree to do 5th grade level school work? Back in the 90s, they used to accept high school students as tutors for grade-school students. In fact, I held several such jobs during my middle school and high school years. Come to think of it, I was helping people with 5th grade level school work back in, um, 5th grade.
Why stop at a mere M.A.? If I ever have kids who need tutoring, I'm going to demand the ultra-nanny-- someone with a Ph.D. in electrical engineering.
It turns out that this isn't as unreasonable as I thought; nowadays in the over-achieving area that I live, they want nannies and babysitters who can speak French, with masters degrees, etc.
I mean, take this person who wants a tutor for their 10 and 11-year olds:
I am looking for a homework helper. The individual needs to have teaching experience preferably a masters in education. I have 3 children. The ages are 10, 10 and 11 years of ages.Now will someone please tell me-- wth does someone need a masters for, simply to drive around 10 and 11- year olds and help them with their homework!?
The job would be afterschool which would include: picking the children up from school, taking them to their activities, bringing them home and helping them with their homework. Car will be provided.
Does this person really think that it takes a master's degree to do 5th grade level school work? Back in the 90s, they used to accept high school students as tutors for grade-school students. In fact, I held several such jobs during my middle school and high school years. Come to think of it, I was helping people with 5th grade level school work back in, um, 5th grade.
Why stop at a mere M.A.? If I ever have kids who need tutoring, I'm going to demand the ultra-nanny-- someone with a Ph.D. in electrical engineering.
02 January 2008
My top 5 movies of 2007
1. Pan's Labyrinth
2. and 3. a tie between Lives of Others and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
4. No End in Sight
5. Away from Her
I do not watch enough movies to compile a top-10 list. In fact, I probably don' t watch enough movies to warrant even a top-5 list, but since I am very discriminating about the movies I choose to watch, it's not surprising that I like a third to half of the movies I watch in a given year. All of the ones in my "top-5" are movies I'd give at least a 9 out of 10.
Some movies I wished I had seen include:
-the Harry Potter movie, which I'm sure I wouldn't have given a 9 out of 10, but I very much wanted to catch on the big screen.
-12:08 East of Bucharest, which got pretty good reviews on metacritic, but didn't show in this area.
-Persepolis, which I'm dying to see, but is not showing in this area yet.
-Rattatouille
2. and 3. a tie between Lives of Others and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
4. No End in Sight
5. Away from Her
I do not watch enough movies to compile a top-10 list. In fact, I probably don' t watch enough movies to warrant even a top-5 list, but since I am very discriminating about the movies I choose to watch, it's not surprising that I like a third to half of the movies I watch in a given year. All of the ones in my "top-5" are movies I'd give at least a 9 out of 10.
Some movies I wished I had seen include:
-the Harry Potter movie, which I'm sure I wouldn't have given a 9 out of 10, but I very much wanted to catch on the big screen.
-12:08 East of Bucharest, which got pretty good reviews on metacritic, but didn't show in this area.
-Persepolis, which I'm dying to see, but is not showing in this area yet.
-Rattatouille
28 December 2007
Phone ettiquette and pet peeves. . .
Is it hypocritical of me to on the one hand, be annoyed at people who I call 3 times, but never call back, but then to also be annoyed to be the recipient of 3 calls that I don't have the energy to return?
In the case of case 1, there are several guilty people. I don't mean to sound high maintenance, but if I call you 3 times over the course of a few months, at some point, if our friendship is more than a token friendship, then I expect you to call me back, or at least email me and say, "Sorry I haven't called you back." Or have an infant. :)
It's not the act of not calling me back that bugs me so much as your earnest "promises" that you'll "definitely" call back, etc., and then you never do.
Don't make promises that you can't keep. Or if this is a hint for me to stop calling, that's fine too, but then I get mixed signals from some of you, b/c then you tell me in gushy tones to come visit.
As for case 2, this is Mr. Venn diagram, who I "broke up" with after sort of seeing him for 2 weeks. Since our venn diagrams don't overlap at all, I often don't have much to say to him. Yet, he calls, which is perfectly fine, if it were once a month or less. After all, I see him regularly. So really, between running into him almost daily and our unshared interests, I don't have a whole lot to talk to him about. So when he calls multiple times in a week, although as a rule, I try to call back everyone that calls so I don't become like case #1, it becomes really trying when you are busy as hell, don't have time to eat or breathe much, and this person who doesn't really excite you much keeps calling you. A few times a week.
So perhaps I'm like the kettle that calls the teapot black or however that expression goes, but damnit people. If you call me 4 times (in one week. Not over the course of several months or a year as in my case.) and I don't return your calls, then perhaps it's time to pace your calling.
How about you wait till I call you back? Then roughly count how many days it took for me to return your call (to gauge exactly how interested and excited I am to talk to you), and then leave that much space between the next call?
In the case of case 1, there are several guilty people. I don't mean to sound high maintenance, but if I call you 3 times over the course of a few months, at some point, if our friendship is more than a token friendship, then I expect you to call me back, or at least email me and say, "Sorry I haven't called you back." Or have an infant. :)
It's not the act of not calling me back that bugs me so much as your earnest "promises" that you'll "definitely" call back, etc., and then you never do.
Don't make promises that you can't keep. Or if this is a hint for me to stop calling, that's fine too, but then I get mixed signals from some of you, b/c then you tell me in gushy tones to come visit.
As for case 2, this is Mr. Venn diagram, who I "broke up" with after sort of seeing him for 2 weeks. Since our venn diagrams don't overlap at all, I often don't have much to say to him. Yet, he calls, which is perfectly fine, if it were once a month or less. After all, I see him regularly. So really, between running into him almost daily and our unshared interests, I don't have a whole lot to talk to him about. So when he calls multiple times in a week, although as a rule, I try to call back everyone that calls so I don't become like case #1, it becomes really trying when you are busy as hell, don't have time to eat or breathe much, and this person who doesn't really excite you much keeps calling you. A few times a week.
So perhaps I'm like the kettle that calls the teapot black or however that expression goes, but damnit people. If you call me 4 times (in one week. Not over the course of several months or a year as in my case.) and I don't return your calls, then perhaps it's time to pace your calling.
How about you wait till I call you back? Then roughly count how many days it took for me to return your call (to gauge exactly how interested and excited I am to talk to you), and then leave that much space between the next call?
Media bubble
Wow. I really must make it a point to read the news. I just happened to look at the NYT yesterday, after a several-day hiatus, and in the course of a few hours (while I was watching a movie), the former PM of Pakistan was assassinated. I'm sure if I had a TV, this would be blaring all over the news, but since I don't have a TV, and since I don't subscribe to actual hard copy papers, it's really easy to live in a sort of bubble and not be aware of the goings-on in the world for this week that I am off. Can you imagine if I hadn't checked the news? How could I be aware of the latest movie releases but not of Bhutto's death?
I am still in shock over her sudden death and the fact that I might've missed that minor tidbit, had I not checked the NYT.
I am still in shock over her sudden death and the fact that I might've missed that minor tidbit, had I not checked the NYT.
12 December 2007
Slightly neurotic, but we love him anyway.
My caper-chord-loving, congan drum instructor is an absolute nutcase, but we still love him. Please observe exhibit A--extensive notes for practicing our music:
"Procession I'VE GOT NEWS: The sound is really gorgeous. Go to www.metronomeonline.com, click on the A 440 (starting pitch) and keep a pulse of eighth note = 138. Duration of notes before breaths (in # of eighth notes): est 3, it 2, e (of hodie) 1!, li 2, li, 3, ti 2, ia, 3, 3 & 3. PRACTICE BREATHING RHYTHMICALLY
Ave Maria Kodály HAIL MOTHER OF GOD: altos keep on checking your G naturals for a headier tone. The Tempo I of m. 59 tends to settle in flat.
In Terra Pax JOYOUS PEACE. Sunday was better rhythmically but it still rushed on letter C sopranos. From m. 25 to the end (with the exception of letter E) I'm at quarter = 100 (practice speaking on www.metronomeonline.com). The last fugato entrance of the middle part was off on Sunday (pick up to m. 83) caught some off guard? Singing more sound throughout solidifies the harmonic transitions. Very effective ending and the spirit was there. "
etc. etc.
Note the instructions to go to such-and-such site and click on such-and-such a tempo marking and practice. Even though this is probably a perfectly reasonable expectation (if it weren't for the potlucks, work functions, final papers and everything else going on during the 2 busiest weeks of the year, that is. . .. Right now, anyone that wants me to do anything besides sleep, eat, go to work and practice is being extremely unreasonable), I can't help but find this absurd.
And yet, he wouldn't have taken the trouble to type all this out if he weren't serious. And this is why we love him to silly pieces. . .. Because he tells us to go to metronome.com and tick out eighth=138 and practice to this online metronome thingie and he is 100 percent serious.
As much as we laugh and at times, groan about his unreasonable demands, it is such an honor to sing and make music with someone who is so exacting and demands perfection and 120 percent out of all of us, as well as with my fellow drummer/choristers who live up to this expectation, all the while being full-time moms, working full-time, taking care of family, taking classes, volunteering on 200 committees, singing or playing in other groups, ice skateing, doing martial arts, training for a marathon, and reading a book a week, etc. etc.
On that note, I better stop blogging and get on that site and practice my eighth=138 timing.
"Procession I'VE GOT NEWS: The sound is really gorgeous. Go to www.metronomeonline.com, click on the A 440 (starting pitch) and keep a pulse of eighth note = 138. Duration of notes before breaths (in # of eighth notes): est 3, it 2, e (of hodie) 1!, li 2, li, 3, ti 2, ia, 3, 3 & 3. PRACTICE BREATHING RHYTHMICALLY
Ave Maria Kodály HAIL MOTHER OF GOD: altos keep on checking your G naturals for a headier tone. The Tempo I of m. 59 tends to settle in flat.
In Terra Pax JOYOUS PEACE. Sunday was better rhythmically but it still rushed on letter C sopranos. From m. 25 to the end (with the exception of letter E) I'm at quarter = 100 (practice speaking on www.metronomeonline.com). The last fugato entrance of the middle part was off on Sunday (pick up to m. 83) caught some off guard? Singing more sound throughout solidifies the harmonic transitions. Very effective ending and the spirit was there. "
etc. etc.
Note the instructions to go to such-and-such site and click on such-and-such a tempo marking and practice. Even though this is probably a perfectly reasonable expectation (if it weren't for the potlucks, work functions, final papers and everything else going on during the 2 busiest weeks of the year, that is. . .. Right now, anyone that wants me to do anything besides sleep, eat, go to work and practice is being extremely unreasonable), I can't help but find this absurd.
And yet, he wouldn't have taken the trouble to type all this out if he weren't serious. And this is why we love him to silly pieces. . .. Because he tells us to go to metronome.com and tick out eighth=138 and practice to this online metronome thingie and he is 100 percent serious.
As much as we laugh and at times, groan about his unreasonable demands, it is such an honor to sing and make music with someone who is so exacting and demands perfection and 120 percent out of all of us, as well as with my fellow drummer/choristers who live up to this expectation, all the while being full-time moms, working full-time, taking care of family, taking classes, volunteering on 200 committees, singing or playing in other groups, ice skateing, doing martial arts, training for a marathon, and reading a book a week, etc. etc.
On that note, I better stop blogging and get on that site and practice my eighth=138 timing.
07 December 2007
I want a classical music version of Chowhound
After extolling the virtues of Chowhound on my not-as-clandestine food blog, I've decided that what this area really needs is a classical music equivalent of Chowhound. A board where I can find out about latest performances (grouped by region). A board where I can find out about which version of a score is better--the Henle-Verlag or Barenreiter. A board where I can play "name that tune" or "name that conductor" (e.g. does anyone know the name of a composer whose name begins with R and wrote a double trumpet concerto in E minor? It turns out that google is quite useless for such queries. . .). A board where I can ask people whether such-and-such an opera is worth going to or where I can post my own opinions about whether said opera is worth seeing. A board where I can ask about diminished chords in a certain piece. A board where I can ask people what their favorite recording of the Mahler 3rd Symphony is. A board where I can ask for suggestions for picking music for a memorial service for someone who likes Schuman.
Why doesn't such a board exist?!?!?!??!?
Why doesn't such a board exist?!?!?!??!?
I can't spell backwards
I thought I was being clever by coming up with a username for my Stanford alumni account that was the backwards spelling of my name. After all, I have a yahoo account in which I spell a word backwards, and I get no spam in this mailbox whatsoever. So after getting about 100 pieces of spam per month (I only check it once or twice a month, so deleting 70 to 100 messages every time I logged on got old), I requested to have my email username changed to my first and last name spelled backwards. I had planned on using it as my official email address someday.
Well, no more. It turns out that I can't spell backwards. Thus I switched 2 of the letters in my last name. Instead of telling people that this email address is "simply my name spelled backwards", I now must tell them that it's a combination of my first name spelled backwards, plus my last name spelled in pig latin.
How cleverly idiotic. . ..
Well, no more. It turns out that I can't spell backwards. Thus I switched 2 of the letters in my last name. Instead of telling people that this email address is "simply my name spelled backwards", I now must tell them that it's a combination of my first name spelled backwards, plus my last name spelled in pig latin.
How cleverly idiotic. . ..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
