"Entirely under Priesthood Direction"
I took a few minutes today to glance through yesterday's trial transcript from Perry v. Schwarzenegger (transcript of the proceedings for Wednesday, 20 January 2010, of Perry v. Schwarzenegger (Volume 7, pages 1480–1741), and found a few things that caught my attention.
You may recall that during the campaign last fall, accusations were made that the Catholic Church and, particularly, the Mormon Church were bankrolling the "Yes on 8" campaign, nominally run by "ProtectMarriage.com" and, in addition, were significantly involved in operations. Those charges were vehemently denied by officials of both churches.
To no one's surprise, we can now establish that they lied. Much of yesterday afternoon's proceedings were spent examining a number of documents obtained during pretrial discovery relating to those questions of involvement. Herewith a few interesting paragraphs.
From an email written by Ron Prentice, head of "ProtectMarriage.com" to, if I remember correctly, members of the Catholic Bishop's Conference:
"The total projected cost for the [ballot] qualification effort has been set at 1.5 million. Thus far, 1.25 million has been raised and spent. The monies have come from four primary sources thus far: The Catholic community of San Diego, due to the involvement of Auxillary Bishop Cordileone, Fieldstead & Company, who pledged 50 cents for each dollar raised in January for the effort, Focus on the Family, and small gifts from direct mail efforts by ProtectMarriage.com." [p. 1612]
From another memo, this time written by a PR person with the Mormon Church:
"Since the first Presidency letter was read in every ward throughout California last month, I have been frequently asked what our [i.e., the Mormon Church's] role in Public Affairs will be in the Prop 8 campaign." […]
"As you know from the first Presidency letter, this campaign is entirely under priesthood direction – in concert with leaders of many other faiths and community groups forming part of the ProtectMarriage.com Coalition. [pp. 1622–1623]
The emphasis is mine, of course.
Finally, a bit from "Plaintiff's exhibit 2561", another document from LDS records:
"You may know that the Mormons have been out walking neighborhoods the past two Saturdays, with about 20,000 total volunteers."
Isn't it interesting how many Mormons were willing to volunteer to help restrict the rights of gay and lesbian people?
In: Faaabulosity, Raised Eyebrows Dept.
Spring Flowers at the Arboretum
Sometimes–okay, most times–spring can't come soon enough to suit me, so the arrival of crocuses, then daffodils, is always most welcome. When the daffodils appear I love to visit the US National Arboretum to take a walk in "Fern Valley" (where the daffodils used to be, but where one still sees a nice collection of woodland wildflowers growing in the woodland) or the Azalea Collection (where most of the daffodils are now).
This is neither of those, but we can still enjoy a break from the winter doldrums with some beautiful flowers.
Camellias at the National Arboretum
One day last year (2 May 2009, to be precise) we had a free Saturday afternoon so we decided to spend it at the Arboretum, which is not all that far from where we live. There was something going on at the main exhibition hall that had their parking lot filled so we decided to be spontaneous and see something we'd never quite made it too before: the Dogwood Collection (Arboretum map).
It was a very clever choice on our part. Everything there was in glorious display. Just outside the area where the dogwoods were planted were some azaleas, camellias, and a peony or two. The azaleas in particular were rather flamboyant, as you can see in the photograph below.
The Flickr Album: U.S. National Arboretum, 2 May 2009. As I mentioned in the notes there, we hadn't taken the camera with us that day but Isaac did have his new Blackberry along, so we took these pictures with it. We didn't know how many images it might capture, but we found out when we ran out of space just before taking any of the dogwoods themselves.
Brilliant Azalea
Nathanson's Almost Testimony: Equality Popping up Everywhere
Today, I watched* a snippet of video deposition of one Paul Nathanson, who was to be called as a defense witness (i.e., supporting the anti-equality side of the argument) in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, until his name was withdrawn. The given reason for withdrawing his name, of course, was incredible fear of persecution at the hands of the gay menace; the rather obvious reason, after one sees this bit of his deposition, is that he would only have weakened the case for the defense.
Now, it comes as no surprise really that witnesses under oath might not sound so convincing in stating a case against marriage equality as they do, say, in free-wheeling television commercials underwritten by, say, the Mormon Church. However, this bit of deposition sounds rather more like making the case for plaintiffs than anything else.
The video can be seen at the website of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, here. (AFER also is helpfully posting their copies of the hearing transcripts here.)
Here is the transcript of the beginning of the deposition excerpt that startled me so much. I believe the questioner here is Mr. David Boies, co-counsel for plaintiff (i.e., the fair side). Remember, this is an opponent of marriage quality:
Q – Do you know what position the American Anthropological Association takes, if any, with respect to the issue of gay marriage?
A – They support it. They support it.
Q – Do you know what the position, if any, of the American Psycho-Analytic Association is with respect to gay marriage?
A – They support it.
Q – Do you know what the position of the American Psychological Association is, if any, with respect to gay marriage?
A – They support it.
Q – Do you know what the position is of the American Psychiatric Association…
A – They support it.
Q – … with respect to gay marriage, if any?
A – They support it.
–
Q – Are you familiar with the American Academy of Paediatrics?
A – No. No, I’m sorry, I am. And they also support it.
Q – They also support what?
A – Gay marriage.
Q – Do you know any of the reasons why the American Academy of Paediatrics supports gay ma
A – They see no problem for children.
———-
* H/T Jeremy at Good As You.
In: All, Current Events, Faaabulosity
Professional Verbs
I was interested to discover that a number of things I have done professionally have no verbs. How did we ever get anything done? (Although, I also find it interesting that I've worked at times as an "engineer", whose professional noun is exactly the same as the verb of the professional activity, "to engineer".)
It also occurred to me that many names of occupations are agentive forms of verbs for the characteristic activity: weaver, cobbler, driver, cleaner, writer, robber, teacher, and so on. But there are some occupations, like chemist, where not only is the name not an agentive form of a verb, but in fact there's no verb at all for the characteristic activity. What a chemist does (I guess) is to apply the science and technology of chemistry to practical or theoretical problems — but there's no verb for that, no "chemicize" or "chemistrate" or whatever.
[Mark Liberman, "Professional verbs", Language Log, 31 December 2009.]
Perhaps there is no verb for what chemists and physicists and biologists and mathematicians do because — wait for it — nobody knows what they do? Actually, one could say that one principle activity of all of them is "research", although that doesn't really address the problem.
In: All, Laughing Matters, Such Language!
Fiore's "Learn to Speak Tea Bag"
Well, gosh, word is (via Joe.My.God) that Mark Fiore's cartoon, "Learn to Speak Tea Bag", has caused some upset among conservative political extremists. Imagine!
Is there, then, any better reason than that to do some viral spreading with this metaphorical blog sneeze?
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
In: All, Laughing Matters, Splenetics
Olson & Boies talk to Maddow
So that I can locate it easily, here is the short segment of Rachel Maddow talking with Ted Olson and David Boies, Perry v. Schwarzenegger lawyers for plaintiffs.
I have to admit that it thrills me to listen to Ted Olson say, "If you listen to these individuals and you hear our arguments, you are going to agree with us."
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
In: All, Current Events, Faaabulosity
Perry v. Schwarzenegger : A Note
Yesterday morning, in a federal courtroom in San Francisco, began the trial of the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger, widely known as the "gay-marriage trial". This is the lawsuit brought against the state of California, challenging the constitutionality of proposition 8, the sate constitutional amendment that outlawed same-gender marriages in that state when they were already legal.*
Almost needless to say, this is an exceedingly important case, at least for me and my fellow conspirators of the homosexual menace. For us it's the chance for justice, equality, and civil right to triumph over irrational fear, bigotry, and oppression. The other side, apparently, believes it's their chance to demonstrate that their god really, really does hate homosexuals.
I don't plan to "report" on the progress of the trial, nor do I plan regular commentary as such. On the other hand, it's a significant interval in the arc of American civil rights and it will likely seep into whatever I'm thinking about over the next few weeks–or longer, if Isaac and I have to start making wedding plans sooner than we expected. I don't like making predictions about matters like this — it violates my physicist's fondness for verifiable statements — but I have difficulty seeing how any rational adjudicators can find for the defendants. However, given my reference to "rational adjudicators", I can hear you thinking that the Supreme Court is likely part of the suit's future.
In my earliest days online (usenet, c. 1992) it was a very popular activity in certain circles to "debate homosexuality". It always seemed a pointless activity to me, like "debating rocks" or "debating clouds" — what was there to "debate"? — but some loved the full-contact sport. (College students and those of sophomoric bent always seem drawn to pointless "debates".)
Some seemed to feel that they were honing their "arguments" but "honing" for what purpose wasn't clear to me either. Debates in the streets, I guess.
At that time the "procreative argument" that was meant to demonstrate that same-sex relationships were not "natural" was very popular and thought to be unassailable by those who used it.
It always started and ended in the same way: same-sex relationships were not natural because two men or two women couldn't have children, and that was what their male/female parts were "meant" for. But, one objected, what about mixed-sex couples who either couldn't or chose not to have children in their relationship? That objection was always brushed aside with something that approximated this idea: mixed-sex couples, in some Platonic-essence subjunctive world of male-types and female-types, could in essence procreate even if a particular instantiation was unable or unwilling to do so, so it's still "natural".
I kid you not. This "debating point" was taken very seriously by some, regardless of how obviously, ridiculously specious it was. Perhaps I should describe it as prima facie specious to make it sound more court-roomy, since this "argument" is still with us and has already turned up in the cloud of discussion surrounding Perry v. Schwarzenegger,
Fortunately, and rightly, the "argument" is sounding even sillier (if that's possible) than it did 15 years ago, and I have to say I'm happy enough to see that it will finally show up on the record in a courtroom where it can be laughed out of existence, as it should be.
The anti-equality forces that promulgated Proposition 8 were very vocal about their opposition to "the homosexual lifestyle", usually invoking children somewhere in their propaganda–a time-honored tradition with reviled social groups. Oddly, when the time comes to put their self-righteousness on the record in courtroom transcripts, they scatter like cockroaches in a kitchen when the lights are suddenly turned on. One of the defendants, who begged earlier last year to be made part of the case, is now begging to be left out. The governor and attorney general of California have both refused to defend the case in any way, perhaps realizing how quickly their names in the history books can become blackened with tarnish.
Before the trial began, Judge Walker planned to allow the proceedings to be recorded on camera, and for said recordings to be posted on YouTube. Not televised, but the next best thing. Oddly, the anti-equality defendants raced to the US Supreme Court to get the decision stayed. As I write the temporary ban is in place until at least tomorrow evening.
Why would the anti-equality people, who feel so self-righteous about their "moral" position on the matter, shun the light of national scrutiny? They claim a fear of violent retribution — remember when homosexuals were "pansy" weaklings that one could tread all over with impunity? — but we all know better, don't we? Recall the cockroaches in the kitchen. When on the record and under oath, their testimony is likely to whither faster than one could exclaim "Jesus Christ!" It could be embarrassing at least; at unlikely best it could silence their empty claims for years to come the way Kitzmiller v. Dover quieted the intelligent-design creationists, at least for a bit.
How in the world has it come to pass that we lovers of "the love that dare not speak it's name" have now moved out into the full sunlight demanding truth, honesty, and recognition when, a mere five decades ago, collective and individual shame was the acceptable strategy for surviving in a time when one's irrepressible love was both illegal and classified as a mental illness?
The homophobes really have no one to blame but themselves for this turn of events. Most gay and lesbian people had worked out schemes for living quiet, if not always satisfying and rewarding, lives. However, the "don't shove it down out throats" crowd just wouldn't leave us alone. Police made raids, then made arrests, then loudly published names just to ruin the lives of homosexuals. Shock treatments were touted as "humane" cures. Homosexuals were hounded and persecuted by McCarthyism as a far more tangible target than communists.
We weren't shoving it down anyone's throat but our persecutors amazingly kept opening their mouths and swallowing it, but blaming us for their discomfort while they enjoyed having social scapegoats that they thought were easy to blame and would never fight back.
Well, it got tiresome and finally went too far. Every year some of us celebrate the turning of the tide when homosexuals said enough is enough. We want to be left alone and you just won't leave us alone, so here we are to claim our rights as full citizens. Every year "gay pride" events around the country mark the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots that started on 27 June 1969, which is why such events typically happen in late June.
I think the dynamics of homophobia, both individual and societal, are pretty well known by now. Whence comes the idea that homosexuality is "shameful" I don't know–it could keep lots of graduate students busy for a long time writing theses about it. But, given the strength of the shame, we have seen for years the intense reaction it creates in some people who will go far beyond any rational response to their dislike of homosexuality with violence towards gay people and whatever legal forms of persecution they can contrive. Shakespeare gave us the truth from Gertrude's mouth: "the lady doth protest too much"; today we can easily recognize that person bearing the burden of shame trying to contrive ways to make him stop, to remove temptation by making succumbing to temptation too awful to contemplate.
But denying one's nature to that extent is a grave mistake and now the truth is out of the bag, that train has left the station, and the horse has escaped the barn. Pride has been the antidote to the venom of self-hatred and societal disapprobation.
And so here we stand at the edge of liberty and the beginning of equality for another group of people–my group of people. Whether it will happen through this lawsuit I can't say, but it's happening and this moment marks a big advance either way.
I was thinking today about the pitiful stance of some religious groups towards marriage equality for gays and lesbians, those who feel it necessary to proclaim that gay marriage somehow detracts from "traditional marriage". It's being revealed that the idea is as empty as it seemed, and it set the tone for the beginning of this lawsuit. (see "He Doesn't Know").
Think about it for a moment. Suppose, say, that the Pope had chosen to proclaim that "expanding marriage to more people, to loving gay and lesbian couples, can only strengthen traditional marriage by opening participation to all loving couples who wish to proclaim their enduring relationship".
I can't think of any way to make it clearer that "arguments" invoking "traditional marriage" are empty and arbitrary. And now equality foes have really dug their own grave by inflating "marriage" to an institution of such vital importance, so central to civilization as we know it, that gays and lesbians would be foolish idiots not to want it! Ah well, who am I to complain if they can't win for losing–or vice versa.
I appreciate the attention and support of my friends–and our friends–on this matter. We couldn't have done it by ourselves.
———-
* If you'd like to read some comprehensive background on the trial, you might try:
- Theodore B. Olson, "The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage : Why Same-Sex Marriage is an American Value", Newsweek, 9 January 2010.
- Margaret Talbot, "A Risky Proposal : Is it too soon to petition the Supreme Court on gay marriage?" The New Yorker, 10 January 2010.
In: All, Current Events, Faaabulosity, Reflections
Death Metal Rooster
When 30 seconds of video makes me laugh this much, naturally I want to share the joy with all y'all who might not otherwise have this much fun today. Besides, it's my blog.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
p.s. The music is original for this video. That is so cool.
[Thanks to Andy Towle.]
In: All, Laughing Matters, Wanderings
More Popery
Creatures, including humans, "can be protected or endangered", the pope, 82, told the Vatican diplomatic corps in a traditional January address focusing mainly on environmental issues.
"One such attack comes from laws or proposals which, in the name of fighting discrimination, strike at the biological basis of the difference between the sexes," he said, citing "certain countries in Europe or North and South America".
[excerpt from "Pope slams gay marriage", Brisbane Times, 11 January 2009.]
I am thrilled. Here with the recent move by Portugal to legalize gay marriage (see, e.g.), I thought we'd reached the stage where one more progressive country recognized loving and enduring relationships between people of the same gender.
But, if the Pope can be believed, it would seem that countries around the world, without telling me, have been outlawing heterosexual procreation, banning mixed-gender marriages, and forcing positively everyone into fruitless, same-gender unions. Such nirvana!
Does he really, really believe that the human population is threatened with extinction because some of us are not busy making babies as fast as we can? Doesn't he realize that the "what if everyone did that?" argument (about anything!) was passe even in my youth? Does he really believe that one more same-gender marriage might topple the apparently synthetic heterosexual facade and cause all straight people to come over to the forbidden dark side? I guess the pope's job description calls for being able to believe lots of unbelievable things.
As I've pointed out before, we (i.e., the homosexual menace) are quite capable of reproducing as necessary to save the species. Why, we don't even have to enjoy it to get the job done!
In: All, Faaabulosity, Will Rogers Moments
He Doesn't Know
For example, one of the arguments that the anti-gay-marriage side has increasingly turned to outside the courtroom is that allowing same-sex marriage would hurt heterosexual marriage. At the pretrial hearing, Judge Walker kept asking Charles Cooper, the lawyer defending Proposition 8, how exactly it did so. “I’m asking you to tell me,” he said at last, “how it would harm opposite-sex marriages.”
“All right,” Cooper said.
“All right,” Walker said. “Let’s play on the same playing field for once.”
There was a pause—it seemed like a long one to people in the courtroom, though it was probably only a few seconds. And Cooper said, “Your Honor, my answer is: I don’t know. I don’t know.”
[final paragraphs from Margaret Talbot, "A Risky Proposal : Is it too soon to petition the Supreme Court on gay marriage?", The New Yorker, 18 January 2010 issue date; viewed 9 January 2010.]
In: All, Briefly Noted, Current Events, Faaabulosity
Friday Soirée IX: New Year's Supper
Okay, it clearly isn't a Friday night, but it also isn't the evening of New Year's Day when I was thinking about this program, either. I'm sure our imaginations can handle it.
Hors d'Oeuvres — Astro-Weenie Christmas Tree
If there's a concept that could use re-introducing for 2010, I think it's smart. That's smart as in "what the smart hostess" from the 1950s will be serving for her smart evening's entertainment. No doubt something witty and cunning, something suitable for the space age!
I own an incalculable debt of gratitude to Charles Phoenix for finally bringing to my attention the definitive recipe for Spam Cake. Mr. Phoenix makes his living from his passion for collecting slides of family living from the 1950s and thereabouts. It's retro to the max and one never knows what delights are hidden just around the next slide. Like Spam Cake.
Or the "Astro-Weenie Christmas Tree". I remember when that was slide-of-the-week in the emailing list, and what an amazing sight it was: a shining, space-age cone of enticing appetizers on toothpicks. Very, very, smart.
Let's begin then, with this video demonstration by Mr. Phoenix recreating this smart party-starter.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Entrée — Ravel : La Valse
Waltzes on New Year's Day make a traditional celebration, but I was as I often am in the mood for something a little non-traditional, so our waltz this time is The Waltz by Maurice Ravel, a favorite of mine. Here is an excerpt from Phillip Huscher's notes for the Chicago Symphony Orchestra:
La valse is not the piece Ravel planned to write. In 1906 he began to sketch Wien (Vienna), a tribute to Johann Strauss, Jr. and “. . . a kind of apotheosis of the Viennese waltz, with which is mingled in my mind the idea of the fantastic whirl of destiny.” This is still true of the music Ravel finally composed in 1919, at the request of the impresario Sergei Diaghilev. But fate now made the waltz a bitter reminder of a vanished era and newsreels showed that Vienna was no longer a city in its glory.
Certainly the bittersweet irony is strongly evident, but I also hear a lot of humor in it even if the humor is a bit macabre. Diaghilev didn't much care for the piece when he heard it, we're told. I like this quotation, attributed to Francis Poulenc (source):
Ravel, c'est un chef-d'oeuvre, mais ce n'est pas un ballet. C'est la peinture d'un ballet.
[Ravel, it's a masterpiece but it's not a ballet. It's the painting of a ballet.]
Here's the scenario as Ravel published it in the score (source):
Through whirling clouds, waltzing couples may be faintly distinguished. The clouds gradually scatter: one sees at letter A an immense hall peopled with a whirling crowd. The scene is gradually illuminated. The light of the chandeliers bursts forth at the fortissimo letter B. Set in an imperial court, about 1855.
I am always enchanted by the way the first waltz tune seems to appear ever so gradually out of the whirling mists.
We're accustomed to hearing the work in the gorgeous orchestration (by Ravel), but for tonight I thought something a bit more unusual and intimate.* This is a performance of an arrangement for two pianos, played by "twin sisters" whose names are given nowhere I can find them.‡ The piece is slightly over 10 minutes long, so it's given in two parts.
[YouTube link (part 1, part 2) for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Dessert — "Cherpumple"
This is another very, very cunning dish prepared by Mr. Phoenix. It's a pie/cake concoction that he calls the "dessert version of the turducken". I think that's probably ample introduction to get going with.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Digestif — Debussy : Danses Sacrée et Profane
Well, it's not exactly keeping with the waltz theme although the middle section is vaguely waltz-like. However, this gorgeous work by Debussy is sure to aid the digestion — something quite welcome after a big slice of that cherpumple. Besides, much of it is so achingly beautiful that it really needs no excuse to be heard.
This is a work for harp and strings (in this version). Originally written on a commission as a demonstration for a chromatic harp, it's always played on the pedal harp (since the chromatic harp disappeared rather quickly):
In 1904 Pleyel, the famous Parisian firm of instrument manufacturers, approached Debussy with a commission for a new test piece for chromatic harp, intended for use in the diploma examinations at the Brussels Conservatoire. Pleyel had introduced and patented the chromatic harp in 1897. Unlike the conventional concert harp, which is tuned according to the notes of the diatonic major scale, and has seven foot pedals, each of which corresponds to a single scale degree and its chromatic alterations (i.e. natural, sharp, and flat), Pleyel's instrument had no pedals. Instead, a separate string was provided for each chromatic note throughout its range. [source]
This performance (on pedal harp) is from 2007 by Ensemble Instrumental de Corse,
Marielle Nordmann, harp.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
———-
*If you want an orchestral version, here, in two parts, is a fine performance by Simon Rattle and the Berlin Philharmonic: Part I, Part II.
‡ [Added a day later:] A friend writes with the information that the "twin sisters" are Susan and Sarah Wang. Thanks for the information, Richard.
In: All, Food Stuff, Friday Soirée, Music & Art
"Perversion for Profit"
From about 1965, here is an hysterical "public-service" film which, today, seems reasonably amusing: "Perversion for Profit (Part I)". In it you will find out the "truth" about the perverting effects of pornography, particularly gay pornography with which, apparently, one glance turns the glancer into a twisted communist of some sort. It's worth keeping in mind that this film is from a time when homosexuality carried considerable social stigma, in addition to being both illegal and an official "mental illness". But I hasten to point out that the perversions illustrated (literally–it's difficult to known filth when you see it unless you've seen it) in the film are not limited to homosexual ones. Oh deary me no.
The description tells us: "Anti-pornography film produced by financier Charles Keating, linking pornography to the Communist conspiracy and the decline of Western civilization." The stated party responsible for its production is the "Citizens for Decent Literature, Inc." (a very early form of astroturf, evidently). I was enchanted to see that it was presented by George Putnam, "outstanding news reporter". Wow! Who wouldn't like a byline like that! His visual aids, too, are state-of-the art for that pre-PowerPoint dark age.
From Mr. Putnam's mouth:
We know that once a person is perverted, it is practically impossible impossible for that person to adjust to normal attitudes in regard to sex. […] Never in the history of the world have the merchants of obscenity, the teachers of unnatural sex acts, had available to them the modern facilities for disseminating this filth.
Oh dear, and that was well before the internet ! Clearly we are deep into the end of civilization without even realizing it. Naturally, as a not-well-known pornographer myself, I chortle in deviant delight at these developments that help me distribute my filth and pervert the youth of America with it; I just wish there really were that much "profit" in it for me. My experience, alas, is more of the "Porn for a Pittance" type.
Of course, the main argument for stemming the tide of filth is along the "save the children" lines. However, I can't quite see what's actually upsetting the "Citizens for Decent Literature". Perhaps it was just another bid to get people all excited so that they'd contribute money to conservative causes.
There are several interesting theories presented in the film, including a sort of "gateway to depravity" theory, that a glimpse or two of one of these magazines will instantly lead young boys into investigating harder (if you'll pardon the expression) stuff.
[The Internet Archive link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Now, not to feed your lustful flames but solely in the interest of education and awareness of this problem, here is the link to "Perversion for Profit (Part II)".
[Thanks to Michael Shermer for pointing this out to me.]
In: All, Faaabulosity, Laughing Matters
A Few Days Away
Gosh, take a few days without blogging and all sorts of things rush in to fill the void. One of those things is that I've been getting some of 2009's photographs processed and posted. The "few days away" was a little day trip we made. The two combine in this one post!
Thomas Jefferson's Monticello
Isaac wisely thought we could use a little get-away, so the Sunday after Christmas we drove, with friends Richard, HelenJean, and Scotty, to Charlottesville, Virginia. Part of the plan was to spend some restful time at the Hilton Garden Inn there, where Isaac had some preferred-customer bonus points to use so we could do it cheaply. The other part of the plan was to visit Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's home.
We visited Monticello on Monday, spending a leisurely 3 or 4 hours there, taking the tour of the house, wandering the grounds, looking in at the Jefferson Graveyard, looking at exhibits in the new visitor's center, shopping at the gift shop, and taking a couple of photo-ops with the life-sized bronze of TJ himself.
Here's the link to the Flickr photo set. In addition to all the wonders at the house, we saw some things that captured my attention. A big, gnarly mulberry tree, windows in the cellar, tree silhouettes, the aforementioned cemetery, the biggest English Ivy I've ever seen (by far), and the first time I'd ever seen a "Body Fluid Clean-Up Kit".
The day was cold but sunny and we had a delightful time looking around and being near all that history. The house itself, by modern standards, was rather small but very cozy and filled with interesting features. Now I'm wanting an octagonal room or two of my own.
The next day, Tuesday, we headed back towards DC, but happily got sidetracked on the way and stopped in for a tour of Montpelier, James Madison's home.
James Madison's Montpelier
The contrast was striking. Clearly the Madisons were a wealthier family than the Jeffersons. On the other hand, it seemed that the foundation that takes care of Monticello has significantly more money than the Montpelier group.
Again, we braved some significant cold and enjoyed the house tour and our stroll through the cellars and the grounds. Here's the link for that Flickr set.
In the early 20th century Montpelier was bought by the duPont family, who made extensive additions to the house. Recently, equally extensive restoration recovered the original scope and style of the Madison house. However, two rooms from the duPont time were kept and reconstructed as part of the visitor's center: a ballroom and the red, "Art Deco room" that Marion duPont Scott decorated c. 1928. It was a nice surprise at the end of our visit.
Marion duPont Scott's Art Deco Room
Birding at Blackwater
As you may remember, Isaac and I like to make day trips on federal holidays. In 2009 we had the pleasure of making a Presidents' Day outing (16 February) with our friends Lisa and Byron,‡ who shared with us one of their favorite day trips: birding at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, near Cambridge, MD, on Maryland's Easter Shore.*
It was a very pretty day, bright and sunny and unseasonably mild when we got there mid-afternoon.
A view of the estuary at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge.
Here's a bit about the refuge:
Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge is located on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, approximately 12 miles south of the town of Cambridge, in Dorchester County. The Refuge includes over 25,000 acres, composed mainly of rich tidal marsh characterized by fluctuating water levels and varying salinity. Other habitat types include freshwater ponds, mixed evergreen and deciduous forests, and small amounts of cropland and managed impoundments that are seasonally flooded for waterfowl use.
Blackwater Refuge was originally established in 1933 as a haven for ducks and geese migrating along the Atlantic Flyway. The Refuge is a popular place during the November migration when upwards of 35,000 geese and 15,000 ducks visit Blackwater.
[from the official site: Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, Cambridge, Maryland.]
This tuned out to be my kind of bird watching. When Lisa first suggested it I pictured trekking through muddy swamps in cold rain at the crack of dawn, and I don't even have a pair of waders. However, to our relief, this was largely birding by car, since the Refuge has a nice, drive-through arrangement. It was also largely photography from car, too.
We saw quite a number of birds that are new to my life list, I'm happy to say. I had never seen Sandpipers before, and they were out in force, scurrying around the mud where the water had receded. We saw a beautiful heron enjoying lunch. I very much enjoyed the views of the estuary in the February sun, not to mention the shapes of the trees on the horizon. There are lots of those photos in the albums (linked below).
Of course, a day trip implies that we had lunch somewhere. In fact, part of Lisa & Byron's refuge-day-out involved having lunch at a charming French restaurant in nearby Cambridge, Maryland. We all remarked that it was a surprising place to find a chic French bistro, but there you go. It was a delightful little place to spend some time, cozy and inviting and lovingly decorated. The menu was very nice. At Lisa's suggestion I had the croque-monsieur (I mistakenly thought it would be a light luncheon) and some onion soup for starter; how can I visit a French restaurant and not sample their version of onion soup (in the photo below)?
You can look through the photographs either at the Flickr set or theBearcastle album. The images are the same but show up in different sizes: one modest size in the Bearcastle album, a smaller default size with available really big size at the Flickr set.
Onion Soup at Bistro Poplar, Cambridge, MD
———
‡A month before we had taken Lisa & Byron with us for one of our favorite trips through Spring Grove, PA. There's a Flickrset and Bearcastle photo album (identical, I think, except for sizes of the images) of that day out, too.
* As in "eastern shore" of the Chesapeake Bay, i.e., the region across the Bay Bridge from Annapolis, MD.
In: All, Personal Notebook, Wanderings
Friday Soirée IX: Christmas Eve
Christmas Eve at our house is traditionally a very quiet time, because Isaac works all night directing and playing four different musical programs for 3 Christmas-Eve services (plus one interlude). I typically stay at home and cook and read until it's time to go to friend's house for a little midnight supper.
Tonight then, to celebrate the quiet and to follow some musical tradition, our musical focus is on French Baroque composer Marc-Antoine Charpentier (1643 – 1704). The centerpiece of the program is some excerpts from his Messe de Minuit pour Noël (Midnight Mass for Christmas). You may, as you prefer, wait until midnight to listen, but I think we're close enough that you can just go ahead.
Charpentier : Magnificat à quatre voix
In fact, since the "Magnificat" (the "Canticle of Mary", beginning "My soul doth magnify thee…"; Catholic Encyclopedia entry) is part of the evening service of Vespers, you shouldn't wait until midnight to hear it. This is a beautiful setting by Charpentier, beautifully performed by Maria Christina Kiehr (Soprano), Gérard Lesne (Countertenor), John Elwes (Tenor), and Josep Cabré (Baritone), singers and instruments directed by Jordi Savall. (There are extensive notes on the YouTube page about Charpentier that you might find interesting.)
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Advertisement for "Liberace's Christmas Eve Special"
And now, a few minutes of Christmas Eve silliness, an old sketch (from 1981) by the Second City TV folks (Dave Thomas, Rick Moranis, Andrea Martin and John Candy), featuring not only the pseudo Liberace, but also a faux Elton John, false Ethel Merman, and ersatz Orson Wells. Fun music and faaabulous costumes!
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Charpentier : Messe de Minuit pour Noël
This has become the one piece I delight in hearing every year on Christmas, one of my own little traditions (like watching Hitchcock's "Spellbound" in the evening). I find it charming, beautiful, and clever. "Clever" and "light-hearted" are due to the act that Charpentier based this setting of the mass on a number of popular French Christmas carols, or Noëls. These noëls were commonly used in services as the basis for organ improvisation and variation that were very popular, but Charpentier was original in using the material for his mass setting. Listening to recordings of such organ works by Balbastre, Dandrieu, Daquin, Lebegue, etc. is another Christmas Day tradition for me.
Here is an excerpt from the notes on the work by John Bawden (source):
The use of popular carols in church music had long been an accepted practice. In England carols were more often sung than played, but in France noëls figured prominently in the substantial French organ repertoire. The liturgy of Midnight Mass permitted the singing and playing of these Christmas folksongs, and by Charpentier’s time quite complex instrumental arrangements were commonplace. However, Charpentier’s idea of basing a whole mass on these songs was completely original. Altogether there are eleven noëls, most of which are dance-like in character, reflecting the carol’s secular origins. In addition to the carol melodies that he adapted to fit various parts of the mass text, Charpentier also composed new material, such as the slow sections ‘Et in terra pax’ at the beginning of the Gloria and ‘Et incarnatus est’ in the Credo. It says much for the composer’s craftsmanship that these quite different idioms are so seamlessly and convincingly blended together.
Let's listen to two excerpts, the opening "Kyrie" and the short closing sections, "Sanctus / Benedictus" and "Agnus Dei". I think you'll remark on the dance-like quality of these movements, which I find very appealing.
In case you want to follow along, the vocal score with keyboard reduction is available for free at the Choral Public-Domain Library: Messe de Minuit pour Noël. I should download it and leave it surreptitiously for Isaac; I've wanted to sing it for several years but haven't convinced him to put it together yet.
This performance is by the Chamber Musicians of the Loeuvre, Mark Minkowski conducting.
1. Kyrie Eleison
The opening section is based on the traditional tune "A la Venue de Noël".*
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Next sections on YouTube from this performance:
2. Christe Eleison
3. Gloria
4. Credo
5. Offertory
6. Sanctus / Benedictus
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
7. Agnus Dei
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
———-
*This charming performance — complete with unhappy child — of the Balbastre variations is one famous organ noël on the tune.
In: All, Friday Soirée, Music & Art
Books of a Feather
The game: correctly match entries from columns "A", "B", and "C".
| A | B | C |
|---|---|---|
| c. 1000 BCE | Old Testament, by numerous | The infallible word of god, every word to be interpreted literally |
| c 800 BCE | Odyssey, by Homer | An epic, heroic fantasy, an allegory of life's tribulations |
| c. 450 BCE | Physics, by Aristotle | Everything that was known about how the world worked, largely supplanted by later discovery and understanding |
In: All, Eureka!, The Art of Conversation
Shortest Day vs. Earliest Night
I am always happy to celebrate the decision of our sun to return to a higher point in our northern sky, a decision it routinely takes about this time of year: 21 December. It seems so delightful that the days seem to start getting longer immediately it makes the decision.
And then, whenever the topic comes up, as it certainly has today, I always make a pest of myself by pointing out my favorite astronomical fact for those of us in the northern hemisphere: although the winter solstice marks the shortest amount of daylight in the year, the earliest sunset of the year actually happened three weeks ago, on 7 December. The last time I mentioned it in this space (in 2006) I didn't have any really good, clear explanation to offer and I don't this time, either. I posted a few links previously — look at them if you feel yourself the intrepid explorer of orbital dynamics — but for now we'll just wave our hands and say it's because of the tilt of the Earth, and the fact that it's roughly spherical (at least, I think this would not happen if the Earth were cylindrical along its axis of rotation).
But anyway, the point I always make is this: by the time we get to the solstice, the sunset is already getting noticeably later and psychologically (to me, at least, since I rarely encounter sunrise) this makes us feel the day is getting longer at a rather brisk pace once the solstice is passed. The reason for that sensation, of course, is that it started three weeks ago. (Have fun verifying this for yourself with the NOAA Sunrise/Sunset calendar.)
For those who key on the sunrise to judge the length of their day–I'm sorry, but the latest sunrise falls on 7 January.
In: All, It's Only Rocket Science, The Art of Conversation
D'you Remember Joseph?
What happens when biblical literalism become biblical forgetfulness? Odd things certainly. Herewith a brief, heart-rending excerpt from an opinion piece by Chuck Norris (via Tinyfrog because I hate to link to the original):
What would have happened if Mother Mary had been covered by Obamacare? What if that young, poor and uninsured teenage woman had been provided the federal funds (via Obamacare) and facilities (via Planned Parenthood, etc.) to avoid the ridicule, ostracizing, persecution and possible stoning because of her out-of-wedlock pregnancy?
— Chuck Norris
The funny thing to me is this: Mary, as related in the book itself, did in fact have a husband, she was not a poor, out-of-wedlock pregnancy tragedy. His name was Joseph.
Don't most of those nativity scenes, the ones that aren't allowed on courthouse lawns, show the Jesus, Mary, and Joseph trio? I'm sure I've seen an image or two or three of all of them, the happy Joseph beaming at the bambino even though it's not his. Even though I think of Joseph as the first cuckold, Mary most definitely had a husband. Big Daddy, it seems, planned for that out-of-wedlock contingency.
Why is it that these traditional-family-first types keep forgetting about Joseph? What is he: chopped liver? (Yes, the title is sort of an allusion to Woody Allen in "Annie Hall".)
In: All, Laughing Matters, Raised Eyebrows Dept.
Friday Soirée VIII: Ghosts in the Snow
As I sit down to write this the snow has begun. We don't know when it will stop, of course, nor how much we might get, but forecasters seem to delight in adding up the biggest numbers they can credibly find: 18 inches? 20 inches? 26 inches? Whatever, it seems likely that this snowfall will be our biggest since our great blizzard of 1996, when we ended up with some 28 inches of snow. Here's an interesting thing we learned then: once the snow is deeper than about 18 inches it can be plowed and shoveled but there's no place to put it that isn't dangerously in the way.
We were out this evening at a potluck Christmas-caroling party. Happily, we made it home despite the hills we had to negotiate into our neighborhood, but it was just at the edge of barely driveable turning into seriously not driveable.
At the moment it's exceedingly quiet and a little bit mysterious. So, for our brief musical program tonight, the mood is quiet and just a little bit mysterious. Also, our three pieces are short so we're having another first: comparative performances. (To be honest, I couldn't decide on favorites, but the different versions do offer different hearings.)
Peter Maxwell Davies : Farewell to Stromness
Let's start with something modern, but far from modernistic. Davies (b. 1934) is an English composer of considerable repute and talent, who probably isn't so widely known as he should be. In his earlier years his music could be quite experimental and extreme, but he seems to have quieted some in his later years. Some people seem to think it was his moving to the Orkney Islands in 1971 that led to the calmer, gentler Davies.
Regardless, "Farewell to Stromness" is from the calmer, gentler, even melancholy Max. It comes from a set of pieces he composed in 1980 to protest a proposed uranium mine in Stromness, Wikipedia claims that the hypnotic bass line portrays the residents of Stromness walking sadly from their homes, forced out by uranium contamination. Perhaps.
Still, it's a haunting tune. Here it is in its original version as a piano solo, performed by "MattRay94".
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Next, another version of "Farewell to Stromness", this time in an arrangement for four guitars, played by the Los Angeles Guitar Quartet.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
François Couperin: Les barricades mystérieuses
To my ear this is one of the oddest, yet one of the most perfect pieces of music ever written; it comes from the early 18th century. I say "perfect" because it's always seems to me so beautifully poised, so elegantly balanced that not a note could be removed or inserted without tipping the whole thing over into a mess on the floor.
But it's also odd in its quirkiness. If you'll indulge me, I want to take a quick look at the musical notation:. These are the first three bars of the piece (click to get an image of the first page):
When I first read the music and then learned to play it on the keyboard, what I was seeing seemed to have almost nothing to do with what I was hearing. At first. What sounds like new agey arpeggios is notated as four-voice counterpoint in which none of the voices ever aligns with the others, so it's filled with syncopation and suspensions.
Musicians might furrow eyebrows to note that the piece begins on the second eighth-note beat in a 2/2 time signature, a very, very odd place to start. When I was learning it, trying to start on that beat seemed awkward and likely to dislocate a shoulder, but once I got it — sublime! The listener doesn't hear this notation but it gives a quirky shift to the rhythm at the beginning of each repetition of the rondeau theme, as though the first few notes tumble over each other in their hurry to get going. It is a rondeau, a simple form in which a theme is repeated with different bits of musical development in between each repetition.
Many people play the piece too slowly, as though that lends gravitas and mystery (or something). I can't stand to hear it that way. These two performances move along just fast enough–not hurried, but not slow!–that you'll hear the bass lines propel the harmony in graceful stride while the upper voices dance in attendance.
You might also notice the unusual sonority of the piece. Again, musicians will have noticed that it's all notated in bass clef. All that means is that it's all written about an octave lower than one might expect, and the voices are rather close together, so the harmonies sound very rich.
I think I could go on and on about this piece, but let's move on to listening to it. First, a performance by one Carlos Rodriguez, previously unknown to me. I like his tempo and the sound of his instrument.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Next, a performance by Scott Ross, a favorite harpsichordist of mine. His tempo is quite similar, perhaps a little slower, but still moving. Most of the interpretive differences will come in the ornament at the end of the rondeau theme and the little break that traditional comes between the end of the theme and the beginning of the next sequence, plus the fact that Ross changes registration (playing different sets of strings) for theme repetitions, for contrast.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
Well, look there: the first snow plow of the night has just gone by!
John Dowland: Lacrimae Antique, or "Flow My Tears"
Again, this is one of the greatest pieces of music ever written. You may also be interested to know that, for Isaac and me, this is "our song". We're not entirely sure how that came about, but it is and has been for over 17 years. For those who know our family, it's probably also the reason that we renamed our first greyhound "Dowland" when he arrived.
So, John Dowland (1563–-1626) was another English Composer. (I neglected to mention that Couperin was French, but you might have figured it out.) This "Lacrimae Antique" ("Ancient Tears") was undoubtedly his biggest hit, probably the hit of 1604. It started life as a lute piece, but its popularity meant it got arranged into every combination of instruments imaginable, and all the other composers of the time wrote their own arrangements and variations on the tune. Indeed, Dowland even wrote his own expanded set of pieces based on this one hit (the "Lacrimae Pavans"). Once you know it, you'll hear it everywhere in music of the time.
It is called a "pavan", which is a slow, stately dance. At the time melancholy was a much cultivated affectation, and this was its theme song. As a lute song, it's text began "Flow my tears…". Let's hear one of each.
In this first performance, an arrangement in five parts (I think) for viol consort, played by Hespérion XX and Jordi Savall. Enjoy the very rich sounds of the close voices shifting slowly past each other, sometimes with unexpected dissonances that will raise an eyebrow.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
And finally, the lute song version: "Flow my tears", performed by Diane Cushing and Ted Mann.
[YouTube link for those who don't see the embedded player.]
In: All, Friday Soirée, Music & Art
"Going Vogue"
I have to admit that I have never seen "RuPaul's Drag Race" on LOGO TV — for one thing, we don't have cable — but I'm thinking it must be lots of fun, largely on the strength of the promotional image below, which, we have to admit, is much, much, much more faaabulous than the original that it parodies.
I particularly like the motto: "No Experience Required".
In: All, Faaabulosity, Laughing Matters