This final chapter title of LKM's BLOG is inspired by Rev. Russell Isler, Pastor of Montgomery Baptist Church(LKM's current church), and is based on the Bible scriptures of Genesis chapter 12, as well as Matthew 13:57-58 and Mark 6:4-6: The prophet is not without honor, except in his own household and among his own people. John 1:11 says "He came unto His own, but His own received Him not." The title of this BLOG article is a repeat theme of Pastor Isler's sermons, and this scripture is still mostly true in modern Israel: to date, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has yet to stage a crusade right in Jesus Christ's own back yard.
Does anyone truly have a comfort zone? Or is this just an illusion? Department of Justice statistics say most murders occur between people who know each other, and an initially-good personal relationship turns sour. Also, the number of murders committed where perpetrator and victim are of the same race or national origin considerably outnumber the number of those committed where perpetrator and victim are of different races or nationalities.
It is often popularly said that it is better to go with a devil one knows, than to take any chance with the unknown. But yet, every friend we now have was once a stranger to us, we had to leave a comfort zone in order to discover and make that new friend.
This blogger is a Toastmaster. One day, he gave a speech to his club called "God Bless Archie Bunker", in the which he pointed to Archie Bunker's Great Depression historic background as an apology for his bigotry and lack of cultural finesse. Who among us would be smooth and suave in our personal relations with other peoples unlike ourelves, if we had to quit school early and hustle to find a job--any job--at a time when job finding was nightmarishly difficult? But those of us with better education should know better, except for the fact that we still refuse to leave our illusory and imaginary "comfort zones". This blogger's only real objection to this popular comedy was that it depicted Archie Bunker as a WASP proto-type as being the only genre of person who is bigoted. There is a certain amount of "Archie Bunker" in all of us, and this blogger is not holding his breath to find any Chinese able to speak Arabic, or any Hispanics knowledgeable in the Hindi-Urdu language. "Why should they care", would come the response. After all, knowledge of one's fellow humans of different nationality is "not necessary", the shrinking of the world through improving communication and transportation notwithstanding. "Those people, those people, they, they, they...." as Archie Bunker says.
Then we keep coming back to George Mason University law professor David Bernstein's book, You Can't Say That! Is speech being regulated for cause of guaranteeing us the integrity of our comfort zones here? Is a legal wall being constructed between ourselves and certain inconvenient truths we need to hear? Sometimes, the price of freedom is and must be exposure to ideas that cause us to squirm in great discomfort. Many Bible passages are just like that, as they convict us of our sins. The Bible is metaphorically called "the SWORD of the Lord", and not His butter-knife.
If we leave our comfort zones, we may be surprised to learn that "those people" on the other side of the railroad track are not all that much different from ourselves, at the end of the day.
Finally, the Christian must understand that he or she never had any comfort zones to begin with. As the words to the hymn go: "Christian, do not seek repose, cast your dreams of ease away, you are in the midst of foes, watch and pray..." John 15:18-23. The author of this BLOG has encountered over the years even until now, people within the Christian church, as well as outside of it, who hate him. While he wants to love other people as the Lord loved us, he has known well since adolescent years that he can never trust any other people to love him in return. Jesus Christ spoke true.
-LKM
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Friday, April 22, 2011
Bullying: An Inconveniently Truthful Perspective
Firstly, an acknowledgement: the author of this BLOG acknowledges the phrase "inconvenient truth" to be originally from the mind of Albert Gore Jr. Regardless of what we may think of the particular ideas and claims of Mr. Gore, at least the point is well-taken that in a supposed land of the free and home of the brave, there are certain truths which must be publicly enunciated, despite their inconvenience and incongruity to our usual predilections.
In recent years, government officials at all levels have become gravely concerned with this issue as relating to our schools. The author of this BLOG remembers being a victim of bullying himself while in school approximately fifty years ago.
Why do young people of adolescent age bully one another? The author of this BLOG suggests the answer to be that the outward physical projection of power onto people is glorified by society-at-large: politicians often make self-aggrandizing power grabs to subjugate the citienry; while in sports, individuals and teams engage in contests of strength and violence in order to gain social prestige at the expense of parties they defeat in such contests. Indeed, the American national ethos was truthfully expressed by former President Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal, when he said, "First you plunge your knife into your enemy, and then you twist!"
In a word, hapless adolescents are merely following the example set for them by older adults. The only difference is that older adult bullying is given the more respectable euphemism called government. To govern is to bully: both require use of physical force and violence--or threat of the same--to coerce citizens to comply with the wishes of stronger entities and/or parties initiating this use of physical violence. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely", wrote Lord Acton. During the era of the American military involvement in the Viet Nam war, then-U.S. Senator James William Fulbright wrote a book called "The Arrogance Of Power". But why war? The Bible scripture of James 4:1-3 explains the answer: men are usually motivated to war by pride, greed, envy and lustful desire. But these motives are usually disguised under pretext of altruism, patriotism and humanitarian benificence. Aggressor nations always claim to be liberating the peoples and nations they invade from some wicked evil or another. Likewise, the school bully will usually claim some virtuous intent for his actions, as a self-appointed vanguard of noble rectitude. Both the religious and the anti-religious share equal culpability in trying to "change the socio-political order for the better". Similarly, the school bully purports to "teach somebody else a lesson" towards an allegedly-higher good.
Yes, the inclination to bully is written deeply into the human psyche. This blogger remembers well one version of the famous movie "West Side Story" which he applauds. Here was a story of love and romance, against a back-drop of teen-age gang war between two rival gangs--the Jets and the Sharks--war which resulted in the pointless and tragic deaths of three young men. At the conclusion of this version of the movie, one police officer comments on the silly frivolities and moral recklessness of youth. But his colleague retorts, "Yeah, but are we any better?" Then the camera focuses on a newspaper at the local news stand. Its headlines read, "Four Hundred More American Troops Die In Viet Nam This Week".
-LKM
In recent years, government officials at all levels have become gravely concerned with this issue as relating to our schools. The author of this BLOG remembers being a victim of bullying himself while in school approximately fifty years ago.
Why do young people of adolescent age bully one another? The author of this BLOG suggests the answer to be that the outward physical projection of power onto people is glorified by society-at-large: politicians often make self-aggrandizing power grabs to subjugate the citienry; while in sports, individuals and teams engage in contests of strength and violence in order to gain social prestige at the expense of parties they defeat in such contests. Indeed, the American national ethos was truthfully expressed by former President Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal, when he said, "First you plunge your knife into your enemy, and then you twist!"
In a word, hapless adolescents are merely following the example set for them by older adults. The only difference is that older adult bullying is given the more respectable euphemism called government. To govern is to bully: both require use of physical force and violence--or threat of the same--to coerce citizens to comply with the wishes of stronger entities and/or parties initiating this use of physical violence. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely", wrote Lord Acton. During the era of the American military involvement in the Viet Nam war, then-U.S. Senator James William Fulbright wrote a book called "The Arrogance Of Power". But why war? The Bible scripture of James 4:1-3 explains the answer: men are usually motivated to war by pride, greed, envy and lustful desire. But these motives are usually disguised under pretext of altruism, patriotism and humanitarian benificence. Aggressor nations always claim to be liberating the peoples and nations they invade from some wicked evil or another. Likewise, the school bully will usually claim some virtuous intent for his actions, as a self-appointed vanguard of noble rectitude. Both the religious and the anti-religious share equal culpability in trying to "change the socio-political order for the better". Similarly, the school bully purports to "teach somebody else a lesson" towards an allegedly-higher good.
Yes, the inclination to bully is written deeply into the human psyche. This blogger remembers well one version of the famous movie "West Side Story" which he applauds. Here was a story of love and romance, against a back-drop of teen-age gang war between two rival gangs--the Jets and the Sharks--war which resulted in the pointless and tragic deaths of three young men. At the conclusion of this version of the movie, one police officer comments on the silly frivolities and moral recklessness of youth. But his colleague retorts, "Yeah, but are we any better?" Then the camera focuses on a newspaper at the local news stand. Its headlines read, "Four Hundred More American Troops Die In Viet Nam This Week".
-LKM
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
LKM: Happy Recollections Of His Cello World
The music in the background for this article should be "Happy Recollections", for cello and piano, by the famous 19th century cellist composer David Popper. This cellist blogger fervently believes that the art of cello-playing, at least in America, will not survive long beyond his own lifetime. He also doubts that names of great cellists of the past-- such as Mstislav Rostropovitch, Pablo Casals, Leonard Rose, Janos Starker, Gregor Piatigorsky, Bernard Greenhouse, Andre Navarra, Fritz Magg, Aldo Parisot, Antonio Janigro, Samuel Mayes , Paul Tortelier and Pierre Fournier--will even be in the memory of generations of Americans born after the end of his own lifetime. Starting with Elvis Presley and the Beatles, the slow but certain trashing of Western musical culture began. Today's contestants on the TV show "American Idol" owe infinite apology to the musical greats of fifty and more years ago, as the former cause this American blogger great chagrin and embarrassment for the sake of cultural repute of his native country.
The four cello maestros in this blogger's life were: 1)William Stokking, a.k.a. "Dutch Uncle Bill", future principal cellist of the Cleveland and Philadelphia Orchestras(he was in the Navy Band-Orchestra during the time of teaching this blogger); 2)John Martin, for fifty years principal cellist of the National Symphony; 3)Leopold Teraspulsky, professor of cello at Indiana University Music School; and 4)Mihaly Virizlay, principal cellist of the Baltimore Symphony. Great first-rate performers, all! But this blogger's favorite teacher of all was---Leopold Teraspulsky. This choice has no relation to Mr. Teraspulsky's playing or teaching ability, although those things he certainly had. No, Mr. Teraspulsky is chosen because he did not smoke! As a non-smoker himself, this blogger infinitely appreciated Mr. Teraspulsky's abstinence from the use of tobacco!
The first teacher, i.e. "Dutch Uncle Bill", often told stories about himself in which he made himself the hero. For example, while driving his bright-red and white station wagon and wearing his Navy uniform hat, he once followed an emergency fire-truck convoy through a red traffic light. A near-by policeman, mistaking him for the fire chief, waved him on through the traffic light! "Dutch Uncle Bill" gave me a great early foundation, giving me left hand-developing exercises which he said would one day see me signing my checks with my left hand(I am right-handed). Then one day, he sought to teach me vibrato. I had been experimenting with this technique all the week before, and almost knocked him off his chair with shock-surprise, to show him I already had the technique mastered! I continued to study with "Dutch Uncle Bill" until the end of my elementary school days, playing for my sixth grade classmates one day at Beltsville Elementary School.
Transition over into junior high school also saw my transition over to John Martin as my cello teacher, I was to study with him until graduation from high school. I remember but little of my study with him, except that he introduced me to cello exercise books by cellist composers David Popper and Alfredo Piatti. I studied several well-known pieces of cello solo repertoire with Mr. Martin as well. When I would complete playing these at my lessons, Mr. Martin would say to me his now-immortal words: "That was nice for a warm-up, NOW LET'S PLAY IT!" What he was referring to was the fact that while I had played these works in perfect intonation and rhythm, any semblance of artistic expression and interpretation was still horribly lacking: I was playing these solo works just like an exercise: hmm-m-m. I wonder why that was?! But John was overall an excellent teacher. He was a suave, reserved and easy-going gentleman, in stark contrast to a more forward and sometimes petulant William Stokking. John Martin never told any stories about himself as William Stokking did.
Then I went on to college, to Indiana University Music School and Leopold Teraspulsky. I learned much new cello repertoire from Mr. Teraspulsky, who was the first of my teachers to discuss with me seriously the issue of musical interpretation and refined musicianship. I eventually got the message, but concluded in later years of playing that without the ability from within one's own heart and soul to understand this concept, the instrumentalist would always be a mere organized-noise-maker, as opposed to being a true musician. Mr. Teraspulsky was also a basically very friendly and easy-going individual, and again I especially appreciated his abstinence from smoking.
Then after leaving Indiana University, I took a break from my cello as I went on to U.C.L.A. to further pursue my foreign languages studies: I had never actually majored in music while in college per se, but had opted for major in the languages studies. This is because you need no institutional degree to play in a professional orchestra: you are tested by orchestra managers on your actual playing skills when you apply for the job, and John Martin himself served as principal cellist of the National Symphony for fifty years, with no formal music institution degree. It is recognized by orchestras that some musicians are privately instructed and trained.
I finally resumed my cello again in 1974, going to the Peabody Music School of Johns Hopkins University to study with Mihaly Virizlay. Mr. Virizlay also taught me much about general musicianship, as well as about bow economy and utilization according to relative importance of various musical passages. His introduction of new and unfamiliar cello repertoire to me also prompted me to explore the cello literature on my own. Today, I have a collection of approximately 200 works for cello and piano: some are originally composed for cello, while others are merely transcriptions of works written originally either for voice or for other instruments(they sound nice on cello anyway!). I studied with Mr. Virizlay until 1980, when the school tuition simply became too expensive for me. Also, while Mr. Virizlay displayed superb ability to teach, he had a bad habit of running out on my scheduled lessons to play at his own self-glorifying public events, making up those missed lessons at his convenience! He often boasted to me of his public repute, I recall. I felt such conceit to be unnecessary, as one's musical performance speaks much more than words for any musician's public repute. By 1980, I had already had 18 years of formally-structured education on the cello, and had all the basics of cello-playing well in hand. It was just a question of learning new repertoire, and its appropriate-best stylistic interpretation is always a subject up for debate and discussion by those in the business!
My activities in Music Makers over the last forty years have always been a joy to me, and although I have made but pennies with my cello-playing, I also believe not every worth-while thing in this life is measurable in any monetary units. I also consider my high school days experience of playing with the all Prince George's County high school orchestra a culturally very enriching experience. Those of my high school classmates who would ridicule me for my involvement in this activity, both then and now, simply do not know the magnitude of cultural greatness they were(and are!) missing! I still held the high ground on this issue, the ignorance of the school's education establishment about great Classical orchestra music notwithstanding! Upon reflection, this blogger acknowledges that the genre of music he played--and still plays today--was not composed for the entertainment of the masses of common people: the latter have their own musical traditions of far more simple-minded appeal. Also, the lion's share of music this cellist blogger plays was and is the brain-children of great European--not American--composers. Also, most of the great cellists mentioned in this blog are also of European--not American--birth. Therefore, the "cultural incorrectness" this blogger experienced among his high school colleagues lies in the fact that this Western Classical music tradition is deeply rooted in Europe, but merely has shallow roots here in American soil. The likes of this blogger's former cello teachers would never "cut it" on American Idol. America's culturally-better days are most unfortunately behind her as the truly great musical composers and performers die off in our day, one by one. Indeed, the nation was too ensconced in the Watergate scandal as President Nixon fired his first Watergate prosecutor, to notice that a truly great cello virtuoso--Pablo Casals--passed from the world scene on that very same day.
The four cello maestros in this blogger's life were: 1)William Stokking, a.k.a. "Dutch Uncle Bill", future principal cellist of the Cleveland and Philadelphia Orchestras(he was in the Navy Band-Orchestra during the time of teaching this blogger); 2)John Martin, for fifty years principal cellist of the National Symphony; 3)Leopold Teraspulsky, professor of cello at Indiana University Music School; and 4)Mihaly Virizlay, principal cellist of the Baltimore Symphony. Great first-rate performers, all! But this blogger's favorite teacher of all was---Leopold Teraspulsky. This choice has no relation to Mr. Teraspulsky's playing or teaching ability, although those things he certainly had. No, Mr. Teraspulsky is chosen because he did not smoke! As a non-smoker himself, this blogger infinitely appreciated Mr. Teraspulsky's abstinence from the use of tobacco!
The first teacher, i.e. "Dutch Uncle Bill", often told stories about himself in which he made himself the hero. For example, while driving his bright-red and white station wagon and wearing his Navy uniform hat, he once followed an emergency fire-truck convoy through a red traffic light. A near-by policeman, mistaking him for the fire chief, waved him on through the traffic light! "Dutch Uncle Bill" gave me a great early foundation, giving me left hand-developing exercises which he said would one day see me signing my checks with my left hand(I am right-handed). Then one day, he sought to teach me vibrato. I had been experimenting with this technique all the week before, and almost knocked him off his chair with shock-surprise, to show him I already had the technique mastered! I continued to study with "Dutch Uncle Bill" until the end of my elementary school days, playing for my sixth grade classmates one day at Beltsville Elementary School.
Transition over into junior high school also saw my transition over to John Martin as my cello teacher, I was to study with him until graduation from high school. I remember but little of my study with him, except that he introduced me to cello exercise books by cellist composers David Popper and Alfredo Piatti. I studied several well-known pieces of cello solo repertoire with Mr. Martin as well. When I would complete playing these at my lessons, Mr. Martin would say to me his now-immortal words: "That was nice for a warm-up, NOW LET'S PLAY IT!" What he was referring to was the fact that while I had played these works in perfect intonation and rhythm, any semblance of artistic expression and interpretation was still horribly lacking: I was playing these solo works just like an exercise: hmm-m-m. I wonder why that was?! But John was overall an excellent teacher. He was a suave, reserved and easy-going gentleman, in stark contrast to a more forward and sometimes petulant William Stokking. John Martin never told any stories about himself as William Stokking did.
Then I went on to college, to Indiana University Music School and Leopold Teraspulsky. I learned much new cello repertoire from Mr. Teraspulsky, who was the first of my teachers to discuss with me seriously the issue of musical interpretation and refined musicianship. I eventually got the message, but concluded in later years of playing that without the ability from within one's own heart and soul to understand this concept, the instrumentalist would always be a mere organized-noise-maker, as opposed to being a true musician. Mr. Teraspulsky was also a basically very friendly and easy-going individual, and again I especially appreciated his abstinence from smoking.
Then after leaving Indiana University, I took a break from my cello as I went on to U.C.L.A. to further pursue my foreign languages studies: I had never actually majored in music while in college per se, but had opted for major in the languages studies. This is because you need no institutional degree to play in a professional orchestra: you are tested by orchestra managers on your actual playing skills when you apply for the job, and John Martin himself served as principal cellist of the National Symphony for fifty years, with no formal music institution degree. It is recognized by orchestras that some musicians are privately instructed and trained.
I finally resumed my cello again in 1974, going to the Peabody Music School of Johns Hopkins University to study with Mihaly Virizlay. Mr. Virizlay also taught me much about general musicianship, as well as about bow economy and utilization according to relative importance of various musical passages. His introduction of new and unfamiliar cello repertoire to me also prompted me to explore the cello literature on my own. Today, I have a collection of approximately 200 works for cello and piano: some are originally composed for cello, while others are merely transcriptions of works written originally either for voice or for other instruments(they sound nice on cello anyway!). I studied with Mr. Virizlay until 1980, when the school tuition simply became too expensive for me. Also, while Mr. Virizlay displayed superb ability to teach, he had a bad habit of running out on my scheduled lessons to play at his own self-glorifying public events, making up those missed lessons at his convenience! He often boasted to me of his public repute, I recall. I felt such conceit to be unnecessary, as one's musical performance speaks much more than words for any musician's public repute. By 1980, I had already had 18 years of formally-structured education on the cello, and had all the basics of cello-playing well in hand. It was just a question of learning new repertoire, and its appropriate-best stylistic interpretation is always a subject up for debate and discussion by those in the business!
My activities in Music Makers over the last forty years have always been a joy to me, and although I have made but pennies with my cello-playing, I also believe not every worth-while thing in this life is measurable in any monetary units. I also consider my high school days experience of playing with the all Prince George's County high school orchestra a culturally very enriching experience. Those of my high school classmates who would ridicule me for my involvement in this activity, both then and now, simply do not know the magnitude of cultural greatness they were(and are!) missing! I still held the high ground on this issue, the ignorance of the school's education establishment about great Classical orchestra music notwithstanding! Upon reflection, this blogger acknowledges that the genre of music he played--and still plays today--was not composed for the entertainment of the masses of common people: the latter have their own musical traditions of far more simple-minded appeal. Also, the lion's share of music this cellist blogger plays was and is the brain-children of great European--not American--composers. Also, most of the great cellists mentioned in this blog are also of European--not American--birth. Therefore, the "cultural incorrectness" this blogger experienced among his high school colleagues lies in the fact that this Western Classical music tradition is deeply rooted in Europe, but merely has shallow roots here in American soil. The likes of this blogger's former cello teachers would never "cut it" on American Idol. America's culturally-better days are most unfortunately behind her as the truly great musical composers and performers die off in our day, one by one. Indeed, the nation was too ensconced in the Watergate scandal as President Nixon fired his first Watergate prosecutor, to notice that a truly great cello virtuoso--Pablo Casals--passed from the world scene on that very same day.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Free Speech: A Right From God Or A Priviledge From Men?
The author of this BLOG regrets to add this shameful chapter to his BLOG as per the record of his own experience. However, he believes the shame herein described belongs not to himself, but to our government, for its abject refusal to acknowledge that the civil rights and liberties enumerated in the U.S. Constitution--as this nation's founders said--come from God as absolute and inalienable, and not as priviledges granted and withdrawn by men, according to their convenient political expedience. Further address to this issue is available in George Mason University law professor David Bernstein's book, You Can't Say That!(Why not? Read on!)
The legal background to this article is the U.S. Supreme Court cases of Connick v. Myers, and Churchill v. Waters. Here, the high court proclaims that government employees have First Amendment free speech rights, so long as their speech "does not interfere with the efficiency of government operations." Who assesses the meaning of this edict? Why, government itself, unchecked and unrestrained from any possible politically-motivated abuse. Four times was the author of this BLOG suspended from work at the U.S. Defense Mapping Agency, for which he worked from June 1976 - June 2006.
Suspension number one came in response to his written letter to his department chief, questioning the latter's patriotism and sense of commitment to other people. The man switched sides three times at a department picnic volleyball game, trying to abandon the losing team and secure a place for himself on the winning side. When it became obvious that whichever side he was on was going to lose, he chickened out and dropped out of the game altogether. The author of this BLOG also referred to this department chief--a black African-American man named James--as "Uncle Jim-ima", a male-sex version of a nationally-famous commercial food icon. This BLOG author was suspended for "use of insulting language", and for making a "racially discriminatory comment about a superior agency official". QUESTIONS: Is it interference with government operational efficiency, if an employee's insults to his superiors do NOT relate to the government agency's official mission? How will the government define "insulting language" in a manner satisfying the Constitution 14th amendment, when one man's villain is another man's hero? Is it discriminatory under any federal civil rights statute, to satirically call a black person after the name of a long-established and famous commercial food product black icon? In any event, the volleyball team-switching incident made the BLOG author wonder if his department chief's leadership included the magnanimity to help those in struggle to succeed on the job, as opposed to self-glorification by association with those already winning and successful.
Suspension number two came in response to doctoring the photograph of an agency lawyer in the agency's newspaper, to make him look like Satan the devil and send the doctored photo to him. He was being cited for an agency award for outstanding work. This BLOG author felt he did not deserve the award, for reasons of constitutional import relating to the first suspension incident. QUESTION: Is it interference with government operational efficiency, to express contempt for an agency official not in the employee's chain-of-command, and concerning an extraordinary occasion of award not directly central to the successful execution of the agency's mission?
The third suspension came in response to an e-mail addressed by this BLOG's author exclusively to his immediate first-line supervisor. In this e-mail, he used the word "nigger-boy", to describe how he felt he was being treated by a fellow co-worker believing himself to be more competent on the job than this BLOG's author. This co-worker was repeatedly commanding the BLOG's author to go down to the map library five floors down, and retrieve maps. After several episodes of this treatment, the BLOG's author felt greatly demeaned, to say the least! QUESTION: How can the use of just one word in an e-mail, no matter how unpleasant or "politically-incorrect", possibly cause interference with government operational efficiency, if used only once and not as part of a repeated pattern of co-worker harrassment? Hostile work environment law would have very unlikely application to this instance.
The fourth suspension came in response to e-mails sent from the BLOG author's home to that of a foreign-language instructor on temporary contract with the agency. These e-mails were composed by the BLOG author on his own time, from his own home, and using his own resources. He was chiding the foreign language-instructor for the latter's boasting about previous association with high-ranking government officials. The BLOG author was warning that government and politics are very unpopular here in America, and so such personal association would NOT confer socio-political prestige, but quite the very shameful opposite. The foreign language instructor complained to agency officials about "feeling threatened" by the e-mails, although the e-mails contained no statements of intent to inflict any criminal injury upon the instructor. Thus the charge of "feeling threatened" was vague: threatened with what adversity? Not explicitly stated or proven. QUESTIONS: Do government agencies, as employers, still have administrative control over their employees, concerning the latter's behaviour off of government property and after working hours? Does government have authority to vague, non-specific threats not stating intent to violate any particular law? Is "feeling threatened" by a communication's recipient sufficient legal grounds to even say a real threat exists, i.e. does "feeling threatened" equal objective reality under the law? This question also occurred with the second suspension incident.
As far as this BLOG's author can fathom, the four suspensions he experienced on his job were not based on any credible interference with any aspect of the agency's official mission, per se. Rather, he was suspended for mere "political incorrectness" which offended various agency officials' feelings. To use the words of William Shakespeare, civility is "a consumation devoutly to be wished". But the question of government being empowered to dictate rules of unwritten customary civility still remains. The power to penalize people for violation of unwritten social mores is a power the people should confer upon our government only with the greatest of reluctance--if they confer such power upon government at all--given the presence of the 14th amendment in the U.S. Constitution. Equal enforcement of unwritten law can never be guaranteed, and the words, "you cannot impose your religious morality on me" is a rallying cry of the American far Left. Why that cry should be nullified as a condition of government employment is a question the Left has yet to answer.
This BLOG author has not been able to procure justice on this issue, even five years after retirement from his government job. The question of use of "offensive language" is an ever-increasingly prominent issue nonetheless. "Free speech for me, but not for thee?" The U.S. Constitution, backed by the Declaration of Independence, contains much high-flying, idealistic rhetoric. But the author now knows that as relating to himself, none of it is true! -LKM
Friday, April 8, 2011
Education: A "Woman Thing"?
This blogger remembers his high school and college years, 1961-1971. All during those years, the gender balance of all his teachers and professors was more-or-less evenly distributed, half-and-half. He greatly appreciated seeing both genders take responsibility for the education of future generations of Americans.
More recently, however, in October 2009 exactly, the state of Maryland held a state-wide symposium in Columbia(Howard County) on parental involvement in education. This blogger attended that convention, and, to his shock-surprise, discovered that a good 90-95% of attendees at the convention were women! He began to seriously wonder if he as a man was a freak incongruity, an unwelcome intruder at some event far more exclusive than publicly advertised. What had happened over the last 35 years since he left the four ivy-covered walls of formally-structured academia? Men at the conference, while certainly present, were few and far between.
Is education today becoming an exclusively woman-thing? Statistical surveys recently are indicating that more women than men graduate from college with advanced degrees, and that women academically out-perform men at all levels of education and schooling. Are men getting the message, sought or unsought, that education is no longer for them, so they better get out of education "while the getting is good"? What would be the economic and socio-political consequence of a complete feminine take-over of all academia? Could America afford, or perhaps even desire, such a consequence? Now that John Wayne is dead, it might enable women to say, "Men can do anything they want to----as long as they have supper ready for us women when we come home from work." (Some men, particularly among the French and Italians, have proudly shown themselves to be among the world's best chefs. Meanwhile, most medical doctors and lawyers in Russia are women.) Europe appears to be not the least bit squeamish about crashing the walls of gender distinction in the distribution of highly-educated top-paying professions. Et tu, America?
Today, technological advance is replacing brute bodily physical strength as the central qualification of competence to perform many tasks previously thought to be "a man's job". Most notably, the military is moving in this direction in relation to national defense. John Wayne is dead, and so are those brash "rides into the very jaws of hell and returning back again unscathed(ta-da-a-a-h!). No longer does the U.S. Marine Corps claim to "build men", or to be "looking for a few good men", as it once did, shall we dare say, "in the good-old days"? (Do we hear older males' champaign glasses clinking in salute to the memory of those days?) But today, the U.S. military is gravely concerned that today's educational institutions may fail to accomodate competent operation of new and advancing technologies so sine qua non to America's national defense. If women academically out-perform men in school, the new American military may have no choice but to rest the burden of national defense mainly upon the shoulders of women. Will women then still need men "like a fish needs a bicycle"? Maybe. But the extent of feminine willingness to transition over to this previously-exclusive "good-old-boys' club" remains a big bottom-line question. Trends of gender in education will hold the key to answering that question.
What if between men and women, women become the more superiorly-educated sex, what effect, if any, will this have on love-life relations between the sexes? Will women love men more, love them less or love them about the same as in past generations? This blogger admits to speculation about married life to a woman far more-educated than himself(whatever "educated" means). To a medical doctor, a corporate CEO, to a Nobel Prize-winning college prof? Maybe. But to a lawyer? When pigs fly: when William Shakespeare advocated killing all the lawyers, he made no reference to sexual preferences. "The first thing we must do...." Some superiorly-educated women may decide it is high time to contemptuously spit men out of their mouths; but, the wiser among them will see education as a continuous revelation to themselves of how very ignorant they still are, and perhaps understand that maybe--JUST MAYBE--their "ignorant and stupid" man might still know a few things they would find at least interesting, if not downright urgently important. In any case, sameness of profession, and of intelligence level in the same, can lead to intense professional jealousy and rivalry, as well as to complementary romantic compatibility. So regardless of education, marriage should ideally be with complementary rather than with competitive professional roles.
The Bible still counsels that God has chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise, so that no man--or woman--will boast in His presence. (I Corinthians 1:17-31). -LKM
Saturday, April 2, 2011
LKM: His Christian Faith and His Music
The author of this BLOG is thoroughly convinced that the ability to compose and/or perform music is a very special gift from God not imparted to everybody. Evolution cannot explain how and why men have any aesthetic discernment so obviously present in music composition and performance. Were this to be a consequence of evolution, all men--or most men--would have such aesthetic discernment. But such is not the case. The composer Gustav Mahler once said, "If the music composer could say in words what he says in his music, he would not bother to write the music." This Christian musician is therefore deeply perturbed by those of his Christian brethren who say only choral music containing praise words men understand is worthy of performance in a Christian religious setting, and instrumental music is to be condemned as "worldly", "secular", etc. Indeed, Psalm 150:3-5 advocates praise of God through instrumental music: "Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet: praise Him with the psaltery and the harp. Praise Him with the timbrel and dance: praise Him with stringed instruments and organs. Praise Him upon the loud cymbals: praise Him upon the high-sounding cymbals." God is not anthropomorphic: thus He needs not human words by which to discern if music performed be to His honor or no.
Approximately 40 years ago, this Christian musician helped establish a local amateur musicians' club called Music Makers. Its activity survives to the very day of this writing, being held the first Sunday afternoon of each month. This BLOG author and Christian musician therefore sees such musicale meetings as a continuation of his Sunday morning worship service of the Lord: we present to Him our best show of musical talent with which He has blessed us. I Samuel 16:7 says men look upon the outward appearance, but God looks upon the heart. Through instrumental music, God has the clearest expression of the human heart unmarred by human language, referencing Gustav Mahler's quotation. This BLOG writer and Christian musician therefore asserts that the great symphonies of Haydn, Beethoven and Mozart, for example, are just as much musical monuments to the glory of God as are traditional hymns of the Christian faith such as "Faith of Our Fathers", "What A Friend We Have In Jesus", "The Old Rugged Cross", etc.
This Christian musician considers it most unfortunate, therefore, that around 1900, the Christian churches expelled as hopelessly sinful all music not openly propagandizing through human language for the Christian faith. It is by no coincidence that this Christian musician rarely chooses to perform the music of composers born, or even those dying, after 1900. It is also no mere coincidence that the world's greatest musical compositions were written by composers dwelling in lands where the gospel of Jesus Christ has been preached and beloved most copiously by all. Countries of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Sikhism, Confucionism and yes--even Judaism--have given to the world nothing of musical composition comparable in magnitude of either quality or quantity to the historically-Christian realm. Cynics may attribute this fact to Europe's Age of Enlightenment, in the which the traditional Christian church was rejected by men in favor of atheistic secular humanism. Rebuttal: Antonio Vivaldi was a Roman Catholic priest, Franz Joseph Haydn was also a Catholic, and Johann Sebastian Bach was his Lutheran church organist for many years. Bach composed Saint Matthew's Passion and Saint John's Passion, two musical works of equal magnitude to the more famous Messiah of George Friedrich Handel.
Today, there is unquestionably a regrettable disconnect between music and the Christian faith, i.e. Christian churches only value music to the extent that it propagandizes openly for the Christian faith, and not for any intrinsic genius of musical content or message per se. For their part, most musicians not in the employ of any Christian church openly sneer in abject contempt and disbelief in the Christian faith. They do not see music as being any special gift from God, but they cannot explain their special musical talent and capability otherwise. Both camps miss the central bottom-line point: According to the Bible, God said, "Let us create man in Our image." This means the endowment of men with creative capability unique to his genus and species: no other members of the animal kingdom exhibit this same capacity to create, even as God also creates. This blogger's musical colleagues may bury their heads like ostriches into the sand in denial of this truth, but the truth still lives, Enlightenment or no Enlightenment! From whence came the light to empower the Enlightenment? God is a god of purpose, and it was not for no purpose that God said in the beginning, "Let there be light!" -LKM
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Why I Believe In Jesus Christ
There is one major and several minor reasons why this BLOG's author personally believes in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour, Redeemer from sin. The minor reasons are those which merely enable intellectual assent to this divine proposition, without acceptance for one's own life of its true spiritual efficacy. Let us look at those first. 1)Mutually-conspired collusion by the Old Testament prophets to fake a prediction of Christ's coming is virtually impossible: they were not all chronological contemporaries of one another; yet, every prophecy about Christ was fulfilled by His life. 2)Jesus Christ could not have had personal human control over every Old Testament prophecy made about Him, such as His family ancestral lineage, His betrayal by Judas Iscariot for exactly thirty pieces of silver, the gambling of Roman soldiers for His clothing at the foot of the cross, the location of His birth, His abuse and suffering at the hands of the local Jewish crowd on the road to Calvary, and His burial in a tomb borrowed from a rich man(Joseph of Arimathea). 3)Concerning His resurrection from the dead, some cynics say Jesus merely swooned--fainted into temporary unconsciousness on the cross--but later revived in the tomb. Rebuttal: A Roman soldier's spear thrust into Jesus' side should put final end to a mere swoon on the cross. 4)Also concerning the resurrection: Roman soldiers were posted in front of the boulder closing the entrance to the tomb, to assure that Jesus' body would not be stolen. The boulder was huge and heavy, rolling it away would have been a very strenuous task taking too much time to escape the Roman guards' notice. The punishment for a Roman guard sleeping on guard duty was death. So, the body of Jesus Christ could not possibly have been stolen. 5)Jesus Christ re-appeared to His disciples after the crucifixion. All of them acknowledged Him. It is virtually impossible that all were simultaneously experiencing the same hallucination. 6)Cynics say the whole New Testament is a fictitious concoction by the ancient historian Josephus Flavius. Rebuttal: It is highly unlikely that Josephus Flavius had all the Old Testament writings collected together in hand, to invent a New Testament fulfilling of all the Old Testament prophecies about Jesus Christ with such uncanny accuracy. The entire Bible was not formally compiled and canonized into a single book until the time of the early church councils, a few centuries after the lifetime of Josephus Flavius. The authorship of the New Testament apostolic letters after the Four Gospels is well-corroborated and attested as the Bible claims. 7)Finally among the minor reasons why I believe in the Bible is that it is possible to deceive just so many people for just so long: had the whole Bible--or at least the New Testament--been a baloney-sausage, it would have been discredited and forgotten centuries ago, and no Christian church would exist anywhere today.
Now to the major reason why I believe in Jesus Christ. At the outset, it should be said that no man can choose Jesus Christ on his own initiative, nor will he: Jesus Christ must choose men. John 6:44, 15:16. But the main reason for belief is the radically-fundamentally transforming power of people's lives by Jesus Christ today: gamblers, drunkards, drug addicts, liars, rapists, robbers--sinners all--are changed to sainthood by the power of Jesus Christ living in them. No amount or severity of prison incarceration alone can reform wicked and evil sinners like this, as repeat criminals untouched by Jesus Christ prove daily. No external pressures can change the inner heart and soul of man: change must come from inside the man and work its way outward. This is the meaning of "born again" as used by Jesus Christ in conversation with Nicodemus the Pharisee. John 3:1-8, I Corinthians 2:14. Natural men have no spiritual discernment.
Finally, it must be asserted aggressively and unequivocally that science does not refute religion, but is complementary to it. Science is one realm of truth while religion is another realm of truth. Spiritual truth cannot in any way be tested and evaluated within the physical realm of science. Notions of right and wrong can in no wise be measured and tested in science laboratories for corroboration or refutation. From where comes man's unique ability to love, appreciate, value and esteem, as no lower animals can? Science has no answer here.
Jesus Christ is the real deal because He and His followers have faced persecution and opposition to an unprecedented magnitude. Satan the father of lies and ruler of this world leaves his own alone. Nobody ever hears of persecution of Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Taoists or Confucionists. Even Jews, for all the persecution and hostility they have faced down through the centuries, cannot claim a scope and magnitude of persecution matching the experience of Christians. Unfortunately, persecution of Jews since the era of Jesus Christ has been intimately related to alleged Jewish responsibility for the death of Jesus Christ, based on Matthew 27:24-26. Still, salvation and reconcilliation to God is open to all men today, to Jew and Gentile alike.
-LKM
Monday, March 28, 2011
Christianity Not Imposable Upon Unbelievers
In the course of national debate and discussion of the proper role of religion in other areas of national life--most notably in politics--the Christian community has fallen victim from the atheistic secular Left to the accusation that Christians are trying to forcibly impose their religious beliefs upon unbelievers. I would like to clarify the truth of this matter to both Christian and non-Christian alike. The Bible scripture of John 6:44 quotes Jesus Christ to say, "No man can come to me, except the Father which has sent me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day." So the entire question of who shall/shall not be a follower of Jesus Christ is completely out of the hands of any man to resolve. This prerogative belongs exclusively to God, He chooses His own people at His pleasure. Both Christian and non-Christian must understand this principle. How do we know if God has placed His loving hand upon our lives, to choose us to be one of His people? We know this when we have a continuous on-going desire to live our lives in such a manner as to please God. The author of this BLOG makes claim to this experience: Jesus Christ is indeed the paramount apex of my life, changing it as nobody and nothing else has or ever will. This is not to say I am a sinless saint, as I continue to spiritually grow and develop in Christ daily: this does involve making some stumbling mistakes into sin from time to time. But the difference between this and the unbeliever is the intended direction in which we are going: the unbeliever makes a deliberate point to go in the opposite direction in defiance of God's divine ordinances. Finally, a word about The Great Commission and the good news of Jesus Christ: the atheistic secular Left accuses that Christians are harshly judgemental and condemnatory to those who refuse to embrace the teachings of Jesus Christ and trust Him for their salvation. The truth is just the opposite: the Bible indeed acknowledges that every human being is sinful, believers and unbelievers alike. But the Christian message is not one of condemnation, but of salvation, redemption and reclamation available to all who acknowledge their sins and repent of them. This is the good news of the Christian message. We serve a God of second, third, fourth etc. chance, Jesus did say to forgive other sinners as we would like to have our own sins forgiven. Matthew 7:1-5: With what measure we judge others, that same measure of judgement will return back to us. -LKM
Saturday, March 5, 2011
The Way We Were Not.....
The author of this BLOG will never suppose that America has ever enjoyed a sinless Golden Age of saintly virtue. To varying degrees, crime, sin, vice and immoral depravity have always been with us since the fall of man in the Garden of Eden. Still, those old enough to remember the decade of the 1950s--as this blogger does--are compelled by the facts to admit that 21st century America has witnessed a dramatic downward morality shift by comparison to where it was sixty years ago, to wit:
1)In the 1950s, children obeyed immediately the commands of their parents without question or debate. THOU SHALT HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER was still a command, not a mere suggestion.
2)Divorce and extramarital sex were comparatively rare in the 1950s by today's standards, albeit that it certainly existed then as well. Still, divorce and extramarital sex were shameful sixty years ago, while today, they are brazenly shameless and mainstream: what is the big deal here?
3)Pornography and other overt reference to sex was almost non-existent sixty years ago as relatively taboo topics of conversation. Today, those topics are shamelessly mainstream. Yesterday's "hard core" pornography is today's "soft core" pornography, if indeed considered pornographic at all.
4)Sixty years ago, parents did not fear to spank their unruly and rebellious children. But today, thanks to Dr. Benjamin Spock, parents can go to prison for doing the same, on charge of assault and battery, and of child abuse.
5)Sixty years ago, the notion of "political correctness" was unheard-of, and unlike today, people did not fear to speak their honest minds. Today, "political correctness" has trumped our supposed First Amendment right of free speech.
6)Homosexuality was virtually unheard-of sixty years ago, and to date, a "gay gene" has yet to be discovered. Anyone suggesting sixty years ago that two persons of the same sex should be permitted to marry would have been laughed out of town!
7)Traditional male chivalry towards women, unquestioned sixty years ago, is now subject to controversy and debate. "Liberated" women now say women need men like fish need bicycles.
8)Senior citizens. once unquestionably respected sixty and more years ago, are now contemptuously viewed by younger generations as being half-dead old fogies who do not know which end is up. They should all just die quickly, and get out of the way, to give more living space to the young. Age is no longer respected: youth call their elders by first name with no accompanying title of respect.
9)In the 1950s, Christian churches were full on Sundays. Today, in churches not requiring attendance by their members, pews are half-empty, while shopping malls do a brisk business on Sundays.
10)American patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism, once strong in America sixty and more years ago, is today sneered at in contempt by most Americans(especially the foreign-born). John Wayne is dead, and globalist multiculturalism tells us America is "just another country among many", nothing special.
11)Between 1950 and 1980, America bravely fought wars against Communism in Korea and Viet Nam, only now to have Communism advocated by pointy-headed pseudo-intellectual college "professors" on university campuses. In education, Communist indoctrination has replaced honest education.
12)In the 1950s, the man was the unquestioned ruler and master of his own house, and all who were in it with him. Since then, extremist radical feminists have unequivocally declared to American maledom, "We have taken over your office, and here's a list of our demands!" Men are slowly but surely being deprived of their manhood because of this sexual revolution. On the TV show JAG, was Admiral Chegwidden wrong, to tell Colonel Sarah McKenzie that there will never be any female Navy SEALS? This blogger wonders when the U.S. Navy will sing, "Anchors aweigh, my girls, anchors aweigh...."
13)Repair shops were plentiful in the 1950s. One could take broken TVs, radios, watches, shoes and bicycles to them to be repaired. But today, we have become such a throw-away society that such repairs are no longer done. The afore-mentioned commodities, when broken, now must be discarded and new replacements for them bought. Repair shops of yester-year are now gone, and things are no longer valued and conserved as they were by our parents and grandparents who grew up in the disastrous 1930s Great Depression years. It might be well to remember that the earthly profession of Jesus Christ was that of carpenter: where would He be today, in this throw-away society of ours? This blogger believes that His ministry of restoration and redemption of human souls was at least in part inspired by the physical example of his carpentry, i.e. repair of broken pieces of furniture.
14)In the 1950s, the worst things kids did in school was run down the halls, shoot paper-wads with rubber bands in class, and maybe put a live hop-toad in the teacher's lunch box. Today, police are required to be on school property, with cameras and metal detectors installed, out of fear of students committing violent crimes against other students, teachers and school administrators.
15)The tradition of marriage of the 1950s is not quite yet completely gone, but the number of young couples "shacking up" together without formal marriage is now on the increase. Shamefully, governments extend to them all the same benefits they give to validly-married couples.
In conclusion, America is morally going to hell in a hand-basket with younger Americans totally impervious to that danger, i.e. they have no living memory of earlier decades, nor have any sense of historic obligation to the past socio-political and moral values of their once-great country.
-LKM
1)In the 1950s, children obeyed immediately the commands of their parents without question or debate. THOU SHALT HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER was still a command, not a mere suggestion.
2)Divorce and extramarital sex were comparatively rare in the 1950s by today's standards, albeit that it certainly existed then as well. Still, divorce and extramarital sex were shameful sixty years ago, while today, they are brazenly shameless and mainstream: what is the big deal here?
3)Pornography and other overt reference to sex was almost non-existent sixty years ago as relatively taboo topics of conversation. Today, those topics are shamelessly mainstream. Yesterday's "hard core" pornography is today's "soft core" pornography, if indeed considered pornographic at all.
4)Sixty years ago, parents did not fear to spank their unruly and rebellious children. But today, thanks to Dr. Benjamin Spock, parents can go to prison for doing the same, on charge of assault and battery, and of child abuse.
5)Sixty years ago, the notion of "political correctness" was unheard-of, and unlike today, people did not fear to speak their honest minds. Today, "political correctness" has trumped our supposed First Amendment right of free speech.
6)Homosexuality was virtually unheard-of sixty years ago, and to date, a "gay gene" has yet to be discovered. Anyone suggesting sixty years ago that two persons of the same sex should be permitted to marry would have been laughed out of town!
7)Traditional male chivalry towards women, unquestioned sixty years ago, is now subject to controversy and debate. "Liberated" women now say women need men like fish need bicycles.
8)Senior citizens. once unquestionably respected sixty and more years ago, are now contemptuously viewed by younger generations as being half-dead old fogies who do not know which end is up. They should all just die quickly, and get out of the way, to give more living space to the young. Age is no longer respected: youth call their elders by first name with no accompanying title of respect.
9)In the 1950s, Christian churches were full on Sundays. Today, in churches not requiring attendance by their members, pews are half-empty, while shopping malls do a brisk business on Sundays.
10)American patriotism and belief in American exceptionalism, once strong in America sixty and more years ago, is today sneered at in contempt by most Americans(especially the foreign-born). John Wayne is dead, and globalist multiculturalism tells us America is "just another country among many", nothing special.
11)Between 1950 and 1980, America bravely fought wars against Communism in Korea and Viet Nam, only now to have Communism advocated by pointy-headed pseudo-intellectual college "professors" on university campuses. In education, Communist indoctrination has replaced honest education.
12)In the 1950s, the man was the unquestioned ruler and master of his own house, and all who were in it with him. Since then, extremist radical feminists have unequivocally declared to American maledom, "We have taken over your office, and here's a list of our demands!" Men are slowly but surely being deprived of their manhood because of this sexual revolution. On the TV show JAG, was Admiral Chegwidden wrong, to tell Colonel Sarah McKenzie that there will never be any female Navy SEALS? This blogger wonders when the U.S. Navy will sing, "Anchors aweigh, my girls, anchors aweigh...."
13)Repair shops were plentiful in the 1950s. One could take broken TVs, radios, watches, shoes and bicycles to them to be repaired. But today, we have become such a throw-away society that such repairs are no longer done. The afore-mentioned commodities, when broken, now must be discarded and new replacements for them bought. Repair shops of yester-year are now gone, and things are no longer valued and conserved as they were by our parents and grandparents who grew up in the disastrous 1930s Great Depression years. It might be well to remember that the earthly profession of Jesus Christ was that of carpenter: where would He be today, in this throw-away society of ours? This blogger believes that His ministry of restoration and redemption of human souls was at least in part inspired by the physical example of his carpentry, i.e. repair of broken pieces of furniture.
14)In the 1950s, the worst things kids did in school was run down the halls, shoot paper-wads with rubber bands in class, and maybe put a live hop-toad in the teacher's lunch box. Today, police are required to be on school property, with cameras and metal detectors installed, out of fear of students committing violent crimes against other students, teachers and school administrators.
15)The tradition of marriage of the 1950s is not quite yet completely gone, but the number of young couples "shacking up" together without formal marriage is now on the increase. Shamefully, governments extend to them all the same benefits they give to validly-married couples.
In conclusion, America is morally going to hell in a hand-basket with younger Americans totally impervious to that danger, i.e. they have no living memory of earlier decades, nor have any sense of historic obligation to the past socio-political and moral values of their once-great country.
-LKM
Monday, February 7, 2011
Of Music Makers and Toastmasters
As a post-script to the immediately-precedent BLOG essay on Toastmasters, I, Lawrence Keeney Marsh, cellist since age eight, testify that I helped establish a local club of amateur musicians called Music Makers, nearly forty years ago. That club is still in fully-vigorous existence today, meeting always the first Sunday afternoon of each month in various club-members' private homes.
Many long years of prior experience with music performance in front of Music Maker audiences was a great help in becoming a Toastmaster of far more recent time. Granting that speaking and instrumental music-playing are not identical skills, the two nevertheless do share some degree of common ground with such skills as artistic phrasing, dynamic contrast, tempo, rhythm and clarity of articulation. In serving as a Toastmaster speech evaluator, I critique speeches of other people with the ears of a trained musician.
More importantly, however, many long years of Music Maker experience have in large measure conquered the severe trepidations I might have otherwise had in my early days of Toastmaster speaking experience. Most important: I know that in both settings, I am among friends, and nobody in the audience has a shot-gun across their lap, waiting to blast me away a la John Wayne style, the first time I stumble a little.
-LKM
Many long years of prior experience with music performance in front of Music Maker audiences was a great help in becoming a Toastmaster of far more recent time. Granting that speaking and instrumental music-playing are not identical skills, the two nevertheless do share some degree of common ground with such skills as artistic phrasing, dynamic contrast, tempo, rhythm and clarity of articulation. In serving as a Toastmaster speech evaluator, I critique speeches of other people with the ears of a trained musician.
More importantly, however, many long years of Music Maker experience have in large measure conquered the severe trepidations I might have otherwise had in my early days of Toastmaster speaking experience. Most important: I know that in both settings, I am among friends, and nobody in the audience has a shot-gun across their lap, waiting to blast me away a la John Wayne style, the first time I stumble a little.
-LKM
Friday, February 4, 2011
What Toastmasters Means To Me
As of the time of this writing, I, Lawrence Keeney Marsh, testify that I have been with Toastmasters International for twenty months.
Other people always see us from different sides and angles from that by which we see ourselves. We cannot possibly see ourselves from the same perspectives as those by which others see us. One man's villain is another man's hero, one man's coward is another man's diplomat. Are we bold and brave, or are we brash, reckless and foolish?
Toastmasters is to me a golden oppertunity for reality check, concerning the status of my relations with other people. As we speak to an audience, we expect certain audience reactions to our words, according to how we ourselves would also react. With some listeners, we are not disappointed. With other listeners, we are shock-surprised, for better or for worse, at the unexpected emotional impact our words have on them.
Often, we form our opinions of other people based on incomplete and limited information about them. We judge books by their covers. If we stay with Toastmasters for several years, we realize that in some cases, our first guesses about other people were correct; while in other cases, we were very wrong. Abraham Lincoln once said that it is better to remain silent and be thought to be a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. President Calvin Coolidge was a man of few words and little action. Was he lazy, or was he judicious in his exercise of presidential power? In Toastmasters, we learn who are the ambitious and aggressive, and who are the restrained and reserved. When people do dare to open their mouths to speak, all doubts about them are indeed removed. Can there be such a thing as a "reticent Toastmaster"? Should there be? The answer to that question depends on the limits people want to place upon information about themselves they give out to other people, and upon their ability to live with the concomittant judgements other people pass upon them accordingly.
Finally, a strong criticism of Toastmasters: It is ideologically too much bent towards needs of corporate business America, when other professions, too, could use Toastmaster skills of communication. For instance, Toastmasters should also seek alliance with academia, so as to help teachers and professors to become better teachers and professors. Educators, for their part, should have some hand in the content and design of Toastmaster manuals. I would suggest publication of a new Toastmaster manual called Toastmasters For Teachers. The extant manual called Speaking To Inform is a first step in that right direction, but it does not go far enough. More cooperative research and brain-storming between Toastmasters and academia must be done.
How can teachers and professors turn mediocre students into excellent students? Is it not true that the success or failure of educators in their profession rests upon their ability to effectively communicate their academic subjects to their students? Perhaps a Toastmaster DTM should be one prerequisite for entering the teaching profession. By the same token, expounding upon new methods of marketing some new product, or re-arranging company financial policies and practices, is a very different concern from that of pedagogical methods in the teaching of science, mathematics and foreign languages. No academic subject is truly hard to learn, it merely seems hard to learn if there are gaps in the logical sequence of progression from one principle to another, such that students fail to see relevant connections between them. This is especially true of sequential subjects like science and mathematics, where grasp of a succeeding principle necessarily depends upon understanding of a related prior one.
To this end goal, Toastmasters communications techniques have almost infinite potential to boost academia to new heights of excellence.
-Lawrence K. Marsh, CC
Tech Corridor Toastmasters
M.A. Near Eastern Studies U.C.L.A. 1971
Other people always see us from different sides and angles from that by which we see ourselves. We cannot possibly see ourselves from the same perspectives as those by which others see us. One man's villain is another man's hero, one man's coward is another man's diplomat. Are we bold and brave, or are we brash, reckless and foolish?
Toastmasters is to me a golden oppertunity for reality check, concerning the status of my relations with other people. As we speak to an audience, we expect certain audience reactions to our words, according to how we ourselves would also react. With some listeners, we are not disappointed. With other listeners, we are shock-surprised, for better or for worse, at the unexpected emotional impact our words have on them.
Often, we form our opinions of other people based on incomplete and limited information about them. We judge books by their covers. If we stay with Toastmasters for several years, we realize that in some cases, our first guesses about other people were correct; while in other cases, we were very wrong. Abraham Lincoln once said that it is better to remain silent and be thought to be a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. President Calvin Coolidge was a man of few words and little action. Was he lazy, or was he judicious in his exercise of presidential power? In Toastmasters, we learn who are the ambitious and aggressive, and who are the restrained and reserved. When people do dare to open their mouths to speak, all doubts about them are indeed removed. Can there be such a thing as a "reticent Toastmaster"? Should there be? The answer to that question depends on the limits people want to place upon information about themselves they give out to other people, and upon their ability to live with the concomittant judgements other people pass upon them accordingly.
Finally, a strong criticism of Toastmasters: It is ideologically too much bent towards needs of corporate business America, when other professions, too, could use Toastmaster skills of communication. For instance, Toastmasters should also seek alliance with academia, so as to help teachers and professors to become better teachers and professors. Educators, for their part, should have some hand in the content and design of Toastmaster manuals. I would suggest publication of a new Toastmaster manual called Toastmasters For Teachers. The extant manual called Speaking To Inform is a first step in that right direction, but it does not go far enough. More cooperative research and brain-storming between Toastmasters and academia must be done.
How can teachers and professors turn mediocre students into excellent students? Is it not true that the success or failure of educators in their profession rests upon their ability to effectively communicate their academic subjects to their students? Perhaps a Toastmaster DTM should be one prerequisite for entering the teaching profession. By the same token, expounding upon new methods of marketing some new product, or re-arranging company financial policies and practices, is a very different concern from that of pedagogical methods in the teaching of science, mathematics and foreign languages. No academic subject is truly hard to learn, it merely seems hard to learn if there are gaps in the logical sequence of progression from one principle to another, such that students fail to see relevant connections between them. This is especially true of sequential subjects like science and mathematics, where grasp of a succeeding principle necessarily depends upon understanding of a related prior one.
To this end goal, Toastmasters communications techniques have almost infinite potential to boost academia to new heights of excellence.
-Lawrence K. Marsh, CC
Tech Corridor Toastmasters
M.A. Near Eastern Studies U.C.L.A. 1971
Saturday, January 29, 2011
John Wayne: A Reality Check
John Wayne was one great American who by way of his Hollywood movie career portrayed to America, what it really means to be a man. Not only was he tough on screen, he was unabashedly and refreshingly honest, always to say truthfully what is on his mind. None of this political correctness nonsense for him! If ever a Gloria Steinem or Germaine Greer-type woman got uppity with him, he had no second thoughts to turn them across his knee and give their fannies the true-grit paddling they so richly deserved! Yet, he was actually very generous in his attitude towards women and their rights. Shortly before he died, The Duke said, "Women can do anything they want to....as long as they have supper ready for us men when we come home from work."
Fair enough: throughout the history of America, men have done a very great deal, from which women have benefitted. So there is some justice to be had in a little gracious compensatory gratitude back to men from the distaff side.
For all his portrayal of male machismo on the Hollywood movie screen, however, John Wayne never actually served in the U.S. military armed forces, despite being of appropriate age to do so in World War II and in the Korean conflict. (He was born in May 1907.) He never led any real-life charges up San Juan Hill, nor did he ever ride into the proverbial very jaws of hell and return again, unscathed. A college football injury was responsible for his marked absence from military service to his country.
John Wayne may have had great basic physical strength, but as an alleged inveterate smoker off-screen, he never had any enduring stamina to display in any of his movies, i.e. he never ran or swam continuously for any great distance. He also never participated in the Olympic Games. These facts create something of a credibility gap between his on-screen invincibility, and his real-life athletic capability. But at least, when we Americans turned off the TV after watching a John Wayne movie, we felt damn good to be an American! Stars and stripes forever, and no bowing to foreign heads of state to apologize to them for America's past doings abroad!
Yet, John Wayne was never gratuitously pugnacious or petulant. He was always well-reserved, saving the full force of his wrath exclusively for those who deliberately provoked it. He obliged both good and evil with the utmost of equity becoming a patriotic American.
This blogger confesses that John Wayne was every bit the man yours truly never was and should be. He has it in mind that when he dies and goes to heaven, his first question to God will be, "Lord, why did you not make a John Wayne out of me?" God's answer may well be, "But Larry, John Wayne knew not a lick about music! Look at all the musical talent with which I blessed you!" "I am mighty grateful to you for that, Lord", I would reply in kind. But all my musical talent won me more scornful and jealous enemies than admirers in my lifetime, even among alleged friends and family relatives. John Wayne was far better-off in the popularity department with an America which admires crude brutality over refined cultural erudition.
Thanks to the stereotype of such effeminate music composers as Mozart, Schubert and Mendelssohn, this musician blogger never dated girls in high school and college, feeling assured no woman in her right mind would be caught dead in the company of a sissy-wimp cellist. Yet, the reality is that even The Duke himself experienced divorce several times in his life. Maybe wives exposed to the private lives of the rich-and-famous know something about wowie-kazowie men the rest of the general public does not know about them.
No, there is never any rose without thorns, even if that rose is named John Wayne. Still, it is well beyond dispute that on the Hollywood screen, The Duke was and still is a hero--a great American hero--to tens of millions of Americans. In an American Rust Age of anti-hero, The Duke still remains rhetorically an eternal torch in the hearts of those who remember him, of all those traditional values which built America into the world's greatest and uniquely-exceptional nation.
-LKM
Fair enough: throughout the history of America, men have done a very great deal, from which women have benefitted. So there is some justice to be had in a little gracious compensatory gratitude back to men from the distaff side.
For all his portrayal of male machismo on the Hollywood movie screen, however, John Wayne never actually served in the U.S. military armed forces, despite being of appropriate age to do so in World War II and in the Korean conflict. (He was born in May 1907.) He never led any real-life charges up San Juan Hill, nor did he ever ride into the proverbial very jaws of hell and return again, unscathed. A college football injury was responsible for his marked absence from military service to his country.
John Wayne may have had great basic physical strength, but as an alleged inveterate smoker off-screen, he never had any enduring stamina to display in any of his movies, i.e. he never ran or swam continuously for any great distance. He also never participated in the Olympic Games. These facts create something of a credibility gap between his on-screen invincibility, and his real-life athletic capability. But at least, when we Americans turned off the TV after watching a John Wayne movie, we felt damn good to be an American! Stars and stripes forever, and no bowing to foreign heads of state to apologize to them for America's past doings abroad!
Yet, John Wayne was never gratuitously pugnacious or petulant. He was always well-reserved, saving the full force of his wrath exclusively for those who deliberately provoked it. He obliged both good and evil with the utmost of equity becoming a patriotic American.
This blogger confesses that John Wayne was every bit the man yours truly never was and should be. He has it in mind that when he dies and goes to heaven, his first question to God will be, "Lord, why did you not make a John Wayne out of me?" God's answer may well be, "But Larry, John Wayne knew not a lick about music! Look at all the musical talent with which I blessed you!" "I am mighty grateful to you for that, Lord", I would reply in kind. But all my musical talent won me more scornful and jealous enemies than admirers in my lifetime, even among alleged friends and family relatives. John Wayne was far better-off in the popularity department with an America which admires crude brutality over refined cultural erudition.
Thanks to the stereotype of such effeminate music composers as Mozart, Schubert and Mendelssohn, this musician blogger never dated girls in high school and college, feeling assured no woman in her right mind would be caught dead in the company of a sissy-wimp cellist. Yet, the reality is that even The Duke himself experienced divorce several times in his life. Maybe wives exposed to the private lives of the rich-and-famous know something about wowie-kazowie men the rest of the general public does not know about them.
No, there is never any rose without thorns, even if that rose is named John Wayne. Still, it is well beyond dispute that on the Hollywood screen, The Duke was and still is a hero--a great American hero--to tens of millions of Americans. In an American Rust Age of anti-hero, The Duke still remains rhetorically an eternal torch in the hearts of those who remember him, of all those traditional values which built America into the world's greatest and uniquely-exceptional nation.
-LKM
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Behaviour Unbecoming
In both the civilian government and the military, there exists in the law code a broad and disturbingly-vague category of punishable wrong-doing, simply called "behaviour unbecoming", i.e. behaviour inconsistent with and contrary to a perfect role-model example of someone in government service at public tax-payer expense, whether in civilian service or in the military. This legal category is itself unbecoming to the rest of the body of law because it is so very imprecise and thus subject to partisan political or otherwise whimsical and capricious interpretation by any would-be tyrant using that power of government office for personal hubris and self-aggrandizement. In order to insure equal justice under law, law itself must be narrowly and accurately defined.
Many Americans--this blogger included--proudly believe in American exceptionalism: we say there is something about America which sets it uniquely apart from all the rest of the world's nations. We believe this American exceptionalism to be a gift from God, a gift which the Lord will rescind, should America decline its obligation to play its exemplary role of unique destiny in world history.
In recent decades, grave American governmental and societal departures from that unique obligation have heralded a new era of behaviour unbecoming to the unique greatness America alone has heretofore been priviledged to know and exercise. What are these behaviours unbecoming to America? Lest we, too, be accused of being vague and imprecise, let us declare them to the world:
1)America has condoned law-breaking by certain "politically correct" demographic segments of society, based on alleged claim of victimhood from generations past now long-dead and gone. 2)America has tolerated leaders in high government office who shamelessly talk dirty four-letter-word bathroom-wall language. This behaviour is an assault upon the solemn dignity of public trust in high government office. 3)America has invaded the privacy of its citizenry in the name of national security, by use of politically-motivated surveillance without warrant. This government behaviour opens the door to possible use of federal agencies for partisan political purpose. 4)America has engaged in excessive taxation of its citizenry, thus robbing the people of God-given right to pursue happiness on their own terms. 5)America has cowardly abandoned freedom of speech in favor of political correctness. 6)America has winked its approval of certain sexual behaviours not tolerated in this country one hundred years ago. The mass communications media shamelessly places these sexual perversities on center stage before the public, in daring defiance of traditional marriage. 7)America has zipped the proverbial rug out from under the feet of the nation's parents, to discipline their own children as they see fit. Consequently, America has recently raised generations of defiant young brats who feel America owes them a free living with no obligations on their part in return. Dr. Benjamin Spock is largely to blame for abolishing parental boards of education applicable to young seats of learning. 8)America has recently replaced beauty with ugliness in public display of both audial and visual arts, saying in the name of political correctness that ugly is just as good as beautiful, and there is no absolute and objective measure of either. 9)Inferior public school education threatens to render future generations of Americans unable to successfully compete in international global markets. 10)Numbers substitute for absolute principles in determination of right from wrong. 11)America has adopted quick-easy divorce laws allowing nullification of marriage for relatively light and transient reasons. This practice is an assault upon a God-ordained and sacred social institution. 12)After sacrificing thirty-five-thousand American lives in a war against Communism in Korea, and sixty-thousand more in a later war against Communism in Viet Nam, we slowly but surely adopt Communism for ourselves, even by our own collective hand, as we convince ourselves that individual liberties are too dangerous and the uncertain vicissitudes of a free market place are too discomforting for America's own good. The hottest beds of Communism in America are in its halls and classrooms of academia, where honest education is supplanted with political indoctrination. 13)Thanks to reckless and irresponsible government economic policies, the American dollar continually loses its purchasing power every year. This decline has international repercussions as foreign governments also lose confidence in the American dollar as the world back-up monetary currency.
To be sure, America has never witnessed a Golden Age of Victorian sinlessness and moral rectitude. Nevertheless, the certainty of moral decline in America over the last one hundred years is beyond dispute. Behaviour unbecoming to the ideals of the American character are now more endemic than ever before. That said, we need not listen to the clarion call of some who declare that America's better days are now irreversibly behind her. We have many other sources of leadership to look to for inspiration besides those in government and politics. What about our pioneers in science and technology? What about our innovators in education? What about our literary writers, music and theatrical drama composers, our architects and our automotive industry designers? What about our inventors and discoverers? It is these people who will courageously carry the day for America, popular majority opposition and cynicism notwithstanding. All that is necessary for a revival of American greatness is for every American to quit saying "Let George do it", look at himself or herself in the mirror, and say in full confidence and conviction, "I will do it."
-LKM
Many Americans--this blogger included--proudly believe in American exceptionalism: we say there is something about America which sets it uniquely apart from all the rest of the world's nations. We believe this American exceptionalism to be a gift from God, a gift which the Lord will rescind, should America decline its obligation to play its exemplary role of unique destiny in world history.
In recent decades, grave American governmental and societal departures from that unique obligation have heralded a new era of behaviour unbecoming to the unique greatness America alone has heretofore been priviledged to know and exercise. What are these behaviours unbecoming to America? Lest we, too, be accused of being vague and imprecise, let us declare them to the world:
1)America has condoned law-breaking by certain "politically correct" demographic segments of society, based on alleged claim of victimhood from generations past now long-dead and gone. 2)America has tolerated leaders in high government office who shamelessly talk dirty four-letter-word bathroom-wall language. This behaviour is an assault upon the solemn dignity of public trust in high government office. 3)America has invaded the privacy of its citizenry in the name of national security, by use of politically-motivated surveillance without warrant. This government behaviour opens the door to possible use of federal agencies for partisan political purpose. 4)America has engaged in excessive taxation of its citizenry, thus robbing the people of God-given right to pursue happiness on their own terms. 5)America has cowardly abandoned freedom of speech in favor of political correctness. 6)America has winked its approval of certain sexual behaviours not tolerated in this country one hundred years ago. The mass communications media shamelessly places these sexual perversities on center stage before the public, in daring defiance of traditional marriage. 7)America has zipped the proverbial rug out from under the feet of the nation's parents, to discipline their own children as they see fit. Consequently, America has recently raised generations of defiant young brats who feel America owes them a free living with no obligations on their part in return. Dr. Benjamin Spock is largely to blame for abolishing parental boards of education applicable to young seats of learning. 8)America has recently replaced beauty with ugliness in public display of both audial and visual arts, saying in the name of political correctness that ugly is just as good as beautiful, and there is no absolute and objective measure of either. 9)Inferior public school education threatens to render future generations of Americans unable to successfully compete in international global markets. 10)Numbers substitute for absolute principles in determination of right from wrong. 11)America has adopted quick-easy divorce laws allowing nullification of marriage for relatively light and transient reasons. This practice is an assault upon a God-ordained and sacred social institution. 12)After sacrificing thirty-five-thousand American lives in a war against Communism in Korea, and sixty-thousand more in a later war against Communism in Viet Nam, we slowly but surely adopt Communism for ourselves, even by our own collective hand, as we convince ourselves that individual liberties are too dangerous and the uncertain vicissitudes of a free market place are too discomforting for America's own good. The hottest beds of Communism in America are in its halls and classrooms of academia, where honest education is supplanted with political indoctrination. 13)Thanks to reckless and irresponsible government economic policies, the American dollar continually loses its purchasing power every year. This decline has international repercussions as foreign governments also lose confidence in the American dollar as the world back-up monetary currency.
To be sure, America has never witnessed a Golden Age of Victorian sinlessness and moral rectitude. Nevertheless, the certainty of moral decline in America over the last one hundred years is beyond dispute. Behaviour unbecoming to the ideals of the American character are now more endemic than ever before. That said, we need not listen to the clarion call of some who declare that America's better days are now irreversibly behind her. We have many other sources of leadership to look to for inspiration besides those in government and politics. What about our pioneers in science and technology? What about our innovators in education? What about our literary writers, music and theatrical drama composers, our architects and our automotive industry designers? What about our inventors and discoverers? It is these people who will courageously carry the day for America, popular majority opposition and cynicism notwithstanding. All that is necessary for a revival of American greatness is for every American to quit saying "Let George do it", look at himself or herself in the mirror, and say in full confidence and conviction, "I will do it."
-LKM
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Thomas Jefferson On The Political Correctness Doctrine
The pernicious doctrine of political correctness is one of Communist origin. Chinese Communist Chairman Mao Tse-T'ung wrote about it in his Little Red Book several decades ago, calling it "right thinking". In Communist countries, political dissidents have been sent to "mental hospitals", to get their political thinking "straightened out". What would Thomas Jefferson say to this doctrine of political correctness, were he to be alive today to witness it? In America today, threats to supplant free speech with political correctness, especially on pretext of protecting the feelings of certain demographic groups of people against all possible emotional injury, are becoming ever-more pervasive. In his book, You Can't Say That!, George Mason University law professor David Bernstein gives many examples of how individual civil liberties guaranteed us under the Bill of Rights are being rescinded by anti-discrimination laws.
Thomas Jefferson once said, "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty." Around the inner-wall dome of the Jefferson Memorial today, we read others of his words: "I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD, ETERNAL HOSTILITY AGAINST EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MINDS OF MAN."
-LKM
Thomas Jefferson once said, "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty." Around the inner-wall dome of the Jefferson Memorial today, we read others of his words: "I HAVE SWORN UPON THE ALTAR OF GOD, ETERNAL HOSTILITY AGAINST EVERY FORM OF TYRANNY OVER THE MINDS OF MAN."
-LKM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
