Applause Meet Her

At a recent Pops symphony event I attended I was intrigued by the audience requirement to clap and cheer when the conductor glided on to the stage.

Are we really expected to cheer when the conductor comes out to do his job? The job for which we paid to attend and hear? Before the very first string note has been plucked, before the first drum beat has been percussed?

To me this would be akin to tipping the waitress when she shows up to take my food order.  Or paying Apple iTunes to preview a song.

Was this particular event good?  It absolutely was. But there were no guarantees for that, which makes the applause received just a bit premature.  And, to be quite honest, the conductor did a great job, but he was not actually playing an instrument himself, he was waving a baton around and he provided some animation in that fashion for the concert.

It seems to me that applause is quite taken for granted in American culture. Not only do we have this premature applausalation happening, but it is rare that I attend any recent event that the audience does not provide an obligatory standing 'o'.   The standing ovation is typically followed by the entertainer returning to the stage and banging out 1-3 more tunes. AS IF they did not intend to do those 3 tunes, even though the tunes are well prepared and orchestrated even to the point of having prepared pyrotechnics etc.

Obligatory pre-performance applause, obligatory standing ovation, obligatory post finale finale.....it all seems just a bit regimented and prescribed behavior. As we all grew up with the canned applause and laughter pushed on us through American sitcoms since the 60's, we are quite accustomed to having our accolades dictated to us like lambs to the slaughter. Laughter and Slaughter share much in common.

We, as Americans need to go back to our roots and do the unexpected. Doing so would make applause and accolades more meaningful and more deserved, and the quality of our entertainment would improve.  I refer to the scene in the Gangs of New York where the performers were booed, heckled and speckled with tomatoes and fruits...and the yet the show did go on. Entertainers must entertain. We do no service in coddling them. And judging by my ticket prices, their reward comes in their paychecks not from  mandatory applause.

The next time we participate in a concert, let's think hard before we put our hands together.

Cheers, nca

The Second Bear Was Too Soft

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Let me go on record to say that I am jiggy with it.

And let me also go on record that I am ok with some laws that restrict what arms can be carried and by whom.

Is that a contradiction? Maybe so.

There are some restrictions that are already in place,undisputed. An example of this is that I can't tote a Thermonuclear bomb in my F150 to the Fry's parking lot.  I think we are all in agreement on that one. Also, I would probably have pretty universal agreement that I can't go patrolling the riverbed down by the Airport with a FIM-92 Stinger positioned on my shoulder.  Other restrictions can probably also be agreed upon. Do we want a five year old child walking down the street with a sawed off shotgun?  Do we want convicted rapists and murderers walking into the church with concealed 22 mag Glocks?  Do we think it is kosher to allow target practice on the grounds of a nursery, or a national cemetery, or in Grand Central Station?

Since I am guessing we can agree that none of this is acceptable behavior anywhere in this country, I think it is safe to say that we are all willing to negotiate what controls are acceptable. 

Let's face it, when our Founding Father's wrote the 2nd amendment, their Arms of choice were single action, muzzle loading, extremely inaccurate, heavy, with no rifling. The ammunition involved leaden Minie balls with no jackets.  It would take a good minute to load and fire, and the destruction rendered would likely be limited to one target.  I am not saying the right to bear arms needs to be restricted to the arms of 1789 when the Amendment was ratified, but it does help to have their perspective of the capabilities when they wrote the Amendment.

We should be able to agree that some restrictions are necessary, and that our Founding Father's did not fully realize the damage potential that Arms would advance to over the next 250 years.

So now, in my reasoning I think it should be possible to sit down at a table and discuss necessary restrictions and controls in a intelligent manner.  If we had been able to restrict the recent killers across America, theater shooters, school shooters, highway shooters, and all the rest to single action muzzle loading un-rifled flintlocks, then much less damage would have been done.  Is this realistic....no. I fully understand the reality of that.  But it is realistic that some degree of control can be regulated, hashed out in intelligent debate.  

Am I the right person to make these decisions. Probably not. I do not carry. And I do not oppose those who choose to carry.  I have found great enjoyment in target shooting over the years, but I am not a sportsman or hunter.  I am willing to be educated on what controls are necessary and which are not.  I myself have thought that allowing concealed weapons in schools and public places is not a good idea.  I also think restrictions on automated weapons, and restrictions on extreme magazines is a good idea. But I am willing to hear the debate with an open mind. But, after the debate is done, I am not alone to think that some changes, including gun controls, are warranted and overdue.

Therefore, let me go on record that I do feel the debate needs to happen, soon, and in a very intelligent and open minded way. I would like to feel that my daughters can be safe in movie theaters and church, and that my grand-children can be safe at school.  My United States is not a third world country, and these precious children should be able to live safe lives protected from the extreme crazies that are already planning their next tragic hits.  If we don't feel that this is possible, in these United States, than something very wrong is going on. 

Cheers, nca

Words and Pictures

My long time buddy Tom has been posting some awesome pictures he took of Upper Antelope Canyon. Spectacular place. Fantastic photos. Amazing really. I think Tom is very talented. I have several other friends who do photography and I am humbled by some of their pictures. I will probably have to get myself a nice quality digital camera here pretty soon. I probably would still not be as talented as them, regardless of the technology.

It makes me think about the old saying, 'a picture is worth a thousand words'.  In the cases of some of the pictures that inspire us all, the thousand may be an understatement.

I can think of this picture.

And this.

Yet, some words can not be replaced by a box full of pictures.

The Gettysburg Address had 272 words that could not be replaced by a vault of pictures. Those immortal words encompassed the death of  thousands of Americans, the ravaging of a countryside and the terrible yoke of slavery our country endured.

The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-12 was a mere 98 words, again a treasure of words irreplaceable by all the pictures in the world. Simple succinct, and powerful.

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven. 

Blessed are those who mourn: for they will be comforted. 

Blessed are the meek: for they will inherit the earth. 

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness: for they will be filled.

Blessed are the merciful: for they will be shown mercy. 

Blessed are the pure in heart: for they will see God. 

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they will be called children of God. 

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 

There are even single words that transpose all possible pictures.  The 'N' word comes immediately to my mind.  One single word that stores so much hurt, pain, innuendo, oppression, and anger. I myself would be glad to have that word eradicated from all vocabulary (sorry Mr. Twain!). 10000 pictures could not do justice to the impact of this single word on society.

We do have freedom of speech in this country. This blog is a perfect example. I love that right bestowed on my by our founding Fathers. Still, we must take responsibility for the words we choose to use.  What offends other people is real to them and does have consequences. With the freedom of speech we also need to think of the consequences of what issues from our lips.

1000 words, 1000 Pictures.  In a Web enabled world both are accumulated at a rate never before seen. Some pictures are not even worth the digital bytes they inhabit.  The website 'The People Of Walmart" is an example of this. Shameless. 99% of Web content is of this nature. And a lot of printed words are of the same value.  I have to think of the Twilight Saga as an example.  It is hard to believe that series chewed up as much attention as it did.

Every time someone posts a 'true story' on 'Facebook' my critical antennae rise like Ray Walston on My Favorite Martian. I find that I doubt every fact posted. Many of the 'facts' posted can be quickly discounted if you go to a site like snopes.com.  It amazes me that my antennae are so attuned, until I realize that I may be missing 50% of the ones that don't tickle my probes. It also amazes me that people repost these suspect facts without checking.

We do have freedom of speech in this country. This blog is a perfect example. I love that right bestowed on my by our founding Fathers. Still, we must take responsibility for the words we choose to use.  What offends other people is real to them and does have consequences. With the freedom of speech we also need to think of the consequences of what issues from our lips or posts online.

My personal preference is to not offend. And I feel it is important to express that I know my opinions are not 'facts'. My observations are not gospel. And I have a responsibility to check my facts before I profligate them.  I am responsible for my 1000 pictures and 1000 words, and so are you.

Cheers, nca