Friday, October 28, 2016

Warbling Wednesday Week Two

Yes, I know it is Friday. Deepest apologies. I am currently in charge of the household, so I am rather busy.
This week I had a song I played with the choir on Sunday stuck in my head, namely, "When They Call My Name". Particularly the line "I'll be ready, I won't have to HESitate" in which I added a tremolo on the "HES" part. I also added seventh swung arpeggios at certain parts, sort of like this pianist does at the beginning, but I won't bore you with the details.


Thursday, October 20, 2016

Warbling Wednesday Week One

I teach piano morning and afternoon on Wednesdays, and our church's choir practice is in the evening, and therefore I have lots of songs running around in my head on that particular day of the week. So I thought, not having many blog post ideas running around in my head through any day of the week really, I could start a weekly segment that consisted of posting the song most stuck in my head each week and helpfully get it stuck in yours. You are welcome in advance.

The winner for this week is:




Stars from Les Miserables. I have Rebekah to thank for this gift. She bought a dress that has stars on it, and every time I see it I sing the first word of the second verse "Stars...", and then have the rest of it stuck in my head for the rest of the day. For those who care, I stole from a piano arrangement of this song the 6/8 arpeggio left hand chordal pattern's beginning with the lowest notes descending in a diatonic scale (though the chords are not always in root inversion) as a springboard for my "Not all Those who Wander are Lost" piano composition this last summer. The chords numbers I use are not identical, and I carry the pattern for a full octave down and then back up with different chords again, but I took the germ of the idea from this arrangement.



This is, actually, one of my favorite non-sacred songs at the moment, but enough is as good as a feast, even if a spoonful of sugar (liking the song) helps the medicine (having it stuck in my head ALL. WEEK.) go down. Well, now I have a different song stuck in my head until Rebekah wears her dress again.


Friday, October 14, 2016

Large Family Idiosyncrasies: Part 1

Having grown up in a large family, I know we do some things differently than the general population. Our coping mechanisms are second nature to us, and we don't always step back to consider the fact that they may be odd or amusing to others. However, sometimes the strange looks and questions impress the fact upon us, and we laugh, and add a chapter to the imaginary book we've been writing, entitled "Large Family Idiosyncrasies".

It is a shame that this book will always be imaginary, since a study of our family would make fascinating reading, but I resolved that some of our more creative solutions to big family problems would not go entirely undocumented, and thus conceived this blog series. I have no idea how many posts it will be, since I'm likely to remember more idiosyncrasies as I write, but I'm looking forward to writing about this topic, and will try to get a post done every week or so.

Part One: Defining the terms

Before we jump into the actual list of idiosyncrasies in the following weeks, I wanted to explain two things:
1. What is a large family?
2. What do I mean by idiosyncrasy?

So, defining a "big" family is quite controversial, fraught with cultural and historical implications, not to mention the competition with that other family you know who has one more kid than your family, and flaunts their own "big family" status in your face, while belittling yours. (Or, of course, that family who has one fewer children than your own, whom you patronize with such terms as "cute", "little", "diminutive", or other synonyms for "small" with even more syllables.)*

*BOTH OF THESE ARE HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS, WHICH HAVE NO BEARING ON MY ACTUAL EXPERIENCES

Thankfully, however, I have a definition to proffer, grounded firmly on mathematical principles, which ought to lay the whole question to rest once and for all. I call it "The Counting Test", and it is easily illustrated with jellybeans:



Exhibit A


One can see at a glance that there are three jelly beans in this picture. There is no conscious counting, the eye takes it in instantaneously. Contrast that with the picture below:






Exhibit B


There are seven jelly beans here, but it is not so immediately obvious. One must move the eyes across the picture slowly, breaking the number of jelly beans into smaller sets and adding them together, or counting them individually. Any group of more than six objects must be counted this way, unless they are carefully laid out in a grid, so that they can be multiplied. Since people do not form themselves into grids, it follows that they must be counted. Indeed, children are even more difficult to count than jelly beans, since they tend to move around. 

Using this test, it is quite evident: Large Family = 7 or more people = 2 parents + 5 or more children

I doubt any further arguments could be made against such clear evidence, but I might just point out that this definition also fits nicely with the "Two Parents, Four Hands" test, which, briefly stated, postulates that since each parent has two hands, they can manage up to four children on their own, without any of them being in danger of getting run over, while as soon as the number reaches five they must enlist the help of older siblings, and will start eliciting comments from strangers, i.e. "You've got your hands full", "You must be Catholic", "Do you know the Duggars?", etc., etc.

With that question out of the way, we can turn to defining the term "idiosyncrasies"—restating the idea using words with less than six syllables. The New Oxford American Dictionary explains it thus: 
  • a mode of behavior or way of thought peculiar to an individual
  •  a distinctive or peculiar feature or characteristic of a place or thing
Which means we'll be talking about how big families behave, how they think, and what is distinctive about them. Be prepared to find us peculiar! 

Friday, October 7, 2016

A Study on George Berkeley's Theory of an Infinite Perceiver



There was a young man who said, "God
Must think it exceedingly odd
If he finds that this tree
Continues to be
When there's no one about in the Quad." 

REPLY:
Dear Sir:
Your astonishment's odd:
I am always about in the Quad.
And that's why the tree
Will continue to be,
Since observed by
Yours faithfully,
GOD.
-Ronald Knox

Your random limerick for the week. You're welcome. Despite appearances thus far, this is not only a post with a limerick. It is serving a double purpose as an announcement that I am going to post more often! Or at least try to do so. Now that I'm married, I think I'll have more time on my hands, and I've got an idea for a two-part series of posts, which I will start on next week. 

Until then,