Introduction
It is hard to believe that 2019 is wrapping up so fast, and also equally unbelievable that I have been doing these articles for ten years. We are on the verge of wrapping up the year, and also beginning a new ten-year run on these articles to see what and how they impact you, the reader. Let us now do the year-end perspective, as well as giving a glimpse into what I plan to do in the coming year as well.
On the Home Front
2019 has been one of those years that has been both good in many aspects but also extremely challenging in others. A lot of important events happened this year that need to be recapped, and they entail a lot of areas.
First, after many years of struggling with credit issues, I have finally resolved and settled many past bills that had been hanging over my head for at least the past 5 to 6 years. It is good to have that mess cleaned up, and it has opened other doors. With revamped credit and a relatively good financial outlook, things are taking shape that have been needed for some time. And, that has opened doors to other things as well, including a very important one that I will now talk about.
Earlier in the year, we got a letter from the park we live in that offered us a buying option for our place, and it was a nice one. We were offered downpayment credit based on what we have been paying into our place the past couple of years, and at the present time, we are still in the process of completing the paperwork. The implications of this are that we now have a place of our own, and are able to get some nice roots established. I will probably elaborate more on that in the coming year.
This has also been a year of medical challenges as well, especially for Barbara. In April and May, she had two consecutive procedures for cataract removal on her eyes, and she has now gotten completely improved eyesight save for a small complication with a "floater." My year medically has been fairly good as well - I only had one incident just the past weekend with esophagitis, which essentially means that I got irritation on my esophageal lining due to swallowing a piece of extremely hot potato on the Saturday following Thanksgiving. Although I spent an unpleasant 8 hours in the emergency room due to difficulty swallowing, everything checked out fine. However, as I write this I do have an appointment with my new doctor in regards to my blood pressure, which was somewhat high and caused the ER physician some concern - I was actually diagnosed with hypertension back in 2010, and at one time was on lisinopril, an ACE inhibitor derived from the venom of a Central American species of viper that helps regulate blood pressure. Lisinopril is a tricky medication though, as some people (particularly women) develop reactive side effects to it - Barbara was on it for a long time and developed a nasty, lingering cough. However, when I took it I was never adversely affected by it. Whether or not I will be given a prescription for that or for another type of blood pressure medication remains to be seen, but getting my elevated blood pressure under control is definitely important. And, that leads to the next major thing.
In November, I reached the half-century mark of my personal existence, as I turned 50. Reaching that milestone is still something hard for me to comprehend, as it only seems like yesterday that I was a 20-something college kid (in reality, it has been 23 years since I received my Bachelor's). Being 50 does have its advantages though, in particular, the AARP membership I now have, and that I guess is a perk that comes with age. There have also been a couple of more milestones I have reached this year, so we'll visit those now too.
In September, I officially received my 3rd Degree as a Knight of Columbus. The ceremony took place over near Mount Airy just this side of Baltimore, and it was a neat ceremony to be part of. Granted, I was way underdressed for it - Knights generally are somewhat formal in their ceremonies, and I was supposed to wear a shirt and tie but didn't, as I went straight from work to the ceremony itself. This means I stood out like a sore thumb, but thankfully my brother Knights didn't make an issue of it, and our Council Grand Knight Fred Nugent didn't even mention it. However, I am learning from it and next year for my 4th Degree I will have the suit ready for the ceremony, which more than likely will be in Baltimore. Being part of the Knights of Columbus for the past couple of years has been a good thing, and although there is some controversy about the new regalia, I am still glad to be part of this great organization.
The other major step I took was becoming a Maryland Notary Public just last month. For many years, I was a Florida Notary, and therefore am familiar with the responsibilities. My swearing-in was on November 15th at the courthouse here in Hagerstown, and I have a four-year commission. I don't recall it being that formal in Florida when I was commissioned there back in 2005, but I kind of appreciate a little more formality - it gives a bit more authority to the office.
The final thing on the "home front" is some new additions to our household. In July, we went to visit my sister-in-law Sue's place in Indiana, as Barbara's cousin was getting married in Milwaukee at around the same time. Barbara's sister Sue has a lot of challenges right now, as she took on a huge responsibility with a fixer-upper farmhouse, and she also has limited funds. But, while we were out there, she gave us something that has provided some joy to us, and also a little more responsibility. Back when I was a teenager, my mom worked for an old lady who had a pet zebra finch, and to be honest I really became enamored with that little bird. A zebra finch is a tiny bird with a sound reminiscent of a squeak toy, and they are actually adorable little birds. Returning from Indiana, we ended up bringing five of them back with us, and even as I write this now, they are sitting next to the desk chattering like a bunch of little monkeys. All five are males, and they are the cutest little stinkers honestly. We look forward to being blessed with many years of enjoyment from those little birds.
Calling and Vocation
As far as my church work this year, it has been very limited to teaching a group of sixth-graders at our parish, St. Joseph's in Hagerstown, on Sunday mornings during the school year. As my Master's is in Catechetics, I am putting my degree essentially to work by teaching the faith to kids, and this is now my third year doing so. The class that started in September is a somewhat smaller group this year, as I only have seven total, but they are a sharp and well-behaved group. My current class is also very diverse, as it includes a girl whose folks were from El Salvador, a Filipino, two Sri Lankans, a young lady whose father is Kenyan, and two regular American boys. I love diversity though, as I learn a lot about them as well, and that is one of the rewards of the calling. At this point, I am debating about continuing a fourth year, so we'll see what happens.
As for my own faith, I have found myself leaning more in a traditionalist direction, although I want to address some concerns. I have always been fairly conservative in my faith, and as a Catholic, it is no different honestly. I am not anti-Vatican II like some fellow Trads are, as I understand that there are good things that have come from the Council, but at the same time, I see issues with implementation. As I have mentioned, I am not technically part of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, as instead I am part of the Personal Ordinariate of St. Peter, a diocesan structure that is comprised of former Anglicans like myself who have retained what is called patrimony, meaning that those distinctly Anglican traits of our faith that don't conflict with Magisterial teaching are allowed and encouraged. As such, I am more traditionalist than many people at our current parish, which is a regular Roman Catholic congregation, and I have felt the conviction to do some things differently. For one, I have begun taking Communion on the tongue rather than in the hand, and I also say the parts of the traditional Mass that coincide with the Novus Ordo Mass the parish we attend uses. However, I am a little different than most Trads because simply I cannot fathom being anti-this or anti-that when there is no reason to be anti-whatever in those cases. For one thing, the abundant amount of anti-semitism I have noted among Trads hinges on a hatred of Jewish people, and that is not something I will tolerate or condone - I have pulled out of a number of Trad groups on social media over that one, as some of these individuals are even engaging in Holocaust denial conspiracies and even glorifying Hitler, whom they forgot was as much anti-Christian as he was anti-Jewish. I am also not totally on-board with even a lot of the anti-Protestant rhetoric that some Trads spew, as it is hateful as well. It is one thing to have a disagreement with Protestants and to even pray for their eventual reconciliation with the Church, but it is quite another to spout some of the hateful vitriol against Protestants I hear from some self-professed Trads. As for the Jews, it is also one thing to pray for their conversion and to even criticize some of their resistance to Christianity, but it is quite another thing to harbor a blanket hatred for them as a people. Trads need to get their stuff together, and until they do, there are just some of them I would prefer not to be associated with. Anyway, that has been my spiritual journey this year.
Other News
In recent years, I have made it a regular objective to check hometown obituaries, and I have an archive of obituaries of people I have known over the years, as well as family members who have passed on. This year, I lost an aunt who passed away earlier in November, and it is almost surreal as she was an aunt I had known most of my life. Angie McDaniel (1939-2019) was the middle half-sister of my maternal grandfather Dave Strahin. When my great-grandfather, Charles Judson Strahin, passed on sometime around the year 1932, a couple of years later my great-grandmother remarried to a man named Delbert "Mose" Turner, and with him, she had five children. The oldest, Ruth, passed away back in 1976 I believe - she had multiple sclerosis and was largely incapacitated. The next one to pass on was my uncle Robert "Bonzo" Turner, who was the second-youngest. He passed away in 1977 from a diabetic coma. The third to go in this line was my Uncle Delbert Jr. "Teak" Turner, who was the second-oldest of this family - he was found dead in his apartment in Parsons in 1995 or 1996. The youngest of the five, my uncle Joe Garland Turner Sr., died in 2005 from cancer. Aunt Angie was the last of my grandfather's five Turner siblings, and she had been in declining health for a number of years, as her weight kept plummeting so much that she barely weighed anything. Fortunately, in October I was able to see her one last time and to be honest, she looked bad - she was not the same lady I remembered from years ago, the aunt who bought me Goldfish crackers when I was a kid and also made so many delicious homemade items, including peanut butter cups, at Christmas. I have a lot of fond memories of her from when I was little, as she always treated me well despite the fact that over the years a sort of feud has existed between Mom and the rest of the family, so I haven't seen as much of her. Her passing still has me in some shock, as it is hard to believe she is gone. But, at least the memories are eternal, and she will live on there.
My Expectations for the Coming Year
As I have reached the 50 mark agewise and am now also looking at the end of the second decade of the 21st century, a lot of things cross my mind. What do I hope to accomplish this coming year? I am going to briefly set out some objectives now.
First, as for writing. My articles for next year are going to more or less continue in a sort of vein that I am currently in, that being in-depth theological discourses on SPT, reviewing more restaurants and also posting new recipes on "David's Culinary Page," and here I want to begin some more insights regarding past memories and such. Some of the issues I want to take on concerning SPT, in particular, include some analysis of Frank Peretti's two books, This Present Darkness and Piercing the Darkness, both of which I have read several times over the past 25 or so years. Those two books, published respectively in 1986 and 1988, are two of the most riveting and engaging pieces of Christian fictional writing to have been published in years, and well over 30 years after their initial publication, they are still avidly read. I personally try to read those at least every couple of years and am in the process of doing that now. I want to do an article about them analyzing both the strengths and weaknesses of the books, and I may do that in January if circumstance allows. Another area I want to tackle next year is regarding traditionalist Catholics, as an evaluation needs to be done as well as maybe some historical background on them. Dr. Taylor Marshall has done some work in that area, as has Fr. Dwight Longenecker and I will be using their material for some inspiration and to provide a framework to work from. I may also do a nice ten-year perspective on DMM as well regarding our ten years of writing, and that will probably happen in April or sometime as it is the mid-point of my anniversaries for all three blogs. Therefore, I encourage you to stay tuned.
Our home is also going to be getting some makeover and restructuring, as we do need a utility shed outside to house our lawnmower and also a lot of stuff we have piled up in the house now. Even after 3 years of living here, we still are getting situated, and Barbara and I want to accelerate that a bit this year. We need quite a bit in the house - a washer and dryer, some work inside the house, and also we need to upgrade our furniture somewhat. This is now more important with buying the place being a reality, as we need to now step up and take more responsibility for our home, as we'll more than likely be here for many years to come. Talking about this now does have its exhilaration for sure, as homeownership is definitely a big step for us.
The culinary page will also receive some new attention, as I want to begin to focus not only on restaurant reviews and recipes, but also some good articles about foraging for wild edibles and a few agricultural things - we now have raspberry plants outside, and those will be providing us with berries and other things for culinary experiments. Also, I have discovered a source of pawpaws, and will be attempting to grow those this year - I will be starting the seeds in the spring and will see how they turn out. I may venture as well into doing some hunting and fishing and would like to showcase more wild game in my recipes and other endeavors. And, we still have new recipes to try, and new restaurants to visit, and I want to begin doing more of the latter in my home state of West Virginia. This gives an idea of what we will be up to this year as far as culinary arts are concerned.
My music collection will also be focusing mainly on obtaining rare vinyl LP's of stuff I once had, and that includes both my vintage big band collection as well as my gospel music library. I also will be looking into a couple of monumental CD collections, one of Stravinsky's works and the other the 24-disc centennial collection of Duke Ellington's recordings. My music collection, however, has grown to about where it needs to be, so less emphasis will be directed to it than has been in the past.
Now that I have given some basic objectives for the coming year, let us now wrap up.
Conclusion
2019 has been a year of challenges - I have had good things happen, and also some really rough points. In summary, it was not the best year on record, but thankfully it was also far from being the worst also. As we enter 2020, I wish everyone reading this a blessed holiday season, and may 2020 be a great year for you as well as me. Thank you, and will see you next year!
Tuesday, December 3, 2019
Monday, December 2, 2019
Some Random Thoughts
(original draft October 3, 2019)
It has been a while since I have posted a lot, as the demands of life warrant making sure the bills are paid, necessitating employment which takes up a lot of time. I haven't posted one of these "random thoughts" discourses in a while, so figured one was due, therefore here it is.
One of the first thoughts that comes to mind recently is the subject of politics. The clown show that is the cache of Democrats attempting to defeat President Trump next year is the source of both amusement and alarm. While much of what that group of fringe-radical nuts say is downright comical due to the outlandish nonsense that makes up much of their rhetoric (coming to mind of late is Julian Castro's push for abortion rights for transgender women - for those not keeping up with this, a transgender woman is a biological male who dresses up in women's clothes due to a psychological disorder called gender dysphoria - that means that such an individual cannot possibly get pregnant to begin with much less consider abortion). However, the scary aspect of this is that if one of these individuals actually did get elected to the highest office in the country, the consequences would be catastrophic regarding the damage they could do. The mere thought of people like Corey Booker, Beto O'Rourke (who has dropped out - God does still have mercy upon us!), or Bernie Sanders as President is not a pleasant reflection to be sure, and when a creepy pervert and plagiarist such as Joe Biden is considered a "moderate," it is cause for alarm. Honestly, for me, it makes me pine for the Reagan years back when I was a teenager - life was better then, and people seemed to be happier. While many of the Democrats thankfully don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning at this point - a comforting thought, by the way - the fact that they are saying what they are saying should be cause for concern regardless. However, it is in God's hands ultimately, so we can only just watch and see how it plays out.
Since my initial draft of this was written, two other political developments have happened worth mentioning. First, the House of Representatives in October passed the Armenian Genocide recognition resolution with overwhelming bipartisan support. I was actually pleasantly surprised that even otherwise reprehensible characters in the House (Pelosi, Schiff, Waters, and company) actually supported the measure - oh well; even a broken clock is right twice a day! A measure was introduced as well to the Senate, with bipartisan sponsorship by Ted Cruz (Republican) and Bob Menendez (Democrat) called SR 150, and for the most part the Senate looks like they would vote for it (surprisingly, even Steve Cohen, a notorious anti-Armenian bigot, supports it), but then a snag happened. Upon the visit of Turkish tyrant Recip Erdogan to Washington a couple of weeks ago, Senator Lindsay Graham developed a man-crush on the Turkish leader and unfortunately blocked a vote on it. He was followed by a Georgia Senator who did the same thing - also Republican. Lindsay Graham, who also is a closet liberal on some other issues, is a walking motivation to impose term limits on Congress - his betrayal of the Armenian-American community has gotten backlash too, and unfortunately it has infuriated some Armenians so much that they are accusing all Republicans (despite the fact that many of the most vocal supporters of recognition, such as Gus Bilirakis and Ted Cruz, are Republicans) and are pushing on social media now for Armenians to vote Democrat in the coming election. That development is unfortunate, and the reality is that we should never let a single issue define our voting choices. While many Democrats did vote for the resolution - and I am glad they did something right for once - many of these same people also still push for unlimited abortion on demand, the LGBT agenda, and other things that many Armenian-Americans - many of whom are very traditionally and socially conservative on these issues - would find disagreeable. Therefore, two things need to happen here - first, Lindsay Graham needs to either recant or resign, and secondly, some Armenians who are letting emotions get away with them need to understand that for American voters, Genocide recognition is not the only issue up for grabs in the coming electoral season - there are a lot of things. Look at the big picture, in other words. And, this leads to the second issue.
At the time I am writing this, approximately one week ago the fast-food chicken giant Chick-Fil-A noted in the past for being a Christian-influenced voice for traditional values, has seemingly dropped the ball. In updating their charitable foundation's giving, the fast-food giant dumped the Salvation Army as a beneficiary of its charitable work due to the fact that the Salvation Army is supposedly "anti-LGBT." Then, word came that Chick-Fil-A also had been giving contributions to both the Southern Poverty Law Center (an anti-Christian activist organization whose claim to fame is the notorious "hate map" they produce that targets conservative groups) as well as Planned Parenthood. Chick-Fil-A's back-peddling of its original vision is rightly seen as a betrayal of its core principles, as well as a slap in the face against those who have stood with them for many years. It essentially means that our family will not patronize Chick-Fil-A anymore, and this may be a boon to its competitors, notably Zaxby's and Bojangle's, both of which actually have better food anyway honestly. Corporate America can be so stupid sometimes, and this illustrates the fact well. It is probably only a matter of time before Chick-Fil-A will be opening its doors on Sundays too, as the almighty dollar has replaced God Almighty as a focal point of worship for the fast-food enterprise.
On a lighter note now, recently I decided to binge-watch some old Paul Henning classics notably Petticoat Junction and Green Acres. There is something endearing about shows like those, and in the future, I plan on actually exploring the so-called "rural purge" of network television that occurred in 1971, in which these and many other shows like them got the ax from networks such as CBS. The "rural purge," much like James Caesar Petrillo's recording ban in the early 1940s, had a momentous impact on things, and not in a good way. Both Petrillo and the CBS corporate hacks were out of touch with what the public wanted, and both enacted disastrous and stupid measures that contributed to the diminished quality of popular entertainment for decades after the fact. And, as entertainment goes, so goes the culture. There was a reason why so many Americans liked The Beverly Hillbillies and Green Acres, and that fact drives the emphasis of my next point.
Corporate executives and union bosses, I have learned, are actually very out-of-touch people when it comes to public sentiment. However, the tragic thing about that is the disproportionate amount of control and influence such individuals have over consumer markets. Recently, Barbara had a dream in which she was fired from a job for being too good at what she did, and in a sense what she saw n that dream was the very thing that characterized the "rural purge" of television that happened in 1971. Entertainment has a primary and necessary purpose for us - it provides a diversion from much of the pressures and crap we face in life on a daily basis. Entertainment and other forms of recreation are actually essential to our personal well-being, as leisure helps us to recharge our batteries if it is treated as it should be. Once in awhile, in other words, we just need a break. A show like Green Acres provided that, and people loved it. But, then the corporate hacks had to get in there and decided to implement their own "bright ideas" - for them, TV programs (many of which these individuals didn't watch or have no interest in) had to be "more relevant" and they also all of a sudden had to address social issues of the day. These "social issues" were inserted between the laugh tracks of the sitcoms in question, and the problem was a basic one - is this really what the public wanted?? Honestly, in my own opinion, it would say it wasn't at all. The truth is one cannot honestly unwind from the pressures of the day while watching a fictional character like Mike "the Meathead" Stivic (played by real-life obnoxious meathead Rob Reiner) spouting socialist BS to intentionally rile his fictional father-in-law Archie Bunker into a lather. It just does not fly. There are instances, to be fair, where this sort of comedy is good (I call to mind 1999's Office Space, for instance - many of us can really relate to both the fictional Peter Gibbons and Milton Waddams, and I have even used micro-managing executive Lumbergh's name as a verb when some jackass in my workplace annoys me - I call that activity "Lumberghing."), but for the most part, these celebrities and their puppet-masters who are the producers and network executives need to leave politics out of sitcoms, sports, and cartoons (and I would add movies, although in some instances there are good movies that tackle real issues, so that is a different playing-field). And, while they are at it, leave out the sex, and artificially produced "music," and other such crap out of radio too - it must be understood that there are more instruments out there than a guitar that some moron can learn three chords on to play some stupid lyrics, and also the old "doghouse" has a much better sound than the electric bass guitar, as the latter sounds more like someone with a bad case of the farts after eating a box of X-Lax anyway. In short, the only good thing a show like All in the Family contained were the lyrics to its theme, which you remember are these:
It has been a while since I have posted a lot, as the demands of life warrant making sure the bills are paid, necessitating employment which takes up a lot of time. I haven't posted one of these "random thoughts" discourses in a while, so figured one was due, therefore here it is.
One of the first thoughts that comes to mind recently is the subject of politics. The clown show that is the cache of Democrats attempting to defeat President Trump next year is the source of both amusement and alarm. While much of what that group of fringe-radical nuts say is downright comical due to the outlandish nonsense that makes up much of their rhetoric (coming to mind of late is Julian Castro's push for abortion rights for transgender women - for those not keeping up with this, a transgender woman is a biological male who dresses up in women's clothes due to a psychological disorder called gender dysphoria - that means that such an individual cannot possibly get pregnant to begin with much less consider abortion). However, the scary aspect of this is that if one of these individuals actually did get elected to the highest office in the country, the consequences would be catastrophic regarding the damage they could do. The mere thought of people like Corey Booker, Beto O'Rourke (who has dropped out - God does still have mercy upon us!), or Bernie Sanders as President is not a pleasant reflection to be sure, and when a creepy pervert and plagiarist such as Joe Biden is considered a "moderate," it is cause for alarm. Honestly, for me, it makes me pine for the Reagan years back when I was a teenager - life was better then, and people seemed to be happier. While many of the Democrats thankfully don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning at this point - a comforting thought, by the way - the fact that they are saying what they are saying should be cause for concern regardless. However, it is in God's hands ultimately, so we can only just watch and see how it plays out.
Since my initial draft of this was written, two other political developments have happened worth mentioning. First, the House of Representatives in October passed the Armenian Genocide recognition resolution with overwhelming bipartisan support. I was actually pleasantly surprised that even otherwise reprehensible characters in the House (Pelosi, Schiff, Waters, and company) actually supported the measure - oh well; even a broken clock is right twice a day! A measure was introduced as well to the Senate, with bipartisan sponsorship by Ted Cruz (Republican) and Bob Menendez (Democrat) called SR 150, and for the most part the Senate looks like they would vote for it (surprisingly, even Steve Cohen, a notorious anti-Armenian bigot, supports it), but then a snag happened. Upon the visit of Turkish tyrant Recip Erdogan to Washington a couple of weeks ago, Senator Lindsay Graham developed a man-crush on the Turkish leader and unfortunately blocked a vote on it. He was followed by a Georgia Senator who did the same thing - also Republican. Lindsay Graham, who also is a closet liberal on some other issues, is a walking motivation to impose term limits on Congress - his betrayal of the Armenian-American community has gotten backlash too, and unfortunately it has infuriated some Armenians so much that they are accusing all Republicans (despite the fact that many of the most vocal supporters of recognition, such as Gus Bilirakis and Ted Cruz, are Republicans) and are pushing on social media now for Armenians to vote Democrat in the coming election. That development is unfortunate, and the reality is that we should never let a single issue define our voting choices. While many Democrats did vote for the resolution - and I am glad they did something right for once - many of these same people also still push for unlimited abortion on demand, the LGBT agenda, and other things that many Armenian-Americans - many of whom are very traditionally and socially conservative on these issues - would find disagreeable. Therefore, two things need to happen here - first, Lindsay Graham needs to either recant or resign, and secondly, some Armenians who are letting emotions get away with them need to understand that for American voters, Genocide recognition is not the only issue up for grabs in the coming electoral season - there are a lot of things. Look at the big picture, in other words. And, this leads to the second issue.
At the time I am writing this, approximately one week ago the fast-food chicken giant Chick-Fil-A noted in the past for being a Christian-influenced voice for traditional values, has seemingly dropped the ball. In updating their charitable foundation's giving, the fast-food giant dumped the Salvation Army as a beneficiary of its charitable work due to the fact that the Salvation Army is supposedly "anti-LGBT." Then, word came that Chick-Fil-A also had been giving contributions to both the Southern Poverty Law Center (an anti-Christian activist organization whose claim to fame is the notorious "hate map" they produce that targets conservative groups) as well as Planned Parenthood. Chick-Fil-A's back-peddling of its original vision is rightly seen as a betrayal of its core principles, as well as a slap in the face against those who have stood with them for many years. It essentially means that our family will not patronize Chick-Fil-A anymore, and this may be a boon to its competitors, notably Zaxby's and Bojangle's, both of which actually have better food anyway honestly. Corporate America can be so stupid sometimes, and this illustrates the fact well. It is probably only a matter of time before Chick-Fil-A will be opening its doors on Sundays too, as the almighty dollar has replaced God Almighty as a focal point of worship for the fast-food enterprise.
On a lighter note now, recently I decided to binge-watch some old Paul Henning classics notably Petticoat Junction and Green Acres. There is something endearing about shows like those, and in the future, I plan on actually exploring the so-called "rural purge" of network television that occurred in 1971, in which these and many other shows like them got the ax from networks such as CBS. The "rural purge," much like James Caesar Petrillo's recording ban in the early 1940s, had a momentous impact on things, and not in a good way. Both Petrillo and the CBS corporate hacks were out of touch with what the public wanted, and both enacted disastrous and stupid measures that contributed to the diminished quality of popular entertainment for decades after the fact. And, as entertainment goes, so goes the culture. There was a reason why so many Americans liked The Beverly Hillbillies and Green Acres, and that fact drives the emphasis of my next point.
Corporate executives and union bosses, I have learned, are actually very out-of-touch people when it comes to public sentiment. However, the tragic thing about that is the disproportionate amount of control and influence such individuals have over consumer markets. Recently, Barbara had a dream in which she was fired from a job for being too good at what she did, and in a sense what she saw n that dream was the very thing that characterized the "rural purge" of television that happened in 1971. Entertainment has a primary and necessary purpose for us - it provides a diversion from much of the pressures and crap we face in life on a daily basis. Entertainment and other forms of recreation are actually essential to our personal well-being, as leisure helps us to recharge our batteries if it is treated as it should be. Once in awhile, in other words, we just need a break. A show like Green Acres provided that, and people loved it. But, then the corporate hacks had to get in there and decided to implement their own "bright ideas" - for them, TV programs (many of which these individuals didn't watch or have no interest in) had to be "more relevant" and they also all of a sudden had to address social issues of the day. These "social issues" were inserted between the laugh tracks of the sitcoms in question, and the problem was a basic one - is this really what the public wanted?? Honestly, in my own opinion, it would say it wasn't at all. The truth is one cannot honestly unwind from the pressures of the day while watching a fictional character like Mike "the Meathead" Stivic (played by real-life obnoxious meathead Rob Reiner) spouting socialist BS to intentionally rile his fictional father-in-law Archie Bunker into a lather. It just does not fly. There are instances, to be fair, where this sort of comedy is good (I call to mind 1999's Office Space, for instance - many of us can really relate to both the fictional Peter Gibbons and Milton Waddams, and I have even used micro-managing executive Lumbergh's name as a verb when some jackass in my workplace annoys me - I call that activity "Lumberghing."), but for the most part, these celebrities and their puppet-masters who are the producers and network executives need to leave politics out of sitcoms, sports, and cartoons (and I would add movies, although in some instances there are good movies that tackle real issues, so that is a different playing-field). And, while they are at it, leave out the sex, and artificially produced "music," and other such crap out of radio too - it must be understood that there are more instruments out there than a guitar that some moron can learn three chords on to play some stupid lyrics, and also the old "doghouse" has a much better sound than the electric bass guitar, as the latter sounds more like someone with a bad case of the farts after eating a box of X-Lax anyway. In short, the only good thing a show like All in the Family contained were the lyrics to its theme, which you remember are these:
Boy, the way Glenn Miller played,
Songs that made the Hit Parade
Guys like us we had it made,
Those were the days.
When the opening theme of a sitcom expresses a better sentiment than its plot, it speaks volumes. I'll save more of that thunder for a later discourse. But, to summarize, modern entertainment has been sliding down a slippery slope for decades. Oh, it has occasional glimmers of hope - Duck Dynasty and The Waltons come to mind - but honestly, most of what is on network TV is inferior crap these days, and I don't actually watch regular TV anymore. I am very thankful for services like Roku, where the stuff is still readily available on demand.
As to other developments I want to discuss, we now turn our attention to other major political news, which is mainly the attempts by the media to obliterate President Trump. Donald Trump is not our greatest President, and honestly, there are things I have an issue with him concerning certain things in particular related to foreign policy. He and his lapdog Lindsay Graham have already been discussed in regard to the Armenian Genocide resolution, and Trump has no clue as to what he is doing when it comes to empowering madmen like Erdogan to continue their crimes against humanity. For the most part, however, I have stayed pretty quiet in regard to President Trump, as I do have mixed perceptions of him. Essentially, I have taken the personal policy of supporting Trump where he does good and disagreeing with him when he doesn't, and this leads to a couple of things I should make clear to many. First, I am a traditional Catholic Monarchist in my political leanings, which means I, by and large, would be considered also a paleoconservative. Secondly, I am not a Republican, nor did I actually vote for Trump in the last election. Those facts established, here is what I need folks to understand - not every conservative does - nor should they - give blanket support to any politician, regardless whether or not they identify as Republican or not. Republican does not equate with conservative, and many Republicans currently holding office are far from being true conservatives. Being I hold that position, I am not registered Republican, nor did I vote for Trump in 2016, it must be understood first and foremost I am not a "Trump shill." I appreciate the good he has done, and that deserves credit where credit is due, but Trump is not a reincarnated savior for anyone. A second thing I need to clarify is this - I do not currently, and have not in a long time, watched Fox News, so I cannot be accused of being "indoctrinated" with "right-wing propaganda" from Fox News either. I have come to my own convictions by observing and drawing my own conclusions on the issues, and based on what I observe, that determines my support. I am not 100% aboard the Republican platform (or even the majority conservative one for that matter) on a number of things, but that means little to the individuals on the radical Left - those individuals feel that anyone who tends to be conservative - either socially or economically for that matter - must be so because somehow Fox News or even Trump himself must have indoctrinated them. That is actually insulting, as it presupposes that a conservative cannot think for themselves and thus must tow the "party line." The fact is, however, conservatives have a wide diversity of opinions on things, and not every intelligent conservative will agree 100% on everything. On social media, I have actually went after people for those stereotypes, but if they see the facts and own up to their own presumptions and apologize, I can easily let it go and life goes on. Still, however, people need to understand that not every conservative is a card-carrying Republican who voted for Trump without question and lets Fox News feed them opinions. Give us some credit - some of us just know how to be smart enough to think for ourselves, and at times when that happens one ends up with views that could tick off both fellow conservatives and Leftists. That then leads to this - not every conservative talking-point is universally correct or espoused by every self-identified conservative, and not every talking point is wrong either - some are and some aren't. It just means we need to return to the value of thinking critically in order to embrace what is right and discard what is wrong. That concludes my political soapbox in the discussion.
Moving on, I wanted to sort of recollect a couple of things now, although I will save most of that for my year-end retrospection in a couple of weeks. However, one thing comes up that does fit in, and that is the feeling that it's been so good to be back home after 27 years in exile in Florida. Granted, moving back here has had its challenges - many challenges actually! - but I have no regrets regarding the big decision to move back. The location we live in now is actually at the center of my greater domain, which stretches roughly from Clarksburg, WV in the west to Baltimore in the east, and from Pittsburgh in the north to Marlinton, WV, in the south. This essentially encompasses the area where most of my life, my legacy, and my heritage is found. It is familiar, comfortable, and well, just home. The thought of even moving anywhere else now is out of the question, as now we are actually getting ready to buy our current place and re-establish roots again. It is good for Mom as well, as she is in her twilight years and she'll at least die on home turf when her time comes as well. I just wanted to spend some time on that.
Moving onto other thoughts, I have a bit of faith perspective now. If you have seen Fiddler on the Roof, you will recall in the beginning scenes of the movie that a group of villagers was either getting out of Shabbat services at the local village synagogue, or they were having a town meeting. One villager then asks the rabbi if it is proper to pray for the Czar (the film is set during a time of pograms in Russia just prior to the 1917 Revolution, and although the Czar was not directly responsible for these atrocities, Jews were targeted by their Slav neighbors at times). The rabbi replies with this - "God bless and keep the Czar - far away from us!" I may expand on that for a future SPT article, but a couple of things did spurn this discussion. A couple of days ago (prior to writing this original draft), the notorious and openly socialist Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was hospitalized for what essentially was a heart attack. Bernie is 78 years old, so, to be honest, he's a bit old anyway for the activity he is doing. Further, due to his very anti-Christian rhetoric and associations, Bernie is rightly an enemy to those of us of Christian faith. There are many layers to this, but for sake of time the essential point is this - we can, in good faith and correct conviction, both pray for our enemies as well as praying for protection from them. Bernie's situation could be an answer to both types of prayers - he didn't die, which is good, but at the same time, or could have used this to restrain him from doing anything further to jeopardize his people. Even though for all practicality Bernie is more like Lenin than the Czar, I think the fictional rabbi in Fiddler says something that could equally apply in both situations. As mentioned, this is a potential SPT article for later, as it warrants more in-depth study.
So, there they are - some good random thoughts for the time being. I may have more later, so stay tuned. Otherwise, the best to all who chose to read these eccentric and eclectic ramblings.
Friday, November 15, 2019
37 Years
(This article was originally composed on 9/23/2019)
As I write this, I am several days out from October 1st, and as those who have been following me for some time here, that day has a special significance for me - it is my anniversary of collecting vintage records, this year being the 37th. Going back to that 25-cent 1955 Harry Belafonte RCA LP that Mom got me on October 1, 1982, my collection has now spanned almost 4 decades. With each passing year, I get a more complete collection, but there is always something new to discover, which is why I will probably actively collect until I draw my last breath, which will hopefully be many years away yet!
First, let us get to the boring part of the discussion - the numbers. As of October 1st, my collection consists of 1289 CDs, 974 LP records, and 115 DVDs of related interest, in addition to approximately 300 or so 78's and a few 45 EPs. The numbers indicate a steady, growing collection, but the numbers also somewhat belie the details. This is what I will elaborate on now.
This year, acquisitions have actually been slow in coming - I actually did not even purchase any media for months between November 2018 and this past May. However, acquisitions actually picked up starting in August, and the emphasis this year for me has been on acquiring long-lost LP records I have been looking for as well as vintage big band movies on DVD. This was kicked off with the purchase in August of a 52-record collection titled The Great Singers which was originally released as a collection in 1985 by a company called the Easton Press. The 52 LP records in this collection are grouped into boxed albums of 4, and that totals to 13 volumes. Like the Franklin Mint big band set (which I acquired in 2005) this collection was a monumental collection which featured the famous recordings of legendary male and female vocalists such as Tony Bennett, Dinah Shore, Rosemary Clooney, Bing Crosby, Lena Horne, and a virtual cavalcade of other legendary names. However, from my perspective the set was somewhat incomplete, as some notable legends were left out completely for some odd reason - notably Perry Como, Frankie Laine, Dean Martin, Jo Stafford, and Vic Damone, to name a few. Despite that limitation though, the collection is still an excellent one, perhaps the best ever assembled, and although lacking in some areas it still has collectible quality. I thought perhaps there were more than 13 volumes, although my research concluded that 13 seems to be the full collection. Although the legendary pop vocalists that predominated during a period between the big bands and the rise of rock and roll are not a primary focus of my collection efforts, a quality collection of them is still good to have, and this one is by far the best. Like the monumental Franklin Mint big band collection, the likelihood of a collection like this being reissued on CD is practically impossible, being that neither Easton Press (whose primary focus these days is on books) and Franklin Mint (which now specializes in collectible curios) are in the music business anymore. This is the perfect lead-in now to some important commentary I wanted to share on observations I have made over the past 30 or so years.
Back when I started my own collection, I was a 12-year-old kid without access to a lot of money to really invest in the collection I wanted, so the majority of my early collection endeavors were focused on junk stores, in particular, the legendary Rio Mall I have discussed before. But, back in that time, many places - Time-Life, Reader's Digest, Easton Press, Franklin Mint, etc. - did have mail-order record subscription deals, and some of what they offered was phenomenal. The Reader's Digest sets are particularly good, and I still have several of those boxed sets in my collection even now. At that time, records were extremely easy to get too - all you had to do most of the time was just send in a business reply card for the record set you wanted, and in a couple of weeks it would arrive. However, the catch was that those records had to be paid for, and a set like that could run upwards of $50 at that time. In my first years of junior high school, I made the mistake of ordering a crap-load of these, and at one point I had six Reader's Digest sets that I ended up never paying for. That was a regrettable mistake I made up for later when most of my original record collection was lost in storage a couple of months after I married Barbara, and it was a sort of poetic justice now that I look back on it. The Easton Press set comes into this discussion as it was one of those orders I initially got years ago, as that set was released at around the time I was 14 years old and I sent in the card to get it. At that time, I only received the first volume (Bennett/Clooney/Shore) and after some years I had actually forgotten about that collection until I saw the whole set on eBay a couple of months back and was able to get them all - the difference is that this time they are paid for in full! Many companies do not even issue records or CD's anymore for ordering like they used to, and even that 12 tapes for a penny deal the major music clubs like Columbia and RCA used to have don't exist anymore - I haven't seen one of those clubs in over 14 years actually. In a way, it is a tragic reality, but on the other hand we now have Amazon and eBay which offer most of this same stuff at even better prices. My plan in the coming year for my collection is to "fill in the gaps" of my vinyl collection, and I will elaborate more on that shortly.
The other emphasis I have focused on this year is the acquisition of vintage big band movies on DVD. Over the years, the DVD part of my collection has been focused on four areas - live concert
and TV programs, "Soundie" collections, documentaries, and full-length motion pictures. There are a number of good feature-length big band movies that were produced between 1927 and 1959, and I now have most of them due to a major objective I have had this year, that being finding the ones I was missing. Some of the ones I have obtained the past year so far feature Kay Kyser's orchestra (Carolina Blues, Playmates, Swing Fever, That's Right You're Wrong) as well as many vintage pictures featuring famous big bands in a central role (Private Buckaroo featuring Harry James and the Andrews Sisters, Hollywood Hotel featuring Benny Goodman and Johnny "Scat" Davis, Sun Valley Serenade featuring Glenn Miller, and Las Vegas Nights featuring Tommy Dorsey). However, these efforts have not been without challenges. Defective discs have been an issue recently, as I have had to return Carolina Blues 3 times before getting a playable copy, and I also had an issue with the vintage 1943 Ted Lewis picture Is Everybody Happy? At this writing though, everything is good, and I have playable copies of those films in excellent condition now. I have also had delivery issues - one set I got on eBay was a 20-volume Time-Life collection called Your Hit Parade that features the original recordings of practically every hit song between the years 1940 and 1959, and it is a magnificent collection. The problem here was not with the eBay seller, but rather with the typical ineptitude of the postal service, which took practically a month to get a package here which should have been delivered within a few days. However, they did eventually get here, and the gracious seller even refunded me the money I paid for them due to the trouble it took to get them, so all is good. These small logistic snags are a pain in the butt to deal with, but they will happen on occasion. As long as they work out though, all is forgiven and forgotten.
The CD part of my collection has had minimal growth this year, but I did manage to get my hands on some amazing collections. The first that comes to mind was one of the first purchases I made for the new fiscal collection year, and it was of a 5-CD boxed collection of legendary accordionist Charles Magnante that I have had my eye on for several years. In addition, I also managed to obtain a 2-disc collection of legendary Russian Jewish mandolinist Dave Apollon, a must for any vintage big band/jazz collection, as well as the 13-CD collection of Glenn Miller's complete recordings that were produced on the anniversary of his 100th birthday in 2002. I also was able to get some fine CD reissues of the Dukes of Dixieland and of some early 1890's reissues from cylinder recordings, which include the sides of many proto-dance bands such as Edward Issler and others. The year for CDs then was both modest but good.
One of the things about collecting the kind of music I collect is that it entails history. It is more than just a collection, but more like a personal historical archive. Few of us these days actually collect this type of music anymore, as many of those who originally enjoyed it have now gone onto their eternal reward. For the young 20-something Millennials, the Beatles are now considered "ancient," and Elvis Presley to them is actually prehistoric - God forbid you to mention anything to them about such people I collect such as Kay Kyser, Glenn Miller, or Guy Lombardo; the very mention of those names is met with a blank slack-jawed expression and an asinine comment such as "did they sing with the Backstreet Boys?" Most retail music stores - which I rarely frequent now that they are corporate entities that offer little in the way of quality music - don't even sell vintage big band collections save the occasion cheap knock-off import of Glenn Miller or something (big bands neither started nor ended with the recording "In the Mood" by the way - there is a lot more to it than that). The labels such stuff is produced on and mass-marketed to the nostalgic aging "Boomer" that may have some affinity for hearing "In the Mood" on occasion because it gives them the "warm fuzzies" over the memories of their deceased parents who grew up with the music. And, that leads to some other observations.
As I approach my 50th birthday (at the time you are seeing this and I am typing it, I am now in my 50th year of existence) I'm somewhat shell-shocked by the reality that the hippies of my parents' generation are now the old geezers in their 70s, and those who were that age when I was a child are either now dead or at the youngest in their early 90s. It also brings the reality more clear (especially after getting my AARP membership recently) that I am on the threshold of being a senior myself now - that is a lot to absorb frankly. Equally perplexing is the fact that I am in my 37th year of collecting records, and when I first started my collection many of the LPs I had then were around 30 years old; today they are over 70 years and qualify as antiques in many cases. Also in observing how popular culture has radically changed in just over 30 years also makes it more important to preserve good entertainment, especially now since many cultural icons of the past, notably in recent years Kate Smith, are being defamed by the dominant culture as "offensive." A whole other discussion awaits on that at a later time though, as I am in the process of addressing that at length in a future writing.
After that brief detour down the proverbial rabbit-trail, we want to get back to the discussion at hand. So, for the coming years, what do I hope to accomplish? It is time to set out some goals, as there are a few for this coming year in particular in regard to the collection.
To begin, I am going to revisit some vinyl acquisitions. There are a number of things out there on LP that I doubt will ever be privileged with being reissued on CD recordings, and I have in mind a few significant things from years ago I would like to acquire on vinyl this time. Some of what I am after I once had only in the form of cassettes (nothing worth preserving should be put on cassette, as they are crappy in quality), and my personal opinion of cassettes is that they were a technological mistake that never should have happened - even fragile 80-year-old shellac 78s have outlasted most cassettes honestly. Cassettes tended to mess up, tangle, and although cheap were impractical for quality recording purposes. I will also add 8-tracks and VHS tapes to that, as both of those were equally worthless in quality, and thanks be to God they are not marketed anymore! Despite that reality, in past years (in particular my teens) I was able to get my hands on some good stuff on cassette, and later thankfully did find out these were available on vinyl and even on the occasional CD reissue. Thanks to both eBay and Amazon, I am now able to access those and have indeed already started the process of obtaining some of them. In this coming collection year, I hope to focus more on acquiring those particular vinyl recordings, in particular, those which never have had the opportunity to be reissued on CD. Back in my high school years in the 1980s, for instance, I recall finding at the old Ames Mart in Kingwood, WV, a number of volumes of a set of classic Italian jazz imports that were collectively titled "I Gigante del Jazz," and what these featured were rare later-era recordings of jazz legends. One of them was a cassette I originally had which featured Lionel Hampton material from the early 1970s, while another in the series featured Duke Ellington, and in particular one of the best recordings of his composition "C Jam Blues." Yet another item of interest was an LP I found that was on the old Mercury label dating from the early 1960s of a good Dixieland group called the Riverboat Five, and the title of the record was From Natchez to Mobile. The original record I had of this was something I picked up around January of 1983 at an old junk store in Shanks, WV, called Elmo Barnes's, and that establishment was a fierce contender with the Rio Mall for thrift shops back in the day in the area. A third LP item I have in my scope this year is an old Reader's Digest boxed set from the late 1970s of vintage 1940's big band and pop classics entitled Juke Box Saturday Night, and another on my list is a 1960's polka band that recorded on the Liberty label then called Paul Potski's Pumpernickles. The good thing about this is that although the possibility of seeing any of these reissued professionally on CD is negligible, I have the capabilities to record them on CD myself now, and can even digitize them on computer. Upon doing that project - which I have been working on periodically since 2013 - I plan on eventually putting a lot of my rarer vinyl items on a flash drive and then having them even more readily accessible, as some of them I have not heard in years. I am also setting my sights on more big band TV programs, such as those available of Ray Anthony's 1950's program, and as far as CDs are concerned, there is one major set I want that I will mention. In the early 1980s, Time-Life produced a good LP collection of the vintage recordings of the big bands, and each band leader was given an album with two records. Originally, I only had one - Glenn Miller's collection - but the whole set has around 22 albums. Time-Life did reissue those on CD, and I have seen them available on eBay as a collection, and their acquisition is a good possibility this coming year. The other big CD purchase I have on my scopes this year is a massive 24-disc collection of Duke Ellington's The Centennial Collection, which was released in 1998 in lieu of his 100th birthday. That set is very expensive, but it is one of the most comprehensive Ellington collections I have seen, as it contains all his recorded output over a 50-year period (1920-1970). That one is conditional - if I am able to get it this year, I will, but it is not a priority.
This concludes our year-end collection anniversary retrospective, and for the next year - 38 - I plan on posting a few pictures of the collection. Thanks again for visiting, and happy listening until next time!
As I write this, I am several days out from October 1st, and as those who have been following me for some time here, that day has a special significance for me - it is my anniversary of collecting vintage records, this year being the 37th. Going back to that 25-cent 1955 Harry Belafonte RCA LP that Mom got me on October 1, 1982, my collection has now spanned almost 4 decades. With each passing year, I get a more complete collection, but there is always something new to discover, which is why I will probably actively collect until I draw my last breath, which will hopefully be many years away yet!
First, let us get to the boring part of the discussion - the numbers. As of October 1st, my collection consists of 1289 CDs, 974 LP records, and 115 DVDs of related interest, in addition to approximately 300 or so 78's and a few 45 EPs. The numbers indicate a steady, growing collection, but the numbers also somewhat belie the details. This is what I will elaborate on now.
This year, acquisitions have actually been slow in coming - I actually did not even purchase any media for months between November 2018 and this past May. However, acquisitions actually picked up starting in August, and the emphasis this year for me has been on acquiring long-lost LP records I have been looking for as well as vintage big band movies on DVD. This was kicked off with the purchase in August of a 52-record collection titled The Great Singers which was originally released as a collection in 1985 by a company called the Easton Press. The 52 LP records in this collection are grouped into boxed albums of 4, and that totals to 13 volumes. Like the Franklin Mint big band set (which I acquired in 2005) this collection was a monumental collection which featured the famous recordings of legendary male and female vocalists such as Tony Bennett, Dinah Shore, Rosemary Clooney, Bing Crosby, Lena Horne, and a virtual cavalcade of other legendary names. However, from my perspective the set was somewhat incomplete, as some notable legends were left out completely for some odd reason - notably Perry Como, Frankie Laine, Dean Martin, Jo Stafford, and Vic Damone, to name a few. Despite that limitation though, the collection is still an excellent one, perhaps the best ever assembled, and although lacking in some areas it still has collectible quality. I thought perhaps there were more than 13 volumes, although my research concluded that 13 seems to be the full collection. Although the legendary pop vocalists that predominated during a period between the big bands and the rise of rock and roll are not a primary focus of my collection efforts, a quality collection of them is still good to have, and this one is by far the best. Like the monumental Franklin Mint big band collection, the likelihood of a collection like this being reissued on CD is practically impossible, being that neither Easton Press (whose primary focus these days is on books) and Franklin Mint (which now specializes in collectible curios) are in the music business anymore. This is the perfect lead-in now to some important commentary I wanted to share on observations I have made over the past 30 or so years.
Back when I started my own collection, I was a 12-year-old kid without access to a lot of money to really invest in the collection I wanted, so the majority of my early collection endeavors were focused on junk stores, in particular, the legendary Rio Mall I have discussed before. But, back in that time, many places - Time-Life, Reader's Digest, Easton Press, Franklin Mint, etc. - did have mail-order record subscription deals, and some of what they offered was phenomenal. The Reader's Digest sets are particularly good, and I still have several of those boxed sets in my collection even now. At that time, records were extremely easy to get too - all you had to do most of the time was just send in a business reply card for the record set you wanted, and in a couple of weeks it would arrive. However, the catch was that those records had to be paid for, and a set like that could run upwards of $50 at that time. In my first years of junior high school, I made the mistake of ordering a crap-load of these, and at one point I had six Reader's Digest sets that I ended up never paying for. That was a regrettable mistake I made up for later when most of my original record collection was lost in storage a couple of months after I married Barbara, and it was a sort of poetic justice now that I look back on it. The Easton Press set comes into this discussion as it was one of those orders I initially got years ago, as that set was released at around the time I was 14 years old and I sent in the card to get it. At that time, I only received the first volume (Bennett/Clooney/Shore) and after some years I had actually forgotten about that collection until I saw the whole set on eBay a couple of months back and was able to get them all - the difference is that this time they are paid for in full! Many companies do not even issue records or CD's anymore for ordering like they used to, and even that 12 tapes for a penny deal the major music clubs like Columbia and RCA used to have don't exist anymore - I haven't seen one of those clubs in over 14 years actually. In a way, it is a tragic reality, but on the other hand we now have Amazon and eBay which offer most of this same stuff at even better prices. My plan in the coming year for my collection is to "fill in the gaps" of my vinyl collection, and I will elaborate more on that shortly.
The other emphasis I have focused on this year is the acquisition of vintage big band movies on DVD. Over the years, the DVD part of my collection has been focused on four areas - live concert
and TV programs, "Soundie" collections, documentaries, and full-length motion pictures. There are a number of good feature-length big band movies that were produced between 1927 and 1959, and I now have most of them due to a major objective I have had this year, that being finding the ones I was missing. Some of the ones I have obtained the past year so far feature Kay Kyser's orchestra (Carolina Blues, Playmates, Swing Fever, That's Right You're Wrong) as well as many vintage pictures featuring famous big bands in a central role (Private Buckaroo featuring Harry James and the Andrews Sisters, Hollywood Hotel featuring Benny Goodman and Johnny "Scat" Davis, Sun Valley Serenade featuring Glenn Miller, and Las Vegas Nights featuring Tommy Dorsey). However, these efforts have not been without challenges. Defective discs have been an issue recently, as I have had to return Carolina Blues 3 times before getting a playable copy, and I also had an issue with the vintage 1943 Ted Lewis picture Is Everybody Happy? At this writing though, everything is good, and I have playable copies of those films in excellent condition now. I have also had delivery issues - one set I got on eBay was a 20-volume Time-Life collection called Your Hit Parade that features the original recordings of practically every hit song between the years 1940 and 1959, and it is a magnificent collection. The problem here was not with the eBay seller, but rather with the typical ineptitude of the postal service, which took practically a month to get a package here which should have been delivered within a few days. However, they did eventually get here, and the gracious seller even refunded me the money I paid for them due to the trouble it took to get them, so all is good. These small logistic snags are a pain in the butt to deal with, but they will happen on occasion. As long as they work out though, all is forgiven and forgotten.
The CD part of my collection has had minimal growth this year, but I did manage to get my hands on some amazing collections. The first that comes to mind was one of the first purchases I made for the new fiscal collection year, and it was of a 5-CD boxed collection of legendary accordionist Charles Magnante that I have had my eye on for several years. In addition, I also managed to obtain a 2-disc collection of legendary Russian Jewish mandolinist Dave Apollon, a must for any vintage big band/jazz collection, as well as the 13-CD collection of Glenn Miller's complete recordings that were produced on the anniversary of his 100th birthday in 2002. I also was able to get some fine CD reissues of the Dukes of Dixieland and of some early 1890's reissues from cylinder recordings, which include the sides of many proto-dance bands such as Edward Issler and others. The year for CDs then was both modest but good.
One of the things about collecting the kind of music I collect is that it entails history. It is more than just a collection, but more like a personal historical archive. Few of us these days actually collect this type of music anymore, as many of those who originally enjoyed it have now gone onto their eternal reward. For the young 20-something Millennials, the Beatles are now considered "ancient," and Elvis Presley to them is actually prehistoric - God forbid you to mention anything to them about such people I collect such as Kay Kyser, Glenn Miller, or Guy Lombardo; the very mention of those names is met with a blank slack-jawed expression and an asinine comment such as "did they sing with the Backstreet Boys?" Most retail music stores - which I rarely frequent now that they are corporate entities that offer little in the way of quality music - don't even sell vintage big band collections save the occasion cheap knock-off import of Glenn Miller or something (big bands neither started nor ended with the recording "In the Mood" by the way - there is a lot more to it than that). The labels such stuff is produced on and mass-marketed to the nostalgic aging "Boomer" that may have some affinity for hearing "In the Mood" on occasion because it gives them the "warm fuzzies" over the memories of their deceased parents who grew up with the music. And, that leads to some other observations.
As I approach my 50th birthday (at the time you are seeing this and I am typing it, I am now in my 50th year of existence) I'm somewhat shell-shocked by the reality that the hippies of my parents' generation are now the old geezers in their 70s, and those who were that age when I was a child are either now dead or at the youngest in their early 90s. It also brings the reality more clear (especially after getting my AARP membership recently) that I am on the threshold of being a senior myself now - that is a lot to absorb frankly. Equally perplexing is the fact that I am in my 37th year of collecting records, and when I first started my collection many of the LPs I had then were around 30 years old; today they are over 70 years and qualify as antiques in many cases. Also in observing how popular culture has radically changed in just over 30 years also makes it more important to preserve good entertainment, especially now since many cultural icons of the past, notably in recent years Kate Smith, are being defamed by the dominant culture as "offensive." A whole other discussion awaits on that at a later time though, as I am in the process of addressing that at length in a future writing.
After that brief detour down the proverbial rabbit-trail, we want to get back to the discussion at hand. So, for the coming years, what do I hope to accomplish? It is time to set out some goals, as there are a few for this coming year in particular in regard to the collection.
To begin, I am going to revisit some vinyl acquisitions. There are a number of things out there on LP that I doubt will ever be privileged with being reissued on CD recordings, and I have in mind a few significant things from years ago I would like to acquire on vinyl this time. Some of what I am after I once had only in the form of cassettes (nothing worth preserving should be put on cassette, as they are crappy in quality), and my personal opinion of cassettes is that they were a technological mistake that never should have happened - even fragile 80-year-old shellac 78s have outlasted most cassettes honestly. Cassettes tended to mess up, tangle, and although cheap were impractical for quality recording purposes. I will also add 8-tracks and VHS tapes to that, as both of those were equally worthless in quality, and thanks be to God they are not marketed anymore! Despite that reality, in past years (in particular my teens) I was able to get my hands on some good stuff on cassette, and later thankfully did find out these were available on vinyl and even on the occasional CD reissue. Thanks to both eBay and Amazon, I am now able to access those and have indeed already started the process of obtaining some of them. In this coming collection year, I hope to focus more on acquiring those particular vinyl recordings, in particular, those which never have had the opportunity to be reissued on CD. Back in my high school years in the 1980s, for instance, I recall finding at the old Ames Mart in Kingwood, WV, a number of volumes of a set of classic Italian jazz imports that were collectively titled "I Gigante del Jazz," and what these featured were rare later-era recordings of jazz legends. One of them was a cassette I originally had which featured Lionel Hampton material from the early 1970s, while another in the series featured Duke Ellington, and in particular one of the best recordings of his composition "C Jam Blues." Yet another item of interest was an LP I found that was on the old Mercury label dating from the early 1960s of a good Dixieland group called the Riverboat Five, and the title of the record was From Natchez to Mobile. The original record I had of this was something I picked up around January of 1983 at an old junk store in Shanks, WV, called Elmo Barnes's, and that establishment was a fierce contender with the Rio Mall for thrift shops back in the day in the area. A third LP item I have in my scope this year is an old Reader's Digest boxed set from the late 1970s of vintage 1940's big band and pop classics entitled Juke Box Saturday Night, and another on my list is a 1960's polka band that recorded on the Liberty label then called Paul Potski's Pumpernickles. The good thing about this is that although the possibility of seeing any of these reissued professionally on CD is negligible, I have the capabilities to record them on CD myself now, and can even digitize them on computer. Upon doing that project - which I have been working on periodically since 2013 - I plan on eventually putting a lot of my rarer vinyl items on a flash drive and then having them even more readily accessible, as some of them I have not heard in years. I am also setting my sights on more big band TV programs, such as those available of Ray Anthony's 1950's program, and as far as CDs are concerned, there is one major set I want that I will mention. In the early 1980s, Time-Life produced a good LP collection of the vintage recordings of the big bands, and each band leader was given an album with two records. Originally, I only had one - Glenn Miller's collection - but the whole set has around 22 albums. Time-Life did reissue those on CD, and I have seen them available on eBay as a collection, and their acquisition is a good possibility this coming year. The other big CD purchase I have on my scopes this year is a massive 24-disc collection of Duke Ellington's The Centennial Collection, which was released in 1998 in lieu of his 100th birthday. That set is very expensive, but it is one of the most comprehensive Ellington collections I have seen, as it contains all his recorded output over a 50-year period (1920-1970). That one is conditional - if I am able to get it this year, I will, but it is not a priority.
This concludes our year-end collection anniversary retrospective, and for the next year - 38 - I plan on posting a few pictures of the collection. Thanks again for visiting, and happy listening until next time!
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
A Gentleman and a Scholar
Dr. W. Judson and Mrs. Linda Vaughn
In the academic experience, there are those rare professors that really stand out. Each professor has a different personality and teaching style, and over the years I have had several memorable ones. Some of them were pompous, others delightfully eccentric, and many were decent people who knew their material and were fine examples of scholarship. This past week, I have been reflecting upon one of my old instructors in particular, and this one is in a class by himself because he is truly both a true gentleman and a scholar, and I wanted to talk about him some today.
When I was fresh out of high school and started my first semester at what was then Florida Baptist Theological College (now known as Baptist College of Florida) in August 1989, I was somewhat unsure of what to expect and what my first classes would be like. I was fresh out of high school from a small town in West Virginia, and had spent most of the summer working at a beachfront Holiday Inn on Jekyll Island, GA, prior to Dad finally dropping me off on campus at this small Baptist college in the Florida Panhandle town of Graceville. I was, as many a young college student could probably relate, both excited and apprehensive at the same time. The day class officially started, I had signed up for a New Testament course that was taught by a professor by the name of Dr. Judson Vaughn, and I don't recall if he was my first class that first day, or a later class. However, I do remember the first impression of Dr. Vaughn as he walked into that class - he was dressed in a modest suit, and he exuded humility as he greeted us by name as "Brother" or "Sister," which is how he always addressed his students. Then, he prayed for us - his prayer was that of a humble servant rather than a haughty academic, and he prayed for our health, our anxieties, and just for our well-being that semester. Immediately, any apprehension I felt about that class melted away, as I realized that this humble man standing in front of the class was nothing to fear - indeed, he would prove to be a formidable prayer warrior for many students who faced challenges either academically and personally. I want to first talk a little about who Dr. Vaughn is, and then my own personal reflections of this great man of God.
Dr. William Judson Vaughn was a native of Montgomery, AL, where he was born in 1943. Although he was ordained a Southern Baptist minister in 1961, he completed his seminary studies in 1971 at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in KY, and afterwards pastored four Baptist churches in addition to later teaching Greek and NT hermeneutics at both Southern Seminary and later at what was then Baptist Bible Institute in Graceville, the latter of which he began teaching in 1982. He married his wife Linda in 1966, and later had two sons with her. Dr. Vaughn taught in Graceville up to the year 2009 (27 years to be exact), when he retired. He was in Graceville at a college that went through at least 3 name changes - when he started it was Baptist Bible Institute, later changing its name in 1989 to Florida Baptist Theological College, and most recently to the Baptist College of Florida. He also served through two college administrations, that of Dr. Joseph DuBose until 1990, and then Dr. Thomas Kinchen (who I also had known previously, as he was at one time the head of the West Virginia Convention of Southern Baptists prior to accepting the post as President of FBTC). At the college, Dr. Vaughn pretty much taught most of the New Testament curriculum, although he also shared some of that responsibility with Dr. Jerry Corley and a couple of other professors then. In the news release about his retirement the college issued in 2009 ("Vaughn Retires After 27 Years," published 4/30/2009 at https://www.baptistcollege.edu/news_events/press/2009/vaughn_retires.asp - accessed 6/26/2019) a number of people had similar observations about their relationships to Dr. Vaughn over the years. One former associate said of him, "Dr. Vaughn radiates respect toward others," and Dr. Kinchen said of him, "Dr. Vaughn is a passionate scholar clothed in the humility of a servant," and further noting that it would benefit all of us to follow his example. Having sat under Dr. Vaughn's teaching myself over the years, I would agree totally - never had I met a more humble person than Dr. Vaughn personally, and to be honest I often mused if it was possible for the man to ever be upset about anything. He never had a bad word against anyone, and he greeted every person he crossed paths with on campus - whether it was old Carlton Enfinger, the groundskeeper, or President Kinchen - with the same friendly and respectful manner. Even some of the most argumentative and trouble-making of the students (and we did have several of those back in the day!) respected him, and these were people who badmouthed others for reading the wrong Bible translation in their view. Therefore, I wanted to just give a few observations about Dr. Vaughn of my own.
A typical class with Dr. Vaughn could be downright dry - he was a soft-spoken man and he never really raised any concern for debate, and at times he could even lull you to sleep honestly when he lectured - but the apparent dryness of his delivery should not be taken as lack of passion. Dr. Vaughn was in love with the Gospels, and what he taught on them was from a quiet passion that surpassed even his academic qualifications for doing so (which he definitely had as well). And, what endeared him to so many people was the fact he never acted, as do many academics, like he was omniscient and he never talked down to or pulled rank on anyone in his classes. As a matter of fact, he displayed his humility in his teaching - if a student asked him a question he didn't know the answer to, he would always say this: "Well, Brother So-and-So (or Sister, if the case may be), I am not sure about that, but let me look into that and we can address that question next class." And, he always kept his word on that - often, a student would even forget the question, but the next class Dr. Vaughn would have an answer for them. That left a lasting impression upon many students, and his integrity just with that spoke volumes. Many professors I have encountered over the years are often just the opposite - if you question them and they don't know the answer, some just make crap up or they treat the student as an inconvenience for even asking. But, not Dr. Vaughn - he viewed his professorship as a ministry, and he felt a genuine call to serve the students he taught, and he did so in such a way that much of the intimidation younger students would have felt with him melted away. I took that lesson Dr. Vaughn taught by his example to heart - the lesson is that even the teacher still learns at times, and it is perfectly fine not to have an answer, but always be able to find one if you can. I apply that same lesson to my sixth-graders I teach as a catechist in my parish church, and many of them appreciate that. He also made the opening prayer at the start of a class an important part of the class as well - he would literally write down and pray for every concern a student would mention, and he would pray for each student by name. This too drew people to him, in that they knew that Dr. Vaughn was one who took their personal welfare seriously, and he genuinely did so in an active way. To this day, I still think a lot of him for that personally, as he was one of the few people you could see the love of Christ radiating from. And, that leads to a few concluding thoughts.
Although I eventually chose to become a Catholic Christian (of a very traditional sort) in 2000, and as a Catholic Christian often I come across other traditionalists who seem to think that only Catholics can be Christians. I tell those people about Dr. Vaughn, and I also tend to chide them about how his faith could put them to shame in that he reflected more of the love of Christ than they ever did. What is even more interesting is the fact that over the years on occasion I still keep in touch with him, and when I corresponded with him last several years back, I mentioned about my becoming Catholic, and his response was one of the warmest and most disarming things I have ever heard - he said, "Well, praise the Lord Bro. David! It is so encouraging to see you still serving God and His Church." In that statement, he was genuinely happy that I served God still, and it really didn't matter to him what denomination I was part of - to him, we were both doing the Lord's work where He wanted us. And, that was classic Dr. Vaughn - always encouraging, and never a bad word about anyone. Although he is now 76 years old and has been in retirement for close to 11 years now as of this writing, Dr. Vaughn is still an amazing individual, and one day soon I probably should drop him a line and say hello to him. There are few people like the Dr. Vaughn's that cross our paths, and we need to appreciate them more, because they remind us of what our own faith should be about. I pray Dr. Vaughn has many more years ahead of him, and may he have good health and may his legacy always be cherished by those of us who have the blessing of knowing him.
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Jazz, Philosophy, and Other Thoughts
Back when I was around 15 years old and was about three years into record collecting, I was a bit of a misfit teenager in middle school at the time. I was not the popular kid and often was even persecuted by my peers for just being who I was. I found a great deal of comfort in the vintage big band music I collected, as well as in classic jazz in general. Beyond the records though, my interest also permeated other areas of my life, including my reading material. One day in the library at Romney Junior High School, I stumbled across a very interesting little novel that was written in 1965 by renown jazz writer and critic Nat Hentoff, and the book was entitled Jazz Country. It was a sort of coming-of-age story of a young White middle-class teenager named Tom Curtis, who has a passion for jazz, and when he finally gets to experience the jazz culture of Harlem's Black community, he faces many challenges about his music, as well as being a White kid "digging" a music that was considered primarily the domain of Blacks. Tom really loves jazz, and plays trumpet himself, but his new Black friends note he is missing something - he has no real life experience to communicate who and what he is (called "the blues") and Tom quickly finds out he has a lot to learn, both in the world of jazz and in basic life experience. At the time I read this book initially, I was a poor out-of-sorts White kid from the Appalachians, and while on one hand, I identified with Tom, on the other I also identified with his Black friends, many of whom had to overcome some big challenges to get where they were, and some were still struggling. The book was also written at the dawn of the Civil Rights era too when a lot of racial tension and other things gripped the country. As Hentoff writes though, the problem was not just with "racist White folks," but even some Blacks (personified by the character of Mary Hitchcock in the book) harbored their own brand of racism too. After almost forgetting about the book over the years, a few years back I came across a copy of it on Amazon for less than a buck and purchased it. It has set on my bookshelf for a while until I decided to pull it out and give it another read this past week. There are a few insights I wanted to share that I gained from the second reading of that little book, but first a little about Nat Hentoff, the author.
Nat Hentoff (1925-2017)
Nat Hentoff, as I mentioned before, is renown among record collectors and jazz enthusiasts as being one of the most prolific jazz critics and historians - he ranks up there with the likes of people like Leonard Feather, George T. Simon, and Richard Sudhalter. I have been familiar with him for years, as he has written extensively on jazz and vintage big bands, and his work can also be found on the liner notes of many classic jazz albums over the years as well. But, there was another side to Nat Hentoff too, as he was also somewhat socially conservative in his political and social outlook, and he was a staunch advocate for both the sanctity of life as well as for free speech. His involvement with the pro-life movement, as a matter of fact, has made me respect his legacy even more, and although technically an atheist of Jewish heritage, he is also truly what America was all about at one time. He also embodied the true legacy of Martin Luther King's vision as far as civil rights, and he was opposed to the tyranny of "political correctness" and its related ills over the past couple of decades. Interesting enough, you can even see this in his writing even back in 1965, as many of those convictions shine through in Jazz Country.
Getting back to Jazz Country, I wanted to write today about several observations I am gleaning from my journal entries last week, as there is a lot to cover. The book itself has a goldmine of practical wisdom that really could apply to any life situation, and as that skinny White jazz-loving kid myself who read that book at the age of 15, I connect with both Tom and the fictional jazzman Moses Godfrey - I had a lot to learn at that age, but I also had my own "blues" even then as I was a poor disadvantaged kid who had a lot of "scuffs and dirt on my shoes," to use the book's metaphor. However, let's talk about how Hentoff and others viewed jazz - for people like Hentoff and later Richard Sudhalter, jazz was an American art form which was not the exclusive domain of Blacks, although their contribution cannot be underestimated either. Jazz could be seen as a sort of icon of the "melting pot" that is America, and it is that premise which is a major reason why writers like Hentoff, who was an enthusiastic participant in the Civil Rights movement of the time, could easily be part of that while at the same time making a stand for what is considered more conservative issues such as free speech and the right to life. Hentoff rightly saw these various issues as being one and the same rather than opposed to each other (a sentiment that MLK's surviving relatives share, as did Bill Cosby and others). As Hentoff's Wikipedia bio states, he was often more socially conservative on many issues than he was liberal, despite him being confessionally atheist and sort of the archetype of the "progressive" intellectual. And, his stands on these things mirror mine, and I find myself appreciating Hentoff not just as a jazz writer, but as a person too, due to the fact the man actually knew how to think rather than being a shill for the Establishment. One of the things that reflects this in Jazz Country is the fact that Hentoff is trying to get across via a fictional story that racism is not just a White man's problem, but that Blacks and others are just as guilty of it at times. If more people knew of Hentoff's book, as a matter of fact, it would probably be branded as "hate speech" by the loony Leftists running their mouths about this stuff today. The character in the book that best personifies this is Mary Hitchcock, who is the somewhat militant wife of Godfrey's bassist Bill Hitchcock. Mary comes across as bigoted, nasty, and her condescension of Tom in the book just makes the reader want to slap her upside the head for being a nasty skank. However, there is a good side to this as well - as the book progresses, Mary begins to be educated, and at the end, she actually appreciates Tom and they become close. That now leads me into a brief discussion of one of the pivotal characters of the book, Moses Godfrey.
When one reads the book, if that reader is a jazz aficionado, they pick up quickly on the fact that Hentoff's development of Moses Godfrey as a character is based on jazz legend Thelonious Monk. Like Monk, Godfrey is eccentric, and he even imitates in his performances many of Monk's characteristics such as getting up from the piano and dancing a jig if the mood hit him. Godfrey is, like Monk, also unfettered by convention, and at this point, his character takes on a bit of another jazz legend as well, Duke Ellington. Like the Duke, Godfrey is contemplative and somewhat philosophical, as well as speaking eloquently and getting across points in a quiet manner. He is the type of character you would love to get to know, but at the same time, he's also a bit intimidating too, being somewhat impervious to the hero-worship of his young fans. His responses to certain things, as a matter of fact, can come off somewhat offensive and humbling, although this is not the anticipated intent of Godfrey's character. His real intent, as you continue reading, is to gauge how serious the person he is talking to is.
I want to cite a couple of examples of the above now, with the first one being on page 9 of the book. Tom and his friend Mike are situated outside the Savoy Ballroom where Godfrey's combo is playing - they are obviously not allowed inside due to age, but they can catch some of the music. Godfrey comes out with his bass player Bill Hitchcock between sets, and Tom is able to engage him. The first question - a rather innocent one by normal standards - that Tom asks is if Godfrey's group is coming out with a new record soon, to which he gets this answer - "What is soon?" The semantics of the word "soon" then initiates a philosophical discourse from Godfrey, who turns to Hitchcock and asks, "If I told you that your arm is going to fall off next year, would that be soon?" To which Hitchcock replies, bemusedly (he has been down this road before!), "Too soon." Then, a second question: "But, if I told you there'd be no money this week; maybe soon, but not this week, would that be soon enough?" Hitchcock, knowing now where this is going, answers that it would be soon enough to report Godfrey to the musician's union. Out of all that, as the conversation continues, Godfrey is making the point to young Tom that he needs to clarify what he means by "soon," as one context may not mean the same in a different context. The wisdom that is ingrained here is somewhat profound when you reflect upon it, but then it continues in the next couple of chapters of the book. Forward to page 33, when Tom asks how a rich White woman (a socialite jazz enthusiast in her mid-50's named Veronica in this case) could gain acceptance in Black jazz circles, Hitchcock responds by saying it is by "being herself," but that abruptly rouses the catnapping Godfrey and he embarks on another interesting discourse. Godfrey chastises Hitchcock for that answer by using the metaphor of "a tailor weaving the emperor's clothes," which references an old fairy tale. The problem Godfrey has with Hitchcock's answer was that it was a generality, and Godfrey expounds on that by noting that "self" is a multiplicity rather than a singularity - he notes that one is a certain "self" in one context, but then another "self" in a different situation. The idea here is that all of these various "selves" are different dimensions of one's identity, and one cannot be a "whole self" in every situation - you cannot be everything to everyone, and likewise, you cannot be everything you are to everyone in every situation either. I got what that was saying also, in that, for example, a sense of decorum dictates what you reveal about yourself to others in a given circumstance. For instance, if you are in the workplace, it is not appropriate to walk around in one's "tighty-whities" or discuss a religious experience or your passioned political views. If you are at home, you also may not be able to display aspects of yourself even to one's spouse that maybe you can express when you are alone. All of these are what Godfrey is getting at by different "selves." It just means, therefore, that while on one hand, you do only have one identity, the way that identity is expressed is determinate upon the setting one is in. There is tremendous wisdom in that too. So, if you are one person in the workplace and someone different in your social media accounts, does that make you a split personality? Not at all - it means you are your true self when you manifest what is proper to a given situation, that is all. That is the crux of what Godfrey is really saying in the book. In the case of music then, which this whole conversation in the story comes back to, the question Godfrey has for young Tom is this - when you play, what do you say? Music means more when it expresses the true self, rather than trying to imitate someone else, at which point it will become artificial and contributes nothing of you. I guess that is fundamental to Jazz Improvisation 101.
Moving on to page 35, Hentoff devotes a chapter of Godfrey telling the story of his mentor "Big Charlie," who was a blind Black blues singer in 1930's Texas somewhere that Godfrey as a young "Carnie" had run into. There are many twists and turns in this storyline that really pique the imagination. Godfrey, who was born to a single mother in a broken home in the Bronx in the early 1900s, later was sent to an aunt who proved to be overly controlling and somewhat mean to the young Godfrey, so he left home to work with a traveling carnival. It is at this point, on his off-time from working at the carnival, that he encounters "Big Charlie," and it turns out there is more to Charlie's story than his rough outward appearance dictates. Charlie lives in this shack, but the inside of it is actually quite palatial, and he invites Moses in for a visit with him. As Moses gets to know Charlie and comes to be close to him, he learns that the real instrument Charlie mastered was a little flute that is one of his cherished possessions. When he first picks up on young Godfrey's marveling over his house, he says, "Ain't no reason why an old blind Black man can't have comfort, is there?" The flute itself, as Charlie later confides, is a type of therapeutic release for him, and this reveals to the young Moses Godfrey another lesson - externals may not reveal who a true person is. Charlie then has the young Moses go out with him and observe people at a local tavern, and when they return to Charlie's place he has Moses describe the people he observed - the profundity of this would take volumes to really examine, because Moses's initial impressions of various people were all wrong and didn't reveal much due to the focus on externals. A man, for instance, who appeared to be loud and boisterous was actually a pretty decent individual, while a more quiet, sedate guy was actually one not to trust. The cliche lesson from this is that one cannot judge a book by its cover, which leads to some of my own insights now.
The story of "Big Charlie" speaks a lot about human nature - we tend to judge people by externals without knowing the true story of who they are, and even Scripture condemns doing that. In Matthew 7:1, an oft-misquoted verse in this day and age is found; it says simply "don't judge unless you are judged," and looking at what it says, it really will make one think. The way this verse is misapplied so often in today's society is to often justify sinful behavior, but that is not the context of what it actually means. Rather, it is more of a warning against gossip, stereotypes, and related behavior, or the whole "bearing false witness" idea that is prohibited by the Decalogue. Many people wrongly (and also traditionally in many cases) attribute that verse to the sin of lying, but it, in reality, has nothing to do with a mere lie. While lying is a sin and is wrong, the sin that both the Commandment and the verse in Matthew 7:1 are referring to are one and the same - it is gossip and hearsay, which to be fair can have its genesis in a lie, and thus is in reference to false judgments based on said hearsay. We are all guilty at some point of this if we are completely honest with ourselves, as we are quick to draw conclusions based on externals, but appearances can be deceiving so it requires digging a little deeper to get to the truth. Recalling a few years back an incident that happened to Jase Robertson, of "Duck Dynasty" fame, when he was escorted out of the Trump Hotel for being a vagrant, we see what faulty judgment results in. In appearances that could be an easy conclusion, as Jase had a full beard, long hair, and dresses like a hunter in the woods. But, the real Jase is a celebrity who is also well-educated and devoutly Christian, which establishes that there was more to Jase than first impressions could ascertain. "Big Charlie's" message to a young Moses Godfrey in Hentoff's novel is a similar observation - bottom line, if you have the fortitude to look past externals, a rich story with valuable insight awaits. I can also speak from experience that basing things on mere externals at first impressions can later come back to bite you as well - that person you may have spurned and misjudged may end up being your "good Samaritan" when you are personally in a bind. That has happened on occasion with me, and it can be humbling. But, it also can be the start of a new and lasting friendship with that person as well. Although you may initially feel like a jackass for misjudging such a person, it has a good ending to the story. That is another reason why a Scripture passage such as Matthew 7:1 is important. Many people this day and age would benefit from a healthy dose of this too, and I have a couple of in-laws in particular who would benefit from the lessons afforded by that. These particular in-laws are noted for being judgmental and condescending to those they feel are not "their caliber," and then they do the double-standard of spouting off religious talk and acting sanctimoniously. Those types, like my offending in-laws, could use exposure to a guy like "Big Charlie," as they may actually learn something and be a bit humbled. I am not going to waste a lot of time ragging on my jackass in-laws - they are in God's hands, so he'll deal with them - but suffice to say their judgmentalism has more or less invalidated any Christian witness they have to those they treat with contempt without getting to know them better.
To summarize thus far, the fictional character of Moses Godfrey has taught us three important lessons:
1. Clarify what you say, as a notion such as "soon" can have a lot of applications.
2. "Be yourself" is likewise ambiguous, and there needs to be a determination of which "self" one is to be and how it reflects on the true self of the person.
3. Do not judge a person by externals, as more is under the surface.
"Blues," one's story, and the more academic subject we have touched on elsewhere of CNC's all communicate the importance of the personal "story" we each have. That story is unique to us, as we have the unique experiences that shape it, and there is no such thing as a uniform experience although we may share certain universal affinities with others (including ethnic, regional, cultural, etc.). These things are not to be confused with core convictions, although they play a role in shaping those also, they are vital in self-discovery and who we are as an individual. So, what do I mean by that? Simply, societal factors are formative, but not the form themselves - a huge difference. This means that the "story" as it were determines which "self" one is in a given situation. We don't reveal everything about our whole selves to everyone in every place, but our whole selves are carried with us regardless. That is where Moses Godfrey's character was going in his soliloquies in the book. Another way to say it is this - it is possible that one can be the true self they were created as without being their full self. It boils down to plain honesty with discretion, simply put. This begs the question if anyone can be one's whole self at all? God possibly can, as he is omnipotent, omniscient, transcendent, and omnipresent, so he knows the whole self of his own as well as ours, as he designed each of us as we are. What about a spouse? To be completely honest, a husband and wife cannot truly be their full selves with each other at any given time, and there are two reasons for that. One, there are parts of our real selves we don't even know, or if we do, we are not sure how to communicate them. Secondly - and I am saying this after 27 years of marriage myself - a husband and wife don't know everything about each other automatically - as enjoyable and special as the conjugal union on the wedding night is, there is no magical enlightenment entailed with it, nor is it supposed to be so. These things take time, and as a couple matures in their marital bond, they begin to understand each other better. Even within the context of the sacramental bond of matrimony, human nature is still limited to a degree, and this means that there may be undiscovered dimensions of the "full self" a spouse may not even know about themselves, much less about the other partner in the union. Still too, many things will go to the grave without revelation, and of course the old axiom "dead men tell no tales" applies as well there. A couple will know more about each other at their 50th anniversary than they did at their courtship, but they may never know everything about each other. But, that may be the way it is supposed to be anyway, a thought for another time.
Back to some further thoughts on the word "soon" as well, the word "soon" is at best an ambiguous response, and to be honest it is never the best answer for anything as it can mean almost anything. The answer "soon" begs another question - the word "when." "Soon" can mean seconds or years, and it is ultimately the opposite of the word "later," which is equally ambiguous honestly. This means the two words are at risk of being used interchangeably as well, as "soon" often is "later." That whole concept can prove frustrating, especially when a situation demands urgency. Godfrey therefore in the book was right to ask young Tom what he meant when he asked about when Godfrey was releasing an album soon. Godfrey could have given Tom a straight answer for sure, but he didn't because he saw the ambiguity of Tom's question and wanted to use the occasion as a lesson for young Tom. I definitely learned from it, to be sure!
Now, lesson #3 - not judging from externals. While "judge not a book by its cover" is an apt application of this principle, another is "appearances can be deceiving." Over the years, I've noted this many times in ways both surprising and disappointing. In surprising ways, often it is a person I misjudged as weird or somehow offensive to me for some stupid reason ending up being a person I gained great respect for and then I later feel like a jackass (as I should) for wrongly initially judging them. It also can be disappointing, though, in that there are people who leave a good initial impression but later turn out to be people you wished you'd never met once you really get to know them. I have been on both ends of that spectrum. One area where this resonates particularly obvious is in religious circles, in that often the people who tend to shout "Hallelujah!" at everything and use Jesus as a point of reference in everything from a lottery win to a good bowel movement, or prefacing their addressing everyone they meet as "Brother This" or "Sister That," but when their true character emerges, they end up being obnoxious jackasses as well. A person who tries to overcompensate by expressing the "religious act" is often trying to "prove" their Christianity, and that is first off not necessary but also it reveals a lot about such people too. It is the quieter religious person who crosses themselves discreetly at meals and makes his or her faith known in a low-key way who is more impressive to me. Why is that? If you have true faith, you simply have nothing to prove to anyone, and thus you don't need to trumpet it with speech peppered with "Christianese" and calling everyone "Brother" or "Sister." You don't call your biological siblings "Brother Bob" or "Sister Sue" do you? Well, you don't need to do that with your Christian brethren either - they'll figure it out whether you are "part of the family" or not, believe me!
At the time I was reflecting on Jazz Country in my journal, I felt the urge to listen to some Thelonious Monk. I got a CD reissue of Monk's landmark 1963 Columbia LP Monk's Dream, and the title cut of the album is one of my all-time favorite classic jazz recordings. The early 1960's, for classic jazz, was an age of pianists - Monk, Vince Guaraldi, Brubeck, and others were making some great records at that time. One other album from around the same time featured who was then a young pianist named Herbie Hancock, and the 1965 LP was Maiden Voyage. The talk in Hentoff's novel about "letting the music speak" applies well to the title cut of that LP, as everytime I hear it I am taken back to those days when I was fresh out of high school and spending my summers in Brunswick, GA, with my dad - one thing I liked to do then was go over to St. Simons and Jekyll Islands fishing or just walking around, and Hancock's recording transports you to the scene where you can smell the ocean, hear the seagulls squawking, and see the sunlight on those summer afternoons. You feel the calm, see the sand of the beach, and even can envision dolphins and large rays leaping out of the water in the distance. It evokes simpler times for me in other words, which is one reason I really appreciate that record. On the original 1965 release of Maiden Voyage, Hancock is a mere 25 years old, and he features another young up-and-coming trumpeter who would 5 years later release a landmark album of his own that ushered in jazz fusion by the name of Freddy Hubbard. Hubbard's 1970 LP Red Clay is also one I have in my collection, and despite the fact I personally am not a big fan of jazz fusion, Hubbard's album is fresh and innovative for its time. What Hancock's Maiden Voyage exemplifies for me is that it embodies truly what was the last generation of true classic jazz legends, and bookending that era was the young trumpeter Wynton Marsalis, who is for me the last true classic jazz artist of innovation (many of Marsalis's albums were released during my middle school years in the mid-1980s, not long after the time I started collecting records). The important thing in my mention of those old classic jazz records is that they also take me back to a place when I was young as well. Talking about the various "selves" we manifest reminded me of something also - although I am definitely by all definitions a political conservative and a religious traditionalist, I also have that underlying eccentric and nonconformist streak that defines a certain aspect of my identity too. I have been a fan of classic jazz for at least 40 years now, and although I primarily focus on vintage big bands (which although intersecting with classic jazz, the big bands are more than that for sure), I also appreciate good classic jazz. As a matter of fact, up until the mid-1940's or so, jazz and big bands were pretty much entwined with each other, until a group of young jazz musicians starting around 1944 or so began to evolve a separate identity out of the big band setting (although some of this new jazz was played masterfully by big bands too, granted) - they included people like Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis, Gerry Mulligan, Thelonious Monk, and others. These new jazz pioneers - the style was called "Bebop" - began to move the focus away from the big dance band format to small groups, and they also went beyond dance music to embody innovation and experimentation. That type of jazz - which later also manifested as "cool," "third stream," and "fusion" - persisted until the mid-1980's when the tragedy happened. A series of musical abominations with names such as Chuck Mangione, Al Jarreau, and Kenny G came along with a monstrosity called "smooth jazz," and at that point, classic jazz went the way of the dinosaur. What is called "smooth jazz" is, in reality, nothing more than Muzak with a backbeat and saxophones, and it has nothing to do with true jazz. Modern "jazz" stations today are mostly slick commercialized FM venues that play crap like Kenny G, which is so lacking in innovation and originality that it has essentially become sterile rock music honestly. It is artificial, overly-electronic, over-commercialized, and has nothing in common with great legends like Miles, Bird, or Dizzy. To use jazz lingo, I just don't "dig" this "smooth jazz" jive because it is what used to be called "square" and "vanilla." That being said, I also consider classic jazz to be Western Civilization's last true art form, and although there are those who carry on the legacy (Vince Giordano comes to mind, and thank God for him and those like him!) it has been relegated to a small community of aficionados like myself. Classical music likewise has declined, although there are fortunately young talented composers like my friend Adam Gilberti who still embody the continuation of the legacy of serious musical composition and performance. But, for the most part, classic jazz has had its run - thankfully though it leaves behind a rich recorded legacy for those who appreciate it to keep it alive and preserved. And it is in the hands of those of us who do appreciate those legacies to preserve them, and I try to do my part in doing so.
That concludes a lengthy number of insights I had today that I have reflected on over the past couple of weeks, and I hope to see you all again soon.
To summarize thus far, the fictional character of Moses Godfrey has taught us three important lessons:
1. Clarify what you say, as a notion such as "soon" can have a lot of applications.
2. "Be yourself" is likewise ambiguous, and there needs to be a determination of which "self" one is to be and how it reflects on the true self of the person.
3. Do not judge a person by externals, as more is under the surface.
"Blues," one's story, and the more academic subject we have touched on elsewhere of CNC's all communicate the importance of the personal "story" we each have. That story is unique to us, as we have the unique experiences that shape it, and there is no such thing as a uniform experience although we may share certain universal affinities with others (including ethnic, regional, cultural, etc.). These things are not to be confused with core convictions, although they play a role in shaping those also, they are vital in self-discovery and who we are as an individual. So, what do I mean by that? Simply, societal factors are formative, but not the form themselves - a huge difference. This means that the "story" as it were determines which "self" one is in a given situation. We don't reveal everything about our whole selves to everyone in every place, but our whole selves are carried with us regardless. That is where Moses Godfrey's character was going in his soliloquies in the book. Another way to say it is this - it is possible that one can be the true self they were created as without being their full self. It boils down to plain honesty with discretion, simply put. This begs the question if anyone can be one's whole self at all? God possibly can, as he is omnipotent, omniscient, transcendent, and omnipresent, so he knows the whole self of his own as well as ours, as he designed each of us as we are. What about a spouse? To be completely honest, a husband and wife cannot truly be their full selves with each other at any given time, and there are two reasons for that. One, there are parts of our real selves we don't even know, or if we do, we are not sure how to communicate them. Secondly - and I am saying this after 27 years of marriage myself - a husband and wife don't know everything about each other automatically - as enjoyable and special as the conjugal union on the wedding night is, there is no magical enlightenment entailed with it, nor is it supposed to be so. These things take time, and as a couple matures in their marital bond, they begin to understand each other better. Even within the context of the sacramental bond of matrimony, human nature is still limited to a degree, and this means that there may be undiscovered dimensions of the "full self" a spouse may not even know about themselves, much less about the other partner in the union. Still too, many things will go to the grave without revelation, and of course the old axiom "dead men tell no tales" applies as well there. A couple will know more about each other at their 50th anniversary than they did at their courtship, but they may never know everything about each other. But, that may be the way it is supposed to be anyway, a thought for another time.
Back to some further thoughts on the word "soon" as well, the word "soon" is at best an ambiguous response, and to be honest it is never the best answer for anything as it can mean almost anything. The answer "soon" begs another question - the word "when." "Soon" can mean seconds or years, and it is ultimately the opposite of the word "later," which is equally ambiguous honestly. This means the two words are at risk of being used interchangeably as well, as "soon" often is "later." That whole concept can prove frustrating, especially when a situation demands urgency. Godfrey therefore in the book was right to ask young Tom what he meant when he asked about when Godfrey was releasing an album soon. Godfrey could have given Tom a straight answer for sure, but he didn't because he saw the ambiguity of Tom's question and wanted to use the occasion as a lesson for young Tom. I definitely learned from it, to be sure!
Now, lesson #3 - not judging from externals. While "judge not a book by its cover" is an apt application of this principle, another is "appearances can be deceiving." Over the years, I've noted this many times in ways both surprising and disappointing. In surprising ways, often it is a person I misjudged as weird or somehow offensive to me for some stupid reason ending up being a person I gained great respect for and then I later feel like a jackass (as I should) for wrongly initially judging them. It also can be disappointing, though, in that there are people who leave a good initial impression but later turn out to be people you wished you'd never met once you really get to know them. I have been on both ends of that spectrum. One area where this resonates particularly obvious is in religious circles, in that often the people who tend to shout "Hallelujah!" at everything and use Jesus as a point of reference in everything from a lottery win to a good bowel movement, or prefacing their addressing everyone they meet as "Brother This" or "Sister That," but when their true character emerges, they end up being obnoxious jackasses as well. A person who tries to overcompensate by expressing the "religious act" is often trying to "prove" their Christianity, and that is first off not necessary but also it reveals a lot about such people too. It is the quieter religious person who crosses themselves discreetly at meals and makes his or her faith known in a low-key way who is more impressive to me. Why is that? If you have true faith, you simply have nothing to prove to anyone, and thus you don't need to trumpet it with speech peppered with "Christianese" and calling everyone "Brother" or "Sister." You don't call your biological siblings "Brother Bob" or "Sister Sue" do you? Well, you don't need to do that with your Christian brethren either - they'll figure it out whether you are "part of the family" or not, believe me!
At the time I was reflecting on Jazz Country in my journal, I felt the urge to listen to some Thelonious Monk. I got a CD reissue of Monk's landmark 1963 Columbia LP Monk's Dream, and the title cut of the album is one of my all-time favorite classic jazz recordings. The early 1960's, for classic jazz, was an age of pianists - Monk, Vince Guaraldi, Brubeck, and others were making some great records at that time. One other album from around the same time featured who was then a young pianist named Herbie Hancock, and the 1965 LP was Maiden Voyage. The talk in Hentoff's novel about "letting the music speak" applies well to the title cut of that LP, as everytime I hear it I am taken back to those days when I was fresh out of high school and spending my summers in Brunswick, GA, with my dad - one thing I liked to do then was go over to St. Simons and Jekyll Islands fishing or just walking around, and Hancock's recording transports you to the scene where you can smell the ocean, hear the seagulls squawking, and see the sunlight on those summer afternoons. You feel the calm, see the sand of the beach, and even can envision dolphins and large rays leaping out of the water in the distance. It evokes simpler times for me in other words, which is one reason I really appreciate that record. On the original 1965 release of Maiden Voyage, Hancock is a mere 25 years old, and he features another young up-and-coming trumpeter who would 5 years later release a landmark album of his own that ushered in jazz fusion by the name of Freddy Hubbard. Hubbard's 1970 LP Red Clay is also one I have in my collection, and despite the fact I personally am not a big fan of jazz fusion, Hubbard's album is fresh and innovative for its time. What Hancock's Maiden Voyage exemplifies for me is that it embodies truly what was the last generation of true classic jazz legends, and bookending that era was the young trumpeter Wynton Marsalis, who is for me the last true classic jazz artist of innovation (many of Marsalis's albums were released during my middle school years in the mid-1980s, not long after the time I started collecting records). The important thing in my mention of those old classic jazz records is that they also take me back to a place when I was young as well. Talking about the various "selves" we manifest reminded me of something also - although I am definitely by all definitions a political conservative and a religious traditionalist, I also have that underlying eccentric and nonconformist streak that defines a certain aspect of my identity too. I have been a fan of classic jazz for at least 40 years now, and although I primarily focus on vintage big bands (which although intersecting with classic jazz, the big bands are more than that for sure), I also appreciate good classic jazz. As a matter of fact, up until the mid-1940's or so, jazz and big bands were pretty much entwined with each other, until a group of young jazz musicians starting around 1944 or so began to evolve a separate identity out of the big band setting (although some of this new jazz was played masterfully by big bands too, granted) - they included people like Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis, Gerry Mulligan, Thelonious Monk, and others. These new jazz pioneers - the style was called "Bebop" - began to move the focus away from the big dance band format to small groups, and they also went beyond dance music to embody innovation and experimentation. That type of jazz - which later also manifested as "cool," "third stream," and "fusion" - persisted until the mid-1980's when the tragedy happened. A series of musical abominations with names such as Chuck Mangione, Al Jarreau, and Kenny G came along with a monstrosity called "smooth jazz," and at that point, classic jazz went the way of the dinosaur. What is called "smooth jazz" is, in reality, nothing more than Muzak with a backbeat and saxophones, and it has nothing to do with true jazz. Modern "jazz" stations today are mostly slick commercialized FM venues that play crap like Kenny G, which is so lacking in innovation and originality that it has essentially become sterile rock music honestly. It is artificial, overly-electronic, over-commercialized, and has nothing in common with great legends like Miles, Bird, or Dizzy. To use jazz lingo, I just don't "dig" this "smooth jazz" jive because it is what used to be called "square" and "vanilla." That being said, I also consider classic jazz to be Western Civilization's last true art form, and although there are those who carry on the legacy (Vince Giordano comes to mind, and thank God for him and those like him!) it has been relegated to a small community of aficionados like myself. Classical music likewise has declined, although there are fortunately young talented composers like my friend Adam Gilberti who still embody the continuation of the legacy of serious musical composition and performance. But, for the most part, classic jazz has had its run - thankfully though it leaves behind a rich recorded legacy for those who appreciate it to keep it alive and preserved. And it is in the hands of those of us who do appreciate those legacies to preserve them, and I try to do my part in doing so.
That concludes a lengthy number of insights I had today that I have reflected on over the past couple of weeks, and I hope to see you all again soon.
Monday, June 17, 2019
Ethical Decisions - Some Thoughts From Occupational Training Videos I Viewed the Past Couple of Weeks
One thing about starting a new job - in particular with a Federal contractor - is that there are a lot of training exercises you have to undertake. I had some of those in a series of videos I was required to watch (and did of course), and surprisingly there was some solid information on them. Occupational training videos often tend to either be so bland you fall asleep watching them, or they are so common-sense that you don't pay attention to them anyway and you still understand them. In this case however, there were some good things that I feel can be applicable to life in general, which is why I wanted to discuss them.
The video I watched focused on three steps to ethical decisions, and they are as follows:
1. Investigate
2. Evaluate
3. Activate
Let's now take these one-by-one and explore them further, as there are some good insights regarding them.
First, what does it mean to investigate in regard to an ethical decision? Essentially, it emphasizes the importance of gathering all the facts about a given situation before drawing any conclusion. This is a valuable lesson for people who mess around on social media a lot, as dumb arguments and dogfights happen simply because the facts are either ignored or the parties involved create their own false set of "facts" that then spark controversy. Essentially, the step here is to know what the hell you are talking about before going off on something.
So, now what does it mean to evaluate? Once the facts are gathered, it is up to the person to determine if those facts document actions that are right or wrong. It is also important to differentiate in this process that just because something is legal does not mean that it is moral - legality and morality are different things, and in today's society for instance, there are a lot of immoral things that are completely legal ("same-sex marriage" comes to mind). Often, in a workplace situation, some actions may be legal and compliant with company policy, but they may conflict with one's moral compass. I had a situation like that last year that cost me a job honestly. The company I was working for was processing mail for non-profit client organizations, and what those who were opening and processing the mail items were instructed to do was to save checks or other monetary donations while throwing out notes and other things from the donors. I personally saw this as wrong, and contacted one of the client companies about it, which was against our company policy. That action on my part got me fired, but it was the right thing to do. I had the moral conviction that if a donor takes the time to write the organization they are giving money to, and if that organization accepts the money, they should also respect the donor enough to read and respond to correspondence, not throw it out. That was what bugged me in that particular situation. While the company allowed one thing, the thing they allowed was not morally good, in other words. So, upon evaluating that this was wrong, I acted, and that leads to the next step.
Once you know what the facts are, and you have evaluated the facts based on your moral convictions, you then need to do something about that. Appropriate action must be decided, and then it is up to the person making that decision to act upon what is decided. Factoring into this is weighing the risks - what are the consequences of how I choose to act. If you are willing to take that risk and act upon it, then some consequence will naturally follow.
Also factoring into the three steps are what are known as core values. Although each person may have a different set of core values, some of them are universal to everyone, and they include the following:
1. Integrity
2. Honesty
3. Respect for dignity of fellow human beings.
When talking about integrity first of all, it is important to know what it is. Integrity is defined as two things:
1. A state of moral uprightness and consistency
2. A state of being whole and undivided.
In other words, one acts according to his or her convictions without conflict. One cannot be double-minded, or be something they are not, in other words. We as human beings often have a weakness here at times in that we set a bar higher than we can reach, and it ends up blowing up in our faces. You see that in some religious communities, in particular some Fundamentalist Protestant denominations who stress personal holiness without understanding limitations. Integrity is knowing your boundaries and doing your best to stay in them without over-extending your reach to do something you are not capable of. If one can do that, one has integrity. Now, on occasion, we all fall short of this (I know I have many times!) and we cannot allow ourselves to be beat up about it. That is where the next core value comes in.
Honesty is an important albeit sometimes complicated value that we should all strive for. Honesty basically entails being honest first of all with yourself, and then with others, but also within proper context. If you do screw up with something, part of honesty about that is owning up to it, and then admitting that you need work in that particular area. This is true to some degree of all of us, as we have all come up short. Rather than making excuses for that however, we need to honestly acknowledge our limitations and move on - strengthening those areas where we may lack is also important in other words.
As for respect, this too can be complicated, in that it involves a proper understanding of personhood. As Dr. John Crosby, one of my former professors at Franciscan University of Steubenville, taught us in a Philosophy of the Human Person course, there are essentially four things we need to understand about personhood:
1. Persona est sui iuris - A person is his/her own and not the property of another.
2. A person is an end unto themselves and not a mere means.
3. A person is a whole in themselves and not a mere part
4. Every person is subject to fundamental rights.
In order to properly understand all this, there are two things we need to do. First, we need to discourage and even prevent stereotypes based on race, gender, ethnic origin, religion, age, disability, or other factors. Second, it is important for each of us to cultivate a proper code of conduct that centers around good manners irrespective of social position or other externals. However, there are some things that respecting the personhood of others does not mean, and there are three of those. First, respecting the dignity of the personhood of others does not translate as altruism - the respect and proper treatment of one's fellow human beings should never come at the expense of diminishing self to a point where one self-denies personhood. Second, The common good is another factor that needs to be respected as well, and that means that many societal norms being peddled nowadays - a big one that comes to mind is the mythology of "political correctness" - may do more harm than good. Third, the core values of honesty and integrity are proper for both parties involved, which means it is perfectly fine and even natural on occasion to disagree if such disagreement is honest yet respectful. That leads now to a metaphysical dimension of the discussion.
We have discussed on many occasions something called central narrative convictions, which entail some important questions we need to ask based on our worldview. Using the Catholic "Four-Fold Hermeneutic" that is often employed in Bible reading, we can ask those questions using the acronym LAMA:
1. Literal - corresponds to the question "Who am I?"
2. Allegorical - corresponds to the question "What do I believe about (fill in the blank here)?"
3. Moral - corresponds to the question "What is wrong, and what do I do about it?"
4. Anagogical - corresponds to the question "What will be the consequence of my choice/action?" or "Where will this choice lead me?"
The answers to these questions are the CNC's which also entail our personal core values. Core values on an individual scale are important for each person to define, and these questions allow for that. In order to do so, one must do some major reflection, and there are some actions necessary resulting from those reflections. One such action would be for the person to take a personal inventory of their own core values. One can do so keeping a journal (something I would highly recommend) and listing them as they are able to do so. If a list of these is undertaken, it leads to another step - one must elaborate the personal importance of these things. In the case of the workplace, how do one's personal core values intersect with those of one's employer? This is why, in addition to knowing your own core values, it is also vital to know those of an employer as well, and they are often readily available in a corporate mission statement. Once all of that is accomplished, it is then important to employ classification of one's core values, and this entails a few things. First, if a value is unique to the individual, it is called an incommunicable value. If a value listed intersects with others' values or with the corporate mission statement, it is called an incommunicable or universal value. If intersectionality does occur, it should lead to a willful and subjective acceptance of said value by both parties. However, if one party is coerced or pressured to accept the value of the other unwillingly, and if the aggressive party keeps trying to impose this value upon the other party on those unwilling to accept them, then this is a form of coercion, and does not reflect the respect of the dignity of personhood of the party whom is subjected to that. Coercion, first of all, violates dignity of personhood and is distinguished from willful subjectivism in that it is a form of subjugation. Likewise, coercion is a form of bullying and should not be encouraged or tolerated. This then leads to a discussion of what to do if there occurs a conflict of interest with the involved parties.
If there is a conflict in core values involved between two parties, there are measures that need to be taken. First, should it happen, a person is within legal rights to take the proper steps to rectify the situation, preferably in a peaceful and conciliatory manner. This may even entail calling in an indifferent third party or authority. Second, a person does have the right to respectfully disagree with some things that go against their own convictions, provided they do so in a civil and professional manner. This entails first of all getting the disagreement documented in some form, as it will more than likely articulate the issue better than trying to verbally express it. It also is important to always observe proper protocol in such situations, meaning that one cannot go over the head of a superior if the superior is the other party in such a disagreement - in that case, there is a chain of command to be followed. Third, documentation should be retained for one's own records, as well as for the public record if necessary. This is simply the old CYA rule. If these steps are followed and taken, often it leads to successful and meaningful conflict resolution.
You may have guessed by now that I have augmented somewhat the original material from the training videos, as I had my own insights while I was watching them. I wanted to tailor the material to meet my own personal application of them, as they may apply to a given situation I myself may have faced or may yet face. In time, I plan on codifying this into my own personal mission statement, something I really need to do. There is always room though for modification and adaptation to different issues or events, and in time those experiences will be the basis for my own personal code of ethics. If you are reading this, hopefully it will inspire you to do the same. Thank you for allowing me to share with you today.
The video I watched focused on three steps to ethical decisions, and they are as follows:
1. Investigate
2. Evaluate
3. Activate
Let's now take these one-by-one and explore them further, as there are some good insights regarding them.
First, what does it mean to investigate in regard to an ethical decision? Essentially, it emphasizes the importance of gathering all the facts about a given situation before drawing any conclusion. This is a valuable lesson for people who mess around on social media a lot, as dumb arguments and dogfights happen simply because the facts are either ignored or the parties involved create their own false set of "facts" that then spark controversy. Essentially, the step here is to know what the hell you are talking about before going off on something.
So, now what does it mean to evaluate? Once the facts are gathered, it is up to the person to determine if those facts document actions that are right or wrong. It is also important to differentiate in this process that just because something is legal does not mean that it is moral - legality and morality are different things, and in today's society for instance, there are a lot of immoral things that are completely legal ("same-sex marriage" comes to mind). Often, in a workplace situation, some actions may be legal and compliant with company policy, but they may conflict with one's moral compass. I had a situation like that last year that cost me a job honestly. The company I was working for was processing mail for non-profit client organizations, and what those who were opening and processing the mail items were instructed to do was to save checks or other monetary donations while throwing out notes and other things from the donors. I personally saw this as wrong, and contacted one of the client companies about it, which was against our company policy. That action on my part got me fired, but it was the right thing to do. I had the moral conviction that if a donor takes the time to write the organization they are giving money to, and if that organization accepts the money, they should also respect the donor enough to read and respond to correspondence, not throw it out. That was what bugged me in that particular situation. While the company allowed one thing, the thing they allowed was not morally good, in other words. So, upon evaluating that this was wrong, I acted, and that leads to the next step.
Once you know what the facts are, and you have evaluated the facts based on your moral convictions, you then need to do something about that. Appropriate action must be decided, and then it is up to the person making that decision to act upon what is decided. Factoring into this is weighing the risks - what are the consequences of how I choose to act. If you are willing to take that risk and act upon it, then some consequence will naturally follow.
Also factoring into the three steps are what are known as core values. Although each person may have a different set of core values, some of them are universal to everyone, and they include the following:
1. Integrity
2. Honesty
3. Respect for dignity of fellow human beings.
When talking about integrity first of all, it is important to know what it is. Integrity is defined as two things:
1. A state of moral uprightness and consistency
2. A state of being whole and undivided.
In other words, one acts according to his or her convictions without conflict. One cannot be double-minded, or be something they are not, in other words. We as human beings often have a weakness here at times in that we set a bar higher than we can reach, and it ends up blowing up in our faces. You see that in some religious communities, in particular some Fundamentalist Protestant denominations who stress personal holiness without understanding limitations. Integrity is knowing your boundaries and doing your best to stay in them without over-extending your reach to do something you are not capable of. If one can do that, one has integrity. Now, on occasion, we all fall short of this (I know I have many times!) and we cannot allow ourselves to be beat up about it. That is where the next core value comes in.
Honesty is an important albeit sometimes complicated value that we should all strive for. Honesty basically entails being honest first of all with yourself, and then with others, but also within proper context. If you do screw up with something, part of honesty about that is owning up to it, and then admitting that you need work in that particular area. This is true to some degree of all of us, as we have all come up short. Rather than making excuses for that however, we need to honestly acknowledge our limitations and move on - strengthening those areas where we may lack is also important in other words.
As for respect, this too can be complicated, in that it involves a proper understanding of personhood. As Dr. John Crosby, one of my former professors at Franciscan University of Steubenville, taught us in a Philosophy of the Human Person course, there are essentially four things we need to understand about personhood:
1. Persona est sui iuris - A person is his/her own and not the property of another.
2. A person is an end unto themselves and not a mere means.
3. A person is a whole in themselves and not a mere part
4. Every person is subject to fundamental rights.
In order to properly understand all this, there are two things we need to do. First, we need to discourage and even prevent stereotypes based on race, gender, ethnic origin, religion, age, disability, or other factors. Second, it is important for each of us to cultivate a proper code of conduct that centers around good manners irrespective of social position or other externals. However, there are some things that respecting the personhood of others does not mean, and there are three of those. First, respecting the dignity of the personhood of others does not translate as altruism - the respect and proper treatment of one's fellow human beings should never come at the expense of diminishing self to a point where one self-denies personhood. Second, The common good is another factor that needs to be respected as well, and that means that many societal norms being peddled nowadays - a big one that comes to mind is the mythology of "political correctness" - may do more harm than good. Third, the core values of honesty and integrity are proper for both parties involved, which means it is perfectly fine and even natural on occasion to disagree if such disagreement is honest yet respectful. That leads now to a metaphysical dimension of the discussion.
We have discussed on many occasions something called central narrative convictions, which entail some important questions we need to ask based on our worldview. Using the Catholic "Four-Fold Hermeneutic" that is often employed in Bible reading, we can ask those questions using the acronym LAMA:
1. Literal - corresponds to the question "Who am I?"
2. Allegorical - corresponds to the question "What do I believe about (fill in the blank here)?"
3. Moral - corresponds to the question "What is wrong, and what do I do about it?"
4. Anagogical - corresponds to the question "What will be the consequence of my choice/action?" or "Where will this choice lead me?"
The answers to these questions are the CNC's which also entail our personal core values. Core values on an individual scale are important for each person to define, and these questions allow for that. In order to do so, one must do some major reflection, and there are some actions necessary resulting from those reflections. One such action would be for the person to take a personal inventory of their own core values. One can do so keeping a journal (something I would highly recommend) and listing them as they are able to do so. If a list of these is undertaken, it leads to another step - one must elaborate the personal importance of these things. In the case of the workplace, how do one's personal core values intersect with those of one's employer? This is why, in addition to knowing your own core values, it is also vital to know those of an employer as well, and they are often readily available in a corporate mission statement. Once all of that is accomplished, it is then important to employ classification of one's core values, and this entails a few things. First, if a value is unique to the individual, it is called an incommunicable value. If a value listed intersects with others' values or with the corporate mission statement, it is called an incommunicable or universal value. If intersectionality does occur, it should lead to a willful and subjective acceptance of said value by both parties. However, if one party is coerced or pressured to accept the value of the other unwillingly, and if the aggressive party keeps trying to impose this value upon the other party on those unwilling to accept them, then this is a form of coercion, and does not reflect the respect of the dignity of personhood of the party whom is subjected to that. Coercion, first of all, violates dignity of personhood and is distinguished from willful subjectivism in that it is a form of subjugation. Likewise, coercion is a form of bullying and should not be encouraged or tolerated. This then leads to a discussion of what to do if there occurs a conflict of interest with the involved parties.
If there is a conflict in core values involved between two parties, there are measures that need to be taken. First, should it happen, a person is within legal rights to take the proper steps to rectify the situation, preferably in a peaceful and conciliatory manner. This may even entail calling in an indifferent third party or authority. Second, a person does have the right to respectfully disagree with some things that go against their own convictions, provided they do so in a civil and professional manner. This entails first of all getting the disagreement documented in some form, as it will more than likely articulate the issue better than trying to verbally express it. It also is important to always observe proper protocol in such situations, meaning that one cannot go over the head of a superior if the superior is the other party in such a disagreement - in that case, there is a chain of command to be followed. Third, documentation should be retained for one's own records, as well as for the public record if necessary. This is simply the old CYA rule. If these steps are followed and taken, often it leads to successful and meaningful conflict resolution.
You may have guessed by now that I have augmented somewhat the original material from the training videos, as I had my own insights while I was watching them. I wanted to tailor the material to meet my own personal application of them, as they may apply to a given situation I myself may have faced or may yet face. In time, I plan on codifying this into my own personal mission statement, something I really need to do. There is always room though for modification and adaptation to different issues or events, and in time those experiences will be the basis for my own personal code of ethics. If you are reading this, hopefully it will inspire you to do the same. Thank you for allowing me to share with you today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)