The Best is the Enemy of the Pretty Damn Good

.
There is a true saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that the good is the enemy of the best.  This aphorism meant, back in the old days, that if someone could get away with doing a merely good job, he or she would not deliver their very best.

Today, it is a greater temptation to want to postpone doing anything at all, until one has the time to do a perfect job.  So, they just don't do anything, since they have a good excuse to not do it, and in the case of many things that are cumulative, where a little effort by a vast number of people adds up to something significant, the lack of any effort means that the individual contributions simply aren't there, to add up.

Education.  I was just talking to a friend, saying that much of the prejudice and the bigotry out there is fueled by ignorance.  The best lesson one can give is, of course, example.  But these days, it is really worth the effort to say something.  It is futile to wait until you have an enormous platform.  Just saying something to the people around you is a good start, and often all you need to do.  Just to your kid.  To your spouse.  To the mailman.  I don't know: you decide.  Maybe it's a blog, like this one.  People are actually reading this; I'm up to something like 40,ooo views (unfortunately, most of the views are of posts that have pictures in them), so some of my points are being made.

Starting a Blog.  My wife wants to make a blog for herself, but she's waiting until she has the time to do it properly.  Chances are, she'll never get around to it.

Recycling.  Some people just don't do it because they can't get organized to do it systematically.  Now, in theory, doing a sporadic job of recycling can result in you never getting organized.  But from where the rest of us sit, doing a sporadic job is good!  Do it!  Get the flat white paper to where it can be shredded, and recycled.  Get the bottles out to the recycling center.  Stop there, if you must.  If you drink beer from cans, recycle the cans!  If every beer drinker recycled his or her cans, the world would be a better place.  But even if one hundredth of them recycled, the world would be, well, pretty good.

Volunteering.  I'm getting bold about talking about volunteering because my wife drove me to get involved with the local community radio station, so I'm the token Classical Music person for the station, which means that we have a little less than two hours a week of classical music, because I also play a lot of other stuff.  Choose something you would enjoy, like shelving at the local library, especially if you're old and decrepit.  Or even young, and decrepit.  It is a good opportunity to be around young people, which is a refreshing thing to do.

Reading.  If you're reading this, getting started with reading is probably not a problem for you.  But we must encourage people to read, one person, and one book at a time.  Get to the local bookstore, which will almost invariably have recycled books from libraries for sale for a dollar or two.  Choose carefully; this is where your inside knowledge of the person is invaluable.  Young people, for example, might respond better to a book that comes with materials, such as teach yourself how to juggle, which comes with a set of juggling balls, or build your own Liverpool Cathedral (cut-out cathedral pieces), or dinosaur, or whatever.  Or even a beginning Origami book.  Or throw them straight into a thriller, why not?

I'll stop here.  But here's a few more:  Playing the piano: it is better to have played the piano badly, than never to have played at all.  Camping at a State of Federal Park.  In ten years, who knows whether we will have a single wild bird out there?  If bees are dying, what will be next?  Get out and enjoy!  Bridge!  Have you ever wanted to learn the game of Bridge?  Be careful; I'm told it's addictive.  Riding a bicycle?  Another addictive pastime.  If you're too old to balance on a traditional bike, there are pedal tricycles, which I have not tried, but which look like they might be fun.  Cooking.  My wife and I recently taught ourselves how to make Egg Foo Young.  It is easy (there are just a couple of unusual ingredients: Oyster Sauce, and Bean Sprouts), and wowed our friends.

Arch.  [pictures to be added next year.  We just have a little colored text to begin with.]

Dances, and Dance Forms in Music

As some of you might remember, I have a regular radio program on WXPI radio, and I have completed 4 shows thus far: Two one hour shows, on Trios, and on National Anthems, and national and folk music.  Then I was asked to expand to 2 hours.

The next two shows were on Songs and Arias, and on Dances.

The show on Dance, and Dance Forms and Dance Rhythms (I hadn't thought out the title in that detail, but that was about what the program was), made me think of this topic, and it is interesting.

The show started out with a Waltz (Voices of Spring), and then a few minuets, from Beethoven, Mozart, and (later in the show) from Haydn.

Then we got into the Baroque dances: Allemande (Bach, from the French Suite no. 2), Courant (Bach, Orchestral Suite no. 1), Sarabande (Orchestral Suite no. 2), and Gigue (from French Suite no. 5).  We played a couple of Gavottes, one of which was a song by British composer Herbert Howells, entitled Gavotte.

Bolero has to be figured in, as well as a couple of Hornpipes from Handel.

Then we went into Latin dances in earnest, and played a Tango, Rumba (Light my fire), Samba, Cha-cha (why not Cha-cha-cha?  I wonder about what happened to the third Cha; anyway, it was Autumn Leaves, of all things), Bossa Nova (Desafinado).

It turned out that Hernando's Hideaway, a Tango, had connections with the town in which I live, and another song featured in the same Broadway Musical, I'm not at all in love, happened to be in Waltz rhythm.

I was just fooling around with the Do-Re-Mi song, and realized --too late for the radio show-- that it was clearly a Polka.  The Laendler from the Sound of Music was also played, observing that it was an ancestor to the Waltz.

Arch

It was never between you and them, Anyway.

.
Somebody recently posted this quote from "Mother Teresa" on Facebook.

It is phrased in the language of Christian Morality, which is frustrating because of course the so-called Church has appropriated to itself the teachings of Jesus, sort of copyrighting the entire thing.  Teresa manages to articulate in simple language some of the problems we face with right conduct, and right action.

An important idea within modern Christian teaching is that of forgiveness, which affects how we behave towards one another.  If we were perfect in every way, we would not have to forgive anybody, because of course we would automatically do what is right every time.  But being the people we are, our history with each other interferes with what we feel we should be doing, so, in a brilliant stroke, Jesus focuses on forgiveness as an important first principle.  And Jesus makes clear that forgiveness doesn't depend on being deserved; you just do it automatically.

Many of the remaining suggestions have to do with how we imagine our actions will be received.  Are we hesitant to be kind, because we would be misunderstood as having ulterior motives?  Just do it, says Teresa.

As we grow older, we accumulate a store of knowledge about ways in which we might be taken advantage of.  But be forthright notwithstanding, says Teresa.  It might not be good advice for any but the most saintly.

For those of us who do not believe that the Big Daddy in the Sky is watching, and totting up points for us, doing good is often associated with being given credit by our fellow creatures.  This is a big problem, because credit is usually not forthcoming, and if it is, in the degree to which we feel we deserve it.  To do one's best, without regard to possible credit being awarded is a tough assignment.  But once you set your hand to the plow, checking on your credit just gets in the way.

Then, of course, there is the problem of futility.  We recycle, we clean up graffiti, we try to reduce our footprint, but all around us people gleefully undo everything we do.  The latest in this direction is the new fad of 'blowing coal', which is this amusing trick of owners of diesel truck revving up their engines as they pass hybrid, or fuel-efficient vehicles, just to annoy the perceived "tree-hugger" driving it.  No matter how much one does, it seems never to be enough.  But, says Teresa, do it anyway, and I must say, we don't have an alternative.

Teresa, of course, gave a lot of her life to helping the poor in Calcutta, though detractors were persistent in pointing out numerous shortcomings in her service or her lifestyle.  I seem to remember that she was accused of being harsh, of not being impartial, of appropriating various comforts to herself, or of claiming undue credit for one thing or another.  In a way, this quote sets out her attitude towards credit and criticism.  But, in the end, these suggestions are good.  It isn't between us and Them, it's between us and us!

Arch

Has Wall Street Subverted Either the Democrats or Liberals?

.
In a recent post in Salon, Bill Curry (a former aide to Bill Clinton) charges that the Democrat party has come under the influence of what he calls "Wall Street Democrats".  While many of the details of his post are difficult for me to follow, not being an insider to the history of the party, he certainly seems to have some good points.

His post takes as a unifying theme the relationship between Ralph Nader and the Democrats.  Initially, when Ralph Nader originally came to national attention in his denunciation of certain Ford cars, he worked with the Democrats to get certain important pieces of legislation passed, despite the enormous influence of the automobile industry lobby.  Since then, however, it has become more convenient for a certain type of Democrat --precisely those Curry terms the Wall Street Democrats-- to cooperate with Big Business than stand up against Big Business, whereas Nader has continued to firmly oppose anything Big, including Big Business, and (surprisingly) Big Government.

These days, the only way I can make sense out of a closely argued political piece is to copy it out, delete all the references I don't understand, and all the advertising, and then give it a try; until them I'm not going to give an opinion on the entire thing.  However, there are some major points that I think I understand.

• Deregulation (of the Media, of Communications, of Banks and Lending and Investing) has caused enormous damage.  I don't get all the details, but it certainly seems as though something has hastened the demise of newspapers, and deregulation seems as good a culprit as any.  The same is true of Banking, though Curry says that Bill Clinton continues to claim to support it.  I don't know why Bill Clinton does this, and even whether he does this, and he usually has good arguments for things he claims to support, even if he secretly doesn't.
• Small businesses, (Curry claims that Nader claims,) hate Big Business.  Big Business is not on the side of small businesses; they want to swallow them up, or destroy them.  Bill Curry (perhaps picking up on something Ralph Nader says) remarks that Small Business has not been completely grabbed by the GOP even now, and if the Democrats can show themselves as supporting Small Business, they could find a staunch ally there.
• Barack Obama has not yet delivered on a large number of election promises, especially those about openness of government.  To Curry, this is evidence that Obama is a populist.  I'm suspicious of these labels, which are political insider terms, and often mean something different to specialists that they do to us amateurs.  It appears, judging from how Curry uses the word, that the word describes politicians who make false election promises (of a particular sort).  I thought it described someone running for office who was for the rank and file against the inner political circle.  I guess I was wrong, and they were right.

[To be expanded]

Arch