Dr. B's Notes

177 So We Had This Wedding!

6/3/2020

In my last post (#176 in the archives) I made passing reference to the fact that I had been "... helping with daughter #2 (Maggi)'s wedding (held on our back porch with me officiating!) ...."  I suppose that I should take some time to explain what I meant by that and what it meant to me.  Unfortunately, it's something of a longish story....

I believe that I have mentioned before that Maggi was engaged to Brian and that a wedding was planned for this spring.  The happy couple were both quite desirous of having a SPRING wedding because virtually every other "close" family celebration on BOTH sides occurs between Labor Day and the end of the year, and, of course, so does Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's Eve.  They both really wanted to be able to celebrate their anniversary at a time when it wouldn't get lost in the mad shuffle of other events.  I confess that Bonnie and I supported that idea wholeheartedly as our anniversary (Dec. 27) is normally lost in the holiday shuffle, so we understood the concern.

So, the wedding was planned for May 16 (to try to avoid Mother's Day and Graduation time as much as possible, and still allow for flowers to be blooming, etc.  The venue was to be "Joslyn Castle," a Scottish baronial style mansion built by George and Sarah Joslyn in 1903.  After belonging to the City of Omaha and the State of Nebraska, it has become an Omaha Landmark Historic Structure and is on the National Register of Historic Places for its national significance.  The grounds are part of the Nebraska Statewide Arboretum and a trust has been established which is restoring the building to something like its original grandeur.  I think it can be best described as having some resemblance to the Biltmore House, which IS from about the same timeframe, but on a smaller scale and Scottish, not French influenced.  It is a lovely place and we were all looking forward to having the wedding there.  See picture of the exterior below:

Then COVID-19 happened!  THAT, of course, changed everything.  With "social distancing" and the other steps being taken to try to avoid dying from this pandemic, it quickly became obvious that having a public wedding with family and friends coming in from out of town, a big party, etc., etc., etc., was simply unwise, unsafe and not practical.  This led to a good deal of questioning as to how long to postpone the planned occasion, how to deal with bakeries, florists, caterers, the folks at the Castle, itself, postponing the honeymoon trip to Europe, and on, and on....  Of course, Maggi and Brian still really WANTED a spring wedding, so the question became what to do about that.

At some point, I forget exactly when, they decided that they were going to go ahead and get married at our house (probably on our, covered, back deck) on the planned day and deal with the reception-party stuff after things settled down and they could have the get together with family and friends that they really wanted.  They thought that they might even do a "dramatic reenactment" of the wedding ceremony on that occasion.  So now, THIS, new, event had to be planned.

We "menfolk" could just get by with wearing suits, but the women still needed "appropriate" dresses and the originally planned wedding dress was really not "right" for a "backyard" wedding.  Oddly enough, even I agreed with that.  Bonnie had something appropriately "mother-of-the-brideish" which she could make work, but Maggi really didn't have a "proper" dress for this, changed, occasion.  So, after considerably more shopping than I thought advisable, they found an "inexpensive" wedding dress which could be made to fit and adapted to suit with a good deal of work by Bonnie.  So, the dress was bought, and the work began.  This would, ultimately, take several weeks of massive work on Bonnie's part in order to: 1.) make the dress fit properly, and; 2.) decorate it with embroidered flowers and butterflies so that it wouldn't be so plain and would make both mother and daughter happy.  Here's a picture of the dress which doesn't really do it justice, but it does show the dress and some of the embroidery.

In the meantime, of course, COIVID-19 was continuing to spread and all of the other stuff with which we are all too aware was going on.  Still, the plan, modified as it was, seemed to be progressing.

M & B had arranged for a friend to "officiate" for their wedding, since they weren't having a "traditional church" wedding in a church, since they are not really into traditional religious practices, and having a friend made the whole thing more personal and special.  So, things were proceeding....  Both the Officiant and the planned attendants were concerned about COVID-19 because of family considerations, but all were trying their best to make it work. Eventually, only one of the "attendants" was able to make it, but late in the game, I think it was the evening of May 7, the Officiant decided that she just couldn't risk getting sick or passing it along to her children.  I must confess, while that was a disappointment to Maggi and Brian, none of us really blamed her.  But someone to officiate was needed and the wedding was only nine days away.  This was a potential difficulty.

Now Maggi knew that it was possible to be "ordained" online (I believe that that's how the planned Officiant was ordained) and I had heard of that idea, although I hadn't ever really looked into it.  But I was not going to let my daughter down.  If I had to get ordained and perform the ceremony myself, so be it.  I was NOT going to let the coronavirus force them to wait until some unknown future timeframe.  This was MY daughter and her fiancé.  If they wished to get married, I was going to see that it happened!

So, I went online and discovered the "Universal Life Church."  I think I have mentioned before that, as a child, I attended the Unitarian Church Sunday school while my folks attended services, and that I later joined a Methodist Church in Evanston as a teenager, but I have not been an active churchgoer for a long time, mostly because I have never felt comfortable with the idea that it was okay for any religion to argue that their beliefs should be dominant or be made into law.  I'm unconvinced that any, specific, religion has an absolute corner on Truth.  So, when I found the Universal Life Church online, I recognized it as being unlike anything I had previously encountered as a "religion." It also would ordain folks instantly and espoused beliefs which I could support.  They state that:

"The Universal Life Church was founded on the basic belief that we are all children of the same universe and, derived from that basic belief, has established two core tenets by which it expects its ministers to conduct themselves:

Do only that which is right.
Every individual is free to practice their religion in the manner of their choosing, as mandated by the First Amendment, so long as that expression does not impinge upon the rights or freedoms of others and is in accordance with the government’s laws.

"We have made it our mission to actualize these tenets in the world by empowering millions of ministers, whether they come to us from a Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, Shinto, Agnostic, Atheist, Pagan, Wiccan, or Druid tradition, to speak their own truth to power." https://www.themonastery.org/aboutUs

I strongly agree with both of these ideas , so I had no problem in ascribing to them. I suppose that one could argue that this is not really a religion, but a "freedom of religion" organization. Still, constitutionally, it does qualify as a "religion," at least to the extent that it can ordain "ministers" who can carry out ministerial practices within the legal restrictions of the vast majority of states (and probably should be able to do so in all states, etc.). I confess that I also really like the motto/emblem of the ULC shown below.

And so, on May 8, I became a Minister.

Then, I had to figure out how to perform a wedding which would suit my daughter and her fiancé. Quick investigation revealed that all that was technically required (at least in Nebraska, and, I think, most places) is what is called the Declaration of Intent by both parties ("Do you, NAME, take OTHER NAME etc." followed by "I do," or the equivalent); and the Pronouncement "I now declare you etc." by the Officiant, and that there be witnesses to sign the paperwork. Most weddings, of course, are a bit more complicated than that, but, from a legal point of view, that's all that's actually needed. So, I started working on a simple ceremony.

Since folks, including Brian's parents, couldn't come to Omaha (COVID again), M & B decided to stage the wedding on Zoom, so that more than the roughly 6-8 people on the back deck could "attend." That meant that the deck had to have a bit more of a suitable "wedding" set," we had to have a "script" (which I was working on), I needed a suitable "costume" (the others had theirs and I wanted to be able to differentiate between "Father of the Bride" and "Officiant"). So, flowers were purchased and arranged, a suitable "script" was drafted, including a "prologue" to explain what I was doing and why I was doing it, etc. It took several drafts to get it all worked out, but, by Saturday morning (a couple of hours before the ceremony) we had a text we all liked, my academic gown would serve as "ministerial robes" (they ARE much the same) with the addition of a stole Bonnie made for the occasion, and the deck was decorated. The actual ceremony was short; but covered both the legalities and their desires. And so, they were married.

This is not a great picture of the couple; but considering that it started pouring rain as the ceremony was ending, we're lucky to have any pictures before the ones from the official photographer are available.

Following the ceremony, we had a small cake cutting and toasting and then the rain shower pretty much stopped. This was good, since M & B had invited friends to do a "drive-by wedding parade," if they wished and Bonnie had invited some of her friends from her book club, etc. to join in. We had set up a canopy in our driveway to provide some shelter for the wedding party in case of rain (which was anticipated), and the "parade" was, perhaps, more "drive-by" than "parade," but I do believe that a good time was had by all. Even the rain quickly tapered off to just a little drizzle.

I must confess that I'm not going to take being a "minister" too seriously, so I'm really not going to go into the "minister" business, but I was glad to be able to make Maggi and Brian happy, even if it meant that I had to do more than just to walk my daughter down the aisle.  Of course, under these circumstances we didn't even have an aisle, so that would not have been possible in any event.

All in all, it was quite a celebration and, as I (as "Officiant") said at the time, "'celebration' is the right term, I think, because a ceremony, such as this, does not create a marriage, it acknowledges that such a relationship exists."  A ceremony may be required to satisfy legal requirements, but I've been watching Maggi (and Brian) for a good while now and I firmly believe that in every sense but legally, they have been married for some time.  Their relationship clearly makes them both happier and more complete than they were before and I, for one, am very happy that they found each other.

So, now I am a Minister with nothing much to do and little real interest in "ministering."  I guess my payoff for this (other than seeing the joy on Maggi's face) was having both of my daughters refer to me as "Reverend Doctor Daddy."  I confess that that is something that I would never have predicted, and it still makes me smile.  I guess if you live long enough....

I'll be back in a couple of weeks with something more normal, I expect.  Of course, these days, one never knows ....

LLAP,

Dr. B

P.S. I will also confess that the whole experience was a bit like having a flashback to playing the Stage Manager in Our Town, but with fewer lines and no rehearsal.  Not like when Kate and Ty were married and all I had to do was put on a tux and walk her down the aisle.  Still, both experiences are quite special for me, and always will be.

RSB

0 Comments

176 Cats, Especially Our Cat, Fred.

5/20/2020

0 Comments

The tigers I included in my last post, got me to thinking about cats while I've been "self-distancing," and otherwise trying to avoid the coronavirus.  A bit of my time has been spent watching news sources I trust to give me reasonably accurate information, reading, building Harry Potter LEGO's, helping with daughter #2 (Maggi)'s wedding (held on our back porch with me officiating!) and enjoying watching our cat, Fred.  Not long ago, specifically on Easter Sunday, we celebrated Fred's thirteenth birthday.  I have to confess that we don't know his exact birthday as we weren't around at the time.  We DO know, however, exactly when we adopted him.  And I figure that if they can make up a birthdate for Shakespeare based on a reasonable guess, we can do the same for our cat.  It's pretty close, in any event.

Shortly after Finals for Fall Semester of 2008, Bonnie had most of the "metal" removed from her leg which had been put in during the spring of 2005 when she fell in our garden and broke her leg.  This seemed like a good time for this as: 1.) the metal pieces were no longer needed; 2.) it was routine surgery, and: 3.) there was plenty of time available because WCU was, for all intents and purposes, shut down for the holidays, so I'd be home to see to assisting her as needed.  We were without cats at the time because the last of our almost continual companions had passed that fall and we weren't planning on getting another pet, at least for a while.  Then, Kate, the older daughter, called us on the 'phone....

She told us that one of her friends had two, declawed, neutered, male "kittens" (litter mates) which the friend was unable to keep because one of her children had just been diagnosed as highly allergic to cats, and the local animal shelter wouldn't take them because they had been declawed, and since we were without any cats, and we NEEDED to have at least one, so why didn't we just come up to get these?  So, of course, we did.

That's easy to say but was more complicated than it sounds.  Remember, Bonnie was just out of surgery on her leg, so she couldn't drive and was supposed to keep her leg elevated as much as possible.  So, I drove her up to Leesburg, VA (about 500 miles, or 7+ hours from Webster), we spent the night in a motel, spent a VERY brief time with Kate, Ty, and the grandchildren because someone had a bad cold, then went to pick up the "kittens."  Now, time was something of the essence, what with the need of the friend to get them out of the house, Xmas coming, snow approaching, and Bonnie on crutches and not walking much, due to the recent surgery.  It was at this point that we discovered that the "kittens" were a good year and a half old and were good sized CATS, although they WERE not (quite) "fully" grown.  They were close, but they did get larger as time passed!  Anyway, they had been fed their "sleepy" drugs, so we bundled them into the car and got back on the road to Sylva.  The trip was longish, of course, but not really a problem.  So now we had two cats.  Then, Bonnie's brother arrived for the holidays.

Six years later, we had to move the "guys" to Omaha after we retired and that was a somewhat longer and more complex trip (lasting about 16 hours and requiring a replenishment of the "good" drugs along the way).  We all survived that, as well.  Here's a picture of "our guys" curled up together next to the fireplace a short time after we all got settled in Omaha.

Fred is the grey-furred one and George has black fur. I don't remember their "birth" names, but we decided that, since they were litter mates, they should, properly, be named for the Weasley twins from the Harry Potter stories, so that's who they became.

All was well until just a bit over two years ago, when Bonnie and I were in the living room watching the news one morning, when we heard a "thump" from the kitchen. We went to investigate and discovered George collapsed in front of the cat condo we had set up so that the cats could watch the birds and squirrels on the back porch. We bundled him into a towel and rushed to the vet's office down the way, but it was too late. The vet suspected a heart condition which hadn't previously been detected. So, then we were down to one cat, again, with just the memories of our "twins" curled up on our sofa with a Hogwarts throw pillow.

However, we still have Fred, who reminds us with some frequency that he expects us to do our part of taking care of him, as we have opposable thumbs suitable for cat "skritching," can opening, and other endeavors necessary for his comfort and convenience. Here's a picture of him from the other day.

I confess that, while he's really Bonnie's cat (she feeds him mostly, so she gets most of his affection) I think his naturally highly inquisitive expression is most endearing.  I AM very fond of him.  I even wrote a sort of haiku about him.

Fred
Nose as black as coal,
Coat of plushy, gray softness
Collar of purple

Okay, it's not great poetry, but I like it for Fred, and, yes, he does wear a purple collar to support his cat license, rabies tag and a little bell which "tinkles" nicely against his bowl when he eats.  I think it's quite pleasant.

Of course, I have always liked cats.  Probably my favorite spot in the "temperate" portion of the conservatory at Lauritzen Gardens (the local botanical gardens) is this statue of two cats "talking," shown here at Xmas time a couple of years ago.

The trick with cats, I think (assuming that there IS one), is to accept the fact that YOU are NOT in charge of THEM! You ARE in charge of feeding them, providing a clean litter box and proper, adequately supplied, food, but you are NOT the Boss! Once you accept that, you may find, as I have, that one, or more, cats can actually be rather fun to have around. And, they can, when it suits them, be pleasant, and even affectionate, towards you. I think what I have missed the most about being "catless" on occasion, was not having to fight for room to sleep and blankets to keep warm with in the bed I have shared with Bonnie (and various cat[s]) since 1966. We have had periods of being without a cat, but for the vast majority of that time we have had at least one to fight with for bed and blanket space.

Perhaps what I like the most about cats, other than the occasional cuddle and purr, is the fact that they have strong personalities and are not ashamed to let you know it. When they are hungry, they expect to be fed promptly and properly, and they will let you know if you are not doing your job correctly.

Of course, doing your job of feeding and caring for the cat your job adequately does NOT (at least in the mind of any cat I have known) preclude that there is the possibility of additional "goodies" which might come their way, if they were to get lucky. Note below:

There is also the fact that most cats are capable of being VERY affectionate when there is some prospect of them acquiring something they desire in response. There is considerable variety in what a cat may be seeking, more food, treats, a head scratch, a tummy rub, just a warm lap to curl up in/on; but woe be unto the cat "owner" who thinks that he/she is entitled to such affectionate responses. The reality of the situation is shown below:

Clearly Wiley (the creator of Non Sequitur, the cartoon) understands the hierarchy of the world as seen by cats. There is really no use fighting it. That probably explains why there are "dog people" and "cat people." Dog people want to own a slave to whom they will be tied by the necessity of not only feeding them, but taking them for walks, etc. Cat people do have to feed their pets and clean litter boxes every so often, but they recognize the cat is only agreeing to share their domicile with them as long as the person does his job properly. Hence:

I don't remember exactly when we got this sign, but I know it was in our kitchen (near the cats' dinner dishes) when we lived in Webster, so it's been a while, and it still resides near the cat dishes to remind us of our "proper" role in life. As I suggested, Bonnie and I have accepted our roles in our cat's universe and that's okay. We've never had a cat who wasn't worth the effort. I just don't suggest going into such a relationship without knowing what you are doing.

Back in a couple of weeks,

LLAP

Dr. B

P.S. It's also worth noting that I believe that Montaigne knew whereof he spoke when he said: "In nine lifetimes, you'll never know as much about your cat as your cat knows about you."

0 Comments

175 Responses to COVID-19

5/6/2020

0 Comments

I suppose that I really should have done a post related to the COVID-19 pandemic a bit earlier, but I didn't want to think about it much, so, except for a couple of comments in passing, I've largely ignored it. I now think that I may have made a poor choice in this regard, because my comments about the challenges of "social distancing," etc., may be a bit out of step since some people are insisting that "opening up" the economy supersedes other people's right to have a fighting chance of surviving this disease. Now, I DO tend to believe that you ought to have the right to commit suicide in your own way on your own time, but I DON'T support your "right" to take me with you!

I follow the news from actual medical experts and find it highly unlikely that this thing is over and done with and we're all going to be "just fine" any second now because a man with a BS degree in Economics (without Honors) from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and who claims to be some sort of "genius" is smarter than "everybody" because he watches "the shows," and says that things will be just fine shortly. I will admit that I may be old fashioned, but I prefer to place my trust in people with M.D. or Ph.D. in some branch of Biology or Public Health after their name when it comes to questions of MY health.

In any event, like most other people, I have been dealing with staying at home close to 99% of the time (I have been out to walk to our mailbox, for a few medical appts., trips to the pharmacy [prescriptions need to be refilled even in these times], etc., but that totals just a few minutes a week) and I AM a bit tired of staying inside, away from people, and having most businesses and services be closed, but there IS always the fact that this could be the:

I find that a much pleasanter way of approaching this situation than this, for example:

I DON'T think that we have to fly off the handle completely and go into a state of total panic, but I really don't believe that we need some flak jacket wearing idiots with semi-automatic, assault weapons parading in our streets demanding the "right" to go to restaurants and to buy clean underwear to understand that this pandemic is putting a strain on the economy and, generally, making life difficult and uncomfortable for most of us in a wide variety of ways. But, when I see some of these same people waving swastika flags, etc., I wonder if they really are in favor of the treasonous revolution they seem to be advocating.

Remember, OUR FOUNDING FATHERS did to George III's England what they described as "TREASON" in the U.S. Constitution (Article III, “Section 3. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them ....”). I acknowledge that no actual shots have been fired during these "demonstrations," so War has not actually been levied, but the threat is clearly being made and certainly appears to have been intended by these "patriots." Perhaps they should be spending more time helping their children with their History and Civics schoolwork, than parading around in the streets demanding their "rights."

Speaking of assisting with your kids' schoolwork, did you see this?

(I suppose that notice may only have meaning to English majors or others who had "picky" teachers (like me, I admit) who required actually researched term papers, theses, etc. But I thought it was quite amusing.)

Speaking of amusing got me to remembering this Non Sequitur cartoon I saw a week, or so, ago. I had put it in my folder of Internet-related cartoons but decided that it probably fit here better in this post.

Of course, as anyone who follows this blog could easily tell, I am VERY fond of Non Sequitur. I am especially fond of the multi-frame "Sunday" strips, but I rarely collect or use them as them are difficult to format for this sort of posting. Still, this one was just too good to pass up:

This DOES provide a possible solution to the challenge of fast food delivery during a time of "social distancing." I'm not sure that it's totally practical, but it just MIGHT work!

Another solution to boredom was suggested by Foxtrot the other day,

So, there ARE possibilities.

I close by taking a note from the CBS Sunday Morning tv show which Bonnie and I have been pretty faithful watchers of for quite a long time. It's still pretty good, but I confess that I miss Charles Kuralt, the original host of it. Perhaps the feature which I enjoy the most is the "nature minute" at the end of the broadcast, where they just show a few shots of animals, birds, trees, flowers, whatever comes along. No music, no talking, just peace, quiet and pretty.

Here's the best I can do.

It's just some baby tigers flopping near their Mom's feet and tail, enjoying being alive. Why? Because everybody needs a baby tiger every so often.

We will get through this. Togetherness helps. Naps do too, trust the baby tigers.

LLAP,

Dr. B

0 Comments

174 Shakespeare's Birth/Death Day 2020

4/22/2020

0 Comments

As I post this tomorrow is April 23rd, St. George's Day, the day on which Shakespeare died and (oddly enough) the day when they say he was born 456 years ago.  His birthday is actually guesswork as there weren't official records of such things in those days, but this day is as good as any other and seems reasonable based on the day of Will's baptism (April 26, 1564), which WAS recorded in church records which have survived.  In any case, it has become common to celebrate Shakespeare's birth AND death on April 23.

There are those, strangely enough, who think Will Shakespeare of Stratford-Upon-Avon is highly over-rated and probably didn't really write the plays he is credited with having produced.  Of the 70 something proposed candidates for the one (or the group) who DID actually write those plays, Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford has been the most popular choice in recent years.  Personally, based on my reading of several books by a number of prominent scholars, I find the whole idea preposterous, but I AM prejudiced, and you can make up your own mind.  Some people suggest that Will's historical presence is so small as to create doubt over the possibility of his writing poems and plays.

So, what DO we actually KNOW about Will Shakespeare?  Actually, we know a fair amount (more than we know about some of his contemporaries) but a good deal less than we WISH we did!  First, we know that he DID actually exist!  He was born in Stratford in April of 1564, but the exact day is uncertain.  He WAS baptized on April 26, however.  That record exists in Holy Trinity Church.  He grew up, married Anne Hathaway of Shottery when he was 18, had three children with her and, eventually, left Stratford and went "missing" for several years. Sometime between 1585 and 1592, he turned up in London as a poet(?), playwright(?), collaborator (at times) and actor with one of the major theatre companies.  He was also a part-owner of that company (established in records from the time).  He continued in this (these) capacity (capacities) until about 1613, when he retired back to Stratford, although he did make several purchases of Stratford real estate and a variety of investments in grain and other commodities, which assisted him in making quite a reasonable fortune for a non-aristocrat during the period.

While in London, his presence was recorded in a number of legal papers; he was also referred to (by others) as a member of "The Lord Chamberlain's Men" (later "The King's Men").  These references include references to him as one of the leading members of the company in official court documents.  He is also referred to by numerous sources during this period as being a playwright and a poet.  Numerous plays and some poems were published over his name during his lifetime, but there is little evidence that positively proves that he wrote them, and some (perhaps most) were, apparently, published without his permission.  Of course, the common practice of the time did NOT include such things as "intellectual property rights," so plays became the property of companies, NOT playwrights and, once published were open for all to perform.  Therefore, companies guarded their scripts closely as they had no recourse against others performing plays which they had paid for and the stealing, or pirating, of scripts was not uncommon.

Will died in 1616 and was interred in Holy Trinity Church in Stratford.  So, we also have his burial record (to say nothing of the actual tomb, complete with curse) in Holy Trinity Church.  We also have his will preserved as a legal document.  In 1623, two of his theatre company colleagues published a folio version of Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies.  This is, of course, what is known as the "First Folio."  The fact that it was published by John Hemings and Henry Condell, two established members of "The King's Men," who would have known Shakespeare well (they are left bequests in his will).  Thus, it would seem that they believed that Shakespeare was the author of these plays, in addition to other evidence which exists from his lifetime.

I would argue that this establishes quite a strong case that Will Shakespeare not only existed, but that people during the period at least thought he was a playwright, as well as an actor.  If he wasn't, I think one would have to say that we are dealing with probably the largest and most complex conspiracy theory ever (except, perhaps, for the resurrection of Jesus).  I admit that I am a "Stratfordian," but I believe that the evidence is strong enough to support this position above all others.  If you disagree, that's okay, I just think you are incorrect, and I'd sure like to see your evidence and hear your argument.

In any case, I like to celebrate Shakespeare's Birth/Death Day in my own, small fashion, so I thought I would make this posting a portion of that celebration.  I find others also engage in celebrating this day: The Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, D.C. usually have quite a "todo" on the 23rd, although this year is having to rely on "virtual" events.  The local Nebraska Shakespeare Company sponsors a "Talk Like Shakespeare Day" annually on April 23rd, which I've always though was a bit silly, but could be fun.  However, it suggests to me an old "Shoe" cartoon which I've had on file for a good many years, (since 2013, I think) which seemed appropriate to the idea of Elizabethan language.

I suppose that I should admit that I have always enjoyed Elizabeth/Jacobean insults and cursing, as I find them quite entertaining.

On the other hand, given that Will wrote plays for actors, one has to wonder how appropriate this cartoon might be when thinking about my favorite of Will's plays.

Thinking of theatre, generally, suggested to me the absolute accuracy of the following quote from Sean O'Casey, who knew a bit about plays and theatre, himself.

Since it's not been too long since the Ides of March, this "Flying McCoys" cartoon came to mind.

Kate, our older daughter, recently sent me the cartoon below and, under the circumstances of having to "shelter in place," I could NOT resist including it.

There may be, among my readers, those who think that my sense of humor is not sophisticated enough for us highly intelligent and "upscale" sort of people. For them, I thought I might include this:

After all, what's classier than a Shakesduck?  Now, I just need a bathtub.

'Nuf said.    I think that it's time for me to say, "Happy Birthday, Will." and call this post over.

I'll be back in a couple of weeks.  I will admit that this coronavirus thing IS getting to me a bit.  I'm not used to being tied up inside quite this much.  I can't even go to the library, or the bookstore!  I'll be VERY happy when we can stop this.  Still, it's nice to be alive, so I guess I'll put up with it as long as necessary.  I hope you do so, as well. It's the right thing to do!

LLAP

Dr. B

0 Comments

173 Easter 2020

4/8/2020

0 Comments

My calendar says that it's Passover today for Jews, and also reminds me that Easter weekend is approaching for Christians.  Now, my parents took me to the Unitarian Church in Evanston as a young child and, as a somewhat older child, I was baptized and became a member of Evanston's Covenant Methodist Church.  To be honest, that was probably because many of my friends attended that church and there was an active youth group there.  However, that means that I have had some exposure to the basic tenets of religion generally, and Protestant Christianity specifically.  While I was an undergraduate, I took a "Study of Religion" class in which we briefly examined the major ideas of Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam from an academic point of view.  Over the years, I've also picked up a bit about various of the religions of the East from a variety of sources.  All of this is to attempt to establish that I'm not just talking off the top of my head, although I do not have any significant degree of expertise/authority regarding ANY religion (my Methodist training didn't really "take" for the long haul), nor do I claim to have such.

Still, I do see the value of a "church" as a social institution.  After all, a group of folks gathered together to build social connections and engage in "good" works seems like it certainly ought to have some uses.  I have also always thought that anyone with any pretensions to rationality ought to give some thought as to the fundamental questions which Humankind has been pondering for as long as there have been humans, like: "Where did we come from?; Why are we here?; Why do some of us look different from others?; Is there a purpose to our existence?; Which is the TRUE God, or is there one?; etc."  An obvious corollary to those questions, at least for me, is "Since ALL major religions seem to value the ideas of peace, forgiveness, love, doing good, etc., why have most wars throughout history been fought, to some extent, over which religion is "correct?"

I have not found ANY even remotely plausible response to that, last, question.  Nor do I feel that I have come to any sort of answer to the others posed above which I feel confident enough about so as to suggest that others should accept MY conclusions as their own.  Science seems to offer some possible explanations for some of them, but those answers are just the most factual we have, subject to new data, sort of like much of our "knowledge" of the novel coronavirus and COVID-19, as well as a good many other things.

I think that's why I had a moment of pure glee when I attended a local production of the Reduced Shakespeare Company's The Ultimate Christmas Show (Abridged) a couple of years ago.  Now, I will confess that I was not overly enthralled with the script, or the local performance, but the idea of the traditional church-based Christmas show (pageant) going awry was quite amusing to me as a theatre person.  And, I was reminded of the fact that I actually took part in such activities as a teenager for several years in my church a long time ago, so I could identify with the general nature of the experience.  I will also confess that having the church sponsoring this "ultimate" Christmas show being "St. Everybody’s Non-Denominational Universalist Church, where all faiths are welcome because we’ll believe anything" was, I thought, quite amusing.  I decided that I wished it really existed and that, if it actually did, I would join up as quickly as I could.

I'm still looking for my local congregation, but I have hopes of finding it, because I do think that I believe in religious-oriented beliefs: i.e. being kind to one another; treating your neighbor as you would like to be treated; peace and love are preferable to war and hate; etc., which seem to be universal enough concepts to fit right in.  My problem with religion is accepting the notion that any ONE religion has a monopoly on such principles, or on the having access to the "true" Word of God.

I do wonder why it seems to be so important for EACH religion to establish that only IT has all of the CORRECT answers and that every other "religion" (even the ones which we accept as not awful) doesn't really understand that only WE can properly be considered the TRUE believers.  Could it be something as simple as the answer proposed by Non Sequitur?  Is it just that God is male, and that complicates things?  I confess that I rather like this gal's idea.

The same source, the Non Sequitur comic strip, also gave me a laugh by trying to point out that religious leaders, generally, could be viewed as the first people to fall into the ranks of middle management in that they don't MAKE the rules, but are supposed to be able to explain, understand and enforce them. See below...

I think what bothers me the most about many "practitioners" of a wide variety of religious traditions, sects, and/or cults, etc. which I see around me, is that they want to be known as/thought of as "religious" people, but don't seem to make much effort to actually practice the ideas which their "religion" preaches as proper very consistently in their daily lives.  Now, as indicated above, I don't follow any specific religious tradition, even if I do know a bit about several.

On the other hand, I like to think of myself as a reasonably "good" person who has rarely, if ever, gone out of his way to hurt someone else (physically or emotionally).  I may have done so, but I don't think that was my conscious intent.  I've also not tried to set myself up as the arbiter of what is good, or evil, for other people, although I do try to do what I consider to be "good," rather than "evil," and, thereby, demonstrate what I would consider to be a reasonably good example for others.  What I mostly desire is to be left alone to have my own belief system and to let you have yours.  What annoys me the most is people setting themselves up as role models when they are quite clearly NOT practicing the religious principles which they say they wish to use to judge my behavior.

I think I read something about "Judge not, lest ye be judged." somewhere.  Actually, I think it was Matt. 7, 1 in what is called the Bible.  There may be similar texts in other religious books, probably are, but I can't cite them.  I am also frequently annoyed by the "holier than thou" attitude of some regular church goers, who worry more about making the proper social impression within their church community than they do about practicing the basic tenets of their professed religion.  As I heard one religious leader say on TV not long ago after his church building was destroyed by a storm, "A building is not fundamental to religion."  I am also particularly fond of Matt. 6, 6 which would seem to suggest that the whole idea of churches packed with worshippers may be good for the sake of social appearance but might not be the most productive way for a real Christian to satisfy a desire for meaningful prayer.

Again, Non Sequitur has suggested an idea which might be useful to think about.

As one might easily guess, I don't think I believe in a physical heaven or hell, although I appreciate the traditional notion, yet I think it may be time to update the image; there may be worse things than the traditional hot coals.

Anyone who has ever stepped on a LEGO without shoes, understands the possibility of the truth of this image.  For anyone who hasn't had the experience, trust me, you do NOT wish to try it.

I suppose that I might also point out that, while I have nothing against Easter, like so many other "Christian" holidays, it is also, at least in part, an adaptation of other religious traditions.  After all, Jesus and the disciples went to Jerusalem to celebrate Passover. That means that what Christians call "the Last Supper" was (and is biblically described as) a Passover Seder.  After all, Jesus thought of himself as Jewish.

But the roots of Easter go back further and along a number of different paths.  The Greeks and Romans had a variety of spring-related seasonal renewal beliefs and ceremonies, and there were ceremonies, rites, and rituals to various goddesses of Spring (one of whom was named Eostre) in much of Europe long before any real penetration of Middle Eastern religion and, since spring has always been a time of rebirth, fertility rituals, such as May Day and Beltane also fit into the pattern of non-Christian religious occasions which are traditional at this, general time of year.  So, we have yet another example of Christianity "adopting/adapting" traditions from other religions for its use.

What's my point?  Just that, as far as I'm concerned, one is welcome to believe what they wish, but that I, for one, get VERY concerned and upset when people set out to demand that their beliefs are the only ones which should be given any sanction.  Now, I have never heard a discussion relating to these sorts of ideas which didn't, ultimately, boil down to "This is what I believe because the god I believe in says that I should do so!"  Need I point out that this is not a proof!  What it DOES prove is that someone is incapable of considering the POSSIBILITY that their beliefs are NOT the final say on TRUTH just because those beliefs SAY they are.

We are talking about BELIEFs.   Beliefs are NOT established facts.  They are simply an explanation of a way to explain the fact of our existence, etc.  They are not subject to question simply because they have no basis in fact.  That's why they are beliefs!  Personally, I have no problem with you believing in whatever you wish to.  Just grant me the right to disagree.  We can discuss our beliefs, or not, but, as long as I don't harm you through my beliefs, I don't think that you have a right to suppress mine.  As Isaac Asimov, one of my favorite writers, has been quoted as saying; "To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature and it remains premature today."

I still believe that there are questions worth asking, though I have doubts that we will ever find universally satisfactory answers to them in any religion, because all religions seem more worried about making sure that their ideas are dominant than they are about acquiring factually accurate information.  Personally, I suspect that Science might produce better answers than religions, if for no reason than that ALL religions appear to keep trying to "prove" that science is wrong.

Do I have the answers?  No, but I can live with that.  I'm going to try to do my best to act in accordance with the ideas which I believe to be of value, and I'll let you worry about your behavior.  What do I believe?  I really can't put that down in a few words, although I think the idea that Theatre can contribute to the creation of a better world is probably in there somewhere.  Perhaps that's why I like the idea of St. Everybody's.

Next time, I'll try to get out of the "pulpit" and talk a bit about something related to Shakespeare.  After all, his Birth/Death Day approaches quite soon...

LLAP

Dr. B

P.S. Don't step on any bunnies, they might be leaving you Easter eggs.  Of course, what they are leaving might be something else....

0 Comments

172 Things the Theatre Taught me II

3/28/2020

0 Comments

After the "Special Edition" of last weekend, my posting schedule is rather fouled up.  Since I posted IT out of the usual timeframe, it's thrown my "regular" cycle into disorder.  So, in order to satisfy my need for some sort of normalcy in this time of seemingly unending chaos by picking up on a comment I included in that oddball "Special Edition" and discussing a few more more of the things which the Theatre has taught me.  Some of these probably only apply to working in the Theatre, but some, I think, may have broader application.

One of my favorite professors (as an undergraduate) once said to me that a director can be wrong many times, but he/she always has to always be so with authority because nothing upsets a cast more than the director being "wishy-washy."  I think what Mr. Kinzer meant was that nothing is more destructive than to sense that your leader is thrashing around with no idea of how to approach fixing the problem.  Therefore, it's better (as a leader) to be positively incorrect several times, because that shows that you are at least actively dealing with the situation.  I think that works in most fields.  In, perhaps, simpler terms, a good director should say, "That (bit, business, line reading, whatever isn't right) just isn't working.  Next time, try it this way."  She/he should not stop after the first statement.  If the comment is worth making, it needs a conclusion.  Then, if THAT doesn't work, try the same thing with a different idea.

Dean Robert Kherberg (Yes, if you didn't know it, the former Head of the Dept. of Music eventually became the Founding Dean of the College of Fine and Performing Arts at Western.) once suggested to me that "Not all pieces of music deserve to be played more than once."  That got me to thinking about how that idea might relate to the Theatre.  So, I thought about the many productions I have been involved with in some capacity.  What I came up with was:
Most scripts are probably worth doing once!
Some scripts are worth doing many times.
Some scripts are best forgotten after a quick reading.
Think about it.  I suspect you'll agree with me.

Another thought of mine: Theatre is a TEAM sport!  Gordon Craig got it wrong.  (I do have to give Bonnie credit for inspiring this thought.) This notion MAY be too subtle for some (although I think it's true).  If you don't understand my point, keep in mind that Gordon Craig was an advocate of the idea of the "Master Artist" and the "Ubermarionette."  That may help.  I think that's why I was always (still am) more enamored with the somewhat similar ideas/theories of Adolphe Appia, which have a greater emphasis the concept of production unity.

I used to express much the same idea in teaching by suggesting that the best script, the best cast, directed by the best director are still just a bunch of people stumbling around in the dark until somebody (a “techie”) turns on the lights. We all need each other.

Some people have used Appia's ideas to justify a director or designer's "right" to "mold the material into their message."  They sometimes call this "conceptual" production.

Now, the way I learned it; a "concept" was a common understanding-agreement of the intent of the production.  I'm afraid that many of the "big concept” pieces which I have encountered derive from someone trying to do the play THEY WANT to do, rather than the one the playwright wrote.  I would suggest that if you want to write the play, write the play!  At least admit that your production is "Adapted from a play by (whoever wrote the original)."  Don't force YOUR ideas into some playwright's work, because it might sell more tickets.  Even if it isn't a violation of copyright laws, it's dishonest thinking.

I firmly believe that, in order to achieve an even generally acceptable production, First, you read the play!  This sounds simple and obvious, but that's a good deal less obvious and more complicated than it seems at first glance.  Reading a play is MUCH more than just reading the words on the page or counting up how big your part is.  I wrote a whole book/pamphlet about what that phrase means and an approach to accomplishing it!  (If you are interested, I'll send you a copy, just let me know.)  Actually, reading a play is rarely, if ever, accomplished in one pass through the text and requires a good deal of dedication, at least if the script is worth paying any attention to.  On the other hand, spending the time and effort to actually read the play thoroughly before doing anything else with it, will tend to save much time and effort later in the production process.

Finally, thinking back on the days I spent in a touring repertory company while working on my Masters' degree, I think I should point out that: "There are few situations which cannot be improved by a nap."  Having made that statement, I should include the corollary to it, which is that: "A carpeted, raked, auditorium aisle can be a perfectly acceptable place for that nap, and can even be pretty comfortable."  (I speak from experience.)  I would suggest sleeping towards the side of the aisle to avoid traffic and that you lie with your head higher than your feet, but you can choose your own favorite position.

Mostly remember to "Break a leg!"  That's what theatre people do!  And, if you do it correctly, it doesn't even hurt.

LLAP

Dr. B

P.S.  There are other things the theatre taught me, but they can wait for later.  See you in a couple of weeks when I think I'll be back on my usual schedule.  RSB

0 Comments

<<Previous

177 So We Had This Wedding!

176 Cats, Especially Our Cat, Fred.

175 Responses to COVID-19

174 Shakespeare's Birth/Death Day 2020

173 Easter 2020

172 Things the Theatre Taught me II

Archives

Categories

177 So We Had This Wedding!

176 Cats, Especially Our Cat, Fred.

175 Responses to COVID-19

174 Shakespeare's Birth/Death Day 2020

173 Easter 2020

​172 Things the Theatre Taught me II

Archives

Categories

172 Things the Theatre Taught me II