Twiddle

One Christmas when I was say around 12 to 14 years old, I got an amazing Christmas gift. I got a new cassette tape recorder.

I learned that I could hook the microphone of this recorder up to my AM radio and record all of the latest hit songs. Which I did with regularity; WRKO from Boston and WABC with Cousin Brucie were two of my favorite stations. Neil Diamond and Tommy James and the Shondelles were two of my favorite groups, but just about any 45 RPM that made number one on America's Top Forty was a good song.

The problem was that in my heart I sincerely knew that what I was doing was displeasing to God and condemning me to hell. You see, I learned from Perry F. Rockwood on the People's Gospel Hour that all rock music was sinful and would send the sinner to hell (Perry F. Rockwood was the voice of true Christianity to me as opposed to all the liberals and Catholics out there that were masquerading as Christians).

Now I sincerely did not want to go to hell. I remember once at the Princeton Maine Baptist Church that my grandmother attended that I sincerely prayed to ask Christ into my heart. The problem was that when our family drove back home to Rumford Maine that I had my tape recorder and my collection of top forty tapes; and by the time we got back to Rumford my new found commitment to Christ was history.

If only I had learned the art of asking stupid questions that has since come to me later in life. I could then have asked how do I identify this evil rock music that I might avoid it. Certainly God would identify a clear way to avoid clear evil. I have learned that if I ask this questions I would get as many answers as I would have questions. One radio station in Maine that I knew of had this all figured out. Any music that had drums in it that was not military drums was evil (I assume then that the percussion section in symphony orchestras would be evil). However this was prior to the point that pastor Herman Carroll Franklin (the radio station was WHCF by the way) got caught with the secretary and Jerry Farwell had to come up from Lynchburg to bail the church out. God apparently has changed His mind, the radio station now specializes in Christian Country and Western.

Of course now most churches that I know of have music provided by some type of worship band that at times can be much more rock music like than the Neil Diamond music I used to listen to. I could ask how a genre of music that is objectively evil would be appropriate in church. One church that I know of solves this by teaching that the spirit of the composer came through in the music and that rock music that is not Christian is objectively evil. OK that is good. Does this mean that Mozart, Beethoven, and Tchaikovsky are objectively evil (Tchaikovsky was gay BTW so I would think his music would be especially evil).

Note: not to say there is no such thing as evil music, any song that say advocates suicide, murder or other violence should be censored by intelligent parents. But anything that I have read that attempts to stigmatize a whole genre of music as evil intellectually falls on its face.

However, as a music lover I can and will criticize music for being boring, trite, and full of cliches. In other words, just being crappy music. I find that I can not listen to a popular music radio station for long without being driven up a tree by the musical garbage being played.

Now in the musical genre of rock music, I have some global suggestions that I think will help the overall quality of music that musicians in this genre create. First of all, it is very annoying when the dynamic range of this genre seems to be limited to ff - ffff. I would love to listen to a piece in this genre that goes down mp with an occasional subito pp. Beethoven and Mozart knew the expressive power of soft, I would love it if today's artists learned this.

Now I view a rock band as essentially a string quartet with an added vocal and percussion part. But why oh why does the percussion section have to dominate so in any music in this genre. A good Beethoven quartet does not need a percussion section to keep the beat, so why does a rock band need this. This is not to say that the percussion section does not have its time and place, but why does it need to be a constant. Anyway, I would suggest that any artists working in this genre study the string quartets of Beethoven and Mozart to learn how to blend multiple string instruments into a pleasing and satisfying whole.

That having been said, there are some artists that have worked in this genre that I consider to be creative and have risen above the banality that dominates this (most of the artists in this genre know only three chords per key and really could use a course in elementary and intermediate harmony). Some of the classic rock bands that I sort of like include the Beatles, Jethro Tull, the Who, Pink Floyd, Emerson, Lake and Palmer. I could come up with more given some time, but probably can not come up with more than 20.

I am not well versed on contemporary musicians who work in this genre. But I have sort of liked anyway a couple of bands (Radiohead and Phish come to mind).

Which brings me to the title of this post. Twiddle is a Vermont band out of Hubbardton Vermont that actually is creative and is quite (might I say very) good. They are one rock band out there that I will actually pay at least a modest sum of money to see (I have been to a couple of their shows at Higher Ground in Burlington). Now I trust that my bias in this matter is not affecting my judgement (the keyboard player in this band..Mr. Ryan Dempsey..goes back with me since he was a wee one in fifth grade or so. I still remember with fondness the ski trips that he, my son Stephen, and I took all over New England).

But anyway, don't take my word for it. Here is their web site where you can listen to them online. Enjoy.

PS Ryan: I wish you had not removed the song "Gatby the Great" from the web site. Of course I remember when Gatby was Ryan's beloved pet duck. I am sure that Gatby is in duck heaven by now.

Ron Paul

It is getting to the time of year that I really wish we lived in New Hampshire.

You see in Vermont, you can't watch the tube for one hour without hitting upon a commercial for Obama, Hillary, Mitt, Rudy or some other Republican or Democrat who wants to be president. Unfortunately in Vermont our vote doesn't even count. In the Presidential race you can just about chalk up Vermont as a blue state (if it were ever to be competitive you would be in the midst of a Republican landslide in which my vote still doesn't matter). And we have a dinky presidential primary that nobody cares about. So we in Vermont get blessed with all of these political commercials that aren't directed at us. How annoying.

Ah New Hampshire. That is where your vote counts. First of all it is a classic swing state (trending red but whatever). And they have the first presidential primary where a state of what 600K or 700K folks have a way disproportionate role of choosing the next President. I would think that at the least if we in Vermont have to put up with all of these political commercials, that we at least should have a primary that somebody cares about.

Which brings me to Ron Paul. For the last month or so (to the annoyance of my family), I have driven my green suby with a Ron Paul bumper sticker. This is the first political bumper sticker of any stripe that I have allowed to grace any of my cars..and the last since I think we had "American Abortion - Hitler Would Have Loved It" that I think we got from my grandfather who got it I think from Jimmy Swaggart ministries. That was back in the 1980s.

I got the bumper sticker while in downtown Burlington from a Ron Paul stand set up on church street. It was raining and I really didn't have time to talk to the campaign volunteers, but I did manage to scrounge a bumper sticker.

Now politically I have one absolute. I will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate (now at times I might vote for a pro-choice candidate like our governor as the lesser of two evils, but never a pro-abortion candidate. Maybe a second, I will not vote for a candidate that supports gay marriage, but these candidates are rare and to be honest the gay issues are much less important to me than the abortion issue (killing innocent human life is much more weighty than unjustified governmental preferences). I am more interested in gay issues from the perspective of protecting the rights of folks and religions who have dissenting views than in stopping a couple of gay guys from getting a civil union (I can really see on down the line the United States becoming like Sweden where pastors get thrown in jail for preaching a sermon against homosexuality).

That having been said I have a number of political preferences (a preference is something I can change my mind on).
* I really value character. It would be a hard sell to vote for somebody I consider a slime ball.
* I prefer small, unobtrusive government to overpowering government.
* I want my government to be very conservative when it comes to sending our sons and daughters off to war to get killed. Only if it is well justified please (Iraq is not).
* I like fiscal responsibility. If I have to balance my checkbook, I would think the government should do the same.
* I would like a very small federal government. Defer as much as makes sense to the states please. Leave hot-button issues up to the states.
* In the same vein, please appoint judges that will defer to the states. If the good people in the state of Mississippi want to ban abortion and if there is nothing in the constitution that specifically allows abortion, then let the good people of Mississippi do what they want. It's their state. The same BTW works with Massachusetts and gay marriage. Just don't impose gay marriage on the other 49 states without their consent.
* Big changes have unexpected consequences. Work incrementally please.

As you can see, my political philosophy is conservative / libertarian (in fact I like to call myself a pro-life libertarian..I can explain that or a small "l" libertarian). Now pure libertarianism takes some stuff to extremes that I am not comfortable with (legalization of drugs for example), but there is much basis for agreement anyway.

Ron Paul (Libertarian presidential candidate in 1984 or 1988) is the only Presidential candidate that is an identical match on my absolutes and all of my preferences and is a near match on my philosophy.

I can eliminate the Democratic candidates right off for being pro-abortion. I am trying to decide whether Rudy is eliminated on a mixture of pro-abortion and general slimeball (plus being a Yankee fan does not help). The remaining Republicans are mixed on my preference.

BTW, if Ron Paul were not in the race, I think I would be supporting John McCain. Although he and I disagree on Iraq, he has earned enough respect from me over his career so that I can forgive him (and he was right on the surge). All of the other Republicans..meh at at best now (this includes Huckabee whom I am deferring drinking the kool-aid on right now just because he is evangelical Christian..I did that on Carter and Bush 2.0).

And I really wish Sam Brownback were still running.

Pressing Theological Issue: Life on Other Planets

Some theological issues bore me to sleep. As a new Christian at Eastman School of Music, I was the only Pentecostal / Charismatic Christian in my Intervarsity Christian Fellowship in a sea of (what I thought to be) heretics. As such I had my fill of setting these folks straight with the truth as I learned it from my home church on pressing issues such as eternal security, the second coming of Jesus, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. So thirty years later, when I encounter these issues I immediately zone out.

But last Tuesday at church, I began to wonder about what I consider to be a more important theological issue. As a Star Trek and Star Wars fan, I can't help but wondering whether there is life on planets far, far away.

This was of course prompted by a message by our pastor concerning Jesus as the light of the world. To illustrate this message, he spoke some about the science of light and showed on the projector a picture by the Hubble Space telescope. This picture showed pictures of galaxies 12 billion light years away that appeared as small dots to the telescope.

Now of course this also touches on the great theological issue on the age of the earth. I know some folks insist the earth can be no older than 7000 years or so according to the Bible. Galaxies 12 billion light years pose no problem to this theology, God just created the light in transit so that they only seem 7000 years or so.

Of course I would then ask whether this is within God's character to plant scientific evidence that suggests the universe is at least 12 billion years old while at the same time clearly speaking in His word that it is only 7000 years or so old. It would seem to me that this is a rather deceptive thing for God to do. Of course the only other alternative then is maybe the age of the universe is not as clearly laid out in the Bible as some would have me believe.

Anyway, according to my calculations, galaxies that are 12 billion light years away are 12,000,000,000 * 186,000 * 84,000 * 365 * 5280 * 12 inches away. According to my calculations this comes to 1,907,805,892,608,000,000,000,000,000,000 inches. We could then round this to 1.9 dectillion inches away. That is a lot of inches.

Of course then the question comes, given the vast number of inches in the universe, whether there are any other sets of inches that support life.

Now when I was in Junior High, I used to listen to the People's Gospel Hour by pastor Perry F. Rockwood on the radio. Once my friend mailed away and got a little pamphlet "Youth Wants the Answers" which had the answers to this and other great important questions straight from the Bible. Besides learning that women had to wear dresses and that men had to keep their hair off the ears and that everyone (especially Catholics) who did not go to a Bible believing fundamentalist church was going straight to hell, I also learned that it was impossible for there to be life on other planets because God did not say there was in the Bible. This must be the same school of thought that you can't have pianos in church because God did not mention pianos in the Bible.

Anyway it makes sense to me that God does not need to tell us everything that He is doing in the Bible. So therefore I can not eliminate the possibility that there is life on other planets. All that I know is that if there is life on other planets, God did not see that it is that important for us on earth to know about it.

But this leads to questions about intelligent life. One thing that I do know is that the universe is governed by a triune God in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). It does make me question whether there is other fallen life on other planets, because then would not God the Son have had to die for the sins of fallen life on other planets. Would this go against the Scriptures that God the Son died once for the sins of the world. Or would God the Son have died several times on several planets for the sins of several fallen races. This seems improbable to me.

Maybe satan is only in operation on planet earth and any other planets are perfect planets with no fallen races (that I would like to see). Under this theory the Star Trek Klingons and the Star Wars Darth Vader would be an impossibility because every where else would be perfect.

Anyway, these are the pressing theological issues I like to thing about.

Radiation Likely in my Future

Lessons learned..

If you have any qualms or reservations on how your medical treatment is going, do not hesitate to get a second opinion.

And..when seeking a second opinion (that is in the nature of a consultation) have your questions written down. Your doctor will spend the necessary time with you if your questions are written.

Yesterday, I had a second opinion with a radiation oncologist. What I learned was..

Given my stage of cancer, there really are no best practices. There just are not enough data points to formulate best practices for stage 3a prostate cancer with a very low (but not undetectable) PSA level.

Still, given my PSA level and trends, it is probable that a PSA 0.1 is indicative of some ongoing cancer left after the surgery. However there is no way of confirming whether this is actually the case.

Furthermore, given my gleason (3+4), slow rate of PSA rise, and post-op pathology report, there is a good chance that whatever cancer is left is confined to the prostate bed. Of course there are no guarantees this is the case. Furthermore there is no reliable test that can be used to determine whether the cancer has moved (bone scans generally read negative anyway for very low PSA levels).

So I could conceivably have radiation therapy when (a) there is no cancer in which case it is a waste and I would be risking the side effects of radiation for no reason (b) the cancer has already moved, in which case it makes no sense because the radiation will not cure it.

However, since radiation represents my last hope for cure, these are chances I am willing to take. Remember that prostate cancer is way down there on my list of preferred deaths (my #1 preferred death is being assumed into heaven like Elijah (and Mary if you are Catholic) were but my wife is skeptical on whether my life has been on par with Elijah (or Mary). So assuming my #1 preferred death will not happen, my #2 preferred death is dying in my sleep at age 95. Actually the idea of being raptured sounds pretty good also, but I personally find most end-times theology very highly speculative (for grins and giggles read the 1970s version of the Late Great Planet Earth sometime).

Note: I'm not Catholic, but I also have no particular angst against Catholicism. Regarding the assumption of Mary, I can't say for sure she wasn't assumed (God has not recorded everything He ever did in the Bible). All I know is that God hasn't definitely shown it to us through the Bible, and therefore I am under no obligation to believe it. So as much as I know, the assumption of Mary is one of those nice extra-Biblical stories (the idea of Mary being assumed to heaven does sound nice) that may or may not be true. But anyway forgive my theological digressions here..

The net is that since radiation represents my last hope of being cured of this disease (everything after that point is about extending your life a few years in hopes that you die of something else), I would prefer to err on being overly aggressive.

I asked the doctor what he would do if he were me. He said to wait and have one more PSA test. If it rises to 0.2, by all means he would have the radiation therapy. If it stays at 0.1, to him it would be borderline, but since this is the last curative treatment available, he would still have the radiation. He would only put it off if it falls to 0.0.

I think the doctor's reasoning is sound and that will be the course of action I will take.

So What Are You Working on

Working on piano music that I love.

Mozart Sonata in B flat K. 281. A nice early piano sonata and possible first round amateur piano competition piece. Pretty well complete.

Mozart Sonata in C major K 309. A middle period piano sonata and possible second round amateur piano competition piece. Just starting. Both Mozart sonatas count towards my goal of learning all Mozart piano sonatas by the time I croak. These two put me over the hump at 10 of 19.

Schumann Papillons Op. 2. A delightful piece by one of my favorite early Romantic composers. I like Schumann as well (if not more) than Chopin. This is a piece revived from my college days. Possible middle round amateur piano competition piece.

Chopin Nocturne in D-flat Op 27 No 2. This is a nocturne first learned as a Freshman with Miss Faini. This is the only piece that I played well (without performance panic) at a jury in my tenure at Eastman, and have played it many times since. I love this piece. If I decide on a tried-and-true first round amateur piano competition piece, this would be it.

Chopin Polonaise in C# minor Op 26 no 1. In working as an accompanist for BFA St. Albans, I have been priviliged to hear wonderful student pianists. A number of their performances have inspired me to learn their music (see Ginastera Danzas Argentinas). This is also one such piece. I think this would complement the above as another first round amateur piano competition piece.

Brahms Rhapsody in G Minor Op 79. Brahms is another of my all time favorite Romantic period composers. This is a possible first round amateur piano competition piece also..we will see.

Bach: Prelude and Fugue in G# Minor Book 1. I always like to do some Bach somewhere in amateur competitions. We will see if I can fit this in.

Beethoven Piano Sonata in E-flat Opus 7. I always like to be working on one longer stretch type of piece, and this is it, a difficult (are there any easy ones) early Beethoven piano sonata. This would be a perfect third round amateur piano competition piece.

Chopin Scherzo in B-flat minor opus 31. I am resting this piece now but could revive it. I am considering making my first round piece on the next amatuer piano competition a stretch piece. This is based on the way my last competition worked out in which my first round stretch piece (Ginastera Danzas Argentinas) was better than my "easier" piece (Granados Spanish Dance) in my estimation. In fact I think if my whole program had been on the same level as the difficult third dance (which rocked) I could have advanced. However, it wasn't and I didn't. Them's the breaks. But anyway, maybe an opening round stretch piece would be good.

Wasting your cancer

I found this website on wasting your cancer.

It was written by John Piper, a Christian (Baptist pastor from Minnesota I believe) and a fellow prostate cancer survivor. Excellent read.

It's That Time of Year Again

Baseball winter meetings.

Where the rumour mill is running rampant concerning my beloved 2007 world champion Boston Red Sox. Supposedly they are the front runners for acquiring the best pitcher in baseball, Johan Santana of the Minnesota Twins. The cost would be 3-4 near major league prospect, plus signing him to a new contract of say $25 million per year.

The trend lately has been that the Red Sox make one big splash about this time. Last year (while I was in the hospital) they won the rights for Dice-K Matsuzaka, the best pitcher in Japan, by shelling out $51 million or so in change to the Seibu Lions. Two years ago they acquired post season hero Josh Beckett from the Florida Marlins for uber-prospect Hanley Ramirez and absorbing the albatross contract of Mike Lowell. Well it was albatross at the time (coming off a terrible year), but of course he rebounded, became the World Series MVP, and earned a raise up to 12.5 million per year for 3 years.

So I have been busy checking Sons of Sam Horn hourly for updates. The Twins and Red Sox now are bickering over the prospects to be sent to the Twins. Will we get Santana? Stay Tuned.