The Joy of Music, (I)

Music is an interesting phenomenon.

It's easy enough that many individuals have found that after learning a few chords, they can make their own music.  And truthfully, some of it isn't half bad.

But then...there's the serious stuff.  

As any highly-trained classical musician will tell you, there are compositions that will keep you up at night due to their complexity.  One practise session won't do it, so the musician gathers their instrument - piano, violin, voice, or other - and gets to work trying to get a handle on the piece.  Repetition, deep thought, repetition, frustration, repetition, pursuit of perfection, repetition; the hall marks of the professional musician.  Being able to go over the same sections of a work, over and over, without the requisite bouts of fear and yes, even anger at times, is the hallmark of what greatness will finally occur.

And here's a thought...

Think of a symphony orchestra.  Each member is a highly-trained musician who has spent countless hours perfecting what they do, almost always in solitude and the expense of giving up some perhaps more instantly-gratifying activity.  (Which professional musician hasn't yearned to go outside on a beautiful summer day, instead remaining indoors just to perfect that pesky trill passage?)

Now imagine 40, 50, 60 or more of these musicians gathered in one place to play a single work.  The symphony concert has begun.

Think of the number of accumulated, behind-the-scenes hours of work that are present.  If each person carries a minimum of 10,000 hours to achieve their professional status, well then, you do the math.

Of course it is true that very many other activities require the same amount of work.  But hopefully there aren't too many amateur doctors out there like there are amateur musicians, "performing" on their own."

Next time you hear any type of music, think of the total number of hours that are hidden from view.

Is It Worth Your Time?

As the famous American, Benjamin Franklin, once observed, there are only two certainties in life: death and taxes.

The latter for most of us may be more appealing than the former, even though it can be more frustrating.  (Afterall, once you're gone, your frustration level drops to nothing, right?)

In regards to taxes, let's think for a minute of what they really are.  Taxes are your hard-earned money; but looking at it another way, taxes are a taking of your limited time here on earth.

Time spent in labour is necessary, and those of us who work a full-time job do so so that we can provide for ourselves and our families. Nothing new there.  Most people have no real resentment performing even unpleasant tasks at our jobs if it benefits the family.  But can the same be said if it benefits the government and their spurious priorities?

I am not an anarchist, but I do believe government has a sacred trust to be careful how it spends our money.  It is my belief that I can do more for myself than others can do for me except in specialized circumstances such as medical care, security, fire, and other areas where government control has shown their expertise.  And I know that this costs money.

In this case, I don't mind giving up some of my limited time on earth, exchanging it into money, and giving it to the government.

And that is my point: how much of your time in a labour environment are you willing to give up?  Money that could actually go into your household?

From 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. you leave your family, drive in heavy traffic, arrive to fulfill your quota or what constitutes "work" and then leave.  Next payday, the government takes your time in the form of taxes for about a third of your day.  (So from 8:00 to 10:45 a.m. you worked for "free.")  Then there's more "taking" when you fill up your car, make purchases, or give to the next level of government.  How does that feel, especially when you can't afford a home, a car, or even a once-in-a-lifetime trip?

We all have to work for the government but it can be depressing to think that one-third (or more) of your life's time is being given to the faceless levels of government.  In order for this to make sense, our taxes have to be seen as having some worth.  Do they?  Or could you do a better job with the time-to-money activity you engage in everyday?

When you spend your life working, who should get the benefit of your time?

Style Over Substance

In politics, it can seem sometimes that the only factor that matters is how a campaign is run.

If you smile, avoid saying too many dumb things, and attend enough events surrounded by many people, you might get enough of the common folks to vote for you, even if underneath, some of your policies may leave something to be desired by some voters.

Case in point: Alberta is currently in the midst of a provincial election.  The choice is a conservative or a socialist party for government. 

Many people, as well as some newspapers, support whoever runs the most error-free campaign.  Skeletons that are sometimes long-buried are resurrected and trotted out in the bright sun of the election. And truth be told, some of these should be brought out.

The New Democratic Party for example, seems to have a number of pro-communist candidates in its ranks including Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse (Edmonton-Rutherford), Rob Loyola (Edmonton-Ellerslie), Girinder Brar (Calgary-North), and others(!), some who advocate an end to capitalism.

Much of this gets little to no news space in the mainstream media often because communism was never given the same weight as Nazism as a great evil.  That's extremely unfortunate since Communism's track record of death is 125 million... and still counting, unfortunately.

Am I suggesting that the NDP is a covert communist party?  No.  It is not.  Yet extremists seem to lurk within its ranks and membership and nothing is being done about it.

The United Conservative Party's Premiere Danielle Smith has said some really dumb things, mostly hyperbolic in nature, but dumb nevertheless.

But she has never taken overtly extremist stances on anything. No new taxes and it would be business as usual.  

Some have suggested that she advocates some type of user-fee for medical services, but his is false.  Plus it would be political suicide.  (As an aside, I would be fine with a small fee at hospitals if it kept people with colds and flus out of emergency rooms, saving it for true life-threatening situations.)

So, the NDP might win.  Their campaign has been slicker, their leader has made fewer gaffs, and truth be hold, Rachel Notley does have a better smile than Danielle Smith.

But the substance of a 30+ day campaign should not be the only criteria upon which to base your vote.  Look under the hood.  See who's running and what the policies are and whether you be happy with at least four years of their programs.

This same NDP was the government over four years ago.  Soon after, folks indicated that they had voter's remorse.

If they win again, will it be any better this time?

Hybrid Canadians - How Odd it is!

Canadians are in a unique place when it comes to measurement.  Officially metric since 1975, we still have an abundance of imperial measurements creeping into our daily lives, no doubt because we live next door to the one of only three countries that still uses the old system ("Myanmar" or "Burma" and "Liberia" are the others).

Think about it.  When we hear the weather forecast, the temperature is in Celsius and we seem to be good with that.  In fact, trips to our southern neighbour can get a bit confusing when we hear that the high for the day is going to be 61 Fahrenheit.  Should we bring a sweater or not?  But, if we know that that's 16 C, the more cold temperature-sensitive among us might just want to bundle up a bit after all.

But what about cooking?  It seem that a number of folks at least still use Fahrenheit when adjusting their oven temperature.  Afterall, we all know what 400 F does when cooking a roast don't we?  Would 204 C be just as familiar?

What about feet and inches?  Us older folks still prefer to know our height in that way.  Same when measuring the size of that new bookshelf or TV (we want a 65-inch flat screen, not a 165 centimetre one lol). Yet, on a larger scale, metric takes over.

In our travels, we use kilometres per hour (km/h) not miles per hour (MPH). A lot of modern cars will allow you to switch systems with the push of a button.  That's a welcome piece of technology! 60 km/h is obviously a lot slower than 60 MPH, which, if you forget, will find you quickly learning all the latest swear words and hand gestures on America's superfast highways.

For weights, it seem to be half and half.  We're okay buying 2.25 kilograms of sugar, and then adding a half a cup to our recipe.  Buying milk by the litre is no problem and we'll pour ourselves an 8 ounce cup to go with our lunch.  Meat and produce from the local grocery can still be tricky so a lot of them print both, although metric seems to have "won" at the deli counter.

There are other examples. Acres instead of hectares.  With lumber, we're all familiar with 2 x 4's which are supposed to be inches even though they're really not.  Or that 4 by 8 foot piece of plywood, which it actually is.

So the older folk who have learned the metric system later in life will probably stick with their hybrid measurement system for the rest of their days.  The young folk who have been brought up in metric, will probably tip the balance more in favour of that system, being aware that that won't fly when they take that trip to the States.

Yet in spite of the odd nature of how we blend the two systems, it seems to work for us. THAT is Canadian resilience and adaptability,

Happy New Year!

Nuremberg 2.0

One of the very few disadvantages of the fall of Communism in Europe in 1989 is that the true extent of the heinousness of this system was never fully revealed.  The enslavement and annihilation of people, the gulags, and the evilness of the regimes of the past were relegated to secondary status over the elation of the actual fall.

And that's too bad.

After World War II, the Nazis were put on public trial at Nuremberg to answer for their behavior.  They had to account for the suffering, killing, and destruction of Europe and take responsibility for upsetting world peace.  Many of these leaders were hanged, and aside from the acquittals of three minor participants, the rest were given prison sentences, some of them substantial.

After its collapse, Communism was never given such an airing out.

Instead of being held accountable for conditions and actions that often matched or even surpassed that of the Nazis, some communist leaders around 1989 suffered few consequences.  For example, East Germany's Erich Honegger was never arraigned, in spite of his role in the secret police, the "Stasi."  His successor, Egon Krenz, got only four years.  (Granted, some exceptions did occur, like Nicholai Ceausescu's execution in Romania.)

So what should have happened?

Nuremberg 2.0.  Communist leaders should have been forced to stand trial in front of an international tribunal.  The ruthlessness of their actions should have been on display for all the whole world to see.

So... how bad was communism?

The current estimate is that 125 million people perished under that system.  This number does not include those who survived but whose lives were shattered by poverty, abuse and the gulags.  With China, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, and Laos still involved with this system, the numbers are still going up.

The lack of an international trial had another side effect. Today, Communists are still blatantly active, even in democratic countries (think of "Antifa" in the U.S.).  Somehow, being a Communist has never carried the stigma that the Nazis so rightfully have had to endure.  

Anyone who pretends that communism isn't as bad is a liar and deceiver.  

And they need to held to account for their beliefs.

The Black Book

I am currently reading a remarkable book entitled, The Black Book of Communism which contains contributions by Stephane Courtois, Nicolas Werth and others.  The thing that makes this book so remarkable to me is one of the themes that pervades the tome. 

Communism asserts that it the state and its leader(s) are more important than anything else in the world. The state is more important than individuality, free expression, a free press, family, friends, or even God.  If you do not adhere to this, then you are "an enemy of the state," a "bandit," or even a "parasite" and you have no business living comfortably in this world.  Perhaps even a gulag awaits!

Communism is an extreme form of government and a dangerous one at that.  Perhaps the most dangerous.  To date, it has claimed in excess of 100 million lives (!).  

Diluted types of this left-wing style of government is sometimes called "social democracy" or "socialism," among others.  In the latter forms, most do not advocate imprisonment, or worse, for opposing their ideology.  

Yet is it concerning how convinced how many socialists are that they are right about just about everything.  If you're not one of them, you may be ridiculed, censored, or even harmed physically.

However, they are not right.  Placing the state over the individual is never the right thing.  

Censoring is antithetical to democracy and freedom, yet is happens all the time on social media, university campuses, and the printed medium.  And it's made all the worse when they are government-sanctioned.

Communism may be thousands of miles away from North America but its weaker sibling has already made itself known throughout much of the continent.  Beware of what it stands for.  Stand fast against the thuggery of the anti-democratic; makes sure freedom remains alive and well.

ABBA "Voyage" - A Review

 I have read some rather disparaging reviews from professional critics about this album.  They know not of what they speak, at least in this case.

Oh, and I'm a critic too, should that matter.  Maybe not published, but I have all the letters after my name that suggests I should know what I'm talking about, and speak I do!  I also write and produce pop music.

The album is ABBA's first in 40 years.  And it is remarkable.  As usual, the music arrangements are the gold standard to which others should aspire.  Lyrically, the music is representative of lives lived and there's nothing wrong with that.  And the women's voices - still beautiful and emotional after all these years.

Having previewed "I Still Have Faith in You" and "Don't Shut Me Down" on YouTube as singles, I was relieved when I heard the old ABBA was essentially back.  Some have maligned this group for not sticking with current musical trends and all I can say is thank goodness for that!  There is, in my opinion, not much worthy in current pop trends that should be emulated, and Benny, Bjorn and the gals had to good sense to stick with their winning formula.  

Some critics have said there's no new "Dancing Queen" or "Voulez Vous" equivalent in the new tracks.  That is debatable, but whether or not its there is irrelevant.  ABBA  members are now in their 70s and their music shouldn't be expected to necessarily light the dance floor.  They've been there, done that.  What they have opted to do instead is provide listeners with a well-thought-out, well-crafted piece of musical art which reflects their style and their age.

"Voyage" may not grab you at first listening.  It is not typical pop-music ear candy that is full of glitter and empty calories.  Rather, it is an album that seems to get better with every listening, much like viewing an old film.  You may surprise yourself at how often you end up randomly humming a melody from "Voyage" whether you want to or not.

It has been said that this is ABBA's final goodbye.  I hope not.  The group has exhibited a talent and maturity that has stood the test of time.  ABBA, let your record sales speak for themselves - people still want you!  Keep the music coming!