Inspired in no small part by the opera course I took, I started taking bel canto lessons from Gary (http://www.zellermusic.com/) last June.
It's been tremendous fun. I have a slightly better than two octave tenor range, really good breath control, and lousy pronunciation. It's not actually that bad, but it's something that needs to be learned. What I do have trouble with is timing. I have incredibly good imitative skills, but I can't read music very well, so while I know that on paper that note is a whole note or a sixteenth, singing it is a different matter altogether.
Gary, like me, is German, and so we work way too hard when we're together! We complement each other very nicely and get along extremely well, and most importantly we have a lot of fun. We often run over our allotted hour as the time just flies by.
One thing I appreciate about Gary's teaching style is he has no interest in teaching me many songs, but rather in teaching me to sing correctly. So far, my repertoire (so to speak) includes Caro mio ben, Sebben crudele, and most of Amarilli mia bella; we've set that one aside for the time being to start on "O Holy Night" in time for Christmas.
My wife has often despaired of me and Christmas, as I can be quite curmudgeonly about the season (mostly because I tend to completely ignore it until after my birthday, which is almost mid-December); now she gets to enjoy me releasing my inner tenor. I'll try not to drown out the rest of the singalong party we'll have this year.
O Holy Night was originally composed in French, but Gary only has it in English. That and he wants to get me singing in English as a change of pace from the so far exclusively Italian that we've been doing.
English is really a horrible language to sing in. Italian is wonderful, French and German are both good, but English... bah!
Gary has a nice future list of fun songs that will be added to my repertoire in time - the aria from Martha, the Volga Lied, the flower song from Carmen, die Forelle, and others. As long as I'm having fun, I'll keep taking lessons.
30 October 2006
Graduate School
It seems that my blogging interest waxes and wanes, but sometimes I have a few moments and the right topic arrives.
I'm currently taking a course on the Avant Garde, and it's unfolding well. It is in most respects a good course. We're looking at both art and literature of the period, and the first half of our weekly sessions is art, and the second literature.
I'm mildly disappointed that the prof has decided to give us a lecture style presentation on the art. I would have preferred to hear what my fellow classmates would have had to present about the art. The second half discussions are far more interesting because the scheduled presenter discusses the literature and then we have a proper seminar.
However, I have my two paper topics under control, although I'm behind schedule in getting them written - the deadline is the 28th of November, which is not that far away.
Several of us in the class have taken to visiting Steamworks after class, most of them from my cohort. We were chatting about what we were planning to do to finish, and during this conversation, I had an epiphany...
Neither of the January course offerings really grab me - I was contemplating the merits of the seminar on Madness Self and Society over the one on War and Society.
The epiphany was this - I should take a directed studies course from my favorite GLS prof.
He was a guest lecturer for one session in the very first course I took - he talked about Verdi's opera Otello; his passion about music rubbed off on me.
I took his course on opera last fall, and loved every minute of it. Indeed, I got my paper back and for the first time ever in my academic history took the notes and comments and revised it! I'm even considering submitting it (in a slightly revised form) for publication in an academic journal.
He a guest lecturer again this semester, talking about Debussy, Schopenauer and Stravinsky in the context of the Avant Garde.
So, I emailed him that very same epiphanous evening, and he said he'd be delighted to do something with me, provided it would be next summer, and that I get the department to ok it (he's a sessional). They did. Done and done. Win-win.
The icing on the cake is that he's teaching a course on 18th century music next fall, so it will be a fitting penultimate course in my GLS program (the final course being the graduating seminar in January 2008).
One of the things I enjoy most about school is the interaction of the live classroom. I've done directed studies before in my undergrad degree. I had my favorite philosophy professor run a one person section of Workplace Ethics for me, and my French professor allowed me to do a third year French literature course independently of the class. I've also done online courses.
However, working one-on-one with someone who is not only passionate and knowledgeable about their subject matter, but can bring out those same strong emotions in me about what they're teaching is an opportunity not to be missed. Especially in a program that is both interdisciplinary and "is designed to satisfy wider needs".
Now if only I can persuade the department to have him teach the graduating seminar too... :-)
I'm currently taking a course on the Avant Garde, and it's unfolding well. It is in most respects a good course. We're looking at both art and literature of the period, and the first half of our weekly sessions is art, and the second literature.
I'm mildly disappointed that the prof has decided to give us a lecture style presentation on the art. I would have preferred to hear what my fellow classmates would have had to present about the art. The second half discussions are far more interesting because the scheduled presenter discusses the literature and then we have a proper seminar.
However, I have my two paper topics under control, although I'm behind schedule in getting them written - the deadline is the 28th of November, which is not that far away.
Several of us in the class have taken to visiting Steamworks after class, most of them from my cohort. We were chatting about what we were planning to do to finish, and during this conversation, I had an epiphany...
Neither of the January course offerings really grab me - I was contemplating the merits of the seminar on Madness Self and Society over the one on War and Society.
The epiphany was this - I should take a directed studies course from my favorite GLS prof.
He was a guest lecturer for one session in the very first course I took - he talked about Verdi's opera Otello; his passion about music rubbed off on me.
I took his course on opera last fall, and loved every minute of it. Indeed, I got my paper back and for the first time ever in my academic history took the notes and comments and revised it! I'm even considering submitting it (in a slightly revised form) for publication in an academic journal.
He a guest lecturer again this semester, talking about Debussy, Schopenauer and Stravinsky in the context of the Avant Garde.
So, I emailed him that very same epiphanous evening, and he said he'd be delighted to do something with me, provided it would be next summer, and that I get the department to ok it (he's a sessional). They did. Done and done. Win-win.
The icing on the cake is that he's teaching a course on 18th century music next fall, so it will be a fitting penultimate course in my GLS program (the final course being the graduating seminar in January 2008).
One of the things I enjoy most about school is the interaction of the live classroom. I've done directed studies before in my undergrad degree. I had my favorite philosophy professor run a one person section of Workplace Ethics for me, and my French professor allowed me to do a third year French literature course independently of the class. I've also done online courses.
However, working one-on-one with someone who is not only passionate and knowledgeable about their subject matter, but can bring out those same strong emotions in me about what they're teaching is an opportunity not to be missed. Especially in a program that is both interdisciplinary and "is designed to satisfy wider needs".
Now if only I can persuade the department to have him teach the graduating seminar too... :-)
Global Warming
It's interesting how when something gets a price tag associated with it, suddenly there's interest.
I refer to this morning's screaming headlines that global warming will cost the global economy on the order of $7 trillion dollars.
Global warming is an interesting phenomenon in itself. If you listen to the vast majority of climate scientists, it's real and it's happening and it's going to have enormous impacts on all life on the planet.
On the flip side, governments and business leaders have been doing their level best to pay lip service to the problem, and often spend more time pooh-poohing the whole notion of global warming.
Leaving aside the dire "the sky is falling" predictions aside, last June an article appeared in Nature discussing climate change. Some scientists from ten European nations took a very deep core sample of the Antarctic ice allowing them to look at the earth's climate over the past 740,000 years.
The findings are quite telling. There have been several cold periods (ice ages) interspersed with warmer periods. A natural ebb and flow.
To wit:
The question then becomes what we should do about it. On the one hand, it seems that the climate will continue to warm up regardless of what we do.
However, it seems unreasonable that we do nothing. Pollution of our environment affects us all, and will also affect our descendants.
So, while Kyoto as written is probably a bad idea (conceptually good, but the notion of "buying" emission credits from poor countries is asinine), continued research and development of cleaner energy and alternatives to oil and other carbon emitting resources, combined with increasingly stringent regulation of allowable emissions, is a very good one.
I refer to this morning's screaming headlines that global warming will cost the global economy on the order of $7 trillion dollars.
Global warming is an interesting phenomenon in itself. If you listen to the vast majority of climate scientists, it's real and it's happening and it's going to have enormous impacts on all life on the planet.
On the flip side, governments and business leaders have been doing their level best to pay lip service to the problem, and often spend more time pooh-poohing the whole notion of global warming.
Leaving aside the dire "the sky is falling" predictions aside, last June an article appeared in Nature discussing climate change. Some scientists from ten European nations took a very deep core sample of the Antarctic ice allowing them to look at the earth's climate over the past 740,000 years.
The findings are quite telling. There have been several cold periods (ice ages) interspersed with warmer periods. A natural ebb and flow.
To wit:
The analysis has shown that the earth has undergone eight ice ages in the last 740,000 years – periods when the climate was much colder than it is today. These ice ages were interrupted by eight warmer “interglacial” periods. During the last 400,000 years, these warm periods have had a climate similar to that of today. Before that, the warm periods were cooler but lasted longer.Now, one could argue that we're merely in part of one of those warmer trends. But, and here's the rub, it seems that human activity is having some effect:
Scientists can now draw parallels with earlier episodes of climate change. Without the interference of humans, the warm period we are now experiencing, which began 12,000 years ago, should continue for at least another 15,000 years.
Analysis of the air bubbles in the ice reveals variations in the mixture of various gases in the atmosphere over time. Preliminary research indicates that today’s carbon dioxide levels are higher than at any other time in the past 440,000 years.So based on this snippet of information, it seems that we are contributing to global warming, but also that we're about mid-point of a natural warm/cool cycle of global climate.
The question then becomes what we should do about it. On the one hand, it seems that the climate will continue to warm up regardless of what we do.
However, it seems unreasonable that we do nothing. Pollution of our environment affects us all, and will also affect our descendants.
So, while Kyoto as written is probably a bad idea (conceptually good, but the notion of "buying" emission credits from poor countries is asinine), continued research and development of cleaner energy and alternatives to oil and other carbon emitting resources, combined with increasingly stringent regulation of allowable emissions, is a very good one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
