Chorus - Mr. Nemhauser

I realized, to my chagrin, that I have two weeks left in this semester and there are still four classes about which I must write, including two that don’t continue into the spring. Oops. Anyway, on with the show:

This is both a fabulous and an annoying class. It is, literally, a choir. We spend an hour and a half, twice a week, rehearsing choral music and will be giving a concert in April. It is required for two years for all piano, composition, and voice majors, so – thanks primarily to the last of these – we have the potential to sound quite incredible. Certainly superior to any choir I’ve ever experienced previously. However, in practice many people don’t treat it seriously. The only saving grace is that we have a phenomenal director. In fact, during the beginning of term when he was absent for two weeks, the entire thing almost crashed down in flames.
Mr. Nemhauser is doubtless one of the pillars of this school. He has been here forever, and teaches all of the non-academic voice-major classes. His conducting itself is perhaps not quite on the level of a professional choir director, but his command of the rehearsal is incredible. He tolerates no ‘monkey business,’ knows languages, choir vocal technique, and practice methods inside out. Though the point of the class is probably primarily to have players of non-orchestral instruments still involved in some sort of large ensemble, I’m sure we are also expected to pick up rudiments of conducting, so I am effectively learning how to direct a choir in every way short of majoring in it. I also get to play the piano accompaniment on several pieces.

Last in the series

Force is an old paradigm, a thing that comes to us as an instinct inherited from our animal ancestors. For all of human history he who possesses the bigger stick, the longer sword, the heavier bomb has always been in ultimate command. This is a barbaric and uncivilized method of interaction; it requires neither truly intelligent thought nor any attempt to understand a situation. Though the theory of deterrence (“yes, you are free to hit me with that rock but be aware that my friend here will drop a tree on your head as you do it”) often proves to be sufficient for purposes of conflict resolution, men who have nothing left to lose are far less likely to be dissuaded by the threat of retaliation alone. Force can drive them underground for a time, but eventually they will bubble up again through the cracks, stronger than ever, like water through sand.
The way to the hearts and minds of men is through loyalty and respect. One could argue that fear – fear of retribution – itself is a form of respect, but, if so, this is regard built on corrupt foundations; true admiration does not cause men to be forever searching for an opportunity to to turn the tables. The effect of forceful intervention is frequently to cause hatred and ignite a simmering resentment. A man on the losing side of a physical confrontation will feel that he has not been treated fairly because there is rarely any form of compromise involved in the resolution.

Force occurs in many facets of life, but the variety which involves organized and intentional violence usually can be divided into two types. In the past force was often used as a tool by countries that were approximately equal in power, but in our modern world of imbalanced power it more commonly appears as something closer to a matchup of David and Goliath. Often these conflicts go back generations, even centuries, and the roles of strong and weak may be reversed on many occasions over time. A cycle like this will continue forever, much as a pendulum in a clock kept always wound, until either the losing side is entirely annihilated or the stronger one realizes the only way to break the oscillation is to offer an olive branch. It is, however, very difficult to erase and entire race or country, and groups in the superior position rarely wish to admit that the solution requires humility on their part. When the positions reverse, which frequently occurs, the newly-superior group usually feels justified in extracting revenge for past injustices. Objectively this is an understandable reaction, but it falls back into the most primitive of systems: that of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
We, as intelligent and rational beings, must attempt to expose the root of these festering conflicts. Instead of forever trying to treat only the symptoms, we should find the original cause and develop a solution for that first. After this, the house of shadows will collapse as both sides discover that the original reason for fighting is not nearly so serious as they had believed. When everyone realizes that hostilities are often caused not by our differences but by the things we have in common, we will have far fewer opportunities to even consider force as an option. This is something that we as a race must do if we ever wish to see beyond the ends of our collective flat feet.