Here is a first lesson from the Australian Bridge Federation.
Here is a very basic but very clear introduction to bridge, starting with identifying the suites but moving along afterwards.
Ryan's Mammoth Collection was published in Boston in 1883, containing 1050 reels, jigs, hornpipes, strathspeys, etc. In 1940 it was repackaged and marketed as Cole's 1000 Fiddle Tunes (also known as The Fiddler's Bible). Finally, in 1995 it was once again published, this time reverting to the Ryan's Mammoth title. Whichever form it has taken, this collection has been an invaluable store of tunes for countless fiddlers and other musicians, and it is a remarkable snapshot of the repertoire of 19th century America.
so say
http://www.nigelgatherer.com/books/ryan.html
"The Massasoit Hornpipe" appeared in that collection. It was common to name hornpipes for politically important figures, and Massasoit certainly qualified. The melody, however, can be traced back to a Scottish strathspey called "The Back of the Change House," which appears in a manuscript of William Clarke of Feltwell, who was active ca. 1820-1840.
http://www.maryhumphreys.co.uk/William_Clarke.php
Here's the tune from Ryan's Mamoth Collection.
The story of how the the mammoth collection came into existence recounted by Andrew Kuntz at The Fiddler's Companion site.
http://www.ibiblio.org/fiddlers/ryan1.htm
chorus: I believe
I'll go back home (3 times)
An' acknowledge I done wrong.
When I was in my father's house,
I was well-supplied;
I made a mistake in doin' well,
An' now I'm dissatisfied.
When I was in my father's house,
I had peace all the time;
But when I left home an' went astray,
I had to feed the swine.
When the prodigal son first left home,
He was feelin' happy an' gay;
But he soon found out a riotous life
Was more than he could pay.
When I was in my father's house,
I had bread enough to spare;
But now I am naked an' hungry, too,
An' I am ashamed to go back there.
When I left home I was in royal robes,
An' sumptuously fed;
But I soon got ragged an' hungry, too,
An' come back home so sad.
When I get home I'll confess my sins,
And father's love embrace;
I'm no more worthy to be called thy son,
I'll seek a servant's place.
When his father saw him comin',
He met him with a smile;
He threw his arms around him
"Here comes my lovin' child!"
He spake unto his servants-
"Go kill the fatted calf;
An' call my friends an' neighbors,
My son has come at last."
His older son got jealous
An' he began to say:
"You did more for my brother,
Who left an' went away."
He spake unto his elder son-
It was with an humble mind-
"Son, you have always been with me,
An' all I have is thine."
They met together rejoicing,
I imagine it was fine;
The old man he got happy,
An' he was satisfied in mind.
Words and music in Grissom, M. A., 1930, The Negro Sings, New Heaven, p. 36-36.
Listed as a spiritual in the Cleveland Index. This song is apparently the source for Dock Bogg's "Prodigal Son." …Grissom states "This is an excellent version of the many Negro songs about the Prodigal Son."
Here are the Davis Sisters from Philadelphia. This is gospel music.
Here is a version by Jack Kelly and His South Memphis Jug Band. This is the blues
And the great bluesman John Lee Hooker. Notice how the father is now "my baby" and we get the classic "Baby, take me back" theme of the blues.
Here is the Reverend Rickey Jackson during a worship service. This is literally a capella (as in a chapel, that is to say, without instruments).
Here is a version by Borrowed Time. Note the audience reaction to the solo.
Here is the song with two great divas of opera: Kathleen Battles and Jessye Norman. James Levine is the conductor.
Here us a version by Gregg Allman
House parties. Best fun you can get. Watch the video and consider the feelings evinced by the dancers and watchers. Where is this happening? When? How long have these people lived in this neighborhood? The stepping here is called clogging, as opposed to tap dancing. You find it all along the Appalachia mountains from Cape Breton to Maine and New Hampshire down to the South.
In the eighteenth century, dancing masters traveled round to the great houses and instructed the gentry in social dancing. You needed a big room and some musicians. Meanwhile, the ordinary folk had their dances in the kitchens and barns.
Here is a strathspey, which is a sort of reel, being taught in a studio, but you can imagine a ballroom setting, like this one at Blair Castle in Scotland.
This next one is not a house party but a demonstration by the Edinburgh University dance team. The dress is not traditional, but the dances are typical of the sets done in the country "houses" where the gentry danced in familiar surroundings.
I guess you could call this "bluegrass" or maybe "old-timey"--it's awesome either way. Watch the video and consider the feelings evinced by the dancers and watchers. Where is this happening? When? How long have these people lived in this neighborhood? The stepping here is called clogging. You find it all along the East Coast from Canada down to the American southland.
Up in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia or New Scotland, they have been dancing these steps to their Scottish (and some French and some Irish) fiddle tunes in kitchens and living rooms for a long time. In the big houses in Scotland you got a ballroom and a ball. Ordinary folk could still enjoy social dancing. Here, the old-timers in the club or bar get together for some stepping. A good way to watch this is to pick someone to follow and try to imagine doing it yourself. If a smile doesn't come to you, I don't know what. Notice, too, that there is one young couple dancing with the older folk. There was not a separate "youth culture" with its own media outlets, gear, outlook, etc.
Of course there is no evidence that suicidal students might be
dangerous to others. None at all. It is just guns that cause the
trouble... So interesting that the academic writer here considers only the possibility that the school might be sued for not providing needed medical care. The possibility of mass murder, of course, may not even be mentioned, lest such a suggestion offend a powerful lobby.
Removing Suicidal Students From Campus: The Significance Of Recent Changes In Federal Policy
The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) made significant changes in policy that leave colleges and universities in a catch-22 when managing suicidal students on campus or addressing requests for re-entry for students who continue to struggle with active suicidal thoughts. Remove these students from campus through a forced medical withdrawal and face an ADA lawsuit for discrimination against the student. Leave the student on campus struggling with suicidal ideations and be sued for not having the services available to adequately treat the student's medical condition.
Found under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the revised regulation now deems it unlawful to involuntarily separate, suspend, or expel a student on the basis of self-harmful or suicidal behaviors.
As suicide continues to be a leading cause of death among U.S. college
students age 18-24, this new regulation leaves schools and
administrators struggling with some important questions regarding both
institutional legal risk and student safety:
So Prince Charles will control the press office now? Hmmmm....
But just look at the pictures The Mirror chooses. At least they like the queen. But healthy royals are fair game.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-hands-over-reigns-prince-3039892
Queen hands over the reigns to Prince Charles - historic step closer to a new king
Her Majesty to hand duties over to Prince Charles in an historic job share which experts say marks a gentle succession
Next in line: Prince Charles and CamillaIt is being dubbed the “gentle succession” – as the Queen gradually begins to relinquish some of her traditional duties as monarch.
As she approaches her 88th birthday in April after almost 62 years on the throne, she has agreed to hand over part of her workload in a historic “job-share” arrangement with Prince Charles.
In a royal first, he will be taking on more head of state-style responsibilities as
the Palace starts to make tentative plans for his eventual succession.
Courtiers yesterday described the softly-softly move as “wise” – and “just plain common sense”.
The first sign of the partial power transfer will be the merging this week of the Queen and Charles’s press offices.
In future any announcements concerning the monarch and her 65-year-old
eldest son will now come from the same source. Palace sources insist the switch will be entirely seamless.
Princes William and Harry will also play their part in the new set-up, with both assuming far more responsibility since they relinquished their military roles.
Getty Images
Passing the baton: The Queen
One aide said: “This is about passing the baton to the next generation.
“The Prince of Wales’s diary is chock-full. Even he realises with the best will in the world he can’t go on like that.
“This is not going to be a sudden shift. It is a gradual process which will be borne out over the next few years.
“It’s a gentle succession.
“It’s important to note that the Queen is still working very hard. Every day you see her with the red box of Government papers and giving audiences.
“Charles will be doing less of his campaigning and the things he likes to do and more of the head of state role.
“While the Queen is still in excellent health, she is inevitably becoming a little more frail because of her age. Charles and Camilla will be doing much more of the public work on her behalf.”
Her Majesty is already the oldest ever British monarch and will soon overtake Queen Victoria’s longest-serving record of 63 years.
But it was stressed yesterday that the changes do not mean she is planning to take a back seat.
The Mirror can exclusively reveal she and Prince Philip will go to Rome later this
year for a visit that was postponed in 2013.
They will also visit Normandy, along with Charles, this summer to commemorate the
70th anniversary of the D-Day landings.
The merger of Palace press offices is likely to see Charles’s new spin doctor, the
highly respected former tabloid reporter and BBC Head of Communications Sally Osman at the helm of the new operation
A senior insider said: “It is expected that she will be Press Secretary for both main players – The Queen and the Prince of Wales.”
The fact that the Queen’s age is being widely discussed in senior circles was made clear in an award made in the New Year’s Honours List.
There was a second knighthood for her private secretary, Sir Christopher Geidt – for “a new approach to constitutional matters... [and] the preparation for the transition to a change of reign”.
Charles, who swore to be his mother’s “liege man in life and limb” just like his dad Prince Philip, is being her back-up should she need him.
But there is one area where the prince will not be joining in – her weekly
briefings with the Prime Minister.
Heir and spare: Wills and Harry
One former member of the Royal Household believes this would be a step to far. He said: “Those meetings have to be strictly private. A change for the PM to unburden himself without fear of favour. No notes are taken, there are no minutes. It is strictly off limits.”
The source added: “The problem for Charles is, unlike with the Queen, some ministers could see fit to leak the contents of these meetings and suggest that the prince is becoming ‘too political’.
“However that is not the case, he is within constitutional rights. His role as heir to the throne is today purely formal – although he maintains the right ‘to be consulted, to encourage and to warn’ Her Majesty’s ministers via regular audiences with the PM and the ministers themselves.”
Another royal source said it was widely expected that the Queen would no longer be going on long-haul flights to distant lands on diplomatic missions.
But he said she would not be giving up on key royal engagements altogether – even if they did involve a fair bit of travelling.
The involvement of other royals in the revamped system is also being seen as an important factor.
In the modern media world they – the younger generation of William, Kate and Harry – naturally steal most of the headlines.
But it is no accident both William and Harry have quit their roles as helicopter pilots to focus more on their royal duties – although Harry has, of course maintained his position as a captain in the Household Cavalry.
The source said: “What you are seeing, albeit very subtly, is a monarchy in transition. The participation of all the players, particularly Charles and William, is crucial in making things work.”
He revealed: “There are a few noses out of joint – particularly the Queen’s other children, most of all Prince Andrew – who all think they have a part to play.
“But Charles has always believed that a slimmed-down, more cost-effective Royal Family is the best way forward for the 21st century and beyond.”
Would You Let Your Child Major in English?
January 11, 2014Heather Mac Donald's recent Wall Street Journal essay raises this question for me. An excerpt:
Until 2011, students majoring in English at UCLA had to take one course in Chaucer, two in Shakespeare, and one in Milton —the cornerstones of English literature. Following a revolt of the junior faculty, however, during which it was announced that Shakespeare was part of the "Empire," UCLA junked these individual author requirements. It replaced them with a mandate that all English majors take a total of three courses in the following four areas: Gender, Race, Ethnicity, Disability and Sexuality Studies; Imperial, Transnational, and Postcolonial Studies; genre studies, interdisciplinary studies, and critical theory; or creative writing.
This dreck is nothing knew to Ricochet readers, I know. But it makes me think back to the summer after my freshman year in college. When I started at the University of Oklahoma, like many (most?) pre-med students, I declared a zoology major.
Then it occurred to me sometime during my freshman year that I had no interest in the science of zoology. I still wanted to become a doctor, but four years of zoology did not, for me, seem to be what college was about. Some of the harder sciences (physics, astronomy) seemed more interesting, but, like many students who are trying to get in to medical school, I was spooked by the "hard" part of "hard science." I wanted to make A's.
In the spring semester of my freshman year, I took a course called, simply, "Fiction." We read some of the great short books and short stories you might see on a high school AP list: Poe, Hawthorne, Henry James, Crane, Fitzgerald, Twain, et al. It was fun. And I thought "Why not spend four years reading stuff like this, and better?" I didn't know it, but I was stumbling onto the idea of a liberal arts education, Matthew Arnold's "best that has been thought and said," a dialogue with the great thinkers of the liberal tradition.
I came home for summer vacation and told my dad that I was changing to an English major, but that I was still committed to going to medical school. He took it in stride, even though he had always advised me to:
1) Make sure that, whatever I study, it ought to consist of a real body of knowledge, and not be some made up "discipline" (If memory serves, the context for this advice was that he was telling me not to take an Ecology class in high school. A wise man.)
2) Make sure I finish my education with some skill that other people don't have
I'm pretty sure English did not meet those criteria, but I went ahead with it. And how did it work out? It was...OK. I had a good course on the Bible, a good Shakespeare course, a really good course called "Poe, Hawthorne, Melville" that also encompassed the American Renaissance (Emerson, Thoreau, Whitman, Dickinson), a not-awful criticism class, and a decent American lit two semester survey. I took my senior capstone on the literature of the American West from a Marxist, but he was a fun guy, and he gave me an 'A' even though I was in my openly militant Ayn Rand phase.
I did get to read Moby-Dick as part of the deal. That probably made it all worth it.
And I did encounter my greatest teacher, but he was not in the English department.
I could make a pretty awesome list of the writers I was not assigned as an English major. A hint: It includes Dickens, Faulkner, Hemingway, Austen, and all English poets except Shakespeare and Milton. Overall, it was a fairly sloppy, undemanding undergraduate major. (My wife beats me on this: she was a political science major and was never assigned Aristotle's Politics.)
My oldest child is only eight, so I have a while before I have to worry about this. But, reading things like Mac Donald's essay, I already feel a strong urge to gently shunt him to the sciences, math, engineering—something, anything but English, the social sciences, the liberal arts.
Let's assume that your kid is not going to go to a Hillsdale or St. John's or Thomas More or one of the other Great Books schools. Assume he is going to a large state university, or even an elite institution. What are you going to say when he comes home telling you he is majoring in English? Unless he has a plan (not graduate studies in English!) I would say the answer is no. Not with my money. Not now.
You simply cannot trust that he would take the right courses from the right professors—or that these courses and professor even exist at his school. Far better to spend four years in the rigor of a hard science, as far away as possible from gender and postcolonial studies as possible.
I completely agree with Heather Mac Donald's view of what a great liberal arts education offers. The problem is that that education simply no longer exists outside of the few remaining programs and institutions that are overtly dedicated to the Great Books. I see it as an iteration of O'Sullivan's Law: All institutions that are not overtly dedicated to teaching the Great Books and preserving the liberal tradition ultimately will have Queer Theory departments.
And they are sloppy. The only place left in higher education where rigor is guaranteed is in the sciences. In higher education (as it actually exists today, not as we wish it existed) maybe the best that we can hope for is that our kids experience intellectual rigor. If the science departments are the only places where that can still happen, then so be it. They will have to read Plato on their own. Which is too bad, because it is really hard to read Plato on your own. Most of us could use a good guide.
It's too bad because, even though I am a physician, I remember (and need to remember) almost no organic chemistry from my sophomore year in college, nearly 20 years ago. But I bet that an intense encounter with the Nicomachean Ethics at age 20 would have left something of an impression.
Read the Britannica online article about the fascinating friend then enemy of Pope and Walpole who wrote a best-selling travel book about Turkey in the early 18th century.