I once gave a talk on Nehemiah using Lego - members of the congregation were given bags of around 3-12 pieces of bricks, varying number, varying shape, to complete a part built wall on a base board. The gist of it was that as a church, we all have different talents so have to work together.
Good idea. Get them to compose a metrically correct villanelle or sonnet. That’ll snap the mental elastic a damn sight more than clicking bits of plastic together.
Maybe I've been too quick to dismiss it... I hate planning days anyway so the added addition of a group activity with Lego sent my head spinning.
Bene Gesserit: my doggerel wouldn't go down that well. I more meant I don't want to inflict my preferences on others, so why do others? Are they blind that other people may not want to participate? When did just talking during a planning day suddenly become verboten?
Maybe I've been too quick to dismiss it... I hate planning days anyway so the added addition of a group activity with Lego sent my head spinning.
Bene Gesserit: my doggerel wouldn't go down that well. I more meant I don't want to inflict my preferences on others, so why do others? Are they blind that other people may not want to participate? When did just talking during a planning day suddenly become verboten?
It didn't - there's room for both approaches and on the occasion we used Lego we built models of the projects we were working on. It was a one-off really good, fun and productive afternoon! On the other hand, yes, there are times when pure talk wins the day and I can certainly understand your point of view. I'm not over-fond of planning days myself.
Potential employers who practically offer you a job, and then tell you they've decided to go with another candidate.
Oh Piglet, I'm so sorry.
I had a similar experience: was actually asked (nay, pushed!) to apply for a job only for the place concerned to then decide to go with an internal "candidate" - someone on the staff's significant other.
Brides. Or rather, their mothers. All of them. Especially one charmer who just knows that what the organist had agreed with the happy couple 6 months ago is "wrong, and ghastly" and who arrange for a "very talented son of a family friend (VTSFF)" to play for the wedding without reference to yours truly. VTSFF, it transpires, cannot actually manage to play all of the music even as changed by the mama from hell.
So, can I accompany my own choir (!!!) in the "charming" piece from the latest royal wedding because it is "too difficult" for the VTSFF: and play the recessional (Mendelssohn's Wedding March, also too difficult) and, "because its only a tiny piece in the jigsaw" accept "a £20 donation" for my trouble?
To quote the great Jim Royle "My ar*e". No. You want the VTSFF to play I'm still entitled to my full fee - I have a contract and that is also explained in the booklet your daughter and future son-in-law were given.
As usual, my PP is being about as supportive as a piece of week old celery
And now, presumably, the fact that you've dared to say something has Spoiled Their Special Day. Your name is mud and they'll never darken the door of that terrible church again.
Although I'm a minister rather than a musician, I very much sympathise with you. Some people think that, as "paying customers", they have the right to tell churches to do exactly what they say. Generally, we do our best to fit in with their demands - but that's not always possible. (By the way, I don't think I'd relish being the future son-in-law ... !)
And also organists, church weddings, are tiny pieces in the jigsaw of cost, so relatively affordable additions.
There was a wedding that asked if it could reorganise to the local church at very short notice because the church they were going to use was having works done and was clad unattractively with scaffolding. The cost of paying for two services, including another organist, wasn't prohibitively expensive, what was was the cars. So they stayed with the original church.
Totally agree, TheOrganist - you're absolutely entitled to your "bench fee". And as CK says, the organist's fee is pocket money in the grand scheme of wedding costs. If people had to pay you what you're worth, everyone would elope ...
The Very Talented Son of a Family Friend (VTSFF) has been to "have a quick look through the music" and, frankly, if I didn't know what the hymns chosen were meant to sound like I wouldn't recognise them.
PP arrived in church while VTSFF was busy mangling and asked for a word: Bride's Mother is now asking that I not be present, not be paid, and that they use recordings for the in and out music AND at the signing of the registers. PP asked what I thought !
Gave him the spiel about recorded music advice from the RSCM, licences, copyright, etc; also mentioned that he might like to follow accepted protocol and support his organist. Plus mentioned (again) that regardless of whether or not I was present I got my fee - in full, paid by the couple. Got the usual hand-wringing and dithering.
After some discussion with PP have emailed Treasurer to say that in this instance (with a bit of luck we can do this from now on) we need to invoice the happy pair and state on the invoice that without payment before the wedding there is no service. And have emailed happy pair with details about how to apply for Licence so they can play recorded music, with the usual format we use that without sight of the Licence they can't use a recording.
Meanwhile VTSFF confided that he wasn't happy (!) and that he had only said he would play because Bride's Mother said there was "no suitable organist" available at the church. Asked what I thought so I just wondered aloud what is there about holding a recognised qualification from a Royal College that renders an organist "unsuitable"? VTSFF went beetroot and said he wasn't happy.
The Organist my mother would have been the exception at my sister's wedding that proved the rule. She was so fed up with how her Mum had behaved at her wedding* that she largely just accepted what my sister and future husband wanted. That was not to say the wedding was painless, the mother of the groom was a different story altogether.
*I should perhaps say that her mother had objected to my father's best man on grounds that neither of my parents thought was acceptable.
Party politics in Australia certainly move fast. I thought on of the candidates mentioned was on the verge of being kicked out of Parliament altogether (yesterday).
ask for the same history as given two months ago to be repeated (thought we'd done that and hadn't revised those notes),
don't realise the blood tests they are being handed have been requested by their department,
don't realise that this condition has been treated for over a year already, albeit previously at a different hospital and theoretically this one too;
don't listen to answers;
give advice that goes against the advice given two months ago (and by the previous consultant);
have asked for the same detailed diary and photographic evidence that was requested in June to be repeated for the next two months - without reading the diary or asking for a run down on this;
seem to live on a different planet - not sure which planet allows infinite A&E appointments and have ENT consultants on tap for observations;
are fixated on one issue and not looking at the bigger picture;
are heavily pregnant so will not be there in two months, so three visits to this hospital will mean seeing three different consultants.
It's not even a local hospital, this waste of time has taken all day to achieve and cost a significant amount in travel costs. And the conversation we had could have been done by email and phone.
Well, I can only concur - except to say (annoyingly, perhaps) that IME my consultants have been quite good at referring to my GP, and at keeping me informed.
Experience of the NHS shows that quality is patchy, to say the least.
CK , your frustration is so very plain to see. Why is the cause allowed to go on like that. (Rhetorical question, by the way.) I give a push to hell as well for you.
Thank you for the concern. That was me venting, while thinking of ways to constructively deal with the situation. We're reckoning a polite letter querying the advice as it goes against the advice previously given, the previous actions and the distance from the department. (Not me this one, daughter.)
TICTH the BBCs current Telechef offering "The Great British Menu". Golly, this is tedious. I reckon they take three hours content, cut all but 10% of it, and pad that with previews, recaps, scene setting and chat, chat, chat.
Meanwhile in Australia, My Kitchen Rules is splendidly entertaining Fast paced "Train crash in a kitchen" show with well chosed contestants. Tears a plenty but no actual fist fights yet.
I wonder if it's made for the American market? Most of the food shows we get here seem to have that format - they keep previewing and reviewing until you want to scream "YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT!!!" at the television.
I'm quite happy to sit in silence with a book or my Tablet, and really don't watch much TV these days. D., on the other hand, always reaches for the remote as soon as he sits down and will put on some load of junk* that's on its bazillionth repeat, look as if he's reading, and more often than not, fall asleep.
Of course, any attempt to switch it off will be met with the utmost outrage. I can't begin to describe my despair when one channel devoted an entire long weekend to back-to-back screenings of the Lord of the Rings films.
* Usually any one of Border Security, Dragons' Den, Ice Road Truckers or Canadian Pickers
Not really - it seems to me that it's mostly bleeped-out swear words. And really, how interesting can you make a load of truck-drivers cursing their way through the snow?
Of course, any attempt to switch it off will be met with the utmost outrage. I can't begin to describe my despair when one channel devoted an entire long weekend to back-to-back screenings of the Lord of the Rings films.
Comments
It seemed to be a constantly recurring theme in the con-evo Church Of My Yoof...
If we'd had Lego, I might have been more interested....
IJ
@Climacus, why *not* suggest poetry??
Bene Gesserit: my doggerel wouldn't go down that well. I more meant I don't want to inflict my preferences on others, so why do others? Are they blind that other people may not want to participate? When did just talking during a planning day suddenly become verboten?
If nothing else, it will show poetry is not about lolling on a sofa waiting for daffodil to pass by.
It didn't - there's room for both approaches and on the occasion we used Lego we built models of the projects we were working on. It was a one-off really good, fun and productive afternoon! On the other hand, yes, there are times when pure talk wins the day and I can certainly understand your point of view. I'm not over-fond of planning days myself.
Would GIN help? If so, a virtual bottle (with Ice and a Slice) is on its way...
IJ
Oh Piglet, I'm so sorry.
I had a similar experience: was actually asked (nay, pushed!) to apply for a job only for the place concerned to then decide to go with an internal "candidate" - someone on the staff's significant other.
As you say,
So, can I accompany my own choir (!!!) in the "charming" piece from the latest royal wedding because it is "too difficult" for the VTSFF: and play the recessional (Mendelssohn's Wedding March, also too difficult) and, "because its only a tiny piece in the jigsaw" accept "a £20 donation" for my trouble?
To quote the great Jim Royle "My ar*e". No. You want the VTSFF to play I'm still entitled to my full fee - I have a contract and that is also explained in the booklet your daughter and future son-in-law were given.
As usual, my PP is being about as supportive as a piece of week old celery
Although I'm a minister rather than a musician, I very much sympathise with you. Some people think that, as "paying customers", they have the right to tell churches to do exactly what they say. Generally, we do our best to fit in with their demands - but that's not always possible. (By the way, I don't think I'd relish being the future son-in-law ... !)
There was a wedding that asked if it could reorganise to the local church at very short notice because the church they were going to use was having works done and was clad unattractively with scaffolding. The cost of paying for two services, including another organist, wasn't prohibitively expensive, what was was the cars. So they stayed with the original church.
An Organist's Wife Has Spoken.
The Very Talented Son of a Family Friend (VTSFF) has been to "have a quick look through the music" and, frankly, if I didn't know what the hymns chosen were meant to sound like I wouldn't recognise them.
PP arrived in church while VTSFF was busy mangling and asked for a word: Bride's Mother is now asking that I not be present, not be paid, and that they use recordings for the in and out music AND at the signing of the registers. PP asked what I thought !
Gave him the spiel about recorded music advice from the RSCM, licences, copyright, etc; also mentioned that he might like to follow accepted protocol and support his organist. Plus mentioned (again) that regardless of whether or not I was present I got my fee - in full, paid by the couple. Got the usual hand-wringing and dithering.
After some discussion with PP have emailed Treasurer to say that in this instance (with a bit of luck we can do this from now on) we need to invoice the happy pair and state on the invoice that without payment before the wedding there is no service. And have emailed happy pair with details about how to apply for Licence so they can play recorded music, with the usual format we use that without sight of the Licence they can't use a recording.
Meanwhile VTSFF confided that he wasn't happy (!) and that he had only said he would play because Bride's Mother said there was "no suitable organist" available at the church. Asked what I thought so I just wondered aloud what is there about holding a recognised qualification from a Royal College that renders an organist "unsuitable"? VTSFF went beetroot and said he wasn't happy.
Watch this space!
I've just had a thought - if they use recorded music without the licence, could you shop them to the Performing Rights Society?
*I should perhaps say that her mother had objected to my father's best man on grounds that neither of my parents thought was acceptable.
It's not even a local hospital, this waste of time has taken all day to achieve and cost a significant amount in travel costs. And the conversation we had could have been done by email and phone.
Well, I can only concur - except to say (annoyingly, perhaps) that IME my consultants have been quite good at referring to my GP, and at keeping me informed.
Experience of the NHS shows that quality is patchy, to say the least.
IJ
IJ
They can't use recorded music without access to the PA system: controlled by the CWs and they will only allow it if they see a copy of the Licence.
IJ
Meanwhile in Australia, My Kitchen Rules is splendidly entertaining Fast paced "Train crash in a kitchen" show with well chosed contestants. Tears a plenty but no actual fist fights yet.
[/rant]
I'm quite happy to sit in silence with a book or my Tablet, and really don't watch much TV these days. D., on the other hand, always reaches for the remote as soon as he sits down and will put on some load of junk* that's on its bazillionth repeat, look as if he's reading, and more often than not, fall asleep.
Of course, any attempt to switch it off will be met with the utmost outrage. I can't begin to describe my despair when one channel devoted an entire long weekend to back-to-back screenings of the Lord of the Rings films.
* Usually any one of Border Security, Dragons' Den, Ice Road Truckers or Canadian Pickers
Not want to watch LOTR? Now that Is Outrage!
IJ
Watching paint dry is at least soothing, though, no?
IJ
I never even bothered with his "Hobbit" trilogy, which would have made one good solid movie.
Comet's not aboard but she could enlighten us. I just hope the ice melts early and/or polar bears come into view. .