Back in December, our church, the Kingston Unitarian Fellowship, moved to a new building. And next month, on April 15, we will celebrate the official opening of the building and welcome visitors to an open house. Since the new building can accommodate more people at our Sunday service, some of us feel we should let more people know about our church and our religion. (To be clear, I'm writing now on behalf of myself, not KUF.)
One problem is that Unitarians don't proselytize. Although many of us are quite opinionated on a variety of topics, when it comes to our church, most of us keep a low profile. As our minister, Kathy Sage, pointed out in a recent sermon, Unitarianism was actually outlawed in England for a while. It wasn't legal in England until 1813. Before then, keeping a low profile was essential.
Dissenters have always had a hard time. For example, back when the King James Bible was being written, the authors knew that 1 John 5:7 was a gloss and considered omitting it. But, in spite of the scholarship, they kept the verse in since they didn't want to be seen as pandering to the Unitarians.
Another problem is describing our religion. If you talk to a number of Christians, for example, you'd quickly see what that religion is all about. But if you talk to a number of Unitarians, you might get different answers from each. Unitarianism doesn't preach a specific creed. Strictly speaking, it has no creed. We all recognize that many of us are on a spiritual journey, and that we all have different spiritual needs. We all have different approaches to understanding the world around us, and we all can share and learn from each other.
That said, we generally follow a set of seven principles. The first principle is to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person. You can read the rest at our web site: About Us. Looking at these principles, to me they seem self-evident. How can anyone argue with these principles? In fact, these principles look very much like the eight points of Progressive Christianity.
If you look to church or religion for definite answers to the great questions of life, universe, and everything, you probably won't find them at a Unitarian church. Or maybe you will. Either way, you will be welcomed at a Unitarian congregation, just as you are, no matter who you are. We won't tell you what to believe, or how to live your life. But we'll support you in your own search for spiritual meaning.
Again, the open house is on April 15. I hope to see you there!
Cheers! Hans
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Where are we headed?
I've been using Facebook for about two and a half years. I resisted joining for a while, but relented when I realized that there were a lot of other ukulele players on Facebook. Now, I find it invaluable in knowing what's happening.
Upon joining Facebook, I was impressed with the friend recommendations. They were all spot on! Later, I realized that Facebook must have already been building up a profile of my public activities on the internet prior to my joining.
Facebook became so popular since we could connect so easily with people. For example, I found 18 of my 28 first cousins. But now that we've all been using this on-line social networking thing for years, where are we now?
Over the past half year, I've reduced my Facebook activities. I had concerns over Facebook's ability to respect our privacy settings. Also, back in the Fall, Facebook made some drastic changes to the look and feel of the web site. And changes are still happening. In some cases, it took me hours to reconfigure my settings. And weeks for Facebook to fix the bugs preventing those settings from working properly.
But now, where are we headed with on-line social media? First, I think the novelty of Facebook has worn off for many of us. We just don't have to look at all the pictures of our friends grand-kids. And as we increase our lists of "friends", wading through the volume of postings becomes more and more of an effort.
Second, Facebook has given us the option to view "Top Stories". But how do they decide what's important to us? Perhaps they have some secret algorithm that helps them decide. But the top stories they give me are not the things I consider most important. The thing about Facebook is that, for the most part, the stories posted on my news feed are not important. Few are truly "Top" stories. The vast majority are all pretty much equally unimportant. And yet, in spite of complaints about the futility of "Top Stories", Facebook still sees value in the whole concept. It seems like they really want to keep the ability to decide what we should see. As Facebook moves towards its expected IPO, it seems pretty clear that Facebook will decide that we should see the messages of its paying advertisers.
What about Google Plus? Well, it's a different sort of on-line social networking experience. I think it's a good start at implementing on-line networking. Although they could have capitalized on Facebook's recent missteps, I've been disappointed with the pace of Google Plus development. Google's strength is in all their different components, such as Gmail, Youtube, and Calendar. By integrating them all together in effective ways, they could have a real powerhouse on-line networking platform. But where are all the good interconnections?
We're clearly in the middle of a shift. Perhaps Google is trying to figure out where we're going? Or perhaps Google is busy implementing that shift? Many have argued that 2012 will be the year of the tablet computer. While many of us still use desktop machines, portable devices are clearly becoming more important. As tablets drop in price over 2012, more and more of us will be using them. I confess, I don't have one now. But I do expect to buy one during the coming year. They're just too useful to ignore. And a lot of fun too.
And so, while Facebook may have won the current war over on-line social networking, smart companies will do what they can to change the battleground. With big earnings expected, Facebook can be expected to play it safe, doing what they can do satisfy their investors and advertisers. Which means we'll have to look elsewhere to find real innovation.
Cheers! Hans
Upon joining Facebook, I was impressed with the friend recommendations. They were all spot on! Later, I realized that Facebook must have already been building up a profile of my public activities on the internet prior to my joining.
Facebook became so popular since we could connect so easily with people. For example, I found 18 of my 28 first cousins. But now that we've all been using this on-line social networking thing for years, where are we now?
Over the past half year, I've reduced my Facebook activities. I had concerns over Facebook's ability to respect our privacy settings. Also, back in the Fall, Facebook made some drastic changes to the look and feel of the web site. And changes are still happening. In some cases, it took me hours to reconfigure my settings. And weeks for Facebook to fix the bugs preventing those settings from working properly.
But now, where are we headed with on-line social media? First, I think the novelty of Facebook has worn off for many of us. We just don't have to look at all the pictures of our friends grand-kids. And as we increase our lists of "friends", wading through the volume of postings becomes more and more of an effort.
Second, Facebook has given us the option to view "Top Stories". But how do they decide what's important to us? Perhaps they have some secret algorithm that helps them decide. But the top stories they give me are not the things I consider most important. The thing about Facebook is that, for the most part, the stories posted on my news feed are not important. Few are truly "Top" stories. The vast majority are all pretty much equally unimportant. And yet, in spite of complaints about the futility of "Top Stories", Facebook still sees value in the whole concept. It seems like they really want to keep the ability to decide what we should see. As Facebook moves towards its expected IPO, it seems pretty clear that Facebook will decide that we should see the messages of its paying advertisers.
What about Google Plus? Well, it's a different sort of on-line social networking experience. I think it's a good start at implementing on-line networking. Although they could have capitalized on Facebook's recent missteps, I've been disappointed with the pace of Google Plus development. Google's strength is in all their different components, such as Gmail, Youtube, and Calendar. By integrating them all together in effective ways, they could have a real powerhouse on-line networking platform. But where are all the good interconnections?
We're clearly in the middle of a shift. Perhaps Google is trying to figure out where we're going? Or perhaps Google is busy implementing that shift? Many have argued that 2012 will be the year of the tablet computer. While many of us still use desktop machines, portable devices are clearly becoming more important. As tablets drop in price over 2012, more and more of us will be using them. I confess, I don't have one now. But I do expect to buy one during the coming year. They're just too useful to ignore. And a lot of fun too.
And so, while Facebook may have won the current war over on-line social networking, smart companies will do what they can to change the battleground. With big earnings expected, Facebook can be expected to play it safe, doing what they can do satisfy their investors and advertisers. Which means we'll have to look elsewhere to find real innovation.
Cheers! Hans
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Ukelele-Banjo: First Impressions
About two weeks ago, I added to my modest collection of musical instruments. I must confess that I've always wanted a banjo. And admit it: You want one too!
This instrument is a banjo-ukulele. But in my opinion, that name is a misnomer. It is a banjo, not a ukulele. So a more appropriate name would be "ukulele-banjo". The instrument I bought has almost all the characteristics of a banjo. The only differences are the nylon strings, a neck the same length as a concert ukulele, and tuned the same as ukulele.
You can play the uke-banjo more or less like a ukulele. However, while the ukulele is a very forgiving instrument, which make it so easy to play for beginners, the uke-banjo is much less so. It seems like any touch to the instrument can make a sound. So although it's a sturdy instrument, it's best to handle it with care.
Unlike the ukulele, strumming the uke-banjo really needs a more nuanced approach. Of course, you can get a really loud sound out of the instrument. And while that's appropriate in some cases, often you have to apply a lighter touch to your strumming. But you can play with rhythms by varying the strength of strum. For example, on some songs you can do a light strum, but emphasize every other beat by doing a harder strum.
Regarding repertoire, I've had to go through all of my song books to see what songs work. Probably not surprisingly, not all songs work well on the uke-banjo. Or perhaps I just haven't figured out how to make them work. On my regular ukulele, I've been leaning towards a more bluesy feel to my songs. But that doesn't work on a banjo. So far, I've been looking for songs I can play fast. Songs that work well include "Farewell to Nova Scotia" and "I'm Henery the Eighth, I Am". In general, a lot of old classic folk songs seem well suited to uke-banjo. Recent pop songs don't work nearly as well.
Finally, since this instrument is much louder than a conventional ukulele, you have to be more considerate of those you live with. Finding an appropriate time and place to practice may be more of a challenge. And while a new instrument may be a novelty in the home, that novelty can wear off fast. Unfortunately, not everyone appreciates the charm of this type of instrument.
In conclusion, this instrument is a lot of fun. It is well suited to up-beat music, and has a wonderful sound. In a Peanuts cartoon, Charles Schulz offered the opinion: "As soon as a child is born, he should be issued a banjo". Make that a uke-banjo, and I agree whole-heartedly!
Cheers! Hans
This instrument is a banjo-ukulele. But in my opinion, that name is a misnomer. It is a banjo, not a ukulele. So a more appropriate name would be "ukulele-banjo". The instrument I bought has almost all the characteristics of a banjo. The only differences are the nylon strings, a neck the same length as a concert ukulele, and tuned the same as ukulele.
You can play the uke-banjo more or less like a ukulele. However, while the ukulele is a very forgiving instrument, which make it so easy to play for beginners, the uke-banjo is much less so. It seems like any touch to the instrument can make a sound. So although it's a sturdy instrument, it's best to handle it with care.
Unlike the ukulele, strumming the uke-banjo really needs a more nuanced approach. Of course, you can get a really loud sound out of the instrument. And while that's appropriate in some cases, often you have to apply a lighter touch to your strumming. But you can play with rhythms by varying the strength of strum. For example, on some songs you can do a light strum, but emphasize every other beat by doing a harder strum.
Regarding repertoire, I've had to go through all of my song books to see what songs work. Probably not surprisingly, not all songs work well on the uke-banjo. Or perhaps I just haven't figured out how to make them work. On my regular ukulele, I've been leaning towards a more bluesy feel to my songs. But that doesn't work on a banjo. So far, I've been looking for songs I can play fast. Songs that work well include "Farewell to Nova Scotia" and "I'm Henery the Eighth, I Am". In general, a lot of old classic folk songs seem well suited to uke-banjo. Recent pop songs don't work nearly as well.
Finally, since this instrument is much louder than a conventional ukulele, you have to be more considerate of those you live with. Finding an appropriate time and place to practice may be more of a challenge. And while a new instrument may be a novelty in the home, that novelty can wear off fast. Unfortunately, not everyone appreciates the charm of this type of instrument.
In conclusion, this instrument is a lot of fun. It is well suited to up-beat music, and has a wonderful sound. In a Peanuts cartoon, Charles Schulz offered the opinion: "As soon as a child is born, he should be issued a banjo". Make that a uke-banjo, and I agree whole-heartedly!
Cheers! Hans
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)