|
| 
好喜歡，好喜歡寶柱。 十七年如一日。
每每重溫［戲說亁隆］片段，寶柱的風采依然深懾我心。
七分英氣，三分謙和。
一舉手一投足皆瀟灑從容，不亢不卑。
堂堂藍頂武官，遇到大事有不失身份的沉著與膽識。
平時也有頑皮開朗的一面, 可以和賈六，春喜打成一片。
身為大內高手，刺客卻說他 ”招式不狠毒“。
春喜言語不饒人，他總是淡淡一笑。
他對皇上忠心，對曹大人恭謹，對春喜守禮。
他的耿直使他聽不得沈封辱罵大清。
他不善詞令，不通詩賦，可是春喜被劫時他說：
”如果讓我寶柱親眼看見，除非寶柱教人打死，不然我一定用我的命保住春喜。“
情深義重，莫過於斯。
可惜春喜沒聽見。
My all time favorite TV series character, Baozhu. I first watched Tale of Qian Long 17(!) years ago. I grew up being in love with him. His full title is "Imperial Guard Bearing Arms in the Emperor's Presence." How impressive is that. The actor who played him has this manliness about him that's hard to put into words. More on this TV series later.
| | |
| Those arguments supporting the development of simplified Chinese Characters often mention that a living language evolves. Here is the perfect insight and counter argument for such point of view. Taken from The Abolition of Man by C. S. Lewis:
A Theorist about language may approach his native tongue, as it were from outside, regarding its genius as a thing that has no claim on him and advocating wholesale alterations of its idiom and spelling in the interests of commercial convenience or scientific accuracy. That is one thing. A great poet, who has 'loved, and been well nurtured in, his mother tongue', may also make great alterations in it, but his changes of the language are made in the spirit of the language itself: he works from within. The language which suffers, has also inspired the changes. That is a different thing -- as different as the works of Shakespeare are from Basic English. It is a difference between alteration from within and alteration from without: between the organic and the surgical.
| | |
| As I assess the methods of Classical Education, I am also thinking about how to teach Chinese and music to Emma. "The Well Trained Mind" focus on the English language, but have little information for those who wants to do a bilingual education. It also did not talk much about music.
My first step is trying to talk to Emma in Mandarin and English so she will be exposed to both. I also play lectures on CDs in the background. I read Chinese and English books to her. When she is ready for alphabets, I will teach both Roman letters and Taiwanese phonetic symbols. But am I going to confuse her? Will she become a slow language learner and will start talking late? I don't know. But that is fine, if she can indeed be versatile in both language as she grows.
Now, concerning music education, I have my theory. Music is like a language. You can understand it or not understand it. Some people can fall asleep while others fluster with excitement and unspeakable emotion listening to the same music. Why? Well, I would fall asleep if you read me a story in Gaelic. Which means, you must teach the alphabets and grammars and logics of music just like you do English. People like to tell me I should give kids freedom to choose when I told them Emma will learn music. But why should a child have a choice about learning music when she have no choice about learning English? The rest of the argument is self-evident.
| | |
| In the process of researching Classical Christian Education, I came across the name Douglas Wilson. Then I came across the book "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris, and Wilson's respond "Letter from a Christian Citizen."
Sam Harris interview
http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780307265777&view=auqa
Here is the first pages of Wilson's response in pdf
http://www.canonpress.org/forms/chrcitizen_PP.pdf
I have not read anything apologetic for a long time now. I have been a bit of a hermit from reading Christian literature lately. But this reminds me how I have not came across one sound argument, personally or in print, from any atheist on their position. Am I just too provincial-minded on the subject or is there really no atheist out there who can dish out a reasonable challenge? Please enlighten me.
| | |
| Here is a quote I read today from a post on opera-l.org, where practically everyone writes better than me. This is on the topic of the merits of loudness of voices. And this is exactly how I feel about Netrebko, but did not have the eloquence to put into words. Why am I posting this? Only so that, if anyone who reads my blog decides one day to actually check out opera, or if anyone happens to have a chance to hear a performance, that they may be a discerning listener and will know the the hype from the crux. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject:
Re: : "The lack of super-sized voices today is a matter of choice": Discuss From: Bob Rideout rjrideout@GMAIL.COM Date:Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:29:02 -0400 ..... There are issues of basic execution that far outweigh loud, as far as I'm concerned. What is going on when Anna Netrebko (yes, I'm acting up once again) passes as a great singer. I didn't say great performer, which she undoubtedly is, but a great vocalist? A wonderful and dear friend who was recovering from surgery, a member of this list, played for me the "Potion" scene from Romeo the other day, when I paid him a convalescence visit. I really wanted to say it was "great", because he loves her, And I COULD NOT! I hear a voice that is labored throughout the range, one that takes a disconcerting breath every three or four bars, a sound that is unremittingly pushed, one that cannot find the meaning of repose and one that does get to tops, and loudly, but whose tops are neither dead center nor a thing of beauty. Vocal color, rhythmic tension, phrasing that matches the text, these don't exist. Worse, she does not finish phrases, she ends them, and there is a huge difference. I don't get it one little bit. BUT, she is loud! ......
| | |
|
