So Charlie did a couple of re-sits last week, with his A2s starting this week.
Does he deserve good results? I'll let you be the judge. Here's what he told me about his philosophy paper this week.
'It was terrible. Towards the end, I needed to blow my nose, so I put my hand in my pocket for a hanky. And I found I had my notes in my pocket. It was too late into the exam to tell the invigilator: I'd already written two really good essays, and didn't want them discounted. So the only thing to do was to eat my notes. So I tore them up and ate them bit by bit.'
--
You might remember him in your prayers.
Showing posts with label teenagers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teenagers. Show all posts
Sunday, 18 May 2014
Saturday, 8 February 2014
Teach First: Think Later (if at all...)
I have not been watching Tough Young Teachers, despite a a strong interest in the topic, for a number of reasons (like being away a lot, not having a TV, stuff like that). However, I know that it tracks teachers on the Teach First programme, who are placed in schools after an intensive summer course, and gain their pgce that way, rather than in the more conventional way.
As they say on their www site: 'We work with primary and secondary schools where more than half of pupils come from the poorest 30% of families in the UK, according to the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI).' Hence the Tough Young Teachers title. However, what I wish to comment on isn't really related to the fact that this was a Teach First programme, because I think the issues which concern me are more widespread.
As I say, I didn't watch the programme, but I did read Tom (always entertaining and often thought-provoking) Bennett's review of the programme. He wrote, inter alia:
Who could conceivably think that this is a good idea? Even by their own odd notions of education, this is wrong-headed. What learning objectives does such a filth-fest support? Where is the evidence base that this is a sensible thing to do with a mixed class of adolescents?
The intention, I can only assume, is to signal to the children that we can talk freely about things that are normally embarrassing. Or to put it another way, that we can talk freely about things which modesty and social convention teach us should not be part of normal conversation. Or to put it a third way, to de-sensitise them.
What actually happens, of course, is that the children who know the most risqué and deviant words, and the ones who have been watching pornography, are rewarded. They are the ones who can say the most original things, and (if they are lucky) break through the teacher's assumed nonchalance and provoke a blush or a stammer.
The most depraved kids are thus given the power, permission and platform to corrupt the rest. The expletives I deleted from Tom Bennett's review included two that I was not familiar with. I really don't need my kids being taught this sort of vocabulary, and still less introduced to the ideas it expresses.
This 'liberal' approach is actually very doctrinaire. Those of us who take seriously our responsibility to preserve our kids' innocence are over-ridden by this ideologically-driven approach. Never mind that we have no TV, teach them custody of the eyes, and so on: at school not only will they be introduced to depravity, but also to the notion that this is all normal and acceptable.
Doubtless, people will argue that we must teach our kids about this; and that I am naive not to realise that most kids are watching porn, and so on.
Yet most is not all, and I do not see why the innocent should be corrupted and the perverse rewarded.
And as I have blogged before (here and going further back in the archives, here) what evidence there is, suggests that even getting them thinking about and discussing sex may increase the likelihood of early sexual experimentation.
My other reflection is how bad this is for the teachers: individually and as a profession. Either they don't want to talk to kids about sex (which is a normal and healthy reaction) and are being made to do so, overcoming any scruples they may have. Or they do want to talk to kids about sex, in which case they are the very last people who should be doing so.
As they say on their www site: 'We work with primary and secondary schools where more than half of pupils come from the poorest 30% of families in the UK, according to the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI).' Hence the Tough Young Teachers title. However, what I wish to comment on isn't really related to the fact that this was a Teach First programme, because I think the issues which concern me are more widespread.
As I say, I didn't watch the programme, but I did read Tom (always entertaining and often thought-provoking) Bennett's review of the programme. He wrote, inter alia:
Sex, desire and relationships: one of the most important topics in the human experience. Naturally in schools we make sure it gets taught and discussed in a professional way, with trained specialists and....nahhh, let's just dish it out to whomever's free on the timetable and chuck some worksheets at them. That's bound to be good enough. Poor Nick did something that I have seen so frequently from new teachers that I can only assume they train them to do it in teacher college: he got them to brainstorm all the sweariest words they could. The intention appeared - and always appears - to be to somehow 'get it off their chest' and out of the way. The outcome is, of course, a train crash of [expletives deleted by BT] written on the board as the class literally shake themselves to death with excitement.I find this as worrying as Tom does amusing.
Who could conceivably think that this is a good idea? Even by their own odd notions of education, this is wrong-headed. What learning objectives does such a filth-fest support? Where is the evidence base that this is a sensible thing to do with a mixed class of adolescents?
The intention, I can only assume, is to signal to the children that we can talk freely about things that are normally embarrassing. Or to put it another way, that we can talk freely about things which modesty and social convention teach us should not be part of normal conversation. Or to put it a third way, to de-sensitise them.
What actually happens, of course, is that the children who know the most risqué and deviant words, and the ones who have been watching pornography, are rewarded. They are the ones who can say the most original things, and (if they are lucky) break through the teacher's assumed nonchalance and provoke a blush or a stammer.
The most depraved kids are thus given the power, permission and platform to corrupt the rest. The expletives I deleted from Tom Bennett's review included two that I was not familiar with. I really don't need my kids being taught this sort of vocabulary, and still less introduced to the ideas it expresses.
This 'liberal' approach is actually very doctrinaire. Those of us who take seriously our responsibility to preserve our kids' innocence are over-ridden by this ideologically-driven approach. Never mind that we have no TV, teach them custody of the eyes, and so on: at school not only will they be introduced to depravity, but also to the notion that this is all normal and acceptable.
Doubtless, people will argue that we must teach our kids about this; and that I am naive not to realise that most kids are watching porn, and so on.
Yet most is not all, and I do not see why the innocent should be corrupted and the perverse rewarded.
And as I have blogged before (here and going further back in the archives, here) what evidence there is, suggests that even getting them thinking about and discussing sex may increase the likelihood of early sexual experimentation.
My other reflection is how bad this is for the teachers: individually and as a profession. Either they don't want to talk to kids about sex (which is a normal and healthy reaction) and are being made to do so, overcoming any scruples they may have. Or they do want to talk to kids about sex, in which case they are the very last people who should be doing so.
Thursday, 30 January 2014
It's all right for some
She sails from Genoa in a few days, for a ten day voyage, to Malta.
How is it that I never got to do such stuff at her age? (or any age, come to that?)
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
Sex Education
I used to have a fairly clear view on sex education: it is the role of parents.
I am moving away from that a bit.
I think that we need to consider what we mean by Sex Education, and break it down into different component parts, in order to answer the question a little more intelligently.
So I would draw a distinction between: the biological facts of human reproduction; an education in love and relationships; the practical reality of physical and emotional intimacy; and growing up in a world of disordered messages and behaviours.
The first thing I want to say here is that I believe the correct teacher of the practical reality of physical and emotional intimacy is one's spouse. There are some things that one need not (and I believe should not) learn from others, second hand; or from theory, or from books, but from experience, and I believe that marital (sexual) love is one of those things.
That is not to say that we should keep kids in ignorance of the basic biological facts of human reproduction; but rather that we should treat anything beyond those facts as a sacred mystery, to which the correct initiation is the marriage bed.
(Incidentally, that is one of the reasons I prefer traditional worship to modern: the sense that some mysteries are sacred. I love the idea of the iconastasis, of the silent canon, and so on, for those reasons. Not everything should be on public display; just as I choose not to use the Holy Name of Jesus in casual conversation... but I digress.)
But it is important that children understand that the privacy surrounding such intimate love is not because it is something bad or dirty, but precisely because it is something good, holy, and supremely intimate.
The best teachers of the biological facts are the child's parents, in the first instance, as they should have the sensitivity and the intimacy of relationship with the child to judge when and how to explain these things. Schools may legitimately teach them as part of biology at an appropriate age and with parental knowledge, but only if they are very clear about the limits of their remit here.
The current trend, to stimulate and then gratify children's curiosity in the class room, allowing the most daring to ask the most outrageous questions, often allowing anonymity to shield them from shame, (as described by a head teacher and an 'expert' on the Today programme last Friday morning: 'why are condoms flavoured?' was an example given of a question that was answered 'honestly, factually and without embarrassment'), is profoundly wrong. The corrupted kids will steal the innocence of the others.
What children need most, of course, as they grow up, is an education in love an relationships. Again, the parents and natural family are the primary teachers here. But school teachers also have a very important role. However, the key issue here, I believe, is that such things are best taught not by being talked about, but by being experienced. Kids learn to love if they are loved, and witness their parents and teachers loving others; to respect others if those around them respect others, and so on. Remedial classes in Relationships will have little or no purchase if they do not build on such foundations; and if those foundations are in place, there will be little need for them.
Of course, it is sometimes necessary to discuss such issues; particularly when something goes wrong and a child needs either correction or comforting (or both). But words are the smallest part of such an education.
The other issue is educating children who are growing up in a world of disordered messages and behaviours. This, too, is primarily the parents' role, though schools may support it, always recognising the limits of their role and the boundaries of chaste discussion.
Voyeurism has rightly been seen by most cultures as aberrant. We need to teach our kids that; rather than exposing them to text books, cartoons, movies or magazines which, whether ostensibly for educative purposes, or for entertainment or for straightforward titillation, parade private human behaviour in public.
What kids need to know about pornography is that it is bad, and why; that it is to be shunned, as it is a strong and corrupting temptation for us in our fallen state, and has addictive qualities and does terrible harm in many ways. Some limited discussion of the issues here is probably important, given the culture we live in, but always avoiding anything that is in itself likely to stimulate either impure thoughts or inappropriate curiosity.
The traditional notion of custody of the eyes is very important here. And again, example is the best teacher. I cannot go along with those who say that kids are going to see it all around them anyway, so it is best to inure them to it. I think we do better to help them school themselves to avoid it: Let such things not even be named amongst you, as becomes Saints.
Then of course, there is the whole issue of contraception and abortion. Kids readily understand the purpose of human love: to bind a couple and to bring forth children. They understand how it is disordered to eat and then make oneself sick, thus having the pleasure of the taste of food without the good of nourishment; so they get the perversity of contraception.
Teaching about abortion is harder, of course, not because they don't understand how evil it is; they see that immediately. Rather, it is such a dreadful thing that they are (rightly) appalled by it, and teaching them how to regard those who are involved in it with charity is the challenge.
But again, all this teaching is founded first and foremost on their experience of their parent's love, for them and for each other, and beyond the family as well. Get that right (no small challenge, I realise) and most of the rest will be much easier.
I am moving away from that a bit.
I think that we need to consider what we mean by Sex Education, and break it down into different component parts, in order to answer the question a little more intelligently.
So I would draw a distinction between: the biological facts of human reproduction; an education in love and relationships; the practical reality of physical and emotional intimacy; and growing up in a world of disordered messages and behaviours.
The first thing I want to say here is that I believe the correct teacher of the practical reality of physical and emotional intimacy is one's spouse. There are some things that one need not (and I believe should not) learn from others, second hand; or from theory, or from books, but from experience, and I believe that marital (sexual) love is one of those things.
That is not to say that we should keep kids in ignorance of the basic biological facts of human reproduction; but rather that we should treat anything beyond those facts as a sacred mystery, to which the correct initiation is the marriage bed.
(Incidentally, that is one of the reasons I prefer traditional worship to modern: the sense that some mysteries are sacred. I love the idea of the iconastasis, of the silent canon, and so on, for those reasons. Not everything should be on public display; just as I choose not to use the Holy Name of Jesus in casual conversation... but I digress.)
But it is important that children understand that the privacy surrounding such intimate love is not because it is something bad or dirty, but precisely because it is something good, holy, and supremely intimate.
The best teachers of the biological facts are the child's parents, in the first instance, as they should have the sensitivity and the intimacy of relationship with the child to judge when and how to explain these things. Schools may legitimately teach them as part of biology at an appropriate age and with parental knowledge, but only if they are very clear about the limits of their remit here.
The current trend, to stimulate and then gratify children's curiosity in the class room, allowing the most daring to ask the most outrageous questions, often allowing anonymity to shield them from shame, (as described by a head teacher and an 'expert' on the Today programme last Friday morning: 'why are condoms flavoured?' was an example given of a question that was answered 'honestly, factually and without embarrassment'), is profoundly wrong. The corrupted kids will steal the innocence of the others.
What children need most, of course, as they grow up, is an education in love an relationships. Again, the parents and natural family are the primary teachers here. But school teachers also have a very important role. However, the key issue here, I believe, is that such things are best taught not by being talked about, but by being experienced. Kids learn to love if they are loved, and witness their parents and teachers loving others; to respect others if those around them respect others, and so on. Remedial classes in Relationships will have little or no purchase if they do not build on such foundations; and if those foundations are in place, there will be little need for them.
Of course, it is sometimes necessary to discuss such issues; particularly when something goes wrong and a child needs either correction or comforting (or both). But words are the smallest part of such an education.
The other issue is educating children who are growing up in a world of disordered messages and behaviours. This, too, is primarily the parents' role, though schools may support it, always recognising the limits of their role and the boundaries of chaste discussion.
Voyeurism has rightly been seen by most cultures as aberrant. We need to teach our kids that; rather than exposing them to text books, cartoons, movies or magazines which, whether ostensibly for educative purposes, or for entertainment or for straightforward titillation, parade private human behaviour in public.
What kids need to know about pornography is that it is bad, and why; that it is to be shunned, as it is a strong and corrupting temptation for us in our fallen state, and has addictive qualities and does terrible harm in many ways. Some limited discussion of the issues here is probably important, given the culture we live in, but always avoiding anything that is in itself likely to stimulate either impure thoughts or inappropriate curiosity.
The traditional notion of custody of the eyes is very important here. And again, example is the best teacher. I cannot go along with those who say that kids are going to see it all around them anyway, so it is best to inure them to it. I think we do better to help them school themselves to avoid it: Let such things not even be named amongst you, as becomes Saints.
Then of course, there is the whole issue of contraception and abortion. Kids readily understand the purpose of human love: to bind a couple and to bring forth children. They understand how it is disordered to eat and then make oneself sick, thus having the pleasure of the taste of food without the good of nourishment; so they get the perversity of contraception.
Teaching about abortion is harder, of course, not because they don't understand how evil it is; they see that immediately. Rather, it is such a dreadful thing that they are (rightly) appalled by it, and teaching them how to regard those who are involved in it with charity is the challenge.
But again, all this teaching is founded first and foremost on their experience of their parent's love, for them and for each other, and beyond the family as well. Get that right (no small challenge, I realise) and most of the rest will be much easier.
Wednesday, 14 August 2013
A Great Day Out
Anna and I (and Goldie) had a wonderful day at Fountains Abbey and Studley Royal. There is not much to add to what I wrote about the site on the occasion of our last visit, last year.
However, it was even more enjoyable this year, as it was sunny rather than raining. Also, I tried the acoustics in the Cellarium. The stone-vaulted ceiling is made for chant, and I filled it with sound without singing very loudly - till Mrs T bade me desist.
It was fascinating to stop and chat with the archaeologists who are digging a trench to try to discover the whereabouts (and any remains) of the Studley Royal bath house. There are pictorial records of this feature, and it is shown (in different positions) on some Victorian maps. So far, they have found some old plaster and rubble, and half a brick: but they were very optimistic and enthusiastic.
In the meantime, Charlie and Dominique had a wonderful day at Lightwater Valley: rather them than me.
However, it was even more enjoyable this year, as it was sunny rather than raining. Also, I tried the acoustics in the Cellarium. The stone-vaulted ceiling is made for chant, and I filled it with sound without singing very loudly - till Mrs T bade me desist.
It was fascinating to stop and chat with the archaeologists who are digging a trench to try to discover the whereabouts (and any remains) of the Studley Royal bath house. There are pictorial records of this feature, and it is shown (in different positions) on some Victorian maps. So far, they have found some old plaster and rubble, and half a brick: but they were very optimistic and enthusiastic.
In the meantime, Charlie and Dominique had a wonderful day at Lightwater Valley: rather them than me.
Friday, 3 May 2013
A Good Gig
Last night was the school's spring concert.
The music was largely 20th - 21st century apart from Marc-Antoine Charpentier and Oskar Rieding; but despite my prejudices, there was little one could describe as cheap (Hans Zimmer's score for Pirates of the Caribbean, an Aerosmith song, and Johnny Nash's I Can See Clearly Now being the only lapses).
So we were treated to Irving Berlin, John Rutter, Poulenc, Burt Bacharach, Tom Lehrer (no he's not cheap - not high art, of course - but a different category altogether), Eric Coates, and a wonderful Sonatina for Cello which I hadn't known by Pal Járdányi, amongst others.
The most modern compositions were by pupils performing their own pieces, one a serenade for Clarinet and Piano, with the composer's younger brother on clarinet, and the other a piano piece. Both were very good.
The programme was nicely balanced, too, with performances by the Band (Puttin' on the Ritz and a Glenn Miller medley) the Chamber Choir (The Way You Look Tonight, For the Beauty of the Earth, New York, New York!) the String Group and a String Quartet, the Choir, the Boys' Chamber Choir (Poisoning Pigeons in the Park, I Can See Clearly Now), the Brass Sextet and of course the full orchestra (Dambusters March, Pirates...) as well as many soloists, including a sax player performing Gerry Rafferty's Baker Street (which Charlie and Dominique were thinking of doing next year - having discussed it, they still may, as they feel last night's performance, though competent, was nothing compared to what they could do with it!)
Charlie featured in the Brass Sextet, which we hadn't even heard about till yesterday, and both he and Dominique are in the orchestra.
What was impressive, though, was the standard of musicianship throughout. There were one or two slightly weaker performances, but overall it was as good as anything the school has put on, and a lot better than many. In particular, the strings are vastly improved: the intonation, which is always what makes me wince with school string groups and orchestras, was flawless for much of the time, particularly in the String Group and the Quartet. It was a little dodgy in the orchestral pieces at times, but still significantly better than it used to be.
All the singing was of a very high standard, as were the other small ensembles; and the soloists ranged from good (though nervous in the case of the sax and the flautist playing Poulenc's very tricky Sonata) to excellent in most other cases; the highlight being the cellist playing the Járdányi Sonatina.
We pass lightly over the percussion (and wish they had).
I had gone expecting it to be good in parts; I left really impressed.
The music was largely 20th - 21st century apart from Marc-Antoine Charpentier and Oskar Rieding; but despite my prejudices, there was little one could describe as cheap (Hans Zimmer's score for Pirates of the Caribbean, an Aerosmith song, and Johnny Nash's I Can See Clearly Now being the only lapses).
So we were treated to Irving Berlin, John Rutter, Poulenc, Burt Bacharach, Tom Lehrer (no he's not cheap - not high art, of course - but a different category altogether), Eric Coates, and a wonderful Sonatina for Cello which I hadn't known by Pal Járdányi, amongst others.
The most modern compositions were by pupils performing their own pieces, one a serenade for Clarinet and Piano, with the composer's younger brother on clarinet, and the other a piano piece. Both were very good.
The programme was nicely balanced, too, with performances by the Band (Puttin' on the Ritz and a Glenn Miller medley) the Chamber Choir (The Way You Look Tonight, For the Beauty of the Earth, New York, New York!) the String Group and a String Quartet, the Choir, the Boys' Chamber Choir (Poisoning Pigeons in the Park, I Can See Clearly Now), the Brass Sextet and of course the full orchestra (Dambusters March, Pirates...) as well as many soloists, including a sax player performing Gerry Rafferty's Baker Street (which Charlie and Dominique were thinking of doing next year - having discussed it, they still may, as they feel last night's performance, though competent, was nothing compared to what they could do with it!)
Charlie featured in the Brass Sextet, which we hadn't even heard about till yesterday, and both he and Dominique are in the orchestra.
What was impressive, though, was the standard of musicianship throughout. There were one or two slightly weaker performances, but overall it was as good as anything the school has put on, and a lot better than many. In particular, the strings are vastly improved: the intonation, which is always what makes me wince with school string groups and orchestras, was flawless for much of the time, particularly in the String Group and the Quartet. It was a little dodgy in the orchestral pieces at times, but still significantly better than it used to be.
All the singing was of a very high standard, as were the other small ensembles; and the soloists ranged from good (though nervous in the case of the sax and the flautist playing Poulenc's very tricky Sonata) to excellent in most other cases; the highlight being the cellist playing the Járdányi Sonatina.
We pass lightly over the percussion (and wish they had).
I had gone expecting it to be good in parts; I left really impressed.
Monday, 8 April 2013
Sexting...
I keep seeing reports of teenagers indulging in sexting (here and here for example), and the admonition of parents for failing to monitor their kids' electronic devices (as in the first article linked to).
Clearly this is a serious problem.
But the problem doesn't lie simply with the kids. Consider this (from that same article):
If the only advice we can offer to teenagers is to 'think about your digital footprint,' we are completely missing the point.
But I suppose it's the equivalent of 'make sure you use a condom.'
That is, we will not teach good behaviour (morality) for fear of seeming to preach - we will merely offer advice on how to avoid the consequences of immoral behaviour: advice which is doomed to failure, as immoral behaviour has profound and lasting consequences, even if the most obvious and immediate consequences are avoided, and also because all the protections (condoms, wiping computer memories...) are flawed and may fail too.
This seems to me to epitomise the moral bankruptcy that we are leaving as a legacy to the next generation, and it frightens me.
I would never give my kids such advice, any more than I check their mobile phones to make sure they are not taking pornographic pictures of themselves and others - but then I hope (and believe) that we have raised them in such a way as to make such advice, and such checks, unnecessary. I could, of course, be wrong, but even so, I think the noxious implications of such advice are such that I refuse to consider giving it anyway.
Sancta Maria purissima - ora pro nobis.
Clearly this is a serious problem.
But the problem doesn't lie simply with the kids. Consider this (from that same article):
Jon Ebert, a psychologist who spoke to the Tennessean had wise words for kids today: “A lot of adolescents are still developing in their mind the ability to think ahead to the consequences. They’re in the moment, and they’re thinking of shock value or just being funny. What they’re not thinking about is the footprint they’re digitally leaving for themselves. They’re not thinking about what that footprint can do to them later on down the road or what effect that footprint can also have on others.”Is it just me, or is that a profoundly troubling quotation (and editorial comment: 'wise words')?
If the only advice we can offer to teenagers is to 'think about your digital footprint,' we are completely missing the point.
But I suppose it's the equivalent of 'make sure you use a condom.'
That is, we will not teach good behaviour (morality) for fear of seeming to preach - we will merely offer advice on how to avoid the consequences of immoral behaviour: advice which is doomed to failure, as immoral behaviour has profound and lasting consequences, even if the most obvious and immediate consequences are avoided, and also because all the protections (condoms, wiping computer memories...) are flawed and may fail too.
This seems to me to epitomise the moral bankruptcy that we are leaving as a legacy to the next generation, and it frightens me.
I would never give my kids such advice, any more than I check their mobile phones to make sure they are not taking pornographic pictures of themselves and others - but then I hope (and believe) that we have raised them in such a way as to make such advice, and such checks, unnecessary. I could, of course, be wrong, but even so, I think the noxious implications of such advice are such that I refuse to consider giving it anyway.
Sancta Maria purissima - ora pro nobis.
Sunday, 10 March 2013
Mothering Sunday
Today, as well as being Laetare Sunday (no rose vestments at our parish, alas) is also, of course, Mothering Sunday.
Ant and Bernie being away at University (though both checking in with cards, phone calls, facebook etc) it was really down to Charlie and Dominique to spoil their mother.
They both produced lovely home-made cards for her (and for her mother, as did Anna herself, of course). But they also did some baking...
It is good that they always include Anna's mother in their plans, so she had one of these wondrous cakes, and Anna had the other. I am told they tasted good, too!
Ant and Bernie being away at University (though both checking in with cards, phone calls, facebook etc) it was really down to Charlie and Dominique to spoil their mother.
They both produced lovely home-made cards for her (and for her mother, as did Anna herself, of course). But they also did some baking...
It is good that they always include Anna's mother in their plans, so she had one of these wondrous cakes, and Anna had the other. I am told they tasted good, too!
Friday, 14 December 2012
It's that time of year...
Last night we were at another Christmas Concert. Two nights out in one week: how the Trovati live it up!
This one was at the school, so Charlie and Dominique were in the orchestra. For some reason Grandma chose not to come - can't imagine why...
Actually, the school orchestra are reasonably good: strings stronger than sometimes, brass and flutes good, a bit lacking in confidence in the clarinets, and percussion entertaining.
It was another good mixed programme, though, with soloists and the choir and smaller ensembles all making contributions. The cheapest music this time was Lennon and McCartney (Michelle), and attentive readers will have detected my weakness for the Beatles, so that was OK, and All I want for Christmas is you, which was lamentable...
Highlights were a lively performance of Gaudete by the Chamber Choir, and the Orchestra's Bizet (Farandole)
The soloists all acquitted themselves well, too, and the punch at the interval was very good!
This one was at the school, so Charlie and Dominique were in the orchestra. For some reason Grandma chose not to come - can't imagine why...
Actually, the school orchestra are reasonably good: strings stronger than sometimes, brass and flutes good, a bit lacking in confidence in the clarinets, and percussion entertaining.
It was another good mixed programme, though, with soloists and the choir and smaller ensembles all making contributions. The cheapest music this time was Lennon and McCartney (Michelle), and attentive readers will have detected my weakness for the Beatles, so that was OK, and All I want for Christmas is you, which was lamentable...
Highlights were a lively performance of Gaudete by the Chamber Choir, and the Orchestra's Bizet (Farandole)
The soloists all acquitted themselves well, too, and the punch at the interval was very good!
Friday, 21 September 2012
Advice to Catholic freshers
Lazarus has just posted some advice, prompted by his first going off to University.
Which reminded me of a note I wrote to Bernie this time last year, when she left home to study Fine Art:
Dear Bernie,
I am sure that you do not need any words of advice from me. But somehow I feel that I need to offer some. I remember experiencing pangs of guilt when Ant left without any paternal exhortations ringing in her ears...
There are only two things I want to say: one is to enjoy yourself and the other to look after yourself. On the first I have nothing to say except what is relevant in addressing the second. The same applies to your studies: I believe if you enjoy yourself and look after yourself, the studying will fall into place.
In terms of looking after yourself, I think it helpful to consider four aspects: physical, mental, social/emotional and spiritual well-being.
- Physical: this is the obvious bit. Make sure you get sufficient exercise and sleep, a sensible diet, not too much alcohol, and no drugs.
- Mental: keep your mind sharp by thinking about what you do, by taking an intellectual interest in your Art, and by finding friends who have discussions about things that matter to you or them, not merely superficial chat...
- Social/emotional: stay in regular touch with your friends and family. Use music to combat the blues! Use your emotional ups and downs (which are pretty inevitable) to inspire art – if only by keeping a diary. Find people with similar interests, sense of humour etc. but take your time in making new friends really close: you may want to get to know them over time (especially boys!...)
- Spiritual: Have a regular Plan of Life: morning offering, rosary and examination of conscience daily, and weekly Mass (weekday Masses are good too!), regular confession, and get to know some other Catholics. A bit of spiritual reading wouldn’t go amiss, either.
Have a good time - in every sense of the word!
Lots of love
Father
Xxxx
I don't know how good the advice is, but she is doing very well - just going back full of enthusiasm for her second year.
Thursday, 9 August 2012
Bernie at the Olympics
Bernie is volunteering at the Olympics this week; not on public duty, but as a cleaner in the Olympic Village. That is normally paid work, but she has been recruited to a scheme whereby her wages are donated to a charity in Uganda.
She is sleeping in the notorious workers' portakabins - nothing like the hell-holes portrayed by the press, more like youth hostel accommodation: shared, spartan, but fine. Nonetheless, the news that that was where they were due to stay caused two of her co-volunteers to drop out before even seeing the place.
Two more dropped out after the first morning's work. It is hard work, endlessly changing the beds, cleaning the rooms, and washing down the bathrooms of the athletes (which are rather more luxurious than her room, as you'd expect).
However, she is having a great time; we receive regular text updates, including that she has cleaned Sir Chris Hoy's room and made his bed; has met a very friendly Madagascan athlete who gave her a Madagascar badge, with which she is delighted, and most dramatically that she pulled the duvet off one bed, only to find a sleeping athlete in it! Her text continued: 'Awks! Never been so frightened in my life!'
So I gather she's having a fine time; and as she has her evenings free, is planning to enjoy some of the sights of London, including the Royal Academy summer exhibition.
She is trying to wangle some tickets for at least one Olympic event, so far unsuccessfully, but I'd put money on her getting to something before the week is out.
I'm pleased she's doing it - not least because our kids lead a very privileged life, and I think it is good for them to do some real hard work, and get some clue about how so many people have to work to make a living. At her age, I used to work as a janitor and kitchen porter etc during my year off and vacations, and have long valued the people I met along the way and the whole experience of manual labour.
And there's also the aspect of having played some part in the London Olympics, as well as supporting a worthwhile charity.
She is sleeping in the notorious workers' portakabins - nothing like the hell-holes portrayed by the press, more like youth hostel accommodation: shared, spartan, but fine. Nonetheless, the news that that was where they were due to stay caused two of her co-volunteers to drop out before even seeing the place.
Two more dropped out after the first morning's work. It is hard work, endlessly changing the beds, cleaning the rooms, and washing down the bathrooms of the athletes (which are rather more luxurious than her room, as you'd expect).
However, she is having a great time; we receive regular text updates, including that she has cleaned Sir Chris Hoy's room and made his bed; has met a very friendly Madagascan athlete who gave her a Madagascar badge, with which she is delighted, and most dramatically that she pulled the duvet off one bed, only to find a sleeping athlete in it! Her text continued: 'Awks! Never been so frightened in my life!'
So I gather she's having a fine time; and as she has her evenings free, is planning to enjoy some of the sights of London, including the Royal Academy summer exhibition.
She is trying to wangle some tickets for at least one Olympic event, so far unsuccessfully, but I'd put money on her getting to something before the week is out.
I'm pleased she's doing it - not least because our kids lead a very privileged life, and I think it is good for them to do some real hard work, and get some clue about how so many people have to work to make a living. At her age, I used to work as a janitor and kitchen porter etc during my year off and vacations, and have long valued the people I met along the way and the whole experience of manual labour.
And there's also the aspect of having played some part in the London Olympics, as well as supporting a worthwhile charity.
Tuesday, 26 June 2012
A Musical Weekend
On Saturday we went to Bernie's university music society concert. She was playing in the main orchestra and in several other smaller groups, which always makes for an entertaining evening.
The variety of talent on display was nearly as impressive as the quality, ranging from barbershop (and barbieshop - the female version) a cappella singing, through swing band, flute choir, string ensemble, and brass band to the full orchestra. The finale was an unashamed re-run of the second half of the Last Night of the Proms, complete with flags, balloons and party poppers. All in all a very enjoyable evening.
On Sunday morning, it was the EF Mass at Lancaster Cathedral, which was strictly unaccompanied Gregorian chant, fo the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist. The Schola there is certainly improving over time, and sounded much better yesterday than it did only a short while ago - apart form the communion verse, which struggled to start... (but once underway, it was fine.)
Then on Sunday afternoon, Charlie was playing a few pieces in a local concert in one of the village churches. It was really a show case for the wind band and the brass band from one of the local schools (not his), but he and a couple of others were invited to participate, to add some variety, I suppose, and to make the concert feel long enough (even with his three pieces, and the guest cellist's and guest flautist's, it was finished in an hour.)
As with anything involving Charlie, it was highly entertaining. His first piece was over rather quickly (he had decided the repeats were boring) and so there was a moment's silence before anyone clapped. He looked over his shoulder from the piano, with a look of complete bewilderment mixed with incredulity - and was there a hint of contempt? - at the audience, which caused me to crack up.
The second piece was fine - reasonably performed and unremarkable. But the final piece, a moody jazz piece that he normally plays with great panache, was again fraught with interest. The piano provided was an electric one, which had been ok for the first baroque piece, which had probably been written for the harpsichord anyway. But it didn't have the resonance in the bass which he required, and just from the shape of his back I could sense his growing disgust. Then the loose first page of the piece fell onto his keyboard. He thought he could keep going, then wasn't so sure, then ground to a halt. He re-started fine, but then did a repeat (on auto-pilot) that didn't seem to correspond to the music on the page, and then, it seemed to me (though he subsequently denied this) busked his way through his favourite passages of the piece in a somewhat disdainful way. He was not at all happy with the performance; I had enjoyed it heartily; and most of the audience seemed pleased enough. It is fair to say that he and the other soloists were older, and significantly more advanced on their chosen instruments, than the school ensembles, who opened and closed the event.
And then home, to start work on the music for the 8th Sunday after Pentecost (the next Lancaster Mass).
All in all, a weekend of mixed and rich musical entertainment!
The variety of talent on display was nearly as impressive as the quality, ranging from barbershop (and barbieshop - the female version) a cappella singing, through swing band, flute choir, string ensemble, and brass band to the full orchestra. The finale was an unashamed re-run of the second half of the Last Night of the Proms, complete with flags, balloons and party poppers. All in all a very enjoyable evening.
On Sunday morning, it was the EF Mass at Lancaster Cathedral, which was strictly unaccompanied Gregorian chant, fo the feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist. The Schola there is certainly improving over time, and sounded much better yesterday than it did only a short while ago - apart form the communion verse, which struggled to start... (but once underway, it was fine.)
Then on Sunday afternoon, Charlie was playing a few pieces in a local concert in one of the village churches. It was really a show case for the wind band and the brass band from one of the local schools (not his), but he and a couple of others were invited to participate, to add some variety, I suppose, and to make the concert feel long enough (even with his three pieces, and the guest cellist's and guest flautist's, it was finished in an hour.)
As with anything involving Charlie, it was highly entertaining. His first piece was over rather quickly (he had decided the repeats were boring) and so there was a moment's silence before anyone clapped. He looked over his shoulder from the piano, with a look of complete bewilderment mixed with incredulity - and was there a hint of contempt? - at the audience, which caused me to crack up.
The second piece was fine - reasonably performed and unremarkable. But the final piece, a moody jazz piece that he normally plays with great panache, was again fraught with interest. The piano provided was an electric one, which had been ok for the first baroque piece, which had probably been written for the harpsichord anyway. But it didn't have the resonance in the bass which he required, and just from the shape of his back I could sense his growing disgust. Then the loose first page of the piece fell onto his keyboard. He thought he could keep going, then wasn't so sure, then ground to a halt. He re-started fine, but then did a repeat (on auto-pilot) that didn't seem to correspond to the music on the page, and then, it seemed to me (though he subsequently denied this) busked his way through his favourite passages of the piece in a somewhat disdainful way. He was not at all happy with the performance; I had enjoyed it heartily; and most of the audience seemed pleased enough. It is fair to say that he and the other soloists were older, and significantly more advanced on their chosen instruments, than the school ensembles, who opened and closed the event.
And then home, to start work on the music for the 8th Sunday after Pentecost (the next Lancaster Mass).
All in all, a weekend of mixed and rich musical entertainment!
Sunday, 15 April 2012
Bernie's 19th
Because Bernie's birthday usually falls in Eastertide, we are lucky that it is often in the holidays. It was this year, so she was home from University for it, and we had a great time.
The kids all love it when we are all together as a family, and we don't need to do anything special for it to feel like a high holiday. A family walk, some cake and candles, some cards and presents...
And in the evening we went to the movies to see The Hunger Games, which they all enjoyed too.
As so often, the birthday put me in a reflective mood. Bernie is now halfway through her first year at University, studying Fine Art. She is having a good time: her first term was time to settle in, make friends and so on - but the work got a bit left behind in all that, which was a bit of a problem. This term she resolved to put more time into the work, and has been enjoying that more, too, as a result.
The fact that she identified the problem and sought advice to solve it, and then followed that advice, as well as developing her own ideas, really pleased me. In many ways, that kind of learning is as valuable as any other at university. She is growing into a mature, sensible and increasingly independent young lady.
And it continues to delight me that the kids love each others' company so much.
The kids all love it when we are all together as a family, and we don't need to do anything special for it to feel like a high holiday. A family walk, some cake and candles, some cards and presents...
And in the evening we went to the movies to see The Hunger Games, which they all enjoyed too.
As so often, the birthday put me in a reflective mood. Bernie is now halfway through her first year at University, studying Fine Art. She is having a good time: her first term was time to settle in, make friends and so on - but the work got a bit left behind in all that, which was a bit of a problem. This term she resolved to put more time into the work, and has been enjoying that more, too, as a result.
The fact that she identified the problem and sought advice to solve it, and then followed that advice, as well as developing her own ideas, really pleased me. In many ways, that kind of learning is as valuable as any other at university. She is growing into a mature, sensible and increasingly independent young lady.
And it continues to delight me that the kids love each others' company so much.
Sunday, 18 March 2012
Laetare! and Mothering Sunday
Alas, no rose vestments at the Parish Mass this morning. Father said the Parish doesn't own any - in tones of relief. Would it be naughty to donate some?
However, Bernie pulled of a real coup de theatre by coming home (unbeknownst to her mother) late last night, and thus being here to greet her for Mothering Sunday along with Charlie and Dominique!
A propos this morning's Mass, why is it deemed better to have a lay person read the readings, rather than a priest who has studied Sacred Scripture to a high level at seminary? This morning's readings were rendered almost unintelligible by a well-intentioned but clearly ignorant reader: saying concentrating for consecrating, for example (and many other similar slips), and dividing the sentences into clauses that emptied them of meaning.
However, the sun is shining, Mrs T has three of her brood at home, the breakfast table was covered with flowers and home-made cards (including from the absent Antoinette), so a suitable Laetare atmosphere prevails.
UPDATE
Mothering Sunday Challenge: Who did which card? Whose is missing? Why?
However, Bernie pulled of a real coup de theatre by coming home (unbeknownst to her mother) late last night, and thus being here to greet her for Mothering Sunday along with Charlie and Dominique!
A propos this morning's Mass, why is it deemed better to have a lay person read the readings, rather than a priest who has studied Sacred Scripture to a high level at seminary? This morning's readings were rendered almost unintelligible by a well-intentioned but clearly ignorant reader: saying concentrating for consecrating, for example (and many other similar slips), and dividing the sentences into clauses that emptied them of meaning.
However, the sun is shining, Mrs T has three of her brood at home, the breakfast table was covered with flowers and home-made cards (including from the absent Antoinette), so a suitable Laetare atmosphere prevails.
UPDATE
Mothering Sunday Challenge: Who did which card? Whose is missing? Why?
Card A
Card B
Card C
Sunday, 12 February 2012
He's at it again!
Bad parenting award number... errr.... (no, I've lost count...)
That Ben has been allowing his kids to skate on thin ice again!
Doesn't he know that every year, hundreds of people fall through ice and... (cont on p 67).
Doesn't he know that every year, hundreds of people fall through ice and... (cont on p 67).
Monday, 6 February 2012
Charlie's Essay
I just saw this masterpiece on the Family computer when I had my lunchbreak.
I have always known that boys are different from girls, and Charlie is certainly very different from his sisters. None of them could have penned this amazing piece of prose...
How important was violence, amongst other factors, in bringing about the failure of Chartism? 12
Violence was an important factor in the failure of Chartism. The Newport Rising and violence at several Chartist protests did lead to condemnation by many and a fear of their motivations (REVOLUTION). However, other factors did play a more important role in their failure. In my opinion the most important reason was the division between the leaders. The fact that they couldn’t agree on a common goal or how to reach it led to a disorganised structure. This led to Chartism becoming a more localised movement, and it didn’t get to many industrial towns. This was in an age before mass communication, so different towns had different concerns. This meant that the overall movement lacked support.
Another factor in the failure of Chartism was the total lack of money. This was a major setback once the movement had started as it meant that the spreading of it was very difficult. Grandma is behind me, coming into the room, I can hear her… puts a mug down. Picks it up. To the sink! Puts it down. Splashes water wanders away… breathes coughs. Shuffles about. Puts a mug away. Jingles all the mugs. ANNOYING. Shuts cupboard walkes towards sink. TEAPOT?emptyyies it, fills it empties it fills it empties it.WHAT? I think it is full now, she put it on boil. Now she gets things out cupboards. Farts. UGH. Tinkle water tinkle tinkle. Breathes LOTS. Sniff. OOoooohh now shes wiping down surfaces, empties the washing up bowl. LOUD WATER LOUD. Please to go granma? Stop all watering! Still wiping things.gkkkkkkkeeeeeeeeelllllllnnnnnbjv j fj kd doihbdiohdx.fhib z bold? p whio put bold on? Turn bold off.End
Sunday, 5 February 2012
Bad Parenting Award No. 365, 321
We've just been for a lovely walk in the country, and ... I allowed Dominique to skate on a frozen pond!
Not only that, it was pre-meditated - we had taken her skates.
And I allowed Charlie to slide around on it in his wellies (and did the same myself).
Don't some people realise that every year, people fall through ice and... (cont on p. 53)
Not only that, it was pre-meditated - we had taken her skates.
And I allowed Charlie to slide around on it in his wellies (and did the same myself).
Don't some people realise that every year, people fall through ice and... (cont on p. 53)
Wednesday, 28 December 2011
Home Made Cards
The kids always make their Christmas Cards. Here are the ones they presented us with this year; each fairly characteristic.
Ant:
Bernie:
Charlie:
Dominique:
And wishing all my readers a Happy and Holy Christmastide...
Ant:
Dominique:
And wishing all my readers a Happy and Holy Christmastide...
Tuesday, 20 December 2011
I am going to cover myself in Vaseline...
... and pretend I am a slug, Charlie announced at tea tonight.
For a moment there, I was worried!
For a moment there, I was worried!
Monday, 21 November 2011
Why we don't homeschool...
A comment in my comms box recently asked why we don't homeschool, which is an excellent question, and felt worthy of a post of its own.
My late father always used to say 'There are two reasons for everything: the good reason and the real reason.'
So I will be quite honest and say that the real reason we chose not to homeschool is because my wife point-blank refused to countenance the idea.
At the time, she wasn't Catholic; but even though she was received into the Church some 15 years ago, I think her refusal would be as strong.
However, with hindsight, there are some good reasons for not homeschooling (as well as many excellent reasons for homeschooling - some of the best Catholic young people I know have been homeschooled, and all that stuff about not being socialised is rubbish, in my experience).
However, I do think that there is some value in having children in schools who are Catholic; it opens the eyes of friends and teachers - and even sometimes those who are hostile to them - to the fact that it there are still believing Catholics about.
Ant and Bernie have both survived school and gone onto University with their Faith intact - and one of Bernie's friends is now keen to convert.
Charlie and Dominique both seem secure in their Faith, at present; and as regular readers will know, I have recently had to take the opportunity to educate their school about some basic issues...
So while I was disappointed at Anna's refusal to consider homeschooling, if I had my time again, I am not sure I would want to homeschool: for our kids, the other option has worked, and possibly benefitted others beyond our family.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
