Stabat Mater

I see by the old clock on the wall that it is time for a post that includes some beautiful music. I am indebted to Snowdrift Snowfall Snowflake a man in Oregon for this one.

Snowplough Snowcone The man in Oregon is a self-avowed (what a strange term!) atheist who knew Madalyn Murray O’Hair personally, but being an atheist doesn’t mean he can’t appreciate beauty if it’s couched in religious language. That’s not wishful thinking on my part; he said so himself. We have become blogging friends even though we disagree on some very basic stuff.

Recently Snowshoe my Oregon friend included a musical link in his comments section that I am now going to share with you. I realize that it may not be everybody’s cup of tea, but you ought to watch and listen at least once:

“Stabat Mater” by Giovanni Battista Pergolesi, performed by soprano Veronique Gens and countertenor Philippe Jaroussky.

For once, I happen to agree wholeheartedly with Snowball my Oregon friend. The voices and instruments are beautiful.

To learn more about Giovanni Battista Pergolesi (1710-1736), the composer, click here.

To learn more about Veronique Gens, the soprano, click here.

To learn more about Philippe Jaroussky, the countertenor, click here.

If countertenor is a new term to you, it means a male singer who sounds like a woman when he sings (with the exception of the late Bea Arthur, a baritone). Countertenors sing in the contralto, mezzo-soprano, and even soprano ranges. To learn more about counter- tenors, click here.

According to Wikipedia, Stabat Mater is a thirteenth-century poem written in Latin about the suffering of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, during his crucifixion. Its title is an abbreviation of the first line, Stabat mater dolorosa (“The sorrowful mother stood”). The poem has been set to music by many composers, with the most famous settings being those by Palestrina, Pergolesi, Haydn, Rossini, and Dvořák. Wikipedia includes the full Latin text and also an adaptation (not a literal translation) in English. It should be said that halfway through, this poem about Mary turns into a prayer to Mary.

Neither my friend Snowscape Snowtire in Oregon nor I can appreciate the Stabat Mater text in the same way a Roman Catholic believer might, he being atheist and I being Jewish-Metho-Bapti-costal, but we both can and do appreciate the beauty of the musical composition and the performance. An odd thing about this particular performance was that it occurred on Christmas Day -- because the text refers to something that happened on Good Friday. Another odd thing is that I am sharing it with you near the end of July. Or perhaps it is not odd at all, but an indication of the timelessness of its subject.

Here is another depiction of the same subject, this time a visual one. It was painted in 1482 by Italian artist Pietro Perugino.


SNOWBRUSH! To learn more about Snowbrush, click here.

Tying up a few loose ends and creating a few others

Life isn’t always peaches and cream. The rest of the story I started telling you about in my last post is:

The Babylonian army pursued King Zedekiah and overtook him in the plains of Jericho. All his soldiers were separated from him and scattered, and he was captured and taken to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, at Riblah, where sentence was pronounced on him. They slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes. Then they put out his eyes, bound him with bronze shackles, and took him to Babylon, where he died.

Thomas Wolfe (the one born in Asheville, North Carolina, who wrote Look Homeward Angel, not the one born in Richmond, Virginia, who wrote The Right Stuff) was right. Sometimes you can’t go home again.

I don’t know why anyone would think life is always peaches and cream anyhow, unless you are one of those Hollywood celebrities who earns millions of dollars and lives in big mansions in places like Malibu and Maui and Aspen and the Hamptons and wears expensive clothes and drives expensive cars and has fans drooling for your autograph every time you turn around and you can’t even go out for a simple lobster with your squeeze du jour without being hounded by paparazzi exploding flashbulbs in your face. You know what? I suspect that even peaches and cream ain’t all it’s cracked up to be.

In other news, Mr. David H. Barlow of Tooele/Ephraim/Manti, Utah, reports that he is “of joseph who was sold into egypt and his son ephraim, branches over the wAll to america and down to tony mike dan braydon, owie josh and andrew, LEAVING OUT ALL THE GIRLS JUST ACCOUNTING FOR MALE POSTERITY” [capitalization and punctuation his]. All righty, then. As accounting for male posteriors is not what this blog is all about, let us hurry along to other subjects.

Speaking of the right stuff, can you name the original seven Mercury astronauts without cheating? Here are a couple of public-domain NASA photos of them to help jog your memory:



As long as we’re naming people, can you name these two?


Finally, before you toddle off to read someone else’s blog, which of the following captions describes the last photo best?

(a) Bubble and Squeak
(b) Peaches and Cream
(c) Two Fat Ladies
(d) Ye Gods and Little Fishes
(e) All of the above

This is my 587th post

...so it isn’t an important milestone or anything like that, but it reminded me that Zedekiah, king of Judah, was carried away into Babylonian captivity by Nebuchadnezzar’s army in 587 B.C.

As some of my posts were written by Billy Ray Barnwell, and a couple of recent ones were written by Editor Bob, the true number written by me and me alone remains iffy. (My new motto: Egos Altered While-U-Wait.) There is also the irritating fact that 587 B.C. actually began the second phase of Judah’s exile because the first captives were carried away around 597 B.C. and there’s also the other irritating fact that the entire northern kingdom, called Israel, consisting of ten of the twelve tribes, was carried away more than a century earlier by the Assyrians and its inhabitants were never heard from again. The southern kingdom was called Judah even though it consisted of two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, which is also confusing. Originally there was a single kingdom consisting of all twelve tribes under the rule of King Saul and then King David and then King David’s son, King Solomon, but after Solomon died things were never the same again and it was split into two kingdoms with, surprise, two kings. Then there’s also the fact that Judah was supposed to remain in exile for seventy years according to Jeremiah or Ezekiel or somebody, but they began returning in 538 B.C. or thereabouts, so who knows what to believe, really?

I don’t know about you but I find this fascinating, and knowing such stuff is how I was able to qualify to be on Jeopardy in 2003, only I was never actually “on” Jeopardy because after they took my picture with a Polaroid camera and told me I would remain in their files for fourteen months I was never contacted again by Alex Trebek’s gang.

It occurs to me that Billy Ray Barnwell may be writing this post as well.

The twelve tribes of Israel were named after the twelve sons of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel after a wrestling match at Bethel. In a book called Genesis, the twelve sons of Jacob are listed as Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, and Benjamin. For some reason, Joseph’s descendants became known as the half-tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, undoubtedly because his two sons were named, surprise again, Manasseh and Ephraim, but why this phenomenon didn’t occur with the other ten sons’ descendants, I can’t really say, except that trying to keep track of them all would prolly have become very unwieldy very quickly.

You can tell right away, just by reading your Bible and paying attention, that things were very different back in those days, because Jacob had children by four women, Leah, Leah’s handmaiden, Rachael’s handmaiden, and Rachael. Leah and Rachael were sisters. It’s a long story. Jacob worked for their father for seven years to get Rachael and wound up with Leah instead, so he worked for their father for another seven years to get Rachael. He must have been what we would call today an illegal immigrant because according to what I hear illegal immigrants are the only ones who will do certain kinds of hard work and I can’t think of many red-blooded, flag-waving American men who would work for fourteen years to get anybody. Most of them would prolly just try to carry their woman off like a caveman or possibly like one of Nebuchadnezzar’s soldiers.

If this post seems rambling and disjointed to you, it seems that way to me also, and the only way I know to get out of Billy Ray Barnwell mode is to sign off, but before I do I would like to dedicate this post to Mr. David Barlow of Ephraim, Utah, which may or may not be related to a certain half-tribe mentioned earlier.


For the benefit of jinksy and Snowbrush, this has been another tongue-in-cheek post from rhymeswithplague.

Editor Bob’s mailbox

At the end of the preceding post (“Me and him went to town”), I invited people to submit sentences for Editor Bob’s consideration and several readers did so. Some just groused about certain words or grammatical topics. For the benefit of the subset of readers who never bother to read blog comments, I have reproduced the comments below along with responses from Editor Bob:


#1 - This is the sentence I would like Bob to consider: Blogger authorities have sentenced Bob to five years hard labour for pedantry. (from Yorkshire Pudding of Sheffield, Yorkshire, England, 11:13 AM, July 19, 2010)

YP, the first rule of editing is “Never pay attention to anyone who uses the word pedantry.” (The second rule is “I before E except after C, or when sounded like A as in neighbor and weigh,” but that’s neither here nor there.) Blogger authorities have authorized me to inform you that your wish is not their command.


#2 - Me and him aint got no quarrel with you’re analysis. (from Ruth Hull Chatlien in Illinois, 11:42 AM, July 19, 2010)

Ruth, I’m not sure whether this is a comment or the sentence you are submitting. In either event, him and you have qualified for a free copy of Marriage Ain’t A Word, It’s A Sentence for illustrating that the floating apostrophe phenomenon (FAPh) can introduce a silent ‘e’ where you least expect it. Awesome! Just send $25.00 to Editor Bob to help cover shipping and handling costs and you’re prize will be on it’s way. Your welcome, I’m sure. And if him and you aint married, I recommend that him and you get married posthaste, as it is getting more difficult every day to find people with whom you can agree.


#3 - you are doing this grqmmer thing cause you miss the ole putz (from Putz in Utah, 12:26 PM, July 19, 2010)

Putz, I don’t know how to tell the old putz from the new putz, but grqmmer is my life, and a sentence should always start with a capital letter, unless you are E. E. Cummings, which (and even whom) you are not.


#4 - And when did ‘those’ become redundant in favour of ‘them’? I can be pedantic, too... Other pet hates...‘for free’, ‘could of’ and ‘your’ for ‘you’re’, or vice versa...and let’s not get into ‘its’ and ‘it's’! (from jinksy in Havant, United Kingdom, 12:42 PM, July 19, 2010)

jinksy, I could of sworn that ‘those’ has never become redundant in favor of ‘them’ but I may not have the latest information at my fingertips because I let my subscription to Editor’s Monthly lapse several years back and they won’t give it to me for free. It’s [note] all in knowing when to use which one. See my answer below to Carolina in #6. Editor Bob tries to be tongue-in-cheek, but Editor Bob is learning that tongue-in-cheek is in the eye of the beholder.


#5 - Here’s one for you, RWP: “Let’s you and me go to town and get them cheese and them license.” I declare under oath (which I take very seriously) that I have heard “them cheese” and “them license” spoken in my presence. (from Pat in Arkansas, 11:26 PM, July 19, 2010)

Pat,thanks for your contribution. Texans would never say “them license.” Texans say “those license.” In Minnesota, however, “them cheese” is an abbreviation used when referring to one’s neighbors in Wisconsin, the longer version being “them cheeseheads.” Saying “Let’s you and me go to town and get them cheeseheads,” however, borders on being bellicose. Perhaps one day when Editor Bob is in more of a subjunctive mood he will blog about alliteration.


#6 - I dare not comment, since I don’t know my whos from my whoms or who’s from my whom’s. But at least I have a good excuse. And just to be sure: he and I went to town? (from Carolina in the Netherlands, 9:30 AM, July 20, 2010)

Carolina, you are 100% correct: The subject of a sentence should be in the nominative case. Objective case is for direct objects, indirect objects, and objects of prepositions. This seems simple enough, but many, many Americans don’t seem to know (or care) which is which. Some people don’t know their who’s from their whose, either, but to whom much is given, of him (or her) much will be required.


#7 - Suppose you know the sentence which got author Lynne Truss up on her high horse about the correct use of commas (and made her a fortune with best-selling book on punctuation); apparently a zoo sign regarding pandas should have read “Eats shoots and leaves”, but actually read “Eats, shoots and leaves” ... a gun-toting panda! (from Brian in Catalonia [think Spain but not Spanish], 10:27 AM, July 20, 2010)

Brian, I suppose there are few things worse than a gun-toting panda, but one might be a gun-toting panda with opposable thumbs. Speaking of commas and punctuation, Americans put commas and periods inside quotation marks; Brits put commas and periods outside quotation marks. Both put semi-colons outside quotation marks. I prefer not to think of commas at all until after breakfast. I have done away with the cereal comma.

(End of comments and responses)


Editor Bob is gratified that his sphere of influence continues to expand, Yorkshire Pudding’s opinion notwithstanding. So keep them comments coming, folks, perhaps to this very post, and Editor Bob may let you lovers of language peek into his mailbox again real, er, really, er, very soon.

Me and him went to town.

There is so much wrong with that sentence. For one thing, me and him hardly know each other, and I can assure you that me and him have never went to town together. We may have went to town separately, but the plain fact is we have never went to town together as implied in the sentence. When you are in doubt about how a sentence may be received, it is always better to recast it to say what you actually mean. A better rendering of this particular sentence would be: Me and him have went to town on occasion, but never together, always separately, in case you were wondering, as me and him hardly know each other, but her and him have went to town frequently, in more ways than one.

Thanks go out to Mr. Aloysius P. Snowbrush of Lowell, Mass., for inspiring this brief but very informative post when, among other things in a recent comment, he said: “We all make mistakes--except for Bob who does us the service of pointing them out--but some are so atrocious as to mark one as ignorant in a generalized way.”

If you have a sentence you would like Editor Bob to comment on, forget them cards and letters as they are very old school, but keep them comments coming.

O Canada!

If you live in the United States, here is a map of our great neighbor to the north. If you don’t live in the United States, here is a map of a great big country on some continent somewhere (and if you click on the map, it will get even bigger.)


I don’t know what you noticed about the map, but I immediately noticed three things. Really, they just jumped off the page at me:

1. What was in my youth called the Northwest Territories has been split into two parts. The smaller, western part is still called the Northwest Territories, but the larger, eastern part is now called Nunavut (which, according to Wikipedia, means “our land” in the Inuktitut language). You can learn a lot more about Nunavut, Inuktitut, and even Inuinnaqtun by clicking here.

2. Greenland, which is close to but not a part of Canada, belongs to Denmark. Greenland is now just its parenthetical name. Its non-parenthetical name is Kalaallit Nunaat. For those in my age bracket, the same sort of thing happened with Myanmar (Burma), Zaire (Belgian Congo), and Indonesia (the Dutch East Indies). Proving that time marches on, Pluto isn’t even a planet any more.

3. The heck with that three-mile-limit thing or even that twelve-mile international waters thing. Canada has declared for itself something called the Exclusive 200-nautical-mile Economic Zone (EEZ). Fishermen from other countries, take note. I’m just sayin’.


People in my age bracket may also remember when Canada’s national anthem was a song entitled “The Maple Leaf Forever” which English-speaking Canadians sang with gusto. They especially liked the line, “The thistle, shamrock, rose entwine the maple leaf forever,” because the thistle was a symbol of Scotland, the shamrock was a symbol of Ireland, and the rose was a symbol of England. French-speaking Canadians, however, most of whom lived in Quebec, were having thoughts instead about the fleur-de-lis. After an impasse of sorts occurred, “O Canada” became the country’s new national anthem. Also, a new flag replaced the former design in which the British Union Jack had featured prominently. The new flag proudly displays the most widely recognized symbol of Canada, Wayne Gretzky Celine Dion the maple leaf.

Here for your listening pleasure is the Canadian national anthem “O Canada.” Both the English and the French lyrics are superimposed over the new flag.

To recap, here are the official English lyrics:

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.


and here are the official French lyrics:

Ô Canada!
Terre de nos aïeux,
Ton front est ceint de fleurons glorieux!
Car ton bras sait porter l'épée,
Il sait porter la croix!
Ton histoire est une épopée
Des plus brillants exploits.
Et ta valeur, de foi trempée,
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.


Here is an English translation of the French lyrics:

O Canada!
Land of our forefathers,
Thy brow is wreathed with a glorious garland of flowers!
As is thy arm ready to wield the sword,
So also is it ready to carry the cross.
Thy history is an epic
Of the most brilliant exploits.
And thy valour, steeped in faith,
Will protect our homes and our rights,
Will protect our homes and our rights.


Did you notice that the two versions have nothing to do with one another?

The same sort of effect can be achieved by playing a certain familiar tune while half the audience sing “My Country, ’Tis Of Thee” and the other half sing “God Save The Queen.”

Finally, you can simultaneously while away the hours and increase your knowledge of Canada’s provinces and provincial capitals by playing with these three puzzles.

In case you already know all of Canada’s provinces and provincial capitals, here is “O Canada” in Inuktitut:

Uu Kanata!
Nangmini nunavut!
Piqujatii nalattiaqpavut.
Angiglivalliajuti,
Sanngijulutillu.
Nangiqpugu, Uu Kanata,
Mianiripluti.
Uu Kanata! nunatsia!
Nangiqpugu mianiripluti,
Uu Kanata, salagijauquna!


One can only speculate about the national crises that might arise if we ever discover what the Inuktitut words mean.

Here ends my little experiment in creating posts about various national anthems. It’s not that I’m tiring of the subject, necessarily, but I sense that some of you may be. And I freely admit that my Jewish heritage on my mother’s side makes me reluctant to create a post about “Deutschland, Deutschland Über Alles,” Joseph Haydn’s music notwithstanding.

Concentrating on Canada, though, even for only one post, turned out to be a good way to try to stay cool during these dog days. At this time of year, readers in Australia and New Zealand aren’t worried about staying cool. Apropos of absolutely nothing, this rendition of the Swedish national anthem, “Du Gamla Du Fria,” is either very cool or very hot, unless it’s both very cool and very hot.

After everything is said and done, we can all while away the hours watching this. Any resemblance to your correspondent is purely coincidental.

P.S. - If you managed to make it all the way to the end of this post, here is a musical bonus just for you!

Lest my friends in the British Isles feel slighted

...I herewith publish the words to the standard version of their national anthem:

God Save the Queen

God save our gracious Queen,
Long live our noble Queen,
God save the Queen:
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us:
God save the Queen.

O Lord, our God, arise,
Scatter her enemies,
And make them fall.
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On Thee our hopes we fix,
God save us all.

Thy choicest gifts in store,
On her be pleased to pour;
Long may she reign:
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause
To sing with heart and voice
God save the Queen.


I invite you to click here to join in a public “sing-along” at which several members of the royal family were present. The second verse with the lines “Confound their politics / Frustrate their knavish tricks” was omitted on this occasion, possibly in deference to the members of the House of Commons. You may stand if you like, although standing in the privacy of one’s own home is always optional.

Inexplicably, Her Majesty wore clothes that caused her to blend into the crowd like one of her common subjects. More often, she tends to dress like this:

Day Vear:

Evening Vear:

Svim Vear:

Here is the queen appearing before legions of her adoring public on the occasion of her Golden Jubilee in 2002.

Let it be noted that in America such adulation is seen only at concerts by the Jonas Brothers or sightings of Angelina Jolie. To quote again from that omitted second verse, God save us all.

I apologize to those of you who were hoping for a post about St. Swithin’s Day.