[email protected]

In a message dated 2/4/2003 7:35:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:


> We started out as classical homeschoolers. My daughter is fine with the
> structure and books, but my son just isn't. I have switched curricula
> repeatedly in certain subjects, and just decided a few weeks ago that we
> are going to give unschooling a try, because I am tired of fighting him to
> do his work. It is stressful, and I just don't like feeling like a
> dictator.
>

I find that my son (8) Is just like this. We started out doing workbooks and
such which didn't last long. We are now in the first part of unschooling
which is deschooling. This is our second year at home but with me pushing
school I feel he never had a chance to deschool.
It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy and neither
one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle for hours.
Does anybody find it the same?
It just seems to me that boys need to move.

Lori in MI


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jon and Rue Kream

" It just seems to me that boys need to move. "

I see that you haven't met my whirling dervish - I mean daughter :0).
~Rue




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Olif VanPelt

I actually don't think I am too surprised that boys do better as unschoolers as opposed to "school at home" because studies (I don't have any specifics) show that schools are set up for girls to succeed in their general learning styles and not boys. I know this isn't true for everyone, but maybe it is generally true. Maybe more boys are kinesthetic learners.

Lori, how is your son doing? Is he starting to show specific interests yet? My daughter does, but my son really hasn't yet. Maybe because I am still in the habit of looking for "school interests". I think he is just having a good time being his own boss. When he was in school (K-2), he used to be so happy to be able to come home and do his own thing. The only thing is that it was always shortly bedtime to him, because he had to get up the next day, and he didn't have enough of "his time" that he needed. He would tire of things like Boy Scouts because he would get into doing his own thing at home and it was time to leave again. He really enjoys just being home. I think he would probably be called an introvert whereas his sister is definitely an extrovert.

-OlifGet more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

squidgybumemma <[email protected]>

HI Karin & Lori,

I'm new to this group & I know they advise just to read for a week or
too but I just had to reply. My daughter (13) can sit & read a books
for hours & is not really bothered if she ever goes too far. On the
other hand my son (12) has to be active the whole time & he HAS to
run or walk the fields (we have 39 acres here in WV) at least once a
day. He loves the outdoor life & will only read what he wants to.
But, you know what, he is a very balanced kid - just has energy that
needs burning. He is card crazy & whenever we are all free, he wants
to play. Be encouraged, at least you're giving them the opportunity
to be themselves.

See ya,

Liz

P.S. I have been amazed at how "active" this site is. Everyone here
is laughing at the number of emails I'm getting each day!
>
> > I find that my son (8) Is just like this. We started out doing
workbooks
> and
> > such which didn't last long. We are now in the first part of
unschooling
> > which is deschooling. This is our second year at home but with me
pushing
> > school I feel he never had a chance to deschool.
> > It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy
and
> neither
> > one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle
for
> hours.
> > Does anybody find it the same?
> > It just seems to me that boys need to move.
> >
> > Lori in MI
>
>
> Yes, Lori, my boys are the same as you are describing yours to be.
> They have never been to school but 6 years ago we started out with
typical
> homeschooling (school-at-home).
> At least we tried. I had this vision in my head of my boys happily
doing
> "assignments" and work in books that I told them to do and they
would be
> busy all day with all this schoolwork.
> NOT!!
> It never happened that way. Whenever I made us sit down and do
schoolwork,
> it felt really forced and I knew they couldn't wait to
be "released" from
> their chairs to go play or whatever.
> Here we are, 1 1/2 years into unschooling.
> My boys are happy that they don't HAVE to do schoolwork and I'm
happy that I
> don't have to force them to do it.
> They're outside playing right now. <g>
>
> Karin in Phoenix, AZ
> mom to Ben (11) and Jonny (10)

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/4/03 1:30:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, lwillson7@...
writes:

> It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy and neither
>
> one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle for hours.
>
> Does anybody find it the same?
> It just seems to me that boys need to move.
>
> Lori in MI
>

Same here.. My daughter is actually stressed out from LACK of structure.. She
feels liek she not learning anything.. I am hoping ( and encouraging) that
she startst to be self motivated.. I CAN and I will make her out a lesson
plan/curriculum type thing, but I really think that once she begins to feel
like she can pursue whatever she wants, not just what is "required" she will
feel much more liberated. She is such a smart girl. I hate to see her
"missing:" school.

Teresa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Karin

> I find that my son (8) Is just like this. We started out doing workbooks
and
> such which didn't last long. We are now in the first part of unschooling
> which is deschooling. This is our second year at home but with me pushing
> school I feel he never had a chance to deschool.
> It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy and
neither
> one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle for
hours.
> Does anybody find it the same?
> It just seems to me that boys need to move.
>
> Lori in MI


Yes, Lori, my boys are the same as you are describing yours to be.
They have never been to school but 6 years ago we started out with typical
homeschooling (school-at-home).
At least we tried. I had this vision in my head of my boys happily doing
"assignments" and work in books that I told them to do and they would be
busy all day with all this schoolwork.
NOT!!
It never happened that way. Whenever I made us sit down and do schoolwork,
it felt really forced and I knew they couldn't wait to be "released" from
their chairs to go play or whatever.
Here we are, 1 1/2 years into unschooling.
My boys are happy that they don't HAVE to do schoolwork and I'm happy that I
don't have to force them to do it.
They're outside playing right now. <g>

Karin in Phoenix, AZ
mom to Ben (11) and Jonny (10)

Fetteroll

on 2/4/03 8:33 PM, grlynbl@... at grlynbl@... wrote:

> My daughter is actually stressed out from LACK of structure.. She
> feels liek she not learning anything..

Maybe suggest that she take a break and learn *nothing.* And as part of the
break she should make a note of everytime she "fails" and learns something
"by mistake".

> I CAN and I will make her out a lesson
> plan/curriculum type thing

What if you help *her* make one out. Ask what *she* wants to learn and help
her figure out a plan for her to learn those things. And then review the
plan periodically to see if it's working, what parts need tweaked, and
whether her goals have changed.

> I am hoping ( and encouraging) that
> she startst to be self motivated..

What if you help her make out a plan to explore what interests her? She can
make that a goal so that she can get the same feeling of progress and
accomplishment.

Joyce

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/2003 7:40:39 AM Eastern Standard Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
> Maybe suggest that she take a break and learn *nothing.* And as part of the
> break she should make a note of everytime she "fails" and learns something
> "by mistake".

One day last Fall I was working. I groom dogs and I was expecting another
long day of being alone in the "salon" with a bunch of poodles. I was in the
middle of roughing out the first one and said to myself, "Well, I guess I
won't be learning anything new today. It's just more of the same ol', same
ol'." I had NPR on (I can't carry a tune or read music---but I love hearing
it! <BG>), and the guy was talking about a conductor who had just retired. He
told about how he gave his last performance and how the orchestra remained
seated as he took a bow. This was the ultimate show of respect and honor and
deference that an orchestra can give to a conductor.

I NEVER knew that! It really touched me to learn it. And I got to hear the
final performance and hear the applause he received---all by his lonesome.

I think it's got to be very emotional to retire from someting you love so
much---and then to be honored in such a way.

I can't figure out WHAT a conductor really DOES! <G> I figure that if
everyone KNOWS his part, that this guy just HAS to be superfluous! <BWG> But
I enjoy watching him.

But here on a day when I thought I would learn NOTHING new, I DID! <G> And it
was really neat. I "failed"! <g>

~Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fetteroll

on 2/5/03 8:24 AM, kbcdlovejo@... at kbcdlovejo@... wrote:

> I can't figure out WHAT a conductor really DOES! <G> I figure that if
> everyone KNOWS his part, that this guy just HAS to be superfluous! <BWG> But
> I enjoy watching him.

Well, this is coming from someone ignorant about music ;-) but sometimes
orchestras will play without a conductor. (There may even be a word for it.)
So probably if you looked up some discussions about why they try that
sometimes it would be clearer why they do use a conductor most of the time.

But I *think* it has to do with keeping everyone on the same tempo. (Or do I
mean beat? Or is that the same thing?) Just knowing all the notes isn't the
same as 50 or 100 people being able keep the exact same tempo throughout it.
It could be also that sitting in the orchestra things sound different than
they do to the audience. So maybe there's some unconscious tendency to drift
into making things sound right from where you're sitting rather than sound
right from where the audience is sitting.

Joyce

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/2003 9:05:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
> I can't figure out WHAT a conductor really DOES! <G> I figure that if
> > everyone KNOWS his part, that this guy just HAS to be superfluous! <BWG>
> But
> > I enjoy watching him.
>
> Well, this is coming from someone ignorant about music ;-) but sometimes
> orchestras will play without a conductor. (There may even be a word for
> it.)
> So probably if you looked up some discussions about why they try that
> sometimes it would be clearer why they do use a conductor most of the time.
>
> But I *think* it has to do with keeping everyone on the same tempo. (Or do
> I
> mean beat? Or is that the same thing?) Just knowing all the notes isn't the
> same as 50 or 100 people being able keep the exact same tempo throughout
> it.
> It could be also that sitting in the orchestra things sound different than
> they do to the audience. So maybe there's some unconscious tendency to
> drift
> into making things sound right from where you're sitting rather than sound
> right from where the audience is sitting.

Yeah. Ben says it's like a ball team's needing a coach---but as an
"independent" athlete, I can't buy that! I'm not into team sports---I don't
"play well" with others! <g> My horse and I (or my dog and I) are a
team---and I'm willing to take all the praise or all the blame, so I just
don't GET that mentality! <G>

If what Ben says is true, then why can't the coach/conductor get it all
arranged at practices and then back off on game day/symphony night?

Yeah, yeah. I'm hopeless! <G>

~Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fetteroll

on 2/5/03 9:21 AM, kbcdlovejo@... at kbcdlovejo@... wrote:

> Yeah, yeah. I'm hopeless! <G>

Yes, you are, if you just want to pleased with your ignorance ;-)

Here's some links:

What players think of conductors
http://www.ambache.co.uk/conductor.htm

There's players thoughts on having a conductor, no conductor. Conductors's
responses. What audiences think. And examples of effective musical
leadership.

Here's a piece on The Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, "widely considered to be
one of the world's great orchestras". (Even nonmusical me has heard of them.
;-)

The Conductorless Orchestra.
http://www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/L2L/summer2001/seifter.html

The founder had "the goal of bringing the chamber music ideals of democracy,
personal involvement, and mutual respect into an orchestral setting." Lots
of good stuff about the bad parts of having a conductor. But it *is* only 27
people.

Joyce

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/2003 10:05:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
> > Yeah, yeah. I'm hopeless! <G>
>
> Yes, you are, if you just want to pleased with your ignorance ;-)

I meant hopeless in the sense that I just don't understand the "team"
mentality---NOT that I can't do my own research! <G>

> Here's some links:
>
> What players think of conductors
> http://www.ambache.co.uk/conductor.htm
>
> There's players thoughts on having a conductor, no conductor. Conductors's
> responses. What audiences think. And examples of effective musical
> leadership.

Really neat---to read what some musicians thought about conductors---many of
them think the same way I do! <G>

> Here's a piece on The Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, "widely considered to be
> one of the world's great orchestras". (Even nonmusical me has heard of
> them.
> ;-)
>
> The Conductorless Orchestra.
> http://www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/L2L/summer2001/seifter.html

HAH! I beat you there! I can also google! <g>

And I've heard the Orpheus MANY times on NPR--they have just never said that
it's conductorless! I wish they would--although THEN it would probably be
seen as a slap in the face of the many conductors who are so revered, so
maybe they shouldn't, considering their audience. Like having Sandra Dodd
speak at a curriculum fair! <BWEG>

> The founder had "the goal of bringing the chamber music ideals of democracy,
> personal involvement, and mutual respect into an orchestral setting." Lots
> of good stuff about the bad parts of having a conductor. But it *is* only
> 27
> people.

Twenty-seven with others in & out. But it WORKS! And so it's not about beat
and/or tempo---or where you're sitting. It's about CONTROL! And authority.

Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about this--especially
as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a difference to you?
Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?

~Kelly, curious


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kelli Traaseth

On the conductor front--

I've played violin and piano in orchestra settings and the place where I have felt the conductor very necessary is with bringing it all together. Obviously<g>

Such as with dynamics, loudness and softness. Someone hearing the whole thing, together. When you are playing your instrument its pretty hard to hear the parts and if you are at the right levels, volume wise, or if others are loud or not.

That's where I think they are needed. Although maybe if they are there in rehearsal, they wouldn't be needed so much in the performance. I think it also has alot to do with how many are in the orchestra/band.

Kelli, who misses playing with an orchestra!


kbcdlovejo@... wrote:In a message dated 2/5/2003 10:05:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
> > Yeah, yeah. I'm hopeless! <G>
>
> Yes, you are, if you just want to pleased with your ignorance ;-)

I meant hopeless in the sense that I just don't understand the "team"
mentality---NOT that I can't do my own research! <G>

> Here's some links:
>
> What players think of conductors
> http://www.ambache.co.uk/conductor.htm
>
> There's players thoughts on having a conductor, no conductor. Conductors's
> responses. What audiences think. And examples of effective musical
> leadership.

Really neat---to read what some musicians thought about conductors---many of
them think the same way I do! <G>

> Here's a piece on The Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, "widely considered to be
> one of the world's great orchestras". (Even nonmusical me has heard of
> them.
> ;-)
>
> The Conductorless Orchestra.
> http://www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/L2L/summer2001/seifter.html

HAH! I beat you there! I can also google! <g>

And I've heard the Orpheus MANY times on NPR--they have just never said that
it's conductorless! I wish they would--although THEN it would probably be
seen as a slap in the face of the many conductors who are so revered, so
maybe they shouldn't, considering their audience. Like having Sandra Dodd
speak at a curriculum fair! <BWEG>

> The founder had "the goal of bringing the chamber music ideals of democracy,
> personal involvement, and mutual respect into an orchestral setting." Lots
> of good stuff about the bad parts of having a conductor. But it *is* only
> 27
> people.

Twenty-seven with others in & out. But it WORKS! And so it's not about beat
and/or tempo---or where you're sitting. It's about CONTROL! And authority.

Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about this--especially
as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a difference to you?
Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?

~Kelly, curious


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Come forth into the light of things, let Nature be your teacher.
William Wordsworth


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kelli Traaseth

Betty <bap58@...> wrote:

Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do with the chromosomes!
Betty



I don't think so! Hope your somewhat joking. I have a very want to please husband, and me, well, lets say I'm on the complete opposite end. Not a people pleaser. And I have one girl who is a pleaser and one that is not. I don't think its a gender thing.



Kelli




----- Original Message -----
From: lwillson7@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Boys and Unschooling?


In a message dated 2/4/2003 7:35:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:


> We started out as classical homeschoolers. My daughter is fine with the
> structure and books, but my son just isn't. I have switched curricula
> repeatedly in certain subjects, and just decided a few weeks ago that we
> are going to give unschooling a try, because I am tired of fighting him to
> do his work. It is stressful, and I just don't like feeling like a
> dictator.
>

I find that my son (8) Is just like this. We started out doing workbooks and
such which didn't last long. We are now in the first part of unschooling
which is deschooling. This is our second year at home but with me pushing
school I feel he never had a chance to deschool.
It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy and neither
one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle for hours.
Does anybody find it the same?
It just seems to me that boys need to move.

Lori in MI


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Come forth into the light of things, let Nature be your teacher.
William Wordsworth


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/03 11:56:49 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bap58@... writes:

> Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do with the
> chromosomes!
> Betty
>

AMEN!.. I think for the most part, your right.. There are always exceptions,
but my experience hasnt ran across any.. lol

Teresa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/03 12:16:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kellitraas@... writes:

> I don't think so! Hope your somewhat joking. I have a very want to
> please husband, and me, well, lets say I'm on the complete opposite end.
> Not a people pleaser. And I have one girl who is a pleaser and one that is
> not. I don't think its a gender thing.
>
>
>
> Kelli
>

AHA!.. the exceptions!.. I knew they were out there :-)

Teresa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Angela

Maybe as a rule, but darn it, we always break all the rules. I have one who
is a people pleaser and one who isn't and they are both girls. The oldest
is the one who is not the people pleaser and if it weren't for her, it might
have taken me longer to be the unschooler as I am. It was her refusal to do
anything I wanted her to do, when she had different priorities, that really
taught me to back off and let her direct her learning. It was obvious she
was learning in great leaps and bounds. She just wasn't learning the things
that schools think are important. Thank goodness for little
non-conformists. :0)


Angela in Maine-unschooling@...
http://userpages.prexar.com/rickshaw/

"What you are shouts so loudly in my ears I cannot hear what you say."
Emerson


Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do with the
chromosomes!
Betty



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/2003 11:56:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bap58@... writes:

> Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do with the
> chromosomes!
>

Not so. I have two boys. One (15) is SUCH a pleaser! Kindest, most
considerate, most empathetic child (of either sex) you'd ever want to meet.

~Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the_clevengers <[email protected]>

> In a message dated 2/5/2003 11:56:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> bap58@h... writes:
>
> > Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do
with the
> > chromosomes!

Wow, not in this family! My son is sweet-tempered and cares a lot
about what others think and feel. He's very cautious and likes to go
into things slowly. My daughter is hell on wheels (more than a little
bit like her momma, my parents like to point out). I came from a
family of two girls, and my sister was more of a pleaser, I was more
of a dye-my-hair-pink-and-screw-you. Of course, that was as a
teenager, but even as a very small child I was doing my own thing and
always getting myself into trouble of my own making (jumping off a
wall, thinking I could fly at 4 years old, necessitating the first of
many ER trips - just one example).

I think the first thing my kids has taught me is that we are all
individuals and there are no hard and fast rules.

Blue Skies,
-Robin-

Betty

Girls like to please, boys don't care. I think that it has to do with the chromosomes!
Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: lwillson7@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Boys and Unschooling?


In a message dated 2/4/2003 7:35:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:


> We started out as classical homeschoolers. My daughter is fine with the
> structure and books, but my son just isn't. I have switched curricula
> repeatedly in certain subjects, and just decided a few weeks ago that we
> are going to give unschooling a try, because I am tired of fighting him to
> do his work. It is stressful, and I just don't like feeling like a
> dictator.
>

I find that my son (8) Is just like this. We started out doing workbooks and
such which didn't last long. We are now in the first part of unschooling
which is deschooling. This is our second year at home but with me pushing
school I feel he never had a chance to deschool.
It seems that boys benefit more from unschooling. I have two boy and neither
one likes to sit still but I have nieces that can sit and doodle for hours.
Does anybody find it the same?
It just seems to me that boys need to move.

Lori in MI


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tia Leschke

>
> Well, this is coming from someone ignorant about music ;-) but sometimes
> orchestras will play without a conductor. (There may even be a word for
it.)
> So probably if you looked up some discussions about why they try that
> sometimes it would be clearer why they do use a conductor most of the
time.
>
> But I *think* it has to do with keeping everyone on the same tempo. (Or do
I
> mean beat? Or is that the same thing?) Just knowing all the notes isn't
the
> same as 50 or 100 people being able keep the exact same tempo throughout
it.
> It could be also that sitting in the orchestra things sound different than
> they do to the audience. So maybe there's some unconscious tendency to
drift
> into making things sound right from where you're sitting rather than sound
> right from where the audience is sitting.

You've pretty well hit it right on the nose, Joyce. The bigger the group of
musicians, the harder it is to keep it together and balanced. I'm playing a
couple of concerts this weekend with a very small orchestra. Actually we're
playing one piece for 8 woodwinds. That one won't be conducted, but if you
were watching carefully, one of the players would be making exaggerated
movements with his instrument to indicate tempos, etc. Another piece we're
playing is for 2 horns, 2 oboes, and strings. I *think* that our conductor
will be conducting that one from the concertmaster's spot (first violin),
again with the exaggerated movements of his bow. The other piece is a
violin concerto. He's been conducting that, and I *think* he will for the
concert, but I'll find that out at the dress rehearsal tonight.

As to power-tripping conductors . . . I've had a few. They fit the old joke
about what's the difference between a conductor and a bull?





The orchestra has the horns at the back and the a**h*le at the front.
Tia

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/03 7:05:19 AM, fetteroll@... writes:

<< But I *think* it has to do with keeping everyone on the same tempo. (Or do
I
mean beat? Or is that the same thing?) Just knowing all the notes isn't the
same as 50 or 100 people being able keep the exact same tempo throughout it.
>>

Worse than that, they're not SUPPOSED to keep the same tempo throughout.
Each time things slow down, speed up, or change speeds abruptly, the
conductor has to set that pace.

In small ensembles the change is accomplished, again, by following that
leader. Or the person/player who comes in at the new temp sets the tempo and
others follow that change.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/03 8:40:23 AM, kbcdlovejo@... writes:

<< Twenty-seven with others in & out. But it WORKS! And so it's not about
beat
and/or tempo---or where you're sitting. It's about CONTROL! And authority.
>>

When someone directs a play or a movie, is that about control and authority,
or is it about art?

<<Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about this--especially
as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a difference to you?
Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?>>

I prefer ensemble music without a conductor, but if I were in a large enough
ensemble/orchestra/band I would want one. It's a matter of scale.

When I lead vocal groups, which I used to do much more, I like songs with
obvious leaders, so that no matter how many "backup singers" there might be,
there is a person to follow. If the lead singer of that song decides the
audience is bored and wants to bail to the last verse, and if the last verse
has a special kind of ending (a repeat or hold or extra harmonies) the leader
can indicate that by eye contact or a gesture to the one or two people who
can make the difference.

When we start songs up, if possible we get one singer or one instrument to do
the first line, or a lead-in line and then we have the pitch and the tempo,
with no counting or humming a tone or hand-waving. It's still control and
authority, but it's not the formal baton-waving.

<<Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?>>

If I'm part of a group playing music in the style someone else decided, I'm
part of THEIR musical moment. When I'm deciding how a piece is going to be,
I rarely have anyone saying "That's too fast," or "I really want to use a ton
of vibrato here even though it's an early Renaissance piece." If you make
your point for good reasons and you explain them, and get the cooperation of
your other people, it's not meddling, it's cooperation.

When other people are willing to go in with me on my vision of something, I'm
willing to do something their style if they want.

But as with many pursuits, there are way more followers and "whatever" guys
than there are visionary leaders with strong opinions.

Sandra

Stephanie Elms

> Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about
> this--especially
> as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a
> difference to you?
> Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?

Speaking as someone who was a member of the 330 piece Marching Virginians (at Va Tech)
I couldn't picture all of us staying together without our drum majors, especially when
strewn across 100 yards of football field. Too easy to go off on your own (especially it
you have had a few mixed drinks before half time!).

Stephanie E.

Tia Leschke

>
> <<Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about
this--especially
> as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a difference to
you?
> Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?>>

Interesting. We just had a taste of this at rehearsal tonight. The
"leader" of our octet actually asked the conductor if he would conduct the
piece because we were having trouble staying together. (mainly one of the
bassoons, who couldn't keep up and hasn't learned to just leave out notes
here and there in order to stay in time) Anyway, the conductor refused. It
will be fine. He was also asked to conduct one of the string pieces and
refused. It really did sound better with him playing first violin. It's
just a little harder for them to follow

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/5/2003 10:30:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:

> When someone directs a play or a movie, is that about control and authority,
>
> or is it about art?

I don't do THAT either--acting/standing in front of a crowd---so I have no
personal take on it.

But after watching The Actors' Studio, I hear many different ideas on that. I
guess it depends on the actor. When asked what kind of director he likes, the
actor will generally fall into one of two categories. Either he wants a
director with an exact vision of what he wants---who can verbalize exactly
what he sees in his head. Or he likes a director who is "hands off" and
allows him the freedom to "become" that character the ACTOR sees in HIS head.
Ben and I try to guess which one they'll be (or ARE, in the case of
directors).


If the lead singer of that song decides the
> audience is bored and wants to bail to the last verse, and if the last verse
>
> has a special kind of ending (a repeat or hold or extra harmonies) the
> leader
> can indicate that by eye contact or a gesture to the one or two people who
> can make the difference.

Can you really DO that "cold turkey"? Or does it have to be discussed in
advance, so that the musicians/singers know it's a possibility? I guess
everyone coud pobably notice the audience would be yawning, so could expect
it. But how would a conductor know? (his back's to the crowd) Or can he even
DO that? Classical music pretty much is "standard"---folks know every note.
Deviations could drive an audience mad. Maybe in just the choral productions?

>>But as with many pursuits, there are way more followers and "whatever" guys

than there are visionary leaders with strong opinions.<<

And I guess that's the thing---individual vs team mentality.

I think that's why with my usual strong opinions, when I say "whatever", I
REALLY don't care! <G>

~Kelly





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

the_clevengers <[email protected]>

> <<Ok, y'all---many of you musicians: How do y'all feel about
> this--especially
> > as UNschoolers? Do you prefer conductors? Can they make a
difference to
> you?
> > Or does it feel like meddling in what YOU know?>>

I think it depends on the situation. I've sung with a big choir and
pretty complex music (Mozart's Coronation Mass) that definitely
benefited from having a conductor. A good conductor can teach you
things you don't know about the music, the language it's written in,
etc. as well as holding you all together on a sometimes difficult
beat or set of tempo changes. But I've been in other, smaller, groups
where it's not so important. I think it depends a lot on what you
want to get out of the experience as well. I don't ever mind teachers
if I've sought them out for their knowledge and they know something I
don't and I would like to learn it.

Blue Skies,
-Robin-

[email protected]

In a message dated 2/6/03 6:03:10 AM, kbcdlovejo@... writes:

<< When asked what kind of director he likes, the
actor will generally fall into one of two categories. Either he wants a
director with an exact vision of what he wants---who can verbalize exactly
what he sees in his head. Or he likes a director who is "hands off" and
allows him the freedom to "become" that character the ACTOR sees in HIS head.
Ben and I try to guess which one they'll be (or ARE, in the case of
directors). >>

Somebody still has to have the vision of the whole play or movie, to know
who's in when and where they're standing.

<Can you really DO that "cold turkey"? Or does it have to be discussed in
advance, so that the musicians/singers know it's a possibility? >>

You can do it cold turkey if the musicians are smart and flexible and
experienced.

<<But how would a conductor know? (his back's to the crowd) Or can he even
DO that?>>

No, I was talking about smaller groups, without conductors.

With orchestras they just end up leaving out whole numbers, or doing just
last movements if the crowd is starting to be lost (like for kids' concerts,
when they make an excuse and end sooner than scheduled sometimes).

<<Maybe in just the choral productions?>>

I wasn't talking about "choral productions" the way you're thinking of it
either. Not a director and 120 voices doing Bach. Twenty voices doing
Somerset Wassail, or Riu Riu Chiu, where the final verse's text is going to
be immediately recognizeable to the singers, and the soloist going to that
text is the clue that this is the last verse.

<<And I guess that's the thing---individual vs team mentality.>>

No, some things can't be done without a group. No individual can put on an
opera. Not even a skit.

Sandra