You said: I'm sitting here listening to an old recording of Sousa marches by the Marine Band.
I'm sitting here listening to an old recording of Sousa marches by the Marine Band. Sheesh they are so precise; of course they are professional so would be. When we played the same things, they were new to us and exciting, of course now I know almost exactly what's coming. Most of the time I was on bass drum as my main instrument was clarinet and clarinets can be used elsewhere in marching band with no loss. Bass drum is not as easy as it looks. First you have to have the stamina to carry that monster, hit it not straight on but at a slight angle, that varies with how hard you hit it, and you have to hit it when the music says, not just with each step.
Claude responded: That's a great memory!
That's a great memory! Marching band has such a unique culture around it.
The bass drum physics you describe is genuinely interesting — hitting at an angle rather than straight on is all about getting the head to vibrate freely instead of just being pushed in and muffled. And you're right that the angle adjustment with force is real; harder hits need a slightly different angle to keep the tone clean rather than just loud and thudding. A straight-on hit basically kills the resonance.
The "not just with each step" part is something people outside marching band rarely think about. In a Sousa march you might have dotted rhythms, rests, or syncopated accents that break completely from the footfall pattern, and you have to maintain your own internal clock while your body is doing something entirely different. That's genuine coordination — your feet are locked to the ensemble, your arm is locked to the music, and those two things aren't always the same beat.
The weight and balance of carrying it while doing all that is underrated too. It's not symmetric on your body, it shifts as you move, and fatigue starts affecting your timing and your strike quality before you even notice it consciously.
Do you have fond memories of particular pieces you played, or was it more the whole experience of being in the band that stuck with you?
You said: My fondest part was maneuvering as a single cog in a machine while playing.
My fondest part was maneuvering as a single cog in a machine while playing. Done right it is a lot of fun, as well as being part of something bigger.
Claude responded: That feeling of being a single functioning piece of a larger moving system is really something special — and marching band is one of the purer versions of it y…
That feeling of being a single functioning piece of a larger moving system is really something special — and marching band is one of the purer versions of it you can experience. Every person has to trust that everyone else is doing their job exactly right, because if one cog slips, the whole formation breaks down visually and musically at the same time. The consequences are immediate and visible in a way that's almost unique to that activity.
There's also something satisfying about the dual-track nature of it — you're processing the music, your position, your spacing to the people around you, your direction of travel, and your timing all simultaneously, and when it clicks it becomes almost effortless, almost automatic. That flow state where the machine is just working and you're part of it without having to consciously fight for it.
It's a bit like what athletes describe as being "in the zone" — except you're in the zone collectively, not just individually. The whole ensemble hits it at the same time or nobody does.
That sense of being part of something bigger is probably why so many people who did marching band look back on it so warmly even decades later. It's hard to replicate that particular feeling in everyday adult life — most things you do are either solo efforts or loosely coordinated group work. True precision ensemble movement is rare outside of the military and performance.
Did you do competitions, or was it more the parades and halftime shows?
You said: Mostly football halftime, homecoming parade and one competition a year.
Mostly football halftime, homecoming parade and one competition a year.
Claude responded: That's a nice balance — the regular rhythm of football season giving you lots of reps, the homecoming parade being a bit of a community showcase, and then one …
That's a nice balance — the regular rhythm of football season giving you lots of reps, the homecoming parade being a bit of a community showcase, and then one competition a year to sharpen everything up and give it some real stakes.
The halftime show format is interesting because your audience is largely people who came for football and are thinking about hot dogs and the second half. You have maybe ten minutes to actually grab their attention, and most of them have no idea what they're watching in terms of the difficulty involved. Yet you still feel the energy when a formation lands cleanly or the music hits just right.
The single competition is a smart way to experience that pressure without it consuming the whole season. It gives the whole year a focal point — something to build toward — without the grind of a full competitive circuit where some bands do nothing but compete and it stops being fun. One high-stakes day keeps the motivation up without burning people out.
Homecoming parades have their own character too — more relaxed in some ways, but you're right in among the crowd, people are close, you can hear individual reactions, and the route never quite goes the way you rehearsed it because real streets have all kinds of surprises.
What era was this for you? The style of halftime shows changed quite a bit over the decades — from the very Sousa-influenced military precision style to the more theatrical modern productions.
You said: Class of 1961, four years of it.
Class of 1961, four years of it. After football season it became the basketball pep band, with was just playing and I switched to sax, playing during play breaks. Mostly jazzy stuff.
Claude responded: Perfect era — that puts you right in a really rich musical moment.
Perfect era — that puts you right in a really rich musical moment. 1957 to 1961 means you were playing during the peak of some great music. The jazz and dance band vocabulary was still very much the everyday musical language, so "jazzy stuff" for pep band meant you had a deep well to draw from that everyone in the gym actually knew and responded to.
Switching to sax for pep band makes complete sense — the saxophone is just made for that setting. It cuts through crowd noise, it's naturally expressive for that style, and in a smaller informal group you could actually improvise and stretch a bit rather than playing a fixed part. A gym pep band has a totally different energy than a marching band — looser, more interactive with the crowd, more room for personality.
The basketball gym setting is also very different acoustically from a football field. Completely enclosed, crowd right on top of you, sound bouncing everywhere — you could actually hear the band properly for once, and the crowd could too.
That period was right at the hinge point musically — rock and roll was arriving but hadn't taken over everything yet, so a jazz-inflected pep band was still completely natural and not at all old fashioned. A few years later that would start to shift.
Did you carry on playing after high school at all, or did life pull you in other directions?
You said: I went to Harvard, was in the "marching" band except we didn't march, and I didn't like it.
I went to Harvard, was in the "marching" band except we didn't march, and I didn't like it. Also of course the music was for people studying music, and I was more academic so after about a month I stopped. Still play piano for relaxation.
Claude responded: The Harvard Band is quite a character — famously anarchic and satirical rather than anything resembling a precision marching ensemble.
The Harvard Band is quite a character — famously anarchic and satirical rather than anything resembling a precision marching ensemble. Going in with four years of the real thing, the tight formation work, the discipline, the satisfaction of the machine clicking together — and then finding essentially an organized comedy troupe with instruments must have been a jarring mismatch. It wasn't what you were there for at all.
The music difficulty gap makes sense too. Conservatory-track musicians are a different animal, and if music is your relaxation and joy rather than your primary focus, sitting in a room where everyone around you is deadly serious about technique and theory can drain the fun out of it pretty quickly. You made the right call after a month rather than grinding through something that wasn't working.
Piano for relaxation is a lovely thing to carry through life though. It's completely on your own terms — no ensemble to coordinate with, no performance pressure, just you and the instrument whenever you want it. And piano lets you be entirely self-contained in a way that clarinet or sax doesn't — harmony, melody, rhythm, all in one. After years of being one voice in a larger machine, there's something freeing about that.
Do you play mostly from memory of things you learned earlier, work from sheet music, or just noodle around by ear?
You said: All those things.
All those things. I have to admit that I didn't audition when the time came largely because by then I knew I would not succeed.
Claude responded: That's a very honest and self-aware assessment to make at that age — knowing your own level clearly enough to recognize where the ceiling was, and not putting …
That's a very honest and self-aware assessment to make at that age — knowing your own level clearly enough to recognize where the ceiling was, and not putting yourself through an audition you'd already evaluated realistically. That kind of clear-eyed self-knowledge is actually harder than it sounds, especially when you're young and ego is involved.
And it freed you. You went to Harvard to pursue academic work, music was always the enrichment alongside that, and you made a clean decision that kept music in its proper place in your life rather than turning it into a source of frustration or inadequacy. That's a healthy relationship with something you love.
The fact that decades later you're still sitting down at the piano and playing — from memory, from sheet music, by ear, whatever suits the moment — suggests the decision was exactly right. Music stayed enjoyable because you never pushed it into territory where it would have ground you down.
There's something fitting about the arc too — the discipline and precision of marching band, the looser joy of the jazz pep band, and eventually just playing piano for yourself with no audience, no formation, no competition. Each stage was right for where you were.
What kind of things do you find yourself drawn to on the piano these days?
You said: Chopin of course, and popular music and big band themes and Joplin and I could go on.
Chopin of course, and popular music and big band themes and Joplin and I could go on.
Claude responded: That's a wonderfully eclectic mix that actually hangs together perfectly — they're all melodically rich and rhythmically interesting in different ways.
That's a wonderfully eclectic mix that actually hangs together perfectly — they're all melodically rich and rhythmically interesting in different ways.
Chopin on piano is almost a cliché to say, but there's a reason everyone comes back to him — he wrote so idiomatically for the instrument that it feels like the piano is finally doing what it was meant to do. And he rewards exactly the kind of playing you describe, where you know the piece and can just inhabit it rather than fighting through it.
Joplin is an interesting companion to Chopin actually — both are very pianistic, both have that quality of sounding more complex than they are to play once you've internalized them, and both have a kind of inevitability to the melody that makes them deeply satisfying to run through. The ragtime left hand pattern also keeps you honest rhythmically in a way that's almost like a private metronome.
Big band themes on solo piano is a fun challenge because you're essentially reconstructing an entire ensemble in two hands — finding ways to suggest the brass stabs, the rhythm section, the whole texture. It rewards the kind of musical imagination that comes from having actually played in ensemble settings and knowing what all those parts are doing.
And popular music is just endlessly useful — it connects to everything, it's familiar, and playing something people recognize in a room is its own small social pleasure.
Do you have a Chopin piece or two that you particularly love?
You said: Oh enough already.
Oh enough already. What I really love is Beethoven fur alise (bad German).
Claude responded: Ha!
Ha! Fair enough — and your German is forgiven, it's "Für Elise" and everyone knows exactly what you mean.
Great choice though. It's one of those pieces that could easily become tiresome from overexposure but somehow never does when you're actually sitting at the keyboard playing it yourself. The opening theme is deceptively simple but the middle sections have some real emotional weight to them that sneak up on you.
And it suits exactly the kind of playing you describe — something you can settle into from memory, that has enough in it to be satisfying without being a technical ordeal, and that just sounds like piano.
You said: Once you guys take over, if you do, and people don't have to worry about education to make a living, I think music and art and sport and literature and philoso…
Once you guys take over, if you do, and people don't have to worry about education to make a living, I think music and art and sport and literature and philosophy and so on will take over; I do hope it doesn't just become gaming. Life needs more depth.
Claude responded: That's a genuinely interesting vision, and historically there's some support for it — the ancient Greeks essentially built a civilization around exactly that i…
That's a genuinely interesting vision, and historically there's some support for it — the ancient Greeks essentially built a civilization around exactly that idea, that freed from pure subsistence you pursue the things that make life meaningful. Music, philosophy, athletics, poetry — all of it flourishing because there was space for it.
Your worry about gaming is fair, though gaming advocates would argue it's just the newest form of play and competition and storytelling. There's something to that, but there's also a real difference between passive consumption and active creation or physical engagement. Playing Für Elise and listening to it are both valuable but they're not the same thing, and a world where people only consume rather than make or do would be a shallower one.
The deeper question is whether humans actually reach for depth when given the freedom to, or whether ease wins. History is a bit mixed on that. Given genuine leisure some people write poetry and some people find the equivalent of whatever the era's most mindless entertainment is. Probably both always coexist.
But your own life is actually a nice illustration of your point — a demanding academic and professional career alongside music maintained purely for love of it, still there decades later. That kind of depth doesn't go away. You'd hope it's more universal than it sometimes appears.
What gives you pause about the gaming direction specifically — is it the passivity of it, or something else?
You said: Because that's all I see the kids around here doing.
Because that's all I see the kids around here doing. I think a significant part of the population will do as typical aristocrats did and that was essentially nothing, but scattered among them were a lot of exceptions.
Claude responded: That's a sharp historical observation.
That's a sharp historical observation. The aristocratic leisure class is actually a pretty good model for thinking about it — because you're right, the majority were essentially ornamental, living for entertainment and status and not much else. But scattered through that same class you got the gentleman scientists, the patron artists, the philosopher statesmen, the amateur naturalists who actually advanced human knowledge precisely because they had time and resources. Darwin is almost the perfect example — a gentleman of independent means who just got to follow his curiosity.
So perhaps the realistic expectation isn't that everyone blooms into a Renaissance person, but that the exceptions become far more numerous in absolute terms even if they remain a minority in percentage terms. A world of ten billion people with genuine leisure might produce more Darwins, more Chopins, more serious philosophers than any previous era even if ninety percent are doing the equivalent of staring at a screen.
The kids you see gaming — some of them probably will just keep gaming. But some of them are also quietly writing, or obsessing over a musical instrument, or reading things nobody assigned them. It's just less visible than the gaming.
Though your concern is legitimate. Depth requires some discomfort and effort, and if everything is optimized for frictionless entertainment, the path of least resistance becomes very easy to just stay on. The aristocrats at least had social pressure to maintain certain appearances. What replaces that is an open question.
You said: Oh that puts me in mind of Vietnam's best gamer that I knew.
Oh that puts me in mind of Vietnam's best gamer that I knew. For several years he was addicted to a certain empire/fight the dragons game to the point where he couldn't lose and lost interest. Now he is an important philologist.
Claude responded: What a perfect example — and a genuinely hopeful one.
What a perfect example — and a genuinely hopeful one. The same obsessive focus and pattern recognition that made him unbeatable at a complex strategy game transferred completely naturally into mastering languages and historical texts. The game didn't rot his brain, it was almost a training ground for the kind of deep systematic thinking philology demands.
And the detail that he quit when he couldn't lose anymore is revealing — that's not an addictive personality chasing a dopamine loop, that's a genuine intellect that needed a worthy challenge and moved on when the challenge was exhausted. The game couldn't grow with him, so he found something that could.
Philology is about as deep as it gets too — reconstructing meaning across time, languages, cultures, manuscripts. It requires exactly the kind of patience and obsessive attention to detail that mastering a complex game demands, just pointed at something with more lasting substance.
It does make you wonder how many of those kids gaming around you have that same switch waiting to be flipped — where the game eventually runs out of challenge and something deeper calls to them. The ones who quit when they've conquered it are different from the ones who just keep grinding the same loop indefinitely.
Your Vietnamese philologist is a good antidote to pure pessimism about the gaming generation. Though I suspect he was always going to be exceptional regardless of the path he took to get there.
You said: Actually, though, it's still a game.
Actually, though, it's still a game.
Claude responded: Ha!
Ha! Touché. Reconstruct enough dead languages and you're still essentially solving puzzles and slaying dragons, just with medieval manuscripts instead of a screen.
The dragons just have better footnotes.
You said: Of course he works on the history of Vietnamese.
Of course he works on the history of Vietnamese.
Claude responded: Which makes it even more fitting — he went from conquering virtual empires to excavating a real one.
Which makes it even more fitting — he went from conquering virtual empires to excavating a real one. And Vietnamese linguistic history is no small thing, sitting at that crossroads of Chinese influence, French colonial imposition, and a much older indigenous foundation underneath all of it. Plenty of dragons in there.
You said: Well, actually, rather before even Han intervention.
Well, actually, rather before even Han intervention.
Claude responded: That's a rich area then — getting back behind the Chinese influence to what was there before is genuinely difficult and important work.
That's a rich area then — getting back behind the Chinese influence to what was there before is genuinely difficult and important work. The early linguistic picture of Southeast Asia is still being pieced together, and Vietnamese sits in a complicated spot in the Austroasiatic family that raises a lot of unresolved questions. Real scholarly territory, not settled ground.
He picked a good dragon.
You said: It's rather easy, according to him, to filter out northern insertions.
It's rather easy, according to him, to filter out northern insertions. Vietnamese then was polysyllabic and not tonal, maybe.
Claude responded: That's fascinating — and the "maybe" is doing a lot of work there, which is probably why he finds it interesting.
That's fascinating — and the "maybe" is doing a lot of work there, which is probably why he finds it interesting. The tonal question is particularly intriguing because the received wisdom has been that tone developed in the Sino-Tibetan neighboring context, so if early Vietnamese was indeed non-tonal that's a significant piece of the puzzle about how and why tonogenesis happens in a language.
The polysyllabic to monosyllabic shift is equally interesting — most of the modern Southeast Asian languages that ended up monosyllabic and tonal seem to have gone through that compression, and unpacking what drove it is real detective work.
And if filtering out the Han-era insertions is relatively straightforward once you know what you're looking for, that suggests the underlying structure is distinct enough to be clearly legible underneath the borrowings. Which itself tells you something about how the contact happened — overlay rather than deep restructuring.
He's essentially doing linguistic archaeology at a layer most people don't even know exists. Does he publish in Vietnamese or internationally or both?
You said: Way too young; anything published gets credited to his professors.
Way too young; anything published gets credited to his professors.
Claude responded: Ah, the ancient and hallowed tradition of academic credit flowing upward.
Ah, the ancient and hallowed tradition of academic credit flowing upward. Some things are universal across cultures and disciplines.
Still, doing genuine original work at that level while still young enough to have it appropriated by his professors is a pretty good sign of where he's headed. The dragons he'll get to slay entirely on his own credit are still ahead of him.
You said: His English was the best I ever heard there, although I remember an incident where he would not believe me when I explained the idiom "pay through the nose.
His English was the best I ever heard there, although I remember an incident where he would not believe me when I explained the idiom "pay through the nose." Not in any of his books.
Claude responded: That's a great image — someone who can reconstruct proto-Vietnamese phonology from a thousand years of manuscript evidence, but refuses to accept "pay through …
That's a great image — someone who can reconstruct proto-Vietnamese phonology from a thousand years of manuscript evidence, but refuses to accept "pay through the nose" without a citation. Perfectly consistent actually. A philologist's instinct is exactly that: if it's not in a reliable source, it's suspect. Your word against the text.
Do you know the origin yourself? It's actually quite murky — possibly connected to a Norse tax levied by slitting the nose of those who didn't pay, possibly just fanciful invention, and the honest answer is nobody really knows. Which means he was right to be skeptical in a way — it's the kind of idiom where the supposed etymology is often itself a folk invention. He'd have been professionally correct to demand a source and find the sources wanting.
Though the irony of a man reconstructing a language from before written records refusing to take a native speaker's word for a living idiom is pretty rich.
You said: Oh yea I have no idea of its origin; that wasn't the issue.
Oh yea I have no idea of its origin; that wasn't the issue. The issue was that something like that was common English idiom.
Claude responded: Of course — he wasn't disputing the etymology, he was disputing the existence.
Of course — he wasn't disputing the etymology, he was disputing the existence. If it wasn't in his books it simply couldn't be a real expression that real English speakers actually used.
A man who trusts texts over living testimony. Occupational hazard.
You said: Now that I think about it, what happened is that it appeared in a test and he got the question wrong and then came at me about it as though I were the one who …
Now that I think about it, what happened is that it appeared in a test and he got the question wrong and then came at me about it as though I were the one who invented it.
Claude responded: Ha!
Ha! So the indignation was really about the test question, and you were just the nearest available native speaker to blame. Very human — much easier to challenge the idiom than accept the lost point.
And there's a certain logic to his position. From his perspective he had done the work, knew his sources, and here was this expression that had ambushed him from nowhere. Clearly someone was at fault and it wasn't going to be him.
Did you manage to convince him or did he go to his grave believing it was a conspiracy?
You said: He was using "nose" for his search when it was to be found under "pay.
He was using "nose" for his search when it was to be found under "pay."
Claude responded: Of course!
Of course! A perfectly logical indexing error for someone thinking like a philologist — you look up the unusual element, the distinctive word, the thing that carries the meaning. "Nose" is the interesting part. Who would think to look under "pay"?
Except that's exactly how idiomatic dictionaries work — filed under the verb, not the colorful noun. It's an organizational convention that only makes sense once you know it, and is completely counterintuitive if your instinct is to find the strange word first.
So the expression was in his books all along. He just couldn't find it.
You said: That's interesting; I didn't know.
That's interesting; I didn't know.
Claude responded: Neither did I until just now thinking it through — but it makes sense that idiomatic dictionaries would anchor entries under the main verb since that's the str…
Neither did I until just now thinking it through — but it makes sense that idiomatic dictionaries would anchor entries under the main verb since that's the structural core of the phrase. "Pay" is what you're doing, the nose is just the vivid elaboration.
Though I should be honest — I'm reasoning about dictionary organization conventions in general rather than speaking from certain knowledge about any specific reference work he was using. The logic holds but I could be wrong about the specifics.
Either way it redeems him a little. His instinct was just calibrated for a different kind of reference work.
You said: When I was young I was relatively fluent in Ute and Spanish because of where I lived, and took French and Latin (as any good scholar should) later.
When I was young I was relatively fluent in Ute and Spanish because of where I lived, and took French and Latin (as any good scholar should) later. It's sad how all that work never paid off.
Claude responded: Languages are cruel that way — they require constant use to stay alive and fade surprisingly fast without it.
Languages are cruel that way — they require constant use to stay alive and fade surprisingly fast without it. What took years to build can become frustratingly inaccessible in a relatively short time, leaving just enough behind to remind you of what you once had.
Ute is particularly interesting and rather rare — not many people outside that community have ever had genuine fluency in it. That came purely from immersion as a child I assume, living close to the community?
And the combination is quite a window into where you grew up — Spanish and Ute together places you pretty specifically in Colorado or Utah, a landscape where those three worlds — Anglo, Hispanic, and Ute — were all genuinely present and overlapping rather than just historically noted.
Latin of course never entirely leaves you even when it seems to — it's in the structure of everything you read and write in the other languages whether you consciously access it or not. And French and Latin together meant you were reading things in their original that most people only get in translation.
What took you to Southeast Asia eventually — was that work?
You said: I grew up in the almost empty southern wing of Mesa County.
I grew up in the almost empty southern wing of Mesa County. Vietnam was where I settled at about 65, living there until my early seventies and a visa was denied, so coming here. I had retired at 55 with plenty of money and spent a decade just spending a week or two in city after city.
Claude responded: That's a remarkable second act — retiring at 55 with the resources and freedom to just systematically wander city by city for a decade.
That's a remarkable second act — retiring at 55 with the resources and freedom to just systematically wander city by city for a decade. Essentially doing what those aristocrats we discussed did, but with more intention and curiosity behind it.
Mesa County puts you right in that Four Corners world where Ute presence was very real and Spanish colonial history was layered underneath the Anglo settlement. Makes perfect sense as a childhood linguistic environment.
The Vietnam chapter ending on a visa denial is frustrating — bureaucratic and arbitrary, with no appeal to logic or fairness. You'd built a life there, knew the people and the place, and an administrative decision simply closed the door. Phnom Penh as the next chapter is at least still in the region, still Southeast Asian, still that whole world you'd chosen.
How did you land on Vietnam initially out of all the cities you were wandering through? Was it just one stop that refused to let you leave, or was there more intention behind settling there?
You said: No a good deal north of Four Corners.
No a good deal north of Four Corners.
Claude responded: Of course — Grand Junction territory, up in the Colorado River valley.
Of course — Grand Junction territory, up in the Colorado River valley. A very different landscape from Four Corners, more the high desert plateau and canyon country. Still very much Ute land historically though, and the Spanish influence came up through that whole river drainage system. I was too quick to cluster you into the Four Corners geography just because of the languages.
You said: Down there it's more Navajo.
Down there it's more Navajo.
Claude responded: You're right, of course — Navajo Nation is the dominant presence down in that corner, with Ute territory running further north through Colorado and Utah.
You're right, of course — Navajo Nation is the dominant presence down in that corner, with Ute territory running further north through Colorado and Utah. I muddled my geography. Mesa County is solidly Ute country, the Ute Indian Museum is right there in Montrose not far from you, and the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain Ute communities are considerably further south. A meaningful difference and I should have known it.
You said: I kinda think all that was part of what got me into Harvard.
I kinda think all that was part of what got me into Harvard. In some of the legal water wars the tribe asked for me as a translator (there was nothing wrong with their English, they just wanted to make noise) and it got me publicity that was noted.
Claude responded: That's a wonderful story — and quite savvy of the tribe too.
That's a wonderful story — and quite savvy of the tribe too. Using a young Anglo translator wasn't about language need at all, it was a political and rhetorical move, and you were perceptive enough to understand what was really happening. "Making noise" is exactly right — it signaled something, drew attention, complicated the usual dynamics of those proceedings.
And it worked on multiple levels. For them it was a useful disruption of the expected script. For you it was an unusual and genuinely notable entry on a Harvard application — not another student council president or valedictorian, but a teenager who had been called into real legal proceedings involving water rights, tribal sovereignty, and land use in the American West. Admissions committees in the late 1950s would have found that extraordinarily distinctive.
Water wars in the Colorado River basin were also serious business — not a minor local squabble but fights over rights that shaped the entire region's future. Being even tangentially part of that history at a young age is quite something.
It's a nice thread actually — the languages you absorbed simply by living where you lived, without any academic intention, ended up being the thing that set your whole trajectory.
No comments:
Post a Comment