Can a stool make a piano?

I met a fascinating person this week who has spent his life restoring pianos and making harpsichords and would now like to develop his own unique design of classical piano. To do so he needs to invest time and money in making his prototype that he can launch onto the world's stage (literally). Part of his way to achieve his goal is to design a stool; which having seen it and sat on it, is a piece of creative genius. Ideal for portable use (it breaks down and goes into a nifty carry pack) or to look like a piece of sculpture in your living space, ready for the odd extra guest that may pop-in. Trouble is he needs investment to develop this too and the man can't split himself in two. Where are all the dilettantes, I ask myself? Why can't we not recognise genius and reward it without stifling it in the form filling process? Will his chair make his piano?

 

This reminds me, somewhat, of King Lear and love sought and love lost; no doubt because of the marvelous Melvyn Bragg programme on Radio 4 on Thursday. His subject was Lear and he managed to weave so many themes in and out of the core subject, even though his blog told us that he was suffering from jet lag after filming Gore Vidal in New York. Go to the following link to know more about the best weekly programme there is on subjects that stretch the mind: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/.

 

As you know, if you regularly read this blog, I am attempting to show my creative output from my early life up to the present day (although there's more of the former than the latter). That having been said here's two pieces that are kind of interesting. The first is taken from an essay I wrote, which could as easily apply today, but this wasn't today, this was a very long time ago (as the names will reveal):

 

It is unfortunate that, at this time in our civilisation, we should have to consider a fundamental element in the instinctive properties of man; namely, how to live together in reasonable peace. Furthermore the form for this consideration defeats the purpose. From the emotionally involved James Baldwin to the vote-catching President Johnson, there stems far more diverse prejudices which cover the clear thinking needed for this subject. Objective reasoning is more important than subjective involvement. There will soon be few people who can boast of their objectiveness without having incurred some scar or infection in their involvement with the problem, however slight it might be. It is arguable that objective thinking is wrong, for unless one becomes a part of the problem, then there is no grounds for opinions. The ideal line is one of objective thinking after being involved in an objective manner. With this in mind, we can see the problematic aspects of race prejudice.

 

Some things never change. The next little surprise is a poem I found, which I cannot remember writing. Maybe it is from another poet (I have one or two other poet's pieces), or perhaps the muse was at work, without me noticing (Robert Graves where are you?). Either way, I find it quite interesting, and I hope you do too:

 

I had seen the evening's rain

before church's masonry.

 

Fathers walk with purple maidens

drenching the clouds with their water

onto the chipped blocks of stone.

 

This stinging day lays heavy

not needing this much sacrament.

 

To have walked with one

perhaps the mean task of it

allayed the happening.

 

I am alone with my child

softer than the hand of this woman.

 

And men can let the gowns drop

deep upon the dust of roads

dead upon the evening grave.

 

Where to next?