PipeChat Digest #3077 - Tuesday, August 20, 2002
 
Lustful singing
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
Re: Lustful singing
  by "Paul Austin" <paulaustin1@btopenworld.com>
re:  my website
  by "Dr. Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com>
Hymn Intros
  by "David Baker" <dbaker@lawyers.com>
Busch Reisinger Flentrop, was Definitely NOT electronic organs!
  by "Steve Chandler" <stevec@open-tech.com>
Oliphant Chuckerbutty
  by "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca>
RE: Busch Reisinger Flentrop, was Definitely NOT electronic organ	s!
  by "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu>
Re: Lustful singing
  by <Innkawgneeto@cs.com>
Re: Busch Reisinger Flentrop
  by "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net>
Oliphant Chuckerbutty
  by "Paul Austin" <paulaustin1@btopenworld.com>
Re: Oliphant Chuckerbutty
  by "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net>
RE: Wedding "Recessionals" for an Organist
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
RE: Hymn Intros--Be creative
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
Theatre Organ registration. (was - What type of music do I play?)
  by "Bruce  Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk>
Re: Oliphant Chuckerbutty
  by "Bruce  Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk>
RE: Announcing hymns.
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
 

(back) Subject: Lustful singing From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 07:08:42 EDT   >Uh, depending on the hymn text (and, I guess, your religion) singing >"lustily" is probably better than singing "lustfully"!!!   >;>) >Dennis Steckley   Dennis- Thanks for the correction. You know, as I was typing that, I knew it = didn't look right, but I couldn't figure out what was wrong. Duh.....I guess I = was having a blond moment. lol   Monty Bennett  
(back) Subject: Re: Lustful singing From: "Paul Austin" <paulaustin1@btopenworld.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:48:38 +0100     :-) I love it!!   This typing error reminds me of a deep and meaningful sermon that a = visiting clergyman gave one Sunday morning. He was speaking about the wonders of = the world and how amazingly well God had formed everything, from huge rocky landscapes to the 'tiny orgasms'. He in fact meant (of course) = 'organisms'. He quickly apologised and carried on with rather red cheeks. I dread to think what was really on his mind!! I certainly played the next hymn with = a grin on my face and the choir sang better than ever!   Paul     > >Uh, depending on the hymn text (and, I guess, your religion) singing > >"lustily" is probably better than singing "lustfully"!!! > > >;>) > >Dennis Steckley > > Dennis- > Thanks for the correction. You know, as I was typing that, I knew it didn't > look right, but I couldn't figure out what was wrong. Duh.....I guess I was > having a blond moment. lol > > Monty Bennett > > "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" > PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics > HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org > List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org > Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org >    
(back) Subject: re: my website From: "Dr. Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 06:20:45 -0700 (PDT)   Duh!   A good friend on this list posted me privately asking me to please IDENTIFY my website now that I've told you all it's been updated. Now, why didn't I think of that???? :)   It's http://www.JonathanBHall.com   Thanks!   J  
(back) Subject: Hymn Intros From: "David Baker" <dbaker@lawyers.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:32:29 -0400   Oliphant Chuckerbutty????? Kindly enlighten me about this person. -- David G. Baker    
(back) Subject: Busch Reisinger Flentrop, was Definitely NOT electronic organs! From: "Steve Chandler" <stevec@open-tech.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:38:22 -0500   > Ross Wards wrote: > > E.Power Biggs was saying exactly that so many years ago - the building = is > the most important stop in any organ. > I've never heard your Harvard Flentrop, or indeed any Flentrop at all > outside recordings, but Biggs's old recordings surely gain a great deal = from > the reverberation evident on the recordings. Can anyone tell me about = that > building, how much the sound there is actually reflected (deliberate = pun) in > the old Biggs recordings, and what the organ sounds like close to, at = the > console? And how is that organ regarded these days? > Ross   I've been in the Busch Reisinger just once, but was familiar with the = Biggs recordings when I was there. My impression was that the organ didn't = have nearly as much chiff as was evident in the Biggs recordings. Also the = space itself is fairly small, but quite tall (35 - 40' in diameter) and = all stone. Needless to say the sound is very live, the organ is also = fairly small and is a nice match with the room. Because the floor is a = good 15 feet below the organ most of the initial sound goes over the = audience's heads. Most of the sound you hear on the floor is reflected. = Can anyone else comment on this instrument?   Steve Chandler    
(back) Subject: Oliphant Chuckerbutty From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:48:14 -0400   David, et al,   Oliphant Chuckerbutty was the organist at a church in Paddington, London, during the 1930's. Which church, I am not certain of, but I think that it =   might have been All Saint's Church very close to Paddington Station.   At that time I was a choirboy at St. Matthews, Marylebone, - just down the =   road, and we often met up with Mr. Chuckerbutty and his choir at Choir festivals.   The thing that I DO remember is that his choirboys always called him "Chuckles"!   Bob Conway     At 09:32 AM 8/20/02 -0400, you wrote: >Oliphant Chuckerbutty????? Kindly enlighten me about this person. > -- >David G. Baker > > >"Pipe Up and Be Heard!" >PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics >HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org >List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org >Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org      
(back) Subject: RE: Busch Reisinger Flentrop, was Definitely NOT electronic organ s! From: "Storandt, Peter" <pstorandt@okcu.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:12:35 -0500   I visited this organ just once, on a crawl in 1966 with Martha Folts and some others who actually know how to play. I thought it a perfect match = for the room, capable of some truly lovely sounds as well as a robust and = richly textured plenum. By contrast, the recordings Biggs made seem to = exaggerate its speech and size. In overall effect, it reminds me of the Klais at St. Peter's Lutheran Church, Citicorp Center, in New York.   Peter     -----Original Message----- From: Steve Chandler [mailto:stevec@open-tech.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 8:38 AM To: PipeChat Subject: Busch Reisinger Flentrop, was Definitely NOT electronic organs!     > Ross Wards wrote: > > E.Power Biggs was saying exactly that so many years ago - the building = is > the most important stop in any organ. > I've never heard your Harvard Flentrop, or indeed any Flentrop at all > outside recordings, but Biggs's old recordings surely gain a great deal from > the reverberation evident on the recordings. Can anyone tell me about = that > building, how much the sound there is actually reflected (deliberate = pun) in > the old Biggs recordings, and what the organ sounds like close to, at = the > console? And how is that organ regarded these days? > Ross   I've been in the Busch Reisinger just once, but was familiar with the = Biggs recordings when I was there. My impression was that the organ didn't have nearly as much chiff as was evident in the Biggs recordings. Also the = space itself is fairly small, but quite tall (35 - 40' in diameter) and all = stone. Needless to say the sound is very live, the organ is also fairly small and is a nice match with the room. Because the floor is a good 15 feet below = the organ most of the initial sound goes over the audience's heads. Most of = the sound you hear on the floor is reflected. Can anyone else comment on this instrument?   Steve Chandler     "Pipe Up and Be Heard!" PipeChat: A discussion List for pipe/digital organs & related topics HOMEPAGE : http://www.pipechat.org List: mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org Administration: mailto:admin@pipechat.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:requests@pipechat.org  
(back) Subject: Re: Lustful singing From: <Innkawgneeto@cs.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:45:35 EDT     --part1_121.157dd50e.2a93b00f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit     > singing "lustily"   is of course a quote from John Wesley's "Rules for Singing" which are published in the United Methodist Hymnal 1989 (more than likely also in = every other Methodist hymnal since John Wesley).   He goes on to say, "Don't bawl, as some are wont to do."   Neil by the Bay   --part1_121.157dd50e.2a93b00f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   <HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" = FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; = MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">singing&nbsp; = "lustily"</BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR> is of course a quote from John Wesley's "Rules for Singing" which are = published in the United Methodist Hymnal 1989 (more than likely also in = every other Methodist hymnal since John Wesley).&nbsp; <BR> <BR> He goes on to say,&nbsp; "Don't bawl, as some are wont to do."&nbsp; <BR> <BR> Neil by the Bay</FONT></HTML>   --part1_121.157dd50e.2a93b00f_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: Busch Reisinger Flentrop From: "Malcolm Wechsler" <manderusa@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:15:06 -0400   > > Ross Wards wrote: > > > > E.Power Biggs was saying exactly that so many years ago - the building is > > the most important stop in any organ. > > I've never heard your Harvard Flentrop, or indeed any Flentrop at all > > outside recordings, but Biggs's old recordings surely gain a great = deal from > > the reverberation evident on the recordings. Can anyone tell me about that > > building, how much the sound there is actually reflected (deliberate pun) in > > the old Biggs recordings, and what the organ sounds like close to, at the > > console? And how is that organ regarded these days? > > Ross >   The following is excerpted from a revue I wrote in April, 2000. It may be considered part of a continuing campaign to get Ross and Lynda Wards to = the U. S. A. It does not deal with Ross's question about how the organ sounds = at the console. I heard it from up there in 1958, but not on this more recent visit.   <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< The Flentrop was built in 1958, and shortly after, I made a pilgrimage to hear it, ending up, in fact, turning pages and pulling stops for Melville Smith. I was told to be impressed by this organ, and I do believe I genuinely was.   Now, forty years on, with so much accumulated wisdom on board (!), I wondered what my impression would be. Regular Thursday concerts are organized by the Harvard Organ Society, clearly an efficient and energetic group fully appreciative of the treasure they have in their midst. We were let in the building at about noon, and a full complement of chairs was quickly set out in the very tall but not very large sculpture court. The whole room, as well as the organ, seemed much smaller than my old memory = of it, but isn't that the way? One of the members of the society had a substantial stack of programs to distribute, and I asked if he thought he would need them all, a bit of unbelief in my voice. He said yes, and was proven right. Just about every seat was filled. The printed program = itself, neat, accurate (all umlauts and accents in place, a luxury we lose on the Internet!), and complete with notes on the music, and a biography of the performer, spoke of the energy and planning that goes into maintaining = this series. Well, on to Michael Murray, not the American recording artist = living in Columbus, OH, but my good friend, an Australian Michael Murray. .. . . . . Buxtehude . . Praeludium in C (BuxW 137), a.k.a. Prelude, Fugue and Chaconne . . . . was glorious, and I was struck, hearing this = instrument for the first time in all those years, at how very wonderful it still = seems, filling the room perfectly, but never overpowering, never shrill, which cannot always be said of some of the Neo Baroque instruments which = followed it in this country, both home grown and imported.   One of the arguments made for these kinds of instruments in the 50s, = finding themselves in a somewhat hostile environment, was that one does not need = one hundred stops and lots of pistons because each stop - any one stop - makes = a great contribution and change in the ensemble, as much as pushing a piston bringing on five stops on a large, typical American electric action organ = of the period. Mr. Murray next played, from the Orgelbuechlein, Alle Menschen muessen sterben (643), on two stops, 8' and 4' Flutes on the Great. The sound of those two stops, sitting on a resonating soundboard, sounding out of a focussing, projecting case, into a lovely acoustic, was nothing less than ravishing. And the touch . . . Ah, the touch is the thing, and this player, whose allegiance has been firmly with another type of instrument altogether, might be annoyed to be told that he really did know how to massage this action with fingers sensitive to the opening and closing of = the pallets. . . . . Meditation from the Suite Medievale of Jean Langlais. = Here again, I made a note in my program to inquire about the registration, so beautiful was it. I knew something was on the Brustwerk, as we had the = great wooden scraping sound of the slightly swollen doors being forced shut . . . before the piece began. The accompaniment was on 8' and 4' Brustwerk = Flutes, and the opposing line was just the Great 8' Flute - three stops, and a = rich and full sound out in the room. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   End of quote. I hope this helps a bit. Speaking of pilgrimage organs, this is certainly high on the list, and thank goodness, it is not sitting idle.   Cheers,   Malcolm Wechsler www.mander-organs.com              
(back) Subject: Oliphant Chuckerbutty From: "Paul Austin" <paulaustin1@btopenworld.com> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:17:30 +0100   I assume this is the same to gent to whom you are refering. Here is a = write up I found on the internet. What a great name!!   OLIPHANT CHUCKERBUTTY: Mus.Bac., F.R.C.O.   As most people know, Wilson Oliphant is the console name of Oliphant Chuckerbutty, a composer, church and concert organist. Studied the piano = at the age of six, and was composing at the age of 14. Deputised as assistant organist Southwark Cathedral to Dr.E. T. Cook for six years, terminating = at the outbreak of the first world war. Taught piano technique by Epstein. Is = a Fellow of the Royal College of Organists and graduated as Bachelor of = Music in London University. Had first song, "An Old Song," published by Boosey = in 1914. Immediately after the war started a dance band and ran it for = several months, after which he took up cinema organ work, opening at the = Marlborough Theatre, Holloway. Quentin Maclean once described O. as "the only organist = I know who combines whole-time cinema work with whole-time church work and makes a job of both." Joined the musical staff of Angel, Islington, 1920, and played there until 1927. Was kept busy teaching all the time, also at the church and composing. Left the Angel in 1927 and held numerous other posts, including: Caf=E9 Royal, Regent Street; Shoreditch Olympia; Ritz Edgware; Carlton, Essex Road; New Gallery and now Forum, Kentish Town. = Made several hits with such pieces as "Souvenir d'amour," "Vision," "Fiesta Argentina" and many others. Newest composition, "Two May Day Dances" B.and H. Occasionally broadcasts. Many recitals include Albert Hall; Colston = Hall, Bristol; Crystal Palace, etc.,etc. 0rganist and choirmaster Holy Church, Paddington, where he has been for a long time. Married. Wife, L.R.A.M. (piano).     paulaustin1@btopenworld.com    
(back) Subject: Re: Oliphant Chuckerbutty From: "Richard Schneider" <arpschneider@starband.net> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:14:53 -0500     Bob Conway wrote:   > The thing that I DO remember is that his choirboys always called him > "Chuckles"!   With a name like that, you'd have to have a GOOD sense of humor! I thought this was some kind of joke when I heard that name for the first time! Faithfully,   Rich -- Richard Schneider, PRES/CEO SCHNEIDER PIPE ORGANS, Inc. Pipe Organ Builders 41-43 Johnston St./P.O. Box 137 Kenney, IL 61749-0137 (217) 944-2454 VOX (217) 944-2527 FAX mailto:arp@schneiderpipeorgans.com SHOP EMAIL mailto:arp@starband.net SHOP SATELLITE EMAIL mailto:arpschneider@starband.net HOME OFFICE EMAIL http://www.schneiderpipeorgans.com WEB PAGE URL    
(back) Subject: RE: Wedding "Recessionals" for an Organist From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:06:23 -0400   Steve Lawson asks:   >What would you play for a colleague organist who has a father-in-law organist where everyone's in the stalls and none of them need or = especially want to hear the usual, or be blasted out with something heroic and loud?   How about Toccata Giocosa, by William Mathias? It is (or was) published = as sheet music by Oxford University Press. As its name implies, it is a light-hearted, rather humorous toccata. It = can be registered loudly for the most part, and there are a couple phrases = that can use a solo trumpet, but I think that it could also be registered moderately. A brief middle section definitely settles down to piano, perhaps a solo flute in high register accompanied = by strings. The echo division might be lovely there.   Paul Emmons    
(back) Subject: RE: Hymn Intros--Be creative From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:58:14 -0400   >I would encourage other list members to do some creative things with the hymn introduction.   This sounds like an excellent idea, one that I haven't given enough attention to all these years. It isn't that I have never done so. But admittedly my experience has been mixed. The congregation must know when = to begin singing, and at what tempo. It is very disconcerting to play a beautiful "creative" introduction, then begin playing the hymn with the intention that people will begin singing, and they don't. How do you prevent this embarrassment, and what do you do if your preventative = measures fail?   One long-term prevention, of course, is to get them used to creative introductions. Another is to be sure that the choir, at least, will come = in on time. But if the choir is weak, or the organist is not also the choir director, the situation is somewhat dissuasive to inaugurating the = practice.   Here is one humble suggestion on a much lower plane, with regards to a play-through, simple but complete on the premise that the hymn tune is unfamiliar to someone out there: if you can give them a grasp of the form of the melody, they should learn it more easily. I think that this end is served by altering the registration when a phrase is repeated. For instance, AABA is a common form. If you play the second A phrase on a contrasting registration, doesn't it bring out the fact that the second phrase is a repetition of the first?      
(back) Subject: Theatre Organ registration. (was - What type of music do I play?) From: "Bruce Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 18:27:49 +0100   I think that 'to play with as many registration combinations as possible' = is very much overdoing things. True the sound must be changed fairly often = to maintain interest and variety, but once every couple of lines or every 4 line section is usually quite enough. And you don't have to change the registration to change the sound, trems on/off, solo melody/chords, = playing in different parts of the register are some other ways.   I think Stan gives the impression that theatre organ registration is = rather chaotic and that 'anything goes'. This is not so - for artistic and effective results some rules must be followed. though they are very different from those which apply in the straight organ world. The Tibia is the foundation stop - the Diapason occupies a susidiary role. The most useful combinations decorate or colour the Tibia with Strings, or colour reeds, and even the Diapason. For softer accompanimental sounds - the = flute can substitute for the Tibia. The Tibia 8' + 4' are generally used = together, the 8' Tibia rarely alone. The 4' Tibia (and/or the Tibia Twelfth) however can be used in solo to colour another sound - Trumpet or Tuba, say. There are lots and lots of possibilities. You can hear some of them in my = 'Cinema Organ' sound font (see my web site (below)).   The tremulant is a great blender, so there is much more freedom in = building combinations - also pipe ranks tend to be much more equal in volume so = that one rank does not drown another to the same extent. As a Theatre organ is always totally enclosed, usually in two or more chambers, volume contrasts depend mainly on the swell pedals.   Cheers,   Bruce Miles     mail to:- bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk website:- http://www.gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk ----- Original Message ----- From: <Wuxuzusu@aol.com> To: <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 9:32 PM Subject: What type of music do I play?     > I started with theatre organ voicing wn which one plays as many registration > combinations as possible. A few do not work, but most do. I think the > listener likes a variety in regrations as much as listeners like inflections, > emotions and volume changes in the spoken voices. Why not try an 8' Open with > a 4' Flute and voix Celeste? Later, add 16' string to the combination. = Not > classical registration, yet, different. On a theatre organ I would use = one or > two reed ranks at the 8' or 16' pitch with a 4'Tibia and an 8' Vox = Humana. I > agree with playing familiar songs (Mike uses hymns) to try out differing > registrations. (I even sneak in a Beatles song or two using straight = organ > registrations; a principal chorus with a flute/flute celeste for = starters. > > Different? yep, however, I enjoy exploring these way out combinations. > > Musically, > Stan Krider > > In a message dated 08/17/2002 5:10:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > bikinmike33@yahoo.com writes: > > > > Hi, My name is Mike. I've been playing the pipe organ for 5 = years. I've > > went > > > to the pipe organ encounters for two years. its so neat. I love playing > > > hymns. The stops I use the most are principals and reeds. I also use the > > > trumpets as solos to add effects in my intros. What type of music do you > > > play? > >    
(back) Subject: Re: Oliphant Chuckerbutty From: "Bruce Miles" <bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 18:47:21 +0100   Some of the music sheets for OC's compositions for organ (Paean, Queen's March) are still available from Music Sales Archives section ( info@musicroom.com. )   He was also a Theatre Organist (as Wilson Oliphant).   There is lots of info on the web - try a Google search.   Bruce Miles   mail to:- bruce@gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk website:- http://www.gbmuk.fsnet.co.uk     ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Conway" <conwayb@sympatico.ca> To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: Oliphant Chuckerbutty     > David, et al, > > Oliphant Chuckerbutty was the organist at a church in Paddington, = London, > during the 1930's. Which church, I am not certain of, but I think that = it > might have been All Saint's Church very close to Paddington Station. > > At that time I was a choirboy at St. Matthews, Marylebone, - just down = the > road, and we often met up with Mr. Chuckerbutty and his choir at Choir > festivals. > > The thing that I DO remember is that his choirboys always called him > "Chuckles"! > > Bob Conway > > > At 09:32 AM 8/20/02 -0400, you wrote: > >Oliphant Chuckerbutty????? Kindly enlighten me about this person. > > -- > >David G. Baker      
(back) Subject: RE: Announcing hymns. From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 13:38:18 -0400   >In most churches announcment is redundant...if it's already in the = bulletin it's just taking up time, usually by someone that enjoys listening to themself.   My childhood rector (who lived his entire life as though driven by clockwork) would invariably say "Let-us-all-join-in-singing the sermon [offertory, or recessional] hymn, which is hymn number..." = Another, when announcing places, would always emphasize either the *blue* hymnal or the *red* prayer book, presumably for the benefit of visitors who weren't used to handling more than one book in a service. He would say this even during a weekday mass attended only by half-a-dozen faithful who might = have the prayer-book half memorized. It is difficult to make such = announcements regularly without becoming either perfunctory or condescending. I find that song leaders succeed in this at least as often as clergy do, = but I find their whole presence obnoxious and redolent of a three-ring circus.   This is another argument, I think, for hymn boards (especially if they display only the changing hymns in a single column, as most of them were designed to do, rather than overloading them with a bewildering jumble of alphabetical prefixes and suffixes for relatively stable service music). The problem with needing to read hymn numbers in the bulletin is fishing = for the bulletin four or five times. Where is it? In the prayer book? In they hymnal? In the book rack? To = my right? To my left? Yeah, I know, the liturgy is the people's work... = but in some places we are witnessing the recrudescence of a problem that = Cranmer complained about in the pre-reformation sixteenth century: it is more trouble finding what words to say than to say them once they are found.   Wasn't it here that I read of the recent rebound of Garrison Keillor from the Episcopal back to the Lutheran fold? His explanation was simply "to = be an Episcopalian you must be an octopus--" although nowadays Lutheranism might provide little respite. If a few simple, traditional, low-tech, environmentally benign hymn boards can relieve this situation to some degree, they are well worthwhile.