PipeChat Digest #3384 - Thursday, January 16, 2003
 
Re: From funerals to weddings
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
Re: Drive Throughs--non-organic
  by <RMB10@aol.com>
Re: From funerals to weddings
  by "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net>
On Eagles' Wings
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net>
Strange Sites for Weddings
  by "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net>
wedding "complicators"
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: From funerals to weddings
  by "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz>
Re: From funerals to weddings
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: From funerals to weddings
  by "Stan Yoder" <vze2myh5@verizon.net>
Re: American mediocrity
  by <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net>
Technical seminar"feeler"
  by "Richard B. Ahlvin" <rahlvin@magnolia.net>
Re: American mediocrity
  by "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk>
Dan Miller, are you there?
  by "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu>
Re: American mediocrity
  by "firman1" <firman1@prodigy.net>
RE: American mediocrity
  by "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu>
Sand Lawn: update
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Re: Strange Sites for Weddings
  by <MFoxy9795@aol.com>
Re: Waikiki Robert Morton
  by "Stanley Lowkis" <nstarfil@attbi.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: From funerals to weddings From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:51:18 -0500   On 1/16/03 12:26 PM, "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> wrote:   > Alan Freed writes: > >> When I said that the venue "has nothing to do with it," I meant "so far = as >> the state is concerned." Lutherans, too, rarely and only >> under exceptional circumstances do weddings in unusual places. When I = did >> those weddings in (even) "strange" places, I was NOT serving a parish = (I was >> retired), which liberated my conscience from the usual parish-pastor >> strictures; > > Just out of curiosity, what prevents a Lutheran or Episcopal clergyman = from > holding weddings elsewhere? Canon law? Bishop's directions as "the > ordinary?" A ruling by the congregation itself?   Speaking only for Lutherans, throughout this post. Nothing REALLY = prevents it; it's just hoary custom, based on practicality (for which, see below). It is NOT (for Lutherans) a "prohibition"; we don't even HAVE a body of canon law. > > And what is the reasoning behind such a prohibition?   1. Where else would you do it? Even a very nice restaurant (and I had = one at the "21" Club) is so dreary compared to a beautiful church. 2. If you DO do it out in a meadow (or whatever), it's so impractical to drag along hymnals, a portable keyboard of some (in)adequacy. 3. The church building surrounds us with the architectural and artistic things that remind us of the "nature" of the event. It's social, yes; but it's a specifically a very CHRISTIAN event, in the life not only of a = couple and their families, but of the congregation. 4. The building has conveniences such as organ, carefully planned acoustics, seating, kneelers, communion ware (if it's a nuptial mass), = etc. Had a wedding a few years back for a Japanese couple from Tokyo, with no = NYC church home; so we rented the (VERY nice) United Nations Church; it had = all we needed/wanted. For another, we simply "borrowed" a (German-language) Lutheran church; it worked out fine. In another case the couple had = chosen the top floor of the World Trade Center for their reception; I tried to "borrow" (for convenience) a Roman church a couple blocks away for the ceremony. Assistant priest said, "I'd welcome you with open arms--but I'm afraid the elderly senior guy, my boss, would have a FIT!" So we rented another room on the 107th floor (of WTC, not the church) and made it into = a chapel; we had a very fine woodwind ensemble for music. > > Perhaps it's for the same reason that banns are published: to enable any > third persons who object to the marriage to appear and do so. If the > ceremony is held in some out-of the-way, obscure spot, perhaps on = private > property with "no trespassing" signs all around it, this precaution = (however > seldom the opportunity is taken) can easily become impracticable. More > generally, strange sites violate the spirit of its being a public event = in > front of various witnesses, and (in the case of parishioners) seem to > exclude or disregard the parish as quasi-family who should feel welcome = to > share the celebration in their usual meeting place.   The "banns" thing, and possible "objectors," are little more than a theoretical problem--but they are there, of course. The more subjective rationale appeals much more to me. I remember when I was a kid, I was working at the church on Saturday afternoon, and heard from the janitor = that there was a wedding going on upstairs. We'll I'd never been to a wedding, so I snuck up the steps and hid in the balcony and WITNESSED this secret thing (a very simple, small ceremony). I was terrified of being caught, = for this was surely VERY illegal! Surely counter to what I SHOULD have felt. And known. > > Those sound like good possible explantions to me. I just wonder whether > this is the actual rationale. As bizarre as the idea of holding a = Christian > wedding away from the church building seems to me personally, I am also > (agreeing with the 16th-century reformers for a change) adamant as to = the > essential superfluity of clergy for the validity of marriage.   Agreed. When I do a wedding (very rare, nowadays), I stand as far away from the couple as is practical, and have them FACE EACH OTHER, holding all = hands together. I want it visually clear that this wedding is something THEY = are doing, not something I am doing. When I have to place my hand on theirs, and wrap the stole around their hands, and they kneel for the blessing, I have to get closer--but that's all AFTER they've "married" each other. My role is more Master of Ceremnies, or "facilitator." I'm NOT the DOer. (Yes, I'm the state's witness/officiant, but I don't think that's awfully important.)   > How can it > need the church building when it doesn't even need a priest? There's = got to > be a better, more objective reason than some vague (and rather = Manichaean) > feeling that a secular setting is just an inappropriate place.   It doesn't NEED either one. And a "secular setting" is not = "inappropriate': it's (very generally) just not as convenient for reasons mentioned above.   Alan    
(back) Subject: Re: Drive Throughs--non-organic From: <RMB10@aol.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:19:58 EST     --part1_65.74add3a.2b585fde_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit   Re: "The Loved One" as mentioned in Stan Yoder's post.... As a funeral director, I have seen and heard all sorts of funny stuff, but =   I've seen that movie several times, and each time it gets funnier.   On an organic note, it's the cheesy "organ" music in the background that gives people such a bad stereotype about what the organ really sounds = like.   Monty Bennett   --part1_65.74add3a.2b585fde_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">Re:&nbsp; "The Loved One" as mentioned in Stan = Yoder's post....<BR> As a funeral director, I have seen and heard all sorts of funny stuff, but = I've seen that movie several times, and each time it gets funnier.&nbsp; = <BR> <BR> On an organic note, it's the cheesy "organ" music in the background that = gives people such a bad stereotype about what the organ really sounds = like.<BR> <BR> Monty Bennett</FONT></HTML>   --part1_65.74add3a.2b585fde_boundary--  
(back) Subject: Re: From funerals to weddings From: "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:43:44 -0500   On 1/16/03 1:51 PM, "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> wrote:   > I'm NOT the DOer. <   Maybe I should have mentioned one more (sometimes delicate) subject: The Wedding Coordinator. He/She can do his thing at the reception, and, if = the bride wishes, in the narthex (sending the procession up the aisle, or afterward lining people up for a reception line). But he/she can be sure that he/she has NO function in the nave or the chancel at all. I can = handle the ceremony all by myself, thank you.   Alan      
(back) Subject: On Eagles' Wings From: "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:47:37 -0600   National pride? Never heard it in that sense. I first remember hearing the song at a funeral mass in the television show, "Nothing Sacred." Great show, so of course it was cancelled. But I found it so moving I looked it up, and we used it regularly in my previous congregation. I find it a beautiful and moving setting of Psalm 91.   To each his/her own, of course, but one can hardly object to the use of the Psalms in church, and the music is certainly a good step beyond "three chords and a guitar."   Dennis Steckley   Ich liebe meine Katzen ______________________   I was not passing judgment on "On Eagles' Wings," despite that being the   initial subject of the threat. I was trying to figure out why Americans are so willfully, militantly, and belligerently celebrate mediocrity, and have embraced it as a source of national pride, right to the top. Incidentally, the only time I've EVER heard the song was in the weeks following the release of the videotape of Ashcroft croaking it out, bellowing at some breakfast meeting. It is impossible to know from that rendition,   which David Letterman played on his show nightly for weeks afterwards, whether it has any musical value.      
(back) Subject: Strange Sites for Weddings From: "First Christian Church of Casey, Illinois" <kzrev@rr1.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:53:53 -0600   Other than the obvious lack of a pipe organ, most "strange site" weddings I've done have been VERY PUBLIC because they are usually located in scenic spots such as parks, mountain overlooks, etc. Many more people are present (and wandering in and out) than would typically be at a church wedding; they are just passers-by, tourists, picnickers, etc.   Dennis Steckley   Ich liebe meine Katzen        
(back) Subject: wedding "complicators" From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:18:04 -0800   Tee hee.   We had one of THOSE at the first wedding in the new church. When he arrived at the rehearsal with a Pekingese-looking-THING perched on his head by way of a toupee, I thought to myself, "THIS is gonna be INteresting." And it was. After about five minutes of "arranging" the attendants so there'd be more photo-ops during the service (we don't permit flash photography during a liturgy ... DUH!), the rector gently but firmly sat him down in the back pew and told him to STAY there (chuckle).   Once was enough ... the church now provides the wedding coordinator for everything that happens on church property, and her word is law.   Cheers,   Bud   Alan Freed wrote: > > On 1/16/03 1:51 PM, "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > I'm NOT the DOer. < > > Maybe I should have mentioned one more (sometimes delicate) subject: = The > Wedding Coordinator. He/She can do his thing at the reception, and, if = the > bride wishes, in the narthex (sending the procession up the aisle, or > afterward lining people up for a reception line). But he/she can be = sure > that he/she has NO function in the nave or the chancel at all. I can = handle > the ceremony all by myself, thank you. > > Alan > > "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: From funerals to weddings From: "Ross & Lynda Wards" <TheShieling@xtra.co.nz> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:59:47 +1300   Same here. I do not use the term "Funeral Director" for an undertaker, either. My job, as Vicar, is to direct the funeral.   I remember a stand-up row I had with a photographer at a wedding a year = ago. He wanted to wear his hat in the church and I forbade it. The problem was solved when I got the bride's father to tell the photographer he'd rather have no photographs at all than put up with the photographer's hat, and = that he'd get no fee if he didn't begin to behave himself immediately.   Incidentally, that photographer's head was almost completely bald and = white, as if he'd never had his head in the sun at all.   Hilarious, sort of.   Ross -----Original Message----- From: Alan Freed <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> Date: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:44 AM Subject: Re: From funerals to weddings     >On 1/16/03 1:51 PM, "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> I'm NOT the DOer. < > >Maybe I should have mentioned one more (sometimes delicate) subject: The >Wedding Coordinator. He/She can do his thing at the reception, and, if = the >bride wishes, in the narthex (sending the procession up the aisle, or >afterward lining people up for a reception line). But he/she can be sure >that he/she has NO function in the nave or the chancel at all. I can handle >the ceremony all by myself, thank you. > >Alan > > > >"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: From funerals to weddings From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:43:28 -0800   Um, Ross, I wouldn't have chosen THAT particular place to draw a line in the sand ... what if he was an Orthodox Jew? In THAT case, your actions would have been offensive in the extreme, yes/no?   We have a Jewish man who attends Mass with his anglo-catholic wife every Sunday. And every Sunday he wears a dashing beret in church. Doesn't seem to bother anybody.   Cheers,   Bud   Ross & Lynda Wards wrote: > > Same here. I do not use the term "Funeral Director" for an undertaker, > either. My job, as Vicar, is to direct the funeral. > > I remember a stand-up row I had with a photographer at a wedding a year = ago. > He wanted to wear his hat in the church and I forbade it. The problem = was > solved when I got the bride's father to tell the photographer he'd = rather > have no photographs at all than put up with the photographer's hat, and = that > he'd get no fee if he didn't begin to behave himself immediately. > > Incidentally, that photographer's head was almost completely bald and = white, > as if he'd never had his head in the sun at all. > > Hilarious, sort of. > > Ross > -----Original Message----- > From: Alan Freed <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> > To: PipeChat <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Date: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:44 AM > Subject: Re: From funerals to weddings > > >On 1/16/03 1:51 PM, "Alan Freed" <acfreed0904@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > >> I'm NOT the DOer. < > > > >Maybe I should have mentioned one more (sometimes delicate) subject: = The > >Wedding Coordinator. He/She can do his thing at the reception, and, if = the > >bride wishes, in the narthex (sending the procession up the aisle, or > >afterward lining people up for a reception line). But he/she can be = sure > >that he/she has NO function in the nave or the chancel at all. I can > handle > >the ceremony all by myself, thank you. > > > >Alan > > > > > > > >"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 > > > > "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: From funerals to weddings From: "Stan Yoder" <vze2myh5@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:38:14 -0500   There's a story about Charlie Foelsch when he was Pastor of Holy Trinity = Lutheran, Central Park West NYC:   During a wedding the photog climbed up on an interior scaffold (for = painting or something) and started flashing away from on high. Charlie said "Excuse me" to the = couple, went over and stood (dunno how long) at the base of the scaffold with arms folded until the = photog climbed down. Charlie then returned to the chancel and continued.   Stan Yoder Pittsburgh  
(back) Subject: Re: American mediocrity From: <r_ehrh@bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:55:34 -0500   Ah, the chance for a shameless plug! There is some wonderful music for = organ available, but one must really search for it; the big publishers = aren't giving us much these days. Please have a look at the Zimbel Press = web site, including a couple of my own attempts.   http://www.zimbel.com   Robert Ehrhardt Noel Memorial UMC Shreveport, LA http://www.zimbel.com/ehrhardt.html   > > From: lindr@cch.com > Date: 2003/01/16 Thu AM 11:02:37 EST > To: "PipeChat" <pipechat@pipechat.org> > Subject: American mediocrity > > > To get this on topic, I fear that American shallowness and glitziness is > also apparent in a great percentage of the organ music being written and > published today and for some decades. Name me a few recently-composed > American organ works that break out of this mold that are also = accessible > and appealing, and I'll take due note. > > Robert Lind      
(back) Subject: Technical seminar"feeler" From: "Richard B. Ahlvin" <rahlvin@magnolia.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:57:38 -0600   The members of our local chapter (South Mississippi Gold Coast chapter of the American theatre Organ Society) are contemplating organizing and presenting a technically oriented seminar addressing the repair, = restoration and upkeep of pipe organs with emphasis on the theatre Organ. Our chapter is fortunate to have a number of technically inclined individuals who collectively represent about 100 years of experience in this field. We = also have several experienced and accomplished artists who can address various performance issues.   We envision a 1 or 2 day seminar to be held at the site of one of our = about 5 accessible organs. Initially we are considering Jackson, LA where our chapter 2m10r Wurlitzer is located. This is a small picturesque southern town with a rich history and a tourist oriented industry. Other sites = could be at a theatre with an original small (3m8r) Robert-Morton installation = or in one of several members' private residences containing TPO's.   This could be organized as a series of topics or seminars. Possible topics might be: *The modern pipe organ: an overview of its components. *Maintenance and tuning *Simple emergency repairs you can do yourself: do's and don'ts. *Involved repairs you can do. *Rebuilding and restoration *Performance considerations; workarounds   Tell us what topics you would like! Perhaps the format should rather be a round table Q&A? Should it be held during the week, or on a weekend?   Although the chapter members will donate their time and expertise, there will no doubt be a fee to cover direct expenses. (And to enhance the chapter treasury!) We would also like some feedback regarding an appropriate amount and what would be expected.   Please respond to: Richard B. Ahlvin South Mississippi Gold Coast / Magnolia Chapters A.T.O.S. rahlvin@magnolia.net   P.S. Information about our chapter, our available organs, our knowledge base, and other information can be found at: http://atos.stirlingprop.com/    
(back) Subject: Re: American mediocrity From: "Colin Mitchell" <cmys13085@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:36:12 +0000 (GMT)   Hello,   American mediocrity?   Well, maybe there is mediocrity almost anywhere in the world. I cannot think of many recent and good organ compositions in the UK. Is France still an important compositional "school"? Whatever happened to Germany?   It seems that music for the organ is very much a second division occupation these days, and may well remain so until counterpoint once more becomes fashionable.   However, you have wonderful organ builders in America, some stupendous performers (not ALL in the best of taste ALL of the time!) and a rich organ heritage.   Nurture it!   Regards,   Colin Mitchell UK   (I like "On Eagle's wings")   __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com  
(back) Subject: Dan Miller, are you there? From: "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:36:41 -0500   Is there perhaps a Dan Miller, composer of "Count Your Blessings" (1993) = on this list? Please contact me privately re. that piece, which is being played on the OHS convention.   Karl E. Moyer Lancaster PA  
(back) Subject: Re: American mediocrity From: "firman1" <firman1@prodigy.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:07:54 -0600   "Fools in the Republican party. An Awful lot of people from other = countries think we're shallow and have no values..."   This from the party that gives us Clinton (s) and Springer....   who's the fool.... BAF II      
(back) Subject: RE: American mediocrity From: "Emmons, Paul" <pemmons@wcupa.edu> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:37:45 -0500   > I fear that American shallowness and glitziness is > also apparent in a great percentage of the organ music being written and > published today and for some decades. Name me a few recently-composed > American organ works that break out of this mold that are also = accessible > and appealing, and I'll take due note.   America has had a few good organ composers, but has not yet produced a really great one. Maybe we're still too young a nation. So the fact that there are no superlative recent American organ works doesn't necessarily signal a decline.   But, then, who composes in England today to compare with Howells, = Leighton, and Mathias? Who has assumed Messiaen's mantle in France? Are any contemporary German organ composers as interesting as Reger, Distler, or Hindemith? Such lacunae or hiati (the latter word comes from the Latin = for "yawn") are hardly peculiar to the U.S.   But I have to agree that too many Americans purvey mediocrity, perhaps because the mediocre is such unthreatening and reassuring stuff to live amidst, whereas excellence is thought pretentious to have and unsettling = to be around when you don't. Mencken had quite a bit to say about the = nation's aversion to high standards. Plain old mediocrity is at least honest. But Americans do worse: we tend to serve up mediocrity and pretend that it's cool and the greatest thing since sliced bread.   Paul Fussell examines this phenomenon in his humorous and illuminating = book "BAD." People say that BAD is just taste that someone has called bad, = thus it's purely relative. So this book becomes particularly interesting when = he discusses BAD engineering, because this is one area-- maybe *the* one = area-- in which we do not appreciate mediocrity. Either things work reliably or not. BAD engineering means buildings that collapse when the wind blows the wrong way, bridges that fall into the water, airplanes dropping out of the sky. Yet sometimes these happen, even though those who bought them = paid a lot of money for them, assured that were getting something really cool = and innovative. Fussell comically suggests that if things get much worse, reporters will demand keyboard shortcuts for words such as "collapse", "rubble", "chaos." A few will do, because there isn't a lot one can say about entropy and nothingness. Then he notes similarities between the production (and producers) of BAD engineering and BAD things-that-people-say-are-relative. Remarkable similarities.   I frequently listen to interviews and talk shows on public radio. ("Fresh Air" is most typical of what I am talking about, although there are a = couple others). Sometimes the guest is an author, artist, or pop musician who = has gone in for the bizarre (which C.V. Stanford calls the refuge of those who cannot achieve the beautiful)... the eccentric... the "bold" and "daring". These often prove to be rather inarticulate individuals. Sometimes one doesn't know whether to laugh or cry over the hostess's exertions to maintain the impression that it's a significant discussion. Occasionally, however, the guest is a famous classical musician or choreographer (as = fame goes among such in this country). What a difference! The latter display verve, polish, breadth of knowledge over many subjects. Chamber musicians such as string quartet members may be the most interesting of all, because they also talk about life with their colleagues, how one works in close co-operation for decades, subsuming the "artistic disagreements" that account (or so say the encyclopedias) for the quick demise of legions of rock bands.                        
(back) Subject: Sand Lawn: update From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:29:49 -0800   *I* received this from David (grin) ... relaying ...   Cheers,   Bud       I received this from D.H. Clark and just wanted to pass it along - Please continue to keep Sand in your prayers.   David Scribner       >I am sorry to report that Sand is back in the hospital. He had >nausea and vomiting all night. Craig and I visited him after Choir >and he felt fine. He woke up at 1 AM throwing up. The seem to have >that under control. They are not thinking that his heart has taken a >turn for the worse, but I am sure that tests will be done. I saw him >at 5 PM (1/16) He is not in any distress, just somewhat frustrated. >Hopefully, it is just mild dehydration and he will respond to >fluids. He is in ICU.   >Thanks for your prayers.   D H Clark       D.H. is the choir director at Sand's church; he's also an M.D.   Bud    
(back) Subject: Re: Strange Sites for Weddings From: <MFoxy9795@aol.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:37:31 -0500   I was at the grist mill near the Wayside Inn in Sudbury, MA once in early = fall and there were at least three wedding parties all having pictures = taken there; it is a very popular spot. They mostly get married in the = nearby chapel. I am not sure if there is an organ in there, but I don't = think so.   Merry  
(back) Subject: Re: Waikiki Robert Morton From: "Stanley Lowkis" <nstarfil@attbi.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:53:08 -0500   It is. But an organ has to be wanted to be Enjoyed.   It's just a bunch of pipes, with a lot of trouble for people who maybe don't give a s--t about organ music.   It is CRIMINAL. One book in my collection is "Lost New York". What happened to the New York that I grew up with is CRIMINAL.   The "PAN-AM" abomination (met-life) over Grand Central. Those morons wanted to rip down that station, just like Penn Station.   Look at that Hilo. That's a crappy looking little theatre.   Does it have a chance on the "Big Island"?   maybe it's just our 49 1/2 State with bad habits picked up from Boston politicians and theatre organ destroyers.   Of which there are many.   Like the mainland, the 'Aloha State' seems impotent to preserve Heritage. Massachussets crapped on Boston's West End. They also destroyed theatre organs without a thought.   New York City is better, but are there more than three organs?   The State of Hawaii had two organs, almost one.. But they're going away.   Cut 'em up - maybe a collector needs a few ranks. A church somewhere would greatly appreciate a few additional ranks of pipes.   A string or two from a ukulele, mounted and framed on my living room wall might be an interesting conversation piece.   But a Morton Theatre Organ in a theatre played by gifted local organists deserves much more than that fate that was inflicted on our local Boston theatre organs by the ignorent.   It's always "Your Choice" in your community. The Waikiki Organ should be saved.   Stanley Lowkis 28 Estes Street Ipswich, Massacusetts 01938   John Vanderlee wrote: > > >Please excuse me, I will cry for awhile. > > when all is said and done.. I find it difficult to believe that some > one would not be wiling to rent a couple of trucks and find a half > dozen interested people (or bribe kids with soda and pizza ) and get > the organ dismantled and moved to temporary storage . > > Anything less than that is CRIMINAL! > > John V