The Symbolism of Singing

Being a singer myself, one of the most enjoyable parts of Conclave, for me, has been the performances of the SigEp Chorus. Some would say that the chorus is a fun little addition to the Conclave, and not particularly important or even pertinent. I, however, disagree. There is a huge amount of symbolism in any choral singing, and in this group in particular, that is absolutely relevant to the mission of SigEp.

First of all, any chorus is a bringing together of different voices. Variety is a necessity. If there is uniformity, there is also limitation. The music is only complete if some voices take the high part, others the middle, and still others the low. It doesn't matter that the high voices can't reach the low notes, because the lower voices can, and vice versa. Each voice fills in a piece of the overall picture that others cannot. Only when different kinds of voices are brought together can the full range of the music be expressed.

Second, balance is crucial. If one voice is too strong and another is too weak, the harmony is lost. Each voice needs to listen to the other voices and adjust itself so each of the parts complements the others. Everyone has to be aware of those around them. Sometimes that means fading into the background, sometimes it means taking a more prominent role. But always, it means being aware of the strengths and weaknesses of those around, and either helping or compensating for them. 

Third, everyone has to pay attention to the leader. There are times when members can - and should - make suggestions, and every member makes a contribution. But unless there is a single leader taking those suggestions into account and making a final decision, the voices pull apart and confusion reigns. The beauty is drawn forth when there is a single leader setting the pace and establishing unity. 

And finally, an aspect that is somewhat unique to the SigEp Chorus: these voices take what they have learned and practiced with other groups and other singers, and learn to apply it in this group. The songs they perform here, each has performed in other places, amidst other voices. But no two groups perform any piece exactly the same way. They must adapt their usual styles to find a common style that works for everyone. They must let go of the familiar and be open-minded enough to try a different way of doing things. They bring their different experiences together and form a unified whole by choosing the best parts of each contributor and finding what works best in this unique circumstance.

There have been scientific studies showing that choral singing creates a physical unity among the singers: they breathe in rhythm, even their hearts begin to beat in a single rhythm (The Scientist, July 2013). Anyone who has sung in a chorus - particularly a very good chorus - knows that mystical feeling when everyone seems to be in perfect sync, as if they are reading each other's minds. They are perfectly attuned to each other singer and to the leader, and they work together as a single, unified whole.

So what better analogy of the workings of an organization like SigEp than that of members of a chorus working together? Brothers come from many geographic locations and walks of life. They each bring their own unique set of skills and experiences. All brothers need to contribute, and if some do all the work and others just coast, there is no balance, and the chapter - or the national fraternity - suffers. Yet if they work together, the strengths of one member can offset - or better yet, teach - the weaknesses of another. Although there are many voices, there needs to be a single point of leadership, whether it be an individual or a small group, or consensus will never be reached. The leader must take input from the membership, but must then make a decisive choice.

At the national level, SigEp takes the unique styles and experiences of each chapter, all with a common mission yet with their own methods of achieving that mission, and melds them into a single, cohesive whole, weighing the different variations and choosing the best combination of all the varied experiences and practices of the member chapters. There are many individual SigEp brothers, many individual SigEp chapters, many individual SigEp regions, but when they combine as a national whole, their hearts beat as one.

A Woman in a Man's World

I am spending this week completely immersed in a man's world. I am spending the next five days surrounded by frat boys, current and former (although, truthfully, there's no such thing as a "former frat boy"). I am attending the biennial "Grand Chapter Conclave" of my husband's college fraternity, Sigma Phi Epsilon, more commonly referred to affectionately as merely "SigEp." I am a woman in a man's world.

I will freely admit, however, that being a woman here does not make me feel like an outsider. In fact, being a woman makes me feel like I'm being especially welcomed and treated extra graciously. Maybe it's because this year's conclave is being held in Nashville, Tennessee, so I'm surrounded by traditional Southern manners, but I feel like I'm being treated, not as a woman, but as a lady.

I like it.

But what I like most about it is that it represents the respect that these young men are showing, not only to me, as a woman, but also to the older alumni and national fraternity staffers, as SigEp brethren.

Let me back up a bit and confess that when my husband introduced me to SigEp eight years ago, I was not a fan of fraternities. The college I attended didn't have fraternities or sororities, so I didn't have much firsthand experience with them. Most of my knowledge was through news stories (rarely favorable) and movies (never favorable). To me, belonging to a fraternity was an excuse to binge drink without having to get yourself home afterwards. However, once my husband joined the Alumni Volunteer Corporation (AVC) of SigEp New Hampshire Alpha (his alma mater, Dartmouth College, "the fount of knowledge, where young men go to drink"), and later became the AVC President, I got to know some fraternity members (both alumni and undergrads) firsthand, and I changed my tune.

Certainly, there are plenty of young men in SigEp and many other fraternities who spend more time drinking than they should. Which admittedly is not that different than young men NOT in fraternities who spend more time drinking than they should. But the people who changed my opinion on fraternities were not so much the "current frat boys," but rather the "former frat boys," the older men - some just a few years out of college, some a few decades, and some more than a few decades - who had taken on the roles of mentoring their younger brethren. In these men, I could see their youthful fraternity experiences - the non-drinking kind - come to fruition. These were men who had become solid family men, successful businessmen, community activists, philanthropists, and just generally nice people. These men were the kind of men I want my son to grow up to be.

And here at conclave, I can see the younger men also wanting to grow up to be like these older men. I can see the common thread of SigEp brotherhood bridging the generation gap and providing a measure of trust and respect that allows the undergrads to grudgingly admit that maybe these old guys have something valuable to share with them. And I can see that same thread of brotherhood allowing these old guys to see past the youthful wildness and recognize the enormous potential inside every one of these young brothers. The reason it works is that the respect goes both ways. The young men respect the alumni's knowledge and wisdom and experience; the alumni respect the young men's enthusiasm and energy and potential. Being a SigEp automatically creates a peer relationship between two men. My 50-something husband often notices a stranger wearing a SigEp insignia and introduces himself as a friend whether the brother is 20 or 80. The SigEp connection is clearly one that transcends age and social and financial status. If you're a SigEp, you're a brother, and that's all there is to it.

The mentorship of alumni is a crucial part of the fraternity experience and, in my opinion, it is the reason that many SigEps turn out to be the kind of successful adults that they do. SigEp obviously has succeeded mightily with its mission of mentoring undergraduate members.

And so, when a young SigEp brother stands as I enter the room, or politely holds the door for me, it makes me feel good, not just because I enjoy being treated like a lady, but because I know he treats his SigEp brethren with that same respect.

Although I suspect he doesn't call any of them "ma'am."

Thing 1 and Thing 2

My husband is a huge fan of Theodor Geisel, a.k.a. Dr. Seuss. Geisel was a fellow Dartmouth alum and a member of my husband’s fraternity, Sigma Phi Epsilon. So when Geisel visited Dartmouth while my husband was a student, he made sure to introduce himself and even get a photograph, which his father later sent to Geisel to have it autographed.

Geisel’s inscription reads, “It’s very flattering to have my picture wanted…especially with my mouth stupidly open like that. – Ted Geisel”. It is one of my husband’s prize possessions. So naturally, the last time we were up at Dartmouth, he bought the kids bright red T-shirts reading “Thing 1” and “Thing 2”.

For those of you may not remember Thing 1 and Thing 2, they were the fluffy blue-haired cohorts of the Cat in the Hat, always making messes and getting into trouble. Other than the mops of blue hair, my children are very similar to the Things. They specialize in making messes and getting into trouble.

My daughter, at 9 months, is on the verge of walking, but even without that skill, she has become a master of climbing. A few days ago I left her in the playroom for literally 90 seconds while I used the bathroom. When I came out, she had climbed all the way upstairs into the kitchen and was happily opening and closing the cabinet doors. Another time, I left the room to answer the phone, and in the 30 seconds I was gone she had climbed up onto the seat of the couch, then pulled herself up onto the back of the couch, and was standing on the back of the couch, hanging onto the stair railing behind it and grinning at me. If there is a door within her reach, she will open it. If there is a button nearby, she will push it. If there is any kind of small object on the floor, she will pick it up and eat it. If there is any kind of large object on the floor, she will pick it up and bonk herself with it.

And speaking of bonking, her big brother, at age 2-1/2, can give Thing 1 and Thing 2 a run for their money in the world of bonking. Sometimes he bonks himself, sometimes his sister, sometimes another toy or the wall or the television set. But if he can lift it up, he needs to try bonking something with it.

He’s also at an age where he needs to test his will against his parents’ at every opportunity. If I tell him to put down something that he’s holding, he’ll look at me and hang onto it for a few moments, until I raise my voice or warn him about a spanking, before he puts it down. Or he stares at me blankly as I pry it from his hand. I’ll tell him to do something (sit in his chair, get into the car, take off his shoes) and he’ll calmly say, “No, thank you.” (At least he’s often polite about his defiance.) He is mischief personified.

Thing 1 and Thing 2, in the Cat in the Hat books, are often infuriating, and yet the reader is still always delighted when they make their appearance. Likewise, my children are often infuriating, and yet I am still always delighted with them. It is one of the mysteries of life that children can drive you absolutely bonkers but at the same time you’d still throw yourself in front of a bus for them.

It reminds me of a comment Jeff Foxworthy once made: He said he never understood God’s relationship with the human race until he had children. And then he understood how it’s possible for God to love us even when we drive Him absolutely crazy with our disobedience and our mischief.

Yes, I sure do love my Thing 1 and my Thing 2, even when they’re destroyed my house and getting on my nerves and just generally driving me nuts. Because they’re still MY Thing 1 and Thing 2.