The Eternal Search for The Ideal Banjo

Posted on May 14, 2012 by me

A little over a year ago, my wife and I were sitting in a restaurant in Seattle with some friends when I announced, “I think I’d like to buy a banjo.” My wife, not knowing what she was saying, said, “Go for it.”

So began my search for the perfect banjo, by no means a unique quest among banjoists. There are many who play the banjo, then there are those for whom the banjo and banjo lore has become a passion (some would even say obsession). It starts out with finding certain details about the banjo fascinating, and pretty soon you’ve got a living room filled with banjos and banjo parts. As Scott Avett of The Avett Brothers said, “You can never have enough banjos.” What I have come to realize is that this drive to collect banjos is more than just a compulsion to acquire a large number of instruments, it is a philosophical quest: It is the Eternal Search for The Ideal Banjo.

It’s all Plato’s fault

As he sat playing the banjo in a cave, the Greek philosopher Plato proposed that the things we see or touch are merely shadows of a perfect expression of reality. In this perfect reality, there exists the Ideal Banjo—a perfect Banjo Form, of which all physical banjos are mere shadows, imperfect representations at best.

My own quest began innocently enough, simply looking for a good first banjo—one that was affordable but also well-made and with a decent sound. I expected that this banjo is one I would own for a number of years. After all, most of my guitars had been around for some time, 25 years or more. So, I was somewhat taken aback by an article I read about buying a first banjo, which stated that regardless of what you buy, once you begin learning to play you will want another banjo soon. For the life of me, I couldn’t see why this would be true.

I traded my Strat (which had sat in it’s case for about 10 years) for a Deering Goodtime and began taking lessons.  Sure enough, it wasn’t long before I started looking through Craigslist and hitting yard sales looking for used deals. From there I moved to the hard stuff: I began searching eBay. In the past year, I have acquired a total of 8 more banjos, but not necessarily to keep; I have also sold 3 that I have rehabilitated, at a fairly decent profit, and have 2 “project” banjos in pieces. Again, it’s not about acquisition, it’s about the quest.

It’s the question that drives us…

What is the banjo?

There is something about the banjo which is mysteriously compelling. I have altered all but one of my banjos apart and have come to understand their various design features, but I do not understand why I and countless others around the world have become so bewitched by these particular instruments.

Perhaps it is the fact that they are accessible;  you can’t dismantle a guitar or a violin, and if you could, you probably couldn’t get it back together. Banjos, however, invite you in—there is something about the nuts and hooks (not to mention the years of dirt and corrosion) that call out, “Deconstruct me!”

For me, the fascination is mostly the open-back “pot”—the rim, the hardware, the head…  I have nothing against necks and tuners, but to me, there is very little more beautiful than a well put-together banjo pot.

Blind Willie Johnson sang in Soul of a Man, “Won’t somebody tell me, answer if you can / Won’t somebody tell me, what is the soul of a man?” The same question goes for a banjo; you can take them apart, leave them together, and even play them, but the soul of a banjo is a mystery. That, I think, is what drives the quest.

Yes, I actually play them all.

I actually play all my banjos (at least the ones that are assembled), and like each of them in their own way.  If I had to choose only one, it would be my Vega Little Wonder (also made by Deering), a gift from my wife.  It is hand-made from violin-grade maple with great tone and for me, a perfect neck shape. I of course modified it some, putting on a Renaissance head, an old style “no-knot” tailpiece, and a curved “Moon” bridge. Somewhat mysteriously to me, it tends to sound different on different days.

I am, to a great extent, perfectly satisfied playing this banjo. I can play it for hours, and often do. But then, I’ll pick up a different banjo, and enjoy that just as much. And sometimes, I just find myself staring at them.

It’s not the journey, it’s the destination

I realize that I will never find the Ideal Banjo, and as far as banjos go, I think my Vega is as good as any I’ve played (although I did play a Bart Reiter Round Peak that was awfully nice…). However, if Plato was right and there is an Ideal Banjo out there, I think it is possibly a composite of every good “shadow” banjo. So, my theory is, the way to banjo nirvana is to simply experience as many banjos in my lifetime as possible.

Posted in Random Thoughts | 4 Comments

Law and the Rich Young Ruler – New Covenant Law #5

Posted on March 2, 2012 by me

And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” The young man said to him, “All these I have kept. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” When the young man heard this he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.  (Matthew 19:16-22 ESV)

The story we know as “The Rich Young Ruler” presents an interesting encounter between Jesus and a young man who by all accounts was both successful and devout. This incident obviously stood out among the hundreds of encounters Jesus had, as all three of the synoptic Gospels record the story.

It’s the question that drives us…

The question presented was, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” (The Matthew version reads “What good deed must I do…?”)  This is an interesting question, as the discussion that follows shows that according to the popular Pharisee theology, he was already doing it.  As Jesus presents a few examples from the 10 Commandments, the man’s response implies that he felt he had kept the entire law, but the question he asked Jesus reveals that he seems sincerely concerned that simply following the Law wasn’t enough. This could be because either he had realized himself that he still felt incomplete, or that he had been listening to Jesus’ teachings and recognized that what Jesus’ teaching on righteousness went far beyond the requirements of the law. We don’t know; we just know that he was wondering what more he could do to obtain eternal life.

The answer, my friend …

No one I know has ever suggested that in telling the man to give away his riches, Jesus was telling him he could earn his salvation, although I know there are some Judaizers out there who would read it that way (I’ve heard them on a local heretical radio station) . Jesus understood that money, “the root of all evil,” was standing in the way of this man’s relationship with God. To “enter life,” the man needed to take his focus off of his possessions, which were standing in the way, blocking the narrow gate, as it were. As Jesus said elsewhere, “No man can serve two masters” (Matt 6:24).”

It is interesting that in quoting Commandments, Jesus did not mention “Have no other god before me,” which was the one Commandment that the man was blowing big time. He, in fact, had two other gods: money, and the Law itself.  The Law did not require him to give away his wealth, so Jesus was not pointing him toward the law in order to find life. Giving everything to the poor would not have been an act of obedience to the Law, but would have arising solely from a personal encounter with Jesus; that is, relationship. As we’ve already seen, a point Jesus is making is that keeping the Law, as impossible as that is, does not result in Kingdom-qualifying righteousness. True righteousness exists in a realm outside of the framework of Law, beyond the realm of human possibility. Which brings us to the rest of the story:

    And Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly, I say to you, only with difficulty will a rich person enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” But Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”  (Matthew 19:23-26 ESV)

Note that Jesus remarks that “only with difficulty” will a rich man be able to avoid the distraction of riches and enter the Kingdom; he said nothing about it being impossible. The disciples responded as we all do when mistaking that the conversation was about rules (or falling into the trap of thinking that great riches is actually a blessing).

When reducing the Christian life to a set of rules and principles, setting aside our own preferred idols is an impossibility. We cannot keep all of the rules, especially the one that says “have no other gods before me.” If we are successful in giving up our #1 idol, whatever that is, we immediately fall prey to pride, if nothing else. As Al Pacino (as the Devil) says in the final scene of The Devil’s Advocate, “Vanity, definitely my favorite sin.”

However, salvation is not based on our work, but on God’s work. Thank God.

 

Posted in New Covenant Law | 1 Comment

The Heart of God is not in keeping the Law – New Covenant Law #4

Posted on February 17, 2012 by me

Wheatfield Soul

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat.But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him:how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless?I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:1-8 (ESV)

One of the main themes of the Gospel of Matthew is righteousness.  Matthew presumably was writing to a Jewish audience, and while he was focused on presenting Jesus as the Messiah as well as on his divinity, the emphasis on the call to what could be called a “meta-righteousness”—that is, a higher righteousness than that which was the focus of the Pharisees—is clear. Israel, who was as God’s Chosen People called to be righteous, failed in that endeavor and often was overtly rebellious. So, while my purpose is to look specifically at the Law, it seems this slight diversion is warranted.

Mercy, not sacrifice

In the above passage, Jesus directly quotes Hosea 6:6, “For I desire mercy [or steadfast love] and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.” And this is not the first time Jesus has quoted this verse. Earlier, in Matthew 9:10-13, we see this exchange:

 And as Jesus reclined at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were reclining with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” But when he heard it, he said, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” (ESV, emphasis mine)

It would seem that Jesus is addressing the same group of Pharisees, as in Chapter 12 he tells them that if they had followed his earlier advice and learned what the Hosea passage was talking about, they would not have condemned the guiltless.

There are a couple of interesting things here that are often overlooked (most teachers seem to focus on Jesus being “Lord of the Sabbath”).  First, when you look at the context and the combined verses, it seems that Jesus is using the terms “guiltless,” “sick,” and “sinners” to refer to the same people.

Next, in the Matthew 12 passage, Jesus uses 2 Old Testament analogies of  Sabbath-breaking to support his disciples picking grain on the Sabbath. He did not argue that the Law did not apply, but argues that some Law-breaking is simply acceptable, and that some law-breakers remain guiltless.

Finally, note that Jesus is not using the argument that “that was then, this is now,” implying a difference between Old and New Covenant approaches to the Law. Rather, he goes right to examples of the Jewish Priesthood, King David and the OT prophet Hosea to demonstrate that God has not changed. Reading through the Hosea context, we read of God’s judgment on the rebellious Israelites, not because of a failure to keep the fine points of the Law but for being a wicked people, failing to show mercy to other nations or even to each other. Even in the Old Testament, God was a God of mercy, preferring mercy to sacrifice and law-keeping.

Mercy, Mercy Me

It can be argued that Jesus is also equating righteousness with showing mercy.  Throughout Jesus’ teaching we can see references to Israel’s failure not in not keeping the Law, but in the failure to show mercy to sinners and to the Gentile nations. As mentioned before, Israel’s calling was to be a blessing to the nations, not to be a judge of nations. Jesus takes the baton from Israel, so to speak, completing the race by showing mercy and by fulfilling the Law.

The last post in the series dealt with the golden rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Here, now, we see that continued with the call to learn mercy or “steadfast love.”

We see this story continued as Jesus walks into the synagogue, still on the Sabbath, and demonstrates mercy by healing a man with a withered hand, which again breaks the technical Law of Sabbath-keeping.  When he leaves the synagogue, many follow him, and he continues to heal those who are sick, but in private, not to make any sort of point. Again, mercy rules.

Matthew makes the connection to Isaiah 42, quoting

“Behold, my servant whom I have chosen,
my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.
I will put my Spirit upon him,
and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.
 He will not quarrel or cry aloud,
nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets;
 a bruised reed he will not break,
and a smoldering wick he will not quench,
until he brings justice to victory;
and in his name the Gentiles will hope.” (Matt 12:18-21 ESV)

God’s heart has never been in keeping the Law, though the Law is not without its purpose or value; rather, the God who does not change has always been a God who desires mercy, not sacrifice.  And, we see that Jesus appears to be making the distinction between the pseudo-righteousness of the Pharisees and the true righteousness of those who show—and who need—mercy.

 

 

Posted in New Covenant Law | 2 Comments

The Golden Rule Is the Law? or, “Which way to the narrow gate?”

Posted on February 15, 2012 by me

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. ~Matt. 7:12

In my last post, I discussed Jesus’ “mount” teaching on the Law and righteousness, and ended with the question, if perfection is unattainable by keeping rules, then how are we to attain perfection?  Matthew 7 contains an extension of Jesus’ teaching on righteousness and the Law, and he says a number of very interesting, if not confounding, things:

  1. We will not be judged according to our actions, but on whether we judge others. This continues the concept introduced in the Lord’s Prayer that we will be forgiven “as we forgive others.”
  2. The “log in the eye” comment implies that we all have these gross imperfections which render us unable to correctly view others.
  3. Don’t throw your pearls before swine. I’m actually unsure of how this fits in the overall topic.
  4. “Seek and you shall find…”  The Father will give good things (Luke says the Holy Spirit) to those who ask.

It is at this point Jesus says, “So, whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them…”

Why “so?”

It seems that Jesus is trying to paint a larger picture for the Israelites than their focus on keeping the fine points of the Law. As we know from other passages, the Jews of that day saw keeping the Law as the highest good, even if that meant ignoring lepers and dying Samaritans, and pronouncing judgment (and even stoning) those who broke the rules du jour (not that different than today, come to think of it).

The picture Jesus paints is this:

  1. To borrow from Paul, “there is none righteous, no not one.”
  2. We are all blinded by our own sins, and if we dare to pronounce judgment on others, we also judge ourselves.
  3. If we want to find the “good things”—things like love, joy, peace and presumably, even righteousness—we don’t have to put others down, we just need to see the Father.
  4. If we treat others like we would like to be treated, all of the “thou shalt nots” are moot.

Love, then, seems to be the fulfillment of the Law, as opposed to keeping the Law, which when attempted by sinful people seems to only breed more sin (another point for Paul).

The rest of the chapter then seems to make sense, and the famous verses 13-14 take on a slightly different connotation in context:

“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”

What is the “narrow” way? It is not the way of an attempted works-righteousness by keeping the rules at the expense of others, as the “holiness” traditions would have us believe. As unbelievers are quick to point out, there is no love evident in self-righteous attitudes and behaviors. It’s easy to see ourselves as “better than thou” and to pronounce judgment on the “sinners.” What is hard is to ask for mercy, then give it to others.

Jesus then continues to warn of false righteousness: Beware of false prophets, who claim to be righteous but are actually sinners. Not everyone who claims to be righteous will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And finally, the wise build on the rock of the words of Jesus, and the foolish build on the sand of their own attempts at righteousness.

Matthew follows this with several chapters detailing miracles that Jesus performed. Then, at the close of Chapter 11 (our modern designations, of course), Jesus comments on the unrepentance of those cities who witnessed his miracles, then says

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

When looked at as a whole, Jesus’ teaching on the Law is not all that confusing. The narrow way is the way of rest. It may be difficult, but not in the way that is typically preached. The yoke of Jesus is easy. However, giving up our attempts at self-righteousness is difficult.  Grace, it seems—living by the golden rule—is a very narrow gate indeed.

 

 

Posted in New Covenant Law | 4 Comments