First of all, this afternoon I had already been intending to comment on an op-ed piece from this morning’s New York Times, titled “How to Fix Our Math Education.” And I was going to relate it to a comment by Frank Baker, candidate for Boston City Council from the Third District (where I live). But I didn’t actually finish the post before dinner, and then I had to leave immediately in order to go hear all seven of the candidates [...]]]> City council candidates and math education? Those are two utterly unrelated topics, aren’t they? But there turns out to be a connection.

First of all, this afternoon I had already been intending to comment on an op-ed piece from this morning’s New York Times, titled “How to Fix Our Math Education.” And I was going to relate it to a comment by Frank Baker, candidate for Boston City Council from the Third District (where I live). But I didn’t actually finish the post before dinner, and then I had to leave immediately in order to go hear all seven of the candidates participate in a candidates’ forum. So let’s discuss all three topics: the op-ed piece, the candidates’ forum, and the connecting link: Frank Baker.

The op-ed piece, by the distinguished Sol Garfunkel and David Mumford, argues for a major change in the emphasis of high-school mathematics. Their views are basically correct, so go read their entire essay. Here is a brief excerpt so you can see what their claim is:

This highly abstract curriculum is simply not the best way to prepare a vast majority of high school students for life…. Imagine replacing the sequence of algebra, geometry and calculus with a sequence of finance, data and basic engineering. In the finance course, students would learn the exponential function, use formulas in spreadsheets and study the budgets of people, companies and governments. In the data course, students would gather their own data sets and learn how, in fields as diverse as sports and medicine, larger samples give better estimates of averages. In the basic engineering course, students would learn the workings of engines, sound waves, TV signals and computers. Science and math were originally discovered together, and they are best learned together now.

The reason I say that their views are only “basically” correct is that such a curriculum would not be sufficient for students preparing for any career that requires a traditional mathematical background. Even though only a small minority of college-students study science, engineering, and pre-med courses, they need to be well served, and it would be folly to think that we can identify exactly who those students will be when they’re in tenth grade (although many countries do exactly that). We could just offer Garfunkel and Mumford’s solution to non-honors students, but who wants to increase the difference between honors and non-honors courses? That wouldn’t be good either. Some kind of a combination is needed, where students could move more in one direction or another in their last two years of high school, and where the ideas presented in the op-ed piece are incorporated into the traditional program as well. The first of these solutions is what we do at Weston High School, where we offer three semesters of “Applied Discrete Math Concepts” to those who want something different from the traditional pre-calculus and calculus courses. While many of the students who elect this course tend to be our weaker math students, that is far from universally true, and some excellent math students even take Applied Discrete Math in addition to precalculus.

Now let’s move to the apparently unrelated candidates’ forum. We have a surprisingly large field this year, as our long-term councilor, the hard-working Maureen Feeney, is retiring after serving many years. Of the seven candidates who are vying to succeed her, two are clearly Republicans (even though they might not admit it) and I won’t comment on their ideas or their presentations at the forum. The Boston City Council is officially non-partisan, but the other five candidates are clearly Democrats. Three of them gave pretty weak presentations tonight, leaving only the remaining two, whose supporters are coincidentally the only ones whose supporters you will see in this picture:

It may be a little difficult to tell from the picture, but this crowd on both sides of the street was almost entirely white, a bad sign in racially mixed Dorchester. Inside the hall I counted close to 300 people in the audience, of whom 98% were white. So much for “racially mixed.”

Finally, how are these two topics related? The connection is a paragraph last week in the Dorchester Reporter:

Baker suggested the city bring back trade schools and attempt to replicate popular schools like the Richard Murphy K-8 School. “Why aren’t we looking at that and trying to apply it to other schools?” he said.

But here’s the dilemma. On the one hand, college isn’t for everyone, and vocational programs can do a lot to keep kids in school and teach them useful skills. On the other hand, it seems unbearably classist to say that Weston should have a college-preparatory program and Boston should be oriented toward life skills. I don’t know how to resolve this dilemma. Weston is so college-oriented that “college-prep” is the name for our lowest level of courses! Everything that isn’t honors or AP is college-prep. Students who want vocational training can go to Minuteman Career and Technical High School, which offers an excellent program — but it is socially deprecated in Weston and kids don’t want to be separated from their friends. So basically everyone in Weston is assumed to be college-bound. Boston, of course, is far more diverse. Even if it doesn’t bring back trade schools as an option, the kind of math curriculum proposed by Garfunkel and Mumford would at least be a start.

But wait! Maybe the wonders of technology will make this task easier. Sure enough, it turns out that car owners can easily download a perfect copy of their car registration in PDF format from the Registry of Motor [...]]]> My inspection sticker expires this month, so I took the car to our dealer this morning (in case any work was needed) and discovered that our registration had expired two months ago! The current registration was nowhere to be found. What to do, what to do? Obviously I should drive to Braintree or to Watertown and get a new copy of the registration.

But wait! Maybe the wonders of technology will make this task easier. Sure enough, it turns out that car owners can easily download a perfect copy of their car registration in PDF format from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. Whew!

Everyone always blames the Registry and the Post Office for poor service, but here at least the Registry gets points for making this process a simple one. But I didn’t know which of the two organizations to blame for the missing registration: did the Registry fail to send it out, or did the Post Office fail to deliver it?

Anyone who has seen my desk can guess the real end to this story.

It turned out that the Registry had indeed sent out the registration in late May, the Post Office had delivered it promptly, and I had “filed” it in a pile of papers on my desk. So now we have two copies of the current registration. Perhaps the extra one will come in handy some day.

On April 14 the Dorchester Reporter published an article under the headline “New street lights get applause.” It included the following remarks:

The new lights, which were installed with the help of power company NSTAR and energy efficiency block grant funds, use longer-lasting, 39-watt light emitting diodes (LEDs), allowing for greater night-time visibility because the distribution of light is more even in its focus on the street, and involving less energy usage.

…

Local residents [...]]]> The City of Boston is installing new lights on the sides of the streets in my neighborhood and others. But there’s a lot of controversy about these LED bulbs.

On April 14 the Dorchester Reporter published an article under the headline “New street lights get applause.” It included the following remarks:

The new lights, which were installed with the help of power company NSTAR and energy efficiency block grant funds, use longer-lasting, 39-watt light emitting diodes (LEDs), allowing for greater night-time visibility because the distribution of light is more even in its focus on the street, and involving less energy usage.

…

Local residents say they have noticed a difference. “It’s like night and day on Myrtlebank,” said Sean Weir, head of the Cedar Grove Civic Association. “For the most part, I think it’s great.”

…

City officials say they worked with St. Mark’s Area Main Street, the BOLD Teens, and the Codman Square Neighborhood Council on the installation.

Sounds good, right? But not according to Barry Mullen and Kevin Barry in a letter published six days later in the Reporter:

The LED lighting provides focused bright light in the direction that it shines, much like the LED flashlights. This leaves the areas not in the direct beam as much darker than the former lights. The brightness of the LED makes sharp black & white contrasts between the areas in and out of the LED light.

Conversely, the lighting that has now replaced the LED’s on St. Mark’s Rd. more effectively diffuse the light. They give a day-time effect to the light. One can now see people standing in the shadows.

Features and descriptions are much easier to discern than in the stark contrasts created by LED lighting.

This is a public safety issue. Was the police department consulted about the effectiveness of the lighting? I implore people to come to Florida St. and see the distinctions for themselves. At Florida St. one can stand in one spot to see Glenrose Rd. with the LED lights and St. Mark’s Rd. with their replacement lights. Similarly, one can stand at Lonsdale St. to compare its LED lights to the more universal lighting on Florida St.

While we are all in favor of saving money, it would not be wise to jump at the new program for that consideration alone. If crime can’t be seen with LED lighting, then how much have we really saved?

So, who’s right? I think I’ll take Barry and Kevin up on their suggestion for “people to come to Florida St. and see the distinctions for themselves.” Maybe they’re right, though I suspect the issue isn’t with LEDs but with wattage. Here’s the response from Commissioner of Public Works Joanne Masaro:

We will upgrade the wattage as needed. We understand that what works on one street may not work somewhere else. This project is very important and we will work to evaluate it and make changes as needed.

I’ll let you know what I observe. This is an empirical question.

I am about to reveal my list, though as those who have been with me on this quest already know, I’ve dropped hints along the way. And the winner, the all-time great, is … Bach!

You wouldn’t really [...]]]> About seven weeks ago, music critic Anthony Tommasini took on the thankless task of listing the “the top 10 classical music composers in history, not including those still with us.” Of course this task is impossible; no matter whom he chose, there would be more people disagreeing with him than agreeing with him. But fortunately he made the right choice for the #1 position:

I am about to reveal my list, though as those who have been with me on this quest already know, I’ve dropped hints along the way. And the winner, the all-time great, is … Bach!

You wouldn’t really disagree, would you?

Tommasini continues…

My top spot goes to Bach, for his matchless combination of masterly musical engineering (as one reader put it) and profound expressivity. Since writing about Bach in the first article of this series I have been thinking more about the perception that he was considered old-fashioned in his day. Haydn was 18 when Bach died, in 1750, and Classicism was stirring. Bach was surely aware of the new trends. Yet he reacted by digging deeper into his way of doing things. In his austerely beautiful “Art of Fugue,” left incomplete at his death, Bach reduced complex counterpoint to its bare essentials, not even indicating the instrument (or instruments) for which these works were composed.

On his own terms he could be plenty modern. Though Bach never wrote an opera, he demonstrated visceral flair for drama in his sacred choral works, as in the crowd scenes in the Passions where people cry out with chilling vehemence for Jesus to be crucified. In keyboard works like the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, Bach anticipated the rhapsodic Romantic fervor of Liszt, even Rachmaninoff. And as I tried to show in the first video for this project, through his chorales alone Bach explored the far reaches of tonal harmony.

So, who comes after Bach? Here’s the entire list:

1. Bach
2. Mozart
3. Beethoven
4. Schubert
5. Debussy
6. Stravinsky
7. Brahms
8. Verdi
9. Wagner
10. Bartok

It’s not my list — but close enough. (Actually, it isn’t solely Tommasini’s list either, since he had solicited input from readers prior to assembling it.) The only one of the ten who does nothing for me is Debussy, but I certainly have no complaints about admiring nine out of the ten.

And speaking of #10 on the list, Bartok, a composer who would probably not make most people’s top ten, I need to report on a terrific concert I attended last night at the New England Conservatory’s Jordan Hall. The renowned Benjamin Zander conducted the NEC Philharmonia in Bartok’s wonderful Concerto for Orchestra and Dvorak’s beautiful Cello Concerto. The soloist for the Dvorak was fellow Dorchesterite Tony Rymer — “the famous Tony Rymer” as one of my former students once referred to this gifted 21-year-old back when he was only 18. Tony is a truly outstanding cellist who will indeed be famous, and I predict it will happen not too many years from now.

On the one hand, the food was excellent and plentiful. Seventeen restaurants, mostly from the Boston area, provided a huge variety of lamb preparations and side dishes, all to be sampled in small portions. Also on the plus side was the company. Although Barbara was not interested, as she eats lamb only under duress, my friends Phil and Meredith accompanied me and we had a great time together.

On the other hand, there must have been 800 people there, so it was ridiculously crowded. Everyone was jammed into the [...]]]> Mixed feelings about the American Lamb Jam held yesterday at the Charles Hotel:

On the one hand, the food was excellent and plentiful. Seventeen restaurants, mostly from the Boston area, provided a huge variety of lamb preparations and side dishes, all to be sampled in small portions. Also on the plus side was the company. Although Barbara was not interested, as she eats lamb only under duress, my friends Phil and Meredith accompanied me and we had a great time together.

On the other hand, there must have been 800 people there, so it was ridiculously crowded. Everyone was jammed into the Charles Ballroom, which made it almost painful to move around. Even worse, there were only five or six small tables (plus a couple of high stand-up tables), so there was no place comfortable where we could sit and enjoy the event. Fortunately I was able to approach one of the staff and explain that we needed chairs since Phil is elderly and Meredith is disabled; he quickly produced three extra chairs and we crowded around a table for four that already had three people sitting there. Then of course it was a continual up-and-down as we got small plates of food from various stations.

I liked the original version better.

We particularly like one offering that we don’t always see on the carts. The solution, of course, was to take a photo and show it to the servers on my iPhone, since most of them don’t speak English. We eventually found out, from one of the English-speaking employees, that we’re talking about Shanghai Dumplings:

We happened to be seated where we [...]]]> Just got back from another excellent dim sum at the Dorchester branch of Chau Chow. If you live anywhere near Dorchester, come here for dim sum! Unlike Chinatown, parking is easy in their own lot and the overflow lot across the street.

We particularly like one offering that we don’t always see on the carts. The solution, of course, was to take a photo and show it to the servers on my iPhone, since most of them don’t speak English. We eventually found out, from one of the English-speaking employees, that we’re talking about Shanghai Dumplings:

We happened to be seated where we could gaze out at the one remaining Corita Kent gas tank, a.k.a. Rainbow Swash. It was a good angle, as long as you could ignore the used car lot, its prominent lighting, and the Expressway exit sign:

Capsule summary: food was excellent (almost the same quality as at Long Wharf); service started out hectic but calmed down; atmosphere was…well…a bit too young and trendy for us.

Barbara started with an Aviation (including the canonical crème de violette, unlike Mark [...]]]> As we had an about-to-expire Groupon for the Back Bay location of Sel de la Terre, Barbara and I had dinner there this evening. We’ve been to the original Long Wharf location many times, so it seemed appropriate to try out their newest incarnation. This is my fourth review of Sel de la Terre, but my first review of this location.

Capsule summary: food was excellent (almost the same quality as at Long Wharf); service started out hectic but calmed down; atmosphere was…well…a bit too young and trendy for us.

Barbara started with an Aviation (including the canonical crème de violette, unlike Mark Bernstein’s version) and a huge portion of curried chickpea purée, served with olive oil and “yummy breads.” She pronounced this appetizer excellent but had to take home half of it. I started with a small flatbread pizza, which came with mushrooms, onions, and feta cheese; it was good, but nothing special. For her main course Barbara had roasted monkfish with littleneck clams, cranberry beans, and brussels sprouts, all of which she liked; I had duck breast with fingerling potatoes and red cabbage. The duck was supposed to come medium rare, but it actually came rare — fine with me, but I’m sure it wouldn’t be fine for some other people. It was well-prepared and delicious, as were the sides. (The potatoes were there because I said I didn’t want the puréed squash that was supposed to accompany the duck; Erika, our server, volunteered the potatoes as a substitute, without my having to ask.) We had the same wine we had ordered 21 months ago at Long Wharf: Les Arbousiers Domaine La Remejeanne 2005 Cotes de Rhone. We enjoyed it just as much this time, and paid the same $40 we paid then. Erika encouraged us to aim a bit higher next time: she enthusiastically recommended a Regusci Cabernet at $80 a bottle. While this is distinctly above our price range — and our facial expressions must have shown that — she claimed that it was a steal as it would cost $120 anywhere else. Maybe so. Hmmm….

Speaking of our server, service was a tad inconsistent overall. The place seemed understaffed and overworked when we arrived at 6:32 for a 6:45 reservation. We were seated in six minutes (pretty good for a promised five-minute wait!) but then had to sit at our table for another eleven minutes before anyone came over to take our order for drinks. Since Erika was so busy with others, including a large party at another table, it was someone else who spotted us sitting there and stepped in to help. A third server came over at another point, as did the manager. So in the end we got plenty of attention and good service, but it didn’t match the calm atmosphere of the Long Wharf location. Valet parking works well in both places, as on-street parking would be a nightmare at either one and garages would cost more than the valet parking while being less convenient.

We would go back, but on the whole we prefer Long Wharf. It’s more relaxed, and for this kind of money we want a relaxing dining experience. The style fits us better.

We’re happy to tell you that we just had an unquestionably excellent meal at 224. Barbara had a first-rate Caesar salad (not so easy to find as one might think) followed by crabmeat sliders, which she describes as delicious and perfectly [...]]]> Barbara and I used to go to 224 a lot, but we haven’t been there very often in recent years. This is partly because of a couple of meals that were only OK (but overpriced), and partly because Ashmont Grill and 88 Wharf are not only closer to us but also more attractive for various reasons. But things may change.

We’re happy to tell you that we just had an unquestionably excellent meal at 224. Barbara had a first-rate Caesar salad (not so easy to find as one might think) followed by crabmeat sliders, which she describes as delicious and perfectly prepared. I helped her with a few of her generous portion of French fries — crisp and thin the way they should be. But I think I had the better meal, if I do say so myself. I started with a lamb chop “appetizer,” which turned out to be an amazing trio of grilled rosemary-and-garlic-marinated baby lamb chops atop a combo of cipollini and balsamic-dressed greens. Then came the main course (fortunately a bit smaller than the appetizer): pan-roasted sea scallops with a coulis of corn, smoked applewood bacon, shallots, and basil, topped with micro arugula and plum tomato concassé. Without my specifying, the lamb chops turned out to be medium rare and the scallops slightly undercooked, just as they should be. Yum!

Cheaper prices, I suppose. Gaslight is definitely on the pricey side… but no more so than any other first-rate restaurant in Boston.

We arrived 35 minutes before our reservation time and were seated immediately. The restaurant has a very French ambiance. Though surprisingly large, it immediately feels welcoming. Our server, Lily, was both friendly and professional — just the right combination. It [...]]]> Barbara and I just got back from our first time at Gaslight Brasserie du Coin, and it won’t be our last. Mostly excellent food, excellent service, and free parking — in the South End! — what more could one ask for?

Cheaper prices, I suppose. Gaslight is definitely on the pricey side… but no more so than any other first-rate restaurant in Boston.

We arrived 35 minutes before our reservation time and were seated immediately. The restaurant has a very French ambiance. Though surprisingly large, it immediately feels welcoming. Our server, Lily, was both friendly and professional — just the right combination. It was (surprisingly) not too noisy, considering that a group of 14 arrived halfway through our dinner to sit at the next table. Many reviewers have reported that Gaslight is too loud, so maybe we were just lucky. Or maybe it was because we were there on a Tuesday.

Barbara started with a shaved beet salad, which she found a bit stronger than she likes, partly because the beets were raw and partly because the dressing contained a lot of horseradish. Not being that much of a beet fan, I can’t comment. But I started with a first-rate French onion soup, unquestionably the best I have had in years. It was rich and hearty, probably because it contained some shredded truffled short ribs.

For our entrees, Barbara ordered steak frites medium rare, and I ordered duck confit with roasted garlic potatoes and an interesting salad. The steak turned out to be rare, not medium rare; our server graciously agreed, whisked it away, and returned in a couple of minutes with the steak appropriately unrarefied. My duck was great, as were the accompaniments. We also ordered a side of haricots verts to share; they were excellent too. While portions were on the small side, we had more than enough to eat, unlike some of the Open Table reviewers.

I ordered the crème brulée for dessert. It was perfectly prepared, though the crust was cold and they were out of the promised fresh berries that were supposed to accompany it. The server compensated by providing a lovely disk of candied cherries, figs, and kumquats. My dessert was also accompanied by a well-made double espresso.

The whole thing came to $154 including wine, tax, and tip. As I say, not cheap — but not outrageous either. By the way, that free parking is in a supervised parking lot.