There was a considerable amount of conversation this morning ...

.... over this article from the Wall Street Journal. Ostensibly it is about lip syncing or quartet syncing. However, at the foundation it is about our age's need for perfection. Here's a bit and then do go read it all.

But far worse, the emphasis on technologically assisted perfection is at odds with a human conception of artistic beauty. "In all things that live there are certain irregularities and deficiencies which are not only signs of life, but sources of beauty," wrote the 19th-century British critic John Ruskin. "To banish imperfection is to destroy expression, to check exertion, to paralyze vitality."

Which is exactly what happened at the Capitol grandstand: An opportunity for glorious exertion and vitality was missed. Imagine the sight of some of the world's greatest musicians struggling against the arctic elements -- coaxing and cajoling sound out of their reluctant instruments, willing their numb fingers to be nimble. I suspect it all would have come together quite well, if a bit out of tune here and there.

But what if it hadn't? What if Mr. Ma had suffered one of the catastrophes of which he warned -- a broken string? Picture the heroic struggle as he switched his fingering on the fly to find the necessary notes on another string. Mr. Ma is among the rarefied artists who could have pulled something like that off (and probably pulled it off with none but his fellow musicians even noticing). How fantastic it would have been to see him do it. Instead we got play-acting.

Tom maintained that it was completely unrealistic to ask musicians with delicate instruments to be outside in that weather and that under those circumstances the syncing was allowable. My take was that if the musicians didn't fake it then it would be obvious that their performance should be held elsewhere. Or we would have had the heroic performance posited above.

At any rate, this made me think back to a chance encounter at my bank with a young man who, upon a previous visit, had told me all about his wedding plans. When I asked him a couple of weeks ago how he liked wedded bliss, he explained that they were putting off the wedding because in today's economy both sets of parents needed their children's help financially. They couldn't afford the sort of wedding he felt his fiancee deserved. I couldn't help thinking back to the stories of Depression Era weddings and then the later hippie weddings that now seem to be forgotten. Some of the strongest marriages I know were begun on a shoestring under daunting circumstances. Venturing to give an opinion, I brought up the fact that it is the love in the marriage that matters rather than the trappings. For example, even with a potluck reception, the guests could all bring the recipes they used and the couple could have a cookbook that would bring back many memories. In better economic times they could celebrate anniversaries on a more lavish basis. He listened attentively and when I apologized for butting in, he earnestly said, "No, no. I never thought of those ideas. I don't have anyone to tell me. My fiancee says she doesn't care but I don't want her to be disappointed. You don't think that she'd look back and think I let her down?"

This is not necessarily the same thing as the above standards of perfection, but it seems to me that we have learned too well that idea of "not settling" for anything less than the best. Certainly we must strive for excellence, but we also factor in circumstances and limitations while setting priorities. Sometimes compromise surprises us by showing us something better than we would have imagined.

For example, I got married in a nightgown. But that is a story for another day. For one thing, I have to scan in the photo ...