If you haven't watched the You Tube/CNN debates, you've missed out. Unlike most debates, the questions come from folks like me and you. No softballs, no audience plants. In fact, the last question asked was to Rudy Giuliani about how, as a Yankees fan, he could root for the Red Sox in the Series. (His answer satisfied me - he rooted for the American League, as I did, after the Yankees were disqualified) While we're on that topic, let me get this out of my system: The curse is over and so is my empathy for Red Sox fans. The Red Sox now occupy the bottom spot on my list, forcing the Yankees up one notch.
But on to more pressing issues. Tonight's debate cleared some things up for me. Namely, Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate the Republicans could field that I'd even think about voting for. They won't field him, and, so, I won't vote Republican. Glad that's cleared up. I didn't know much about Romney or Hunter and I was curious to learn about them. I did. They're dead to me now.
Giuliani was on my list until tonight. And to his credit, he stayed there for most of the night, until he answered two questions. One was about why blacks and latinos don't vote for Republicans. Giuliani's answer indicated that they should because of what Republicans want to do with education in America. I always knew there was something I didn't like about this guy, and his answer clarified it for me. I agreed with his stance on most issues up to that point. I like reasonable gun laws. I like the fact that he doesn't really see abortion as a presidential issue, but still feels there are circumstances under which it should be legal. I like his focus on the issues at hand - crime when he was mayor, long term investments in infrastructure, and getting things done. I like a lot of things about POLITICAL (not religious) conservativism. He's a pretty good guy among his group.
But when he forced the issue of school vouchers and the non-existent alternatives to public education for the vast majority of Americans, thus pulling even more money out of an already bankrupt public education system, he lost me. This is one issue that not only affects the daily lives of many innocent Americans, but also dramatically affects our future. Public education is the best thing there is for 5-18 year olds in this country. In spite of the whining we hear from Republican candidates about how businesses have had to do more with less and therefore, government should too, both big business and government have gotten richer and richer while public schools, and the Americans who have depended on them have gotten poorer and poorer. Not only have schools still managed to gather intelligent, dedicated, creative and caring professionals at embarrassing wages to teach our kids, there is still simply no better alternative out there. Charter schools routinely close after a few years either because of corruption or because they simply can't provide the services that public schools provide for the money. Private schools exist in such small numbers that they're not even a consideration for even 10% of today's students. Even the handful of minorly successful charter ventures out there exist only for specific audiences by offering one-size-fits-all programs for narrowly targeted groups. There's just nothing better out there for the masses than public schools. And that's not because it's impossible to do, it's because public schools, by and large, are that good. No one can do what public schools do for the money. Teachers already work for embarrassing wages with embarrassing support and the Republican answer is to pull another $5000 per student OUT of that system for vouchers?! To subsidize religious schools or charter programs that haven't kept up?! It's simply not the answer. If, for one minute, America considered putting their money where their mouth is on education in this country, we'd realize that government really is good at some things. Public schools are a good example of that in education just as the Veterans Health Administration is a good example of that in health care. (In spite of CNN's week long attack on VA, it remains the best plan in America... for the record, it was even better before Bush repealed Clinton's Veteran's Healthcare Reform Act forcing VA to bring back the old WWII priority system for who received care - but that's another post) Ask Harvard... ask the NIH... nobody beats VHA health care. When we put some faith, some community involvement, and some money back into public education, no one will beat them. Few do now. Public schools are the living breathing example of doing more with less and all they have to show for it is more and more of the blame when every bit of accountability from parenting to counseling to babysitting is pushed onto them and more and more money is taken away. Never mind the fact that kids with special needs are simply not profitable to teach and so would become impossible to find a place for in the "open education market." Never mind the fact that while most of a student's money is pulled out of public education via vouchers, the public school district where that student resides is still strapped with providing that kid's transportation, books, and any costs arising from those special needs mentioned above. I'll end with some more public scrutiny on education, but let's move on.
The other nail in Giuliani's coffin was the great opportunity he had when a YouTuber asked all the candidates if they believed every word of the bible he held up in his video clip. Giuliani skirted the issue, as did Romney and Hunter (no one else answered) by saying he felt there was a lot allegory and metaphor in the book. He also added that the book contained a lot of wisdom that got him through 9/11 - a point on which I won't disagree, but that brings me to what I feel is the biggest non-issue in any election, except maybe for Pope, and that's religion.
There's simply no place for it, and thus no place for religious-based views on abortion or any other religious (non-presidential) issues in a presidential campaign. Period.
We're electing a man (or maybe a woman) to execute laws made by men, on behalf of a citizenry of men, alive on this earth. That man (or woman) has to sell himself (or herself) on the merits of qualifications for that job, not for his thoughts on the afterlife. In fact, I'm starting to be convinced that a belief in an afterlife should disqualify anyone from being a leader anywhere but in a church. And moderate religious beliefs like Giuliani's are the worst kind.
Yep. That's what I said. Let it sink in for a minute. Go ahead and go back to some old posts where I referred to God... call up the seeming contradiction... It's not seeming, it's a contradiction, although I will hedge a little here and claim that even that God I referred to in previous posts probably wasn't the one you think it is, but that's not the point here.
Religious moderation is what allows tolerance for other religions, which means those religions continue to fly under the radar of rational thought and discussion. Pick one. Let's use Islam for now. Moderate Christians who interpret their faith as tolerant of other faiths help perpetuate the divide between Christians and Muslims. There are a number of problems with this, not the least of which is 9/11... or that the bible allows very little tolerance of other faiths. Four of the ten commandments are about intolerance of other faiths... five if you count keeping the Sabbath holy (after all, it's a pretty specific Sabbath in mind there). Even the new testament calls for stoning heretics to death (and so you'll all have to line up at my door in order to follow Christian beliefs to the letter as a result of this post). Lucky for me, most Christians these days consider themselves moderate and will tolerate my opinions. Which is to say, most Christians are that only in name, not in practice. Those same people often claim that suicide bombers don't really represent the ideals of the faith they claim drove them to their acts. But it's precisely a belief in their faith that allows them to do what they do... because they believe in an afterlife at the expense of those in their current life. In other words, moderates aren't really religious; only fundamentalists are. Fundamentalists are pretty extreme and thus are seen by most moderate members of their own faith as irrational. I'm saying that moderates perpetuate that irrationality and what we need in the next elections is rationality. Back to the real point here, Giuliani, a seemingly rational guy for a Republican, had the chance to run away on this point, and he blew it. Nothing he mentioned until this question was asked had any connection whatsoever to any kind of faith, and yet, when faced with a question about it, rather than pointing out it had little to do with what any of them were talking about thus far tonight, he went with the status quo and lumped himself in with the rest of the candidates (except Paul) who said what they thought the conservative Christian right wanted to hear. Not because of any rational basis for it, unless you count belief rational, but because it polled well.
It's time to get over it. It's time we looked more at experience than religion in a candidate. The time to elect actors with minimal experience and all the right religious answers has come and gone. Sorry Senator Thompson.
Still don't buy my implication that religious faith requires irrational thought and requires the absence of rational discussion of more important actually relevant issues? Consider the British teacher in the Sudan who was arrested for allowing her students to name their class mascot, a teddy bear, Muhammad (peace be unto him)(I'm not making the same "mistakes" she did!)
As part of a lesson on animals, the class adopted the bear as a mascot. Students took turns taking the bear home overnight. They wrote a diary entry addressed to the bear by a name that they chose. Once all the diary entries were done, the teacher surveyed them and chose the most popular choice. The class named the bear and the teacher was arrested. Under the local law, she faces up to a year in prison and/or 40 lashes, from what I've read... FOR ALLOWING HER CLASS TO NAME A BEAR. That's what happens when religion influences the laws of men.
Apparently some parent complaints AFTER the naming of the bear brought attention to the crime. Where were those parents during the weeks of overnight diary entries? Why is it ok that that particular name is the most popular name for male babies in the world but not for a bear? Why was the teacher arrested?
Simple. Two reasons: 1) No rational discussion is permitted when faith enters the conversation. 2) Teachers, worldwide apparently, though I thought ours was alone in this, are at fault when anything goes wrong at any point in anyone's life.
Giuliani lost my support by perpetuating those two simple rules. Dr. Paul gained my support by effectively leaving them out of the conversation when his fellow candidates could not. I'm really starting to think I could vote for this guy... and that there's no way in hell I could vote for any of the other Republican candidates. Once again, none of my favorites will likely end up on a ballot.
I hope, for the sake of my grandchildren, there will one day be a presidential debate where these issues don't factor in. I'm reading a book about Da Vinci right now that puts human understanding into stark perspective. Poor old Leonardo was born at a time when it was believed that everything we ever needed to know had already been discovered. Five hundred years later a vast majority of Americans still operate under this belief. In spite of the gains we've made in physics, chemistry and biology, we remain frighteningly outdated in spiritual and emotional knowledge. Until we come up with a rational way to discuss these issues, we won't rationally discuss anything.
Instead, we'll tiptoe around for fear of offending anyone's religious ideas and we'll watch as religiously motivated violence continues now like it always has. 9-11, the Crusades, Israel-Palestine, India-Pakistan... on it goes until one of two solutions arise. 1) India-Pakistan (or any of the others) erupts into a nuclear apocalypse or 2) Rational discussion replaces the faith-based dance.
I'm pretty sure I'll love my grandchildren if or when I finally have a chance to meet them. I'm sorry for the world I fear we'll leave them. I'm glad I won't be here to see the end they'll inherit. I don't think I could face that.
In the meantime, my kids and I put up our holiday decorations tonight. That's right, we too will celebrate Sol Invictus on December 25! (By now everyone who admits evidence into the discussion knows that Jesus was born in the spring... or January, or November, right?)
At least we can all agree on Santa.
Luth,
Out.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Thursday, November 22, 2007
How Much Is A Billion Dollars?
When referring to the idea that no one seems to care how much money is, in my humble opinion, being wasted in Iraq, I've alluded to the idea that few of us have a concept of what a billion dollars really is. I know I don't. I've only recently wrapped my brain about what a million dollars is, and that, largely because it ain't what it used to be. But I ran across this in the National Guard Enlisted Association newsletter in an article about the Congress's fight over the war spending supplement and thought it might be cool to pass along.
How Much Is A Billion Dollars?
---A billion hours ago, humans were making their first tools in the Stone Age.(of course, if you're a creationist, this one makes no sense)
---A billion minutes ago, it was 104 A.D. and the Chinese first invented paper.
---A billion seconds ago, it was 1975 and the last American troops had pulled out of Vietnam.
---A billion dollars ago, it was only 3 HOURS and 32 MINUTES at the rate our government spends money.
On another note, Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours. I have to go now. If my wife catches me 'blogging while we're supposed to be getting ready to head over the river and through the woods, I'm as cooked as that turkey soon will be.
Luth
Out
How Much Is A Billion Dollars?
---A billion hours ago, humans were making their first tools in the Stone Age.(of course, if you're a creationist, this one makes no sense)
---A billion minutes ago, it was 104 A.D. and the Chinese first invented paper.
---A billion seconds ago, it was 1975 and the last American troops had pulled out of Vietnam.
---A billion dollars ago, it was only 3 HOURS and 32 MINUTES at the rate our government spends money.
On another note, Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours. I have to go now. If my wife catches me 'blogging while we're supposed to be getting ready to head over the river and through the woods, I'm as cooked as that turkey soon will be.
Luth
Out
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Coming Soon
No, I'm serious. I'll get back to this thing eventually. I've been kicking around a bunch of great 'blog ideas including the latest rant on left lane losers, but the two things that have been bugging me the most and that will appear here before 2008 for sure are:
1. Public Healthcare - Why even Republicans will eventually come around
To put it simply, big business will fail if it doesn't offer health plans to get and keep good workers. GM's latest union contracts are proving that even the biggest businesses can no longer afford it. When it becomes a problem for big business, even the Republicans will begin to question why we're the only developed country in the world without public health care. Nevermind the fact that my new employer, Veterans Health Administration, has proven that a government sponsored and administered health care plan can be one of the best systems around. (That's kind of a different topic, but there are some connections)(Oh and another related but different topic has to do with free markets and the lack thereof in health care.)
2. Is there a god? I'm beginning to wonder, but in my quest I've become convinced that organized religion does way more harm than good. (You can't argue with the history!)
Those two topics should put everyone's mind at rest until I get some time to write enough to put you to sleep, eh?
Smell ya later,
Luth.
1. Public Healthcare - Why even Republicans will eventually come around
To put it simply, big business will fail if it doesn't offer health plans to get and keep good workers. GM's latest union contracts are proving that even the biggest businesses can no longer afford it. When it becomes a problem for big business, even the Republicans will begin to question why we're the only developed country in the world without public health care. Nevermind the fact that my new employer, Veterans Health Administration, has proven that a government sponsored and administered health care plan can be one of the best systems around. (That's kind of a different topic, but there are some connections)(Oh and another related but different topic has to do with free markets and the lack thereof in health care.)
2. Is there a god? I'm beginning to wonder, but in my quest I've become convinced that organized religion does way more harm than good. (You can't argue with the history!)
Those two topics should put everyone's mind at rest until I get some time to write enough to put you to sleep, eh?
Smell ya later,
Luth.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Mandatory Public Service
I work with a guy who is in his second attempt at college. He's paying his own way this time, living on his own, and from the time I met him, struck me as one of the more mature twenty-something's I'd ever met. Instead of blaming anyone or making excuses about his first attempt at college (in-residence at an Ohio university famous for its rabble-rousing) he readily admits to, as he puts it, "lighting $20,000.00 of my dad's money on fire." I only mention this to establish him as a fairly normal young adult who has reached one of those maturity epiphanies, therefore placing him above average on the "insight" scale among the twenty-something's I've dealt with.
The other day we were talking about the state of the world when he asked me how I felt, as a former teacher, about the people you see on things like "Jay Walking" who have absolutely no clue about the world around them. I told him I didn't put much stock in those isolated, perhaps, staged "interviews," but he said that's not really what he meant. I don't remember his exact wording, but it was something along the lines of, "I can't believe how much stuff we sweep under the rug in this country... how much people don't learn in school."
When I asked him to clarify, he rattled off a few events like Japanese interment or McCarthyism or Watergate and I interrupted with "the rationale for the war in Iraq." He agreed, but then stipulated that that particular event is the result of what he's talking about, but not necessarily a direct example of what he's talking about.
I told him that I thought one of the reasons for that was the growing emphasis of public education on VOcation over EDUcation. I went on to add that it's one of the reasons I use to rationalize leaving a profession that I, for the most part, loved. I then added that I figured I gravitated toward English in college for some very related reasons because, as I saw it, Literature was one of the few areas where real issues, including bad things good people have actually done, still get debated and discussed thoroughly. That just doesn't happen anymore in the world of Fox vs. CNN. Thanks to that kind of polarization, it doesn't happen in bars or at sporting events and it surely doesn't happen in schools anymore because standardized test prep doesn't leave any time for actual debate or learning how to learn, or formulating arguments and consider those of others
Shortly after that, I was talking with another co-worker about the lack of commitment of younger folks these days. We cited specific examples of people we'd known who promised to do something that affected many other people, events, schedules, etc. and the then just flaked out and didn't deliver but didn't show any sign whatsoever of any remorse or even acknowledgment of having even remotely inconvenienced anyone. Now I won't ever go so far as to say this never happens among older folks, but they, more times than not, at least pretend to feel guilty about it.
As we discussed it, I recalled that last few times I'd taught Romeo and Juliet. One of my favorite lessons involved the responsibility that Friar Laurence gave to Friar John to take the news of the plan to the banished Romeo. (Juliet would fake her own death in order to get out of marrying Paris). Friar Laurence knew that if the message didn't get through, and the "news"of Juliet's "death" made it to Romeo, our young lover would probably rather take his own life than live without his Juliet. Friar Laurence told Friar John how important this mission was and assumed John would take care of it.
The lesson I taught ended in debating, writing about, etc. the degree to which Friar John contributed to the deaths of the main characters. I was increasingly surprised each year as more and more students argued that John bore little responsibility in the situation. "He was quarantined in that house, he couldn't leave. It wasn't HIS fault he didn't get the message to Romeo." they would argue. And that's true. It wasn't his fault that he couldn't leave the quarantined house, but it was HIS responsibility to get the message delivered and in spite of the obstacles that prevented HIM from leaving that house, HE still accepted the responsibility freely, thus leading others to depend on him making good on those expectations.
So let's call the two perspectives on this situation the Responsibility perspective that older folks generally levitate toward, and the Obstacles perspective that younger folks cling to. The Responsibility argument follows the "Letter to Garcia" story by Elbert Hubbard, wherein a sailor accepts an order to deliver a letter without question and makes good on the order in spite of the incredible efforts it requires. He doesn't ask where to find Garcia. He doesn't balk when he learns that Garcia is deep in a dangerous jungle, he just delivers. Because he said he would. And that's great.
The Obstacle perspective relies on the idea that when obstacles beyond one's control get in the way, then one is absolved of previous responsibilities directly prevented by those obstacles.
The truth is, both are reasonable perspectives. Certainly we must apply degrees of reasonableness to each situation, but it doesn't take a lot of imagination to come up situations in which both can be understood. If the Letter to Garcia carried news along the lines of "I changed the kitty litter," then the messenger's efforts seem a little extreme. If the obstacles that get in the way of, say, picking up a quart of Ben and Jerry's involve events that may trigger one's life insurance policy, then one would likely be absolved of the responsibility of delivering said ice cream. No problem.
What's sad is that the best explanation I can come up with for the differing perspectives and the divergent views on reliability as a hiring trait completely shoot down my underlying theory on education. The quickest argument older folks in the Responsibility perspective group will likely make is that no one would want to hire anyone who gave up as easily as Friar John, or, conversely, that employers would pay good money to keep someone like the guy who delivered the Letter to Garcia. So the common argument is based on VOcation, not education.
On the other hand, younger folks, or anyone who favors the reasonable application of the Obstacles argument might point out that a person of even a little intelligence, perhaps the product of a good EDucation, might be able to better discern what point at which to give up on a mission plagued by obstacles... and that Friar John, not adequately apprised of the Romeo/Juliet tension, figured if this message were that important, it would have been FedExed.
Believe me, I've made every argument in class about why that last excuse won't fly... it's not up to John to decide that... he made a deal... no one is ever aware of every detail of every situation so he should have just focused on what he promised to do and make damn sure it gets done, but that's not the point.
The point is, this little conflict between the old and the young is kind of our (the olds') fault. The products of a solid EDucation will eventually try to think for themselves, even if they don't quite have the worldly wisdom to do so the way we want them to in a given situation. And though we may not agree with their explanations or their application of the new-found knowledge, we have to accept it sometimes. If we don't, we may well close the door on any innovative, creative solutions to problems we old folks haven't been able to solve yet. And that doesn't take into account new problems that are bound to crop up that we're too antiquated to deal with.
So why bother discussing all of this, you ask? This very conflict, boiled down to such simple terms, represents the larger issues we seem to have with teens and early 20-somethings these days. First we expect them to pour themselves into their studies and become mature independent young adults through almost complete self-motivation, but then we hamstring them to practically useless roles in society until they're at least 21 or 22, when most of them will graduate from college and join "the real workforce." Then when they join the real workforce, we're surprised to find out some of them don't take their responsibilities as seriously as we do, or require a little extra reinforcement. We don't want them taking jobs away from "real" adults and yet we don't provide them with many readily available opportunities to do much else. Then we criticize them for skateboarding, hanging out, or playing video games. Only the most bored or industrious among them find meaningful uses for their time because they must go out of their way, above and beyond their normal, expected routines to do it.
This is one of many arguments I would make for a public service program that offers alternatives to the skateboarding, hanging out and game playing. There's nothing wrong with those activities, I just think the kids who do them would appreciate them more, and pick up some useful life lessons as well as employability and responsibility skills if they had something better to do with their time. Rather than condemning these kids, criticizing them, and then laughing at them and blaming them for the fruits of where we keep them, we need to offer them some better options than the ones that are currently in front of them. Whether it's military service, local, state or national civilian service, doesn't matter, but we should offer it. Will it be complicated? Sure, and while that has stopped us from instituting a national health plan, we shouldn't let it stop us from providing our kids with better opportunities to become better citizens.
OK, that's out of my system now. If anyone out there knows about existing programs with web pages, send them to me and I'll put the links up. I bet we'd be surprised by the number of average and even under-achieving teenagers who would jump at the chance to do something like this if only the opportunity were easier to find. We basically tell young people indirectly that they don't have a place in the adult world so we can't really criticize them for not going out of there way to find a chance to do so. Let's do it for them.
-----------------------------------
And just for the record, this post started out, based on that same conversation with a remarkably mature 20-something, about the importance of learning from and not repeating the lessons of history. That post is still incubating.
Luth
Out
The other day we were talking about the state of the world when he asked me how I felt, as a former teacher, about the people you see on things like "Jay Walking" who have absolutely no clue about the world around them. I told him I didn't put much stock in those isolated, perhaps, staged "interviews," but he said that's not really what he meant. I don't remember his exact wording, but it was something along the lines of, "I can't believe how much stuff we sweep under the rug in this country... how much people don't learn in school."
When I asked him to clarify, he rattled off a few events like Japanese interment or McCarthyism or Watergate and I interrupted with "the rationale for the war in Iraq." He agreed, but then stipulated that that particular event is the result of what he's talking about, but not necessarily a direct example of what he's talking about.
I told him that I thought one of the reasons for that was the growing emphasis of public education on VOcation over EDUcation. I went on to add that it's one of the reasons I use to rationalize leaving a profession that I, for the most part, loved. I then added that I figured I gravitated toward English in college for some very related reasons because, as I saw it, Literature was one of the few areas where real issues, including bad things good people have actually done, still get debated and discussed thoroughly. That just doesn't happen anymore in the world of Fox vs. CNN. Thanks to that kind of polarization, it doesn't happen in bars or at sporting events and it surely doesn't happen in schools anymore because standardized test prep doesn't leave any time for actual debate or learning how to learn, or formulating arguments and consider those of others
Shortly after that, I was talking with another co-worker about the lack of commitment of younger folks these days. We cited specific examples of people we'd known who promised to do something that affected many other people, events, schedules, etc. and the then just flaked out and didn't deliver but didn't show any sign whatsoever of any remorse or even acknowledgment of having even remotely inconvenienced anyone. Now I won't ever go so far as to say this never happens among older folks, but they, more times than not, at least pretend to feel guilty about it.
As we discussed it, I recalled that last few times I'd taught Romeo and Juliet. One of my favorite lessons involved the responsibility that Friar Laurence gave to Friar John to take the news of the plan to the banished Romeo. (Juliet would fake her own death in order to get out of marrying Paris). Friar Laurence knew that if the message didn't get through, and the "news"of Juliet's "death" made it to Romeo, our young lover would probably rather take his own life than live without his Juliet. Friar Laurence told Friar John how important this mission was and assumed John would take care of it.
The lesson I taught ended in debating, writing about, etc. the degree to which Friar John contributed to the deaths of the main characters. I was increasingly surprised each year as more and more students argued that John bore little responsibility in the situation. "He was quarantined in that house, he couldn't leave. It wasn't HIS fault he didn't get the message to Romeo." they would argue. And that's true. It wasn't his fault that he couldn't leave the quarantined house, but it was HIS responsibility to get the message delivered and in spite of the obstacles that prevented HIM from leaving that house, HE still accepted the responsibility freely, thus leading others to depend on him making good on those expectations.
So let's call the two perspectives on this situation the Responsibility perspective that older folks generally levitate toward, and the Obstacles perspective that younger folks cling to. The Responsibility argument follows the "Letter to Garcia" story by Elbert Hubbard, wherein a sailor accepts an order to deliver a letter without question and makes good on the order in spite of the incredible efforts it requires. He doesn't ask where to find Garcia. He doesn't balk when he learns that Garcia is deep in a dangerous jungle, he just delivers. Because he said he would. And that's great.
The Obstacle perspective relies on the idea that when obstacles beyond one's control get in the way, then one is absolved of previous responsibilities directly prevented by those obstacles.
The truth is, both are reasonable perspectives. Certainly we must apply degrees of reasonableness to each situation, but it doesn't take a lot of imagination to come up situations in which both can be understood. If the Letter to Garcia carried news along the lines of "I changed the kitty litter," then the messenger's efforts seem a little extreme. If the obstacles that get in the way of, say, picking up a quart of Ben and Jerry's involve events that may trigger one's life insurance policy, then one would likely be absolved of the responsibility of delivering said ice cream. No problem.
What's sad is that the best explanation I can come up with for the differing perspectives and the divergent views on reliability as a hiring trait completely shoot down my underlying theory on education. The quickest argument older folks in the Responsibility perspective group will likely make is that no one would want to hire anyone who gave up as easily as Friar John, or, conversely, that employers would pay good money to keep someone like the guy who delivered the Letter to Garcia. So the common argument is based on VOcation, not education.
On the other hand, younger folks, or anyone who favors the reasonable application of the Obstacles argument might point out that a person of even a little intelligence, perhaps the product of a good EDucation, might be able to better discern what point at which to give up on a mission plagued by obstacles... and that Friar John, not adequately apprised of the Romeo/Juliet tension, figured if this message were that important, it would have been FedExed.
Believe me, I've made every argument in class about why that last excuse won't fly... it's not up to John to decide that... he made a deal... no one is ever aware of every detail of every situation so he should have just focused on what he promised to do and make damn sure it gets done, but that's not the point.
The point is, this little conflict between the old and the young is kind of our (the olds') fault. The products of a solid EDucation will eventually try to think for themselves, even if they don't quite have the worldly wisdom to do so the way we want them to in a given situation. And though we may not agree with their explanations or their application of the new-found knowledge, we have to accept it sometimes. If we don't, we may well close the door on any innovative, creative solutions to problems we old folks haven't been able to solve yet. And that doesn't take into account new problems that are bound to crop up that we're too antiquated to deal with.
So why bother discussing all of this, you ask? This very conflict, boiled down to such simple terms, represents the larger issues we seem to have with teens and early 20-somethings these days. First we expect them to pour themselves into their studies and become mature independent young adults through almost complete self-motivation, but then we hamstring them to practically useless roles in society until they're at least 21 or 22, when most of them will graduate from college and join "the real workforce." Then when they join the real workforce, we're surprised to find out some of them don't take their responsibilities as seriously as we do, or require a little extra reinforcement. We don't want them taking jobs away from "real" adults and yet we don't provide them with many readily available opportunities to do much else. Then we criticize them for skateboarding, hanging out, or playing video games. Only the most bored or industrious among them find meaningful uses for their time because they must go out of their way, above and beyond their normal, expected routines to do it.
This is one of many arguments I would make for a public service program that offers alternatives to the skateboarding, hanging out and game playing. There's nothing wrong with those activities, I just think the kids who do them would appreciate them more, and pick up some useful life lessons as well as employability and responsibility skills if they had something better to do with their time. Rather than condemning these kids, criticizing them, and then laughing at them and blaming them for the fruits of where we keep them, we need to offer them some better options than the ones that are currently in front of them. Whether it's military service, local, state or national civilian service, doesn't matter, but we should offer it. Will it be complicated? Sure, and while that has stopped us from instituting a national health plan, we shouldn't let it stop us from providing our kids with better opportunities to become better citizens.
OK, that's out of my system now. If anyone out there knows about existing programs with web pages, send them to me and I'll put the links up. I bet we'd be surprised by the number of average and even under-achieving teenagers who would jump at the chance to do something like this if only the opportunity were easier to find. We basically tell young people indirectly that they don't have a place in the adult world so we can't really criticize them for not going out of there way to find a chance to do so. Let's do it for them.
-----------------------------------
And just for the record, this post started out, based on that same conversation with a remarkably mature 20-something, about the importance of learning from and not repeating the lessons of history. That post is still incubating.
Luth
Out
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The Address
Now I've heard it all. First there was a connection between the events of 9-11 and Saddam Hussein. Then there were WMD. Then we had to topple an evil dictator who, in spite of relative powerlessness and being surrounded by us and our allies - many of whom can no longer be counted as allies - somehow represented a threat to us. And now... now we were asked by an ally for our help.
An ally? Our help!?
That's what we're now calling invading a nation and leaving a vacuum that quickly filled with violence. Hmmm.
Perhaps I misunderstood or, as usual, am fuzzy on the timing. I've always had trouble keeping major world events in perspective. Maybe the president meant we're NOW being asked for help by our allies. But that doesn't hold up well either in light of a recent, and fairly vigorously conducted ABC News poll of Iraqis that says they (the ally, I presume) disagree. The percentage of Iraqis who feel the U.S. should leave now, in spite of what it might mean for the their future has increased by more than 10% since last winter to 47%. Not a majority yet, but then again, neither was the number of Americans who voted for our current president. (I know, I know the electoral college doesn't work like that... don't bother commenting to that effect)
More tidbits from the ally:
65-70% of Iraqis polled believe the surge has made things worse, not better, but, to be fair, they were only responding in terms of peace, political stability, and security. ABC should have asked them about something more substantive... like shopping.
60% of Iraqis say their own lives are going badly and 78% say things are going badly for the nation. So much for winning hearts and minds and offering a better alternative to sectarian gang membership.
There's plenty more where that came from. Check it out for yourself at ABCNews.com. They've now interviewed over 4,000 Iraqi citizens since the start of the war under some pretty rigorous surveying standards. They even managed to dig up some statistics that might be considered positive. Those are rare, and clearly not the point of this post, so you'll have to find them on your own.
As for the cheap trick of reading a letter from a fallen soldier's parents, no one can say what Army Specialist Brandon Stout's parents think or feel. No on can say they're wrong.
I'm in the first part of a book about how humans perceive happiness, or anything for that matter. The overriding theme thus far is that no two humans can perceive any significant reality the same way. In fact, even individual humans can't usually perceive something subjective and emotional, and then accurately recall it with any great success. An interesting side note in the book mentions that what makes optical illusions so interesting is that not only does everyone see something other than what their eyes initially tell them, but that they all see the same illusions and then revert back to what they originally saw. Only in those cases do humans ever reach agreement on perceived reality.
Our president continues to perceive the reality of the war in Iraq differently than most of the people I've talked to who have been a part of it, and many of the people I've talked to who haven't. I suppose there's just no point in arguing it anymore. I will agree that we'll never make up for what we did to the innocent Iraqis whose relative stability we shattered when we invaded their sovereign nation. For that, we should be ashamed and we owe it to them to try to sort out some of the mess we've made. We created chaos for them, in spite of tonight's address's call to combat chaos. That's the way I perceive the reality I saw with my own eyes. This book tells me that's not very reliable, and I probably have to agree, but what I see on TV and read in the papers each night seems to refresh my foggy memory.
I doubt it's my place to call for the withdrawal that I wish would never have been a consideration and I doubt that it would make things better or worse. But backing down troop levels now seems like the only worse option. It feels childish to even type this next line given the weight of the matter, but we either need to go big or come home. Since I can't even begin to wrap my brain around what $2.5 billion per week even means, I suppose I shouldn't care that we still can't provide basic medical coverage for a huge portion of American citizens. Instead, we'll give the Iraqis a better life. Now there's a reality I'd like to perceive.
If we can't put enough troops on the ground to overwhelmingly control every major city, then maybe we should listen to our customers and leave them alone. The fact that we can't possibly do either one with a good conscience right now is nothing more than the result of a poorly thought out plan being drug through its paces by a stubborn mule as if continuing to drag it will make it right. Or perhaps it's an optical illusion that we'll all stare at long enough to make it real. Tonight's address sounded as much like an admission of that (you pick one) as we're ever likely to hear.
For everything that remains great about our nation, to have it tainted by this is just plain sad. Is this what it felt like during Vietnam? At least we have the sense to not blame the troops this time around. Perhaps not all of history's lessons have been ignored.
Luth,
disgustedly,
Out.
An ally? Our help!?
That's what we're now calling invading a nation and leaving a vacuum that quickly filled with violence. Hmmm.
Perhaps I misunderstood or, as usual, am fuzzy on the timing. I've always had trouble keeping major world events in perspective. Maybe the president meant we're NOW being asked for help by our allies. But that doesn't hold up well either in light of a recent, and fairly vigorously conducted ABC News poll of Iraqis that says they (the ally, I presume) disagree. The percentage of Iraqis who feel the U.S. should leave now, in spite of what it might mean for the their future has increased by more than 10% since last winter to 47%. Not a majority yet, but then again, neither was the number of Americans who voted for our current president. (I know, I know the electoral college doesn't work like that... don't bother commenting to that effect)
More tidbits from the ally:
65-70% of Iraqis polled believe the surge has made things worse, not better, but, to be fair, they were only responding in terms of peace, political stability, and security. ABC should have asked them about something more substantive... like shopping.
60% of Iraqis say their own lives are going badly and 78% say things are going badly for the nation. So much for winning hearts and minds and offering a better alternative to sectarian gang membership.
There's plenty more where that came from. Check it out for yourself at ABCNews.com. They've now interviewed over 4,000 Iraqi citizens since the start of the war under some pretty rigorous surveying standards. They even managed to dig up some statistics that might be considered positive. Those are rare, and clearly not the point of this post, so you'll have to find them on your own.
As for the cheap trick of reading a letter from a fallen soldier's parents, no one can say what Army Specialist Brandon Stout's parents think or feel. No on can say they're wrong.
I'm in the first part of a book about how humans perceive happiness, or anything for that matter. The overriding theme thus far is that no two humans can perceive any significant reality the same way. In fact, even individual humans can't usually perceive something subjective and emotional, and then accurately recall it with any great success. An interesting side note in the book mentions that what makes optical illusions so interesting is that not only does everyone see something other than what their eyes initially tell them, but that they all see the same illusions and then revert back to what they originally saw. Only in those cases do humans ever reach agreement on perceived reality.
Our president continues to perceive the reality of the war in Iraq differently than most of the people I've talked to who have been a part of it, and many of the people I've talked to who haven't. I suppose there's just no point in arguing it anymore. I will agree that we'll never make up for what we did to the innocent Iraqis whose relative stability we shattered when we invaded their sovereign nation. For that, we should be ashamed and we owe it to them to try to sort out some of the mess we've made. We created chaos for them, in spite of tonight's address's call to combat chaos. That's the way I perceive the reality I saw with my own eyes. This book tells me that's not very reliable, and I probably have to agree, but what I see on TV and read in the papers each night seems to refresh my foggy memory.
I doubt it's my place to call for the withdrawal that I wish would never have been a consideration and I doubt that it would make things better or worse. But backing down troop levels now seems like the only worse option. It feels childish to even type this next line given the weight of the matter, but we either need to go big or come home. Since I can't even begin to wrap my brain around what $2.5 billion per week even means, I suppose I shouldn't care that we still can't provide basic medical coverage for a huge portion of American citizens. Instead, we'll give the Iraqis a better life. Now there's a reality I'd like to perceive.
If we can't put enough troops on the ground to overwhelmingly control every major city, then maybe we should listen to our customers and leave them alone. The fact that we can't possibly do either one with a good conscience right now is nothing more than the result of a poorly thought out plan being drug through its paces by a stubborn mule as if continuing to drag it will make it right. Or perhaps it's an optical illusion that we'll all stare at long enough to make it real. Tonight's address sounded as much like an admission of that (you pick one) as we're ever likely to hear.
For everything that remains great about our nation, to have it tainted by this is just plain sad. Is this what it felt like during Vietnam? At least we have the sense to not blame the troops this time around. Perhaps not all of history's lessons have been ignored.
Luth,
disgustedly,
Out.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
No gnus is good gnus
Hi kids,
Not much to report here, unless you count moving into a new house as news. We're back up and on the net again, catching up on a lot of old email and trying to figure out where to put all the furniture that was purchased for the last two houses. I'm happy to report the new place won't need a lot of work (although it came with a lot of "want to" work) but I had forgotten how much setting up is involved when moving into a new place. What's really sad is that we've probably only moved about 2/3 of our junk from the old place and I'm ready to watch the old place burn, remaining contents and all. We'd thought about keeping it as a rental, but I can't get it on the market fast enough. Only problem with the plan is, it will probably take a good year to make it ready for anyone but a demolition crew.
Anyhoo, I've had some fun post ideas lately, but haven't had the time to write them up. One involves exploring the phenomena of having a car so cool that the driver doesn't need to be... and all the ways to make a car cool, you know, like having one of the "piss on ______" stickers in the back window, or a spoiler to keep the ass end on the ground at high speeds even though the vehicle in question doesn't even have half the power to achieve those speeds... or playing music so loud with the windows down that everyone gets to hear just how crappy the speakers really are... vanity plates with spellings so clever no one knows what they're supposed to say but you and your idiot friends... you know, COOL stuff like that.
I'm also ready to just vent violently about the dropping of the concept of the left lane being the passing lane from driver's ed programs. I am quickly understanding how road rage develops. I followed a fella doing 60 in the left lane for about 15 miles the other day. He was pulling a large boat with a small truck. The combination probably shouldn't even have been on a highway, let alone in the left lane. When I, and the other 40 cars behind him finally passed him on the right, I pulled back into the left lane and just coasted uphill until I slowed down to about 30. I had hoped he might get the idea of what it's like to be stuck in the PASSING lane behind someone going way too slow. Instead, he began flashing his lights and honking at me. It apparently never occurred to him to cruise on over into the CRUISING lane. Since my message was clearly not received, I drove off at the posted speed limit and pulled well away from him as I moved back into the right lane. You'd think with all the idiots from the right who continue to pretend Bush is worthy of leading this once great nation, more people would want to drive on the right as is the custom in this country, but alas, it's just one more contradiction I'll never understand.
OK, enough for now. I REALLY don't have time for this.
Luth,
Out.
Not much to report here, unless you count moving into a new house as news. We're back up and on the net again, catching up on a lot of old email and trying to figure out where to put all the furniture that was purchased for the last two houses. I'm happy to report the new place won't need a lot of work (although it came with a lot of "want to" work) but I had forgotten how much setting up is involved when moving into a new place. What's really sad is that we've probably only moved about 2/3 of our junk from the old place and I'm ready to watch the old place burn, remaining contents and all. We'd thought about keeping it as a rental, but I can't get it on the market fast enough. Only problem with the plan is, it will probably take a good year to make it ready for anyone but a demolition crew.
Anyhoo, I've had some fun post ideas lately, but haven't had the time to write them up. One involves exploring the phenomena of having a car so cool that the driver doesn't need to be... and all the ways to make a car cool, you know, like having one of the "piss on ______" stickers in the back window, or a spoiler to keep the ass end on the ground at high speeds even though the vehicle in question doesn't even have half the power to achieve those speeds... or playing music so loud with the windows down that everyone gets to hear just how crappy the speakers really are... vanity plates with spellings so clever no one knows what they're supposed to say but you and your idiot friends... you know, COOL stuff like that.
I'm also ready to just vent violently about the dropping of the concept of the left lane being the passing lane from driver's ed programs. I am quickly understanding how road rage develops. I followed a fella doing 60 in the left lane for about 15 miles the other day. He was pulling a large boat with a small truck. The combination probably shouldn't even have been on a highway, let alone in the left lane. When I, and the other 40 cars behind him finally passed him on the right, I pulled back into the left lane and just coasted uphill until I slowed down to about 30. I had hoped he might get the idea of what it's like to be stuck in the PASSING lane behind someone going way too slow. Instead, he began flashing his lights and honking at me. It apparently never occurred to him to cruise on over into the CRUISING lane. Since my message was clearly not received, I drove off at the posted speed limit and pulled well away from him as I moved back into the right lane. You'd think with all the idiots from the right who continue to pretend Bush is worthy of leading this once great nation, more people would want to drive on the right as is the custom in this country, but alas, it's just one more contradiction I'll never understand.
OK, enough for now. I REALLY don't have time for this.
Luth,
Out.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Satire in a Post-911 World, or How the GWOT Ruined My Favorite Source of Entertainment
Satire, my beloved subgenre, seems to have gone the way of the rest of the grown up world. It has succumbed to realism at the expense of idealism. Perhaps I’m just fearful of my own fall from a similar grace. After all, long before Gary Shteyngart’s ABSURDISTAN, Lucilius, Pope, Rabelais, Swift, Twain, Parker and (insert favorite satirist here) had all used the form to belie horrible truths about mankind that plagued them in their respective days. Maybe it’s not the subgenre that has fallen, maybe it’s mankind. Or maybe it’s just me.
In my more hopeful and naive youth, (and by that I mean sometime last week, when my kids were still babies and I was only 150 pounds) I saw satire as the happy, nurturing, altruistic way of changing the world. Guiding mankind, criticizing each other with humor and gentle linguistic skills rather than barroom brawling or nation invasion. It was humorous. It made us laugh while it reminded us of just how flawed we all truly were. Satire didn’t bother with some silly “born of sin” flaw, but actual, of this Earth, human flaws that we all, all religions, nationalities, races, creeds, colors, all of us, hold in common. Those beautiful distinguishing flaws or rather features that connect us all, that make us all brothers, that create the stories that we tell in bars and back rooms in bad translations and broken accents. The flaws that indisputably, irrevocably tie us to our common origins. The flaws that raise common features to stunning beauty. Like the crooked mouth of that girl in WITHOUT A TRACE, or the droopy eyelid of that guy you shared a cab with. The flaws that make me just like you and you just like that guy you can’t stand from college. Satire pointed out those flaws only by forcing us to confront the fact that it is these very flaws that make us all of the family homonid, and thus we all have stuff in common that goes waaayyyy back.
Satire did this in fun ways, like teaching lessons through fairy tales or by telling jokes. Or, sometimes, it did it in scary ways that shed light on things we really didn’t like to talk about. Satire, in any language, made us think at best and smile, at the very least. From any culture, we recognize the joke. We understand that commonality. We get that we all have so much more in common than we do in contrast. It might take a little more work, a little more humility to rely on a translator in order to become part of the “in crowd” to get the joke, but that’s what satire gave us all a membership card to. It gave us entry into that exclusive fraternity. Once in, we were all friends, remarkably capable of overlooking minor, or even major differences in order to bond and revel in camaraderie that no minor flaws could ever sunder. Satire was the glue. It was it. It was the shizzle.
At least it was for me. I’ll admit that my attraction to it was partially intellectual. Or maybe it was hesitant intellectualism. Satire was the gift my studies offered up that I could accept and share, at least in movies and cartoons, with all of my friends without my having to apologize for my education... or more specifically, my commitment to the study of our language. Satire was that rare place where my obsessive interests crossed the more common thoroughfare of my diaspora of friends. The lawyers, the bricklayers, the doctors, the mechanics, the engineers and the musicians all found something we could laugh about together in one form or another of this maligned subgenre.
But now it’s different. In the post-911 world or maybe the post-modern world, or maybe in whatever derogatory label someone decides to hang on us, it’s just not funny anymore. It’s not that satire isn’t good anymore. It’s not that it doesn’t bring us common ground anymore. It’s not that it doesn’t uncover truths in non-judgmental, but diamond-sharp accuracy anymore. It’s just not as much fun.
OK, that’s not entirely true either. There’s still fun to be had, but only by the most hardened among us. Satire is still fun, it’s just not as funny to me. The reason for this is a loss of innocence. I don’t mind turning 40, but to enjoy today’s satire, I have to accept that I’ve truly lost my innocence and I don’t want to. I still want to see the world through hopeful, faithful, sure, even idealistic eyes. But in the age of the GWOT, laughing at modern satire doesn’t allow for that. I’ve got two choices - pretend that I don’t know the real meaning behind Alexander Pope’s “The Rape of the Lock” in order to continue being entertained by it upon learning the surprising real truth, or grow calloused and hard in order to pave the way for new satirical creations that chronicle more modern events.
SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT
OK, I’m new to the whole spoiler alert thing and I don’t really know where it belongs, so I’m throwing it in now for those of you interested in, but not yet around to reading the aforementioned ABSURDISTAN by Gary Shteyngart.
It’s a great book. It’s great because it feels very real. The characters, their flaws, their super-humanness, their pathetic situations are so much like a big warm hug from mom, who then kicks your ass for screwing up, that you can’t help but love it just like you love mom. Reading it is like stepping into your happy place, no matter where that is, only to be reminded that your memory of that place is selective and, therefore, there are dark secrets there too that you don’t necessarily want dredged up along with those happy warm memories. That’s frickin reality, bud. Inescapable, irrefutable reality. Not necessarily cold or hard reality, as it is so often described, just real reality. Shteyngart may take some egotistical liberties creating this reality, but his brilliance as a writer lies in his ability to do it regardless. And he does, as well as any writer I’ve read from Tolstoy to King to Ovid. But damn him for doing it so well.
Satire used to make me believe that this reality was a cool place to live. Not overly happy. Not without some problems, just real, real multifarious, and therefore real cool. Satire used to make me think this reality was worth working to save. I used to think satire was the way we could make the world a better place. I used to think people like Shteyngart were the writers who propelled us forth in our idealistic naivete.
ABSURDISTAN, I guess, does that, but without further ado, here’s the scene that led me to this precipice of prescience. But first, 150 pages of background in two paragraphs:
While temporarily detained in his semi-native, “Norway of the Caspian” aka Absurdistan, our hero, Mikhail “Misha” Vainberg, an old-school Russian Jew visiting in order to pick up a black market Belgian Passport so he can get back to the U.S. and steal his girl back from a literature professor/former classmate now professor (Professor Shteyngart by the way) at “Accidental College” (Misha’s been blacklisted by the INS in Russia because his late, mob boss/philanthropist dad is accused of killing an Oklahoman) a coup erupts between the Absurdsvani Svani and Sevo tribes which creates only a minor inconvenience for Misha. The coup is as artificial as it can be since both majority Svanis and minority Sevos have somewhat willingly intermingled for years and agree that only those in power keep track of their differences in order to oppress both and maintain said power. Their primary difference, by the way, is that the “footrests” at the bottom of their orthodox crosses tilt in opposite directions.
Anyhoo, in the course of the coup, Misha is faced with, and rises to the opportunity to save the life of his Sevo driver when they are confronted by a drunken Svani soldier on their way back from the McDonald’s parking lot where Misha received his faux passport. Moments later, back in the relative safety of the Hyatt parking lot, Misha makes a run for the (slightly less relative) safety of the hotel lobby, his 325 pounds dashing among armored personnel carriers that remind him of his youth in communist Russia. Upon reaching the safety (and air conditioned comfort) of the Hyatt lobby, he realizes his driver, Sakha, has been detained along with a dozen other Sevos by the Svani soldiers “guarding” the Hyatt. (The Svanis take great care to ensure the safety of Halliburton employees working on the Figa 6 oil rigs for BP/Chevron) In spite of his foolish attempt to intervene, which requires him to leave both the safety and the air conditioning, Misha returns to the street to narrate the following scene:
The men, some of them heavy, the others bestowed with an academic’s lack of physical grace, found it difficult to arrange themselves in this tenuous position. (an execution-style kneel) Several were tipping over and had to be dragged up by their collars. The soldiers had fallen in line behind them, one soldier to a man, a ratio that did not bode well.
Sakha’s eyes fixed on me. There were tears on his face; I couldn’t see them, but I knew they were there.
“Misha”, he shouted to me. “Mishenk’a, tell them to stop. They will listen to a man like you. Please. Say something.”
The soldiers looked to Colonel Svyolka, who nodded. They shot the men through the back of the head, the bodies of their victims jerking up in unison with the discharge, then hitting the driveway with tremendous speed, a cloud of loose gravel swirling around them.
The spent bullet casings rolled down the driveway to my feet. A dozen bodies lay on the ground.
What follows is the start of the next chapter wherein, 40 stories above the coup in progress, Misha contacts his NY therapist who, “with great patience and analytic equipoise, beseeched me to calm the fuck down.” The conversations with his therapist, sad as they are, remind us that Misha represents modern man through is need for external affirmation, his gluttony, etc. The conversations remind us that ABSURDISTAN really is a comedy.
It’s satire to be certain, but it’s only funny if you have a world-weary, war generation sensibility. It’s the kind of humor that to me represents real vulgarity. Not an artificial vulgarity linked to proper behavior or manners or not embarrassing your friends, or some twisted version of biblical advice not actually found in the bible, but truly vulgar, basal human instincts - laughing at truths we all recognize, but like to believe we’re beyond. You can only believe that if you still have hope.
Perhaps if you haven’t seen poverty or the devastation of war first hand, this is still funny in an entertaining way - the way I used to enjoy satire. Perhaps if you can ignore the reality that we pulled our best resources out of Afghanistan only to wreak havoc on innocent Iraqis and in the process let a pinned down Al Qaeda go free only to use our troops as live training aids in Iraq, it’s still funny. Perhaps it’s only offensive to me now in the way seeing the word “fuck” in print was always hilarious to me but offensive to my friends who didn’t study language like I did and were thus never as tickled by deft use of it. Perhaps those of us who manage to ignore CNN, Fox, and USA Today can still laugh guilt-free at Sheyngart’s masterfully crafted prose, but I feel all grown up reading it now and I don’t like that one bit.
Let me clarify that the event included in the above quote is only a spoiler in the sense of that particular chapter. Let me also add that I, through sheer addiction to the story thus far, have no intention of stopping reading at what is only about the halfway point of the novel. It really is that good and I really do still live on the sustenance of satire. It’s just that this scene has moved satire from an intellectual to a guilty pleasure. Perhaps this is yet another step in my developing snobbery. Perhaps I now join literary critics who claim that satire is merely derivative at best, flat out plagiarism at worst.
I doubt it. I think I’ll still like it, but I read on a changed man. Less of a man in my former self’s opinion. I will continue to read the way a group of boys “reads” a stolen Playboy or the way a tough guy reads THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY, which is to say, I’ll hide it from anyone curious enough to try to sneak a glimpse of that which so enthralls me.
So I’m growing up. That sucks.
Luth,
Out.
By the way, for a great example of satire that I’d almost forgotten about, but which the Global War On Terror reminds me of more and more as it goes on, check out T.C. Boyle’s “The Top of the Food Chain,” it always cracks me up and it looks uncannily like modern congressional testimony.
In my more hopeful and naive youth, (and by that I mean sometime last week, when my kids were still babies and I was only 150 pounds) I saw satire as the happy, nurturing, altruistic way of changing the world. Guiding mankind, criticizing each other with humor and gentle linguistic skills rather than barroom brawling or nation invasion. It was humorous. It made us laugh while it reminded us of just how flawed we all truly were. Satire didn’t bother with some silly “born of sin” flaw, but actual, of this Earth, human flaws that we all, all religions, nationalities, races, creeds, colors, all of us, hold in common. Those beautiful distinguishing flaws or rather features that connect us all, that make us all brothers, that create the stories that we tell in bars and back rooms in bad translations and broken accents. The flaws that indisputably, irrevocably tie us to our common origins. The flaws that raise common features to stunning beauty. Like the crooked mouth of that girl in WITHOUT A TRACE, or the droopy eyelid of that guy you shared a cab with. The flaws that make me just like you and you just like that guy you can’t stand from college. Satire pointed out those flaws only by forcing us to confront the fact that it is these very flaws that make us all of the family homonid, and thus we all have stuff in common that goes waaayyyy back.
Satire did this in fun ways, like teaching lessons through fairy tales or by telling jokes. Or, sometimes, it did it in scary ways that shed light on things we really didn’t like to talk about. Satire, in any language, made us think at best and smile, at the very least. From any culture, we recognize the joke. We understand that commonality. We get that we all have so much more in common than we do in contrast. It might take a little more work, a little more humility to rely on a translator in order to become part of the “in crowd” to get the joke, but that’s what satire gave us all a membership card to. It gave us entry into that exclusive fraternity. Once in, we were all friends, remarkably capable of overlooking minor, or even major differences in order to bond and revel in camaraderie that no minor flaws could ever sunder. Satire was the glue. It was it. It was the shizzle.
At least it was for me. I’ll admit that my attraction to it was partially intellectual. Or maybe it was hesitant intellectualism. Satire was the gift my studies offered up that I could accept and share, at least in movies and cartoons, with all of my friends without my having to apologize for my education... or more specifically, my commitment to the study of our language. Satire was that rare place where my obsessive interests crossed the more common thoroughfare of my diaspora of friends. The lawyers, the bricklayers, the doctors, the mechanics, the engineers and the musicians all found something we could laugh about together in one form or another of this maligned subgenre.
But now it’s different. In the post-911 world or maybe the post-modern world, or maybe in whatever derogatory label someone decides to hang on us, it’s just not funny anymore. It’s not that satire isn’t good anymore. It’s not that it doesn’t bring us common ground anymore. It’s not that it doesn’t uncover truths in non-judgmental, but diamond-sharp accuracy anymore. It’s just not as much fun.
OK, that’s not entirely true either. There’s still fun to be had, but only by the most hardened among us. Satire is still fun, it’s just not as funny to me. The reason for this is a loss of innocence. I don’t mind turning 40, but to enjoy today’s satire, I have to accept that I’ve truly lost my innocence and I don’t want to. I still want to see the world through hopeful, faithful, sure, even idealistic eyes. But in the age of the GWOT, laughing at modern satire doesn’t allow for that. I’ve got two choices - pretend that I don’t know the real meaning behind Alexander Pope’s “The Rape of the Lock” in order to continue being entertained by it upon learning the surprising real truth, or grow calloused and hard in order to pave the way for new satirical creations that chronicle more modern events.
SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT
OK, I’m new to the whole spoiler alert thing and I don’t really know where it belongs, so I’m throwing it in now for those of you interested in, but not yet around to reading the aforementioned ABSURDISTAN by Gary Shteyngart.
It’s a great book. It’s great because it feels very real. The characters, their flaws, their super-humanness, their pathetic situations are so much like a big warm hug from mom, who then kicks your ass for screwing up, that you can’t help but love it just like you love mom. Reading it is like stepping into your happy place, no matter where that is, only to be reminded that your memory of that place is selective and, therefore, there are dark secrets there too that you don’t necessarily want dredged up along with those happy warm memories. That’s frickin reality, bud. Inescapable, irrefutable reality. Not necessarily cold or hard reality, as it is so often described, just real reality. Shteyngart may take some egotistical liberties creating this reality, but his brilliance as a writer lies in his ability to do it regardless. And he does, as well as any writer I’ve read from Tolstoy to King to Ovid. But damn him for doing it so well.
Satire used to make me believe that this reality was a cool place to live. Not overly happy. Not without some problems, just real, real multifarious, and therefore real cool. Satire used to make me think this reality was worth working to save. I used to think satire was the way we could make the world a better place. I used to think people like Shteyngart were the writers who propelled us forth in our idealistic naivete.
ABSURDISTAN, I guess, does that, but without further ado, here’s the scene that led me to this precipice of prescience. But first, 150 pages of background in two paragraphs:
While temporarily detained in his semi-native, “Norway of the Caspian” aka Absurdistan, our hero, Mikhail “Misha” Vainberg, an old-school Russian Jew visiting in order to pick up a black market Belgian Passport so he can get back to the U.S. and steal his girl back from a literature professor/former classmate now professor (Professor Shteyngart by the way) at “Accidental College” (Misha’s been blacklisted by the INS in Russia because his late, mob boss/philanthropist dad is accused of killing an Oklahoman) a coup erupts between the Absurdsvani Svani and Sevo tribes which creates only a minor inconvenience for Misha. The coup is as artificial as it can be since both majority Svanis and minority Sevos have somewhat willingly intermingled for years and agree that only those in power keep track of their differences in order to oppress both and maintain said power. Their primary difference, by the way, is that the “footrests” at the bottom of their orthodox crosses tilt in opposite directions.
Anyhoo, in the course of the coup, Misha is faced with, and rises to the opportunity to save the life of his Sevo driver when they are confronted by a drunken Svani soldier on their way back from the McDonald’s parking lot where Misha received his faux passport. Moments later, back in the relative safety of the Hyatt parking lot, Misha makes a run for the (slightly less relative) safety of the hotel lobby, his 325 pounds dashing among armored personnel carriers that remind him of his youth in communist Russia. Upon reaching the safety (and air conditioned comfort) of the Hyatt lobby, he realizes his driver, Sakha, has been detained along with a dozen other Sevos by the Svani soldiers “guarding” the Hyatt. (The Svanis take great care to ensure the safety of Halliburton employees working on the Figa 6 oil rigs for BP/Chevron) In spite of his foolish attempt to intervene, which requires him to leave both the safety and the air conditioning, Misha returns to the street to narrate the following scene:
The men, some of them heavy, the others bestowed with an academic’s lack of physical grace, found it difficult to arrange themselves in this tenuous position. (an execution-style kneel) Several were tipping over and had to be dragged up by their collars. The soldiers had fallen in line behind them, one soldier to a man, a ratio that did not bode well.
Sakha’s eyes fixed on me. There were tears on his face; I couldn’t see them, but I knew they were there.
“Misha”, he shouted to me. “Mishenk’a, tell them to stop. They will listen to a man like you. Please. Say something.”
The soldiers looked to Colonel Svyolka, who nodded. They shot the men through the back of the head, the bodies of their victims jerking up in unison with the discharge, then hitting the driveway with tremendous speed, a cloud of loose gravel swirling around them.
The spent bullet casings rolled down the driveway to my feet. A dozen bodies lay on the ground.
What follows is the start of the next chapter wherein, 40 stories above the coup in progress, Misha contacts his NY therapist who, “with great patience and analytic equipoise, beseeched me to calm the fuck down.” The conversations with his therapist, sad as they are, remind us that Misha represents modern man through is need for external affirmation, his gluttony, etc. The conversations remind us that ABSURDISTAN really is a comedy.
It’s satire to be certain, but it’s only funny if you have a world-weary, war generation sensibility. It’s the kind of humor that to me represents real vulgarity. Not an artificial vulgarity linked to proper behavior or manners or not embarrassing your friends, or some twisted version of biblical advice not actually found in the bible, but truly vulgar, basal human instincts - laughing at truths we all recognize, but like to believe we’re beyond. You can only believe that if you still have hope.
Perhaps if you haven’t seen poverty or the devastation of war first hand, this is still funny in an entertaining way - the way I used to enjoy satire. Perhaps if you can ignore the reality that we pulled our best resources out of Afghanistan only to wreak havoc on innocent Iraqis and in the process let a pinned down Al Qaeda go free only to use our troops as live training aids in Iraq, it’s still funny. Perhaps it’s only offensive to me now in the way seeing the word “fuck” in print was always hilarious to me but offensive to my friends who didn’t study language like I did and were thus never as tickled by deft use of it. Perhaps those of us who manage to ignore CNN, Fox, and USA Today can still laugh guilt-free at Sheyngart’s masterfully crafted prose, but I feel all grown up reading it now and I don’t like that one bit.
Let me clarify that the event included in the above quote is only a spoiler in the sense of that particular chapter. Let me also add that I, through sheer addiction to the story thus far, have no intention of stopping reading at what is only about the halfway point of the novel. It really is that good and I really do still live on the sustenance of satire. It’s just that this scene has moved satire from an intellectual to a guilty pleasure. Perhaps this is yet another step in my developing snobbery. Perhaps I now join literary critics who claim that satire is merely derivative at best, flat out plagiarism at worst.
I doubt it. I think I’ll still like it, but I read on a changed man. Less of a man in my former self’s opinion. I will continue to read the way a group of boys “reads” a stolen Playboy or the way a tough guy reads THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY, which is to say, I’ll hide it from anyone curious enough to try to sneak a glimpse of that which so enthralls me.
So I’m growing up. That sucks.
Luth,
Out.
By the way, for a great example of satire that I’d almost forgotten about, but which the Global War On Terror reminds me of more and more as it goes on, check out T.C. Boyle’s “The Top of the Food Chain,” it always cracks me up and it looks uncannily like modern congressional testimony.
Monday, July 02, 2007
A month?! Holy crap.
I can't believe it's been that long since I've last posted. Sorry fans. I've really let you down. Part of the deal is I'm a federal employee again... and not just the part-time, paid vacation in Iraq kind, but the kind whose paycheck comes from the gov, so I have to be much more careful about how I criticize the current administration's utter ineptitude. No longer will you read here about how Dick Cheney speaks from at least three sides of his many faces or how, no wait, I wasn't going to say those things.
So yeah, what else is there to talk about? Oh, the other excuse for not posting. I'm moving again. I'm staying in my hometown, but buying a place for the entire Clan Luther to live in. A place that doesn't require constant, heavy upkeep. The move does come at a time when I'm in the midst of a massive project at the old place (when am I not?), the busiest time of year at the new job, and a sprinkling of inspections and field exercise at guard... so it's not like I have an excuse not to blog. I'm just lazy, that's all.
Speaking of that, I have to get some sleep. I'll type at y'all later. By the way, the new job is the coolest job I've ever had. (I'll probably get RIF'd next month!)
Later dudes,
Luth,
Out.
So yeah, what else is there to talk about? Oh, the other excuse for not posting. I'm moving again. I'm staying in my hometown, but buying a place for the entire Clan Luther to live in. A place that doesn't require constant, heavy upkeep. The move does come at a time when I'm in the midst of a massive project at the old place (when am I not?), the busiest time of year at the new job, and a sprinkling of inspections and field exercise at guard... so it's not like I have an excuse not to blog. I'm just lazy, that's all.
Speaking of that, I have to get some sleep. I'll type at y'all later. By the way, the new job is the coolest job I've ever had. (I'll probably get RIF'd next month!)
Later dudes,
Luth,
Out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)