Poetry Interlude–What The Living Do Edition

OK, how about a rare weekday post crammed between my somewhat irregular Sunday posts. Not too much reading, I hope.

Anyway, someone asked me recently if I planned to ever return to my poetry related posts, which I used to do on a regular basis. She recalled a poem I had introduced her to called “What The Living Do” by Marie Howe. She said that it still haunts her. She’s not the only one. It’s a gripping poem. The sort I could never read in a group setting because my voice would crack and the tears that inevitably well in my eyes each time I read it would blur my vision. No matter that, actually, because I have the poem pretty much committed to memory. I do that for a very fundamental reason—commit poems to memory. When I’m on the bus, or waiting for the bus, or lying awake in bed unable to sleep, or doing dishes, I often recite my favorite poems under my breath. Some people have mistaken my murmuring for prayer, which in a sense it is. My kids have long since learned to ignore me when they hear me mumbling off in some corner of the house, just out of earshot. But they’ve also learned that when I speak loudly enough for them to hear it is because I want them to hear, and they kindly stop what they’re doing and listen. They think they are humoring me. They often exchange knowing glances before going back to whatever occupied their minds before the interruption, completely unaware I have altered their lives in some small, subtle way. In the grand scheme of things it may be one of the more important things I do for my kids.

And, so it seems, I’ve managed to do the same thing for some other people, too. That’s cool. My greatest hope in life is to write a poem someday that haunts a reader years later, that in some small subtle way alters their life forever. But until then—optimistically assuming it will happen—I am almost just as happy to introduce them to poems that I love and to learn years later that those poems still have meaning for them. It makes indulging my passion for poetry a little less self-indulgent.

So, back to the poem that started this post in motion—“What The Living Do.” It is the title poem in a book Marie Howe wrote in the wake of her brother’s death to AIDS. What makes this poem, and the entire book for that matter, so powerful is that Howe’s grief never turns to self-pity or to sentimentality. The poem remains stark in its treatment of the subject, not allowing ornamentation or adornment to get in the way of the sharp, raw emotion. Howe’s handling of the subject reminds me of something another poet, Eavan Boland, says in a poem of her own that addresses a deeply emotional subject:

Let no love poem ever come to this threshold.
There is no place here for the inexact
praise of the easy graces and sensuality of the body.
There is only time for this merciless inventory:

Make no mistake: Howe’s poem is a love poem, in that it is a poem born of and steeped in her deep love for her brother. But it does not turn to the gauzy language of love, the sentimental heart-string plucking vocabulary and imagery poets pull out when they need to beg for an emotional response their poem cannot elicit on its own terms. There is no place here for that stuff.

What The Living Do
By Marie Howe

Johnny, the kitchen sink has been clogged for days, some utensil probably fell down there.
And the Drano won’t work but smells dangerous, and the crusty dishes have piled up

waiting for the plumber I still haven’t called. This is the everyday we spoke of.
It’s winter again: the sky’s a deep, headstrong blue, and the sunlight pours through

the open living-room windows because the heat’s on too high in here and I can’t turn it off.
For weeks now, driving, or dropping a bag of groceries in the street, the bag breaking,

I’ve been thinking: This is what the living do. And yesterday, hurrying along those
wobbly bricks in the Cambridge sidewalk, spilling my coffee down my wrist and sleeve,

I thought it again, and again later, when buying a hairbrush: This is it.
Parking. Slamming the car door shut in the cold. What you called that yearning.

What you finally gave up. We want the spring to come and the winter to pass. We want
whoever to call or not call, a letter, a kiss—we want more and more and then more of it.

But there are moments, walking, when I catch a glimpse of myself in the window glass,
say, the window of the corner video store, and I’m gripped by a cherishing so deep

for my own blowing hair, chapped face, and unbuttoned coat that I’m speechless:
I am living. I remember you.

Sunday Afternoon Random Thoughts–Race To Nowhere Edition

“We need to really think, what does it take to produce a happy, motivated, creative person?”

So says one of the people in the trailer for the educational documentary, “Race to Nowhere.” It’s a striking comment in that it focuses on four things our current educational policy couldn’t care less about: happy, motivated, creative, and the person. As much as our politicians and special interest talking heads jabber on and on about our children and their future, the last thing in the world they actually care about is the kids themselves—each individual human being who is, more often than not, negatively affected by our current system of education. What do they care about? Numbers in columns, statistics, rankings. What will it take to move from 11th to 10th in some comparison chart? In horse racing, you whip the horse harder to move up. In education rankings, you whip the kids harder. That drop-out rates are increasing, that suicide rates are increasing, that kids are literally buckling under the pressure is irrelevant because such things are not reflected in the bottom line. Sure, kids are unhappy. Sure, they’re doing three and five hours of homework a night. Sure, they’re learning to hate school and to hate learning more than anything else. But hey, it’s for their own good. And by “their own good” we mean it makes us look better in news reports and magazine articles. I’m reminded of the famous quote from the Vietnam War: “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.” We seem to be convinced that it is necessary to destroy our kids in order to save them.

Our kids walk into kindergarten, or pre-K, or even pre-pre-K now, with wide eyes and big smiles and a heart full of excitement, and our first order of business is to beat that out of them, to turn them into small compliant machines whose sole purpose is to sit quietly and receive whatever small dose of information is to be provided that day. And then to come back the next day and do it again, and then the next day, and the next. Motivation is not only unnecessary, it is discouraged, because motivation tends to lead to exploration and inquiry, which do not fit well with the scripted lessons most classes are forced to rigidly follow. Same, too, with creativity, which might lead kids to think on their own and make connections not officially sanctioned by the government mandated lesson plans. A group of students excited about a lesson and wanting to follow the train of thought in a particular direction must be reigned in and redirected to the proper path. The reason they must be so narrowly directed is so commonly repeated now that the sinister implications have been removed from the phase, “This is going to be on the test.” The inference is clear: nothing is more important than sticking to the script, to complying with the government mandate. Exploration and discovery and inquiry have no place in education. The purpose of schooling is not to expand a student’s desire to learn more, to expand his ability to seek knowledge, or to promote critical thinking, but to perform a small handful of very specific tasks on test taking day. And the only way to properly prepare students for such a task is to force them to comply with a very rigid lesson plan. Consider that education expert Jonathan Kozol was once fired from a teaching position for reading to his fourth grade students poems that were not on the approved list for fourth graders. These were not dirty limericks, but Robert Frost and Langston Hughes. When “Stopping By Woods On A Snowy Evening” becomes enough of a danger to fourth grade students to fire the teacher, something is terribly wrong.

And what about being happy? We have no room for motivation or creativity, but can we tolerate happiness in our children’s education? Most certainly not. Homework is piled on at increasing rates, with individual teachers assigning hours of homework without regard to what other teachers are assigning to the same student. The notion is that this is necessary to produce the test scores required to move up one or two places in the rankings. Just whip the kids a little harder and we’re sure to go a little faster, a little farther. One girl in the “Race To Nowhere” trailer says, “I can’t really remember the last time I had a chance to go in the backyard and just run around.” Another says, “I would spend six hours a night on my homework.” Six hours? After seven or eight hours in school? Thirteen to fourteen hours a day, five days a week, plus, no doubt, weekend work, too. Child labor laws outlawed such hours in our factories a century ago. But here we condone such abuse in our schools under the guise of education. Does it really matter that more and more of our kids are less and less happy every year? Apparently not. The happiness of our children is secondary (if it ranks that high) to good test scores and impressive rankings. What are a few suicides compared to glowing remarks in US News and World Report. Although having “a chance to go in the backyard and just run around” may be vital to that young girl’s emotional wellbeing, that time is seen as wasted because whatever she does out there in the backyard won’t be on the test.

This is the system we’ve created and that we continue to develop. Children come to school with an innate desire to learn, to explore, and we destroy that early on with too rigid lessons, too time consuming and frivolous homework assignments, and high-stakes tests at increasingly early ages. We suppress their creativity for the sake of convenience and efficiency and because it is easier to measure progress along a narrow path. Allowing students to explore what interests them may be better from a purely educational perspective, but you can’t build a standardized test around such diverse interests. And you can’t easily compile statistics and rankings without the standardized tests. Without the latitude to study topics of interest, kids quickly lose their motivation to learn. Assignments become chores instead of explorations and discoveries. Kids complete assignments and projects because they have to, not because they want to. Recess is cancelled and replaced with more work. Art and music classes are cut and replaced with more classes focusing on the narrow test-driven curriculum. And the kids get less and less happy, more and more disinterested in learning anything at all, and the overall system slips further and further into decline. And the stock answer is to whip the kids harder and harder.

The problem is not that our educational system isn’t whipping the kids hard enough, but that it is whipping them at all. And so the solution isn’t to continue to whip them harder, although that is what is being done every time some reform-minded politician demands to raise the bar higher, or to make the standards tougher, or to impose stiffer punishments for failure. We need to lose the sweatshop approach to education. The educational system is not a factory where our children are forced to work for twelve years, producing statistics and numbers and test scores of a particular style and quality. But as long as we see the product of education as numbers and statistics and rankings in reports, and not as happy, motivated and creative people, we’re going to continue to make the same mistakes we’ve been making.

Sunday Morning Random Thoughts –Rain, Rumors, and Remembrance Edition

I think I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. It isn’t the big things or events that make or break a relationship, but the little things—the hundreds and thousands of small gestures that occur in between the big, easy to get right moments. Almost every man can figure out to buy his woman a diamond ring, but far fewer will paint her toenails. And fewer still will rub her shoulders at a random moment and then walk away, leaving her clothing intact. Or kiss her on the forehead when getting up to leave the room.

So today, I was driving to Safeway around Wakefield Circle in the light mist that has replaced the heavier rains from earlier this morning. And walking around the circle was a young couple pushing a stroller. They appeared to be out for a stroll, not walking to somewhere they had to be. The woman was pushing the stroller and the man was holding an umbrella over all three of them. Only the umbrella wasn’t quite big enough to cover all of them, so the man had tilted it to cover the mother and child, leaving himself exposed to the light rain. And he looked happy, walking with his small family on a lazy Sunday morning, being rained on. She may not acknowledge that small gesture, may not even consciously recognize it, but somewhere deep inside, where the subconscious accounting of the small things occurs, it will register.

. . .

So yesterday was September 11. It seemed pretty low-key to me. My club soccer team won its opening game 3-1 amid a sea of other games going on at the soccer complex. I picked up some peanut butter and Quaker oats (shameless product placement) amid a sea of shoppers. In other words, normal life occurred. Which is a good thing. There were remembrances and solemn ceremonies, to be sure. But there were no religious zealots burning the sacred texts of their enemies (who, by the direct command of their own god, they should be showing love toward anyway). And while there were rival protests in New York over the placement of an Islamic center, the nation in general did not cheapen the date by turning it into a religious or political rallying point. That our streets were filled more with grocery shoppers than Quran burners on this specific date speaks to an important quality that distinguishes us from others: we are less swayed by hatred and anger than others are. That is caused in part by our diversity. As a nation, there is no singular quality that 100% of our citizens share, save for being American. And because of that, it is more difficult to rally us all behind a singular cause, especially one borne of hatred against another group. This is because that, despite all the rhetoric about how intolerant Americans are, we all know people from every other group and so our opinions are tempered by our own personal experiences and relationships with those people. It is a lot harder for me to be convinced that all Muslims are radical extremists when I work with several Muslims and not once has any of them attempted to kill me or burn my house down or blow up the building we work in. I have no statistics to prove it, but I would hazard to guess that the United States is the most heterogeneous society on the planet, and that alone may be our most enduring quality.

. . .

There has been a very big and exciting and—as of right now—untrue rumor going around Southern Maryland, which will remain completely nameless on my blog (and comments referring directly to it will be removed, too, so don’t bother). There is no reason for me to speak to the specifics of the rumor because it is less about this particular one and more about the nature of rumors in general that I am interested in. In this particular instance, I heard the rumor from multiple sources within a few days—from a local bartender, from two coworkers who live in Charles County, from a county government employee, from a local real estate agent. The one place, however, that I did not hear about the rumor from was the internet. I participate regularly on only one blog and I read one or two more, and none of those blogs picked up the story. It actually seemed odd to me that the blogs were silent on the issue. And so it came as a surprise to me when the individual affected by the rumor announced publicly during a radio interview that it was the local blogs that had fanned the flames of this particular rumor. The victim of what appears to be a vicious lie by some yet to be discovered enemy chose to defend himself by issuing his own vicious lie against a blog he sees as his enemy, a blog that has been critical of his actions in the past. It is sheer hypocrisy to rail against the underhanded tactics of others while engaging in those same tactics. Does he think he can heal the wound he has suffered by wounding others? Is his best defense against these claims a misguided and baseless attack on those uninvolved in the controversy? Or does he see this as an opportunity to discredit an otherwise credible source? Whatever his motives, it stinks. If he wishes to disprove the ugly claims against him, let him do it through the honest and honorable effort of proving the claims wrong, not by trying to attack the integrity of others. In doing what he is doing he is simply reinforcing and strengthening the process by which these sorts of rumors can occur.

Sunday Morning Random Thoughts — Primary Election Edition

Here it is Sunday, September 05, 2010, and we are now less than ten days from the primary election in my (mostly) beloved Charles County. I’ve had an opportunity to briefly browse the biographies of most of the candidates for both commissioner and Board of Education. Some candidates I know better than others—by observing their actions at meetings or, in the case of incumbents, in execution of their current offices (and boy, did some of them seem intent on “executing” their offices); by reading their comments in articles and letters to the editor; by knowing them well enough either personally or professionally to discuss issues with them. Through all this I have a pretty good grasp on who I plan to vote for in the primary, and, should the individual make it past the primary, in the general election. In some instances I already know that even though I will vote for a particular Republican in the primary, it will be the Democratic that gets my vote in the general election should the right candidate make it on the ballot. I’m not going to go into a lot of detail or lay down an exhaustive list of each candidate who has earned my vote, but I am going to highlight three or four people and give my reasoning behind my decisions. Call this an endorsement if you will. That’s fine. I just consider this an explication of how a guy who usually can’t decide between white and yellow American cheese in the grocery store made up his mind on some specific races.

Commissioner President – Candice Quinn Kelly

Because I cannot vote in the Democratic primary, I will have to wait for the general election to vote for my choice in this race. And I feel pretty confident I will get that opportunity. I’ve known Candice for about twelve years or so through my involvement on a few different HOA boards. We’ve had to deal directly with each other on numerous issues throughout the years, including a few in which we held opposing positions. In all of our interactions she never once failed to behave in a professional manner toward me, even when I was being more emotional than professional. HOA matters can get quite heated and I’ve seen her handle even the most difficult situations with composure. I’ve heard all the “Candy” stories and all I can say in response to those stories is I’ve never seen Candice behave that way. Does she have the temperament necessary for the position? I believe she does.

Also, I place a lot of value on a person’s ability to be thoughtful, to have a firm grasp on the complexities of a particular issue. It is not just enough to be able to articulate your position on certain issues, you must have a clearly defined position to start with. That comes from a broad understanding of the issues. One must have both clarity of speech and clarity of mind. In watching Candice during her previous time on the board, dealing with her directly in meetings, and reading her positions on some of the key issues facing the county today, I have no doubt she possesses both.

District One – Ken Robinson

Again, this is a candidate I will not be able to vote for until the general election, but once he has cleared the primary he easily has my vote. Ken is media and public relations savvy, I’ll give him that. His is probably the best run campaign in the county. But behind the well-oiled machine is a lot of substance to back it up. I’ve had the opportunity to speak with Ken only two or three times (he probably wouldn’t recognize me if I knocked him down on the street), but I have followed most of his conversations on the Delusional Duck blog, and I’ve read all of his position papers. The fact he has position papers indicates the amount of effort he has already put into the job he is seeking. Anyone can churn out a couple five or six word slogans; it takes a little more time and effort to develop a position paper. As a voter, I’m far more concerned with the hows and whys than I am with the whats. A candidate can tell me he is for any particular issue—say smaller government or better schools—but I want to know why he is for it (proves to me he has a reason for his position and isn’t just parroting the stance of the day), and how he plans to achieve it. Ken, thus far, has given me that.

I’m also impressed with Ken’s level of energy and involvement. There seem to have been few, if any, key events that Ken hasn’t attended. As someone once told me, if you want to know who is emotionally committed to a project, schedule a meeting at 5:00 PM on a Friday and see who attends. Consistently, Ken has been attending the 5:00 PM Friday meetings. And from his discussions on Delusional Duck this is the same approach he brought to his tenure as president of the Swan Point HOA.

Speaking of the Duck, the fact Ken has been consistently a participant there and has made himself available to all, including his detractors, indicates he isn’t afraid to face the public and be open in his actions as a commissioner. In a time when the board seems to become more insular by the minute, a truly open and accessible commissioner becomes more and more critical.

District Two – Rick Campbell

Finally, someone I can vote for in the primary! I’ve had the chance to sit down with Rick a few times in the last year and discuss several different issues. To be honest, Rick and I disagree on a few points, but I have to say I respect Rick for the process by which he has come to his conclusions. There hasn’t been a single topic I’ve heard Rick speak to that he hasn’t done his homework on. His are not positions of convenience or affiliation, even when they align, but positions of careful thought and consideration. He, too, participates on Delusional Duck and I have always been impressed with his breadth of knowledge on certain issues. He has reported numerous times from meetings I didn’t know were occurring that were being held by groups and commissions I didn’t know existed. His efforts in support of his community have been tireless.

One should want for their representative a person whose interest in the community predates and exceeds their candidacy for elected office. I’d be suspicious of any individual who suddenly began to care about the issues only after deciding to run for office. No candidate has convinced me more of his motivations for running for office than Rick has. He leans into his discussions on the issues. His eyes practically light up as he asserts his position on something. This man doesn’t just have his head in the game; he has his heart in the game, too. When talking with Rick, I can’t help but get excited about things I’ve never even heard of until then. That sort of passion and enthusiasm is sorely needed on a board that has collectively appeared to be catatonic at times.

Board of Education – Jennifer Abell

I’ve only known Jennifer personally for about a year and a half now, but I’ve heard her name repeated for years—Jennifer Abell was the only one who listened to us. Jennifer Abell was the only one who seemed to care about what we thought. Jennifer Abell was the only one who took the time to meet with us. And on and on. One of the complaints against the board of commissioners has been how detached they are from the people, how they do everything in lock-step, moving as a single body instead of as a group of independent thinkers serving together on the board. You haven’t heard those arguments made quite as much when talking about the BOE, but I think they apply. I’ve sat in BOE meetings where members have actually said that they think the board should be more united, should present a more uniform public face, that dissent among the ranks weakens the board’s position. The problem with that mentality is that board members are not elected to come to consensus, to be unified, to move as one, but to represent the best interests of the public. And if that requires dissent and debate, then that is what the public deserves.

It is one thing to oppose the majority just for the sake of causing waves. Fortunately, I’ve never seen Jennifer take a stance for such a reason. Even in instances where I disagreed with her position, I respected the fact she held that position for the right reasons. Hers has always been a position of openness and transparency. Her blog, which was met not just with consternation by the rest of the board, but with attempts at reprisal and punishment, has proven to be a valuable educational resource. Where other board members continue (and prefer) to hold the public at arm’s length, Jennifer has not been afraid to throw herself to the wolves (so to speak). Again, that sort of accessibility is uncommon and needed.

So, there you have it folks. Four races, four candidates. I’m not expecting you to agree with my choices, or even to agree with my assessments of these candidates. You have your pre-existing notions and biases just as I have mine. Your opinions and views are just as clouded by your own personal experiences as mine are. As the ad says, your mileage may vary.