Reading life review: June

in

Books read this month: 7
Books read in 2011: 51

The Geeks Shall Inherit the Earth (Alexandra Robbins)
Non-fiction, education. Robbins argues that all of those weird, quirky, yes, geeky traits that make it difficult to find a table in the high school cafeteria will translate into measures of success in the "real" adult world (although the anecdotes for Regan, a twenty-four-year-old teacher, seem to argue against this premise). As one Amazon reviewer quipped, the book seems to explain "why the 'preps' are sometimes sitting by themselves at class reunions." Heh, heh, heh. As a parent-teacher, I am naturally interested in young people who stray from stereotype, so I did enjoy this book. NPR discusses it here.

Confessions of a Prairie Bitch (Alison Arngrim)
Memoir. What a thoroughly entertaining book! With an assured, distinctive, and thoroughly likeable voice, Arngrim describes her harrowing childhood, her life on the set, her castmates, and her journey into adulthood. Some readers may be shocked by her somewhat salty talk, but I was completely engaged. Recommended.

Pitch Uncertain (Maisie Houghton)
Memoir; review copy. Related entry here.

The Silent Land (Graham Joyce)
Fiction. A happily married if somewhat immature couple on winter holiday discovers the nature of love amid a series of unsettling events. This quickly-consumed novel reminded me of "LOST" and "The Twilight Zone," and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

A Midsummer Night's Dream (William Shakespeare)
Play, classic. Related entries here and here.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)
Fiction. With the Misses. Family film night this weekend will feature Jeremy Brett's take on this classic. By the way, I read this and A Midsummer Night's Dream on the Kindle.

Robopocalypse (Daniel H. Wilson)
Science fiction. Weary of vampires and zombies? It's humans versus -- you guessed it! -- robots in this entertaining tale that is told in a manner similar to Max Brooks' World War Z (a book my son recommended to me several times).


Bookmarked
Although the following are not included in the June count, I am nearly done with them / plan to finish them over the coming week (or two) of (mostly) digital fasting. *

A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change (Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown)
Education. This title appeared on a list of summer reading suggestions. Wish I could remember who sent me the list....

Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie: A Tale of Love and Fallout (Lauren Redniss)
Biography, graphic book. What an artful combination of science and romance.

This Girl Is Different (J.J. Johnson)
Fiction. A mostly predictable YA treatment of the "homeschooled kid decides to attend public high school -- and change the world!" story.

The Hypnotist (Lars Kepler)
Fiction. Poolside reading courtesy of the wave of Nordic lit enjoying such popularity here in the States.


* It's nothing cryptic. It's not even inspired by recent reading. We're just a little busier than is our wont, and I know how to recover a couple of hours, right quick.

The recommended daily allowance

in


Murder on the Orient Express (Agatha Christie)

"No, sir. I prefer to read."

Poirot smiled. He could visualize the scene — the large, voluble Italian, and the snub direct administered by the gentleman's gentleman.

"And what, may I ask, are you reading?" he inquired.

"At present, sir, I am reading Love's Captive, by Mrs. Arabella Richardson."

"A good story?"

"I find it highly enjoyable, sir."

"Well, let us continue. You returned to your compartment and read Love's Captive till — when?"

Studying. No, really. We are.

in


Sketch to finished piece: A Midsummer Night's Dream

in

UnCollege

in

Earlier this month, I read an article in the Chicago Tribune about UnCollege, "a social movement changing the notion that going to college is the only path to success." Although I cannot find a link on the Tribune site, it appears that the Seattle Times also ran Laurel Rosenhall's piece.

From "Teen entrepreneur asks: College? Who needs it?" (June 13):

The backlash against college comes, paradoxically, at the same time demand for higher education is soaring. But it could be that the economic downturn is responsible for both the rise in college applications — as students seek a leg up in the job market — and the sentiment that college isn't necessary, as they take on more debt to get their degrees.

"As family incomes, particularly in the middle class, are stretched and strained, and tuitions rise and state support lessens, (it's not surprising) you would begin to hear voices that say, 'What's the value here?' " said Jerry Lucido, executive director of the Center for Enrollment Research, Policy and Practice at the University of Southern California.

Some recent related M-mv posts here, here, here, and here.

"The idea of keeping yourself on a digital diet will, I suspect, become mainstream soon."

in

From "How to survive the age of distraction" (The Independent, June 24):

"What I'm struggling with," he writes, "is the encroachment of the buzz, the sense that there's something out there that merits my attention."

I think most of us have this sense today, if we are honest. If you read a book with your laptop thrumming on the other side of the room, it can be like trying to read in the middle of a party, where everyone is shouting to each other. To read, you need to slow down. You need mental silence except for the words. That's getting harder to find. [Emphasis added.]
I'm not so sure it was the laptop thrumming on the other side of the room that had reduced the time I spent with books. No, I suspect it was something rather like what Neil Gaiman experienced (hat tip to Melissa; see the comments of my Kindle post):
It’s the fact that my eyesight is no longer comfortable with tiny lettering and word balloons. And that simply fascinated me. And fascinated me because I realized that technology is normally driven by the young, and leaves the old and my generation on the sidelines going, "We don’t know what we think about this." Except the Kindle and Kindle technology, which is absolutely being discovered by my age and up from people who are going, “You mean I don’t have to buy large-print books? I can just set the font wherever I like? This is great.” And all these people you expect to be going, “I do not want this modern newfangled thing,” are going, “I have a house full of books I can’t read anymore. This thing is magic.”

in

Semicolon hosts "The Saturday Review of Books." Consider participating this week.

Fine Art Friday

in

This week, I'm featuring the work of two local artists. (Click on the images to enlarge; otherwise, the details are lost.) The first two works-in-progress are, of course, inspired by recent adventures in A Midsummer Night's Dream.



From late April, this next piece was also lit-inspired; a play on A Study in Scarlet, it is also informed by images from the recent film edition of Sherlock Holmes.


And this last piece, a nearly complete illustration, complements the early installments of an adventure series the artist is writing.

"Now considered a classic, it was initially greeted in many quarters with incomprehension, even as an outright affront."

in

From "William Eggleston's Big Wheels" (Smithsonian, August 2011):

Eggleston’s photograph also can be seen in larger cultural terms. In its small way, it’s an example of the growing prominence of white Southern culture in the ’70s—from Richard Nixon’s Southern strategy to the popularity of rock bands like the Allman Brothers and Lynyrd Skynyrd to the election of Jimmy Carter in the same year as the MoMA show. Then there’s a further, literary dimension. As the curator Walter Hopps wrote in an essay for a book following Eggleston’s 1998 Hasselblad Award, his “photographs carry the enriched reverberations of fiction.” This rather forlorn-looking child’s toy (notice the rusted handlebars) is a visual correlative for the ways banality was being used in the short stories of such contemporary writers as Ann Beattie and, especially, Raymond Carver.
Related M-mv entries:

Fine Art Friday (11.14.2008)

"[T]ransforming ordinary moments into indelible images" (3.02.2010)

Never, ever, say, "Never."

in

I know, I know: First comments, Facebook, and Twitter, and now this? Where is the real Mrs. M-mv? Heh, heh, heh. For those who like this sort of thing, my first downloads included the tenth anniversary edition of American Gods (Neil Gaiman) and NYT audio digests for yesterday and today from Audible.com and The Complete Works of Shakespeare and Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children (Ransom Riggs) from the Kindle Store.

"There are other things in life than baseball...."

in


From Janet Chiauzzi's letter to the eleven-year-old son of her son's Little League coach:

Tell your stupid father to back away from the East Meadow baseball team or he will be sorry. There are other things in life than baseball and if he wants to enjoy them he will get out of East Meadow baseball for good. Accidents happen and I would hate to see something happen to your mom or dad or sister because of your dad's stupidity....
Related news items here, here, and here.

There are other things in life than baseball. Had she only heeded her own words, eh?

Bob Cook, who writes a youth sports blog for Forbes, opines on the Chiauzzi case in today's entry:
The other rational economic response is to say, it is worth the time and effort and money, because only by paying that cost can my child even have a chance of being that one out of 100. And, often, that response is not only rational, but correct.

Out of that other rational economic response [to youth sports] comes other decisions that can be declared rational economically, though certainly not rational in terms of human sanity. I don’t know what was going on with Janet Chiauzzi, her son, and the baseball league in East Meadow. But you can see sports parent nuttiness arrive when a parent feels like the system is out to screw over his or her child — and, as a result, lay to waste all the time and effort and money spent on the child’s sporting endeavors. Parental love certainly factors high in the response, for who else but our own children can make us so irrational? But combine that with all the money parents spend on their child’s sports development at early age — before they or the child have any idea whether the kid will like the sport, thrive at it, or be physically superior enough to his or her peers to advance — and you get Chiauzzi and the tut-tutting over how parents can get so crazy over “just a game.”
Cook concluded yesterday's post with a question about youth sports involvement: Does my child actually want to do this — for himself or herself, and not to make me happy?

What do you think? Are your kids involved in sports? Is it "just a game"? Do they do it for themselves? What is your level of involvement? Have you experienced "sports parent nuttiness"?

A Midsummer's Night Dream

in

Can it really be so long ago? Well, then. Seven years ago -- seven years! -- the Misses fell in love with Brian Hamman's rapping Puck in the Chicago Shakespeare Theater production of Short Shakespeare! A Midsummer Night's Dream. (Related entry here.) And yesterday, they returned to Dream. With no small sense of nostalgia, we revisited the same retelling we read all those years ago and then watched the 1999 film version featuring Kevin Kline as the sort of Bottom Shakespeare himself may have envisioned. (Read Roger Ebert's review here.) And today after math and music, we will read the play, choose parts to memorize, and do what we do: Read. Think. Learn.

Live. Dream.

Titania:
I pray thee, gentle mortal, sing again:
Mine ear is much enamour'd of thy note;
So is mine eye enthralled to thy shape;
And thy fair virtue's force perforce doth move me
On the first view to say, to swear, I love thee.

Bottom:
Methinks, mistress, you should have little reason
for that: and yet, to say the truth, reason and
love keep little company together now-a-days; the
more the pity that some honest neighbours will not
make them friends. Nay, I can gleek upon occasion.

Titania:
Thou art as wise as thou art beautiful.

Bottom:
Not so, neither: but if I had wit enough to get out
of this wood, I have enough to serve mine own turn.

in

Semicolon hosts "The Saturday Review of Books." Consider participating this week.

"As Wendy Mogel likes to say, 'Our children are not our masterpieces.'"

in

From "How to Land Your Kid in Therapy" (The Atlantic, July/August 2011):

And yet, underlying all this parental angst is the hopeful belief that if we just make the right choices, that if we just do things a certain way, our kids will turn out to be not just happy adults, but adults that make us happy. This is a misguided notion, because while nurture certainly matters, it doesn’t completely trump nature, and different kinds of nurture work for different kinds of kids (which explains why siblings can have very different experiences of their childhoods under the same roof). We can expose our kids to art, but we can’t teach them creativity. We can try to protect them from nasty classmates and bad grades and all kinds of rejection and their own limitations, but eventually they will bump up against these things anyway. In fact, by trying so hard to provide the perfectly happy childhood, we’re just making it harder for our kids to actually grow up. Maybe we parents are the ones who have some growing up to do—and some letting go. [Emphasis added.]
Ayup. There's one of my parenting mantras, right there: We're supposed to be letting them go from the moment they arrive in our lives. That's the painful truth of this gig. The other hard fact? Their lives are just that -- theirs. Not ours.

Fine Art Friday

in

Untitled (Romeo and Juliet), 1981-1984
Tim Burton, American, 1958 -

The Museum of Modern Art has archived its web complement to the Tim Burton exhibition, which closed in late April, here. The Los Angeles County Museum of Art will host the exhibition through -- appropriately enough -- Halloween 2011.

I blame Melissa for this.

in

She included a link in her reader. Next thing I know, Momiji are en route.

Bloomsday

in

The material in this post was culled from previous Bloomsday entries.

My tour through Ulysses was led by a deft literary guide, a full professor who preferred his students to his study, a rare, rare breed, indeed. He took us by the hand (and some us by the nose) as we sometimes walked, often plodded, occasionally skipped through his favorite book in all the world. And those who could afford the annual pilgrimage to Dublin, he happily ushered through the streets and narrows that his beloved Bloom paced.

As I have done each June 16 since taking Marty N.'s seminar on James Joyce, today I pulled down my tattered copy of the tome and reread a paragraph here, a margin note there, assorted slips of paper quoting Marty, and Chapter 18 in its entirety. Our discussion of "the 'Yes' chapter," all those years ago, was prefaced by a screening of Irish actress Fionnuala Flanagan's performance of Molly Bloom's monologue. The stunned silence that followed the film's end was recalled to me today when I read this bit in the Times Literary Supplement:
This is particularly true of Molly Bloom’s closing soliloquy, which may end on a “Yes” but is tragic in its implications. Here is a wakeful woman, beside her sleeping husband, left with nobody to talk to but herself. After an afternoon assignation with her lover, she feels compelled to m-st-rb-te repeatedly in the bed, because her visitor took all the pleasure for himself. The blank pieces of paper which she posts to herself seem like emblems of her lonely condition, just as her “yes” seems a desperate tactic to convince herself that life is better than it is. When the Irish actress Fionnuala Flanagan performed the monologue in this way on an American campus in the 1980s, some elderly professors handed back their membership cards to the Joyce Association in disgust at her alleged blasphemy against a sacred text.
Not Marty. Like us, he was staggered by Flanagan's interpretation. Oh, what a discussion followed.

Yes, it's Bloomsday again. The twentieth that I've marked. I grow old.*

You know, reading Joyce, hell, reading any of the "heavier" books, requires a time-space that few of us willingly make. Oh, the children, we chide. Ah, work, we moan. Oh, dear, the chores, the errands, the lawn, the home-improvement projects. We toss the books aside in dismay because they are no easier now than they were when well meaning English teachers and professors pressed them on us in our teens and early twenties.

Bulletin! They were never meant to be "easy."

Happy Bloomsday.
___________________

* From "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot:
I grow old . . . I grow old . . .
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.

I do not think that they will sing to me.
Do you want me "to bring it all home"? Okay. Modernists Eliot and Joyce (and Ezra Pound) influenced, nay, arguably shaped twentieth-century literature. In a 1922 review, Eliot described Joyce's Ulysses as "the most important expression which the present age has found." It's no small coincidence that Eliot identified the "mythical method" in Joyce's work: "The Waste Land" was meant to be read as a mythic quest, too.

Hence, it is not remarkable that a discussion of Joyce might remind me that "I grow old... I grow old..." and that growing old in that meter might call to mind Eliot.

The reading life is rife with leaps and connections, links and consolations.

And lest someone think me a literary snob, I offer this from Raymond Chandler's The Long Goodbye:
"'I grow old... I grow old... I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.' What does that mean, Mr. Marlowe?"

"Not a bloody thing. It just sounds good."

He smiled. "That is from the 'Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.' Here's another one. 'In the room women come and go/Talking of Michael Angelo.' Does that suggest anything to you, sir?"

"Yeah -- it suggests to me that the guy didn't know very much about women."

"My sentiments exactly, sir. Nonetheless I admire T. S. Eliot very much."

"Did you say, 'nonetheless'?"
Also from The Long Goodbye:
I'm a licensed private investigator and have been for quite a while. I'm a lone wolf, unmarried, getting middle-aged, and not rich. I've been in jail more than once and I don't do divorce business. I like liquor and women and chess and a few other things. The cops don't like me too well, but I know a couple I get along with. I'm a native son, born in Santa Rosa, both parents dead, no brothers or sisters, and when I get knocked off in a dark alley sometime, if it happens, as it could to anyone in my business, and to plenty of people in any business or no business at all these days, nobody will feel that the bottom has dropped out of his or her life.
The company of books is unimaginably rich.

From the archives:
The capacious-bottomed gal's guide to bicycling

in

Just do it.
Beginning with a cliché would seem to bode ill for this post, but trust me: It's as appropriate a starting line as any. Why? Because many of us become so mired in the thinking about, the talking about, the reading about, the Googling about a pursuit that we never actually, well, pursue it.

Yes, of course, a pursuit can (and probably should) begin with thought and research, but it must graduate from that and become action. Sooner rather than later, I would think because...

... not every pursuit must be professionalized.
Really. It doesn't. And even those pursuits that do benefit from a touch of professionalism do not require certification, a power suit, and a briefcase right at the starting line (if you know what I mean). Take a little time to ease into it. Learn the basics. Discover if it's really you.

And you don't need much to start.
Isn't it funny how all of the things that should make our lives easier -- the internet, specialty stores, and all of the varieties of stuff we can buy -- can also terribly complicate a simple pursuit?

To begin watching birds, for example, you need only your eyes, a guide to the birds in your location (which you can borrow from the library), and time. That's it. That's all you need. Yet some folks will not even familiarize themselves with the birds in their neighborhoods until they have acquired the binoculars this expert recommends and the field guides that one extols, taken a course or attended a seminar, acquired the "right" outfit, and registered with this or that birding society.

You know the type, right?

"I'm an avid birder."

"Really? How cool! What are your favorite backyard visitors?"

"Um..."

Awkward, huh?

Eyes (or, by extension, your sense and senses).
A borrowed guide.
Time.

Think about it. That's all you need to get started. On anything! Parenting. Writing. Education. Even cycling. (If you presuppose that the cyclist already has, well, a bike. Heh, heh, heh.)

Naturally, if a pursuit grows into a passion -- or, eventually, a profession -- it will require more: more equipment, more training, more support. But until that time, you can keep it simple. Really.

When appropriate, then, invest in a few key pieces of equipment.
While expert advice is certainly helpful, it is important to know what you want and need -- not just what others say you will want and need, but those things that you have identified as being essential and specific to your goals and interests. (Which is why it's best not to professionalize your pursuit before it has time to be simply a pursuit: How can you possibly know what you want and need before you've even pursued the interest?)

Before we purchased our piano, for example, we discussed what it was we wanted from the instrument. We could clearly express our vision: We are not terribly worried about what the cabinetry looks like. We simply want a clear, rich sound -- like the round, bold sound that a well-tuned school instrument or studio piano can give.

We called a piano dealer who sold both new and used pianos and spoke to the sales manager. When she met us, she said, "You may look at anything you want, of course, and I would be happy to push this or that piano at you. But I think I know exactly which piano is yours." We walked past pianos that cost much more than we eventually paid but were well within the budget we had given her and arrived at the piano that we did, in fact, purchase. "Try it," she said. And it was precisely what we had described, its sound clear, rich, round, bold.

And about one-fourth of the budget we had established.

"Most people look for a piano. You knew to listen for a piano. Good for you."

Similarly, by the time I decided to purchase a bike, I knew: I may want a Mustang or a Charger, but I need an Odyssey or a Sienna. And that's what I got -- a minivan of a bicycle, built to make a capacious-bottomed gal feel confident and safe while she became fit(ter) and fast(er).

A helmet and a pair of padded gloves also gave me confidence and a sense of safety, which is important because...

... you will fall.
Which, if you read it too fast, looks like, "You will fail." Which you will. Fall. Fail. It's all the same. And it happens. To all of us. Don't believe those who tell you that they've never fallen or failed. They are the worst sort of liars.

It -- the fall or, as my kids would say, "the epic fail" -- may not happen in the first days, weeks, or months of a pursuit. In my case, it did not happen until near the end of my second biking season.

But it happened.

And it will likely happen again.

The gloves, which are deeply padded in the lower part of the palm and therefore take a lot of the pressure off my wrists while I ride, protected my hands when I landed in the loose stones, gravel, and debris at the side of path.

The helmet, which was not called into service this fall, protects my head.

Naturally, not all pursuits require safety equipment, but this extended analogy of a post works if you go back to the subhead: You will fall (fail). It helps to be prepared for that eventuality because you need to spend a little time thinking about what you will do when it happens. Will you give up? Try again? Try something else? Take a break? Cry? Complain? Some combination of these?

How will your pursuits -- including the successes, however small or large, and the falls (failures), however small or large -- enliven your sense of self? help you grow and become? make you better, stronger, smarter, and more complete?

While you're pondering that, by the way, you should remember that...

... others will look better doing this.
Sure, some will look worse, but most of us are non-plussed by those who look better -- So. Much. Better. -- pursuing those things that interest us.

Why do we do that to ourselves? Why do we torture ourselves with comparisons? After all, I can't be the only person whose father told her, "There will always be someone richer than you and someone poorer; someone smarter, someone dumber; someone prettier, someone uglier. That's why you need to worry about just being you, yourself."

We need to remember that, even on the trail. Swank bikes, swanker outfits, and some hopelessly tight asses fly past me on the bike path, but I can't -- I won't! -- let the achievements and hard work of other cyclists dictate how I feel about my achievements and my hard work.

Right?

Right!

Before I wish that my capacious bottom more closely resembled the buns of steel that have just sped past me (riding a Charger or a Mustang, no less), I must recall the adage about walking a mile in another person's moccasins. Think. Think. Think. Well, I guess the truth is, I don't know anything about that person -- apart from her obvious asset, that is. And I like my own moccasins just fine, thanks.

What an epiphany!

And a relief! Yes, a relief. I can give myself permission to be me, to be proud of me, and even (perhaps, especially) to be impressed by someone else without feeling somehow "less than."

Hey! I want to shout. You look good! Good for you!

Hey, but don't take yourself so seriously!
When you travel the same path regularly, you begin to see some "regulars." This is true of any pursuit. For example, the Misses and I are now taking our fifth art class at the local college, and some of the students -- like us, I suppose -- have become regulars, familiar faces and personalities.

The same has happened on our bike path through the Illinois prairie. Some of the riders -- like us, I suppose -- have become regulars, familiar faces and personalities. You nod to one another. Smile. Lift a hand in greeting. Gesture at the upcoming hill. (And, yes, darn it! There are hills on the prairie!) You miss the regulars when you haven't seen them in a while.

Yes, even her.

One of our biking regulars is a woman who seems to take her biking seriously, very seriously. And I suppose I must mention that she doesn't nod, smile, lift a hand, or gesture. To us. To anyone I've seen her pass. I recognized her first because, well, folks, she, too, is a capacious-bottomed gal. Hey, look at that! I thought on first seeing her. Another fat-ass on a bike. Good work! By jove! Good work! And hello!

But my crisp "'Morning!" and bike-path wave went unanswered. Every. Single. Time. So I stopped greeting her.

The sheer volume of her gear is nearly as noteworthy as her butt's likeness to my own. I swear, if there is a bike gadget that she doesn't have, I will buy it for her. Meters, timers, mirrors, racks, lights, packs, monitors. She has it ALL.

Yes, by all appearances, she has definitely professionalized this pursuit. And though I must caution myself to remember the adage about traveling in another person's moccasins, I think it's all right to observe that this gal just doesn't seem to embody that lightness of spirit I think biking should beget. Why, when all is said and done, why would anyone (athletes aside, obviously) over the age of forty climb astride a bike if not to regain some of that wind-and-sun-in-your-face feeling of being ten and flying down the steep neighborhood hill?

And once you admit that bicycling's great appeal is, in fact, being little for a little while, why the hell wouldn't you smile? Grin, even?

And greet your fellow cyclists?

We're allowed to have fun, folks. Our pursuits should have some element of fun. Tackling something as joyful as biking with a grimace and frowny-faced determination seems rather wrong-headed and soul-deadening, if you ask me.

And speaking of the wind in your face?

Use the hills. It's all right to coast for a while.
Just as it's important to embrace the fun in one's pursuits, it's wise to acknowledge that they also require some work -- even, in the case of learning an instrument or foreign language as an adult, for example, a lot of work.

That's what makes hills so awesome. Sure, they're tough to climb, but once you arrive at the top, you pump, pump, pump, and WHEEEEEE! You're flying! FLYING!

Of course, a ride that's all coasting and no climbing is hardly a ride at all. We actually avoid one section of the bike path because once we were strong enough to climb its sole hill, we were forced to acknowledge that somehow, inexplicably, most of the rest of the ride required very little pedaling.

Sure, it's all right to coast. We all need to rest. But the pedals are there for a reason, you know?

Are you focused? On what?
When I rediscovered biking in April 2009, I found four- and five-mile treks challenging. A hill at about Mile Two and another near home on the return trip about undid me for the first couple of months.

Eventually, though, I grew stronger and more limber (the latter of which proving much more important to my progress than you might first think). These days, we ride nine or twelve miles each time we go out. And hills? They don't get me down. Well, they do get me down, but they don't get me down, if you know what I mean. Heh, heh, heh.

Anyway. Hills. I just focus. Climbing uphill, I usually remain focused on the few feet in front of me, mentally intoning, I can do this! Yes! I! Can!

Pump. Pump. Pump.

Flying down the other side, though, I'm free to go "soft-focus" on the world, being little for a little while, a kid with nothing more on her mind than speed and flying and all of the freedom those imply.

And when the path levels off, I can turn my focus to the path ahead or the woods and fields that flank the path or the many birds and animals that have made those woods and fields their home. I can even turn my focus inward -- not necessarily navel-gazing but roaming the rooms of my imagination, perhaps, singing songs to myself, or simply daydreaming.

You can see how the focus varies according to my place on the path, right?

So just in case you've read this far and still haven't gotten it, bicycling, like any other pursuit, mirrors life, folks: Sometimes laser-like focus is required, and sometimes daydreaming is allowed, even encouraged. We must alternately pay attention and relax, climb and fly, work and rest, focus and dream.

Bring it all home!
If you had told me in October 2009 that between Memorial Day and October 1 of the following year, I would ride 500 miles, I would have laughed and laughed and laughed.

No feckin' way, I might have said between guffaws.

Um, yeah. Way.

Wowie, wow, wow.

I realize, of course, that there may be in my readership some athletes or avid cyclists or others who are prepared to dismiss my achievement as too little or too simple. Two things:

1. Remember that adage about walking in someone else's moccasins before thinking you know a thing about him.

2. Just as our pursuits will vary, so will our progress in them. Some of us are smarter; some not. Some of us faster; some not. Some us more enlightened; some not. Some thinner; some not. Some happier; some not.

And so it goes.

_______________________________________

Happy cycling, folks.
May your bike paths always have friendly regulars
and the right sort of hills.

Remember: Tuesday is Soylent Green Day.

in

The Misses each have one of these shirts in their collections. It's remarkable how many of their peers don't know what the expression means, though. What do these kids and their parents talk about at dinnertime? Heh, heh, heh.

Hey, here's some Soylent Green Day randomness:

1. Archery. After six weeks of lessons (related entry here), we're on hiatus; we'll pick up bows and arrows again in late July, sometime after summer swim season ends. Although our coach encouraged us to set up a bale and target in our yard ("There's plenty of room!"), we remain concerned about the neighbors. After all, had we never developed this interest, we would certainly have been concerned if they set up a bale and target. In lieu of the real deal, then, we will continue to practice the mimetic technique Coach demonstrated.

2. Summer reading. Last night, the Misses submitted their book logs for the public library's summer reading program. For the first week of the program, Miss M-mv(i) read Murder on the Orient Express (Agatha Christie), and Miss M-mv(ii) read Mockingjay (Suzanne Collins). The librarian expressed great delight not only in this week's submissions but next week's likely submissions (The Hound of the Baskervilles (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle) and Murder on the Orient Express (Agatha Christie), respectively). Apparently, there hasn't been much interest in the teen program this year: Only one participant had submitted by the time the girls arrived.

3. Contest. Speaking of teens and summer reading, the New York Times is hosting its second annual summer reading contest for students. You'll find the details here.

4. Watching. And speaking of the library... oddly, it took them months to get Exit through the Gift Shop. (You'll find Roger Ebert's review here.) In fact, I had quite forgotten that I had placed it on hold until I saw Girl Detective's review, and then a week later, it came in. I'm hoping to squeeze it in later this afternoon.

We're planning to watch Murder on the Orient Express for family film night this week. Swim season means early rising (before 5 a.m.), so we're not watching much else these days, although Mr. M-mv and I do try to find time for a couple of episodes of "Battlestar Galactica" each weekend. We're about five episodes into Season 3 now and thoroughly enjoying it. And believe it or not, the Misses and I are enjoying How to Become a Superstar Student from The Great Courses catalogue. Much of it is review, but call us geeks: We appreciate the encouragement to approach studies as meaningful work worth doing well.

5. Biking. We rode 9.4 miles this Sunday, for a total of 117.55 miles since we got back in the saddle. Rather than berating myself for missing my two-long-rides-per-weekend goal, I will share with you the fact that I have not missed one day of exercise since May 23. In fact, neither has Mr. M-mv, who is participating in his firm's spring walking challenge. And the Misses swim for 90 minutes every weekday morning. All that activity? That's something to celebrate.

6. Virtual. Well, the great Facebook / Twitter / comments experiment continues. Following an early flurry of activity, though, interest has plateaued. I wonder if any one of these things would have been enough. Comments, for example. We'll see. Until then, friend, follow, and/or comment.

7. Gardening. I know I had said I'd be planting arborvitae and hosta, but I learned that shrub holly does better in the mostly shade that comprises the back corner of our yard, so I installed five of the plants and copious amounts of mulch on Sunday. The split rail fence is lovely, by the way -- defining and, at this writing, unique. After the mulch is laid in the side and back beds (the front was done in late May), the work here is done, I think. Time to relax in my Adirondack chair with the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly.

8. Weather. Except, oh, yeah. It's only sixty degrees out there! Don't get me wrong. I love cool, comfortable weather. I guess I'll just be relaxing and reading right here on the couch, though.

in

Semicolon hosts "The Saturday Review of Books." Consider participating this week.

Pitch Uncertain

in


Pitch Uncertain (Maisie Houghton)

In May, I accepted a review copy of Pitch Uncertain, Houghton's memoir of growing up and finding her voice in the 1950s, but I didn't pick it up until last night. Only a dozen or so pages in, I realized how attentive I had become to her exploration of herself, her family, and, particularly, her parents' marriage. This is good, I murmured inwardly.
My mother guided me toward the dining room. "We must finish lunch," she murmured, rousing herself. The table looked half-ravaged, like my hair, with crumpled napkins and tired lettuce on the plates. I started to weep at the enormity of what I had done. Fat tears fell on my grilled cheese sandwich. "Don't fuss, darling," consoled my mother distractedly. She wasn't even looking at me.

There was an unspoken lesson in that afternoon. My mother should have been angry but instead she held her tongue. Was it at that point that I learned to guard the peace, to mind my manners, to keep my mouth shut?

On my report card, the music teacher wrote "pitch uncertain."

In school someone would grab me from behind on the playground: "whose side are you on? Lucy's?" -- the charismatic troublemaker, or "Kitten's?" -- the charismatic good-girl. It seemed easier -- and smarter -- to keep my mouth shut.

One day I came home from school tense, weepy from trying to please everyone. My mother uncharacteristically drew herself up and exhorted me to "Stick by your guns, have the courage of your convictions." Most important of all, "Be yourself!"

"But how do I know who I am?" I wondered.

Growing up, I swam like a fish in the clouded waters of family life.
Has anyone else read this?

"Some people claim never to have been bored. They lie."

in

Joseph Epstein is an especial favorite of mine. From "Duh, Bor-ing" (Commentary, June 2011):

Boredom is often less pervasive in simpler cultures. One hears little of boredom among the pygmies or the Trobriand Islanders, whose energies are taken up with the problems of mere existence. Ironically, it can be most pervasive where a great deal of stimulation is available. Boredom can also apparently be aided by overstimulation, or so we are all learning through the current generation of children, who, despite their vast arsenal of electronic toys, their many hours spent before screens of one kind or another, more often than any previous generation register cries of boredom. Rare is the contemporary parent or grandparent who has not heard these kids, when presented with a project for relief of their boredom—go outside, read a book—reply, with a heavy accent on each syllable, “Bor-ing.”
And later in the piece:
For one thing, boredom can function as a warning sign, as angina warns of heart attack and gout of stroke, telling those who suffer unduly from it that they need to change their lives. For another, “boredom intensifies self-perception,” by which I gather he means that it allows time for introspection of a kind not available to those who live in a state of continuous agitation and excitation. Boredom can also in itself function as a stimulant; boredom with old arguments and ideas can, in this view, presumably lead to freshened thought and creativity.

"I don't think I'll ever see Carl again. But I saw him. We saw each other. We found each other in the cosmos, and that was wonderful."

in

Michelle sent me a link to this beautiful piece: On Life, Love and Remembering Those Who Died for Us.

"That is the root of the addiction right there — and it is an addiction, sure, if only a lower-case one."

in

From Sven Birkert's "The Room and the Elephant" (Los Angeles Review of Books, June 7):

There is also the vital and vexing question: are collaborative, collectivized ways of living entirely at odds with subjectivized ones? Doesn’t it make sense to imagine a world where we use systems and circuits to do what they do best and indulge our clamoring selfhood in our ever-more-abundant spare time? It sounds good: The Jetsons meets Abraham Maslow. But, alas, it also sounds like a version of the old “it’s just a tool” argument. Maybe things could work that way if our electronic living were not the saturation that it is fast becoming. But if we grant McLuhan’s point, that we “take our technology into the deepest recesses of our souls,” and that our “view of reality, our structures of meaning, our sense of identity — all are touched and transformed …” then we cannot find easy comfort in the both/and perspective.

"The best thing, though, in that museum was that everything always stayed right where it was."

in

From "Woody Allen on Inspiration" (The Browser, May 5):

Many of the five books you’ve chosen will be discoveries to our readers, but one will be familiar to all. When Annie Hall moved out of Alvy’s apartment, they fought over who owned The Catcher in the Rye. When did you first read it and what did it mean to you?

The Catcher in the Rye has always had special meaning for me because I read it when I was young – 18 or so. It resonated with my fantasies about Manhattan, the Upper East Side and New York City in general.

It was such a relief from the other books I was reading at the time, which all had a quality of homework to them. For me, reading Middlemarch or Sentimental Education was work, whereas reading The Catcher in the Rye was pure pleasure. The burden of entertainment is on the author. Salinger fulfills that obligation from the first sentence on.

Reading and pleasure didn’t go together for me when I was younger. Reading was something you did for school, something you did for obligation, something you did if you wanted to take out a certain kind of woman. It wasn’t something I did for fun. But The Catcher in the Rye was different. It was amusing, it was in my vernacular, and the atmosphere held great emotional resonance for me. I reread it on a few occasions and I always get a kick out of it.
Related entry: Defending Holden (1.17.200)

From the archives: It's like sausage.

in

I am always startled by e-mail messages from homeschooling parents seeking my counsel, advice, and, as one correspondent put it, "expertise."

Folks, I am no expert. True, I've been doing this for a while -- twelve years, three months, fourteen years to be exact. And, yes, I have already graduated one student.

But, "homeschooling expert"? Nah.

Do I have a few tips? Sure. And I provide them, here and here... and there... and there. Well, okay, here's a whole passel of tips, if you really want 'em. I've even tried to provide accounts -- real-time (here and here) and stream-of-consciousness -- of our reading, thinking, learning, living days.

It's not enough, some correspondents protest. More. Tell more. What program? What schedule? How? When? Where?
________________________

Once upon a time ago, a colleague and I were working on yet another Very Important Project (Rush! Rush! Hurry! Hurry!) using a program called Ventura. Other publishing professionals may remember this package. It was a behemoth, but, oh, if you could harness even a bit of its power... the places you could go! Anyway, as always, one or another junior attorney in the firm was strutting and fretting in the hall beyond our suite. "What are you doing? When will it be done? Can't you hurry? How do you do that?"

In his carefully cultivated "affable mid-Westerner" style, my colleague replied, "You know what, man? It's like sausage. You really don't want to know how it's made. In fact, if you saw how it was made, you would never eat sausage again."

If you saw how it was made, you would never eat sausage again.

Yeah, I think that about describes how I feel when I field yet another request for a homeschooling how-to tutorial. Heh, heh, heh.

Look. I'm not willfully withholding information. I've been blunt, direct, and transparent.

We read.

We think.

We learn.

We go out into the world and work, play, and live.

What more can I say?
________________________

Perhaps I'm not prepared to provide a conventional how-to tutorial because so much of what I did and what I do is intuitive and specific to me, to my students, and to my family. Besides, describing what we do any more than I already have would be a hellava a whole lot like trying to teach that junior attorney some Ventura "basics."

If you saw how it was made, you would never eat sausage again.
________________________

Last month In September 2009, I read a thought-provoking article on the subject of experts. Two passages struck me. This one:

We are advised to seek and heed to advice of a bewildering chorus of personal experts -- parenting specialists, life coaches, relationship gurus, super-nannies and sex therapists, to name a few -- who apparently possess the authority to tell us how to live our lives.
And this:
While this professionalisation of everyday life has been a distinct trend from the outset of modernity, it has grown at a breathtaking pace since the 1960s, with professionals systematically expanding the range of personal issues that demand expert knowledge. Today, every aspect of life from birth through to school and career to marriage and mourning is subject professional counselling.
While I do think the homeschooling endeavor could benefit from a little more -- for lack of a better word -- professionalism (i.e., the adoption of some of the traits that make us successful in our more conventional work) -- I never bought into the idea of professional motherhood that columnist Anne Quindlen once excoriated. (M-mv entry here; column here.) Critics of homeschooling often accuse us of professionalizing everyday life, though; of, in fact, professionalizing motherhood. And frankly? I understand that accusation. While it is not what prompted my decision, I certainly realize that homeschooling seems to have conferred some -- again, for lack of better word -- status on my choices. Many people maintain that stay-at-home parenting alone does not draw on the education and work experience one has acquired, but they concede that home education may. A little, anyway. (Either that, or they simply dis and dismiss homeschooling parents and their students, which is a topic quite apart from the ideas I'm exploring here, isn't it?)

I'm hoping we can, for now, sidestep the philosophical exploration the previous paragraph begs (i.e., "What do I care what other people think?"). It will add nothing to this entry. Moving on, then.

The family-centered learning project does, indeed, benefit from and draw on the knowledge gained from my studies and work. While a degree may not be necessary to be a good teacher, I cannot, will not understate the role my own education -- which includes a graduate degree and postgraduate studies -- has played in my teaching. More, I firmly believe that the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers and that the quality of teachers affects student performance more than anything else. Folks bristle at such assertions, but they keep writing to me: More. Tell more. Don't become angry, then, when I tell you. My education -- and, yes, my work -- shaped me, shaped the way I receive and convey information, shaped my idea of what an agile mind comprises, so when I found myself in the most important teaching gig I'll ever have, I knew I was shaping my students, shaping the way they received and conveyed information, shaping their idea of what an agile mind comprises. I did so responsibly, not with the objective of providing a good elementary, intermediate, or secondary education but with the goal of growing lifelong learners.

Simply put, then, I have ensured that my students can read widely and deeply, write clearly, and think well.

Critics have also accused homeschooling parents of selfishness and self-centeredness, saying that we do what we do to serve needs of our own, not those of our children. I am guilty of one count of this charge, and this is it: I have selfishly spent the last twelve-plus fourteen years molding the sort of readers, thinkers, writers, and students that I sought in my classrooms and workshops once upon a time ago: Inquisitive. Well read. Versed in culture, both of the capital-C and the popular variety. At once thoughtful and challenging. Clear spoken. Confident. Mature. And so on.

While I appreciate the child-like, the childish leaves me cold, so I discarded conventional ideas about grades and age-level appropriateness and what every child needs to know, ignored most of the educational and homeschooling "experts," and simply gave my students the books, conversations, challenges, opportunities, time, resources, and all required to meet my ideal as quickly and effectively as possible.

The average child is capable of so much more than is typically asked of him or her! He need not be "scary smart" to understand Shakespeare in elementary school. She need not be "gifted" to move quickly through three levels of math. In an environment in which the tools of study are readily available, in a classroom in which the students have been led to understand that this -- all of this reading, thinking, learning, discussing, studying, creating, working, and, yes, playing -- is their job, in a school in which the teacher can, in fact, teach, damn it, there will be much profitable learning.

It's just hard to describe what's happening in such a classroom because it will be unique to that environment, those students, that teacher.

Moreover, folks become intensely uncomfortable when you tell them that, yes, seventh- and eighth-graders can understand college rhetoric, psychology, history, and logic texts. Sure, eleven- and thirteen-year-olds can enroll in college courses. Of course, ten-year-olds can attend museum lecture series. Hell, yeah, a student can do work he loves and earn good grades and graduate from high school with many college credits on his transcript. Certainly, 1.5 hours of music practice daily is possible. And why wouldn't they be able to join a sports team?

They become even more uncomfortable when you assert that your students are quite normal, really. Each has strengths, weaknesses, talents, flaws. But they have been asked to do what they are capable of doing -- regardless of their age -- every. single. day. by a teacher who embraces the idea of a lifetime of excellence. No matter what else life may demand.

It's really that simple.

And, yes, that difficult.

Like working with the 1995 edition of Ventura.

Or making sausage.
________________________

Since most homeschooling parents were products of conventional schooling, many remain caught between two false ideas: (1) that simply because they homeschool, their kids are somehow better positioned for success and (2) that learning must be keyed to certain grades, levels, ages.

Elsewhere, I've already explored how far off the mark the first idea is, but the second... well, that brings us back to the tyranny of experts, I think -- back to all of the e-mail messages asking me, What program? What schedule? How? When? Where? As if I possess the authority to tell someone else what to teach her own child. As if, even if I possessed the authority, the expertise, that what I've done here is replicable, that it would work elsewhere.

But I am no expert on the subject of homeschooling, so I won't add my voice to the "bewildering chorus" telling you which grammar book, reading list, math schedule, foreign language, lab science, etc.

More, I'm not even an advocate of homeschooling. I'm not. Really.

All I can and will say is this: Make your own sausage. My recipe is a family secret. It begins with parenting them well. After that, well, you're on your own.

Hamlet quantified

in

From "Hamlet and the region of death" (Boston Globe, May 29):

One thing is the discovery of how central Horatio is to the play. And that is interesting in itself, because Horatio is usually not one of the characters on whom people focus. He’s a very bland character, and he usually speaks very blandly....Usually we think of central characters as important in every possible way, but this is not the case here.
Well, of course, Horatio is important: "And let me speak to th'yet unknowing world" (10.19.2006). More bardolatry here.

9.26 9.4 yesterday afternoon and this morning...

in

... which gives us a total of 107.03 108.15. (Note: So Mr. M-mv and Miss (ii) were getting conflicting reports from their bike computers about the distance of our regular rides. That's all been cleared up now (primarily, with fresh batteries and a little recalibration). Rather than mess with every post in which I've noted progress, I'm just adding the 1.12 we were off to today's total, and we'll work from there.)

Related entry: "But if you don't have fun doing this thing, my friend, then it will be the dumbest damned thing you have ever done."

"These trends have all added up to less rigor."

in

As I mentioned here, Academically Adrift (Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa) is on my nightstand, so this recent op-ed piece by the authors attracted my attention. From "College, too easy for its own good" (LA Times, June 2):

In much of higher education, the problem is in part that undergraduate education is no longer a top priority. Instead of focusing on undergraduates and what they are learning, schools have come to care more about such things as admission yields, graduation rates, faculty research productivity, pharmaceutical patents, deluxe dormitory rooms, elaborate student centers and state-of-the-art athletic facilities complete with luxury boxes. Many institutions favor priorities that can be boasted about in alumni magazines and admission brochures or that can help boost their scores in college rankings. Colleges have abandoned responsibility for shaping students' academic development and instead have come to embrace a service model that caters to satisfying students' expressed desires.
Hat tip: Joanne Jacobs.

"In short, while friendships 'decay' if not actively cultivated, kin relationships do not."

in

From "Social Darwinism" (LA Times, Mary 24):

The number is highly debatable, but it turns out that, Facebook aside, the average person has about 150 friends — people he or she might actually recognize and be recognized by at a random airport, 150 people he or she might feel comfortable borrowing five dollars from. As for how many friends we have evolved to “need” in a more intimate sense, that is a different matter. According to Dunbar, most of us have, on average, about 3-5 intimate friends whom we speak to at least weekly, and about 10-15 more friends whose deaths would greatly distress us. These circles can include kin; indeed, the more extended family we keep in close touch with, the fewer friends we are likely to have — precisely because our neocortices can only manage so many relationships. What is perhaps most intriguing is the degree to which the inner circles change over time; close friends can drop through the circles of intimacy if we do not spend time with them, and even out of the 150, especially when someone new captures our attention. By contrast, kin have enough staying power that we can visit and expect to be housed by a cousin we have never met or a great-aunt after decades of neglect. In short, while friendships “decay” if not actively cultivated, kin relationships do not. Or so Dunbar claims.

in

Semicolon hosts "The Saturday Review of Books." Consider participating this week.

In which M-mv enters the twenty-first century

in

I don't know how to Tweet. I don't really get walls and the like. And I didn't know anyone needed feeds. (Isn't that what Google Reader is for?) But these are the tools folks are using, right? So I had better adapt. What will this mean for Mental multivitamin? I haven't a clue. Let's see how it goes, eh? Hey, and follow me. Or friend me. Or add me to your reader, okay? I'll reciprocate. Isn't that how it all works?

(Is my enthusiasm just palpable, or what? Heh, heh, heh.)

Added later: Oh, and if comments are your thing, M-mv has those now, too. For now.

Fine Art Friday

in

In "With a Face Like That..." (Newsweek, May 15), Blake Gropnik writes:

[T]he bromide about great portraits is that they capture “inner lives.” It turns out, however, that you need to have decided beforehand what kind of life has been captured, to be sure of the interiority you’re witnessing.
Fresh from reading this observation, I came upon a Time article about the San Francisco Museum of Art's exhibit "The Steins Collect: Matisse, Picasso and the Parisian Avant-Garde." The exhibit includes Pablo Picasso's portrait of Gertrude Stein (1905-1906), and, with a touch of that ol' synchronicity / serendipity / synthesis, I found myself wondering, What kind of life has been captured?

From the Metropolitan Museum of Art's notes about the work:
When someone commented that Stein did not look like her portrait, Picasso replied, "She will."
She will. Heh, heh, heh.

“Why did we have to buy this book?”

in

Thanks to Jeanne at Necromancy Never Pays, both Academically Adrift (Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa) and In the Basement of the Ivory Tower (Professor X.) are on my nightstand. (See this piece in the June 2008 issue of the Atlantic for a preview of the latter.)

Naturally, then, Louis Menand's essay in the June 6 issue of The New Yorker caught my attention, as it not only explores similar territory -- the value and meaning of a college education -- but also discusses both books.

From "Debating the Value of College":

I could have answered the question in a different way. I could have said, “You’re reading these books because they teach you things about the world and yourself that, if you do not learn them in college, you are unlikely to learn anywhere else.” This reflects a different theory of college, a theory that runs like this: In a society that encourages its members to pursue the career paths that promise the greatest personal or financial rewards, people will, given a choice, learn only what they need to know for success. They will have no incentive to acquire the knowledge and skills important for life as an informed citizen, or as a reflective and culturally literate human being. College exposes future citizens to material that enlightens and empowers them, whatever careers they end up choosing.

Nostalgic

in


Oh, how I loved these cookies!