In search of our better natures

The other day I was labeled a “pompous ass” in a cross-posting tête-à-tête with a fellow blogger. My crime—calling attention to a spelling mistake he made while offering a critique of a best-selling author. I'll accept the charge.

His response that I should “lighten up” has been a refrain that I’ve heard throughout my life. My tendency to see things as they should be, versus how they are often accepted, has been a burden I’ve carried with me for as long as I can remember. The desire for people, organizations, and even governments, to respond in ways that reveal their better natures has been a theme I’ve pursued, not to be a killjoy, but because I think that anything we engage in is worth an honest effort, and a striving to be better.

For much of my life, the irony of my tendency towards criticism in others was an inability to respond to critique in my own life. As a result, while much of what I brought to the attention of bosses at work, family members, coworkers, and even so-called religious authorities was honest in its revelation of mistakes and their obvious misdeeds, the inability to “remove the log from my own eye” often diminished the force of my appraisal, or exposition. It also probably contributed to others disliking me, or at least thinking I was a “pompous ass.”

Part of the reinvention that’s become my life the past decade has been a much more honest self-appraisal, as well as a tendency to tone down, or take more time reflecting, before launching a missive about the shortcomings of others. Occasionally, however, I can’t help myself and my snarky side gets the better of me.

It is my opinion that Americans (I speak of America, rather than the world, because that’s the geography that I know experientially, which is what I know best) struggle with self-reflection, particularly if that mode is introduced via the critique of others, regardless of how constructively, or how gentle the spirit with which it is offered. The past eight years, Americans have been able to look into a national mirror, as our own president has modeled that inability to admit mistakes, reconsider actions, and learn from his imperfections.

We’re at an interesting juncture as a nation. The sins that have been magnified, and have had a deadly affect upon us, physically and psychically—greed and pride—have visited an economic calamity on many Americans. There are few, in fact that haven’t been affected in some way from the crisis that is rooted in a belief that things were going to continue to get better and better, in every way.

Nowhere is that point driven home more powerfully than in Florida. George Packer, in this week’s New Yorker, has an article, aptly titled, “The Ponzi State,” because the state’s entire building boom, and development feeding frenzy, was built upon a growth machine that was entirely propped up—not by higher education or high-paying professional jobs (or even the production of goods)—but by an unsustainable model of real estate, and sunshine; basically the selling of Florida. As one of Packer’s subjects, David Reed, an investment fund manager said, “Our growth is all about population growth. When you take that away, what have you got?”

It’s interesting how Florida epitomizes the politics and economics of the past eight years so accurately. A state where low tax rates have been elevated to holy writ (Packer points out that Florida is only one of nine states in the U.S. without a state income tax). For the purposes of balance, I will point out that California, with the nation’s highest income tax is also experiencing economic difficulties of a somewhat different nature. In addition to no state income tax, former governor, Jeb Bush, gutted the taxes levied on corporations, and financial transactions, through exemptions and loopholes. As a consequence, the state is swimming in red ink now that the bottom has fallen out of the real estate market.

I remember in March of 2003, sitting at a ball field in Homestead, Florida, watching our son’s (it is Mr. EDY that I owe my New Yorker subscription to--nice when our children know us well enough to select perfect gifts) college baseball team during his freshman year, and seeing clouds of dust off in the distance. Later, after the game was over, curious about the dust plumes, my wife and I rode out the access road, cutting through the middle of what had been a swamp teaming with god knows what just five years before, and found not one, or two new subdivisions, but literally, 20 new housing complexes, with signs advertising homes from $99,000 to $200,000, all with exotic names, sitting on swampland that was being filled in by the dump truck load, with houses going up the next day. I’m sure the values of these homes doubled, or even tripled over the next few years.

The following two springs, Mary and I boarded a jet and left winter behind for 10 days, when we became spring training baseball gypsies following our son, and the Wheaton baseball squad, while domiciled on Clearwater Beach. When we weren’t at ballgames, we drove the surrounding area, in and around neighboring Hillsborough County, one of the counties that Packer writes extensively about. Since the tournament that Wheaton was playing in was the Tampa Bay Invitational, some of our games were played in downtown Tampa, at the University of Tampa.

One couldn’t help but be amazed at the high rises dotting the downtown skyline of Tampa. Coming from the north, and having spent time in an ancient (in American terms) like Boston, and even Chicago, Tampa had the feel of having risen overnight. Gleaming glass and steel was everywhere. There was this palpable feeling of vigor and I imagined this is what pioneers might have experienced when they made their way west, 150 years prior. I recall having discussions with my better half about possibly leaving our cold winters, and sluggish economy behind, and join the millions flocking to Florida each year, in search of gold. Packer’s article drove home the point that we were wise, or maybe our own lack of the financial means to up and leave Maine probably worked in our favor.

Personal growth requires the ability to face up to one’s faults, and find ways to transcend them. Sometimes that requires admitting that the same way of doing things has never worked, so change becomes the requirement. Not many people enjoy coming face to face with their shortcomings. I don’t know any other way to grow as a human being, however, than to embrace change, and self-improvement.

I wonder if by extension, a national plan of self-improvement might also be possible.

Some newsdays are better than others

[From Jeff Jarvis, at BuzzMachine]

One of the more head-scratching solutions papers are clawing at to save themselves is eliminating a day or two of print, as these Ohio papers are doing on Tuesdays. It’s ridiculous to say that’s a no-news day. But what this really does is make a lie of the supposed necessity of printing the news. Printing is merely a commercial convenience, it says. Tuesday is merely the first domino.

Maine's largest daily, the might Portland Press Herald, is so thin on Mondays, it resembles a broadsheet. Come to think of it, the paper's not much better the rest of the week, and even the vaunted Sunday edition lacks previous girth and substance.

Not sure how many caught yesterday morning's great feature on NPR's Morning Edition, about the importance of daily newspapers, and in particular, the Hartford Courant. Listen here. For those without audio, here's the print version.

Hitting 700

I’ve been blogging here at Words Matter since November 2004. I actually had a blog prior to this one in 2003/2004. This post is another milestone of sorts, as it is my 700th post. It feels like I should be doing something more than sitting here with my laptop, Bruins game on with sound off, and a lukewarm can of Bud Light next to me.

As a writer, I’m not a household name, but when it comes to writing persistence and doggedness, my track record’s a solid one. While other bloggers have larger audiences, and many get much more traffic on the comment side, I feel proud that most of my posting has been original writing, with a minimum of cut and paste material culled from elsewhere.

I originally started blogging as a way to perfect my craft, and as Stephen King advises in his book, On Writing, the best way to improve as a writer is to write (my paraphrase, but true to his vision). I’ve continued to do that.

When I first started getting serious about writing, back in 2002, I started to think of myself as a writer (even before my first published writing clip) when I began to enjoy writing for the sheer joy that came with getting words down on paper (or better, a Word doc).

Once again, it’s King that said, in relation to practicing one’s craft, “Talent renders the whole idea of rehearsal meaningless; when you find something at which you are talented, you do it (whatever it is) until your fingers bleed or your eyes are ready to fall out of your head. Even when no one is listening (or reading, or watching), every outing is a bravura performance, because you as the creator are happy. Perhaps even ecstatic.”

That captures it for me.

Looking back over the last four plus years, here is a timeline of my Words Matter posts.

Post #1-November 21, 2004: I took an article by Lakoff to talk about progressive values. Nothing particularly profound, but I was on my way.

Post #100-February 23, 2005: Titled “Hurting Children,” it was a riff on the Bush administration’s lack of concern for children, using a column by the late Molly Ivins (one of my fave columnists, and someone I miss reading) for my context.

Post #200-August 8, 2005: A post about my son and his generosity. I had blown my old speakers on my 18-year-old stereo, and Mark, knowing my love and passion for music, surprised me by buying some new speakers for me, which I have thoroughly enjoyed.

While I don’t spend too much time blogging about the family, they do show up from time to time in posts.

Post #300-March 6, 2006: Michael Eric Dyson is a gifted writer, speaker, and commentator. He also knows a boatload about rap and hip-hop. This post was about an NPR broadcast where Dyson was waxing eloquent about Tupac Shakur, someone I knew little about beyond the stereotype.

Here is some of what I wrote: “Dyson’s historical perspective, political understanding and sympathetic treatment of Shakur revealed a totally different character than I’d been conditioned to view him as. It made me realize that I have a lot to learn about this branch music and culture. From Shakur’s roots, informed by Reaganomics and the accompanying poverty he experienced, Dyson’s presentation cast Shakur in a much different light than he was often portrayed by the press and the music industry. Dyson's talk was informative for the honest and refreshing way that he was able to demystify Shakur, who like many performers and cultural icons, ends up misrepresented, most often to cultivate an image, which will then be exploited through marketing.”

Post # 500-December 27, 2006: A post about Maine’s media landscape, drawing upon an opinion piece by fellow Maine blogger, Lance Dutson, who is now the new media guru for Senator Susan Collins. Dutson was taking issue with a column by Jeannine Guttman, editor of Maine’s largest daily newspaper, the Portland Press Herald.

Guttman has been a regular subject of Words Matter posts about issues I’ve had with her guidance of the Press Herald.

Occasionally, I’ve gone after other folks via my posts. There have been times this has gotten me in trouble, or at least got the attention of my subject, and I’ve received an email taking me to task.

A post I wrote about Guttman, the Press Herald, and an ad I thought was anti-Semetic, developed by a local marketer named Kimberly McCall generated a flurry of comments (8 comments for me is considered a flurry), and even an email from McCall’s husband, basically saying I misrepresented his wife.

Another time, I took NPR’s Adam Davidson to task for what I thought was shitty feature on Skowhegan that highlighted how the national media, more often than not, gets Maine (and rural America) wrong, because they always get the culture wrong. Davidson, for whatever reason, took offense with what I wrote and emailed me. I ended up moderating my views a bit, and posted a follow-up piece, apologizing for some of my unprofessional comments about Davidson, and his ability as a journalist.

Some of my best blogging was done in a multi-part series of blogs about big-box development. "Big-box Bait and Switch, Parts I, II, and III," used Stacy Mitchell’s Big Box Swindle:The True Cost of Mega-Retailers and the Fight for America’s Independent Businesses as the framework, to rail against non-sustainable big-box development, and Maine’s business leaders that support this kind of toxic growth strategy.

I wrote Part I back in June of 2007, and given what’s happened to our economy, and in particular, the retail sector, I’d say I was quite prescient in my three posts.

Along the way, I’ve managed to write two books, assume a demanding day job, and experience a few bumps in the road where my energy for blogging has waned. I even contemplated deep-sixing Words Matter at one point. I’m glad I didn’t.

I think my writing is better now than it ever was. It’s hard to have every post be top shelf quality writing, given that many of the posts that I put up during the week are composed in the evening, after a long day of work, or the early hours, prior to work. But enough of what I throw up has relevance, I think.

Additionally, I have a blog for work, and I’m now well past the 100 post mark at Working in Maine. Generally, I’m pleased with almost everything I write.

A new feature I launched in January is History Maker Mondays, which requires some real work to make these posts worthwhile. So far, I’ve been able to get up a new post, several of considerable length, every Monday. I hope I can keep this going, as I’m enjoying expanding my own knowledge of history, and I hope readers learn a thing or two in reading my posts.

I don’t know if I’ll make it to 1,000, but for now, I’m enjoying the process, and I plan to ride it as long as I have something to say.

Newspapers vs. blogs

Jason Preston has an interesting post at Eat Sleep Publish on the false either, or dichotomy of newspaper vs. blogs.

He's commenting on a piece by a writer named Emily White, who complains that art and theater critics are being kicked to the curb at major dailies, while sports pages never receive any cutbacks. White goes on to criticize bloggers, falsely assigning quality to all things print.

Preston parries:

It is both incredibly difficult and unbelievably important to get past the preconception that something published online is inherently less good than something that sits in ink on real paper. In fact, the internet is a far more meritocratic medium than anything ever before it: unlike anywhere else, your work stands for itself.

I no longer subscribe to a local daily, after having two delivered to my door for nearly two decades. The reason; lack of content.

On Sunday, my better half returned from the supermarket with the week's groceries, and also the Maine Sunday Telegram. A publication that used to occupy well over an hour on a Sunday morning, and 2-3 cups of joe, was easily digested in 10-15 minutes and quickly deposited in the newspaper recycling bin, most likely becoming firestarter the next time I fire up the woodstove.

I've unintentionally become someone that gets my news online. I don't feel any less informed, either. In fact, I can spend 30 minutes in the morning, before work, check a few financial sites at noon, and do an evening scan of key sites like Alltop and my jones for solid journalism is satiated.

Any other longtime newspaper folks forsaking the fishwrap for the interwebs?

History Maker Mondays-04

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself.
(I am large. I contain multitudes.)
--Walt Whitman “Song of Myself”


Know Thy History

There is a shared belief among some, particularly those accepting the premise that an understanding of who we are as Americans and a knowledge of our past are essential to the kind of common civic memory that ensures a strong and vibrant democracy. I would put myself firmly in that camp.

Back in 1999, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) commissioned the Roper organization to poll college seniors at 55 of the countries top liberal arts colleges and research universities. Their questions were to be based on U.S. history and the nation’s founding principals. The questions, not remarkably difficult, or so it was thought, were drawn from a basic high school curriculum, with many of the questions being the same ones used on the National Assessment of Educations Progress (NAEP) tests that are given to high school students.

How did these seniors, from America’s top schools do? They flunked. Four out of five seniors, 81 percent of them, got grades of D, or F. They couldn’t identify Valley Forge, words from the Gettysburg Address, or even the basic principals of the U.S. Constitution.

I’m not going to belabor this report, but I begin this week’s history post highlighting what I think is a major issue in our country today—widespread historical illiteracy.

It matters because in a culture where information overload is prevalent, having some basis of determining fact or fiction is important. At a time when more and more citizens are relying on the internet, a cauldron of dubious information, and half-truths, for their research (if in fact they research anything that they hear on television, or anywhere else), or take the word of demagogues and other spinmeisters as the gospel truth, the lack of historical veracity is damning to our country.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the midst of our nation’s ideological divide. Republicans on the right are sure they are correct, merely because their favorite talk show host tells them so. On the left, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and other organs of Democratic thought fortify opinions tending toward the left end of the political spectrum.

This week, and next, I’m playing fast and loose with the letter D, since that’s where we’re at in week four, for History Maker Mondays. The challenge thus far has been finding time to do some research, and write something relevant. I may dispense with the alphabet, and even tweak the weekly nature of these posts, only because I don’t want to just cut and past information from Wikipedia, although many of the entries found there on many topics are great jumping off points for additional research on subjects of one’s choosing.

D is for Davis

Since we’re at the letter D, I’m using the late biographer and novelist, Kenneth S. Davis as my tether.

Davis, a biographer of Eisenhower, Lindbergh, and Adlai Stevenson, compiled one of the most vivid portraits of Franklin Roosevelt in his five volume series on FDR. A combination of history with a flair for literature, Davis’s FDR: The New Deal Years 1933-1937, has been some of my reading material for the past week.

The Davis book is one in a list of books that I’ve been poring through since early fall about the Great Depression. Given our current economic woes, with the only parallel being that period 70 years prior, having a grounding in the history of the era, as well as understanding the politics and the key figures is serving me well. I say “serving me well” because it’s grounding me in history, and allowing me to form my own ideas about where we’re at with the election of Barack Obama, and his own indications of what he might be willing to do to address the economic crisis we’re facing at the moment.

The second benefit that my historical orientation is providing me with is a built-in bullshit detector, warning me when a commentator, political pundit, or anyone else begins shoveling fecal matter in my direction about what’s going on at the moment.

A case in point—among certain quadrants on the ideological right, it’s become fashionable to formulate historical revisionism regarding the legacy of Herbert Hoover. The context most often involves Mr. Obama’s association with FDR, and the New Deal. The argument goes something like this; Obama is a socialist in the FDR/New Deal tradition. His stimulus package is like many of the FDR programs, which, by the way, conservative Republicans start foaming at the mouth at mere mention, so by way of association, Obama is immediately suspect with these folks, because they are quite sure that FDR’s policies didn’t work, and in fact, Hoover’s follies suddenly have taken on a new luster, reversing 70 years of history, and countless books about Hoover and his failed policies. The latest revision goes something like this. FDR’s policies are what plunged the nation into the Great Depression, not Hoover’s. FDR was a socialist, and his administration’s overly intrusive, big government programs helped prolong the misery. Hoover on the other hand, was a true Republican, and kept government from meddling in the economy. I kid you not.

Hoover’s Legacy

I’ll end this week’s post with a review of the conditions that the good work done by Herbert Hoover visited on the country, resulting in Hoover losing his bid for reelection in 1932, to Franklin Roosevelt.

It’s hard to fathom the misery and human toll visited on American by the economic collapse that became the Great Depression.

Here are some “snapshots” from 1932:

• 15 million Americans with no jobs and no hope of a job (quarter of the nation’s workers)
• In a country of 130 million people, 60 million of them were without any means of support
• Factories lay idol
• Storefronts were vacant
• Fields had been plowed under
• State governments had exhausted their meager funds to assist
• Skilled and unskilled laborers stood together in bread lines
• There were large scales homeless encampments, known as “Hoovervilles”

"The cure for unemployment is to find jobs.”--Herbert Hoover

In 1932, the U.S. industrial powerhouse that had emerged after WWI, lay idle. Farmers were facing a crisis fueled by debt and drought. For most Americans losing a job, first came belt tightening, then despair, and eventually, dcestitution. Millions lost their homes, saw their clothes wear to the point where they became rags, and were forced to forage like animals for their next meal.

Despite all the telltale signs of loss and physical suffering, the greatest loss was to the spirit. People felt fear, shame, and despair. Suicides soared. Their dreams disappeared with the loss of work.

Under the Republican administrations beginning in 1921 and spanning the administrations of Harding, Coolidge and finding culmination under Herbert Hoover; business interests ran the country. Government was denied a central role in addressing social problems. The right data gathered by the govt. would allow banks to adjust their loan portfolios, and manufacturers their production schedules to achieve maximum efficiency. Labor was just another commodity to be inputted, like iron ore, or cotton, to be purchased on the open market, at the cheapest rate.

Up until the Great Depression, this business-oriented way of seeing the world was generally accepted by the majority, with only radical elements putting forth another view.

In 1932, as businesses continued to fail at unprecedented rates, banks closed their doors (the count being at over 600 and continuing to grow), and more and more Americans landing out of work, Hoover had little to offer the citizenry beyond platitudes.

With unemployment skyrocketing, including 200,000 New Yorkers losing jobs between January and October in 1932, Hoover thought job sharing, coupled with a good joke would do the trick.

The president and business leaders, including Standard Oil, came up with a plan to cut the hours of those working, and sharing their jobs with recently laid off workers. This meant that now, even those who had managed to keep their jobs would be sharing in the ever-increasing poverty in the U.S.

At each step downward into America’s spiral into poverty, Hoover maintained an unflinching resolve to maintain a balanced budget above all else. Fiscal responsibility, and an almost psychotic belief that the only thing preventing America’s economic bottoming out after the stock market crash was for its people to suddenly rediscover optimism.

“I’m convinced we’ve now passed the worst,” Hoover told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on May 1, 1930.

“There is one certainty in the future—that is prosperity.”

In January of 1932, Hoover told Father James Cox, who led a march of 25,000 unemployed Pennsylvanian on Washington that a government sponsored work program (one of the provisions Cox was demanding of the Hoover administration to put people back to work and restore their dignity) would not only violate tradition, but cost too much. The real victory is to restore men to employment through jobs.

Hoover’s beliefs were shaped at the nexus of business and technology. The Stanford grad had gotten rich in mining, and was considered a wizard of finance. Hoover believed the lessons of engineering could be applied to society. Since science had made it possible to tame the natural world, by extension, Hoover posited that man and the problems inherent in society should also bend to the whims of scientific business practices.

As a lifelong Republican, Hoover subscribed to the philosophy of rugged individualism. He saw no role for government in providing relief. If individuals and families couldn’t work, then the role of relief fell to churches, and other organizations.

When the Depression stuck, Hoover’s philosophy left no room for bold action to alleviate suffering.

Lastly, Hoover believed in the power of persuasion, in part because as an advocate of business, he has seen the power of marketing and phraseology for moving the masses.

Hoover continued to treat the situation as a crisis of confidence, something to be talked, joked away, or sung about.

“What this country needs is a good, big laugh. There seems to be a condition of hysteria. If someone could get off a good joke every 10 days, I think our troubles would be over.”

Given that the country was mired in its economic woes, with no relief in site, the American people were looking for someone to lead them forth from their misery. Franklin Delano Roosevelt would be the political savior in whom they put their hopes for the future.