Author: lou sight

Bubbling Crude

Today is the 5th anniversary of the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, affecting the beaches and wetlands from Texas to Florida. The deadly accident on the Deepwater Horizon rig killed eleven workers when it exploded, and gushed oil for nearly 3 months uncontrolled. This environmental disaster has been our nation’s worst to date, affecting lives and livelihoods and wildlife across the region.

The spill’s impacts remain to this day.

Today is also the 16th anniversary of the Columbine High School shooting– a devastating event that we thought was an anomaly. In the 16 years since, we’ve seen countless shootings–and several mass shootings–of innocents (and innocence). Those who gush about their right to protect themselves are quick to deny the consequences of gun culture and violence, and any sort of responsibility for ensuring freedom for those who are unlucky enough to be in the path of a disturbed individual (or two).

When madness bubbles over, and we lack sophistication in our abilities to de-escalate, we are left with the crude culture of violence and abuse, limiting lives long after the initial explosion,polluting our environment.

Those tragic anniversaries of devastation linger not only because they were utterly horrific and wake-up calls, but even more tragically, because they continue to devastate,  and remain unresolved and likely to happen again at any moment.

Policies (and certainly politics) related to guns and the environment have not changed significantly; nor has the culture at large changed with regard to environmental or gun regulation. Regulation is still considered by many to be an infringement upon freedom, rather than the standards for health and safety for all. And while our health care system has been fought over, those afflicted by mental illness are still too often not able to obtain necessary treatment. The effects are not only individual. Individual health affects public health. The ways in which we treat our ailments, individually and societally, still seem crude.

I’m not one to ascribe significance to a date that has had terrible tragedies. As we move through history, there will be more events (good and bad) occurring on the same date. Sometimes there is significance, and often it is crude. I seem to recall that the reason April 20th was selected as the date for the massacre at Columbine High School was because it was Hitler’s birthday.

Hate bubbles to the service in each generation, but how we deal with hate and indifference, as well as greed and ignorance, each crude states, can be (and must be) challenged anew.

The 2016 race has officially begun, but I feel like it’s still the bubbling crude. It’s as though we are coated in greed, indifference, hate and violence–stuck in the gulf. We have become a more crude culture, and we’ve seen the deleterious effects when it bubbles to the surface.

We have a lot more cleaning up to do. Maybe, remembering the flammability of that bubbling crude will inspire more alternative energies going forward.

It Is What It Isn’t

It isn’t bigotry; it’s freedom of religion. It isn’t mass murder; it’s Depression. It isn’t diplomacy; it’s appeasement.

It isn’t rape; it’s drunken sex. It isn’t obstruction; it’s Democracy. It isn’t murder; it’s self defense. It isn’t spying; it’s security. It isn’t union busting; it’s the right to work. It isn’t about public health; it’s about private choice.

It seems like we actually spend our lives on what something or someone isn’t. We have a tradition of distinguishing ourselves from others by emphasizing other-ness. Even with our history of civil rights and feminism, expanding rights for all sorts of people once excluded, the current zeitgeist is not one of inclusion and expansion. Critical thinking has largely been distorted into oppositional thinking.

Say it isn’t so!

We’ve shifted from what it is to what it isn’t, as we’ve been bombarded with challenges to our assumptions:

It’s a slam-dunk! (for which we are paying unimagined consequences in the Middle East).

It’s a no brainer!

It’s a sure thing!

It’s a 10!

It’s a boy!

It’s complicated.

The truth is, it is complicated. There are different views and facets and understandings and expressions of much of life. Concepts of gender, of life, of liberty, of religion, and so many constructs that were historically entrenched….are still evolving. It doesn’t feel like evolution when we seem so mired, and it is easy to feel despair.

It is what it is. The sigh of stalemate. We don’t hear “c’est la vie”  any more. We say “it is what it is”, like pop zen masters (or Winnie the Pooh). When we don’t know what else we can do, we can acknowledge that it is what it is. Move on.

We don’t seem to be moving on by what it isn’t. It isn’t right. It isn’t safe. It isn’t about you (or me). It isn’t working.

So many articles are written to sound as though previously held notions were naive, or misguided, or wrong. It’s as though some people think they sound smarter by debunking anything we’ve known prior to now. It seems as though everything you thought was true isn’t. It is what it isn’t. Aside from being able to eat butter and drink coffee now, this new moment of deconstruction requires critical thinking, not just being critical.  Some previously held ideas and constructs that seemed to be true and even natural deserve to be queried. But, not everything must be turned inside out or dismantled.  In fact, there seems to be a dearth of common sense and wisdom, much less decent behavior. And there is certainly a lack of common good.

So how do we move beyond it is what it isn’t? Acknowledge that it is what it is, but doesn’t always have to be this way or simply the mirror opposite (that way). Movement happens between (and/or beyond) those points–where there is space to move. We know there is a better way, isn’t there?

Convenience Stores

Wait…What??? Hillary took to the world stage yesterday to tell us that while on the world stage as Secretary of State, she found it more convenient to store her emails on a private server at her Chappaqua home, than having 2 email accounts on one device.

Her well crafted explanation, which included everything people would like to like about her–her work on behalf of women, her being a mother (of the bride), a loving daughter, a yogi–as well as a fierce comment calling out the 47 senators whose chutzpah is far beyond Clintonian as they penned an open letter to Iran, openly undermining our President and arduous diplomatic efforts–did not excuse (or even really explain) why she opted for convenience and waited to respond to revelations about her emails. All this waiting when it was really just a matter of convenience?

Even if there’s no there there, we know what’s in store with Hillary. She assumes that we get how virtuous she is, but her actions (and inactions) call her virtuosity into question time and time again. How inconvenient for her that questions about where and why she stored her emails the way she did as Secretary of State are cropping up now as she is about to announce her candidacy for the presidency.

Even if she broke no laws, and put forth the same quantity of emails as other Secretaries of State and other candidates, her silence until yesterday was deafening. The “he did it too” argument is ridiculous. Her talents are consistently undermined by these sorts of choices, even if they are legal. Those who were hoping that her strengths would manifest not only in winning the Presidency, but in good governance, fear that the Presidency is lost without her, and they justify her choices. It’s too scary to think that it’s more than inconvenient for a Hillary presidency to blow up before she officially runs.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Hillary. But maybe we need someone else to mind the store.

Lots

Lots and lots going on this week

suggesting who we are

and what we seek

and whether these moments

are indeed unique.

**********

Bohener’s gift to the GOP

was a powerful speech

by PM Bibi.

Then another gift,

courtesy of Hilary.

***********

Homeland Security is secure

at least until September.

The month when we feel most unsure

if we’ve endured the worst

or must prepare for more (war?).

**********

It seems as though we most desire

basic heroes and villains,

whose masks hide the quagmire

we find ourselves in,

when we neglect what we truly require.

**********

Lots of stories, and the story of lots

This week, the whole megillah.

Heroes and villains and twists of plots

Is Iran still Persia?

My stomach’s in knots.

**********

As the season of Carnival gives way to Lent,

regardless of one’s tradition,

perhaps we’ll find that in the present

we can draw lots

of new possibilities with a shift of intent.

Fashion Statements

Who are you wearing?The Oscars are known for the red carpet fashion show of Hollywood stars, but political and social statements have also become part of the awards spectacle. The Oscars have become the vehicle for those in the movie biz to declare their causes and directions for the country. This year, the winners used their movies as starting points to inspire movements from securing voting rights, to equal pay for women, to immigration rights, ALS research and cure, Alzheimers research and cure….suicide prevention, LGBT rights, better treatment for Veterans, I’m sure there’s more….

All of these are worthy of attention and commitment, and why shouldn’t famous people use their fame for good causes? For a group of professionals who have agents and writers, and yes, stylists, why did their statements seem so ineloquent? Sure the excitement of the moment and nervousness, not to mention time limit, may have contributed to some earnest but awkward statements, but I think there was also an overconfidence that their profession equipped them to be eloquent and elegant in real life at an emotional moment. Important statements need to be fashioned in such a way that considers interpretation and what will remain after the moment.

Movies can be incredibly powerful, precisely because they are crafted, honed, edited, produced by an array of talented individuals. The audio visual work and the words can be examined and fashioned so that the statement has the most effective impact. Movies inspire in positive and negative ways. (We see this with ISIS.)  Of course, not all movies are statements and not all statements move us. But we often follow those who fashion statements.

Before the Oscars, the statements by Rudy Giuliani attacking President Obama’s patriotism were leading news cycles and commentaries. I worry about Mr. Giuliani. He should have enough experience to know that inspiring hate, and instilling fear and paranoia are not the same as critical analysis, or critiquing policies. He doubled down on his comments before writing an op-ed (with no apology) to attempt to put out the fire he ignited. But he can’t undo what he did. Spewing is not the same as a fashioned statement.

The elites don’t seem to be the ones who are defined by the best education, but by those who have the media attention. They have the followers. Even those of us who prefer to follow unbiased news, and think for ourselves, see that our country is following those whose statements are the loudest–not necessarily the most studied or well fashioned.

The Oscars, with all its irrelevance amid attempts at relevance (like Guiliani himself), did however leave us with a couple of well fashioned statements. The bit that left us all a bit gaga, was the Lady herself, as she pulled the most outrageous stunt of all: she wowed with her incredible, authentic voice without any frills. Just a statement of excellence, fashioned to perfection. The other statement, of course, was by J. K. Simmons: “Call your Mom!”  Funny how that’s trending!  Fashioned statements–even basic pieces–require consideration and our best practices. 

Fine Lines, Wrinkles and Age Spots

The wrinkles in Brian Williams’ story (stories?) have caused his six month suspension, and plenty of outrage on social media. Some on the left have said that his embellishments are less serious than the embellishments and lies that are regularly put forth by politicians and other news outlets.(I say, that’s no excuse.)  Of course, the story points to the iconic role of the American news anchor(man) on network broadcast news–a model that has weathered feminism (sort of), but not the information age.

Perhaps it’s a fine line between an embellishment and a lie, but it seems clear now, that if Williams was not even in the same helicopter that was under fire, his story constitutes a lie. The wrinkle for Williams is that his job is based on trust. The public depends on accurate reporting and truth. Mistakes happen, but knowingly reporting falsehoods is not a mistake. It’s just wrong.

The anchor is the person or thing that provides stability and confidence, particularly during uncertain situations. Jon Stewart, anchor of The Daily Show, has always maintained that he is a comedian/satirist (and has since added writer/director to his resume), but over the last 17 years, has become a real anchor. His faux news show has been more truthful, and taken more seriously, than many non-comedic news programs. His recent announcement that he will leave The Daily Show will undoubtedly be a wrinkle for Comedy Central, but the program, or whatever will replace it, will probably have an audience. He built trust and kept us informed and giggling through extremely uncertain, and often painful, times.

What is most revealing in these two stories that played out this week, practically back to back, is our profound need for an anchor. We may not necessarily need the 6:30 or 7:00 Nightly News, as our lives have changed so dramatically from the days when that was the news time. There have been many wrinkles for broadcast news that have rendered the past and current broadcasts beneath their tasks. The fine lines between news and entertainment continue to be injected with fillers. The comedians do a much finer job of treating wrinkles in the news stories. They may be entertaining first, but the intelligence and integrity are apparent, and engage us completely. It’s what the news programs used to do–anchor us.

Spotting the need for an anchor is one that we might not have thought about in previous  generations. Each age of television has had its anchors and standard bearers in news and entertainment. The broadcast news and late night talk shows have endured with their basic formatting for a few generations now. The Daily Show combined those formats and blended the faux news show with a talk show type interview (think Jack Parr) that has been must see tv or wherever for young and young at heart for about a generation and a half in tv years. It remains to be seen if the Daily Show will continue beyond Stewart, but his leaving has left so very many feeling adrift.

The age of The Daily Show has been one fraught with formerly unimaginable craziness and extreme everything–political,environmental, social, religious climate change. This, of course, has intersected with the internet age and the miracles of googling, wikipedia, youtube–all standard and in the palm of one’s hand–rendering network television news quaint, at best. At worst, well…..that’s what we have now.

What I noticed with the surprise and sadness this week, and the profound need for an anchor, is that despite the sense that many have that we are in a steady decline in practically every domain, we have not lost our sense of excellence. We want mensches–those who can discern the fine lines between embellishment and lying, and then be truthful. We can spot truthiness (thank you Stephen Colbert), and in this day and age, we need all the intelligence, rich vocabulary, critical thinking, challenging questions, compassion, integrity  and generosity that has been on display on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. These attributes are what anchor us.

So, while there may be some wrinkles to be smoothed out, we know that what’s true for the ages will keep us anchored. And laugh lines are beautiful.

Prequel

I can’t wait until Sunday night. I have been eagerly anticipating being swept away into another world — looking forward to the past.

Sunday night is the premier of Better Call Saul, the prequel to Breaking Bad. Aside from looking forward to revisiting rich (and hilarious) characters from one of the truly great tv shows, and getting to watch the art that is the combination of great writing, directing and acting, there’s something compelling about a back story.

We love prequels–the stories written after, but that take place before, the stories we already know. Think: Godfather II, Wicked, Gotham, to name a few very successful prequels. These are the backstories of characters whom we originally met as adults in other stories, with qualities that made them distinctive. The prequels give us the stories of circumstances and relationships that gave rise to those distinctive qualities and formed those characters.

When watching or reading a prequel we already know what will happen years later. Many prequels, however, are less satisfying than the works that preceded them. It is a formidable task to re-create all the elements that worked so perfectly in preceding forms. It can also be confusing to talk about later works that are supposed to predate earlier ones, because in real life, we presume that the present includes all the knowledge and wisdom and information possible to make our circumstances the best possible.

In real life, we’ve seen a blowback to those who seem to live in a prequel to 2015. The 2015 outbreak of measles proves that vaccinations have been one of the crowning achievements of science of the 20th century. The measles vaccine has been available, albeit in different forms, for 50 years. Measles and other illnesses that once regularly killed, have been mostly eradicated with the use of vaccinations. But vaccinations only work if everyone uses them. In the 21st century, some have chosen to live a prequel–a recreated fiction that does not include the actual (scientific) knowledge that exists to date, but without considering consequences to others (who live in the present). The current outbreak suggests that those who have not vaccinated their children have actually contributed to this current outbreak of measles.

I understand the fears and questions relating to vaccines and other medical interventions. We have learned from medical mistakes (e.g. thalidomide, among others) and the concerns that we over use antibiotics and other medications and interventions are valid ones. That doesn’t diminish the essential value of antibiotics and vaccinations. They are life saving, and in the 21st century, their use and antiviral use, as well as other immunological interventions will evolve to be more individualized and precise so that they can be more effective.

When we read and watch prequels, we are always aware of what will ultimately happen. We have the most up to date knowledge and wisdom that the characters in the prequel don’t have. I am looking forward to watching the prequel of the character who looked like the ultimate ambulance chaser with his Better Call Saul ads on Breaking Bad. In real life, I am looking forward to the 21st century sequels to 20th century medical breakthroughs, and encourage those who seem to prefer the prequel, (those who have rejected vaccines), to consider their choices in the context of public health and safety. We already know the consequences.

Speech Pathology

While away visiting family and friends, I was not away from the horror of the terror that enveloped Paris. I may have been some 5,600 + miles from Paris, but I could be in the same zone of interest, despite the difference in time zones. I could converse via email with a cousin in Paris, and watch cable news and read analyses on my ipad, and post my sympathies.

Our extraordinary abilities to communicate through fiber optics, cables and signals anywhere, anytime, has transformed civilization in terms of immediate access, but what makes our civilization civilized is our capacity for consideration and compassion. Our advancement in technologies have allowed for an unprecedented flow of communication and movement, which has enabled expressions of hope as well as of hate .

Lately, the pathologies that have distorted and infected our lives with hate have manifested in abuse and violence in carefully orchestrated attacks upon innocents. The hostage takers at the kosher market in Paris spoke fluent French, yet did not speak the same language as their French hostages. The terrorists’ nihilism and dehumanization, was uttered using the same vocalized sounds and words that other French nationals would be familiar with, but there was no connection.

Some have argued that while there is absolutely no justification for violence or abuse, there must be social causes for such disaffection that would enable so many to seek a dangerous and violent path and wage war against Western Civilization. In essence, these people are looking for the pathologies in modern democratic societies that might explain the pathology of terrorism. Freedom, and lately our free speech, whether in the form of a silly comedy movie, or political cartoons, has been threatened with silencing. This is speech pathology!

Often, in cases of medical speech disorders, there is an auditory component. In order to learn language and speak effectively, one must have clear and accurate perception, as well as the structures and strength to create clearly understood speech. Too often, when toddlers are not articulating adequately, there is a hearing deficit. The relationship between being able to hear and speak is inextricable. Even without hearing, there is a capacity for language and communication. Sign language is every bit as expressive, and depends upon perception.

Those who don’t want to hear are seeking to silence the rest of us.This cultural speech pathology has affected those whose perception has them seek to destroy rather than to construct. The speech pathology that we have been witnessing has been so painful because our capacity for communication is so closely intertwined with our humanity and our culture. The pathology of repression and hate, expressed through abuse and violence must always be countered. There is certainly a deficit of hearing and a surfeit of misperception when such pathologies of repression and hate cause those to silence speech and fear freedom.

As I was en route to the airport to head home yesterday, I saw a sign for the “Museum of Tolerance”. I was struck by the idea of exhibiting tolerance. The thought that tolerance as a relic–something housed in a museum– was disturbing. Of course, using historical events as examples of tolerance (and intolerance) are powerful displays of human capacities (and pathologies). Then again, exhibiting tolerance is what we need to do in our daily lives. It’s a sort of speech therapy for the speech and hearing pathologies that have been so threatening.

The Sony Clause and the Gift of Humor

White Christmas. Miracle on 34th Street. Home Alone….The Interview?? Will The Interview forever be associated with Christmas?  What would have been a silly, adolescent sort of flick became an international issue just in time for Christmas. The shutting down of a comedy film, then it’s release in selected theaters as well as streaming online, has become a Christmas gift after all. Regardless of the quality of The Interview as a film, it now stands for freedom and peace on earth. Taking liberties with comedy has become giving liberty, after it felt  like our liberties were being taken. 

Sony had to confront the awful embarrassment and vulnerability of being hacked and threatened by North Korea. I appreciated the responsibility (and embarrassment) that the execs at Sony had to face, although I was rather disappointed with their decision to cancel showing The Interview (even if I had no intention of seeing the movie prior to this). Now, behold a Christmas miracle: The Interview will be shown!

Many have suggested the possibility that this is a brilliant marketing strategy by Sony. More likely, it is a Christmas Miracle for Sony. The reviews for The Interview have not been great, but now EVERYONE wants to see it. It’s practically a patriotic act.

Last week, President Obama expressed his disappointment with Sony’s initial decision to pull The Interview from theaters. He seemed to reflect popular sentiment that a threat by North Korea over a silly movie was truly an insult to everything we stand for, including Hollywood! Ultimately, Sony execs reconsidered.

“We have never given up on releasing The Interview and we’re excited our movie will be in a number of theaters on Christmas Day,” said Michael Lynton, Chairman and CEO of Sony Entertainment. “At the same time, we are continuing our efforts to secure more platforms and more theaters so that this movie reaches the largest possible audience.”

Sony, in an attempt to save some face, or wash some egg off, reminds us with the clause that they are continuing to “secure more platforms”…. The issue of security, whether it’s their own internal e-security, or our cyber security, or our physical well being –especially in a movie theater on Christmas– makes everyone a bit jittery. Adding a clause about security (even in the most generic sense) is the best justifier for anything.

Parents have historically added security clauses after their own temper tantrums. (“I did it for your own good.”) Now we can know that Sony (and perhaps other corporations) can make decisions that are of geopolitical significance as well as corporate economic significance, because of the security clause. Sony was merely protecting us from North Korea.

We appreciate corporate responsibility, and the Sony hacking was revealing in its breadth as well as its rather uninspired (and racist) execs. Aside from the embarrassment that they suffered just from exposed emails, the embarrassment of being vulnerable had to be overcome. The subsequent threats if The Interview were shown, made it easier for Sony to focus on security for everyone’s sake.

But after the initial discomfort over the Sony hacking, Americans didn’t feel justifiably threatened;certainly not by North Korea. If anything, Sony’s initial decision to pull The Interview from theaters felt threatening. Could a corporate decision, about frivolity no less, threaten our freedom more than an enemy government or terrorist?

The Sony Clause gave us the opportunity to see (or not see) The Interview on Christmas or during the holiday season.  The opportunity (more than the movie) may not be a Christmas miracle so much as a gift. Opportunity is a gift, as is humor. We sadly said goodbye to The Colbert Report last week, before Sony shifted to show The Interview. What better gift, especially after the end of The Colbert Report, than the Sony Clause, ensuring more secure platforms, to give liberty to taking liberties!  The incident of The Interview may remind us of the gift of humor this Christmas.  Giggling is always the sound of freedom. Happy Holidays!  Wishing you laughter, joy and peace!

Background Noise

I don’t remember giving THE TALK. I talked way too much for my kids (and my students). Ask my kids (biological or school related)….if I talked constantly. I was always talking about issues, right and wrong, behavior, respect, race, gender, sex, emergencies, dignity, acceptability, responsibility, apologizing, looking, listening, communicating, points of view,circumstances, choices, consequences, health, safety,community.

THE TALK used to mean ‘The Birds and the Bees”. Lately, THE TALK has been referenced with regard to racial profiling. Many parents of older kids or adult children have commented about having to give THE TALK to their non-caucasian children. Recently NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio commented that he had to “train” his son (who is biracial) to be very careful if encountered by a police officer.

I had always assumed that all parents, regardless of race, taught their children, regardless of race or gender, to be low key with the police. Teaching acceptable behaviors toward authority figures as well as from authority figures was part of the job of parenting and educating. 

Likewise, when those in positions of power abuse their circumstances, they need to be discussed and challenged . These are constant conversations. We must keep talking about right and wrong, personal responsibility, safety, and all the other non-sexy stuff that kids hate hearing about, even if they don’t want to talk about them.

The dual outrages of racism and sexual abuse that are far too frequent, must be talked about. How is there still so much confusion? THE TALK, must not only be these conversations, but must be connected to so many other issues.

All my talking and talking may have seemed like background noise to kids, but I am confident that they actually heard and got the messages. Noise essentially disrupts. We need to disrupt the complacency that is not only disempowering, but dangerous. These conversations are the background for creating clarity and justice and hopefully, safety.

Conversations about racial profiling, criminal behavior, abuse of power, sexual behavior, etc., are necessary before kids are 18. Considering different points of view and potential misperceptions are necessary for clarity, and for avoiding unintended consequences. We need to provide some cacophony for our kids, regardless of their backgrounds. They need to know how to be responsible to themselves and to others.

The young woman who is wearing sexy clothes is not asking to be raped, nor does she deserve to be raped. The young woman who is drunk is not asking to be raped, nor does she deserve to be raped. Certainly, the young woman who is passed out, who can’t ask for anything, does not deserve to be raped. We still need to tell our daughters and sons that this happens; that people take advantage in so many circumstances, even when they can get away with criminal behavior. We need to talk to all boys and girls, men and women. These are conversations for everyone, and should be part of everyone’s background.

It is not THE TALK. It is the environment of healthy agitation; of regular reminders and questions, pointers and examples to disrupt assumptions or matters that kids may not think matter to them.  They matter to all of us, and all children and adults need to practice thinking critically and being aware of consequences–even unintended consequences.

We all had some background noise from our parents and teachers. Some of us are noisier than others. If only certain talks are had at certain moments between certain people, we are all missing out, too often to dangerous results. A singular talk needs to become more pervasive, like background noise that we can all hear regularly.