Turn on the Lights

 

         Yesterday I read one of the more riveting books that I have in a long time…and that is saying a lot. The book is entitled: “Myths of Free Trade: Why American Trade Policy Has Failed” by Congressman Sherrod Brown. The book is a historical and current breakdown of U.S. trade policy—namely—the policy of free trade. Of course one can tell by the title that this book is an absolute argument against the current (fervent) movement of free trade (as it exists), however, what makes the book “riveting” is not necessarily its bias but its breakdown of U.S. trade policy and its many informative revelations as to how and why American conducts itself the way it does. What I mean is that in truth my understanding of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization was (and still is) cursory at best and it was exciting to finally learn the history behind these world-sculpting organizations as well as their current standard practices. It was a day of illumination—as well as a day I realized that my knowledge of trade, world finance, and U.S. policy must—absolutely must improve if I am to have any understanding of the world in which I live.

         But why should one educate oneself? How does understanding current economic theory and how this theory is sculpting the very face of this earth make one happier? The answer is as tied up with living the Champagne Life as it is living a life of conscience (see yesterday’s column which deals with one’s conscience); and personally I believe the two, living the Champagne Life and living a life of conscience are inexorably woven. Beyond, however, living a life of conscience or making one’s actions and decisions match what one truly believes is “the right thing” knowledge brings a certain sense of empowerment and hope. Understand why people are rioting in Indonesia—really understand—do not simply be satisfied with what CNN, FOX, ABC, MSNBC or PBS has to say in a few short minutes. Take up the challenge of genuinely knowing the world you occupy—if anything when you breathe your last breaths you will know you knew where it was you were. And certainly empowerment comes in all forms when one becomes deeply informed.

         Empowerment will not only effect your ability to wisely exercise your democratic rights as a voter, objector, or advocator it can also inform you how you should run your personal life and finances and if you are an employer it can inform you how you should run your business. Running one’s life based not on what other’s have told you is wise or good but based on one’s accrued understanding and general sense of empowerment is a life that cannot be easily tarnished. A person with a sense of empowerment—based on wisdom—has a might that not easily corrupted by both the ignorant and the fowl.

         Today it is my suggestion dearest Sailors and Patrons…the kind souls who also seek the sweet shores of the Champagne Life…that you take up a little time in each day to really understand what is going on. Do not aim small in this endeavor. Aim big. Email a professor, ask for a sound reading list, and challenge yourself beyond your intellectual comfort zone. The rewards will go beyond simply understanding, beyond building a stronger brain (which actually is true—as you age the more you challenge your brain the healthier and stronger it becomes), but I believe it will strengthen your ability to live a life in alignment with that inner voice that knows which I believe is the fertile ground from which Champagne Living springs.

 

 

The Power of Conscience

 

         I am currently reading—and nearly finished—with a spare, but thoughtful book on the power of conscience. The book is entitled “The Light of Conscience: How a Simple Act Can Change Your Life” by Bill Shore (author of The Cathedral Within). Essentially, the book is about what it says on the back of the jacket: “An inspirational meditation on the power of conscience—how a simple act, a moment of purpose, can change your life, your community, even your world.” One of the elements or rather the style of the book I believe gives it much of its power and that is the meditative position Mr. Shore takes in discussing such an important yet complex issue: one’s conscience. He uses an isolated New England seaside town both in real terms and in metaphorical terms as he discusses the importance and wonders and (hopefully) inherent rewards of living one’s life based on one’s conscience and not complacency or fear. For throughout the book the author visits this seaside town—even in desolate winter—to illustrate the isolation when one confronts “that quiet voice within”.

         One of the key elements in following one’s conscience versus following one’s want of comfort or safety is loneliness. Often the man who acts out on his conscience is a lonely man and at times a dead man. Yet the world’s progress is often propelled by these often-simple gestures of doing the right thing. Shore writes of the baseball player from Kentucky Pee Wee Reese who played with the Dodgers when Jackie Robinson, the first black player to play on a white baseball team, was first hired by the Dodgers. The fans and the rest of the team were unbelievably cruel to Jackie Robinson—often screaming “vulgar epithets” down on the first African American player when he was down on the field. Then one day at Crosley Field in Cincinnati as the abuse was intense Pee Wee Reese walked over to Jackie Robinson and placed his hand on Robinson’s shoulder which “quieted the fans and brought the entire team together by the simple gesture of walking over to second base and placing his hand on Robinson’s shoulder. ‘That gesture spoke volumes,’ said teammate Carl Erskine. ‘Jackie Robinson—and more than that –the history of baseball changed.’”

         What I like about his example and several others in the book—including Rosa Park’s decision to stand her ground—is that many times world changing acts of conscience are small day to day moments in which we are confronted by our conscience. We do not all have to be a President or a Pope to make are decisions to do the right thing mean anything in fact Mr. Shore points out that governments, leaders, and laws follow the tides that are often keyed off by people like Rosa Parks, Jackie Robinson, and Pee Wee Reese and not the other way around.

         This is a book that I believe all should read. I found it incredibly uplifting and edifying—that to act alone, to act not on what others or the world want to you do but to act upon the most isolated place of all—one’s conscience—is the most rewarding, world changing, and important thing a person can do. Too often people see success in short fits—in little degradable rewards. However, to live one’s life based on one’s conscience is to build a life based on a reward that will never degrade, tarnish or fade which in turn will leave a legacy that man for all time can benefit.

 

 

Grace While The Idiots Rule (6/21/05)

 

 

          Really as one gets to know the ancient Chinese oracle the I Ching or Book of Changes one begins to realize a larger theme within its awesome text. The big circle or biggest theme I would say is how one is to become absolutely wise and enlightened. However, another absolutely constant theme is how a wise man or a “superior man” (as referred to in the text) is to survive the times when inferior men are running the show? The I Ching was created when China was in a great time of turmoil. When war between princes, warlords, and nobles was a constant and the ruling classes were extremely corrupt and often cruel to the people. The I Ching in many ways is a call to persevere during less than enlightened times; and furthermore, how one is to rise up within and survive a time when the inferior are ruling.

          Today, I want to talk about the twenty-second hexagram “Grace” or Pi. Grace is absolutely intended for the superior to heed while working through a quagmire of inferior men. Grace is a funny hexagram—one I have been contemplating for some time—for I still find a great deal of mystery within its lines. It is said in my translation: “Confucius felt very uncomfortable when once, on consulting the oracle, he obtained the hexagram of Grace” (I use the classic Wilhelm/ Baynes translation, Princeton University Press). The idea that Confucius did not like this hexagram—that he did not like being told that now was his time to employ Grace (versus war or other bold or “important” actions)—I found absolutely intriguing. One of the reasons I find this interesting is that the I Ching was written as a way to become wholly enlightened and at one with the Tao—this is no small matter—and while Grace on the surface may seen unimportant or perhaps even trite it is included therefore supremely important. But why…but how…for not even wise and noble Confucius felt comfortable with this admonition?

          The primary image attached to the hexagram Grace is “fire at the foot of the mountain which lights up the beauty and grandeur of the mountain.” Grace in this sense is the uniting of something lesser and greater in order to bring great beauty and not cruelty or harshness. The lesser fire at the base of the great mountain brings beauty by illumination and framing the beauty of the mountain and this act brings importance and dignity to the fire. This is the picture of ideal or perfect grace. True grace and beauty comes from the lesser framing the greater—without grotesquely decorating the greater—without actually changing the mountain. Grace is this sense is a true call for harmony and dignity.

          The rub begins, however, with application: for as Confucius surely knew this type of Grace is rarely achievable for too often the lesser (the fire) is not so happy to frame the inherent beauty of the greater (the mountain), and wants to assert itself as the primary power. In turn, many mountains weaken their positions by over adornment and artifice making them weakened and no longer the image of heavenly grace and perfection. The reality of Grace is really “Grace while the idiots rule”. It is a call to study and learn discipline in small matters—seeking to unite lesser and greater elements with the lesser framing the greater and not ruining the greater—for now is not really a time when the superior man will be effective against the host of inferior rulers. In time, however, a man with Grace will eventually gain influence and rise through the ranks of the profane. And in the end the superior man will succeed by catching the favor of a very powerful superior man thus the inferior finally lose their sway at court.

          Grace is an act of contemplation and not action. Grace is theoretical and idealistic and lives in the world of art. Grace is not to be used for extraordinary things: it warns that Grace is not a strong enough effort in times of great importance. And yet, Grace must be employed. Beauty and harmony are a part of life that must be considered—but sparingly and with understanding of its place—otherwise one who puts too much emphasis on Grace becomes vulgar and foolish.

          I still contemplate this hexagram and I sense something quite great is underneath its quiet, bide-your-time surface. I think of Confucius being disturbed by it…and I think of true beauty coming from framing the greater with the lesser…giving both their proper dignity and importance. I believe (at first round) it is a call to understand the importance of keeping one’s material appearances from home to car to person subtle, harmonious, beautiful…with grace. I also believe that this Grace must also extend to one’s speech and movements for in the end the superior man finally wins over the inferior at court by catching the respect and eye of the princess and she with her ladies in waiting take your case to her husband therefore garnering you great favor and influence.

          There is also one more idea or call to Grace that I find in succeeding rounds with this hexagram and that is the insistence that Grace is contemplation and this contemplation ultimately leads to the “understanding of time and its changing demands” and “Through contemplation of the forms existing in human society it becomes possible to shape the world”. It becomes possible to shape the world…. This is a sharp turn from making sure your house and speech are harmonious…and to be told that Grace is not the way to act during extraordinary times. I believe this is a call to understand that we ultimately “dream” our world and that while the world can be harsh and cruel one must continue to not only keep their homes and speech in a state of Grace but continue to contemplate a world of peace, beauty and harmony for ultimately it is how the heavens and the earth unite. In short, Grace is all about strolling through hell with dignity, harmony, and optimism…for in the end know superior man you will win…and you might win for having Grace.

 

 

Dogen's Shobogenzo (10/26/04, Vol. 2 No 25)

 

            Shobogenzo means “Treasury of the eye of true teaching”.   Shobogenzo is a collection of Zen essays written by the 13 th century Japanese Zen teacher Dogen Kigen.   Dogen is widely respected as a religious reformer, an accomplished Buddhist adept, a profound thinker, and a brilliant writer.   Shobogenzo is among the best of Zen literary works.   It is one of the most demanding, and is also a tool to help foster the Zen use of the mind.   Dogen was born 1200 CE to a noble family in Kyoto, the imperial capitol and cultural center of Japan.   At eight his mother died—this would lead him to his calling based on his profound preoccupation with the impermanent nature of things.   Dogen was the founder of the Soto Zen School.

            The actual Shobogenzo text is a lyrical, complicated series of essays and allegories that primarily focus on “bodymind”.   In the west body and mind are seen as separate—the problem then is to see how they ultimately interrelate.   For Dogen (and a Buddhist) body and mind are fundamentally one—the problem then is to re-experience this fundamental oneness.   Dogen wanted people to learn how to experience life and the world directly: without all of the preconceived notions and assumptions that come between us and any type of phenomenological experience.   The practice of meditation is of profound importance because it is meant to help the aspirant to directly experience being.

            Shinjin datsuraku is traditionally translated as “casting off body and mind”.   This term is used throughout Shobogenzo.   Dogen felt this was the “one great matter of Zen practice for my entire life”.   Dogen actually said that this (casting off body and mind) is all one needs to understand Buddhism.   Casting off body and mind means to experience the world and life without any thetic positings.   For example:   “I love dogs”, “I hate broccoli”, “white is good and black is bad”, or “accept good and reject bad”.   These are all examples of personal views and preconceptions.   Dogen insists that to reach enlightenment one must move beyond relative thinking and critical opinions.   For these cloud reality and our ability to experience the world and life as it truly is.   A practitioner of Buddhism strives to react to a situation without any prejudices—rather than impose all of his presumptions upon any person, place or situation.

            For today's column I read the essay (from Shobogenzo) One Bright Jewel .   One Bright Jewel is a story that revolves around a teacher named Gensha and a student-monk.   Gensha was a highly honored teacher and after attaining enlightenment he said to the people,   “The whole world in all ten directions is a single bright jewel.”   The student-monk then says that he is not sure if he understands this.   Gensha, the teacher, then replies,   “The whole world in all ten directions is one bright jewel—what does it have to do with understanding?”

            The next day Gensha asked the student-monk,   “The whole world in all ten directions is one bright jewel—how do you understand?”   The student-monk then responds by saying that the whole world is a jewel and what does this have to do with understanding—essentially repeating what his teacher, Gensha, had said the day before.   Gensha then reprimands the student for acccepting ignorance.   For while the teachings may be true regardless of one's understanding, it does not mean an aspirant should settle into ignorance—rather an aspirant should always seek to understand.

            What does “The world is one bright jewel” mean?   If you were to remove relative judgments or assumptions from your experience of the world such as good and bad, hot and cold, ugly and pretty, and so forth than the world would no longer be a series of distinctions.   The world would be a unified continuum of being, which includes the one experiencing this “being”.   This experience of unity with the world or oneness is poignantly pursued in zazen or “sitting meditation” and is the primary crux of Zen Buddhism.

            Why would one want to experience the world without relativity?   This is not an easy question (nor, actually, is Dogen's Shobogenzo) to answer.   As someone who has been a meditator and practicing Buddhist for over a decade I can tell you that not only peace arises but a curious flexibility does as well when one genuinely tries to approach life without judgment.   I have a dear friend who is also a practicing Buddhist.   Everyday when he walks to work he practices a walking meditation.   As he walks he tries to “take-in” what he sees, hears, and smells without judgment.   He told me that one day after around a year of this practice he found himself so overwhelmed with joy he was moved to tears—he told me that as he worked through the habit of judgment he came to see that day how absolutely gorgeous every single person he saw was.   Nobody was too fat, too old, dressed out of date, or crippled—everyone, he said, was the most beautiful human he had ever seen.   Even years later my friend refers to that experience as radically altering his understanding of the world, and I assure you this transformed perspective graced him with much joy.

            Dogen's Shobogenzo is a great book to read and spend a lifetime trying to understand.   Even now I feel it is important to disclaim my own take on the essay One Bright Jewel in order to stress the importance of contemplation and meditation when it comes to tackling the teachings of Dogen.   This is the Zen way.   For today's column in addition to my Thomas Cleary translation (and notes), I also used the intellectual assistance of David E. Shaner's paper “The Bodymind Experience in Dogen's Shobogenzo:   A Phenomenological perspective”, (University of Hawaii Press, 1985).

 

 

Careful Where You Park In France

 

          Wow, well we’ve just cleared a remarkable day thirteen of rioting. Curfew is in effect and by all counts the violence is somewhat down from around 1,200 cars destroyed on the twelfth to just over six hundred down last night. The little French rascals organized by cell phones and text messaging did, however, manage to fire bomb a subway station—with sufficient enough damage to shut the trains down. Loads of looting continues as well as talks regarding ways France can both quell the riots and cozy up to their downtrodden. All in all I cannot remember when the news has been this exciting and while I do secretly hope it will drag on just a little longer—if only to bring out more from the French president—for really we have only shared some good times with an uncouth secretary of the interior and a finely dressed Prime Minister.

          What happened? In case you have not been as enraptured as I have by the rioting in France (oh, there is something so exciting about really…really good civil unrest) the riots broke out when two youths, while fleeing from the cops, were accidentally electrocuted. What are some of the real reasons it all broke out? Well, there are several theories being bandied about from racism to poor living conditions to increased Islam extremist propaganda, however, I believe the number one reason is the high unemployment rate currently being enjoyed by the average immigrant suburbanite. And the rate is high: it comes in at around 21%. France in general is struggling but nothing compared to the African and Muslim minorities.

          Right after unemployment I would absolutely say racism or a failure to integrate African and Muslim immigrants into mainstream French society is the engine behind this young angry machine. After WWII African and Muslim immigrants were encouraged to move into the French suburbs in order to fill in the many menial jobs required. Now, we have the second and third generations from this earlier group and unlike their parents and grandparents they do not have a sense of a “Mother Country” from which to gain their identity rather they have a sense of being the disregarded sons of France. Throw in dilapidated housing projects, rampant unemployment, and cell phones and you have a group that not only can become cohesive in their mischief but also in their rationale.

          There have been increasing unrest throughout Europe with fears that this type of civil disobedience will indeed spread throughout the continent. Already the Euro is down due to the recent riots and tourism is expected to take a substantial hit. France has imposed a new curfew and it is believed that the angry youths of the French ghettos have nearly burned themselves out. I suppose the question is when the riots do die down and it once again, becomes relatively safe to park your car in France what next? What should France do and how does a country simultaneously punish the rioters and heal the rift between their African and Muslim citizens and their white population? And realistically both are required in order to prevent them from happening again.

          I believe these riots should be seen as not only a French problem, but also a world problem. Unchecked poverty and hopelessness brings about terrorist cells in Afghani refugee camps—as well as gangs of text-messaging unemployed youths of seemingly advanced Western nations. So, with that all said good luck France, guard those Pinot vineyards and those stores of Champagne, may you come out better than when your nightmare began.

 

 

Neighborhood Preservation

 

         Today is Election Day in my fair city and for the first time I actually feel that I will be making “educated” votes. I suppose I have always tried to stay reasonably in touch with the events of the world that surrounds me, however, when it comes to local politics I have always been more than just a little bewildered by the enormous selection of candidates running for both the school and city council. I have moved a great deal and have rarely stayed in place long enough in order to gain any type of keen understanding as to what and who my current city needed the most. This year marks my fifth year in one place—a real change for me—and also a first time that I have some understanding of not only the most pressing issues of my fair city but also the people claiming to do all of the pressing. It took; however, some effort on yours truly to achieve this and sadly it really was primarily lady luck that helped me become the ultra-informed voter that I am today.

         For the big races debating amongst friends, party lines (and rhetoric), and campaign propaganda are my usual sources of information, however, rarely, are any type of public debates seen. They may have happened, but appear to be allusive incidences where only the few know how and where to catch them. For local government the situation is a little better as usually a local newspaper records faithfully the goings on of the city council, however, in a city like mine much of the news regards my big neighbor Boston and the national news. The war in Iraq also has stolen many inches that would have otherwise informed me of my fair city. Essentially, besides big splashy campaigns such as the presidential, senatorial, and gubernatorial races one is left with just a brief visit at the door, a glossy pamphlet, and perhaps a longish, hollow sounding phone message left on my machine reminding me to vote for so and so. And the information is as hollow as the machine solicitation—we all want good schools—we all want less crime. The big problem is that never do I actually hear how he or she is going to do that…just that they are “for education” or “for safer neighborhoods”. And in truth even the presidential races have become content-free. The debates did shine some light on what the president hopefuls were going to try to attempt and how they were going to go about it—but for the most part the two gents merely repeated what was on their little glossy flyers.

         Lady luck, however, changed things for me and for the first time I can honestly say I am going to make an “informed vote”. I did have to actually write down the names of the people I am going to vote for because I believe there are nearly twenty people running for city council and a dozen for the school council and they all had strange local, un-sanitized names that I could never remember. It was Sunday, and I was waiting for football to commence. I pretty much had planned a day of lounging and watching the games when a surfing expedition landing me on my Community Cable Access Channel and low and behold there was a debate going on between the candidates running for school council. And the debate was oddly refreshing—they actually had real ideas and real plans and were utterly unpolished. Next was (much to my surprise and delight for I had always pined to see what all the faces were behind the countless city council election signs around my neighborhood) was a show wholly dedicated to the city council election. The first part was a brief interview with each of the (millions) candidates. Next there was a long debate held with all of them sitting side by side (and having to share microphones because there were so many). Local community cable hippie-types were the main audience and were allowed present questions to the panel. Each candidate would then answer the question tacking on his or her own personal flare and occasionally disagreeing with a fellow candidate’s opinion. The lighting was weird and many times the sound and color would turn psychedelic, however, all in all it was a solid piece of democracy in action. While I did stick around—even arming myself with a notepad and pen in order to remember the names of candidates I liked—I couldn’t help but bristle knowing that if it wasn’t for sheer luck I would have never caught this most illuminating forum.

         I suppose my point today is that I believe there should be an increased pressure from the voters to have more open debates, newspaper inches, and television and radio spots devoted to candidates. While lady luck was on my side this time around—I hardly would consider luck to be a good policy when trying to preserve a democracy. I believe candidates and their campaigns have become over sanitized and made to fit into glossy pamphlets and slogans designed to fit between other advertisements. I do not feel comfortable that the same technique to get me to buy a certain brand of toilet paper is now being employed for choosing government representatives and with the local elections I assure you more time, thought, and consideration is behind a toilet paper campaign than a school council candidate. A call for more exposure for those who are running for office I believe will help turn back this bleak tide of sound-bite politics and politicians and would eventually foster an election environment from which only the truly thoughtful and bright could survive.

 

 

Fat Acceptance?

 

         With smoking now being thoroughly stigmatized, demonized, and soundly legislated with really only outright banning as the last move, increasingly the nation’s zeal for an inexpensive, healthy populace is now focusing on the obese—including the obese focusing on lawsuits against food manufacturers—and watchdog groups focusing on schools who allegedly “push” junk foods and soda pop on our children at school. Conversely, the obese are fighting their own battle (of sorts) with fat acceptance advocacy and anti-discrimination lawsuits. I spent the weekend reading much about both sides of this curious new coin: the obese as people who are going to cost the nation a whole lot of money and that we should do everything in our power to cure and prevent obesity; and the obese as a healthy, happy group that have been cruelly stigmatized—not because there is anything inherently wrong (health or otherwise) with obesity but because our current culture finds obesity grotesque from an esthetic view.

         The NAAFA or the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance is a support and advocacy group for fat people. I say fat people because the NAAFA does not use or like the tern “obesity” claiming that it makes being fat sound like a disease condition, which they argue simply is not true. They argue (and claim to have much scientific evidence) that one cannot only be fat and happy but fat and healthy as well. I read through their entire website which included a newsletter and a complete collection of their official policies regarding dieting, discrimination, and advocacy goals. Essentially, their key argument is that with only a 3 to 5% success rate with losing weight, the genetic relation to being overweight, the argument that it is yo-yo dieting that brings many of the “weight related illnesses”, and a societal preference for thin as ideal that being fat should not be the grounds for any type of discrimination and that fat people should be protected by the disability laws that not only prevent employers and businesses from discriminating people because of their size but additionally should provide proper facilities to accommodate the grossly overweight.

          On the other side of the coin we have these statistics: that last year America spent $12.7 billion on obesity related health costs and according to RAND corp., a think tank based in Santa Monica, CA, “obesity is a greater trigger for chronic illness than smoking, alcoholism or poverty”. Employers argue that the cost of obese employees is a mounting expense that will hurt the economy and due to the fact that obesity is still considered a voluntary disability and a preventable condition they should be allowed to consider an employees health before hiring. Already several cases are pending when employers decided not to hire after the candidate failed the pre-employment physical based on being obese.

         After spending a whole weekend researching both sides of this argument: that obesity is a genetic condition with little or no way to change and with that argument discrimination should be outlawed along with increased public advocacy towards changing our cultural negative attitudes regarding fat people; conversely, the other argument is that obesity is absolutely a preventable and voluntary disease that should be fought and employers should be allowed to refuse employment based on someone’s weight; I found myself torn. I genuinely did and this surprised me. Most fat people have lost hundreds of pounds throughout their lifetime only to see the weight come back and often finding an increased weight gain after the effects of dieting, and there is much evidence to support the fact that dieting can in the long run cause a person to put on more weight. In fact, they have found that fat people who do not diet actually retain a more stable weight throughout their lives versus dieters who tend to consistently gain weight every year. Additionally, so far many of the medical “cures” for obesity such as surgery and drug therapies have not only proved ineffective, in many cases they have been deadly. However, with all of that said there are people who have managed to lose the weight, keep it off, and see a massive reduction in health problems ranging from sleep apnea to high blood pressure to Type 2 diabetes.

          With 64% of U.S. adults now considered to be overweight or obese this two-sided argument without a doubt will mount along with scientific research backing both sides—leaving the government and the courts as well as popular opinion to come to terms with the issue. I believe that part of living the Champagne Life is enjoying a healthy, vibrant body, however, I also believe that living the Champagne Life is living with a sense of wisdom and compassion. With that in mind it is my suggestion that when contemplating the obesity issue facing American (and the world) that all angles—including the arguments posed by the NAAFA—be considered before one’s inner judge makes a ruling.

 

 

The New Survival Skill

 

          Communication is most definitely the newest survival skill. The old buzzword was computers—that to get ahead in the job market regardless of what field you were in one must know computers. Now, that goes without saying, however, due to the complete proliferation of email communication writing has become one of the most important skills any person can have. Increasingly email is becoming an integral part of business; personal business such as communication between teachers, banks, and contractors; and communication between friends and families. Serious issues at work like negotiations, project assignments, and client communications are being handled by email. Additionally, courts of law are using emails as crucial documents when sorting out large and small claims. In short, emails have gone beyond simple “hellos” and have evolved into important documents. With all of that said most people have had little to no formal training in writing and are often struggling (or should know they are struggling) with good, clear communication. Too often legal, business, and even friendly emails are misunderstood or misinterpreted—bringing sometimes-disastrous results. Today I want to give you all a few pointers as to how you can sharpen your communication skills—for not only will these exercises help you with your emails they will also help you in your speaking—which I assure you great communication can diffuse even the tensest of moments. A fuming spouse or client can almost always be calmed by clear, precise communication.

         Always use specific language. I remember once I was at the doctors’ office and a really cranky nurse was barking at me, “go over there” and “sit here”. The problem was that while she may know what “there” and “here” was I did not have a clue. The end result was her getting increasingly upset with me—and me upset with her—and in the end I surely knew why this nurse was so crabby. Throughout the whole of this nurse’s day I could see that she was (though surely unintentionally) setting herself up to being woefully misunderstood—priming a worldview that people were “stupid” with her being a victim of no one capable of following her reasonable requests…such as “go there”. What would have remedied the situation was “go over to the window” or “sit down on the chair”. This sounds obvious, however, if you were to take a moment and really listen to people throughout your day you will find that too often people forget that humans cannot read minds and will communicate like my angry nurse—and too often you will find the situation tense when we instruct or are instructed to “go there”. The same holds true for writing. Use specific language: instead of “he went to the store” write “he went to the grocery store”.

         Start a word collection. Many years ago I read a wonderful article about the writer Anne Rice. In it she talked about her “word collection”. Ms. Rice would collect words she heard in speech, in books, or any other place words could be found. She would then write those words down and tape them up in her office. The walls of her office were covered in all of these words and very often as she wrote she would scan her word collection and find the perfect word. Much like the idea of using specific language great communication is also about using precise words. Most people only use a small amount of words (compared to the vast amount available) in their daily parlance. The problem is that too often over used or over general language can leave a lot of room for interpretation, which is not good if you want to be clearly understood. The reason we have so many words is because there are many subtle and gross observations, experiences, and ideas in this world and in life—one should make an effort to find the most precise word possible to fit what it is you are trying to communicate. Personally, while I do not tape up words all over my office I do keep a tiny little notepad of “found words” on me and refer to it often—making sure to look up the definitions of words I had heard or read but have no clue as to there meaning.

         Practice using a “word camera”. Around ten years ago I began a discipline that I call “snapshots”. All I do is scan an area with my eyes like I would do if I were taking a picture with a camera and instead of taking a picture I write my “picture” in a notebook. As time went on and I became more proficient with my “word camera” I began to take “pictures” of things that only a word camera could do like snapping shots of people’s personalities—people like my friends and family—and later strangers on the street. I began to snap “pictures” of emotional states and abstractions like mathematics—writing for fifteen minutes on what math is or how boredom feels. However, it all began with me taking “snap shots” of simple things like my kitchen window or the neighbor’s chamomile bushes across the street. The key to taking word pictures is precision. Do not try to be overly artful or complex with your language—just record as faithfully as you can what it is you see. Too often aspiring writers worry about and attempt to forge a style, however, in truth style should and will come automatically. The real treasure is having a command of language and being able to communicate clearly. Taking a word snapshot a couple of times a week will bring astonishing results—you will find your ability to write and to speak greatly improved and more than likely you will find tension levels reduced when your communication skills sharpen.

 

 

 

Get Up, Stand Up (6/29/04 No. 2)

            I suppose part of the Champagne Life is knowing how to avoid hell, and while there are, I am quite sure, several manuals regarding this wise effort Dante's Inferno is by far one of the most colorful and enjoyable.   There is something just so steamy, moral, and hip about Dante's hell that one could not find a better stay-out-of-hell educational text for summer.   Today I shall start us with the third canto (where all the really good hell and torture action begins) and throughout the summer it is my intention to sprinkle cantos now and then like pepper…cayenne pepper that is…but do not fear because when it comes to this Italian gent, hell has never been more fun!

            Dante (born 1265), our fair hero and poet, is a pilgrim in search of salvation and helping him as both his guide and mentor is Virgil (a very cool Roman poet born 70 B.C.—the time of Julius Caesar).   In Canto III Virgil and Dante enter the vestibule leading up to the gates of hell.   The din of lamentation even before they enter hell proper is nearly overwhelming.   Dante's gory travel-log of hell is divided into rings—each having its own set of sinners with their specialized punishments.   Canto III is interesting because we meet a class of souls who are so wretched as to being not even admitted into hell.   In Dante's manual for salvation neutrality is the most repugnant of human offenses (lines 34-39):

And he to me:   “This wretched state of being
     is the fate of those sad souls who lived a life
     but lived it with no blame and with no praise.

They are mixed with that repulsive choir of angels
     neither faithful nor unfaithful to their God,
     but undecided in neutrality.

…And if you must know their punishment is bad.   They run round and round naked after a banner (something they never would do in life) and are stung by bees and wasps and all the while they are streaming with blood and pus…pretty rotten stuff.   This is very intriguing to me—that not ever taking a stand is the grossest of all sins—not even hell will take them.   Believe me when I say as you read on, Dante's hell is quite full of men and women who accomplish some terrible feats, however, living a life with no blame or praise is seen as the most high of evil-doing.

            This is hard to take, and as I write to you all now, I believe I understand why it is Dante's special class of sinners and why it is hard to take:   in truth, rarely do any of us find ourselves in the position to be evil dictators or rapers and pillagers, and most of us, I believe, see ourselves as “pretty good chaps”.   And actually, I believe most men and women of this world are all around good folks.   However, a great many atrocities have happened in this world, past and present, instigated by a grim pinch of humanity, and if this is so…where have the rest of us been?

            While it is true Dante did say the neutral folks were not even accepted into hell, and were seen as loathsome.   It is also important to note that he wrote The Divine Comedy ( The Inferno being part I) to be a sort of helpful guide to getting into heaven and that those losers with the pus and bees were actually just about everyone reading his work.   So, apart from suggesting that perhaps we all should stand up a bit taller amongst injustice, we should also be rest assured that Dante (at least it is this writer's humble opinion) really only meant to scare the crap out of us.

Note:   The Dante's Inferno I use is a translation (with commentary) by Mark Musa.   My copy is a 1971 copyright by Indiana University Press.   It is a bitch to find, however, if you are interested in reading the Inferno this is the best translation I have found—both for the language, and the most informative and helpful notes I have ever read.   If you do look, note it is not the complete Divine Comedy only the Inferno.

 

 

Let’s Discuss Our Way Out

 

         Over the Weekend I not only enjoyed beloved guests from out of town I also managed to expand my mind. Throughout the days and evenings my guests and I discussed several issues ranging from abortion rights, Christian fundamentalism, national health care, the diabetes-obesity epidemic, and the war in Iraq. My guests were not only older and wiser than I but also lent several perspectives that my little brain had not realized. On our last day together (shortly before they had to leave for the airport) one of my gentleman guests suggested, as we had to cut short our hot discussion regarding the pros and cons of national health care coverage (he was a heart surgeon that was absolutely for a national health care coverage plan), that I should entreat many others with varying qualifications to come over and hold a symposium. The idea was intriguing, but what struck me even more intensely at the moment was the very idea of the symposium.

         Symposium. Symposium means to hold discussion with several speakers regarding a particular subject (especially before an audience—according to my Webster’s Dictionary). Symposium can also mean a collection of opinions and articles contributed by several persons on a given subject. However, the number three meaning was “a party, usually following a dinner, for drinking and conversation”—in ancient Greece and Rome.

         What if people were to invite friends over for dinner but then express explicitly on the invitation that it would be a Symposium? You would then include on the invitation what subject or topic that would be discussed…say like the war in Iraq or the ethics behind bariactric surgery (the stomach stapling surgery) on teenagers…and then after dinner over coffee and cocktails you and your guests could discuss and speak on the subject. I personally am excited about the venture and I believe that some goodness would come from the practice. I also saw a larger goodness that could arise if more and more people looked back to the ancient Greeks and began to hold symposiums. Too often I believe people are over willing to passively watch others in the media speak and hold symposiums. It is a wholly different exercise to be the one thinking and speaking than sitting on your couch and listening to others (from journalists to politicians) sharing their thoughts. What if more and more people held symposiums?

         I know that over the weekend my mind did expand with subtle and gross pet ideas tossed out or at least greatly challenged. I also realized that sitting down to discuss a specific subject sharpens both the conversation and ideas shared. With the subtle discipline of the symposium a better fleshing out is achieved—versus a rolling thoughtful conversation covering everything from sports to gossip to the environment.

         Now surely I love and cherish those wonderful animated rolling thoughtful conversations—and certainly many great realizations and laughter has come from such occurrences. However, my point here today is that sometimes it is good to focus a bit—to sit down and really delve deep into a particular subject. I have come to suspect that one of our greatest human resources is each other—that perhaps even the seemingly unsolvable can be sorted out with a little focused mental effort amoungst friends, family and neighbors. So, today it is my suggestion that you seriously consider having a few people over for some pasta, wine, and discussion for I think that if more of us embrace the symposium Democracy in its truest most effective sense would be better realized—not to mention solutions to some of our most pressing problems.

 

 

Confrontation (11/8/04, Vol. 2 No. 30)

 

            Today I want to talk about a very delicate and a very difficult topic:   confrontation.   I found myself over the weekend having to do a little of it (actually a rather big, almost-overwhelming dose of it) with a friend, and oddly just the night before I had seen a documentary about Africa and how one culture had managed to tackle this very touchy subject.   While it was very late at night, so my memory for exact details may be minimal, essentially this tribe that lived at the base of Mt. Kilimanjaro had some fabled plant that had many life-sustaining uses.   One of the uses, however, was social…and awfully clever…so much so I truly wish that New England had something similar….   The plant had long, palm-ish sort of leaves that were very flexible.   If, someone in your town had in some way upset you, or if in some way you felt the need to confront this person, but this person was difficult or intimidating to confront then all you have to do is hand them one of these leaves, knotted in the center and then they will know you want to confront them but were to afraid to.   Then the person receiving the knotted leaf knows to soften and welcome the person into conversation.   The knotted leaf was a sort of ice-breaker, or in some cases a red flag…and man oh man do I wish we had this system.

            Unfortunately, while our founding fathers drafted up one heck of a constitution and civil society, they did not, however, come to peg some type of flora or fauna down as being the “hey buddy you're out of line” signal.   Instead, most of us are faced with usually two options with both more often than not requiring each other.   The two options I speak of are:   A. you tolerate the behavior as much as you can and then behind their backs vent everything to as many friends and family members as you can.   The obvious pitfall is that you are often reduced to becoming a petty gossip.   B. you tolerate the behavior as much as you can then finally blow up…usually at bad times in public places like restaurants, parties, or street corners.   The obvious pitfall is that you are often reduced to becoming a crazed fool…often becoming the topic of petty gossip yourself…and giving the offender a much needed advantage in the court of public opinion.

            However, even with all of the pitfalls, confrontation is actually one of the healthiest and often most profound acts of love one human can offer another.   Because in truth, only people who genuinely care about you are really going to bother…particularly when you consider the costs often paid by the person doing the confronting.   One of the costs (as I learned over the weekend) is feeling like the high school principal or worse, like the over-achieving student hall monitor anxiously waiting for someone to get in trouble.   Another cost is making someone cry, which even in the face of immense correctness is never good…it always sucks…which brings me to another cost…actually being too right.   Yes, too right.   Sometimes when you confront someone you find out that things were actually much, much worse that you had imagined (as in my case this weekend).   Then you find what was irritating or somewhat “wrong” was actually far more intense and involved than you ever realized…I believe the cliché “can of worms” comes into play under these circumstances.   Lastly, one of the most involved costs is the responsibility of the confronter.   I assure you, if you are to confront someone than you will be seen as the primary officer regarding the issue.   Meaning, if you tell a friend they are drinking too much then you will quickly be made into the “drinking cop” by your friend, and truthfully by your own sense of guilt.   Now, mind you everyone has different levels of guilt and senses of responsibility, but this very often appears to be the case.

            So what are some good ways to confront someone?   Because I want to say again that confrontation is actually one of most loving and compassionate acts a person can do.   I suppose I can readily think of a few tips—based on both times I had to confront someone and times when someone confronted me—and while it's never great when someone confronts you a few people in my life have done a great job and I will always be grateful for their love for me.  

            Never confront someone when you are angry.   Wait a little.   Collect yourself.   Never confront someone when you have been drinking.   I do not believe I have to say any more.   Try walking with a person as you talk.   This is a good one.   Walking will naturally reduce the amount of adrenaline and cortisol (the stress hormones) in the body.   Walking will also keep a person well oxygenated, which also reduces panic sensations.   And generally speaking moving around helps the conversation to move rather than stall-out into an argument.   Warn the person ahead of time.   Tell the person before you talk that you need to confront them on something.   I really think it is fair that you allow someone to “brace” themselves.   Accept and be prepared for the other person the defend themselves and realize you may not be one-hundred-percent correct in the situation.   Really, really, know what you want to say.   Rehearse the confrontation if you have to, but I think it is important to really know what it is you are upset about…otherwise, the confrontation can just become nothing more than a personal attack, which is neither loving nor healthy.   And this brings me to my last tip, and I think the most important:   only confront people you really love.   This is a big rule.   True confrontation—confrontation that was meant to either repair a suffering relationship or aid an out-of-control loved one (as in the case with substance abuse) is always grounded in love and never grounded in self-righteousness or meddling.  

            Looking back at my own confrontation this weekend I will say I feel a mix of irritation (that the whole terrible event…on such a lovely fall day…had to ever happen), self-doubt (that perhaps I was getting in “way over my head”), and hope.   And while I still feel a little bit of “confrontation shock” (something I am quite sure you all have experienced) the day ended with a warm, long hug and a heartfelt “thank you” from the friend I had finally found the nerve to confront.

 

 

 

 

All Those Little Things (11/24/04 Vol. 3 No.8)

 

            As we near the day of thanks as all writers anxious to take some days off to do not much more than eat, drink, and sleep I too want to write about the most predictable pre-Thanksgiving topic:   things we should be thankful for.   However, I thought that in an effort to at least be somewhat original I would try to point out all the little things in our lives.those unsung heroes, if you will, that make our days run smoothly and comfortably.   So, instead of spending time on being grateful for family, friends, and good health I shall deal with all those little things..

            I am grateful for:

            I am grateful for whoever invented the plastic shopping bag.   For those who live in cities and often have to walk their groceries home, or for those who while drive but still have to climb one or two flights of stairs these plastic-handled dreams are truly marvels of invention.   I can now hoist six to eight bags at a time up the stairs to my kitchen that is on the second floor of my duplex.   In addition to the ease of carrying, the plastic grocery bag is also one of the more important tools of a dog owner:   the poop bag.   Being the proud owner of not one, but two dogs I can say that no bag equals in poop management to the shopping bag.   I have tried fancy store bought bags designed for poop pick-up, however, they were not quite the right size (a little narrow), and they did not have the handy handle, which is invaluable when one is trying to both hold onto a couple of bags of poop and two anxious, not-so-well healed dogs.

            I am grateful for the spiral notebook.   Yes, the spiral notebook.   I am not always the most fastidious person I know-this being the case I find that little metal spiral that holds all of my to-dos and notes together is amazing.   And mind you the spiral is a whole different game than the three-ring binder or the most irritating-the solidly bound, glued notepad in which the glue eventually dries out and all of the pages begin to loosen and then eventually start falling out-but not ever with the snappy spiral notebook.   The spiral notebook, unlike its competitors, can take a beating.   I am noted for dropping things and not picking them up until they have been finely trampled or ran over by cars.   I am also known for accidentally leaving things at restaurants, theaters, and shopping centers and the hidden quality of a humble spiral notebook-unlike the often gaudy and ostentations "professional" line of leather bound three-ring binders and folders encasing glue-bound notepads-is that no one ever snoops, defames, or steals a bright, spiral notebook decked out with puppies or a rearing-up horse on the cover.

            There are also many other even "little-er" things that I find myself (once I give it some thought) extremely grateful:   I am grateful for canned soup.   I am grateful for the genius invention of the giant platter of "Super Nachos".   I am grateful for ice machines, food processors, and microwaves.   I am grateful for the ballpoint pen (have you ever messed around with quill pens?), the Sharpie pen, masking tape, and gift-wrap bows that curl when you run them over the edge of some scissors.   I am grateful for lycra, Velcro, nylon, polar fleece, polyester, vinyl, "space-age technologies", and ultra-suede.   I cannot believe people had to live without supermarkets (the music.the carts.the in-store deli/ bakery.forget about the Olde Worlde), 24-hour stores, microwave popcorn, walkmans, super-instant-deep-conditioning-hair-restorers, table tennis, and diet soda.

            Well, I am quite sure you can all think of many other little things that one should be grateful for, and I suppose that was my objective:   that it is all well and good to be thankful for antibiotics, the artificial hip, and one's loved ones, however, learning to be grateful for all of the things one has come to use, enjoy, and count on can help one develop a genuine sense of gratitude.   Personally, when I began to say a small gratitude prayer before every meal I found my life wholly changed.   That may sound dramatic, but I assure you I am not exaggerating.   The other day I was asked what I thought was the single most significant thing a person could do to change their life and without hesitation (and with some genuine experience) I said,   "learning gratitude."   So, to all my beloved Sailors and Patrons I wish you all a happy Thanksgiving, and I will leave you with a little "homework" assignment:   that sometime over the holiday you sit around with your friends or family and see how many "little things" you guys can come up with.

 

 

Living Without Answers

 

         This marks the end of my weeklong exploration regarding mysticism (or religion) and science and technology. The two books I read and used as a sort of framework for my internal (and many nightly external) debates regarding the Champagne Life and where science and or mysticism should and does play a role were: “The Evolution—Creation Struggle” by Michael Ruse and “The Internet and the Madonna: Religious Visionary Experience on the Web” by Paolo Apolito (translated by Antony Shugaar). Of the two books, I will say they were exhausting and at times so opaque that even after several re-reads of certain passages I was left still trying to grasp what it was they were trying to point out. In the case of the book on evolution, most of the difficulty came from the problem of trying to encapsulate complex scientific theories in just a few sentences and in the book about the religious visionary experience on the Web, I found some of Mr. Apolito’s rationales to be held together by gossamer—leaving me to suspect that he too was not wholly sure of the point he was making. At other times, however, I came to a great sense of synthesis and some illumination regarding our current time of high science and technology and how religion is responding.

         The most curious thing about this week was the sort of gentle depression that arose when I contemplated not only the books’ philosophical and anthropological theories (Michael Ruse is a professor of philosophy and Paolo Apolito is a professor of anthropology—oddly I found in many cases within their books that Ruse was more of an anthropologist and Apolito was definitely more of a philosopher); but I also felt a keen heavy feeling when contemplating my own soul—my own feelings regarding science, technology, religion, and the mystical experience. The friends with whom I held nightly sessions of discussion regarding this subject too felt a certain malaise when contemplating this subject. Very often we found that in our own lives belief in a god, disbelief in a god, and frank unknowing were all woven together forming a sort of tender area in our psyches where we genuinely experienced the real pinch of the unknown. I don’t know. I would like to know. But I do not know how that could be known.

         Everywhere today I hear of many people knowing what, no matter how hard I try, I seem to be unable to know. Scientists know absolutely that all things run on natural order—any and all mysteries regarding the universe are simply puzzles and not problems. Puzzles always, even thought they may seem impossible, have solutions. Problems do not, however, have guaranteed solutions. Problems in fact often do not have solutions rather murky shades of gray from which compromise and sacrifice come into play. People of faith also seem to know absolutely that there is a god and that all things run under his order—any and all mysteries are not unknowns per se but simply acts of god that our measly human minds cannot comprehend (this is a key contrast and conflict between science and religion: awesome power of god + puny power of man versus awesome power of man + the inevitability of nature revealing all of her secrets to man). Paradoxically it is at the Puzzle—Problem worldview that science and religion seem to agree. For the faithful all unknowns are puzzles: which when the time comes will be completely revealed by god. For the faithful the idea of a problem without a black or white solution is sacrilegious. Likewise for the scientist all phenomenons can be (eventually) explained—absolutely.

         With all of that said I have found that life is riddled with problems along with those puzzles. At times the absolute is blessedly at had, but at other times shades of gray are all that is possible. Are my shades of gray a sign of my puny human mind and if I only got with the scientific or religious program would I find great improvements? Possibly, however, I have found that faith must come and cannot be caught and science must be caught and will not come and it appears though I have been at times under the weather from both infections a night of friends, food and bubbly seems to cure me entirely. And with that idea I must leave the scientists and the faithful to their battle and merrily continue my search for the Champagne Life.

         Have a great weekend! See you on Monday.

 

 

A Scientific Peace

 

          Can science ultimately take the place of religion? Can science bring the same sense of peace, comfort, and moral stability to the society of man? These are the questions I would like to discuss today. As part of a weeklong project I have been reading two books in tandem as well as contemplating the conflicts and possible synthesis between mysticism, science and technology. The two books are: “The Evolution—Creation Struggle” by Michael Ruse and “The Internet and the Madonna” by Paolo Apolito. I am nearly finished with both and I have found that spending a week dedicated to contemplating whether or not religion and or science is the best route if one is searching for the Champagne Life can be and has been exhausting and at times oddly depressing.

         One of the key issues revolving around the science of evolution is the discipline’s historical partner: evolutionism. Evolutionism is the philosophy that not only went along with the concepts of evolution but also was in the many ways the propelling force behind the proliferation and acceptance of the theory of evolution. Evolutionism is a progressionist worldview that took the leap from man evolving from “lower” species to the idea that man is continuing to evolve and improve. With that thinking of man on top as the highest endpoint regarding evolution there becomes a social aspect regarding man’s ability to bring a sort of perfect world brought on by superior insight with regards to both moral constructs and scientific achievement. Essentially, death, pain, suffering, etc… will someday all be vanquished—not by a second coming of Christ where he rules for one thousand years and casts away the devil—but by the brilliance of science and human ingenuity.

         Historically speaking scientists in an effort to make evolution a respected scientific discipline distanced themselves from evolution’s earlier partner evolutionism, and by the 1950’s no scientist, at least publicly, was willing to discuss the moral, philosophical implications regarding evolution. Other issues such as WWI and WWII, eugenics and racism (as justified through the concept of an evolutionary hierarchy of greatness—think Nazi Germany as well as the forced sterilizations of the mentally impaired) also brought a great deal of humility and shame to the idea that science and man could bring perfection and that as evolution continues a sort of painful, but important process of perfection will come about.

          Today, although few scientists would admit to being an adherent to evolutionism at many occasions clearly one can see the progressionist ideas behind their views. Additionally, the entire field of sociobiology is in many ways a highly sterilized form of evolutionism as it attempts to explain human society and behavior as it could be fit in the current models of evolution. Other issues such as the aggressive life saving techniques for premature babies are also questioned by scientists—worried that their forced, or artificial survival will bring weak genes to the human race leading to an increased vulnerability and proliferation of disease. And certainly, the newest genetic research absolutely has an evolutionism tone to it—that man can ultimately make a super race, a super world.

         However, telling parents that their premature baby should absolutely be left to die and striving towards and believing in the possible existence of a “perfect human” are two ethically complex issues. And with that thought can science and should science be the decider of such an enormous undertaking? So far, science absolutely votes “yes”. To them religion, government, and the lay person are so utterly under qualified and so sullied with emotion and superstition that there is no way they could possibly make good decisions regarding what is right or wrong in the scientific and technological arena. But is this really true? And in looking at not only science’s track record with regards to ethics can science as a discipline deal effectively with moral and ethical issues as they pertain to the human experience?

         Personally, I do not think so and while I am not sure organized religion is the obvious and best route I will say that while science is wonderful for empirical exploration and empirical, material repeatability science can be cruelly blind to its own ambitions as they affect humans. Early research in the fields of neurology and psychology immediately come to mind where countless children were permanently damaged by their studies. One study from which I have personally seen the film footage was of a one-year-old child that is severely frightened by a loud buzzer every time his mother went to embrace him. Naturally, in time even without the buzzer the child would cry and panic when his mother—then later—anyone would hold him. One can only imagine the enormous damage that was done to the one year old. And while today, there are ethics boards and immense scrutiny surrounding particularly human studies in no way does it provide an internal ethical framework—meaning that the nature and discipline of science does not have an internal ethical framework from which scientists can base their work.

         I suppose I am once again back to my original question: can and should science take the place of religion? Should we put god aside as the provider of peace and hope and place our faith in science—the faith that someday it will be science and not god that will bring about peace and an end of suffering?

 

 

A Frantic Possession of Truth

 

         This week I am reading side by side the books “The Evolution—Creation Struggle” by Michael Ruse and “The Internet and the Madonna: Religious Visionary Experience on the Web” by Paolo Apolito. My intention is not only to explore and contemplate the above texts but to also ask the question regarding the importance or possible hindrance mysticism and/ or science and technology my have on realizing the Champagne Life.

           The curious thing about this current mini-mission of mine is the repeated and unexpected synchronicities I am finding as I go between the two books. Themes such as positivism, apocalyptic thinking, the Christian Fundamentalist movement, and the interface between science, technology and god are dealt with in each text. What is also curious and unexpected with this little “project” or exploration is its overall affect on me personally. What I have found is a notable twinge of both sadness and compassion—particularly regarding the Madonna and the Internet book. Later in the evening I invited a friend over with the intention to perhaps work out or understand the root of my malaise as stirred by reading about the ever increasing incidences of Virgin Mary, Jesus, saints and angel sightings and the fact that technologies such as scientific verification, cameras, video cameras, and the Internet all are playing an intimate if not primary role in these visions. It appears the miracle can be caught and kept inside a camera—which is in direct opposition with the miracle of the past where the experience was usually highly discrete and subjective as the case with St. Paul’s conversion where he was miraculously struck blind and within that moment of panic and rebuke saw the glory of god and of Jesus.

            What I realized as the root of my sadness was the immediate knowing or sensing of the agony of the unknown as it pertains both to one’s personal life and as it pertains to one’s sense of person against an awesomely overwhelming cosmos. I suppose as I read the histories of the Christian Fundamentalist movement and how it was directly born from a defeated, impoverished and humiliated South after the civil war (while there was and is an English Fundamentalist movement the American movement caught on with far more intensity and fervor); and the constant use of technology and need for scientific empirical “proof” regarding visionaries and their visions I came to see not mysticism—not an embracing of the awe and holy mystery of being—rather a frantic need for possession of truth. Truth. Anything. Something. Solid. Fundamentalism does not argue against evolution based on mystery or rather holes in the overall theory; Fundamentalism argues against evolution based on the same logic that evolutionism argues against creation: both see their stance as factual with one camp basing truth or fact on the bible and the other on research. My point is that there is an obvious lack of faith when you establish absolutes as in the case with the bible being a factual document in which will be, as technology and science improves, vindicated. Likewise, evolution too with all of its remaining holes and mysteries is also understood as a fact that will be wholly vindicated when technology and science improves. Additionally, the current visionary movement—a movement that in the past was occupied and propelled on the bases of an intense and passionate faith—is now objectified into an experience to be captured and proven by science. Again, the ultimate truth of god, heaven, angels, the Virgin Mary, and Jesus are simply knowable facts or objects to be some day vindicated as science and technology improves.

            What bummed me out was that in no way do any of these movements (Fundamentalist Christianity, the Catholic visionary movement, or even science for that matter) deal with transcendence. In truth all of them are expressions of the terror of the unknown. Life is unquestionably chaotic and often filled with suffering; however, to seek to objectify and quantify the holy I believe only puts off the reality of the unknown. Whereas finding a mystic practice or philosophical stance that aids one in coping with and embracing the unknown might better strengthen a person and prepare them for the continual and often painful surprises of life on earth. Most importantly what lead to the general sense of sadness was compassion: to read about a gentlemen who is regularly visited by both Jesus and the Virgin Mary throughout his house—including the bathroom in his finished basement (hardly the grotto at Lourdes)—somehow made me feel both sad and touched. To think of how dramatic, and important, and special this man must feel—perhaps a bill not getting paid or a friend diagnosed with cancer is not so bright compared to the Virgin Mary hovering above one’s toilet.

            Finally I would like to leave you all with some questions—questions that I found myself asking as I read both books yesterday: if god is somehow or someway “proven” or captured by some technological instrument does god become an objective phenomenon like the sun or moon; or does god remain just as awesome and holy with the only difference being that faith is not longer required? And lastly, what would be the experience of having a god that did not require faith?

 

 

Apocalyptic Thinking

 

         This week I want to focus on the conflicts and possible marriage between mysticism and science and within those observations I want to ask does either one play in role in realizing the Champagne Life? Does having a sense of the mystic—the magical aid one in life, or does fully embracing the empirical, rational, scientific mindset finally liberate one and lead one to the sweet shores of Champagne Living (a.k.a. enlightenment)? To give this heady question a ground from which to write I have decided to read in tandem two books that deal with the interface of mysticism and science and technology. The first being “The Internet and the Madonna: Religious Visionary Experience on the Web” by Paolo Apolito, and the second book being “The Evolution—Creation Struggle” by Michael Ruse.

          A surprise synthesis happened with my reading yesterday. As I plowed through the first quarter of each book an immediate coincidence occurred for in both books the concept of the Apocalypse played a key role: the early derision against evolution was not so much regarding Genesis and the defense of the early creation stories (there are actually two—both differing from one another—within the book of Genesis) but rather the conflict was more grounded in the belief of an Apocalypse, and the current rise in Virgin Mary sightings (and a general rise in visionary experiences found today) are very often wrapped up in Apocalyptic thinking. It appears that the Virgin Mary is not popping up everywhere to simply say “hello” she is warning of dire times to come and a catastrophic end of the world.

         The reasoning behind the Apocalypse as the one of the key problems Christians (particularly fundamentalist sects) had with evolution was the popular and often guiding philosophy of evolutionism. The early scientists and thinkers that slowly began to forge the theory of evolution also believed that it was possible for man to create a sort of utopia on earth—that man through advanced science, technology, and moral development could eventually solve all of the world's problems and bring about a great golden era. This supremely optimistic worldview did not coincide with the bible’s insistence—particularly in the Apocalypse chapters such as Daniel and most importantly, Revelations’—insistence that man was evil and inept in the face of an all-powerful god and that ultimately we should focus not on a certainly doomed future but on buckling down, sharpening our faith, and wait for the end of times where god avenges himself and rewards the faithful.

          Italian Anthropologist has seen a dramatic upsurge in not only Virgin Mary sightings but also the community of visionary-based Catholics. These people have been able to grow not only in numbers but have also been able to congeal into somewhat of a cohesive group because of the Internet. The fastest growing and largest groups of these “visionary worshipers” (by “visionary” I mean Catholics that claim to experience or follow the people who have claimed to have experienced visions of either the Virgin Mary, Jesus, or key angels and saints) are uniquely American. Paolo sees two reasons for this: one: while the Internet is global it is still primarily occupied and used by Americans, and two: the influence Fundamental Christianity has had on American Catholics.

          The synthesis that I found was not only based on Apocalyptic thinking and how it played a pivotal role in the argument against evolution—whereas the other book I was reading coincidental discussed the rise in Apocalyptic thinking—the synthesis came in the form of an email from a friend. Yesterday, my friend mailed me a link to a news story regarding a current lawsuit in the U.S.. It appears that a school district has decided to include a statement before evolution is taught in their science classes: that of an "intelligent designer". This caused several families to take the school district to court sighting a breach in separation of church and state. So far when checking out the Dover School District’s Website all I see is a posting of their “biological statement”—no other updates regarding the lawsuit are mentioned. The question I kept on thinking was could a significant rise in apocalyptic thinking be tied into a continued battle between creation and evolution?

           For me though, I want to bring the idea of apocalyptic thinking back to the question of mysticism, science, and the Champagne Life. One of the more disturbing aspects is that anthropologists are seeing not only a rise in apocalyptic thinking in the religious community they are also seeing it in everyone else. A constant deluge of world news, general insecurity caused by terrorism, or more accurately, the threat of terrorism, and an absence of any ideological instance in man’s ability to bring about positive change are the key factors anthropologists sight when explaining this doomsday mentality. Personally, the problem I have with apocalyptic thinking is that not only does it remove hope—it removes inspiration. What if the end of the world is not near? Shouldn’t we stop waiting and worrying for some catastrophe and begin striving for a better world?

 

 

The Mystic and the Scientist

 

         I have been searching and writing about my search for the Champagne Life for some time, and I have internally debated the many paths others have traveled and claimed to have found enlightenment or a keen understanding of life, humanity, and the universe. Have I come any closer to wisdom with all of my wandering? I am not so sure about that as I seem to be finding only more questions and more roads, valleys, and oceans to explore. Certainly there have been some great plateaus or resting moments from which I have enjoyed some good perspective—but no real “Ah Ha!” moments in which I see all and am feeling very jolly about the whole experience of seeing all.

         Last week I dedicated my column to morality and meaning and took a little time questioning and discussing the ins and outs of a person today facing moral relativity and a simultaneous upsurge of religious fundamentalism. This week I want to focus on two books which I shall be reading in tandem and using them as touch stones for a discussion about the importance and/ or peril of mysticism versus the importance and/ or peril of basing life wholly on science. To this mission and this question regarding mysticism and science I feel more than a little daunted for throughout time there have been great men and women occupying both camps and in both cases I can see good reason to see them as (at the very least) inspiration, if not map makers, of finding or realizing the Champagne Life. To make matters much more complicated there have been amazing hybrids: people such as Einstein who seemed to have struck a synergy between god and science of the sense of the mystical and scientific.

         The first book is “The Internet and the Madonna: Religious Visionary Experience on the Web” by Paolo Apolito. Paolo is an Italian professor and anthropologist who has written and studied much of the visionary experience. This book takes an anthropological look at how the visionary experience is affected and realized by the Internet. The numbers of Virgin Mary sightings are on a profound upswing—particularly in America—a place where previously there were few. Paolo not only traces the history and effect the Internet has had on this phenomenon but also discusses the phenomenon itself.

         The second book is “The Evolution—Creation Struggle” by Michael Ruse. Michael is a professor of philosophy and has also studied and written about the complex relationship between Darwin and God. This book is an elegant, scholarly, and highly comprehensive look at all the angles and in-between the evolution and creation conflict—including the current struggle with government, the Christian Right, and schools.

         While both books deal with a specific issue both also reflect a curious modern day balancing act: religious mysticism and technology as the case with a growing community of visionaries on the Web; and religious mysticism and empirical science as the classic case of evolution and creation theory. I not only want to discuss the issues both these scholars write about I also want to use these conflicts or marriages between science and mysticism as a sounding board for asking the question: is mysticism part of realizing the Champagne Life? Or, is abandoning it?

 

 

Meaning Morality and Capitalism

 

         You may not know it but there really is a price on your head: FEMA and the government try to keep it to around a million, the airlines go a little higher with around 6 million and many companies offer services to help other companies come up with their own price tag for human life. Why is there a price tag on something so (well…hopefully) invaluable? Risk assessment and cost ratio are the new fates of our world. No longer do humans seek out gods or karma to settle the score of meaning and value today; mathematics are the ethics from which policy is derived. The Yale philosopher Northrop feared as early as the 1940’s that the trend America was going was to cleave to economists for their ruling philosophical direction—unlike our forefathers using the theories of Hume and Locke. The problem with a society based solely on economic theory is that there is no place for the very real human values such as love, compassion, and sacredness. Companies, the government, or the law does not view human life as sacred it views human life as a monetary value and that value is compared to other values and a decision based on a ratio is made.

          The reality of risk assessment and cost ratio is kept away from the general population. It was an awkward moment when a reporter asked the General of the Army Corps of Engineers why they did not build a levy that could withstand a category five hurricane when they knew there had been category fives in the past and most likely there would be in the future. His answer was perfect: “When we did the risk assessment and cost analysis we decided to build the levy we built.” The reporter looked dumbfounded and outraged by not only his response but the coolness—the matter-of-factness of his repose. However, in truth the reporter should have known a little more about the society she lives in. In truth, from insurance companies (including medical insurance) to chemical companies to car manufacturers safety and the human life are a mathematical ratio. Humans in our Capitalist society actually are not invaluable or sacred they have an absolute monetary value, which can be plugged into numerous mathematically driven scenarios, and it is this interplay that decides what is right or what is wrong. If it is more cost effective to pay families the few million every decade or so than to the perhaps millions to make a product less dangerous then the product will not be improved. This is right and wrong in a Capitalist culture. Nevermind that it was cost effectiveness over your child, parent or spouse that was decided as paramount.

         How does it bode for humanity when her current culture bases its meaning and morality on mathematical models—including human life? This is a very complicated question particularly when you consider other disastrous ways humanity has based its value system as in the case with the Spanish Inquisition or Nazi Germany. It is these two examples which lend some clues as to how come we have sought math to sort out right and wrong—math is absolutely blind to race, gender, or religion. However, math is also blind to humanity and all the complexities that lie in the human spirit.

         Somehow, I believe, that we as a society must become more active in the ethical governing of our culture. We have seemed to have swung from one extreme to another and now we need to collectively seek out balance. Mathematics certainly should play a role in risk assessment, however, additional layers of ethics and value must come into play when confronting human life and human value. So, I guess my last question for you regarding meaning and morality is what do you think the implications are in a society that puts a price on your head? I think you all can have a lot of fun with this one…I know I will.

         Have a great weekend! See you on Monday.

 

 

Meaning: The Base From Which We Stand

 

         It has been my goal this week to explore meaning and morality. Why combine the two? Because meaning is the foundation of our values, and our values are what informs, structures, and supports our morality. However, today, in our culture we are faced with a most curious task. Our task is to not only choose or rather decide what gives us, life, and the universe meaning we are additionally asked to see this belief as purely relative—purely atomic. We are not to assume our meaning is the same for someone else, and we are absolutely not to impose our meaning on others. The obvious problem with this system of atomic/relative meaning is that it does not readily engender true faith. Essentially, if our values are based solely on a sliding, floating, and subjective foundation then we are forced to base our value system on a philosophical or theistic ground of jello. On the plus side of this cultural phenomenon is that religious and governmental oppression is greatly reduced allowing for an unprecedented amount of liberty. However, the down side is an ever increasing sense of meaninglessness and moral anarchy—coinciding with an ever increasing moral despotism as found with the current up rise of religious fundamentalism as seen in both the Islamic and Christian sectors (and actually, I would argue that the current neo-conservative movement although a political movement mirrors the traditional behavior of a religious fundamentalist movement).

         A life without meaning or a life where meaning is wholly relative leaves little room for humanity to forge not only a solid value system it also brings an insidious pressure on the individual to create a meaningful life all the while knowing this meaningful life is only for them. And beyond existential woes there are genuine material problems with a society without a collective, concrete meaning. Drug use (both legal and illegal) and rampant poverty stemming from teenage pregnancies (overwhelmingly the majority of the 37,000,00 people living below the poverty level are single mothers with children—and of that group teenage pregnancy is almost always the root event) are two obvious banes that have risen in this era without meaning. Credit card debt and isolation are also more subtle fallouts where consumerism, disconnection and work have supplanted internal fulfillments such as love, connection, and family.

         Is there a solution? Can we as a society bring meaning back into our culture without returning to oppressive social and governmental values? Well, many leading philosophers, politicians, teachers, physicians, and psychologists are all creating solutions to this problem. One such person is psychologist Dr. Kirk J. Schneider. Dr. Schneider in his book “Rediscovery of AWE: Splendor, Mystery, and the Fluid Center of Life” not only writes in detail the problems today rooted in a life without a concrete foundation or meaning he additionally provides what he think is the cure. His theory is that we must learn and actively practice ‘living in awe’ or living with a sense of humility and wonder towards life and the universe. This practice he believes will return a sense of dignity and meaning to people—which in turn will cause people to forge a solid value system or morality. This solid value system or morality would not have to be atomic for it sidesteps the usual theistic problems of a morality based on religion. In his book Dr. Schneider sees his “AWE” platform as being implemented not only personally, but also socially in the workplace, the government and in our school system.

         How does one practice AWE? And to this question Dr. Schneider claims that opening up group questioning and participation along with a rigorous sense of needing to see ‘the whole picture’ would engender an ever-increasing sense of meaning and wonderment in society. For me personally, his vision is strongest when discussing ways to infuse his “AWE” in the school system—I appreciated his sense of impressing upon children how things are interconnected. However, I must admit that having some sort of “AWE committee” in the White House sounded a little fruity to me. Again though, I did appreciate the value in building forums within all public sectors that encourage people to step back and see how their actions and decisions interconnect with the world—versus the current myopic methods of politicians and corporations today. Essentially, Dr. Schneider believes that if we can build a society that explores how their actions will impact the whole system—the environment, children, people, the society as a whole, and other nations then we would forge as a society, a meaning based on humility, wisdom, compassion, and wonder…AWE.

         Dr. Schneider is just one of many who are currently tackling the issue of meaning in our lives and in our culture. It is surely a complex topic…one perfectly suited for good friends, good wine, and a warm kitchen. However, as someone who has faced her own profound existential dilemmas I will attest to the fact that when one is thrown into a moment of acute meaninglessness the pain is sincere and can be lasting. I suppose that even this column is rooted from my own quest and ultimate haunting of wanting and needing meaning in a world where traditional theistic foundations are ever-increasingly difficult for a person to build upon. So, I suppose today it is my hearty suggestion that you gather some time and maybe some friends (one will do) and open up the question (carefully): What is the meaning of Life?

 

 

A Medical Exception

 

 

         Last week I found myself reading a whole batch of new releases from my library, and unexpectedly I found a curious pattern regarding the tone of each “call to change” and that was an urgent cry for a solution to our current societal phase of atomic morality and foundationless meaning. Essentially, the fallout from a continuous push for ever increasing moral relativity and personal versus collective meaning, industrialized man has found himself rudderless and without foundation. The end result is a society that is violent, depressed, and dependent on continuous stimulation from without. Moral relativity was born out of several things from an increase in scientific understanding as seen in the birth of industrialism as found with the ushering in of the Enlightenment bringing in Newton and Locke to ever change man’s relationship with not only God but with King and law. The backlash to The Age of Enlightenment did little to allay the austere mindset of pure reason with only ideas such as heroic will as described by the ever romantic Nietzsche whose reply to a godless/ foundationless society was a society that simply was bold. The Modern Era traumatized by two World Wars would continue to see meaninglessness in existence and not much would improve through the Postmodern Era in which irony, the past, deconstruction, and ironically (little philosophical humor—though accurate usage) the morality of moral relativity would utterly flatten both meaning and morality to a land of immense personal pressure where each human is required to be his own savoir.

         With all this in mind…and lately a great deal in my mind…I have decided to dedicate this week to discussing the nature and our current woes and status regarding morality and meaning. Today, I want to discuss a burgeoning morality that appears to somehow flourish in a culture that holds the morality of moral relativity—meaning that it is morally wrong to impress your moral views onto someone else—has simultaneously risen. There appears to be an exception with all of this relativity and that is the morality of health. While I am not supposed to judge anyone for their religious, sexual, marital, ethno-cultural practices, or uniform I am fully allowed and encouraged (I’ll get to the current trend of communal censure with regards to health morality in a minute) to judge others regarding their health.

         Certainly, one could go a lot of directions regarding the morality of health from the inquisition—stockade quality of public and governmental censure to the actual philosophical and historical exploration of the morality of health. However, for today’s discussion I would simply like to explore how or why this morality—the morality of health has somehow managed to sneak by the moral flatland of today’s society—how we cannot judge a clearly sexist or racist religion yet we can publicly call out, discriminate, humiliate and legislate against someone for jeopardizing their health whether through smoking or obesity. And quickly I will note that this is a case of morality and not simply economics (though that too is a morality all in its own—which certainly would be great fun to explore) for every leading economist that has explored the cost ratio for smokers has found without a doubt that smokers do not cost any more than non-smokers. Any argument claiming they do is solely used for manipulation used for driving home a moral preference. In every economic model of smokers they found that smokers actually balance out because they die so early—which means it balances out in the end from not drawing on Social Security, Medicaid or other resources. Basically, the non-smokers who live longer end up costing just as much and burdening society in kind to the earlier dying smokers.

         What we are left then, when removing the economic moral, is something quite different and that is the moral of health: that being health is morally correct and risking one’s health is immoral. What makes this prominent moral even more interesting is that in its twenty-first century incarnation it is without its historical meaning. You see, traditionally morals were grounded in some type of meaning—this assured their ability to have some “teeth” with regards to being adhered to. With the idea of the body being the temple of god or in the Greek case with physical health as being part in parcel with the ideal of being a complete man health had a deeply rooted foundation that man could lean upon when faced with temptation. However, the new health morality does not have an obvious foundation—apart from the cry of expense or economics. In the case of smoking the economic reasoning though unfounded is often used as a foundation nonetheless, but where this foundation does seem to have the most teeth is in the case with obesity and its most expensive complication Type 2 diabetes.

         Again though, I wanted to dig a little deeper to the issue of health morality and why it was able to rise out of the murky moral waters our society swims. Certainly, a morality based on economics is a heady and concrete topic, and I do see it as inexorably tied to the health morality, but there appears to be a great deal more intermixed. I believe that part of the fervor is actually the product of a moral vacuum: meaning that in a society that must put up with an inability to impress moral values, the satiation of being able to censure a smoker or an obese person is incredibly fulfilling. Which raises some interesting questions: could a morality be based or rather its foundation to be based on simply the need for man to have one, and is public censure an instinctual part of the human animal that must manifest regardless of cultural preferences, and lastly is public censure necessarily part of morality?

I realize that after all these words, thoughts, and questions I have not really answered the question: how is it that health morality amongst the era of the morality of moral relativity been able to not only flourish but gain continual public and legal power? My answer would be twofold: that economic morality is gaining power and that the human collective ever increasingly is basing its moral decisions on cost-effective models and that the one thing that binds a completely multi-cultural society is our health—essentially we may not all have the same gods but we do all die and to make death immoral then we can return to the tribal comfort of control. With control being one of the most fundamental palliatives humanity—throughout the ages—has sought. And I somehow believe with that last sentence a clue regarding man, morality and meaning is being realized.

 

 

Breaking Reality

 

         There are two fall shows on television that I believe are reflecting a greater change/ exchange in our culture—rather, in our intellectual culture that will in many ways trickle down to our political, social, and personal culture. The key issues are the nature, quality, and value of psychology and the nature, quality and value of ethics and morality. Psychology more than ever is being questioned and inside of the discipline many key psychologists are penning large critiques of both their own discipline and of their colleagues’ styles. Morality and ethics are facing their own critical showdown with religious leaders, philosophers, politicians, physicians, psychologists, and yes even architects writing and lecturing regarding how a multi-cultural, pleuristic society in a consumer based culture is to figure out what is right and what is wrong. I will say I have been studying these books and have come to see that not unlike the civil rights movement of the nineteen sixties soon another revolution of sorts will come to pass—and this revolution will be about finding a way to get a culture based on immediate want and supreme narcissism—a society that now needs copious amounts of drugs to continue and that reports more violence, depression, and emptiness than ever before—to a society that has a deeper sense of not only meaning but right and wrong. Bringing up the civil rights movement was not simply to make a point of cultural revolution. For one of the fallouts of the civil rights movement was a movement of moral relativity such as the world has never seen. Hyper tolerance or a sense that “every body is right” and that meaning and morality must wholly be an atomic human experience has forged a world without foundation. We are all expected to adhere to meaning and morals without any foundation beyond our own personal proclivity, and furthermore we are told that our meaning and morals are not only applicable to ourselves personally, it is morally wrong to impose them or expect them on someone else (even in the case of parent and child—parents are not longer supposed to ‘impose’ there values onto their children). Surely, there were and continue to be many positives of atomic meaning and morality and it has offered a society of great personal freedom and less religious, gender, and racial oppression, however, the new call is to strike a better balance between meaning and moral relativity and utter moral anarchy and meaninglessness.

         This week I want to explore meaning and morality. Today I want to talk a little about two new fall shows that so beautifully (albeit unintentionally) illustrate the enormous changes of dialogue and social policy up ahead. The two shows are UPN’s “Morality Court” and VH1’s “Breaking Bonaduce”. “Morality Court” is genuinely one of the more fascinating shows I have encountered in a long time—so much so that a little club (of sorts) is forming in my living room to watch it. It at first looks a lot like the format of a small claims court TV show (like "The People's Court") however it is not. Though they do use a real judge the issues are absolutely regarding morality—right and wrong—and I will tell you some personal (and if you too form a little club) and public debate ensues. The key to this show is that the judge still must grapple with the reality of moral relativity and a libertine society—yet somehow he marvelously comes to a ruling—bringing a sense of satiation greater than would be expected. There is just something so satisfying to witness something that has for so long been considered a taboo—and that is boldly proclaiming someone is MORALLY wrong. What else makes this show deeper than what you may readily expect is that the judge gives his reasoning or the path he took to come upon his judgment. Classical ethics on T.V.? Hurray—what joy!

         The second show that gorgeously illustrates this upcoming social debate and revolution is “Breaking Bonaduce”. “Breaking Bonaduce” is another installation of VH1’s “Celebreality” where minor celebrities are the focus of otherwise traditional modes of reality T.V.—placing the “Celeb” part as the key to making them special. All in all I have found these shows to be of recreational value (apart from cultural anthropology) only. However, “Breaking Bonaduce” is the first reality show that I believe breaks with traditional reality and leaves the viewer in an odd space of wonderment, compassion, and thrall. Essentially, the show revolves around Danny Bonaduce the redheaded child star of “The Partridge Family” fame. Danny is now a successful radio personality—and is quite frankly, unraveling. The nexus of the show is his psychotherapist’s office where not only he but also he and his wife attempt to put Danny and their marriage back together or perhaps not “back together” but to prevent it from falling apart.

         What makes this show complex and beyond voyeurism is the active questioning. For atomic morality and meaning surely breaks down with two units—two humans trying to relate. Other complications such as substance abuse and infidelity are thrown into the mix—not to mention Danny’s consistent violent outbursts and frustrations with not only himself and his wife but also his therapist with one of his constant moanings “our marriage was pretty good until we started going to a therapist” and (as he yells at his therapist) “what are you doing to my wife?”. What makes this show work is that while his transgressions of drinking, drugs, and women are easily to immediately judge his critiques of therapy are more subtle and complex and sitting through one of their “assigned lunches” where they were instructed to go out to lunch together and “just talk” one can see some problems. For once the couple was assigned to share and talk they found themselves self-consciously quiet and stilted. With Danny again pointing out that in all their years of marriage they never had a difficulty talking—but now suddenly that they are instructed to do they cannot—with his wife holding back tears and insisting that it is Danny and not the therapist that is to blame—heavy stuff to be sure and not so easy to decide. Is there actually a delicate level of intimacy that married couples can actually withstand and is there a possibility that counseling could actually do more harm to a relationship than good with its inherent prejudices and values? All heady questions to be sure and ones that remarkably are brought up in a little ol’ Teeevee show.

 

 

Life as Discipline

 

         Today I want to talk about the seventeenth century Japanese classic “The Book of Five Rings” by Miyamoto Musashi. It was written in 1643 and continues to be considered a core text for reigning and aspiring leaders. I was first introduced to the book some time ago by my Tai Chi instructor. He heartily recommended we all read the book and sighted Kennedy and Nixon as two presidents who were big fans. Finally (as of last night) I sat down and read the martial art instruction book—and realized that (as the author himself implores) the lessons a warrior must learn are lessons we all should regardless of our vocation. The book itself is short—my translation came in around ninety pages—and took me just a few hours to read. With this in mind it is my suggestion that over the weekend you make some good quality tea, sit in a quiet place and study the ways of the warrior. Personally, while I felt the whole book was amazing there were some moments that caused me to sit up straight.

         “Stabbing the Face” The whole point of “Stabbing the Face” is that as you are dueling with your adversary you are to keep thinking of stabbing him in the face with the tip of your sword between his blows and yours. This will cause your opponent to try to get his face and body out of the way. Know that when you manage to get your opponent to shrink away you have already won the battle—immediately go in for the kill. Now certainly (unless one is training to be a warrior) the principle of “Stabbing the Face” can be (and should be) applied in life symbolically. The point is the power of intention and the weakness of shrinking away. If in conflict you hold the intention of out-witting them between the verbal debates that intention will cause your opponent to begin to stammer, shrink, and hold back. When that happens you know you’ve won.

         “Crossing a Ford” The section (as the book is divided into five scrolls containing several small sections—each covering a martial technique) “Crossing a Ford” was one of the more poetic and profound sections. It is indeed brief, as all of the sections are, but the information packed in the lines is worth a good lifetime of effort. In “Crossing a Ford” the warrior is instructed to move through life whether it be on the battlefield, a peaceful village, or a one on one duel as though one is a ship’s captain crossing a ford. One should move steadily, economically, and ready to adjust to what ever the conditions of the sea bring—however, all the while one must understand it is simply crossing the ford. This without a doubt reveals the Buddhist tendencies that pervaded much of the warrior’s philosophy and science. It reveals a worldview that senses an unchanging universal oneness or emptiness with phenomenal experiences as being simply waves in the ocean and nothing more. This little section alone I am quite sure could take up a lifetime of contemplation and discussion amongst friends—and yet still there was something utterly wise and comforting when one considers to adopt this warrior’s lesson.

         “Infection” This lesson I believe is one of the more easily adapted martial lessons one can utilize in their personal and professional life—unlike “Stabbing the Heart” or “The Body Blow” (though still I suspect over time deeper wisdoms would be found in even some of the more overtly martial lessons). Taken from the text, translation by Thomas Cleary: “In large-scale military science, when adversaries are excited and evidently are in a hurry to act, you behave as though you are completely unfazed, giving the appearance of being thoroughly relaxed and at ease. Do this, and adversaries themselves are influenced by this mood, becoming less enthusiastic.” Essentially, the lesson of “Infection” is just that—our moods and behaviors not only affect the people around us but are often copied. If we want the situation in the room, whether it be your kitchen at home with your family or in the boardroom, we need to be mindful of “Infection” and exhibit the emotional-physical state you want others to have. This, my friends is a devilish little weapon…I absolutely encourage you all to try it out on friends, family, and that neighbor who hates your dog over the weekend.

         This is all I have room for…the lessons are many and as you can see they are amazing. Again, I heartily encourage you all to pick this little masterpiece up over the weekend. However, as I immediately realized last night—while it may have only taken a few hours to read, the genius economy is such that it will take a lifetime to absorb.

         Have a great weekend! See you on Monday.

 

 

Diabesity Part III: Solutions for the Future

 

 

         This marks my final column regarding the obesity-diabetes epidemic. For the past two columns and the one today I have been covering the extremely authoritative and comprehensive (this book is appropriate for both laymen and medical practitioners) new book “Diabesity: The Obesity-Diabetes Epidemic That Threatens America And What We Must Do to Stop It” by Francine R. Kaufman, M.D. I first want to say that this really is a book that all Americans should read—particularly parents and absolutely anyone who is overweight. Dr. Kaufman is one of the leading diabetes specialists in the world and has dedicated her life to the disease and to the prevention of the disease; however, it is the point of prevention that I found for the first time myself seriously questioning some of her worldviews and ideas. Today I will be discussing some of her ideas as well as bringing up some of the more grave implications her solutions bring. Issues such as legislation, litigation, school-social responsibility, race, class, and personal responsibility along with current lifestyle realities and optimal lifestyle choices are all involved in confronting this current scourge and upcoming epidemic—an epidemic that can be stopped primarily because while Type 2 diabetes is a chronic and deadly disease it is also unique in that it is almost always one hundred percent avoidable. Type 2 diabetes is no TB or meningitis where infection can strike anyone—Type 2 diabetes is intimately connected to lifestyle.

         Where I had the most issues (for the first time) with Dr. Kaufman’s tone in the book is where she discusses the importance of both legislation and litigation. I simply cannot see justice or a free society existing when people can sue a food company alleging that that said company is responsible for making them fat. Additionally, I have a hard time with the so-called “junk food tax” where items such as soda or candy is taxed like cigarettes because they are dangerous. Both litigation and legislation to me foster a government and a society that denies the importance of personal responsibility and personal freedom. In some cases as in banning soda from public schools I do see some of the justice and logic, however, adding a “junk food tax” is the beginning of the government deciding what I should or should not ingest—ultimately leading to what I can and cannot ingest—an idea that gives me night sweats for this freedom loving girl.

          Community and social support solutions such as increased awareness, measures to make safer outdoor areas for children and adults to exercise (there is a tragic story of one of Dr. Kaufman’s patients who was in a poor Latino neighborhood—she was shot in the stomach twice while trying to get fit—only to find herself in the cross fire of a gang war), revamping school lunches, bringing more marketing to fruits and vegetables, and working with employers to develop and adopt health fitness programs in their companies—programs that have been proven to save millions in dollars due to increased performance, less sick days, higher moral, and a dramatic decrease in health care costs—are all part of what Dr. Kaufman believes can help alter our society and stop the epidemic from exploding beyond our ability to deal with it. For the reality is that right now the society we have collectively created is killing us and our children and if we do not find ways to weave exercise and healthy, whole foods into our day to day lives than we will see an obese, chronically ill society.

         Personal choice is the final pillar in confronting this disease and is one that I believe Dr. Kaufman put too little emphasis on—and yet I could see by her years of professional experience why. For middle class grown-ups I would say—shape up—period. However, the issue of obesity and Type 2 diabetes becomes extremely complicated when you take into account poverty and children. How can we protect children from parents who continue to feed them junk food? How can we tell an impoverished parent to buy fresh fruits and vegetables when they cost profoundly more than shelf-stable foods that are filled with salt, sugar, and fat? Rapid spoilage, lack of refrigeration, expense, and safe places to walk, ride a bike or play are all profound complications for poor people struggling with obesity and diabetes. And yet, I still could not help but wonder that if personal responsibility and personal choice are fostered and encouraged would we not see better long term results—perhaps even leading to the type of self-empowerment that would be required to take back a neighborhood held hostage by violent gangs? It is not my intention to suggest that we abandon our most vulnerable Americans, however, developing programs that foster personal responsibility seem to me as important as programs that provide medical assistance.

          All in all I think this book is a must read for every American. You will be moved, saddened, and in the end I believe you will find yourself debating (as I did) as to how we might stop this impending nightmare. Type 2 diabetes is an extremely complicated and expensive disease to manage. It requires a team of doctors and specialists in order to keep one patient alive and functioning. An epidemic of Type 2 diabetes has the potential to collapse not only our medical system but also our economy—a generation of handicapped adults who contracted Type 2 diabetes as children will not be able to work or contribute to society—additionally, the complications brought on by diabetes are expensive and chronic. Amputations, blindness, kidney failure, stroke, and heart attack are some of the long-term affects of the disease. Currently, more and more obese children are being diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes including young adults, and people in their thirties and forties (ages that are still traditionally very young for this disease that used to only affect the elderly). It does not take much of an imagination to see what kind of country this will be if we do not seek to end the epidemic of obesity and diabetes.

 

 

Diabesity Part II: The Reasons Behind

         Today I will be discussing the second part of the book entitled “Diabesity: The Obesity-Diabetes Epidemic That Threatens America—And What We Must Do to Stop It” by Francine R. Kaufman, M.D. Part I of the book dealt with the actual reality of the disease and the ins and outs of treating it and living with it. Part I also discussed the built in problems of children contracting such a management intensive disease such as Type 2 diabetes. In part II of her book she delves deep into the reasons behind this current crisis and mounting epidemic. She divides the “Evolution of Our Destruction” (as she aptly names her part II) into three main issues: thrifty genes, abundance, and Type 2 diabetes abroad.

         Now certainly we have all heard of our genes—our DNA and how this little spiral staircase creates what we are—and some even argue that it creates who we are as well. Type 2 diabetes and obesity are diseases that are currently being attributed to the idea of the thrifty gene. Essentially, cave man had to survive in a dangerous world were food supply not only required a great deal of activity to acquire it also was unreliable. In addition to periodic famines the food early man ate was lean, very high in fiber, and absolutely unprocessed. In time as the technology of agriculture evolved man gradually had more leisure time and his food choices became more refined. However, nothing like the mechanization of today has man experienced and the genes that allowed us to survive so many hardships are now participating in our demise. Today the Pima Indians are a classic example of the thrifty genes. Pimas endure the highest rates of Type 2 diabetes in the world—and indeed Type 2 diabetes does have race specific issues—people of African or Native American decent (including Latinos) have a much higher chance of contracting the disease. This is due to their thrifty genes that were evolved from living on more difficult to survive lands; Europe was more easily farmed and had less frequent incidences of famine, hence, Caucasians do not have as “thrifty of genes”. However, in the case with the Pimas we see clearly the issue of genotype versus phenotype. The Pima tribe was split up between the U.S. and Mexican borders. The Pimas in Mexico who still live relatively close (in diet and activity) to their ancestors enjoy long healthy lives and fit bodies. However, the Pimas in the U.S. are chronically obese and an overwhelming percentage of them contract virulent Type 2 diabetes. The difference is that the Pimas in the U.S. live the American lifestyle with regards to diet and activity and this lifestyle combined with their extremely thrifty genes has proved to be a deadly combination.

         Pimas, however, are not the only ones affected by this land of plenty and neither are African Americans—Caucasians too are suffering in staggering numbers and at increasingly younger ages of obesity and Type 2 diabetes. Dr. Kaufman discusses the advertising model that was implemented in the seventies with Mc Donalds and then with nearly all restaurants and that is enlarging the portions. What marketers realized was that increasing portion sizes was actually extremely profitable. People would consistently return for the “increased value” of getting more product for the same amount of money. The cost of increasing the size was lower that the boon of more sales; the main costs such as advertising, staff and restaurant costs, and packaging remained the same. The author fondly remembers when sodas were, on average, served in a 6-ounce portion. Now, the smallest drink you can get is 12 ounces. Besides enormous portion sizes in restaurants another key problem is that America is not cooking her meals anymore. People are still eating a great deal of their meals at home, but the meals are not what they used to be. Take-out, frozen, or heavily processed, pre-packaged foods have taken over fresh fruits, vegetables, meats, and whole grains. The result of our land of plenty is proving to be utter disaster—and now sadly it is not a later in life payment—even our children are dying and suffering from the American Lifestyle we have collectively created.

         Now, this American Lifestyle is no longer simply a problem for Americans. With the proliferation of American television and food chains people in some of the more unlikely countries are beginning to suffer from obesity and Type 2 diabetes. Europe, a place that is also a land of plenty, is indeed beginning to see obesity and Type 2 diabetes rise at an ever-increasing rate. However, places like Africa, India, and China—places that have more struggled with poverty and starvation in the past (and in the present)—are paradoxically struggling with this new epidemic. China’s and India’s major cities with the abundance and technology to allow for a similar lifestyle to that of Western nations are now seeing large numbers of people with obesity and Type 2 diabetes—including children. Even in places such as Ecuador Dr. Kaufman is seeing increasing numbers as the people replace their native diets with imported Western and American foods. The key problem with these places and Type 2 diabetes is that they are woefully unprepared, under funded, and overwhelmed to deal with the intense micro-management necessary for Type 2 diabetes—a disease that requires constant blood sugar testing, medication adjustment, and doctor supervision—impossible things for even relatively advanced places in India and China. All along with the ironic twist that many of these developing nations are simultaneously dealing with poverty, starvation, and malnutrition.

         Tomorrow, I will be concluding my series on “Diabestiy: The Obesity-Diabetes Epidemic That Threatens America—And What We Must Do to Stop It” with a discussion on how this current crisis might be managed and perhaps even fixed.

 

 

Diabesity Part I: The Stark Reality of the Condition

 

 

         I am currently reading “Diabesity: The Obesity-Diabetes Epidemic That Threatens America—And What We Must Do to Stop It” by Francine R. Kaufman, M.D., past President, American Diabetes Association, Professor of Pediatrics at The Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, and Head, Center for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. Today I want to discuss the first half of the book in which Dr. Kaufman describes the disease and life after being diagnosed in exact detail. Tomorrow I will be discussing part II of her book in which evolution, genes, and our world today is discussed and on Thursday I will be finishing the series with a part III dedicated to the medical-social issues surrounding this epidemic including hopeful solutions to this impending medical crisis.

         I will begin by saying that this book was personal for me—diabetes has intimately touched my life—both my father and his brother have it and their father not only had it but died early from it. I was around ten when my father received his diagnosis and at the time I really had no idea how serious or what it meant to have Type 2 Diabetes. Even now, while I know it is a serious disease I had no idea how complex and life-invading the treatment (and control) of this disease really is.

         “Experts now predict that more than one-third of American children born in 2000 will develop diabetes in their lifetime….” That is a scary statistic and it becomes even more frightening when on learns how enormous the effort is to keep a person with diabetes healthy and alive. Dr. Kaufman writes in painful detail the reality of a person’s life with this disease from meticulous and constant blood sugar monitoring throughout the day—including keeping a detailed diary of food intake, activity, sleep, sugar numbers, and amount of medication taken—to continuous checking of ones feet for stones or sores, constant vigilance with regards to diet, and constant medical monitoring for medications to properly be adjusted to the patient’s current weight and activity level—for any mistake in this precarious balance called treatment and the person can become gravely ill or even die. Now, you take all this in consideration—all that it takes to keep from going blind, amputations, dialysis, heart attack, seizures and other complications caused from hypoglycemia, and stroke and asked a ten year old boy to do it. That is a big—big problem.

         In Dr. Kaufman’s long time professional experience she has watched a disease be formally known as “Adult Onset Diabetes” to simply Type 2 Diabetes because of the ever-increasing amount of children being diagnosed. Already, she has found that it is difficult to get people in their fifties and sixties to do all the work it takes to stay healthy with diabetes and with children—and particularly teens it has been a major difficulty getting the patients to follow all of the instructions as carefully as necessary. Throw poverty and public schools into the mix and the plot thickens into a social-ethical-medical nightmare.

         After reading the first half of the book I came away with not only a highly detailed understanding of both Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes but also the reality behind having the disease. It made me not only promise myself to stay fit and healthy, but also gave another dimension to my feelings regarding my own father and uncle—both whom I love dearly—and whom I had no idea what a life-altering thing it is to be diagnosed. This is not just some complication related to being a little chubby and growing older—diabetes is truly a terrible disease and to think of one third of our population contracting it—many of them children is truly saddening.

         It is this level of understanding of the stark, tragic reality of children (and adults too) getting the diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes and Dr. Kaufman’s own unbelievable compassion that make this book and the reader able to forge ahead see still the importance and beauty of life—even with diabetes and search for cures and solutions for better managing the condition. Diabetes is going to be a reality for many families and indeed for many people personally. I was proud and amazed by Dr. Kaufman’s tone of compassion, science, and non-judgment and even as she sees obese parents bringing in their obese children only to be diagnosed with a disease that should never have happened to a children. She puts judgment aside and goes straight to scientific and social answers and solutions. I applaud her with this route and felt inspired to adjust my own mind set in this manner.

         Tomorrow I will be covering part II of “Diabesity” entitled “The Evolution of Our Destruction” where Dr. Kaufman discusses the evolutionary causes of our predicament, our current society of abundance, and Diabesity around the world.

 

 

Fear and Ghosts

 

         Over the weekend I finally had the opportunity to see one of the more controversial movies made and quite frankly I was mystified by the world’s response to this spare, lush haunt. The movie is “The Brown Bunny”. It was written, directed and produced by Vincent Gallo and starred Mr. Gallo and Chloe Sevigny.

         The movie’s notoriety was launched by a ruckus, mixed response at its debut at Cannes and only picked up steam in the press. The filmmaker responded in kind and a massive wave of derision and gossip surrounded the film. Now that the dust has settled the movie can now be seen—for it was only sparely distributed throughout the U.S.—and took some time to get a distributor for DVD rentals and sales. The three most bandied about criticisms was the filmmaker’s narcissism, a “real” sex scene (the scene was not “acted” rather genuinely performed), and a too slow first half. Within all the criticisms were loads of curt interpretations as to what the movie was about and why the maker made it.

         The movie I saw was nothing like its press. What I saw was a terrifyingly accurate portrayal of impotence—not sexual—but a brutal portrait of humanity in its non-super hero reality. So often we insist on our collective myths whether in film, novels, or television that when the hero (particularly the male) is confronted with evil he will find some superhuman strength and save the day—both save the endangered party (ies) and completely handle all of the ensuing trauma with humor, vigilante like anger (leading to more heroic acts no less), or romantic bravado. With this movie we are left with a more terrifying—yet true—image. In The Brown Bunny “Bud Clay” (played by Vincent Gallo) was paralyzed when his defining trauma met him and found he could do nothing. In the aftermath, his non-action turned into profound emotional isolation—which is one of the more honest, accurate realities of what happens in the wake of experiencing true regret and the reality of our own impotence to prevent or halt tragedy.

         The gent friend I saw the movie with was utterly stirred by the truth behind male fear and we both agreed that there was an even deeper universality behind being frozen both in the face of a horrific moment and in the mourning process after. Ultimately, what I found “outrageous” was that this film was so controversial. In an age with so many distortions of the human conditions—myths that only continue to reinforce a deep sense of inner failure—that display human heroism as one of action only—I was surprised and refreshed to see a franker, more accurate portrait of being.

                           The movie does have a graphic sex scene and absolutely should not be shown in the company of anyone under eighteen. As for the other criticisms I found little merit. I really couldn’t comprehend the filmmaker as being narcissistic—if he was some gun-slinging vigilante—maybe. However, for Mr. Gallo to portray a character such as “Bud Clay” I had a hard time believing he did it for self-aggrandizing purposes. And as for the famed sex scene, I found nothing outrageous about it—in fact it was refreshing to see the modest sparseness of the human animal versus the superhero bedroom antics we are usually shown in movies. But it is particularly the derision for the quiet, contemplative first half that I disagree the most —for that was the redemption—the cool breath that pushed this movie beyond simply being frank. For in Bud Clay’s solitary, painful trek across the U.S. we see his ultimate redemption. In reality, though becoming a haunted vessel can be painful and lengthy it is our way out. Nature will reclaim her ghosts properly, however, only after we’ve endured a good haunting. Being a super hero only delays and puts off the rattling of chains and slamming of doors.

 

 

…but you don’t

         Often…so often…we think we know.

         Lately, I have been settling for the first time into Rumi. Rumi was a thirteenth century Muslim poet and scholar. His work is compared to that of Shakespeare in its sophistication, scope, brilliance, beauty, and wisdom. To all of this I would heartily agree for even just an hour spent with his work (a mix of poetry and prose) one feels utterly satiated. One poem in particular stood out for me (at least for now…I have a feeling that like Shakespeare his body of work will possess many turns and changes as time passes). The poem is entitled “There’s Nothing Ahead” and I believe holds within its span a lesson that just might change one’s entire life.

         “On the way you may want to look back or not,
           but if you can say, There’s nothing ahead,
           there will be nothing there.”

         Above is one of stanzas from Rumi’s poem. For me it sunk wholly and deeply and I came to see (almost in an instant) that if those few words were to be embraced one would find enlightenment not far away—one would have surely found the Champagne Life. Of course I have read and heard many gurus espouse the importance of living in the moment and realizing that one really does not know the future—yet somehow the lines “but if you can say, There’s nothing ahead, there will be nothing there” struck me deeper than ever. I suppose it really hits with the last line of the stanza: there will be nothing there. There will be nothing there. To think of the future in those terms, for me at least, finally drives home the reality of time, worry, hope, dreams, and the way in which we plot our lives. How often do we ignore the present only to worry or predict the future? In truth our future is always in a state of “nothing there”.

         Certainly I believe that we in many ways create our future and that does come with some planning, hard work, and gamble, but to lose sight of the reality that in truth no one really knows the future—is to lose sight of our real point of power—the present. Indeed, Rumi sees that reality as well—particularly with the important line “but if you can say, There’s nothing ahead” which implies an even deeper layer of wisdom—that we must participate in the present and in our world outlook for it to be wholly true and realized. Seeing the future as empty also leaves an incredible amount of freedom for one to build upon, which further dovetails the idea of belief, creating one’s reality, and a truly empty future. Removing worry, doubt, fear, expectation, preconceptions, and everyone else’s prognostications allows for a lot of room to create and experience one’s present—which is really yesterday’s future.

         “about the future. Forget the future.
           I’d worship someone who could do that!”

         It is this stanza that I believe makes Rumi a genius and not simply espousing nearly obvious wisdom and that is his compassion and understanding of the human condition. Trying to put the future into a healthier more accurate perspective is an ideal, however, know too that it is a very lofty and difficult one. For even Rumi acknowledges that to be able to forget the future puts you on a very—very—high level of being. This too is a wise lesson: that it is fine and good to have high ideals but it is equally important to keep them into perspective. To attain perfection is to become a god, and while for some that goal seems utterly plausible for most, however, just trying to be a good person is challenge enough. 

 

DESIGN your future: part I

 

 

       

         “Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things” by William McDonough and Michael Braungart is a moving book about how things were, how things are, and how things could be. They are not your ordinary environmentalists—they actually want to work with big companies, are not so sold on the effectiveness of recycling, and do not think “use less” is a workable option. Instead, they want to wholly transform how we think of making, selling, and re-making things: they want to change our current “cradle to grave” model of consumption to “cradle to cradle”. And this transformation has already proved itself possible today with buildings that actually generate surplus energy and fabric that can simple be thrown on the ground and be used (after it’s initial life) as nutritious fertilizer.

         William McDonough is an architect and Michael Braungart is a chemist and together they have forged not only a business relationship, but a visionary one as well. Together they have constructed a philosophy and appending vision of abundance, health, beauty, and growth. It was fascinating reading an environmental book that was not all doomsday and did not suggest severe sacrifice on the part of humanity (including withholding from having children) in order for the planet to heal. Quite contrarily, both authors insist that with intelligent design we humans can have our cake and eat it too—we can have a world with economic growth, convenience, luxury, beauty, and—and, yes, a healthy planet.

         “Reduce, reuse, and recycle” is absolutely the battle cry of most environmentalists, however McDonough and Braungart insist that that model is essentially only delaying the inevitable whereas their model cradle to cradle or waste equals food stops environmental destruction completely. Reduce, reuse and recycle essentially tells companies to try not to grow, it encourages often dangerous applications of waste materials and downgrades materials versus upgrades.

          The first traditional tenet—reduce—is contrarily to our entire economic system which depends on growth for continued success and profit. Also, the need to request the population to reduce can often prove too demoralizing to have any lasting success. Most importantly, however, is that the problem with “reduce” is that it entails that manufacturers are not actually cleaning up their act or making safer products rather they are simply making less of them which eventually will lead to the same human and environmental health issues as before.

         Reuse, the second major tenet for traditional environmentalists, also brings with it some serious problems. The key example the authors use is that of using plastic soda bottles for clothing fabric. At first when this product was invented and announced, it was touted as a great environmental breakthrough. The plastic bottles were finely shredded and made a polar fleece like fabric. However, the authors point out that those soda bottles were never made or considered with this application in mind therefore and while they proved to be relatively state in their virgin or original form when they were processed into cloth they “off-gassed” many toxic chemicals to people therefore making the clothes extremely dangerous to where. Additionally, these bottles were not meant to be finely shredded and worn against human skin. The friction would also release toxic particulates onto the wearer’s skin making the “eco-friendly” clothes actually toxic dangers.

         Recycle is the last and most holy of traditional environmental thinking and for the authors of this book, should be seen as only crudely effective and in most cases causes more trouble than good. First off, like the example with the plastic soda bottle fabric many things that are currently being recycled were never designed to be recycled and reused and therefore often produce dangerous to people and the earth products. Additionally, for all of the trouble and expense of recycling the products are always downgraded into something less strong and valuable (not to mention toxic). These second lives of bottles, aluminum, and paper are often brief leaving the product to end up in a landfill with recycling only delaying the problem and not solving it.

         Essentially, it is this final point that the current dogma of the environmental cry “Reduce, reuse, and recycle” merely delays a deadly problem and does absolutely nothing to solve it. And in some cases the tenets can prove more harmful to humans and the environment than if they were not employed. McDonough and Braungart are not, however, all gripe. The book is actually an up-beat call for change with re-life solutions and an incredible vision for the future. Tomorrow, I will be bringing you their rebuttal and solution to current environmental thinking.

 

 

The New Fall Issue Has Arrived…Finally!

         Finally, it is here and while I must blushingly admit that it is a tad late in no way is it the lesser for it. This issue is again, one of our finest, and I have many people to thank for making this issue possible. First I would like to say thank you and hello to the people at Laurent-Perrier who have officially signed on as sponsors for The Better Drink. I remember the first time I had the good fortune to enjoy a bottle of their finest back when I was a sophomore in college…it was actually given to me as a birthday present by the magazine’s co-founder, Dr. Timothy Smith,…little did we know the gesture would eventually lead to a full-fledged adventure called The Better Drink! In this issue Aimee Cronin writes about Laurent-Perrier’s newest image driven by the beautiful images of famed French nature photographer Jean-Baptist Huynh. Definitely check out his amazing work in this issue’s feature.

         Dr. Timothy Smith lends a generous hand in this issue with a great interview over the phone with the Executive Chef of Long Acre House at Westport Rivers Winery, Kerry Downey Romaniello. Tim said he had a great time speaking with Ms. Romaniello, and I believe you all will enjoy reading his informative piece regarding food, wine, and life as a chef. Tim also writes another great Arts and Sciences article regarding corked wine—I know I’ve had to pour out a few bottles. New contributor John Euclid nicely rounds off our sparkling wine section with another great wine review. In this issue John takes on the clever new “minis” of wine packaging. Also, check out our Industry News column where a current Wines of Spain event is posted.

         Our First Person section is wonderful this time around with Sandy Mitchell presenting a novel approach to meeting someone for the first time, and Peter Hammer giving us an exciting, nearly averted international incident. Both are exceptionally talented writers, and I am proud to have them printed side by side in our Hellogoodbye column. Our Passion Forum is truly heady as our West Coast Correspondent Paul Donaldson writes an interesting piece about his passion for Systems Dynamics. I personally have had the good fortune to speak at length with Paul regarding this subject, and I not only encourage you all to read his piece but to also investigate the subject. Better Drink favorite Suzie Sims-Fletcher returns with yet another amazing piece—this time she writes a touching Life Before Ten. And lastly, our loyal and very talented staff writer David Sirois writes a chilling piece for “Under the Goldlight—true tales of drinking champagne”. This is a must read and not for the tender hearted. I am proud of his honesty and courage regarding the subject of the seamier side of a night of drinking.

         Our Art & Literature section for fall is filled with good reads…perfect timing as we slowly move indoors. The Marcia Reed Virtual Gallery exhibition is a first for this magazine: it is a group show made up of artists represented at Art Attack a gallery in Somerville, MA owned by Heather Somershein. The work is a wonderful representation of what Art Attack shows. I would like to not only thank Heather but also all of the talented artists who agreed to share their work with us all. The artists shown are: Cheston Gasik, Russell Freeland, Stoicho Nikiforov, Tarryn Soderberg, and Vincent Mac Loughlin. The Fiction section is filled this fall with new to The Better Drink writer, Sheri Mc Gregor. Her piece is entitled Warmth and is a great piece of writing. Our Film in Review section is absolutely excellent, and I want to thank all of its contributors. Anna Luciano gives an honest and in-depth review of “ An Unfinished Life”. Ian Detlefsen gives a great and informative review (one only a first rate movie fanatic can) of “Sin City”. And long time Better Drink supporter, Dave Brown, writes a wonderful “Closet Classic” encouraging all of us to check out (and how to view—no less) the movie “The Limey”. The poetry section is (I must modestly admit) filled with poetry from my very—very—best friend in the world Rose Tolstoy and (I must now admit to blushing) a poem by yours truly, Jennifer J. Barnick. It was nerve wracking to put one of my poems in our popular Drinker’s Poetry section, and I now have a renewed sense of compassion for all of the bold and brave Better Drink contributors.

         I would like to give a special thank you to my parents and to Dr. Timothy Smith’s parents who have generously loaned us time, money, and loads of support for the magazine. Additionally, I would like to thank Felisha Foster for her enthusiasm and support in the “behind the scenes” side of The Better Drink.

         Most importantly, however, I would like to thank all of our loyal readers who come back every issue and celebrate the Champagne Life…and speaking of the Champagne Life the brand-new adventure begins on Wednesday, September 28!!! So, please join me as I continue to explore the near and far and everywhere in between—earnestly seeking the sweet, golden shores of the Champagne Life.

         September 26, 2005

         Jennifer Barnick, editor