Live the Questions

2007-02-26T19:40:00.000-05:00

Make me feel good, rock 'n roll band, I'm your biggest fan

Stories from General Anna and Ruby K's California adventure

Saturday and Sunday:

The first day of our trip was harrowing, but in the end, our persistence was rewarded.

When we arrived at JFK for our flight, the airport was a madhouse. Folks whose flights had been cancelled for the past three days due to the winter storm + teachers and NYC students on the first day of vacation = mass chaos. It was somewhat like one of the movies I show for my course on genocide where a huge mass of refugees, their worldly possessions on their backs, are all desperately trying to escape their war-torn country. Except these were people trying to go skiing or to the Bahamas.

We did make our flight, which was held for an hour due to the chaos. As we were sprinting through the terminal towards our gate, I heard the faint strains of Chariots of Fire. During the flight we played an interactive trivia game with other passengers (on our touch screens). Ruby and I dominated several rounds, duking it out for first place, when some interloper from seat 31A joined the game and beat us both with his knowedge of obscure geographical locations.

When we arrived, we got our rental car and zipped North (that was my first "I'm not in Kansas anymore" moment; great views driving up the peninsula on 101) to my friend Teo's house, picked him up, and headed over to Golden Gate Park to meet my friend from college and her fiance. The weather was unseasonably warm-- in the high 60's-- and bright and sunny. We sat on the gorgeous lawn outside of the Conservatory of Flowers and then took a walk through Golden Gate park, past primeval--looking groves and ponds, a mini-rave with lots of stoned college students, the new Asian art museum, and a really cool fire-dancing performance which was accompanied by a fantastic drumming circle. Very California. We joked that we'd seen it all and could go home now. My college buddy is a professional ballroom dancer, and her fiance works at Google, so we enjoyed hearing about their respective professions (for very different reasons).

We returned to Teo's awesome apartment on Haight Street. He's not quite in Haight-Ashbury, but pretty close, and his apartment has a balcony with a great view of the cute gingerbread houses that dot the city. We put our bags down and relaxed for a minute or two before heading out in Teo's Prius (Priuses are so cool!) to Fisherman's Wharf for some seafood. We walked around Fisherman's Wharf, trying to settle on a restaurant and tourist-watching, and then ate at The Blue Mermaid.

Sunday we slept in and waited for Ruby's lost suitcase to arrive, which it finally did. Then, we were off to Haight Ashbury for brunch (mmmmm... banana walnut pancakes) and a trip to Amoeba, the largest independent record store I've ever been in. It had a fantastic selection, and we browsed and left with quite a nice stack of exciting new music. I strolled around the area, which is (predicably) filled with funky clothing stores, tattoo parlors, coffee shops, head shops, and other "countercultural" spots. It feels a little sad to me that the hippie counterculture has now become a mass marketing scheme for tourists, but if you don't think about it then it's still fun.

We drove down Lombard street (Teo is an intrepid driver and the hills do not phase him) and over to Coit Tower, which sits atop a hill overlooking the bay, both bridges, Alcatraz, Treasure Island, etc. It has phenomenal views as well as a whole set of communist WPA murals of various California industries on the bottom. We snapped lots of photos of the city. The weather has been fantastic so far, so we've been really lucky. We also walked over to Telegraph Hill in search of the famous parrots, but they had gone to roost elsewhere. The flowers are in full bloom, especially cherry blossoms, so just walking around the greenery was beautiful.

I insisted on a stop at Pier 39 to listen to the sea lions barking at each other. They had a photo exhibit showing how the local marine mammal folks save injured or sick sea lions. Although it's sad that they need these elaborate rescue schemes, it was pretty cool to see how it is done.

Then, we met up with a group of Ruby's college friends for dinner in Chinatown. It is the beginning of the lunar new year of the boar, so there were random firecracker blasts at various points, but other than that dinner was uneventful but yummy. I got to browse the poetry section at the City Lights bookstore and bought a few volumes of poety, including Lawrence Ferlinghetti's "Coney Island of the Mind" since it is his store, after all. Amiri Baraka is doing a reading there tomorrow, and I was a bit sad that we are missing it.

Monday and Tuesday:

The past two days have consisted mostly of looking at really beautiful views. We've taken two rolls of film in two days...

On Monday, we drove down to Monterey through rolling hills and farmland out of a Steinbeck novel. It is fantastic to see fields stretched out as far as the eye can see. We stopped in Gilroy, the garlic capital of California, to buy some garlic-themed products, including a garlic lolipop, which we have not tried yet.

We met up with NH3 and his wife J at their home and then drove downtown to the Monterey aquarium, where we marveled at the luminescent jellyfish, the giant, deformed-looking sunfish, and very wise-looking sturgeon. I even got a "guide to environmentally sound fish consumption" so now I know what to eat and what not to eat. Click here to see the guide-- it's great!

Then, we drove the scenic drive (it is actually called that) down the edge of the bay, stopping to ooh and ahh at huge cypress trees strategically placed at dramatic points on craggy seaside rocks. It was great to have the time to catch up with NH3 and J. NH3 is finishing up his thesis research on underwater submarine detection technology (it's pretty cool--something to do with focusing sound waves to do echolocation/ radar with them) and then moving back to Newport RI in the fall. They also have a very cute puppy, so we had a great time playing with him and taking turns trying to tire him out (it was impossible, however). As befits a Navy Puppy, he is extremely well-trained and has been a star student at puppy obedience school.

Tuesday morning, we headed out fairly early and drove into Big Sur on Highway 1. Of course, the views are absolutely phenomenal-- just breathtaking the entire way-- and we had to train ourselves not to stop at every single turnout to get out and take photos. We still have probably 20 pictures that are variations on the amazing coastline scenes.

We stopped at Andrew Morel state park and took a lovely short hike down to the beach area. We passed through a grove of cedar trees (they smelled good) and first noticed one, then, two monarch butterflies-- then, the whole grove exploded with butterflies! They were apparently roosting there on their migratory path. The beach was gorgeous and we just stood around and looked at the view before heading back to the car.

We had lunch at Nepenthe, a restaurant with perhaps the most amazing view of any restaurant I've ever been in, and a name to match. (Nepenthe is the magical liquor that makes you forget all of your troubles and stresses.) Huge hawks kept soaring overhead as we ate our burgers.

Then, we drove on to Hearst Castle, the summer home of William Randolph Hearst. Wow. The guy owned tapestries that had belonged to Louis XVI, decorated his walls with 14th century gothic choirstalls, imported the fragments of an ancient Roman temple to make the facade for his outdoor swimming pool, used gold-encrusted tiles on the floor of his indoor swimming pool, had an indoor movie theater which seated 90 people, created his own zoo on the property, and owned 45 miles of the California coastline at one point. The castle consists of the three "bungalows" (2000 square feet each) and the main house. It was a marvel of excess. He jumbled everything he had together with no respect for period or context-- a 16th century Spanish painting next to an Art Deco statue, etc. But it was fun to see. No one should ever be that rich.

In the realm of simpler pleasures, we drove to a spot on the coast where hundreds of elephant seals, harbor seals, and sea lions all hang out. The elephant seals are humongous-- some over 2 tons! The most impressive thing was the noise they all made-- they barked, roared, squealed, screamed, sang, yodeled, and made other noises I really can't describe. Hundreds of seals all talking to each other all at once was deafening.

Then, we drove to Cayucos, a little beach town, and spent the night here at a great B&B. Since we are not spending anything on lodging the other nights, we decided to splurge a little bit and stayed at a lovely one-- which we got a great deal on since it is off-season. We had a suite to ourselves, with a balcony and everything. The suite was sweet.

Wednesday and Thursday:

Our friend W successfully defended his dissertation yesterday and in return received a T shirt that says, "Trust me: I'm a doctor."

We arrived in San Diego yesterday at around noon to meet up with W's family and friends before the defense. We all got to watch his presentation on his research on interluken 1-beta and how it interacts with cell membranes. It had lots of colorful diagrams of spirally-looking proteins. That's really about all I can tell you about the contents, but apparently it was good enough for a PhD. We had a little reception for him afterwards and met some of his colleagues from his department. Then, the whole family descended on a Mexcian restaurant and celebrated with margaritas and enchiladas.

The day before yesterday, we woke up, took a brief walk on the beach at Cayucos, and settled in for our longest drive yet. We drove to Santa Barbara and stopped there for lunch and a quick tour of the Mission, which is supposed to be one of the largest and most beautiful on the central coast. I was pleasantly surprised by the positive attention in their exhibits given to the talents and cultural heritage that the Chumash Indians had BEFORE the Spaniards arrived. As always, my favorite part of the cloister was the garden. The main church was painted in bright rainbow colors and patterns and smelled of incense from that morning's Ash Wednesday service.

We drove on to Los Angeles, singing along on the way, and encountered some famous LA traffic. ( :We got to Santa Monica Pier by around 6pm and checked out the scene on the pier. The solar-powered rollercoaster was closed, much to my dismay, but we played games in the arcade for a few minutes (I won mad tickets at skee-ball) and then went to meet our friend M from the NHC. We met M at a fantastic Mexican restaurant where I had the best tamales I've had in a long time. My cousin J met us at the restaurant and we all caught up.

Ruby went off to see Houston Persons, a famous saxophonist, at a local jazz club, and I went with J to meet her boyfriend, who seemed cool in that chill California-style way. Ruby met up with us later that evening and we all chatted for a bit longer before we collapsed at J's.

Friday and Saturday:

We are getting gloomy because tomorrow we have to get back on a plane and return to the frozen north. Yesterday, we had a chance to check out Los Angeles. We hadn't yet met Ruby's friend's new fiance, who lives in the city of angels, so we arranged to have lunch in LA's farmer's market. While it bore no resemblance to an actual farmer's market (it was definitely the cleaned-up, fancy-schmancy Hollywood version) it offered many choices for food and a good place to meet up.

After scoping her out (and calling our friend to tell him that we approved) we walked over to the La Brea tar pits. According to the map I had, "Park La Brea" was in between the market and the tar pit museum, so I decided that it would be a lovely half hour walk through the park. Unfortunately, "Park La Brea" was an exclusive gated housing community, so we had to walk around the outside. Very LA.

The tar pits themselves were just smelly ponds, but the museum was very cool. They've found an incredible number and variety of fossils and preserved remains in the pits, and we got to see the skeletons of mammoths, sabretooth cats, giant sloths, camels, wolves, and all kinds of other crazy huge mammals that apparently used to roam southern California. One of my favorite parts of the museum was the lab and workroom, which had huge glass windows so that spectators could see the scientists cleaning and preserving the fossils. Ruby got very emotional about a diorama of a baby mammoth watching helplessly as its mother was sucked into the tar pit. It really made me happy that I wasn't alive when the sabretooth cats were hanging around.

Then, we drove up to Hollywood since neither of us had ever seen Grauman's Theater or the Walk of Fame. Frankly, we were underwhelmed. They were setting up the red carpet walk for the Academy Awards and it seemed like much ado about nothing. Other tourists were busy snapping photos of themselves walking on the red carpet. We did check out the foot and hand prints of our favorite actors. It was worth it to be able to say that we'd done it, but neither of us was impressed.

Then, we headed over to my friend JG's home for shabbat dinner with her and two other friends in town. She hosted us for a lovely and delicious dinner and we chatted about how to create incentives (especially monetary ones) for companies to do the right thing. JG is a social worker specializing in end-of-life and geriatric care, and I am always inspired by her work. We stayed up late catching up.

This morning, we headed back to San Diego-- our final long California drive-- and met up with Ruby's friend S. and her husband and new baby for lunch in Old Town San Diego, which is supposed to re-create the Mexican mission atmosphere of ...well... old San Diego. Then, we went with W&W (that was a lot of W's!) to the San Diego Zoo, and headed straight for the tapirs, much to my excitement. They were so cute! And they had a capybara as well. We enjoyed the well-designed zoo, and since we were there later in the afternoon, many of the animals were waking up from afternoon naps and getting active again.

Along with other friends of W&W's, we got food for dinner and sat at a picnic table at the beach to eat it. There were tons of stars out and the crashing of the waves was very relaxing, although we were freezing. ( : It was a good way to say goodbye to California...

Best story of the trip:
We were scheduled to leave SF for Monterey early on Monday morning so we could hang out with NH3 and his wife Monday afternoon. However, Ruby K decided that he wanted to return to Amoeba records to buy a couple of CDs for W&W, our San Diego hosts. When we arrived at Amoeba early Monday morning, it was closed.
Ruby poked his head into the door and motioned frantically to one of the clerks on the opening shift. The guy came over and asked, "Whaddaya want?" Ruby made his plea, insisting that he knew exactly which two CDs he wanted. The clerk looked skeptical, but asked, "Which two albums?" Ruby told him that he wanted The Coup's new record and another album. The clerk shrugged and walked toward the shelves, saying, "I'll see what I can do." At this point, another Amoeba worker scurried over to Ruby and said, "You know who that was, right?!?! That was The Coup's former guitarist!" Ruby got the CDs.

2007-01-07T17:45:00.000-05:00

Thoughts on Systemic Change and Parshat Vayechi

This shabbat I was struck by the coincidence of two encounters, one with a fellow Department of Education colleague and one with the Torah portion. In Parshat Vayechi, Jacob blesses Joseph's sons Ephraim and Menashe. Joseph assumes that Jacob wants to give the "right-hand" or primary blessing to the elder son (Menashe) and positions his sons in front of his blind father so that Jacob's right hand will rest on Menashe's head. However, Jacob crosses his hands and lays his right hand on Ephraim's head, giving him the primary blessing. When Joseph tries to correct him, Jacob acknowledges that what he has done is unconventional, but that it's correct, and that he made a deliberate choice to bless Ephraim.

At shabbat lunch, I spent a good deal of time ranting about the New York City Department of Education with several other teachers and one DOE administrator. All of us complained of powerlessness in the face of such a huge bureaucratic system; we all griped about feeling that our hands are tied due to mandates that dictate our priorities, methods, instructional values, and materials, even when they run counter to what we understand to be solid educational choices. The most high-profile example, of course, is the growing emphasis on high-stakes standardized testing due to the No Child Left Behind legislation. What was most disturbing to me was that the DOE administrator had the exact same complaints as the teachers; he also felt totally powerless to make choices different than those dictated to him by legislation, the central DOE offices, etc.

All of this made me admire Jacob greatly. Old, infirm, and blind, he was presented with a situation in which the system of primogeniture had been literally laid out before him. He was expected to behave in a certain way, to uphold certain societal norms and priorities, and all he had to do was stretch out his hands right in front of him. The system "set him up." No one could have blamed him had he blessed Menashe with the right-hand blessing even if it had been destined for Ephraim.

But he didn't. He crossed his hands, and with that simple act, he bucked the system, transformed his grandsons' fates, and ensured that the future would turn out as he wanted it to, not the way that the system had ordained. Jacob took a seemingly-inevitable fulfillment of his obligation and transformed it into an active choice in which he was able to envision a new and different future. He did have to defend his decision against Joseph's questions (and implicit condescension toward his dying father), but his decision was ultimately upheld.

How many times are we presented with choices that we think have already been made for us, situations when we could easily abdicate our responsibility by saying, "That's just the way the system works. I can't do anything about it"? Let's hope that we can be encouraged by Jacob's example and cross our hands every once in a while. Let's hope that we can all find the strength to stop taking the system and our own powerlessness for granted and instead find the situations in which we can make a bold moral choices that affirm our visions of the world.

2006-12-17T00:02:00.000-05:00

What do Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik and Arlo Guthrie have in common?

D’var Torah—Vayeshev 2006

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, a leading 20th century theologian, commented that last week’s torah portion, this portion, and next week’s portion all prominently feature a mysterious “ish” or man. Last week in vayishlach we read about Jacob’s nighttime battle with a nameless ish. Next week, Joseph’s brothers, unaware of his true identity as they beg him for food, will refer to him as “the man.” This week, we read about another nameless “ish.” Jacob sends Joseph on his fatal errand to check on his brothers in Shchem, where Jacob thinks they are pasturing their flocks. When Joseph arrives in Shchem, they are nowhere to be found. While Joseph is wandering the fields searching, a man finds him. This conversation ensues:

The Man: What are you looking for?
Joseph: I’m looking for my brothers. Please tell me where they took their flocks.
The Man: They left. I heard them say that they were going to Dotan.

I would add to Rabbi Soloveichik’s drash that in this week’s parsha we also have a mysterious isha or woman, in addition to the ish. In order to obtain justice for herself and to continue her dead husband’s line, Tamar disguises herself as a cult prostitute and sits by the roadside. The Torah makes a point of telling us that when Judah sleeps with her, he has no idea who she is. When Judah’s friend returns with payment for the “isha,” she has disappeared. They are dumbfounded until Tamar appears in court and reveals her true identity.

So what are the connections between these figures?

First, they all represent encounters with an Other, a being or person assumed to be distant from the self, family, and community. In two of the cases, those of Joseph and of Tamar, the mysterious Other turns out to be a member of the family, an intimate part of the self. In the case of the ish who Jacob wrestles, we never really know his true identity—was he an angel? A manifestation of Jacob’s own psyche? Here we have the theme of the person who is seemingly an Other but is revealed to be intimately connected with the self.

Second, in the case of the ish and isha in this portion, both of the interactions are perfunctory encounters in which the person is objectified. The man in the field at Shchem is just that—some guy who gave Joseph directions. To Judah, Tamar is just some kedesha, a cult prostitute, he meets along the roadside. The ish or isha is just an object, someone of use to the main character, but, at first glance, not significant as an individual.

However, these two incidents are intimately connected to some of the grandest and most crucial events in Jewish history—the Exodus from Egypt and the establishment of the Davidic Kingdom. Peretz, one of the twins born from the union of Judah and Tamar, becomes one of the ancestors of King David, and therefore of the messiah as well; according to traditional accounts, the messiah will be “ben Partzi.” So Tamar’s actions result in the birth of King David and the establishment of the Israelite kingdom.

How does some guy in the field giving directions relate to the Exodus from Egypt? Well, to explain that I’ll have to retell a dvar torah that I heard from one of the great rabbis of our generation, Arlo Guthrie, at a concert. Guthrie pointed out that the Exodus really all leads back to that man standing in the field. Had Joseph given up on finding his brothers and just headed back to Jacob, the story of the Jewish people would have been very different. Joseph never would have been sold into slavery by his brothers, never would have gone down to Egypt, never would have brought his family there, and thus the Jews would never have been enslaved in order to be redeemed. And, as Guthrie said at the concert, it was all due to one man standing in a field saying, “They went that way.” Joseph himself emphasizes that every step was part of God’s plan; when his brothers apologize to him for selling him into slavery, he tells them, “Even though you meant harm to me, God meant it for good, to achieve his present end, the survival of many people.”

Traditional commentaries pick up on the importance of this figure. Rashi, the 11th century French commentator, states that the man is actually the angel Gabriel, while Midrash Rabbah on Genesis says that Joseph actually encountered three angels, based on the fact that the word ish is repeated three times in that passage, thus drawing a connection between the men who announce Isaac’s birth to Abraham and Sarah and Joseph’s encounter in the field.

What is an angel anyway, and why is it important to the rabbis to designate that this man standing in the field is actually an angel? First, the rabbis are responding to some curious details in the text. Note that Joseph does not ask the man “can you tell me where my brothers are?” but rather “tell me where my brothers are” and that the man does not have to ask who Joseph’s brothers are or what they look like—he knows. That seems to indicate some supernatural funky stuff going on.

However, I also think that if we consider the connection between all of the mysterious Others in these parshiot—all of the “ish”es and the isha, that in their insistence on identifying this man in the field as an angel, the rabbis are actually saying something about the possibility for humans to be messengers of God and instruments for bringing about God’s will.

The most common Biblical term for angel is malach, which comes from the root for messenger—a messenger of God. So by definition, an angel is someone acting as God’s messenger. Here’s where Rabbi Guthrie comes in. That random guy in the field, nameless and mildly helpful, actually ends up having a dramatic effect on the destiny of the Jewish people. His small gesture of kindness, giving directions to a lost stranger, becomes a key part of a chain of events that results in the fulfillment of God’s plan.

It often seems Pollyanna-ish and overly idealistic to believe that we have the power to be a force for positive change in the world. This story does not deny the fact that we are all tiny cogs within our society, and that our ability to make direct, sweeping change is limited. It does not overestimate our power. Instead, it reminds us that the long-term, distant consequences of our actions may be more powerful and more significant than we could ever dream.

This story also pushes us to recognize the innate possibility for power in those people we encounter in our daily lives—the checkout clerk, the person next to us on the subway. It cautions us not to see them merely in relation to ourselves, but rather as potential world-changers and great deed-dooers.

Here we have two seemingly random encounters with a nameless other, and both turn out to be crucial events in determining the history of the Jewish people. In both cases, the Other is actually a malach, a messenger of God, an instrument of God’s will in the world. So here’s a double blessing for this week: First, may we be able to recognize that the person, the ish or isha, who we encounter in a seemingly meaningless, day-to-day way, may actually be a malach. Secondly, may we be able to understand the ways in which we ourselves, despite our seeming insignificance, can be malachim.

2006-09-14T19:23:00.000-04:00

Ann Richards z'l

Hope there are motorcycles and nasty Republicans to berate in heaven! (No, actually, I'm pretty sure that nasty people of any political persuasion aren't supposed to end up in heaven.) While Ann Richards was not the first woman elected governor of Texas (Ma Furguson, 1924) she was the second, the most progressive, and certainly the most feisty. Outspoken and brave, she sponsored some controversial but ultimately successful programs, like the "Robin Hood" plan to make public school funding more equitable, and a substance abuse treatment plan in Texas prisons; she appointed record numbers of women and minorities to her administration. Before being governor, she was a junior high school teacher (which probably prepared her for dealing with badly-behaved members of the Texas legislature), raised four children, and won a battle with alcoholism. Apropos for a Texas woman, she was always perfectly coiffed. She was politically active up until last spring (when she was diagnosed with cancer) stumping for Dean and later Kerry during the last presidential election. Ann also had some of the best lines EVER, including the famous, "Ginger Rodgers had to do everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels!" and, of George H. W. Bush, "He was born with a silver foot in his mouth." Because she was governor of my home state when I was just becoming aware of politics, she's always the first image that comes to mind when someone says "governor of Texas." Thank God, because if Rick Perry came to mind, I'd probably go crazy. Ann, we'll miss you.
Great photo

2006-08-21T10:31:00.000-04:00

Sometimes even the rabbi is at a loss...

I was tickled by this funny story from the Talmud. Anyone who has ever felt lost or uncomfortable when asked to do a ritual act in an unfamiliar community can identify. It also has a good moral at the end-- that observation and attention can get you out of many a tight spot.

This story is related when the rabbis are trying to figure out what the kiddush (blessing to sanctify the day done over a cup of wine) on shabbat day is supposed to comprise. Since the day is technically sanctified on Friday night, what is the purpose of the Saturday kiddush? What should you say? They basically decide that it just needs to consist of the one-sentence formulation "Baruch atah... borei pri hagafen" "Blessed are you. . . creator of the fruit of the vine." However, because this kiddush is so short (especially when compared to the Friday night kiddush) it is euphemistically called the "Great Kiddush."

This is my own translation and I tried to be literal except where it was absolutely necessary to add in [information you needed to understand the story].

Pesachim 106a
Rav Ashi happened to be in Machoza. They said to him, "Sir, make the Great Kiddush for us." They brought him [a cup of wine]. He thought [to himself], "What is the Great Kiddush?!?!? All of the blessings [i.e. for kiddush] begin with 'borei pri hagafen,' so I'll say that first. He said, " . . . borei pri hagafen" and he drew out the words [until] he saw an old man sit down and drink. He said to himself, "A wise man has eyes in his head." (a quote from Ecclesiastes)

hehehehehehehe

2006-07-04T09:13:00.000-04:00

Stuff that Should Be Self-Evident

Try reading the Declaration of Independence today. I promise that it will surprise you if you haven't read it since US history in high school-- or even if you read it last year. Plus, the language is beautiful.

The Declaration of Independence

2006-07-02T11:39:00.000-04:00

Over the river and through the woods . . .
In common parlance, the word "Talmudic" has come to connote reasoning or argumentation that is excessively arcane, esoteric, convoluted, hair-splitting, etc.
I just started a summer program in which I am studying Talmud every day, and my overwhelming sense is quite the opposite.
Just as a differential equations textbook would be arcane and esoteric to someone who had not studied some math, Talmud is certainly daunting and seemingly-irrelevant to those not engrossed in Jewish texts. Obviously, many sugyot (discussions) in the Talmud are also highly concerned with the specific details of observance or law, because that's the Gemara's basic job-- to explore what it means to live day-to-day while trying to follow the principles and rules established in the Mishnah.
In the past few days, I've really felt how folksy the Talmud is, how mundane-- how much the materials collected in the Talmud are a product of the everyday discussions and disagreements of a group of (albeit very intelligent and learned) guys.
For example, when a rabbi hasn't explicitly stated an opinion about a particular topic (or even sometimes when he has), the discussion sometimes tries to figure out what he thought by bringing anecdotes about him. One of my favorites from Friday was from a sugya about whether or not a "taste" from a plate that has been used for one type of food will transfer to different hot food that is later placed on that plate. The story tells that a rabbi goes to his grandfather's house (the grandfather also being a great rabbi). Grandpa rabbi's eyes hurt, so grandson rabbi prepares him an ointment in a bowl. Later, grandson rabbi brings grandpa rabbi stew in the same bowl (presumably after it's been washed) and Grandpa complains, "Even after all this time I can still taste the ointment!"
Doesn't this sound like your grandpa?
The Talmud is filled with little stories, petty arguments and ego plays, domestic dramas, and the details of day-to-day life... not "Talmudic" at all, in that sense...

2006-06-25T10:46:00.000-04:00

What the teacher's union protests in Oaxaca, Mexico have to do with beating the Neocon agenda

"What teacher's union protests in Oaxaca, Mexico?" you ask. Exactly. This is the biggest story not to have entered the mainstream media this month. My father was in Mexico last weekend and he didn't even find out. (Of course, he spent most of the trip coordinating care for his two aging aunties.)

So what's happening?
On May 22, 70,000 teachers from the state of Oaxaca went on strike to protest cuts to public schools and to advocate for salary increases and more governmental support for education. Much like the federal government in the US, the Mexican government seems to have the unspoken goal of privatizing education and undermining the public school system. So the teachers union (SNTE) went on strike. The protesters have occupied the central square in Oaxaca (Oaxaca is the name of both the state and its capital city) for over a month now. At the beginning of June, they were broadcasting news and reports from the occupied plaza on their own radio station.

The protests gained momentum and the teacher's union members were joined by parents, students, members of other unions, community groups, indigenous-rights groups, Zapatistas, and socialist parties. As often happens with protests (perhaps lamentably), the focus broadened and the protests became a generalized attack on the policies of the current governor of Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz. The groups called for Ruiz's resignation. (See below for what's wrong with Ruiz.)

At 4:30am on June 15th, Ruiz called in around 2,000 members of the state police and special forces to forcibly remove the protesters from the plaza. A military helicopter was used to drop teargas. Many protesters were injured in the raid. There have been some reports that riot police have killed anywhere between 3 and 11 protesters, but I was not able to find this corroborated in the mainstream media, so you can decide whether or not you believe it. It has been documented that protesters have been beaten, attacked physically, teargassed, and arrested in large numbers.

The other thing the riot police did that smacks of oppressive dictatorship was to destroy the radio equipment that the protesters were using to broadcast news and information about their strike. A few days after the raid, the protesters were able to reoccupy the square and continue broadcasting from the university radio station. They are still there.

Many Mexican government officials were worried that the protesters would call for a large-scale boycott of the upcoming presidential elections (July 2nd) or that they would somehow interfere with the election process. The most recent news from the coalition of protesters in Oaxaca is an assurance that they will not interfere with the election.

Why should we care?
1. We should care about everyone's well-being and human rights, and Ulises Ruiz has pretty clearly shown that he is willing to go to extreme measures to repress dissent and to maintain power.
2. Mexico is our neighbor and will either be a major force in advancing the Neocon agenda for our hemisphere or will be able to stand up against that agenda. The elections of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia are hopeful signs that across Latin America people are ready to elect leaders that will stand up to Bush and to the traditional power structures in their own countries. This has a chance of happening in Mexico, too. Their presidential elections, set for July 2nd, will decide between Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a lefty candidate in the mold of Chavez and Morales (although not as radical, which I think is actually a positive thing) and Felipe Calderón, the conservative candidate, who would pretty much be a toady for the Bush administration.

Oaxaca's governor, Ulises Ruiz, is a member of the PRI, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (what an Orwellian name, eh?), the party that controlled Mexico for most of the 20th century and was only overthrown in the last presidential election. As a holdover from Mexico's days as a one-party "democracy," Ruiz has demonstrated that he still governs with the PRI's Iron Hand approach. Since (as my dad pointed out to me) Mexico has only recently emerged from under the PRI's dominance, the people need to be assured that they can exercise their rights to vote, to express dissent, and to ensure that their government officials have some kind of accountability. There has been an upsurge in grassroots political activity. So Mexico is at a turning-point. If leaders like Ruiz see that they cannot wield oppressive power, then the teachers and other protesters will have brought home a real win for democracy, freedom, and progressive politics in Mexico. That's why I'll be at a protest on Wednesday at the Mexican Counsulate (see below.)

Scroll down for sources of information...

ACTION
Labor/Teachers Rally to Support Striking Teachers in Oaxaca, Mexico
Wednesday, June 28th 4:00-5:30 pm
The Mexican Consulate (27 E. 39th St. between Park and Madison Aves.)

PSC-CUNY, the union of faculty and professional staff at City University of New York, is calling for a picket at the Mexican consulate to support our brother and sister Mexican teachers fighting a bitter, difficult strike in Oaxaca, southern Mexico. We call on the Mexican authorities to stop the violent use of police against the strike, and to meet the just demands of Local 22 of SNTE (National Education Workers Union).

Sources
The NYT's one article: http://http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/world/americas/22mexico.html
an amazingly sensitive story from the Houston Chronicle:
http://http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/3981476.html
coverage from an "anticapitalist" site:
http://http://auto_sol.tao.ca/node/view/2155
an incredibly negative article from the AP:
http://http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MEXICO_ELECTIONS_PROTEST?SITE=ILMOL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
in Spanish
http://http://www.noticias-oax.com.mx/
http://http://blogs.diariovasco.com/index.php/politicaoaxaca/2006/06/

2006-06-04T15:48:00.001-04:00

For New Yorkers: Rally for Great Public Schools

I will be at the Rally for Great Public Schools this Wednesday (June 7th) and I hope you will be, too! Here's why I'm going: After teaching in the NYC public schools for five years, I've learned that certain key factors make a HUGE difference in the quality of education we are able to deliver to our students. At the top of that list are smaller class sizes, more support for meaningful teacher professional development, materials and books that are up-to-date and engaging, and enrichment and remediation programs for students who need those services. Without support for these initiatives, we can't hope to serve NYC students better.

NYC has received money for new school construction from the state (see info below) but is still fighting for the $5.6 billion increase in the yearly operating budget for NYC's schools that Albany was ordered to provide by the NY supreme court. As citizens of NYC, we need to make sure that we support our youth and their development and fight for equitable funding for our city schools.

This rally is being sponsored by nearly all of the major school reform advocacy groups and should be a tremendous gathering. Please come if you can.

Wednesday, June 7th 6-8pm
Park Avenue between 50th and 51st streets

Here's the information from the sponsors of the rally:

We must come together to demand that Albany fully fund our schools NOW! We must DEMAND:

· smaller classes in all grades
· a quality teacher in every classroom
· fully equipped science labs in every middle & high school
· modern books & materials
· quality early childhood and after-school programs
· academic enrichment & remediation programs.

Rally for Great Public Schools!!
Wednesday, June 7th, 6 – 8 PM
St. Bart's Church
Park Avenue, between 50th & 51st Streets, Manhattan
6 to 51st St or E·V to Lexington Ave – 53rd St

All the letters, petitions, calls, and lobby days have paid off. This year, we won $1.8 billion from Albany for school construction this year, and an additional $9.4 billion in increased bonding for school construction over the next four years. This means that over 100 new schools will be built and over 65,000 new schools seats will be added over the next five years!! Too many of our kids have been crammed into overcrowded schools, and too many have suffered academically due to large class sizes. This is a great victory for our kids!

But much more needs to be done! Legislators have still failed to increase operating aid by $5.6 billion a year as ordered by the courts. Without this money, we can't hire more teachers to reduce class sizes, or provide full-day early childhood education. We can't buy new books, lab equipment, computers, and school supplies. And we can't invest in after-school, academic enrichment and remediation programs. Join with other parents, teachers, students, clergy, and others in demanding that Albany fully fund our schools NOW!

Rally for Great Public Schools sponsored by (alphabetical order): ACORN, Alliance for Quality Education (AQE), ANYCEC (Association of NYC Education Councils), Brooklyn Education Collaborative (BEC), Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE), Community Collaborative to Improve Bronx Schools (CCB), NAACP Metropolitan Council, Northwest Bronx Community & Clergy Coalition, United Federation of Teachers (UFT) (list in formation)

2006-05-28T17:42:00.000-04:00

Pope Benedict, God is asking the same question to you, too

So Pope Benedict visited Auschwitz and was inspired to pray:

“Where was God in those days? Why was he silent? How could he permit this endless slaughter, this triumph of evil?” Benedict, one of the Church’s leading theologians, said humans could not “peer into God’s mysterious plan” to understand such evil, but only “cry out humbly yet insistently to God—rouse yourself! Do not forget mankind, your creature!” (as reported by MSNBC)

Well, Benny, I think you're suffering from the syndrome we like to call the "I sent two boats and a helicopter syndrome." You know that old joke? A man is warned that severe floods are coming and that he should evacuate his home. He refuses to evacuate, saying, "I've always trusted in God and I know that God will save me." Sure enough, torrential rains and floods follow and the man finds himself confined to the second floor of his home. Several Coast Guard boats arrive to rescue him, but the man decides to remain in his home, saying, "God will save me." The waters rise, he's stuck atop his roof, and a helicopter tries to save him, but he refuses the help again. He dies. When he gets to heaven, he angrily asks God, "Why didn't you save me?" and God responds, "Well, I sent two boats and a helicopter!"

When a man who was part of the Hitler Youth Movement as a teenager asks God, "Where were you? Why were you silent?" there's nothing to say but, "Pope Benedict, where were YOU? Why were you silent?" I am sure the Pope would describe himself as an instrument of God in the world, and yet his prayer at Auschwitz is evidence that he doesn't really consider himself to be one. He seems to prefer waiting around for a miracle to confronting the fact that God acts through us and needs us to bring morality into the world.

As one of my amazing New Haven mentors always says, "God has no hands but ours."

Pope Benedict is a powerful man. He has political influence, money, and resources aplenty. He has the ability to do more to aid the oppressed and the suffering than most of us. However, if his idea of helping people is to pray, then that's really frightening. How many lives could he save if his theology involved a more active role for human beings in creating a just world?

But maybe the Catholic Church is too busy with other things . . .
. . . like managing spin about the DaVinci Codes.

After seeing the movie last night (I read the book a year or two ago) I was dissappointed to see that Sony Pictures had obviously added in some lines to placate establishment Church types. (At the end of the movie, Langdon asks Sophie: "What would a real descendent of Jesus do: destroy faith, or renew it?" I expected her to pull back her sleeve to reveal a WWJD bracelet.)

Be that as it may, I decided that establishment religion (not just the Church) should be scared by this book and movie, because while The Da Vinci Codes is fictional on one level, it's completely true on another. The Priory of Sion, secret ancient conspiracies to protect Jesus' descendants, etc.-- that's an entertaining fiction. The idea that establishment religion has systematically tried to eradicate representations of God as female / goddess imagery (and when they couldn't be eradicated, co-opted those symbol sets into a masculine-dominated paradigm) is true. While spawning another legion of Holy Grail seekers is useless, perhaps it's a positive step to provide alternative pathways for women who struggle to identify with God or create a relationship with God due to the masculine imagery promulgated by mainstream religion. So instead of being reactionary and denying that the book has any truth to it, could churches and synagogues use this as an opportunity to explore female God symbolism and language? This may be a chance to discuss gender and God, a chance to confront the fact that although I warrant most religious people would agree that God has no gender, our dominant paradigm for God is a masculine one? No, of course not. But it's nice to dream.

Fun fact: The British judge who wrote the copyright-infringement decision about The Da Vinci Codes actually included a coded puzzle in his opinion. Cool, no?

2006-05-24T20:33:00.000-04:00

. . . the darndest things (#2)

Today while we were going over a sample English Regents' Exam, I called on a student who had raised his hand to volunteer an answer: "Josh, go ahead." Unfortunately, there are two Joshes in that class, and both of them began to speak simultaneously. They looked up at me, and I shrugged and said, "Whichever of you wants to answer."
Josh #1 turned to Josh #2 with a determined look on his face and held out a clenched fist.
Anticipating some kind of inappropriate threat, I tensed, but before I could say anything, both Joshes pumped their fists in the air three times and made bizarre signs with their fingers.
Josh #1 had picked scissors, Josh #2 rock.
Without a word, Josh #2 breezily answered the question.

2006-05-18T02:21:00.000-04:00

What are we afraid of?

The facts: Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, a 27 year old Afghani, has caused a huge stir recently at Yale. Hashemi was once a member of the Taliban, and in fact was its international spokesperson due to his intelligence and facility with languages. He came to Yale in 2001 to defend the Taliban's record on women's rights in a debate against Dean Koh of the Law School. This year, he returned to Yale-- as a student-- under the sponsorship of an alumnus. He is currently enrolled in a non-degree-granting program, but has recently applied to be in a degree-granting program. Many people (both on and off campus) are violently opposed to Hashemi being allowed to study at Yale. A whole protest group has been sending envelopes full of plastic fingernails to the Yale Development Office (see Nail Yale, below) supposedly reminiscent of the Taliban's gruesome punishment for women who wear nail polish.

Some relevant info:
1. Hashemi is not living in the dorms, not receiving financial aid, and not taking a spot from any would-be undergraduate student (due to the fact that he is enrolled in the "Special Students" program).
2. Hashemi has made public statements to reporters that, while not repudiating his past, are critical of the Taliban regime and are positive about the USA and the West in general. Making these kinds of statements would be political (and perhaps literal) suicide if Hashemi was planning to return to some kind of Taliban-government-in-exile. There is no evidence that he is currently involved with any kind of terrorist group; indeed, one would imagine that his tenure studying at a US university would disqualify him for activities of that kind. As Hashemi himself said in the February 2006 NYT article by Chip Brown(link below):

''You have to be reasonable to live in America,'' he said. ''Everything here is based on reason. Even the essays you write for class. Back home you have to talk about religion and culture, and you can win any argument if you bring up the Islamic argument. You can't reason against religion. But you cannot change Afghanistan overnight. You can't bring the Enlightenment overnight.''

Scary, right? Oh, wait-- not so scary.

My take:
A university is precisely the place for a person like Hashemi to be encountering the USA and for people in the USA to be encountering Hashemi. What experience could better help students understand the dynamics behind repressive juntas than speaking with an actual former Taliban member? How could it not be an enriching experience to have a conversation with Hashemi about his values, his assumptions, his understanding of the situation in Afghanistan, his thoughts about religious fundamentalism? I would like to think that part of any university education should be encountering people with alien perspectives and defending one's own ideas in light of those radically different views.

Consider the question from the perspective of how Hashemi will report on his experience when he returns to his homeland. What is preferable: 1. That he describe how he was rejected and that Americans found his very presence threatening Or 2. That he return having been welcomed into a community of thinkers and scholars who were willing to engage with his ideas, values, and concerns and perhaps challenge some of his assumptions? We need more Hashemis coming to the USA and learning that we aren't all unthinking monsters, that we aren't all knee-jerk anti-Muslim bigots, that we aren't all materialistic, corrupt, and degenerate. His fundamental assumptions may or may not change during his time here at Yale, but rejecting him would clearly send the message that we are afraid of him and feel that we have nothing to offer a lapsed fundamentalist. To the contrary, I think that only by welcoming those lapsed fundamentalist leaders will we actually be able to reach a state of peaceful coexistence with the countries in the Middle East we are currently alienating with the war in Iraq.

At Yale, I met plenty of fellow students whose morals and values I violently disagreed with. Did I question their characters? Absolutely. Did I question their right to be students in an open academic environment? Not unless they were legacies (but that's another issue altogether). Yale turns out plenty of CEOs for profit-hungry multinational corporations that exploit millions of people all over the globe. That's different than being a member of the Taliban, you say? I agree with you that planned terrorist violence is located on a different part of the "bad things" scale, but I think it is on the same scale as the forces that allow a corporation to pay its workers starvation wages, force them to work in a plant where they will likely die young due to industrial poisons, and "dissappear" them when they attempt to unionize.

Yale reports that "character" is one criterion for admission. However, I honestly think that if a student will not endanger or threaten the well-being on other students on campus, Yale has no business pretending that it can judge an applicant's character. Let the students engage each other in open discussion and exploration and figure out for themselves what constitutes a person of "character."

For more information, see. . .

Two articles from the New York Times about Hashemi, including the February 2006 profile of Hashemi that started it all:
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB081EFB3A5A0C758EDDAB0894DE404482

http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F60D1EFD355B0C778CDDAC0894DE404482

The recent article in the Yale Alumni Magazine:
http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/index.html

The opposition's blog, Nail Yale:
http://www.townhall.com/blogs/nailyale/

2006-05-12T16:56:00.000-04:00

The President doth protest too much, methinks.

Regarding President Bush's statement: "We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans."

The Bush Administration seems to be willfully ignoring the fact that the fundamental problem with the phone call database is not whether or not the information is being used, but that the NSA should not have access to the information in the first place. This is yet another example of the Bush Administration framing its debates in terms that put its opposition on the defensive.

This Administration has a history of engaging in faulty logic, like the following: The main aim of our initiatives is to combat terrorism. Therefore, if you oppose our initiatives, you are a terrorist. As a teacher, my favorite example of this was in 2004 when Education Secretary Rod Paige called members of the National Educator's Association terrorists for opposing No Child Left Behind. Knowing this, how can we trust the administration to identify the "known bad guys"?

Listening in on my calls, General Hayden? Well, if you listen in my classroom today you'll hear a lesson on civil liberties. Today, it's a current events lesson; tomorrow, I may have to reclassify it as history.

2006-05-10T19:36:00.000-04:00

. . . the darndest things

Those of you that know me have heard me tell funny stories about my student from Georgia (the former Soviet republic, not the US state). This student-- I'll give him the alias Ushisha, which means "fearless"-- is brilliant but often rather childish and socially inappropriate. Although Ushisha's only been in the USA 2 years, his written English is better than that of many of my native-born students. He is energetic, distractible, and loves to annoy others, so I often have to ask him to stop bothering his peers. Recently, I had to prevent him from repeatedly poking another student with his pencil. While the student on the receiving end was attempting valiantly to ignore Ushisha, I could tell his patience was reaching the breaking point.

I chastised Ushisha. To distract him from poking the hapless student, I asked him, "Ushisha, how do you say 'stop doing that!' in Georgian?"Ushisha replied with a sentence in Georgian, which I wrote down phonetically after having him repeat it several times to ensure that I approximated the accent, etc.

The next day, Ushisha was at it again, "boinging" the curls of the girl sitting next to him, while she whined, "stuuuuuuuuuuuuoooooooooop!" I quickly found the piece of paper where I had written down the phrase from the day before and called it out to Ushisha.

He immediately stopped and glanced up at me with an extremely wounded look. "Miss! You cursed at me."

Needless to say, he had taught me how to say something akin to, "Stop doing that, you asshole bastard!" and then had actually momentarily forgotten what he'd taught me.

Caveat praeceptor (beware, teacher)

Afterwards I asked him to teach me how to say, "Please stop," but I've been too scared to use it.

2006-05-07T21:14:00.000-04:00

Use a condom, fight the patriarchy

This week in the New York Times Magazine, an article by Russell Shorto called "Contra-Contraception" details the growing anti-contraception movement in this country. While I was frightened by the article's implications for women's reproductive health, the teen birth rate, and our rights of reproductive choice, I was even more stunned by the clear subtext of this and other Religious Right movements. Under the rubric of "family values" (what a terrible thing that we have let the Religious Right define "family values" as basically only involving sexual morality instead of being about creating justice in our communities) they're reinstating the patriarchy. Check out this choice quotation from the article:

... she [Leslee Unruh, leader of the abstinence-only movement] sponsors "Purity Balls," which fathers attend with their teenage daughters. "We think the relationship between fathers and their daughters is the key," she told me. At the purity ball, a father gives a "purity ring" to his daughter — a symbol of the promise she makes to maintain her virginity for her future husband. Then, during her marriage ceremony, the daughter gives the ring to her new husband. Abstinence Clearinghouse's Web site advertises the purity ball as an event "which celebrates your 'little girl' and her gift of sexual purity."

Sound familiar? Dad controls his daughter's worth, measured by her virginity, until she gets married, and then transfers it to her husband. Women count as human beings only because their viriginity creates value in the "market" and because they are associated with a man. Women's autonomy and ability to make choices about their own sexual expression dissappear. Scary, right? There are apparently no "Purity Balls" for young men where their mothers give them rings.

No matter what the Religious Right may tell us, "Family Values" are NOT about sexual morality-- they are about returning to a time when men controlled women, when women's identities were reduced to their market value as childbearers and sexual objects and were subsumed into either their husband's identity or their father's.

I also noticed this subtext in another NYT Magazine article by Shorto from June 19, 2005, "What's Their Real Problem with Gay Marraige? It's the Gay Part." It was clear from that article that one of the major reasons gay marraige is threatening to the Religious Right is that it threatens their vision of what marraige is all about-- traditional gender roles being enacted in a relationship with an unequal power dynamic. If there are two men or two women in a relationship, who dominates who? Who controls the domestic sphere and who the public sphere? Who "wears the pants"? It messes up their whole idea of what marraige means.

Check out this excerpt from that article:

. . . the structure, with its architectural signals of tradition and power, was built in 1996 for its tenant: the Family Research Council, the conservative public policy center. . . . Beneath a large wall-mounted plaque emblazoned with the group's slogan -- Defending Family, Faith and Freedom -- and flanking a rather ferocious-looking American eagle statue are two large, museum-quality glass cases. The one on the left contains a complete groom's outfit -- tux, tie, fluffy shirt -- and the one on the right holds a bridal gown and all the trimmings, right down to the dried bouquet. Color snapshots of happy wedding parties festoon both display cases, and the back wall of the bridal unit features verses from the book of Genesis, King James version:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. . . . And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Protecting civil rights for Gays and Lesbians is extremely important, as is protecting women's reproductive freedoms. However, the part of this trend that is really wigging me out is the insidious return to traditional gender roles and the oppression of women in the most systematic, deep-seated, and personal contexts. Lest we forget that we've won our rights recently. . .

Does this scare anyone else?

2006-05-06T21:48:00.000-04:00

Spring Returns to Bethesda Terrace

Today marked the first time this spring that I made my Saturday-afternoon pilgrimage to Bethesda Terrace. If you haven’t experienced the scene, you should set aside time and go. It was magical today. I walked down through Central Park from the Upper West Side to check out the roller-dancing crew, the drum circle, Thoth, and assorted live musical performers. I especially enjoyed watching the roller-dancing today because there were a number of accomplished skaters twirling and strutting and generally getting their groove on to the driving 70’s funk music they play. Plus, there was a huge tree nearby that was shedding little golden seed pods, so when a big gust of wind came along, the falling seed pods showered the area, looking a bit like snow or confetti. You know it’s a great party when Mother Nature joins in the festivities. I’ve decided to join the skaters next week, so if it’s good weather, come on down and you might just get the chance to catch General Anna shakin’ her groove thang.

2006-05-04T21:46:00.000-04:00

Rave

Read A Conspiracy of Paper by David Liss!
I am a devotee of historical mystery novels, and this is definitely the best one I've read in a long while. Besides being well-paced, exciting, and striking that delicate balance between keeping the reader totally in the dark (Conan Doyle) and making the solution so clear it's frustrating (Jonathan Kellerman, l'havdil*), the book exposes the reader to some fascinating ideas. I usually find finance dull as dishwater, but this novel describes the very early years of the English stock market-- just before the South Sea bubble of 1720-- and draws implicit parallels between financial issues these days and back then.

Liss not only tried to make his novel true to period events, cultural norms, lifestyles, etc. but also attempted to give the reader a window into the attitudes and worldviews of English people in the 1700s. Thus, he deals with the rise of paper currency and the dramatic shift in understanding value that it caused; his detective experiments with ratiocination as a crime-solving method (beating out Auguste Dupin by a century); and his characters confront the ruthless methods of large corporations in their early stages.

And the protagonist is a pugilist and Portugese Jew. What could be better?

* I couldn't find a good link to explain "l'havdil" so I'm doing it here. It comes from the root that means to separate/ to draw a distinction. We say "l'havdil" when we are mentioning two things together-- usually something holy and something not holy-- that aren't in the same league, as if to say, "don't think these are analagous." Hence my use of l'havdil when I mention Conan Doyle and Kellerman in the same sentence.

2006-05-03T19:05:00.000-04:00

Rallies Rule and Rally Rules

I spent 10 hours Sunday on a bus-- and incidentally spent a few hours in Washington DC at the Save Darfur rally. It was, all in all, a positive experience, and I felt strongly about being there. While teaching an interdisciplinary elective on Genocide this past fall, I spent a great deal of time reflecting about the fact that we always end up regretting our silence and inaction.

The rally was also a terrific example of the power of focus in organizing; many Jewish institutions worked together to make this a "must-do" event and to make it as easy as possible for many people to participate. People turned out because the Darfur rally organizers stayed on message and maintained a constant pressure. Someone once asked me how I decide which causes to support and one of the many parts of my answer was, "whatever everyone else is focusing on." In these types of battles, especially, numbers are crucial for success. My time creates social change more effectively if I jump on the bandwagon (obviously, provided I support the cause) rather than striking out on my own. Note that here I am not talking about major projects I might devote large amounts of time to, but rather smaller committments like which rallies to attend, which protest letters to write, etc.

"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles."
-- Bob Dylan, "Subterranean Homesick Blues"

I have two rules for rallies that I'd like to introduce here, based on two unfortunate parts of the Darfur rally.

Rule One:
A rally speaker should check in with other consituencies before invoking them.

One of the rabbis who spoke at the rally went on and on about the "historic Black-Jewish partnership for social justice," and spoke as if there were an unbroken connection between Rabbi Heschel marching in 1965 and today. Now, I am extremely proud of the contributions Jews made to the civil rights movement as freedom riders, as voter-registration activists during the Summer of Freedom, as leaders who lent their voices to the struggle. However, we haven't really stuck our necks out for the African-American community very much since then. So invoking the "historic Black-Jewish partnership for social justice" feels downright disrespectful.

One of the most surprising moments of my entire college career was during a forum we held at Hillel with the head of the NAACP chapter in New Haven and the pastor of one of the largest African-American churches in the city. One of our rabbis started out by saying that he felt that the Jewish and African-American communities had a lot in common, because both knew what it felt like to experience oppression and prejudice. Well, the NAACP chairman and the pastor nearly fell off their chairs. Their experience was that the Jews in New Haven were the rich absentee landlords and the privileged of the city-- and where had we been for the past 30 years, anyway, if we cared so much about social justice? They did NOT perceive Jews as brothers and sisters in oppression in their community, and they were right. So before we go assuming anything about how other communities see us, let's reflect and perhaps check in with them, OK? (Read the awesome book How Jews Became White Folks and What that Says about Race in America by Karen Brodkin for an exploration of some of these issues.)

Rule Two:
Don't spew hatred and prejudice when that's what you're supposedly trying to combat.

My friend SB and I were wandering through the crowd at the rally when we spied a homemade protest sign that disturbed us both. One side said something like: "You can't murder us just because we don't believe in Muhammad" (with a large cross and Jewish star) and the other side said "Arabs stop murdering people of Darfur." Now, you have to understand; I had already seen three or four Muslim groups at the rally and the head of the Arab-American League had just spoken. So self-identified Muslim and Arab groups were a vocal presence against the genocide. And if I were Arab or Muslim, that sign would have made me feel alienated, unwanted, and threatened (not to mention disgusted and angry.) One of the attitudes that makes genocide possible is the habit of stereotyping and generalizing the motives, "conspiracies" and characteristics of whole groups. I found it extremely offensive that someone at an anti-genocide rally would create a sign that indicted all Arabs and all Muslims.

A note for the reality-based community members among us: The Muslims perpetrating the genocide in Darfur are killing mostly Muslims, so they aren't killing the Fur people because they aren't Muslim; it's an ethnic conflict and a conflict over access to scarce resources-- the genocide is a tool being used to exert power over a volatile country.

SB and I were so disturbed by the sign that we decided to speak to the couple carrying it. Although I just wanted to yell at them, SB prevailed in her desire to engage them in a productive dialogue, because she is an amazing, tolerant person and really wanted to try to change their minds.

We approached and let them know that their sign bothered us. They replied that they believed it was important for us to "point the finger" at the people who were responsible for the genocide. When we suggested that they could have written "Khartoum Government" or "Janjaweed" on their signs to be both accurate and less harmful, they became very defensive. "They're killing us!" they said. It became somewhat clear to me that these were people who felt afraid of Muslims and Arabs in general and that this conflict was a chance for them to express their fears.

Reasoning out of fear rarely leads us to smart conclusions.

SB and I were gratified to see that many of the people in the crowd who witnessed the dust-up were nodding in agreement with us, and a few also chimed in to say that they had been offended by the sign as well.

2006-05-02T20:57:00.000-04:00

You're It!

OK, so my friend at Abacaxi Mamao tagged me for a meme, and since I can't resist feeling popular-- a holdover from my severely unpopular days as a child, I suppose-- I am responding to it. Also, I like alphabetical acrostics. However, I've decided to add an additional wrinkle, which is that I'm going to try to be as brief as possible, mostly in the interests of time, but also to see just how decisive I can be.

Accent: Please, if you ever meet anyone from Texas (see below, "Hometown") and he or she does not have a discernible Southern accent, do not spend the first five minutes of your conversation grilling the person about why he or she doesn't have one. Please.
Booze: Stella Artois, Tecate; signature cocktail: Alabama Slammer
Chores I Hate: Putting away nice warm clothes just out of the dryer. I just want to make a big pile out of them and snuggle into the pile.
Dogs/Cats: If you don't have kids or another dependent, get a pet. It makes you a better person to have something lovable that needs you around. I like both dogs and cats.
Essential Electronics: In my dream world, none. In reality, my laptop.
Favorite City: Too tough to choose. Favorite city recently visited: Cuzco, Peru.
Gold/Silver: Silver
Hometown: Dallas, Texas
Insomnia: Never; I am almost always sleep-deprived
Job Title: curriculum designer, learning facililtator, paper-shuffler, manners consultant, counselor, parental substitute, babysitter, janitor, disciplinarian, guide, and more...
Kids: inspire me and infuriate me, often at the same time
Living Arrangements: One of those rooms added on to an apartment to make the rent livable in Manhattan. Over the course of five years, I've had a fantastic assortment of roommates who I am lucky to have lived with and learned from. Almost always cluttered but never dirty.
Most Admired Trait: Many people assume that I am a very patient person and praise my patience. But they are wrong; I just do an OK job of stifling my impatient comments and urges.
Number of books owned: Oh, geeze, you're not going to make me count them, are you? I love books and I have a bunch. And they are breeding or something 'cause more keep appearing.
Overnight Hospital Stays: Thank God, only once, and that was not because I was sick but because I was staying at the hospital with a friend who was sick.
Phobia: Before I went cave-crawling at Tel Maresha in Israel and later at Mammoth Cave in Kentucky, I was claustrophobic, but I basically beat it out of myself.
Quotes: All-time favorites: 1. "Cada uno es hijo de sus obras." -- Don Quijote 2. It is said that in 1881 when Robert Louis Stevenson was at Pitlochry, he saw a dog being abused by its owner. When Stevenson tried to intervene and stop the beating, the owner told him, "It's not your dog!" Stevenson replied, "It's God's dog and I'm here to protect it."
Religion: Jewish. Non-denominational. However, I should acknowlege that my worldview and conception of God owe a great deal to many other religions and philosophical traditions. Basically, I am an opportunistic mutt when it comes to finding ideas that inspire me and help me understand the world.
Siblings: One awesome younger brother who just returned from a round-the-world post-college tour.
Time I usually wake up: Between 5:30 and 6:00am. ARGH!!!!
Unusual Talent: Ummmmm... falling asleep in various strange positions with the lights on?
Vegetable I refuse to eat: I have always been embarrassed that I dislike asparagus, because people tend to cook it as a special treat and then I don't eat it.
Worst Habit: Can I answer this one tomorrow? (Procrastination.)
X-Rays: Once when I sprained my wrist at sports camp as a kid. I got the "best sportsmanship" award at the end of the summer because I basically had to sit out the rest of camp.
Yummy Foods I make: Black bean soup, stuffed portobello mushrooms, brownies, zucchini pie, veggie curry.
Zodiac Sign: Virgo. Love the astrology column in The Onion.

2006-05-01T22:19:00.000-04:00

Re: Immigration

Let's go road block trippin' in the middle of the night, up in Gainesville town.
There'll be blue lights flashin' down the long dirt road. When they ask me to step out,
They say, "We've been looking for illegal immigrants. Can we check your car?"
I say, "You know it's funny-- I think we were on the same boat back in 1694."
oo la la, shame on you

-- Amy Ray of The Indigo Girls, "Shame on You"

2006-04-27T21:38:00.000-04:00

Unannounced cellphone confiscation in schools and other nonsensical initiatives that keep us from focusing on real educational reform

Since the NYC Department of Education announced that the School Safety Division of the NYPD would be making surprise visits to various schools to scan students for cell phones and other electronic devices, public school parents have been bemoaning the terrible fate of their children who will quite possibly have their precious cell phones confiscated. While I am sympathetic to the parents' desires to keep their children safe by providing a means of ready communication, I think that this current initiative is misguided for totally different reasons. Here they are:

1. Scanning (requiring students to go through metal detectors before they enter school in the morning) is an extremely dehumanizing process. In schools with severe disciplinary issues, scanning may be warranted in order to protect students from guns, knives, blades, etc. However, this initiative would provide for unannounced scanning at relatively safe schools for the express purpose NOT of discovering weapons but of confiscating electronic equipment.

For two years, I taught at a high school where students went through metal detectors before they entered the building each day. Scanning was justified at this school; during my two years, one student was caught with a gun, one with a taser (stun gun) and many with knives or utility blades. However, this does not change the fact that students resented scanning and thus hated their first 3-5 minutes in school every morning. They felt that scanning reflected a lack of trust and created an expectation of violence; as a student named Arthur said to me, "They already treat us like criminals, so why shouldn't we act like criminals?"

Being the 1st period teacher is tough when the experience that students have right before your class is waiting in line to be herded like cattle through roped-off lanes in order to take off boots, belts, backpacks, and jewlery and be interrogated if they forgot to remove some metal article from their clothing. Think of how annoyed you get in the airport. Would you be able to learn constructively right after that? Every day?

This is to say nothing of the students' right to privacy; both from a legal standpoint and from a psychological standpoint, teens need to feel secure and autonomous.

Why force students to go through scanning when it is not justified?

2. Empty initiatives like this that have nothing to do with the key issues in education-- quality of instruction, class size, resources available in schools, pushing for innovative and effective curriculum, reform of the nasty Department of Ed bureacracy, or school funding-- distract public attention from the real problems in education.

I certainly understand why cell phones in the classroom are bad; don't get me wrong. I've seen kids cheat with cellphones, text message each other in class, and even (only once-- the student wouldn't want to incur my wrath that way again) had a student take a phone call in the middle of class. There's no question that cellphones don't belong in the classroom. However, expending millions (and believe me, this entire campaign of moving metal detectors from school to school and using a cadre of NYPD officers will cost millions) to confiscate cellphones does not seem like a good use of our resources.

3. This is removing autonomous decision-making power from individual schools. The official DOE policy is that cell phones and electronic devices are banned in schools. However, up until now, if individual schools wanted to quietly look the other way or enforce different versions of cellphone bans, the DOE did not impose its absolute ban. In modifying the cell phone rules to fit the school community and the needs of parents and students, schools responded to their circumstances and constituencies. Again, if we were dealing with a crucial issue, I would understand the DOE's insistence on lockstep compliance. Here, I just see it as an unwelcome intrusion.

2006-04-27T21:04:00.000-04:00

Grannies Acquitted

A shout out to the "Granny Peace Brigade," a group of . . . ahem. . . mature women who blocked the doors of the Times Square military recruiting center in October 2005 to protest the war in Iraq. (Actually, what they did was cleverer-- they demanded to be allowed to enlist.) The Grannies were on trial for disorderly conduct but were acquitted today.
A New York Times article this morning stated, "Judge Ross clearly recognizes that ruling against grandmothers. . . could be political suicide, or at the very least make him a villain to grandchildren everywhere." While I think that the grannies' defense lawyer (Norman Siegel of the NYCLU) was canny in using sympathy for grandmothers as a key element of his strategy, I wonder whether the grannies can be said to have had a fair trial-- or rather, I wonder whether conventional activist types would have been acquitted. Good for the grannies for recognizing that they have a sort of immunity granted to them due to their age, and manipulating that immunity to their advantage.

2006-04-23T21:38:00.000-04:00

The Real Story at Duke
Here's an angle on the Duke lacrosse team rape story that I haven't seen pursued in any mainstream publication: Why is being an exotic dancer the most lucrative and flexible career option our society presents to a 27 year old college student and single mother of two? It would be great if the accuser had been able to make enough money to support her family and pay her tuition bills by doing something other than exposing herself to the risks inherent in entering an unknown place and offering herself to be exploited sexually. (Yes, third wave feminists, it's possible that she is an extremely liberated woman who chose this job out of an array of possible options. But let's be real.) What does this say about the incentives our society sets up? Whatever happened that night, it's clear that it would never have happened had the accuser been able to support herself doing something other than exotic dancing.

2006-04-15T12:13:00.000-04:00

On Passover, William Sloane Coffin, and being an effective agent for social justice

On April 12, William Sloane Coffin died. May his memory be a blessing.

Born into privilege (a wealthy, elite New York family, education at exclusive prep schools and then at Yale), Coffin became a devotee of liberation theology and one of our country's strongest voices for justice. After becoming disenchantment with his work in the Army's military intelligence unit and the CIA, Coffin became a Protestant minister and discovered the theology of Reinhold Niebuhr. As a Presbyterian and UCC minister, he fought against the Vietnam War and opposed the draft, took part in the Freedom Rides and other actions to promote civil rights, worked towards nuclear disarmament, supported the creation of the Peace Corps, championed many antipoverty measures, and even advocated equal rights for gays and lesbians years before many other progressive religious leaders were comfortable doing so. A firm believer in the power of civil disobedience, he was imprisoned several times for participating in protests and actions; he risked his position as Chaplain of Yale University in the 1960s when he protected young men avoiding the draft and as senior minister of Riverside Church in New York City when he took bold and unpopular political stances. Coffin positioned social justice centrally in his theology and his life as a person of faith.

As I read various obituaries over the past few days, what surprised me most about Coffin is that he came from a blue-blooded, wealthy, elite New England family and followed a highly conventional path for most of his first 30 years of life. Yet, something in his experience or temperament led him to question the foundations of that path and to identify with the suffering and the oppressed. Coffin's activism was not grounded in paternalistic pity or "charity" but in an identification with other people and an understanding of the interconnectedness of everyone's well-being. Although he could have chosen to lead a comfortable life, insulated from much of the suffering in the world, Coffin instead realized "you can be more alive in pain than in complacency."

At the Passover seder, we re-enact the story of the Exodus from Egypt. The Haggadah tells us that "in every generation a man must see himself as if he [personally] had gone out from Egypt." As Rabbi David Stern taught this weekend, it is important to recognize that instead of selecting the 3rd-person account of the going out from Egypt from the book of Exodus for the Haggadah, the rabbis selected the 1st person recounting of the story from Deuteronomy 26. Why did the rabbis pick the less direct, less detailed version of the story, the version mediated by an additional narrator? The passage in Deuteronomy 26 is a story about identifying with the story, about retelling it in such as way as to reclaim not only the historical sense of the event but also the sense of being personally affected and personally involved.

The most frequently-cited motivation for "doing the right thing" in the Chumash is precisely this same type of identification with the oppressed and the suffering. "Do not (or do) X, Y, or Z because you were strangers in the land of Egypt." The text is not asking us to do some kind of Rawlsian thought experiment and rationally determine what the best policy would be; the text is demanding that we understand ourselves as slaves and strangers in order to be effective in protecting the rights of slaves and strangers. Only empathy and an understanding of one's own oppression (not compassion, not pity, not sympathy, not a detached sense of right and wrong) will allow us to create justice in our communities.

We are often very short-sighted when it comes to remembering this. Witness the trouble we (the people of the United States) are having deciding on immigration policy when we are, ourselves, nearly all immigrants.

Here's my question for my readers: How do we cultivate this identification? How do we help ourselves understand the depth of the connection between ourselves and other human beings?

And a final word from William Sloane Coffin:

"When you see uncaring people in high places, you should be mad as hell. "

2006-03-16T22:57:00.000-05:00

Live the Questions with General Anna

...I would like to beg you, dear Sir, as well as I can, to have patience with everything unresolved in your heart and to try to love the questions themselves as if they were locked rooms or books written in a very foreign language. Don't search for the answers, which could not be given to you now, because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps then, someday far in the future, you will gradually, without even noticing it, live your way into the answer.
--Rainer Maria Rilke, 1903 in Letters to a Young Poet

So who is General Anna, anyway? General Anna is a character from an amazing children's novel called The Pushcart War by Jean Merrill. It is a paean to grassroots activism and is also hilarious as all get-out. Go read the book.