The Tree of Life

So there are movies you watch where the entire theatre gasps at the end and wishes it hadn't ended, and you see people just looking at the screen, not talking. As they file out, they begin to talk about what a great film it was, etc.

THIS DID NOT HAPPEN WHEN WE SAW THE TREE OF LIFE.

Instead, after several people left the theatre to see how long it was going to be (some two and a half painful hours), someone blurted out, "oh, thank god that's over." This pretty much sums up the communal reaction to the film. A group of people sat in a theatre waiting for what was promised- a beautiful masterpiece, a stunning blah blah blah...; instead, what they saw was a lot of volcanoes and gauzy garments and reproducing cells and dinosaurs stepping on other dinosaur's heads, all swirled into some sort of pastiche- yeah, that's what it was, a pastiche. While that was going on there was a story about a family, but most of that was not really told as a story, but rather as another pastiche on top of or simultaneous to the other pastiche.

Oh, it could have been marvelous, I mean, you sort of got the idea from the big whispered philosophies of the mother- there are two kinds of approaches to life... a way of grace and a way of nature, and the wife seemed to be the one who could see these truths, but it didn't matter in the end because they all ended up in some sort of heaven (which was more of a sandbar).

The problem was that it wasn't marvelous. It has the epic feel of 2001 A Space Odyssey, but unlike its predecessor, it really doesn't work. If you've never seen Stanley Kubric's film, it's worth a try. It has at least a few memorable moments and if you get the whole evolution of man into ubermensch kind of thing going on, well, that helps.

But The Tree of Life fails to reach this level of coherence. It's sort of like a mash up of A Space Odyssey with Legends of a Fall and A River Runs Through It and a National Geographic episode on the earth/life. If you try (as my fellow theatre sufferers did) to put all this into some sort of coherent message or plot, forget it.

The plot is made incoherent by an overwrought sense of artiness that fails to help bring anything into focus. We learn a great deal about one of the sons in the family, and a bit about another, who, I think... died in the first plot scene, but otherwise, nothing. In fact, one of the brothers (not Cain or Abel) is so left out of anything, he is pretty much just a third entity without any purpose for being there. Our main character, later grown up to be Sean Penn who I think is an architect, is the Cain type, who wants to kill his father, and tortures his younger brother (a universal theme), only to lose him later on. Working into this loosely told story is a constant questioning of God and a reverberating reference to the book of Job, where God asks where were you when I created the world, and the characters in the movie turn this around, asking, where were you, God?

But as they experience this pain, they are supposed to come to see such questions as human, all too human, and if you can get past the pain, you'll see that it's all part of the circle of life. This kind of message was clearer in Lion King.

While you are trying to piece all this together, there are other boys in the neighborhood who get plopped into the action, including a kid with a patch of hair missing, like he'd been burned, but we never know how or why or whether it really matters to anything else in the movie.

Now, as we watched this mess, my wife was sure I would walk out of the theatre saying, wow, that was awesome. She was very relieved to hear me say that there goes two and a half hours I'll never get back. And I was not alone. Whoever writes these reviews of such movies with such glowing reviews should have their critics licences revoked. To be fair, there were some beautiful shots in the movie, and some film student will probably be amazed at the use of light or see the tremendous cinemetography, but if you are looking for a coherent work of art, steer away from this mess!

The end of collegiality

Look into your crystal ball. It's right there in your newspaper. You can see some things about what our schools will be like in ten years. Better yet, save this blog entry and see how close my crystal ball is when compared with New Yrok State in the coming years.

The idea of sharing ideas with fellow teachers will have faded into the old way of doing things. A willingness to take on the harder kids in a school... gone. Teachers will be jockeying for the classes that ensure their survival, and a bit like a Hobbesian state of nature, it will be teacher against teacher.

Why? Because 40 percent of our evaluation for APPR will be based on various standardized tests. These scores will be used to pit each teacher against another, district vs. district, etc. All of this is in line with Obama's terrible metaphor driving eduation philosophy. If you think No Child Left Behind had terrible effects on schools, wait for the long term implications of Race to the Top. Did you ever wonder how many people can get to the top first? Just one. Everyone else loses.

This Darwinian approach to what has been a borderline noble professoin through the years will make collegial sharing and cooperation will be dead. More on this later...

who shoiuld run for the republican nomination?

Newt... Newt... Newt

He is in favor of a loyalty oath for all members of his cabinet, especially the Muslims. Tim Pawlenty looks like a weasel and acts like one too. He is afraid of Mitt Romney when he is on stage with him, but talks behind his back. Who els can impress us? Perhaps Miss Palin could give us a run down on history and demonstrate her ability to deal with tough questions like, what did you learn?

For 18 months, we will now hear talking points and watch pretenders drop. Silly questions will be asked, and not answered. Especially if Ron Paul stays in the race. He thinks people's questions are not worth asking because they are all part of a left wing conspiracy to establish a nanny state.

The saving grace is that we only have to hear from these kooks and dissemblers from one party at a time. Oh, if only Ross Perot could return.

Here's an idea- maybe Obama should run for the Republican nomination! His policies haven't been exactly from the liberal playbook anyway. He might be able to make a dent. Better yet, let's see if we can get Andrew Cuomo to run for the Republican nomination. He's destroying New York's education system as well as any Republican could. He's given in to the millionaires as weell as any anti-tax conservative could.

Medi-share

Take a gander at the new possibilities our market economy has to offer. This is an actal ad I recieved this morning, and it got me to thinking...

"Medi-Share is Proven
For over 17 years, Medi-Share participants have been helping one another through medical bill sharing-over $500 million has been shared and discounted! It's God's way of helping His people care for one another while providing healthcare that works.
Medi-Share is Sensible
With options to fit every budget, and even an incentive available for our healthier participants, Medi-Share is a great option for Christians who don't want to be left alone to pay their medical bills.
Medi-Share is Good Stewardship
Medi-Share is Good Stewardship. Medi-Share is for Christians who want their healthcare dollars to help fellow believers who are living the same lifestyles they are, based on biblical principles and service to others."

Imagine if you will, a retelling of the Good Samaritan parable...

Jesus is talking with a young man about how to be "justified"-

He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
Unfortunately, the good samaritan had "Medi-share coverage", which wouldn't cover care for people outside his own sect of Judaism, and so he was denied coverage. The inn keeper had to sue him for failure to reimburse. The inn keeper called the 1 800 number and tried to explain about how the Samaratin had found the poor man and how he had been attacked. The associate on the help line explained that "we provide help only for those living the same lifestyles we live by, based on biblical principles and service to others like ourselves."
36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, "Medi-share is my choice for health insurance. They are excellent stewards of our money and and there's even an incentive available for our healthier participants!
Jesus wept.

Length does matter

This week a firestorm swept the CUNY system as honorary doctorate recipients looked for ways to return their awards. They did this in support of Tony Kushman, a now ex-recipient of an honorary doctorate from CUNY. The short version- a Pataki appointed chancellor or member convinced the rest of the short sighted members of the CUNY board that Kushman was an anti-semite and voila, honorary doctorate removed. Of course, there are numerous details and nuances one could look into, but who has the time?

This week another storm brewed as President Obama tried to make a dent in the armor of a conflict that has been waged since World War II. By mentioning a single date (1967), Obama was said to have "picked a fight with Israel." Today he begins to make in roads into repairing the damage, explaining that he didn't say anything earth shattering or unusual in his reference to those post war boundaries.

What do these two storms have in common? Israel, yes, but more importantly, taking a short view of things vs. a longer one.

The 'short view' in general is the quick decision without the research, the impulse buy at the store, the whim that can lead to heaven or hell. In both these cases regarding Isarael, had the agents involved stopped to think, maybe they'd be better off today. To whom does this warning apply? All of them. Tony Kushman probably may have been better off had he considered how his words would be taken out of context and used against him. The CUNY board should have looked into the situation before rescinding his award. In these two cases, political expediency trumped long and deliberate thought. Perhaps it was impossible for Kushman to think out the long term ramifications of his ideas, and the way our world now recycles and spins words and sound bites, they are little machines with teeth of their own. The CUNY board, trying to "get out in front" of the accusation that they were being anti-semitic, surely made their move without a conversation with Kushman.

Could Obama have had more conversations about this speech prior to this moment in order to calm the waters? Did he and his cabinet know the furor was coming? Perhaps. Perhaps not. I have come to see of late that we rarely see anything coming as clearly as we think we do. In hind sight, we see it all, and can assign motivations to every event. But in real time, I am surprised at every event that comes up.

We can all read the news as Harry Shearer does with a supercillious air, finding every news maker ludicrous and short minded. To be fair, it was Mr. Shearer who made me aware of the CUNY debacle in the first place. It was his show and his spin on the story that made me think, how could they dare do this?

As news consumers it is a very convenient place from which we judge the short sightedness of others. Still, there are decisions made that we can criticize as (in hind sight) really, really bad.

This past week, someone decided to layoff one of my family members. This is the short sighted view of the world at its worst. This short sighted person looked at what would "work" for her in the short run. Despite claiming that it was about the future of the company, she was really choosing what was convenient for her for now. If she had considered alternatives, and had conversations about the problem, the conflict might have been resolved. But who can have such conversations? Instead, we act fast, think decisively, and react to the catastrophes later.

One is often criticized as being too pensive, too cerebral, too wishy washy if one asks questions first. This is the classic attack on Hamlet, the prince who thought too much. I am more and more convinced of the importance of Nietzsche's observation that Hamlet did not think too much, but rather, that he thought too well. He thought too well because he could see the long term implications of every act he considered. This can lead to paralysis. One must eventually put on a le show or respond to a request...

Take a quick listen to the Harry Shearer show from Saturday. You will hear about...

Those who sell and buy FEMA trailers full of formaldahyde are desperate for cash and desperate for housing, respecively. Preston Mitchum plagiarizes a You Tube speech and later hopes it won't have an impact on his career as a lawyer... Another man blamed his Danish sense of humor for offending... well, everyone except his closest friends. von Trier said he sympathized with Hitler. He is now "persona non-grata." In an opening prayer, Bradley Dean attacks Obama's faith in the Minnesota house of representatives. GOP head Kurt Zellers denounced the words, but should he have seen it coming? James Frey (A Million Little Pieces) was apologized to by Oprah Winfrey this week because, she now explains, she hadn't thought about his side of the story. Someone named Hartge used the word "jewed" and then defended it by saying it was in the dictionary and that it was a business term. Jamie Diamond (of JP Morgan Chase) apologized for wrecking people's lives while the shares of JPM went up by 11%. Newt Gingrich apparently was "inartful" when he "appeared" to call Ryan's plan for destroying Medicare socialist. He now wants to work with him and are exchanging emails.

This list of short sighted folks is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Of course, the only way one can stay off such lists is to say nothing or do nothing... The long view takes too much time, and by the time you get the idea out, everyone is on to something else. We live in a very rapid world, where time is short and so is our attention span. Most of us cannot read anything longer than a paragraph or so. Length matters, and so does the long view, but it takes time we don't have?

On how to avoid despair

This week was tough in Averill Park. Suffice it to say, many of us feel a bit like ships without a star to guide us. We wandering barks have looked on tempests in the past, but the current one is more like a dead spot in the eye of a hurricane.

Many of my colleagues are beginning to ask very serious existential questions, primary among them: why am I doing this? Why should I care? What's the point? On a moment to moment basis I move between pragmatism and my old friend idealism. Pragmatist me has been winning of late.

The only solace I can offer them and myself is that it will pass. Having taught for almost a quarter century, I cannot easily answer the question my daughter offered up this afternoon: is this is the worst it's ever been? I can't remember it being worse, but I can't really trust my memory.

In the end, you can only control your own situation, and so I guess my advice is to continue to do what is meaningful to you. The things I've believed in still seem true to me, so I will continue to do the things that conform to those ideas. In my last class of the day today, I was leafing through my old copy of Knoblach and Brannon. For those of you did not do a masters degree on the writing side at SUNY Albany in the late 80s or early 90s, their book was the gold standard in the field of composition. Their first paragraph, which I read to my class (I doubt they got why I read it), demands of teachers that they be philosophers in the classroom, that they think about why they do what they do. That while they may be tempted to despair or tempted into the doldrums, every day should be a new chance to seek out the doing of things that conform to an intentional approach to the teaching of literature or composition.

It is important not to give in to abandoning one's principles and simply training kids in what is fashionable or comfortable or what sells. Being able to pull up a PBL document on a large screen is smexy in teacher world these days, but if one is doing such things to impress a principal or to satisfy one's sense that one has not become mired in the past, etc., let that go. Remember why you do what you do. I still believe that learning to be a great reader or writer comes when students are given a constant message: you are the author, you work within a real world on real ideas that must be taken seriously, writing to fill in boxes in an instructional plan is not learning- it is performing- it is dying.

So, if you want to avoid despair, return to your root principles- whatever they are, and like the Santiago you are, fight the fight. Go to the mattresses. Push the rock up the hill. It is all pointless in the end, but it's the only game in town.

References in the last paragraph (Hemingway, Puzo, Camus, Fish)

state aid to education up to 270 million

If the times union anti tax blogger/teacher hater/professional misanthropes are right, and I really am the greedy bastard they say I am, I am going to take my share of this huge windfall of cabbage and splurge all of it on... um... chocalate!

The state will say it's got this great package and that it's going to upstate schools, but mark my words... none of it will end up in Averill Park where I work or in Schodack where I pay taxes. Somehow, it never trickles down. Even with all that pandering I got NYSUT to do for me and all the brain washing I did to my students, it will come to nothing somehow... mark my words!