I woke up this morning to more amusing noise from the Tea Party: Sarah Palin using the term "WTF" to refer to Obama's phrase "winning the future" in his State of the Union Address. While she still makes me cringe whenever she opens her mouth, this recent display of outrageous contrivance has been somewhat reassuring, as further evidence that she is careening closer and closer to the fringe, making it more and more difficult for a widespread swath of voting Americans to blindly accept her vision for the future. Yay!!!!
What Palin's "WTF" really got me thinking about, though, as it was quickly followed up by Real News from Egypt, where citizens are rioting in the streets, was the News.
Do you remember when you were in college (strangely, while I forget most of my life before and after college, I do have strong recollections of those four years ... go figure) and you could go for weeks at a time without a TV, and without any news from the "outside"? There were no computers (well.... except for the word processors at the Computer Center, and the ones used by crazy geeks like Bill Gates), no Blackberries, no Iphone, no email, and, oh wait, no blogs! Hah.
The events in Egypt reminded me of when I was in college and I first heard that Anwar Sadat had been assassinated. I didn't learn of the news until five days after it had actually happened, and was shocked and dismayed, both at the news itself and at the realization that we lived in a true "bubble", isolated from events taking place in the real world. (And, in a true Princeton Class of '85 moment: Dr. Ruth is now on the Nate Berkus show .... don't ask...LOL; her advice is "Keep your mouth shut. Never compare the new boyfriend to the old boyfriend. Even if the orgasms were better with the old one, don't do any comparison." Oh My God.)
.... maybe I should just turn off the television .....
But wait! That's It! Maybe we should just turn off the television! How can anyone focus on what's important, what's real, and what's right in front of him/her that truly matters, with the constant assault on our brains, our eyes, and our ears, not to mention our psyche, from TV, cell phones, computers, and blogs. I told Julia that from this point forward I am making the kitchen table a technology-free zone. People will have to place their cell phones in a bowl on the counter, and refrain from answering the several texts and tweets they get for the twenty minutes we are actually sitting together as a family (shout out to Julia: she is not the primary offender in this situation; it's actually the college boys who can't seem to function if they are away from their phone for longer than 30 seconds).
If we didn't have the TV on this week, we would have missed: The State of the Union speech, Sarah Palin's response, Gabrielle Giffords' steady health improvements, the anniversary of the Challenger Disaster (Do you remember where you were? I was in the atrium in the law firm in NYC where I worked as a paralegal and remember all the attorneys and secretaries crowded into conference rooms where there were televisions so that we could stay updated over the several hours that day), updates on the Amanda Knox story in Italy, and, of course, countless celebrity sightings, episodes of reality TV, and, oh wait, Duke beat BC in basketball last night -- shocker! We also would have missed all the Weather forecasts -- okay, we may need some of these, but now that we're on our fourth Blizzard of the year, we don't need Constant news of plowing, shoveling, airport cancellations, and school closings; Enough already!
Living in a bubble is neither realistic nor particularly attractive. Living with constant assaults on our psyches from television, news, and technology is also a difficult state in which to thrive emotionally. There must be a healthy way to strike a balance among all these technologies competing for our attention. I guess the true challenge is to find that balance. There is, of course, complete irony in the obvious, that I'm blogging about all of this, and merely adding to the cacophony assaulting you. I would hate to make myself obsolete, but realize that if your filter were working at all properly, no doubt it would filter out all those useless blogs .....!
Friday, January 28, 2011
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
It's All Fun And Games Until Someone Gets Hurt
I told Julia the other day that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords HAD to survive, that we should do everything we could to pray for her to live. When she asked me Why? I told her that we as a country needed her to Live, to prove that insanity and violence do not rule the day, so that public servants will continue to serve, and so that we remain at peace with ourselves as a country born from political differences.
There are so many issues raised by the tragedy in Tucson. As readers of this blog can probably already tell, I FIRMLY BELIEVE that Words Do Have Consequences. Bullies, for example, throughout history have had perceived power over others as a direct result of the words they use to belittle and denigrate their victims. And, just as words have negative consequences, they also have positive ones. Yes We Can comes to mind. Think of the supportive and complementary words you give to your children, your co-workers, and your friends in order to lift them up in difficult times. No one can dispute the power of words.
Of course, it's not that simple. Giffords' assassin didn't try to kill her Because of words, political or otherwise. He was almost certainly mentally deranged. His mental incapacity, combined with his targeting of Giffords -- we don't yet exactly know why he targeted her, though he did so months if not years ago -- resulted in a spree of violence that swept up innocent bystanders in its wake.
In situations like these, we naturally and almost automatically look to see Who is at Fault, and Who is to Blame. It is too easy, however, to blame a specific person or group for Jared Loughners' actions. I would argue, though, that it is also too easy to blame Only him. In our society, like it or not, we are often responsible for certain others' actions. Just as employers are responsible for their employees in certain circumstances, individuals may also be morally, if not always legally, responsible for foreseeable or not wholly unpredictable actions of others. In this regard, it seems that Loughners' family was paralyzed by their own incapacity to effectively deal with his actions, either out of fear or because of their own incapacities. Children don't come with Users' Manuals, and not everyone should be a parent. His teachers at his community college also clearly had the power and authority to demand intervention, to protect themselves and Loughner himself. They also did nothing, either because they didn't take the time, or more likely because they didn't know they had such authority. Loughners' neighbors were also clearly aware that he was unstable, but never alerted authorities to his bizarre and frightening behavior. There are so many "woulda coulda shoulda" scenarios that for the time being, it's almost useless to dwell on them; that will be reserved for the Tucson victims' families, should they decide to pursue legal actions of their own.
What is abundantly clear from the news coverage of this event is that Rep. Giffords herself believed that Words and Ads and Rancor and Politically Charged Rhetoric were affecting politics and politicians. She herself had raised the issue of Sarah Palin's Rifle Crosshairs before the last election. As recently as the day before the shooting, in an email to a friend, she asked him to join her to discuss ways to reduce the angry personal and political discourse that seems to have invaded every corner of media and politics. Any lawyer worth her salt will tell you, one takes his victim as he finds her. Giffords felt susceptible, perhaps even afraid, as a result of the angry and violently charged discourse that she believed was having a serious, negative impact on society and on elected officials like herself.
Words sent out via large megaphones will inevitably land on the ears of Everyone, including the rational and the irrational. Don't the speakers, and the holders of the megaphones, have some obligation to act responsibly and morally? Just as we set age limits on movies, and alcohol, and voting, and cigarettes, for example, shouldn't Americans demand that those individuals disseminating words and images comport with reasonableness, and with societal norms and standards? Even Amazon.com took down the pedophile's book, for example. There has always been a fine line in the sand within the First Amendment. Perhaps those responsible for the megaphone should start paying a bit closer attention to its effectiveness, even when that effectiveness is different than anticipated.
It is Not a coincidence that Rep. Giffords repeatedly raised these issues, and then was intentionally gunned down at a political gathering.
In closing, I'd also like to say that it is Too Easy to blame Sarah Palin for the level of violence committed in Tucson. No matter how disingenuous her explanation is of the crosshairs on her website, one woman's words don't suffice to explain a mentally deranged person's violent actions.
However, listen to what Palin has recently said regarding the incident (I think a new New Year's Resolution may be to never ever quote her again in my blog, but I just can't promise that completely ....):
"I listened at first puzzled, then with concerned, and now with sadness to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event," Palin said."If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."
Wow. "A Blood Libel." I'm pretty sure that she didn't get the memo .... We can only hope and pray that her supporters did.
There are so many issues raised by the tragedy in Tucson. As readers of this blog can probably already tell, I FIRMLY BELIEVE that Words Do Have Consequences. Bullies, for example, throughout history have had perceived power over others as a direct result of the words they use to belittle and denigrate their victims. And, just as words have negative consequences, they also have positive ones. Yes We Can comes to mind. Think of the supportive and complementary words you give to your children, your co-workers, and your friends in order to lift them up in difficult times. No one can dispute the power of words.
Of course, it's not that simple. Giffords' assassin didn't try to kill her Because of words, political or otherwise. He was almost certainly mentally deranged. His mental incapacity, combined with his targeting of Giffords -- we don't yet exactly know why he targeted her, though he did so months if not years ago -- resulted in a spree of violence that swept up innocent bystanders in its wake.
In situations like these, we naturally and almost automatically look to see Who is at Fault, and Who is to Blame. It is too easy, however, to blame a specific person or group for Jared Loughners' actions. I would argue, though, that it is also too easy to blame Only him. In our society, like it or not, we are often responsible for certain others' actions. Just as employers are responsible for their employees in certain circumstances, individuals may also be morally, if not always legally, responsible for foreseeable or not wholly unpredictable actions of others. In this regard, it seems that Loughners' family was paralyzed by their own incapacity to effectively deal with his actions, either out of fear or because of their own incapacities. Children don't come with Users' Manuals, and not everyone should be a parent. His teachers at his community college also clearly had the power and authority to demand intervention, to protect themselves and Loughner himself. They also did nothing, either because they didn't take the time, or more likely because they didn't know they had such authority. Loughners' neighbors were also clearly aware that he was unstable, but never alerted authorities to his bizarre and frightening behavior. There are so many "woulda coulda shoulda" scenarios that for the time being, it's almost useless to dwell on them; that will be reserved for the Tucson victims' families, should they decide to pursue legal actions of their own.
What is abundantly clear from the news coverage of this event is that Rep. Giffords herself believed that Words and Ads and Rancor and Politically Charged Rhetoric were affecting politics and politicians. She herself had raised the issue of Sarah Palin's Rifle Crosshairs before the last election. As recently as the day before the shooting, in an email to a friend, she asked him to join her to discuss ways to reduce the angry personal and political discourse that seems to have invaded every corner of media and politics. Any lawyer worth her salt will tell you, one takes his victim as he finds her. Giffords felt susceptible, perhaps even afraid, as a result of the angry and violently charged discourse that she believed was having a serious, negative impact on society and on elected officials like herself.
Words sent out via large megaphones will inevitably land on the ears of Everyone, including the rational and the irrational. Don't the speakers, and the holders of the megaphones, have some obligation to act responsibly and morally? Just as we set age limits on movies, and alcohol, and voting, and cigarettes, for example, shouldn't Americans demand that those individuals disseminating words and images comport with reasonableness, and with societal norms and standards? Even Amazon.com took down the pedophile's book, for example. There has always been a fine line in the sand within the First Amendment. Perhaps those responsible for the megaphone should start paying a bit closer attention to its effectiveness, even when that effectiveness is different than anticipated.
It is Not a coincidence that Rep. Giffords repeatedly raised these issues, and then was intentionally gunned down at a political gathering.
In closing, I'd also like to say that it is Too Easy to blame Sarah Palin for the level of violence committed in Tucson. No matter how disingenuous her explanation is of the crosshairs on her website, one woman's words don't suffice to explain a mentally deranged person's violent actions.
However, listen to what Palin has recently said regarding the incident (I think a new New Year's Resolution may be to never ever quote her again in my blog, but I just can't promise that completely ....):
"I listened at first puzzled, then with concerned, and now with sadness to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event," Palin said."If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."
Wow. "A Blood Libel." I'm pretty sure that she didn't get the memo .... We can only hope and pray that her supporters did.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
For Kerry -- I Was Prickly .....
I can't be the only person I know who sometimes takes advantage of close friends and family, treating them somehow Too honestly -- with an extra heavy dose of sarcasm or nonchalance -- and with less care than I would friends who don't matter as much to me. I'm not sure if it's a result of growing up in a big family, or a result of having a big family, or marrying into a big family. Perhaps it has nothing to do with a big family. In any event, when I recognize that I'm doing it -- acting extra "prickly" -- I regret it afterwards.
So it happened last weekend, when a lack of sleep and a glut of wine led me to be a bit more prickly than usual with friends and family at our annual New Year's Eve gathering. When offered a compliment from a friend about Chasing Shade, I immediately turned it around with a sarcastic comment and self deprecation. I had what I thought was a good reason -- I do wish people would be more comfortable putting comments on the blog itself rather than emailing me their comments or posting them on Facebook -- but I should have been more encouraging and appreciative for the comment and the support. With some extra self-reflection, I realized that my assumptions regarding family and friend support for my blog leave me sometimes feeling (and acting) self-absorbed and presumptuous which is exactly what I wanted the blog to overcome. Ahh, what to do, what to do.
Add "Less Self Absorbed" to my list of 2011 New Year's Resolutions. Along with Lose 20 pounds, Workout every day, Get a job that provides health insurance, and Drink less wine. Each of these resolutions has as much chance of success as the others, and is completely capable of being measured objectively and of being attained. Especially now that I have a wedding to prepare for (latest news puts the Date at early August 2012 -- meaning three weddings in six months for the Sullivan extended family!). If I haven't learned to be less prickly and less self absorbed by then, I'm in Big Trouble!
LATEST GOOD BOOK READ: Major Pettigrew's Last Stand by Helen Simonson -- A charming love story about a retired English major and a Pakistani widow in a small village in England. Beautifully written, if small in scope.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Share it
