Academonic Times

I am convinced the academy is sucking the life out of me. I just told Emily today that I feel like a degree in creative writing is actually making me less creative. Just look at the lack of snazzy metaphors and e-prime verbage thus far in this entry.

In the last month, how many blog postings have gone undone, despite the strong desire to rant and rave on some topic? Must finish thesis, that thing for which I have no time because I teach (only) two freshman composition classes. Must finish degree before I know whether or not I can be a writer. Although I suppose if I were a true writer, I'd say fuck the stupid degree and just write right now. (Still, I feel this process of getting a master's is teaching me how to compile a large project, which probably counts for something.)

How're everyone elses' days?

zimdog's syntax secular

In an essay my students and I read for class, the author writes "Gilbert and Sullivan" as something of a punchline. I understood the reference, and even chuckled at its use, but what I was thinking about most was the use of "and."

For some years now, I've wondered what the difference is between "&" and "and." There may be an accepted usage for each, but since I prefer to speak with ignorance on rational matters I have decided free of external influence, I shall now state how I think the usage differs. You let me know if you agree or disagree. Honestly, I'm getting much better at talking about absolutely nothing for a really long time. I learned it from one of my professors.

My decision, from this moment forward, is that I shall use "&" to join two commonly/closely-related entities. The syntactical purpose is to eliminate confusion in sentences that have lots of "and"s in them. For instance:

Civil War history teaches us the dynamics of color like black and white and blue and gray.


Pretend I have just descended in a UFO and learned English, but I know nothing about the American Civil War. How do I know what color dynamics my non-alien self just wrote about? How do I know the "black and white" refers to races of people and the "blue and gray" refers to the clothing of warring sides. I say, think of the aliens (or anyone else who may encounter confusion from lack of context). Use more &s.

Now try the same sentence on for size, using &s:

Civil War history teaches us the dynamics of color like black & white and blue & gray.


... or perhaps this other example, which also uses &s to establish which "and" joins two choices and which "&" joins one word & another:

When considering the creators of musicals, I like Gilbert & Sullivan and Rogers & Hammerstein the least.

True story by the way...

'Tis bureaucracy, m'lord. Simple, hog-rotting bureaucracy.

A few minutes ago, I checked my Broward College e-mail account. I tend to do this at work when I get hung up on a project. It's one way to take a mindless break from the constant thinking that non-pleasure writing requires. Normally, these BC e-mail excursions do not last very long. I do a quick pan with the eyes, followed by a vast sweeping highlight before I purge the inbox of the many college-wide e-mails that have gathered since my last work day.

Today was different. I saw all these e-mails about polo shirts, so I'm thinking to myself I can understand college-wide e-mails about Hurricane Ike or maybe phishing scams and other notable scandals, but polo shirts? I had to read them...

Here's the seed crystal e-mail, sent 9/9/2008 4:22:24 PM:

I have had a couple of inquiries about who is eligible to receive a shirt...any full-time employee of the college can have a shirt.

Jillian

And the downtrodden respond:

1. Jillian, I truly believe that the college was remiss in not offering the shirts to those of us in Adjunct positions. Some of us have been serving (and successfully so) the college for a significant number of years. I have just begun my 17th year of teaching at the North Campus. The tenure of many of the Adjuncts far exceed that of the relatively-new or recent full-timers.

We have heard at almost every one of the Adjunct meetings and seminars over the years that the college would not be able to function effectively without us.

Why then, are we now being snubbed?

Steve

2. I would agree. I have just begun my 18th successful year as an Adjunct.

Jimmy

Fortunately, there is hope:

1. Good Morning! Never shouldl 'anyone' should be slighted, after all we are a 'TEAM' and Together as a TEAM we make BC.
This is not much, however, I would like very much to donate my Polo shirt to the adjunct community.
Thank you,
Barbara

2. I second the thought. Adjuncts, feel free stop by my office, Bldg. 71, Rm. 121 (south) for a medium T-shirt. I am guessing I will have it in a few weeks. First come, first fitted.

Gary

The most recent e-mail, from Gary, was sent 9/10/2008 12:49:51 PM. In the course of less than a day, I have borne witness to the tension brewing at Broward College: the uprising of the masses, having found their issue upon which to declare their equality, and whose pleas do not go entirely unheeded, for they find sympathizers in positions of power who are quick to dismount their full-time horses, seeing it as their duty to offer alms to the adjuncts. The revolution has been avoided.

Or has it? I will keep you updated when I know more about the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008. After all, I'm at work. What else should I focus on?

...

Since I posted this entry, two more e-mails have come along. Now I actually look forward to checking my work e-mail!

This e-mail is directly addressed to a previous participant, Steve, whose heated reply (cited above) opened widespread debate on the topic of a college's moral obligation to provide polo shirts for adjuncts. In his reply to Steve, James aligns himself with the adjuncts using Bill Clinton's famous message of 'I feel your pain':

I believe it is generous to offer workers free garments, but if there aren't enough to go around, and that prompts exclusion, then maybe it is something to be re-thought. I often hear that BC is a family. Does this mean adjuncts and part-timers are its stepchildren? I certainly hope not. I know and work with many adjuncts and part timers who are some of the most dedicated people in this college, and that I have ever had the good fortune to work with, and also believe they should not be treated as second class citizens. Suggestion: If there aren't enough shirts for everyone, perhaps they should be donated to a charity that feeds and clothes the needy. If my words come across as soaked in umbrage, perhaps it's because I was a stepchild myself who was often overlooked during gift-giving occasions -- so I know the feeling. I think what you guys do make BC the wonderful institution that it is, and know you will continue to do so, freebee or not. Another suggestion: A shirt only for Adjuncts and part-timers that reads: "Unsung Heros," or better yet: "Backbone of the College."
Just a thought.

One thing's for sure. If the college does make "Unsung Heros" t-shirts for adjuncts and part-timers, I say leave the misspelling of heroes. I think it means something.

Next, the most recent e-mail wins the Hypocrisy Award, considering I received it:

And so it begins.

Please stop with the 'reply all' snarky comments.

Just. Please. Stop.

Gino

Will more Broward College employees enter the e-mail coliseum to do battle wearing only their perspectives on the issue of polo shirt distribution among faculty? As we approach the 24-hour-versary of the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008, I vow to do my duty as news correspondent to remain fair and balanced in these trying times....

...

Your humble reporter is back on the case of the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008: A Symbolic Debate for Equality. Since I last did any news corresponding, only two more e-mails have been sent campus-wide.

In the first one, Shirley writes to Barbara and Gary, those humble souls who previously announced a humble willingness to donate their rightfully earned polo shirts to desiring adjuncts:

Thank you so much for your generosity. I am an adjunct who would love a polo shirt. Unfortunately, though, I would need a Large!
Any other kind soul out there with one to spare?
Thanks in advance!

As you can see, the plot thickens. We discover that generosity is not always enough. For selfless giving to meet a practical outcome, the right people must express generosity to fated counterparts. Otherwise, generosity will see none who can benefit.

The second polo shirt e-mail proves that campus-wide e-mails function based on synergy. From the generosity of full-time staff members willing to acknowledge the broader base of adjuncts beneath them, a new hope for the future of these polo shirts has come to being. As if on cue, the next e-mailer brings the light of Christian love into the discussion by illuminating the greater sense of urgency for generosity.

DEAR WONDERFUL STAFF, FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATION:

For the past couple of days I have the read various e-mails about these POLO SHIRTS for faculty and whether the adjuncts should be entitled to them, as well. As I read each e-mail I thought to myself, "Would it not be a GREAT idea that these BC POLO shirts be put to better use? Why not donate them to those that REALLY need them. How about those victims in HAITI, CUBA and the TURKS and CAICOS Islands?"

Well, just my humble thoughts and opinion.

God Bless,
Andrew


Yes, Andrew. God bless indeed. Thank you for being the voice of reason--and for reminding us that state institutions such as Broward College run on the fuel that is the love of the Christian God. If only God had thought to send those shirts directly to those in need, all this squabbling within the BC family--um, er, TEAM, might have been prevented.

I wish I could tell you more about the end use of these much-debated polo shirts, but it seems the faceless institution of bureaucracy has stepped in to bring our polo shirt democracy to an end:

BC,

The preferred method of group discussions at Broward College according to policy is the college forums at: https://forums.broward.edu//. Please consider not using the collegewide distribution list (BCC) for group discussions.

Thank You

Technology Support
Information Technology

If only this entity, this "Technology Support/Information Technology," had not stepped in to make a soft-worded suggestion for us to [p]lease consider not using the collegewide distribution list (BCC) for group discussions, we might all get to know a little more about how free clothing influence us all. It now seems clear that the distribution of swag polo shirts speaks to more than just job title. The question of who gets a free polo shirt is a deep one, and one better left to the higher powers, like God Himself.

I now see the error in my ways, blaming God for not distributing these BC polo shirts to those in need. He wanted us to learn the lesson our way. One can only assume these humble humans of Broward College made the right choice. Via God's loving hand, they have made the first hesitant step toward ensuring that their unwanted polo shirts make it to those ravaged by the very storm that God Himself invented.

To those who followed me through the many days of this emotional story, I wish only to say, God bless you, and God bless the institutions of America. And God Bless America, and all those who live here. And, I guess, God bless those upon whom we wish to bestow our charity and polo shirts (even though God obviously doesn't like them, because why else would He send Hurricane Ike their way).

In closing, I have only one more thing to add:

Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this email communication may be subject to public disclosure.

zimdog's words of wisdom: birthdays

Two weeks ago, trying my best to conjure some clever wording for inscription in the birthday card of a planetarium boss, I decided the following:

"Birthdays are like stars: the more you see, the grander life is."

Maybe I can sell it to Hallmark.

ACV: A Political Matter?

For a few months now, I've been doing daily treatments of apple cider vinegar. Anyone who knows my mom knows she keeps all sorts of interesting reading material in the most reader-supportive room in the house, the b-a-t-h room (for those faint of sensibility). One b-room book was a supermarket checkout-sized booklet on apple cider vinegar. Apparently, there's always (or for hundreds of years has) been an awareness of apple cider vinegar as a helpful daily treatment. I've only been privy for a few months, but it seems to do me some good. I've also noticed that I feel the effects of the tonic more when I use the extra-natural stuff: raw, unfiltered, organic, and unpasteurized. As the booklet also suggests, I mix ACV with honey, but molasses or fruit juice are apparently just as acceptable. These add-ins do not alter or enhance the effects of ACV. They're there for their vitamins and minerals, and also to mask the "unaccustomable" flavor of ACV. And yes, I made that word up.

Taking apple cider vinegar daily (with or without the add-ins) is "rumored" to have various positive health effects. Here's a pretty standard list as found on a HomeRemediesWeb.com page. (The first section of the page describes ACV; the second section lists its "known" benefits.) Even WebMD admits to similar benefits, although the WebMD page immediately follows these claims up by saying: "While the results of these studies are promising, they are all preliminary. Many were done on animals or on cells in a lab. The human studies have been small. Before we will truly know whether vinegar has any health benefits, much larger studies are needed." Bogus or not, there exists a massive population of people who think apple cider vinegar is a miracle treatment. The booklet I looked at listed many, many everyday uses for ACV, both health and cosmetic. I started taking it as a daily tonic because I understood it would help the arthritis developing in my knees. But then WebMD tells me ACV can "cause low potassium levels and lower bone density" (same link as above). Another site tells me ACV contains a whole lot of potassium. Who do I believe? And of course, nevermind that folk medicine has been treating with vinegars for hundreds of years, because all that came before the scientific revolution, which has rendered instinct and unscientific observation all but useless.

I read one account of a doctor selling a product called "Jogging in a Jug," which was a simple mixture of ACV and various fruit juices. The FDA fined him because the label of the product made unproven claims about the health benefits of apple cider vinegar. Could this be one more example of government hypocrisy? The FDA hasn't taken much time to study the effects of apple cider vinegar, but they are quite skilled at reminding people of government authority. Nevermind that they don't have any answers for why they can say no. If the FDA is ignorant on matters of ACV, perhaps it could use its authority to... oh I don't know, STUDY APPLE CIDER VINEGAR. Given my cynical perspective on government corruption and the myriad inefficiencies of bureaucracy, my guess is that apple cider vinegar hasn't been studied because, as a homeopathic remedy, it is cheap and readily available to those that might benefit from it. Often times, lobbyists don't much care for these "communist" substances.

I say, whatever. I'm drinking the shit. Until the FDA and our nation's medical practitioners can prove otherwise (or until ACV meets federal prohibition), I'm going to trust what my body tells me, and so far my body tells me it wants me to keep up what I'm doing. My knees feel better than they have in a long while, and combined with the honey, I feel more energy from an ACV drink than I do from coffee. And it's that wholesome energy, not the nervous kind that makes me feel plugged into the wall.

I'm by no means saying everyone should try this treatment, but have a look around on the Internet and decide for yourselves who's telling the truth about apple cider vinegar. Who knows? Maybe this blog entry makes me one of the "crazies" trying to pollute the population with another one of Nature's toxins. Or maybe I'm just trying to rid my own body of the man-made toxins I encounter on a daily basis. Apple cider vinegar is supposedly good for that too, but you'll never know for sure... at least, not if the FDA and friends have anything to say about it.

Our Endangered Oceans

As a bystander, the debate on global climate change is so annoying to listen to. The red fights the blue on the playing field. Meanwhile, the real destruction takes place on the sidelines. And most of the commentators are fucked in the head too. Whatever media has been commercialized and sensationalized for business interests has also been "bought" by either/or face of the bickering political machine. It's much easier to trust science because true science, like nature, gives deconstruction no attention. Valid science says, a fact is a fact. The only trouble is, it's a real shame science has to give money and politics a thought.In this world of truth gone mad, non-profit organizations seem most effective.

A bunch of non-profits undertook something called the Blue Project to study our endangered oceans. I read of the project in this weekend's Parade, a media name that probably triggers anti-liberal or anti-conservative sentiment. I wouldn't know. I'm too busy caring about the health of my ecosystems. The earth is more than just another news grabber or a political hot button. The oceans are our oceans, and they're very real aspects of our existence. We all know the human body can't function and replenish itself without healthy blood. When toxins are systematically pumped into our blood, we can survive for a time, but not indefinitely.

Turns out the same is true of our oceans, which are something like the planet's life blood. No matter who's right, the politics of the debate over global climate change cannot distract me from the SCIENTIFIC FACTS. The seas have risen, warmed, and acidified worldwide. Those changes, combined with overfishing, have caused 90% of our big fish to disappear [...] Pollution has led to almost 26,000 U.S. beaches being temporarily closed or put under advisories [...] and nearly 90% of our wetlands, the nurseries for fish, have vanished due to development. The oceans are in crisis. Quoted above is Leon Panetta, co-chair of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative. Regardless of who he makes promises to for his money, Panetta's is a title I can get behind. I don't care what McCain or Obama think about the oceans. They don't study them for a living.

Even if the two 90% statistics in the quote are off a little either way, any significant reduction in big fish and wetlands means something, whether it's coming from a liberal or a conservative. Ecological problems create tremors in the food web. When the big creatures begin dying, it's a very clear sign that the things smaller than them have already been affected, severely. We could blame development, but that only gives each and every one of us a reason not to blame ourselves.

The bottom line: News stories about the planet's well-being can affect us for a moment, at least until the next news story comes along to change our moods. Well, I plan on letting news stories affect me very much, especially if they suggest a major ecological problem. Who cares if that next strip mall gets built? What I wanna know is, what will the effect be?

Reinstating Cosmic Order with Rocks 'n Crap

A friend and I hiked the Old Loggers Path in Central PA a few weeks ago. Along the trail, I couldn't help noticing some rock stacks left behind in the middle of a stream. Someone passing through took the time to stack flat rocks, making miniature rock monuments that stood out amongst all the surrounding chaos. A week or so later, Emily and I were driving somewhere. In the passing scenery, I saw another such rock stack in a stream nowhere near the ones I passed on foot. Hundreds of miles and one week apart, the events brought to mind the work of Andy Goldsworthy, whom I admire greatly for his close connection with nature on a daily basis. I learned of his work years ago from a professor (and fellow Blogspotter). Goldsworthy's art reflects time spent to establish cosmic order using natural objects. I find it so interesting that a man would use naturally-existing objects and financially-valuable time to make structures that would not otherwise form in the natural order of things.

Man has, for the most part, taken this premise to appalling lengths. I mourn those who died from the collapse of the Twin Towers, but I do not mourn the towers themselves. I see no beauty whatsoever in the proposed Freedom Tower that will replace the Twin Towers, but I see lots and lots of beauty in structures like Stonehenge.



We are all lucky that men like Goldsworthy exist to bring humans closer to something like humility. He returns us closer to the builders of ancient rock structures, who, like Goldsworthy, built structures to bring cosmic order to the earth.

I do not choose to ignore the self-interest in such construction projects. In its days of use, the grounds of Stonehenge were a place of selfish human sacrifice. Our morals have evolved since then. Nowadays we only sacrifice each other in non-lethal ways. The skyscrapers of the modern age act less like examples of cosmic human order, and more like the economic excesses of a rich minority. The proposed Freedom Tower will become one such place where the rich minority can create more debt for the poor majority. (I know what I believe, so you'll have to ask yourself if you feel like your quality of life is being sacrificed for the benefit of others.) The difference I see between Stonehenge and skyscrapers is one of man vs. nature. Man's existential system, society, is based mostly in beliefs and inter-relationship. Nature's existential system, balance, is based mostly in science. We can deconstruct beliefs and the nature of relationships, but there is no deconstructing nature. Nature operates as it does, and that is that.

From now on, I plan to devote much more of my own deliberation to issues of ecology, and I think my blog of late is proof. From this moment forward, I offer the chew toy up as a sacrifice to the planet I love. Here, I will engage in deep consideration of ecological caution, because I consider anything else immoral support for continued ruination. My spirit demands that I make this extra effort on behalf of others. I take great pride in being blind to "unnecessary" caution. I don't mind that others speed on, blissfully ignorant of the impact they create. Most of all, it's their loss. They pay no mind to the beauty they help to destroy, nor do they recognize the ways they're wasting their own existences paying attention to useless crap. I do admit though that I often wish I could force hyper-capitalists to nurture the planet as much as they take advantage of it.

But I know I can't force anyone to realize something, and it would be morally wrong to do so if I could. For this reason, I am saddened a little by the realization that I may already have chosen for at least one person. In recent months, I've been very seriously owning up to the responsibility of the child Emily and I have on the way. The world of that child is in jeopardy, because of decisions made by me and those around me. I have no choice but to enter a new era of questioning everything I do, even more so than before, which poses a real challenge given the obligation I have to recognize when I should ease off from making decisions for my child. In the meantime, our newborn will be unable to make choices for him-or-herself. Newborns create increased ecological impact, which is where I can make a difference on my newborn's behalf.

For its own benefit, the market economy promotes a parenting of convenience. Unfortunately for the market, that c-word sets off alarms all over my conscience. Convenience, or ease of human living, only creates dis-ease for the planet. The convenient living we've established is as good as ignorance. While ignorance may be bliss, it's also ignorance, and I don't want to be an ignorant parent. For the time being, I will accept all responsibility for myself and my child. In those times when I have to throw away a baby food package, I want to feel the act in my gut. In those times when I find it convenient to use a plastic disposable diaper, I want to feel the smelly plastic choking me like it chokes my planet. My hope is that these pains will make me a more conscientious parent and a less admired consumer. Reduce, reuse, recycle means getting creative, so that's what I plan to do. I don't need to heed the parenting crap blasted at me by TV commercials. Companies can't tell me the easiest way to raise my child. To be a good parent, all I need to do is take a deliberate role in raising my child, and I simply do not see what there is to learn from wrapping his or her poop in a disposable diaper and removing it from sight as soon as possible. Disposables are easier, but if I really want to know my child, I'll share an existence with him or her through very deliberate acts--like scraping poop out of a cloth diaper and washing that diaper in a pail. (Hey, it's just poop. It's not like cloth diapers support terrorism or anything.) The very deliberate act of using cloth diapers will remind me that easy isn't necessarily good. Sometimes, easy runs on lacking creativity.

I often hear parents talk with concealed joy about the many physiological nasties their children produce. "Oh, I see all sorts of stuff shooting out of little Sammy," they might say with a restrained chuckle. They're unaware of the cosmic order they create by spending the time to move something "nasty" away from their children. This cosmic order hits a sudden roadblock when parents wrap their child's poop in a disposable diaper and ignore it from that point forward. They ignore the potential energy that fecal matter has to offer the immediate ecosystem. Poop can be returned to the planet through the dumping of a diaper pail. Instead, it sits preserved like a corpse, wrapped in plastic for the many kajillionz of years it takes disposable diapers to biodegrade.


(stolen from www.greendiary.com/images/disposable_diaper.gif)

Meanwhile, detritus cycles continue cycling without that fecal matter. The turning detritus cycle of any given ecosystem constitutes an overwhelming majority of that cycle's energy. The amount varies from one ecosystem to another, but when I say "an overwhelming majority," I mean the detritus cycle checks in at somewhere near the 90-th percentile of energy in a given ecosystem.

What does all this have to do with the rock structures I've seen lately? As our ecosystem adjusts quietly to slow human self-destruction, I'm sensing a real nervousness among people. More unsettled, I think people are becoming less content with the way of things. Whether they realize it or not, the skeptics of destruction perpetuate a message as toxic as their irresponsible practices. When we can quiet our own agendas, it's quite easy to see that global destruction is being proven by science. (See a later, smaller post.) It's not some agenda. It's the fate of the entire world. The only way to re-establish cosmic order on this planet is through very deliberate and loving acts of nurture. Building rock structures takes this sort of disposition.

Let me end by saying I feel no guilt at all for my place on this planet. I'm not telling others not to use disposable diapers. I'm saying I don't want to, because I see the importance of the hard work it takes to maintain cosmic order. This existence is about making choices that affect the ecosystem of which we're a part, and I strongly question the abilities of most people to know what a relationship with the planet feels like. From where I'm standing, they aren't living their lives. They're spending them, one dollar a minute. Well, I favor a debt of a different kind. I don't want my life owned by corporations and banks. I'd prefer to make daily payments to the nature that gave me a loan in the first place. That way, when the big day comes, I know I'll be able to pay back the loan. The only way I'll get there is by making a daily effort to pay back pieces of the debt, one deliberate act at a time.



Do you think Stonehenge was easy to build? No, the people who built it spent many years and performed "miracles" to get the stones of the Sarsen Circle so perfectly aligned to the summer solstice sunrise. Ancient people didn't make rock structures because they were bored, or because they were easy to make. True, they did it construct them to slaughter someone for the benefit of everyone else, but the point is, those who built Stonehenge made personal sacrifices to construct the monument. They took valuable time out of their survival schedules because they saw building the rock monument as time well-spent.

I saw no sacrificed animals splayed out in front of the rock stacks that started this entry. Nor were those monuments aligned to cosmic events in the sky, as far as I could tell anyway. So what purpose did they serve the people who made them? I saw no clear and practical purpose, other than that they enjoyed the deliberate act of making them. It is my dream that someday the majority of people on this planet will come to understand the wisdom of its ignored minority. For those who built the rock stacks I saw, know that I understand why you did what you did, whether you know or not. I share that love of existence, and I plan to go on living my own "foolish, tree-hugging" existence until the day I die, when I get to make one giant re-entry into the detritus cycle.