Interviewer: We only have just a minute left, unfortunately, but one of the quotes that you refer to is John Dewey in your miseducation book and I’ll just read it: “The ultimate aim of production is not production of goods, but the production of free human beings associated with one another on…
(Source: american-philosophy.org)
There is a crisis in our country today which threatens to harm the single largest group—women. If anything has been learned from radio pundit Rush Limbaugh’s recent verbal assault on woman, it is that this nation’s media is fervently against female advancement. It seems as if Mr. Limbaugh cannot accept the fact that women, in today’s society, have every right to view themselves as equals to men. Instead, the hypocritical, ill-informed pundit believes that men are somehow above women—as if men get the final word on what is right and what is wrong. The crux of this matter, of course, is something much larger than just a media incident involving a prescription drug addict and his widely popular radio show—predicated upon barbarism and ignorance ; rather, the essential problem is the media’s double-standard. Somehow, this nation’s most powerful news channels, radio stations, and newspapers have deemed it appropriate for a promiscuous man to be congratulated and crowned a hero, but a woman of the same persuasion called a “slut”.
It is not difficult to understand the clear sexism that exists in our media today, despite the apparent pledge to protect woman’s rights by many networks. Woman are chiefly used as eye-candy on many news networks, Fox News being the prime example, where many of the week-end news anchors are former Miss America Pageant winners. Such examples of using woman as mere objects to attract viewers is by far the most immediate problem in today’s media. Rather than being challenged to degrade woman in the most crude ways possible—such as Mr. Limbaugh has done—the media should be urged to showcase the ability and achievement of woman. Much like the films of director Pedro Almodovar, the media should portray woman as strong, independent, capable people who have the ability to do great things. Indeed, some may write such as challenge off as silly, unimportant, or “feminist”, but those people are simply following in Limbaugh’s footsteps. Too often the term “feminist” is used to describe radicals, fanatics who make it seem as if woman are out to get men. A closer examination of the real problems—the verbal abuse and objectification of women—will yield a much wiser view on the status of woman.
Indeed, the problem of the media’s double-standard and its unrelenting objectification of woman is deeply ingrained into American culture. A recent statistic from Time tells us that woman only earned 77 cents on the male dollar as recent as 2008(See “Why Do Woman Still Earn Less than Men”).This great disparity reflects a very tangible example of the inequality between men and woman. While I refuse to agree with the extremist demands of some of today’s radical feminists, I do believe that the United States must address this issue with great care. Radicals have soured what is in reality a good principle : the empowerment of woman. But the media, largely controlled by men—names like Ailes, Turner, and Murdoch—continues to wage a war against the female population. If the United States truly wishes to be the greatest nation in the world, it must start by rethinking the way in which it views one of its most extraordinary majorities. It is time to not only revel at the great “founding fathers” of this nation, but also their female counterparts who were largely unacknowledged.
Steven P. Rodriguez
April 2012
— William Faulkner, Nobel Prize for Literature Speech
As winter creeps upon us(Snow in October?), I finally feel a great sense of relief. A process that took me a great number of weeks has finally ended: I have officially applied to college. Indeed, many people still feel anxious, nervous, and just plain sick even after their apps have been submitted. They will sit, waiting for that letter to arrive telling that they have gotten in to the school of their dreams. Or, more likely, they will pace around in circles until they feel sick, repeatedly going through mental scenarios in their head, trying to figure out the much feared “worst case scenario”. Normally, it goes something like this:
“There’s no way I’m getting in. I’m not even that smart. There’s no point.”
A few moments later
“Well, it’s ok. I can just got to community college if I don’t get in…those schools let everyone in. I’ll just transfer after I go there for a year or two. Everything will be fine.”
So, it’s not hard to see how silly all of these thoughts are when they are written out like I have done above. The thoughts that creep around in our head are usually pretty insane—like super nutty. But we fail to question them when we are in a state of complete panic. It’s as if the logical part of our minds just shut themselves down in the face of what we consider to be a “major crisis”. Whatever the case may be, this type of thinking is dangerous. I can say through both personal experience, and through direction observation of my close friends, that getting stressed out only leads to the inevitable nervous breakdown. In one of my previous scribbling here on the site, I believe I talked about how we always seem to be teetering on the edge of a nervous breakdown. In some ways, this can be a great tool for motivation, but it can manifest into something very debilitating when you take it to the extreme. I survived the college application process through exploring my own personal philosophy, reading books about people having similar apprehensions, and a good amount of unadulterated panic attacks. It was not until after I submitted my apps that I developed the foresight to see just how silly I had been acting. Emotions are strange things sometimes.
Now that I’ve applied, I sometimes ask myself, “What’s next?”. It’s a valid question. After all, there is a very distinct possibility that I won’t get into my top choice school, or even my second choice school. What happens then? Well, I’ve come to realize that these questions accomplish nothing besides make me want to pie myself in the face. The only thing that I can do is believe that not getting into a top choice school is not the end of the world, as it were. Being sucked into the mass hysteria that seems to define any high school senior is silly and without purpose. I like to think of the opening lines of howl when I picture the madness of my peers: “I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked”. In this case, the madness is applying to college. All of this seems to leads us to one other question: What causes all of this hysteria around applying to college?
If I were to answer this question honestly, I’m afraid I would get a lot of flak for not being politically correct. My honest answer—which I will be so bold as to put down in writing—is that smug, anal retentive parents make this process hell. While they are not the sole cause of this stress, parents who want to relive their childhood vicariously through their children are the chief source of problems. Many of us would like to believe that such is not the case, but I’m afraid it is the truth. Parents want their children to be better than their friend’s children. It’s pure competition. Wars are going on in Suburbia—a form of warfare in which parents try to inflate their ego through the academic success of their offspring. (This all sounds rather cynical, but I’m afraid you must admit that there is at least some truth in it.)
` To be fair, there are also a number of other factors that contribute to the mass hysteria that surrounds applying to college. For instance, many students feel the need to elevate their peer’s level of stress by incessantly talking about every aspect of college. Every social function becomes a place to talk about the common app, tuition, prestige, or SAT scores. One starts to feel sick after this constant discussion which, in reality, is anxiety couched in egomania. It’s almost as if some terrible sickness begins to spread, catching nearly every student applying to college. But indeed, we manage to deal with it. To be polite and genial it is necessary to listen to everyone moan and groan about their college application process. We are expected to empathize and be nothing but polite. It’s a tough life we all live—the horror of applying to college. The abominable first-world problems we all must face every single day. When will this madness end?
We know we have lost it when we begin to think like this.
There were many times over these past few weeks when I realized I hadn’t written anything in quite some time. I suppose being too wrapped up in my own personal affairs and “busy” lifestyle had me give up on writing for a while. Yet, each period in which I have ceased this activity has been filled with mostly bleak days without that wonderful satisfaction one gets after completing a paragraph, or finishing a lengthy diatribe. The rhythm of sentences, commas, semicolons, and all other elements of grammar/punctuation—not to discount the personal favorite em dash—had become a pleasant memory, but were no longer part of the daily routine. For the first time in my life, I began to understand what it felt like to come home from work too tired to write about the miserable day. I had forgotten how cathartic this medium truly is; writing seems to be as human as eating, breathing, sleeping, and all other biological functions. I’m not sure if this is true for all people, but I’ve found that writing allows be to get a better perspective on just about everything. And yes, this is just about the most pretentious essay ever written on this tumblr. It’s a smug satisfaction I suppose.
Even thought I have probably damaged my credibility with the flowery and highly idealistic prose above, I still believe that writing—in the simplest sense—helps us get over the fact that life often sucks. Words provide a direct channel for us to communicate our emotions. The written word allows this process to be even more intimate and direct. At the moment, I am in the midst of many things, some troubling, and some unbelievably wonderful. The challenge seems to be balancing these two sets of things out; thinking about what sucks when you should be having fun does not fare well. So, with this short message, I return to this tumblr once more for an ongoing experiment: A quest to see whether or not writing can actually improve one’s daily life. Natalie Goldberg seems to think so…
I don’t think I ever really knew what it was like to be “busy” until this past week. Typically, I would hear this term, think for a moment, and then assume that whoever was saying that they were “so busy”, was probably just exaggerating. I still stand by this belief for some people who like to moan about having a lot of work, but more and more I’m starting to realize that people really are “busy”. For a Junior in high school, most of the year is filled with testing ad infinitum: SAT’s during the spring, AP exams in May, and for some SAT II’s in June. I typically don’t think it very fair to compare our academic plight to any historical group, but I would say that students today have it rough—although we have food, shelter, and don’t need to wait on bread lines. Indeed, I often need to stop for a few moments to realize how well-off the greater North Jersey area is.
Nonetheless, I am one of those unexceptional students who does not deal with a large amount of work well. The panic mechanism tends to kick in, the Apocalypse seems near, and everything becomes murky and uncertain. There is an infantile instinct that exists which causes me to forget everything I have been taught over my long academic, and instead intellectually curl up into the fetal position. This is why I tend to write extremely mediocre essays on any sort of standardized exam. When it comes to mathematics, I seem to forget some of the most basic principles ; the calculator becomes my brain while my bean rests in a vegetable-like state. Yet, I will then proceed to go home and do some scribbling of my own which tends to be infinitely better than the one I composed on the exam. It is for the reasons presented above that I dread any sort of standardized exam. They lack character, and feel terribly Orwellian in nature. In fact, the word “standardized” seems to be almost offensive on its own. But, I do take some solace in the fact that in the grand scheme of things, the ability to actually write meaningful pieces, and not automaton cookie-cutter essays, will help me tremendously.
But honest, I don’t like to complain about too much work.
The chief reason I feel terrible complaining about work is that it makes me feel weak and terribly inept . I am surrounded—in most situations— by an exceptional group of very hard working individuals who have enough honor to be jovial even when they are on the verge of collapse due to a heavy work load. In general, I try to hold myself to a higher standard whenever possible. This seems to be a good policy, as it has helped me advance over the years. I find that some of the finest work is produced when people have way too much on their plates. This goes against the myth that seems to exist in our heads which says that if we had more free time, then we would be able to finally do X, or write Y. Stress can, in some cases, be a great creative influence. At other times it can be the catalyst to a nervous break down. You know that you’re doing good work when 1) you’re on the verge of a nervous breakdown, and 2) you’re scared that you are about to fail miserably. Not very comforting, but it’s the god’s honest truth.
So, I suppose this little piece marks my return to writing for a while. The notion that the written word, and the composition of it, allows for a cathartic experience is very true. I feel infinitely better now that I was able to sit down and string some words together.Natalie Goldberg is correct in her book Writing Down The Bones when she says that it is necessary to write everyday—no matter how crumby the composition comes out to be. Just as a small aside, I highly recommend that anyone reading this run out and buy a copy of Writing Down The Bones. It is one of the best books on writing in existence, with exception to Stephen King’s excellent On Writing.
And as one last note, I must take a moment to thank Merlin Mann of 43 Folders for giving an excellent talk on being scared shitless. My week would have been hell without his humor and reassurance:
“Scared Shitless”
So I guess this is what happens when you get a really mediocre SAT score.
A little less than a week ago, the local Board of Education decided that three specialized programs—IT, Communications, and Theatre Arts—were no longer worth keeping around. *They justified this decision by asserting that the enrollment numbers in the programs did not sufficiently meet what the the Board considered acceptable. Students currently enrolled in the programs have been assured that they will be able to finish out what they initially signed up for, but there will be no incoming class. The University Programs for Theatre Arts & Communications + IT are being decommissioned.
In the paragraph above, I gave the facts regarding the situation. Now, I will try to give some perspective and attempt to show how this unwise decision by the Board of Education will ultimately be detrimental to the district’s reputation, the students, as well as teachers. All throughout this analysis I will intersperse some important past history regarding the program as well as the progression of the Board’s decision. The first problem with this entire situation is that it very clearly breaks a promise made by the Board to the students and teachers of the University Program:
In an open letter to the University Program community, Castor and board members Belsky, Sadie Quinlan and President Wayne Peterson indicated that it will revive its proposal should the targeted programs fail to meet specific benchmarks by Aug. 15, 2011: 18 incoming students enrolled in any of the programs or 60 total students in each program, including the members of the Class of 2015.
(“Enrollment Crucial to Future of University Programs”, Wyckoff Patch, Sept. 28, 2010)
The quote above—concerning the Aug. 15 deadline—appeared in an open letter posted on the RHS website, which was presumedly written to appease opponents of the Board. I must now pause and give credit to my good friend Brendan Neal, whose keen eyes were the first to catch this vitally important “breech of contract”, as he has phrased it. Whether this is a legitimate, binding legal contract is something for a lawyer to decide, but what seems clear is that the Board looks quite bad breaking their initial promise. Parents and students ought to be outraged that Board members would be so quick to break a very simple commitment. More and more, it seems like the Board had their decision made months in advance—as if the open letter was nothing more than a phony PR document. It is difficult to have respect for a body that cannot even stick to commitments agreed upon in a highly publicized “open letter”. Looking at the actual language of the letter, it seems very clear that the Board tried to manipulate parents by making it seem as if the entire controversy was a mere misunderstanding:
The Committee members believe that it is unfortunate that our recommendation has been misunderstood by some members of the UP community. Our recommendation does not derive from any disregard for the value of the three programs in question nor from any sense that these programs are less important than the other three UP programs, Science, Medicine & Research; Engineering & Design; and International Studies & Business. Rather, our recommendation emanates solely from our responsibilities to the District community as a whole. We understand that one of the primary roles of the Board is to make choices among competing interests. This requires that we evaluate these interests for the best outcome for the entire community.
(Board of Education “Open Letter” )
A simple and acceptable level of semantical interpretation shows that the Board wants to make it seem as if they are the victim in this situation. The Board claims that their decision does not mean to disrespect the programs themselves, but simply tries to ensure that the needs of all students are met. I find it hard to believe this when the Board presented no solution to remedy the program’s to low enrollment numbers, but rather decided that the only option was to end it. If the body did in fact care about the programs themselves, it only seems logical that they would meet with teachers, parents, and students to figure out how enrollment numbers could be increased. But once again, the Board runs the school much like a Board of Investors in a large corporation. To a person like Ira Belsky, students are emotionless automatons who have only one purpose: to earn high scores on state standardized tests.
From a more personal perspective, the termination of the Theatre Arts & Communications University Program at Ramapo is not only insulting to students, parents, and teachers—as they are beginning to feel increasingly marginalized—but also to the work of a passionate and dedicated man named Harry K. Berkheiser. I did not have the honor of meeting Mr. Berkheiser before he passed away some years ago, but I have heard countless stories and pleasant tales about the man. All of these memories discuss how passionate and dedicated the man was. He was the true mastermind behind the incredibly unique Theatre Arts & Communications University Program. It was thanks to his work that Ramapo became known throughout the region for its unmatched program. In fact, if it was not for Mr. Berkheiser’s work, it seems safe to say that many Ramapo alumni who graduated from the University Program would have never gotten the jobs they currently have. Indeed, many graduates of the Communications University Program eagerly correspond with past teachers, highlighting the importance of the skills acquired from their time as students. Yet, the Board seems to disregard the work of this compassionate man. They would much rather write it off as too costly, and affectively stomp all over his legacy. For this, Board members should feel awful.
Another disturbing element of the Board’s decision to terminate the program’s is the very clear lack of planning as to how the programs will be slowly dismantled. Superintendent Dr. C. Lauren Schoen has been less the helpful in answering even the most basic of questions. It is almost disturbing to think that the Board would end the programs without establishing a clear plan of future action. When asked about the particulars of the presumed open UP electives, Schoen simply responded with a typical “Well, that’s a good question. I’ll look into that.”, type response. Let me make it clear that such a response is in no way appropriate given the circumstances. Teachers, parents, and students should be getting highly detailed information as to how the programs will proceed. So far, the only thing that is certain is that current UP students will be able to finish their program as promised ; however, other details are still up in the air. In a very general sense, the Board neglected their due diligence by failing to outline a plan as to how things should proceed. At this point, I certainly hope the reader is asking him or herself one very important question: What is the point of a “Board of Education” when it fails to fulfill even the most basic of obligations? This question has been baffling me since I attended the much publicized September 27 meeting of the Board some months ago. At the meeting, numerous parents and students(myself included) spoke out against the Board’s rash decision. Yet, member’s like Ira Belsky simply sat with blank expressions, fidgeting with pens and paper, wondering if he could shut opposers up by ignoring them. It is very disturbing to think that our schools are managed by executives who only comprehend entries on a spreadsheet, and have no understanding of students. In a sense, they have become so desensitized and bored by their humdrum life, that they can no longer respond to emotional stimulus. All of this is highly disturbing to someone who cares.
Additionally, the Board had failed to investigate the possible consequences of opening up the former University Program as ordinary electives.With thousands of dollars worth of specialized equipment, it seems logical to assume that students without proper training would cause considerable damage by mere accident, or perhaps due to horseplay. Members of the Communications University Program were required to undergo extensive training regarding safe operation of the equipment. Even with this training, equipment would occasionally get damaged due to an accident. Untrained students wandering into the Television studio, or into the Editing Suite, are bound to have many more accidents. Logic tells us that the number of accidents—and in turn damage—occurring will increase considerably with students who lack the proper pre-requisites. Furthermore, the high standards of excellency and rigor that made the program so well respected will decline. Open electives inevitably tend to attract a less dedicated crowd. Some students might see “Broadcasting Studies” on a list of electives and choose it because they expect it to be very little work—a quick and easy “A”. The overall sense of community that has been so essential to the Theatre Arts & Communications programs at Ramapo will most certainly be destroyed. Arbitrarily scheduled elective classes will not allow for a “family” feel that has been essential to the operation of the programs. The very notation of a cumulative curriculum—one that builds on each year’s experience—will be terminated in favor of a non-linear series of electives. All of these reasons highlight the negative implications of dismantling the Communications & Theatre Arts University Programs, but the Board has never once voiced any concern about the issues outlined above.
Throughout this entire process, it seems that the students have gotten the short end of the stick. Speaking for my fellow classmates, I can affirm that we have be repeatedly ignored by the Board of Education. At no point were students asked, or even confronted, regarding their opinion of the Board’s decision. Information was hidden from students in an attempt to hamper any chance of mass opposition. Indeed, the Board was clever in how they executed the diabolical process. This is why the September 27 meeting was such a breath of fresh air ; students joined together to oppose the Board, despite their efforts to quiet any such opposition. Even Ira Belsky must acknowledge the extreme dedication showcased by students who voiced their opinions to the Board. Granted, many of these suggestions and opinions were flat out ignored, as students preached to deaf ears, but they were nonetheless honorable. I would go so far as to say that the Board should send a personalized letter out to students who fought to oppose the Board’s decision. After all, one of the main goals of the public school system is to turn students into outstanding members of their communities—to be informed and responsible individuals. From what I can gather, the passionate opposition among students demonstrated all of these qualities. But it is a pity that Ira Belsky, Wayne Peterson, Jane Castor, Jeff Brown, Dr. Lynn Budd, Thomas Bunting, Robert Gebhard, Elizabeth Pierce,and Sadie Quinlan simply do not care. They are happy with their Excel spreadsheets and would much rather go on assuming that students are mere widgets without any capacity for emotion or contrarian thought. Perhaps it is time that we review the actions of the Board and elect passionate people who actually care, rather than numb, depressing executives.
* At no point did the Board of Education produce a document that set guidelines for minimum enrollment numbers. Therefore, one can assume that the numbers were decided upon after the fact, as a way of adding to the Board’s crusade.
A lot of people I talk to squawk at the fact that I enjoy theatre. It’s not an uncommon thing to encounter someone who views theatre as a meaningless, and perhaps boring endeavor. Most people of my ilk—those who act or assist in production—take great offense to harsh views like these. Indeed, it is very understandable that an actor—a person who takes the craft very seriously—would be put off by statements bashing their art. However, many simply fight with the unappreciative ignoramus, rather than try to reason with them. I suppose that I am somewhat of a recovering “theatre ignoramus” ; that is, I understand what drives people to regard theatre as a waistless activity. Also, I still struggle to regard myself as a competent actor, which is why I view myself as an outsider looking in, rather than a skilled participant.
Having acted in 3 high school theatre productions, I learned to appreciate the arts, and gained valuable understanding as to how a production operates. What seems to be the most overlooked aspect of theatre is the incredible camaraderie. During the course of a production, an actor will inevitably become very good friends with fellow actors. In fact, these friendships made during productions will many a times develop into romantic relationships. Yet, all of this is not considered by those who ignorantly say that theatre is meaningless and stupid. I must take a moment of acknowledge an oversight of my own, which deals with a similar sort of ignorance in regards to sports. For nearly my entire life, I have viewed sports as the byproduct of unhealthy levels of testosterone. This belief, I agree, is very silly. It was not until very recently, however, that I realized that sports were also an amazing place for comradeship. Just as in theatre, sports also allow for a sort of “family” feeling with fellow teammates. Without such strong relationships, teams sports would surely crumble. Unity is something shared by both theatre and sports. Finally realizing this key similarity is what allowed me to realize that sports people and theatre people are not so different. So, the next time someone comes up to you and says “Theatre is gay!” or “Theatre is pointless”, do not retort with a equally as hurtful comment, but instead take a moment to educate the person. Tell them about the simalarity between sports and theatre. That is all.
Such a loving god.
Even the Beatles liked to celebrate Christmas!
German troops waving a white flag of surrender to American soldiers during the Battle of Cherbourg.
Cherbourg, France - June 26, 1944.
untitled by .ali scott on Flickr.
The idea that an ugly face might hide a subtle mind has attracted...
