Certain times evoke particular memories or associations but I never really realized how local those associations are. When I started to question this, I had a major revelation. I don't understand Australia at all.
Some of you might be Australianese and might be able to help me understand (I haven't checked my statistics to see if I get any readership from wherever it is that Australia is), and some of you might know some stuff about Australia, so feel free to chime in. I'll start this from the Judaic perspective but will move into a larger context afterwards.
We just marked the 9th of Av, a 25 hour fast day commemorating the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. I always think of it as a long day which is usually hot and uncomfortable. The fast starts late in the evening and ends later then next night. As we were not even a month after the solstice, we were in the range of the longest day and latest sunset. But in Australia, it is apparently now winter, with the sun setting early. That means that their 9th of Av finishes in the 5:30 range! Their association with the 9th will be of cold weather and, I would guess, a day off from school. Our winter fast (the dawn to evening 10th of Tevet) has to be the long one for them and interrupt their summer vacation whereas here, it ends by 5:30 and is often accompanied by a wintry mix and gray, bleak skies.
Then I continued pondering the Jewish calendar. Passover, the quintessential Spring festival would be, on the other side of the world, at the beginning of the fall. All the Spring references would not make sense! And Sukkot (the Feast of Booths -- John Wilkes and Edwin) which we dread because it has us sit outside when the weather is either the too hot of late summer or too cold of the fall, would be at the beginning of Spring down under there. Don't they know they are doing it wrong? Do they shift everything to accommodate their agricultural cycle or do they live in a state of cognitive dissonance? Is that what it takes to live upside down? Channukah, the festival of lights, designed to inject some candley goodness into the darkness of the winter is a summer holiday there? No way.
From Channukah, I got to thinking -- Christmas. Now, I don't celebrate Christmas, but I can recognize it as a cultural marker with its own set of associations -- a White Christmas for example. What if Irving Berlin had lived in Sydney or Alice Springs? Would the song be "Green or Brownish Christmas"? Why would Santa be wearing that ridiculous red coat in the middle of the summer? And Rudolph's services wouldn't be so necessary because the chance of white-out conditions would be severely reduced. Next is New Year's day -- if it isn't cold, then when the millions of people jam pack their equivalent of Times Square, how do they rationalize their alcohol consumption? And Groundhog's Day must make no sense at all. That rodent comes up, tush first probably, and if he sees his shadow, they get 6 more weeks of what exactly? Why would they need a holiday to help them look forward to Autumn? How do they stay outside for the July 4th fireworks if it is winter time?
Like I said -- the place makes no sense at all.
Monday, July 22, 2013
Sunday, July 21, 2013
The other shoe
On our way to shul yesterday, my second daughter and I fleshed out a concept for a business. I will float it here and let someone else do the work of actually creating it and sending me checks not so much out of any legal need but because you know it is the right thing to do.
The aforesaid daughter had a problem during our walk. As she pointed out repeatedly, one of her feet is slightly larger than the other. In order to accommodate that foot, she had to buy shoes which were a half size larger than the smaller foot required. So now, the larger foot is all comfy but the smaller one slips around as she walks. We discussed a variety of inserts or other solutions but she pointed out that this discrepancy and the consequent lack of comfort will plague her through every pair of shoes she buys unless one of her feet magically catches up to the other. I pointed out that I have the same issue and you get used to it. In fact, I have heard that many people have slightly mismatched feet. So she suggested opening a store which allows customers to buy single shoes and not just pairs, or to create mismatched pairs. Imagine going in to a shoe store and saying "I like these -- do you have a right foot in a 5 and a left in a 5 and a half?" Sure, inventory would be a bear and there would be the element of the uncertain because the store might not have the size/foot/style combination you seek, but isn't that just an extension of what happens in shoe stores now? You go in and they say "oh, we don't have that pair in your size. Try these instead."
A quick look online shows that amputees and others who desire only a single shoe have set up odd shoe markets to sell what they don't need or exchange shoes, but that seems rather haphazard and forces one person to take someone else's castoffs. Our store (the name possibilities are endless and groan inducing but I'm sticking with "Un in paired") would have the most recent styles and would have a stockroom brimming with shoes (and a computerized inventory system so we could know which foot of which shoe we have). We will also sell single shoe laces. Why are we being forced to buy a pair of laces when only one is broken? What are they hiding?
What makes this store even more remarkable is that we will also sell single socks. If you lose one in the dryer, bring in the remaining one and we can try to match it. If one rips and you need to replace it, we can do that. If you want to make a sock puppet, but he isn't married or seeing another sock puppet, you can come in a buy just one sock. Or if you want to make a diverse sock puppet community and need a variety of socks, you can pick and choose here. And yes, some of our costs will be defrayed by taking donations of unmatched socks.
This is a brilliant idea, admit it. Start sending those checks, please.
The aforesaid daughter had a problem during our walk. As she pointed out repeatedly, one of her feet is slightly larger than the other. In order to accommodate that foot, she had to buy shoes which were a half size larger than the smaller foot required. So now, the larger foot is all comfy but the smaller one slips around as she walks. We discussed a variety of inserts or other solutions but she pointed out that this discrepancy and the consequent lack of comfort will plague her through every pair of shoes she buys unless one of her feet magically catches up to the other. I pointed out that I have the same issue and you get used to it. In fact, I have heard that many people have slightly mismatched feet. So she suggested opening a store which allows customers to buy single shoes and not just pairs, or to create mismatched pairs. Imagine going in to a shoe store and saying "I like these -- do you have a right foot in a 5 and a left in a 5 and a half?" Sure, inventory would be a bear and there would be the element of the uncertain because the store might not have the size/foot/style combination you seek, but isn't that just an extension of what happens in shoe stores now? You go in and they say "oh, we don't have that pair in your size. Try these instead."
A quick look online shows that amputees and others who desire only a single shoe have set up odd shoe markets to sell what they don't need or exchange shoes, but that seems rather haphazard and forces one person to take someone else's castoffs. Our store (the name possibilities are endless and groan inducing but I'm sticking with "Un in paired") would have the most recent styles and would have a stockroom brimming with shoes (and a computerized inventory system so we could know which foot of which shoe we have). We will also sell single shoe laces. Why are we being forced to buy a pair of laces when only one is broken? What are they hiding?
What makes this store even more remarkable is that we will also sell single socks. If you lose one in the dryer, bring in the remaining one and we can try to match it. If one rips and you need to replace it, we can do that. If you want to make a sock puppet, but he isn't married or seeing another sock puppet, you can come in a buy just one sock. Or if you want to make a diverse sock puppet community and need a variety of socks, you can pick and choose here. And yes, some of our costs will be defrayed by taking donations of unmatched socks.
This is a brilliant idea, admit it. Start sending those checks, please.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Call me Polonius
In case you don't already know, I like Hamlet (the play, not the guy or the concept of small town). It includes a lot of stuff that I really admire in terms of the story telling and the language. In fact, one character whom I really enjoy thinking about it Polonius. If you haven't read the play (well, first off, you should -- read my earlier blog post about why one should study Shakespeare, then read the play. I'll wait. Don't watch a movie, even the Branagh version. Just read the play 20 or 30 times. I'm in no rush) I'll fill you in. Polonius has 2 kids, Laertes and Ophelia. He is a doting father who sometimes, maybe, has ulterior motives, but does seem to want to help his kids avoid the mistakes he has made in life. I appreciate that.
In one memorable scene (aren't they all?) Polonius gives Laertes some advice before the young man embarks for France. In the tradition of the Ethics of the Fathers, he lists ways to be and interact with the world. Many of the classic pieces of advice which we bandy about come from this one speech, a set of suggestions which, it could be said, his own kids didn't appreciate. Well, I do. And, as my elder is preparing for her own trip to Israel next week, I feel it meet to set down these few precepts which I would want her to keep: [that being said, she probably won't read this unless someone tells her to, so please, someone, tell her to]
1. Don't assume everything is kosher. Yes, it is Israel, but that is no guarantee.
2. Don't assume everything is yours, or destined to be yours. That goes for land, people and things.
3. Don't assume everything and everyone are safe. Take care in where you go, what you do and whom you spend time with.
4. Don't hand over trust as a free gift, and cherish it when it is given to you as if it were a precious jewel.
5. Let yesterday inform but not limit today. Be in touch with heritage and tradition but realize that they serve to foster growth, not stunt it.
6. Spend money when you must, spend time when you can, spend energy when should.
7. Experience past, present and future with each step. Any rock in Israel has more stories than any library elsewhere.
8. Eyes up. Stop looking down at your phone. The world happens in the real world.
9. Stay with the group for safety and follow the instructions of the advisors. There will be years ahead for exploration.
10. Ask questions because you want to investigate ideas and maybe, find answers, not because you want to question. Any question you have, 5 others have also but they may not be strong enough to ask. Ask for them and lend them your strength.
11. Judge people by what they say and do not by what others tell you they said or did.
12. Don't let taking pictures constantly get in the way of actually seeing things.
13. Keep a daily journal of what you said or did and with whom EVERY DAY. Use it to record and reflect. Trust me -- you will cherish it in the future. [and when you get home, when we ask "how was it?" you can hand us the journal, expurgated if necessary, and say "here. I'm going to sleep for 2 days."]
14. Plant seeds -- seeds of curiosity, friendship and maybe, wheat.
15. Keep a siddur with you (if possible, a tanach also). Take every chance to connect.
16. Know that we are proud of you and miss you so much and look forward to your return, so you can turn back around and go to L.A!
In one memorable scene (aren't they all?) Polonius gives Laertes some advice before the young man embarks for France. In the tradition of the Ethics of the Fathers, he lists ways to be and interact with the world. Many of the classic pieces of advice which we bandy about come from this one speech, a set of suggestions which, it could be said, his own kids didn't appreciate. Well, I do. And, as my elder is preparing for her own trip to Israel next week, I feel it meet to set down these few precepts which I would want her to keep: [that being said, she probably won't read this unless someone tells her to, so please, someone, tell her to]
1. Don't assume everything is kosher. Yes, it is Israel, but that is no guarantee.
2. Don't assume everything is yours, or destined to be yours. That goes for land, people and things.
3. Don't assume everything and everyone are safe. Take care in where you go, what you do and whom you spend time with.
4. Don't hand over trust as a free gift, and cherish it when it is given to you as if it were a precious jewel.
5. Let yesterday inform but not limit today. Be in touch with heritage and tradition but realize that they serve to foster growth, not stunt it.
6. Spend money when you must, spend time when you can, spend energy when should.
7. Experience past, present and future with each step. Any rock in Israel has more stories than any library elsewhere.
8. Eyes up. Stop looking down at your phone. The world happens in the real world.
9. Stay with the group for safety and follow the instructions of the advisors. There will be years ahead for exploration.
10. Ask questions because you want to investigate ideas and maybe, find answers, not because you want to question. Any question you have, 5 others have also but they may not be strong enough to ask. Ask for them and lend them your strength.
11. Judge people by what they say and do not by what others tell you they said or did.
12. Don't let taking pictures constantly get in the way of actually seeing things.
13. Keep a daily journal of what you said or did and with whom EVERY DAY. Use it to record and reflect. Trust me -- you will cherish it in the future. [and when you get home, when we ask "how was it?" you can hand us the journal, expurgated if necessary, and say "here. I'm going to sleep for 2 days."]
14. Plant seeds -- seeds of curiosity, friendship and maybe, wheat.
15. Keep a siddur with you (if possible, a tanach also). Take every chance to connect.
16. Know that we are proud of you and miss you so much and look forward to your return, so you can turn back around and go to L.A!
Monday, July 1, 2013
Remotely entertaining - a true story
We had a real problem in the house recently. We couldn't find the remote. Now, sure, this was a great opportunity for an object lesson about convenience and luxury and being spoiled. I tried to point out to the kids that in the olden days, whenever we wanted to change channels we had to have a sibling get up and do it for us. This was true suffering. For the most part, the children did not want to hear this lesson. Maddie dealt with the crisis by retreating to her room -- not to engage in some hermitage and mourning over the loss, but to watch TV on her computer. Talia simply downloaded an app to her phone which simulated a remote so she didn't have to share in our technological backwater. No lesson learned.
We looked everywhere. And then looked again. We retraced our steps, then we stepped more and bought more tracing paper and traced again. We looked in the cushions. We bought new cushions and looked in them. Nothing. Then today, it hit me -- look in the garbage. It wasn't there and that was gross. But I did look in the recyclables pile and found the remote there. So yay.
Now, that might be the end of the story but I won't let this go. I made a big deal out of doing this -- in front of my children I started rooting through the fireplace. I explained that people always say "I found it -- it was in the last place that I looked!" Well, we all know how dumb that sounds because, once you find the thing, you stop looking so any place you found the object was, by definition the last place you looked. So I made sure to look in one more place after finding the remote so that the next time someone says in the presence of my children "It's always in the last place you look" my kids can say, "no it isn't -- once my dad found it in the second to last place he looked." I told them to file this piece of information away, and then I said "I wish I spent more time at the office" so that if someone says "no one ever said 'I wish I spent more time at the office' " my kids can say "my dad did say that."
On an unrelated note...we wonder why our kids don't have any friends.
We looked everywhere. And then looked again. We retraced our steps, then we stepped more and bought more tracing paper and traced again. We looked in the cushions. We bought new cushions and looked in them. Nothing. Then today, it hit me -- look in the garbage. It wasn't there and that was gross. But I did look in the recyclables pile and found the remote there. So yay.
Now, that might be the end of the story but I won't let this go. I made a big deal out of doing this -- in front of my children I started rooting through the fireplace. I explained that people always say "I found it -- it was in the last place that I looked!" Well, we all know how dumb that sounds because, once you find the thing, you stop looking so any place you found the object was, by definition the last place you looked. So I made sure to look in one more place after finding the remote so that the next time someone says in the presence of my children "It's always in the last place you look" my kids can say, "no it isn't -- once my dad found it in the second to last place he looked." I told them to file this piece of information away, and then I said "I wish I spent more time at the office" so that if someone says "no one ever said 'I wish I spent more time at the office' " my kids can say "my dad did say that."
On an unrelated note...we wonder why our kids don't have any friends.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
My New High School For a Change
Everyone seems to be all atwitter about reforming and rebuilding high schools. They might want to rebuild other schools but, seriously, who cares. Little kids are loud and often annoying. High school students have figured out how to be annoying without making as much noise.
Now I am not one to jump on the reform bandwagon. I haven't seen anyone explain clearly what is broken about the current system so i can't see a clear direction to fix it. Are there areas of weakness? Sure, but does that indicate a systemic flaw which needs to be reworked? I think not. So, faithless reader, you have seen me point to the newest pedagogical flan in the pash (a caramel custard in a collection) as a tool to be used or not sued based on the skill and insight of the individual educator. But let us say that I actually wanted to reset an entire curriculum and build a high school from scratch, what would it look like.
Well, I have to be honest and true to myself -- it would not chuck traditional pedagogy or subjects out because of some belief that youngsters can find their own way. But it would also not limit itself slavishly to the traditional areas of study. It would not be the school for everyone, and that's an important point. Every school cannot be for every student unless it is fragmented within to address the particular needs of, at least, grouped students. Tracking, programs, sub-schools all take the monolithic and huge school and turn it into something which can help educate each student in his own way. I think that maybe, some high schools need to admit those students who can thrive in certain environments. Fortunately, the school I am creating is a private one [could this be exported to a charter school? No idea. DK/DC].
So here is my thought: remake a high school to be similar, in some ways, to a college.
Freshman year --
Required year of intensive writing instruction
Required Half year of Basic Geometry and Algebra 1. Students who have studied Algebra 1 can take half a year of Algebra 2.
Required Half year of Intro to Scientific method and half of Biology {each science class would require a minimum of 5 labs, scheduled separately}
Required year of historical survey (ancient world to 1600)
Yes, for the math and science, this would reduce what can be covered and would force teachers to focus in on exactly what the core concepts and skills are and omit all the outside stuff. Math teachers might take their cue from external standardized tests in terms of setting curricular goals. The ugly truth is that intro math courses serve 3 purposes -- foundations for thinking, foundations for later classes and prepping for standardized tests. And only 5 labs? But for most students, other than remembering how gross the lab was, what does the student gain that can only com about through 15 labs? It reduces science labs. Not fair, I know. And English teachers would see intensive writing without a literature component as unfair, but students need to know how to write through practice and correction. They will need to read, but not in order to discuss literature -- only to analyze writing and push forward their own writing. History teachers would complain that there is not enough time to cover all that stuff, but the fact is, there is no real external measure for ancient world history. Students need it as a foundation for later history classes, so a teacher need not teach technical details.
Pedagogically, I suspect that there will be a lot of traditional frontal teaching (with whatever methodology a skilled teacher opts for), complemented by extra videos and independent work by students. Projects and group investigation are nice additions but are not the backbone. Look, I have 4 courses per day listed up there. Even in a dual curriculum school, and adding in gym, I still only have a 9-5-ish day. Compared to what we have, this is less.
Sophomore year --
Required half year of fiction reading and discussion. Required half year of non-fiction reading and discussion
Required Half year of Chemistry and half of Physics {same lab issue as above}
Required Half year on Algebra 2 (or pre-calc for ones who took Alg 2 in 9th grade) and half year on "Math in Life" a course highlighting current applications of math.
Required year of American History
Yes, yes, yes...complaint, complaint. I'm breaking ground here, people. In the 10th grade, there will be more stress on larger independent projects and group discussion but still, a lot of traditional teaching in whatever form the teacher sees as most efficient. We are still driven by the 3 goals of an intro class -- whetting the appetite, thinking skills, external tests.
Now to 11th grade. The elective year.
In this year, students will be offered a broad range of independent study or structured classes. A schedule will have 4 classes per day which might be the "second half" of the first half classes offered above (Bio II, Calc, Poetry etc) or completely separate from the core courses (either taken virtually, or through mentorships or one-on-one classes with teachers, volunteers and such. I'm not trouble shooting here...I'm dreaming). I am sure some classes, especially the level II classes will have enough enrollment to be scheduled with the in-house teachers, but offerings would be driven by student demand. A student who wants to take the Math SAT II will use this year to take the additional math class to help him, but the English student will already know enough math both the to take the SAT I and to see how math is integrated into life. I guess my bias is clear here, but I simply don't think that applied science is as relevant to everyone's life experience as applied math is, so I don't have a "Science in Life" class. More classes will focus on project and inquiry based approaches but not all, and none entirely. If we think that students must, at some point, decide their futures for themselves, then I don't think that this can happen before they have tasted some of everything. I chose 11th grade to let them spread their wings but that is somewhat arbitrary. It just happened to fit into a larger scheme which I am envisioning.
Senior year -- the senior project
Two classes a day: a required class on Civics, Basic Economics, literacy (in a larger cultural sense) and comparative cultures class and a required class as the anchor for the senior project.
The senior project is a group based inquiry complemented by a teacher initiated challenge. A student-group must meet with a team of teacher/mentors and devise a project which identifies an issue, explores its history, creates an action plan (which incorporates real world angles like money and environmental implication) and begins to implement the plan. The plan must be based n the real world, and must require communication with experts outside the school. Yes, the details of this 12th grade project need to be fleshed out, but the idea is to have students work together, incorporate and apply what they have learned on their own and together, and tackle what the world is really going to push on them.
No AP's. No labels. Lots of freedom, but freedom within a structure. It isn't for everyone, and it is just my thinking out loud.
If you wish to improve on this, or reflect on it, let me know. If you think it is a good idea, you may be right or wrong. Same if you think it is a bad idea.
Now I am not one to jump on the reform bandwagon. I haven't seen anyone explain clearly what is broken about the current system so i can't see a clear direction to fix it. Are there areas of weakness? Sure, but does that indicate a systemic flaw which needs to be reworked? I think not. So, faithless reader, you have seen me point to the newest pedagogical flan in the pash (a caramel custard in a collection) as a tool to be used or not sued based on the skill and insight of the individual educator. But let us say that I actually wanted to reset an entire curriculum and build a high school from scratch, what would it look like.
Well, I have to be honest and true to myself -- it would not chuck traditional pedagogy or subjects out because of some belief that youngsters can find their own way. But it would also not limit itself slavishly to the traditional areas of study. It would not be the school for everyone, and that's an important point. Every school cannot be for every student unless it is fragmented within to address the particular needs of, at least, grouped students. Tracking, programs, sub-schools all take the monolithic and huge school and turn it into something which can help educate each student in his own way. I think that maybe, some high schools need to admit those students who can thrive in certain environments. Fortunately, the school I am creating is a private one [could this be exported to a charter school? No idea. DK/DC].
So here is my thought: remake a high school to be similar, in some ways, to a college.
Freshman year --
Required year of intensive writing instruction
Required Half year of Basic Geometry and Algebra 1. Students who have studied Algebra 1 can take half a year of Algebra 2.
Required Half year of Intro to Scientific method and half of Biology {each science class would require a minimum of 5 labs, scheduled separately}
Required year of historical survey (ancient world to 1600)
Yes, for the math and science, this would reduce what can be covered and would force teachers to focus in on exactly what the core concepts and skills are and omit all the outside stuff. Math teachers might take their cue from external standardized tests in terms of setting curricular goals. The ugly truth is that intro math courses serve 3 purposes -- foundations for thinking, foundations for later classes and prepping for standardized tests. And only 5 labs? But for most students, other than remembering how gross the lab was, what does the student gain that can only com about through 15 labs? It reduces science labs. Not fair, I know. And English teachers would see intensive writing without a literature component as unfair, but students need to know how to write through practice and correction. They will need to read, but not in order to discuss literature -- only to analyze writing and push forward their own writing. History teachers would complain that there is not enough time to cover all that stuff, but the fact is, there is no real external measure for ancient world history. Students need it as a foundation for later history classes, so a teacher need not teach technical details.
Pedagogically, I suspect that there will be a lot of traditional frontal teaching (with whatever methodology a skilled teacher opts for), complemented by extra videos and independent work by students. Projects and group investigation are nice additions but are not the backbone. Look, I have 4 courses per day listed up there. Even in a dual curriculum school, and adding in gym, I still only have a 9-5-ish day. Compared to what we have, this is less.
Sophomore year --
Required half year of fiction reading and discussion. Required half year of non-fiction reading and discussion
Required Half year of Chemistry and half of Physics {same lab issue as above}
Required Half year on Algebra 2 (or pre-calc for ones who took Alg 2 in 9th grade) and half year on "Math in Life" a course highlighting current applications of math.
Required year of American History
Yes, yes, yes...complaint, complaint. I'm breaking ground here, people. In the 10th grade, there will be more stress on larger independent projects and group discussion but still, a lot of traditional teaching in whatever form the teacher sees as most efficient. We are still driven by the 3 goals of an intro class -- whetting the appetite, thinking skills, external tests.
Now to 11th grade. The elective year.
In this year, students will be offered a broad range of independent study or structured classes. A schedule will have 4 classes per day which might be the "second half" of the first half classes offered above (Bio II, Calc, Poetry etc) or completely separate from the core courses (either taken virtually, or through mentorships or one-on-one classes with teachers, volunteers and such. I'm not trouble shooting here...I'm dreaming). I am sure some classes, especially the level II classes will have enough enrollment to be scheduled with the in-house teachers, but offerings would be driven by student demand. A student who wants to take the Math SAT II will use this year to take the additional math class to help him, but the English student will already know enough math both the to take the SAT I and to see how math is integrated into life. I guess my bias is clear here, but I simply don't think that applied science is as relevant to everyone's life experience as applied math is, so I don't have a "Science in Life" class. More classes will focus on project and inquiry based approaches but not all, and none entirely. If we think that students must, at some point, decide their futures for themselves, then I don't think that this can happen before they have tasted some of everything. I chose 11th grade to let them spread their wings but that is somewhat arbitrary. It just happened to fit into a larger scheme which I am envisioning.
Senior year -- the senior project
Two classes a day: a required class on Civics, Basic Economics, literacy (in a larger cultural sense) and comparative cultures class and a required class as the anchor for the senior project.
The senior project is a group based inquiry complemented by a teacher initiated challenge. A student-group must meet with a team of teacher/mentors and devise a project which identifies an issue, explores its history, creates an action plan (which incorporates real world angles like money and environmental implication) and begins to implement the plan. The plan must be based n the real world, and must require communication with experts outside the school. Yes, the details of this 12th grade project need to be fleshed out, but the idea is to have students work together, incorporate and apply what they have learned on their own and together, and tackle what the world is really going to push on them.
No AP's. No labels. Lots of freedom, but freedom within a structure. It isn't for everyone, and it is just my thinking out loud.
If you wish to improve on this, or reflect on it, let me know. If you think it is a good idea, you may be right or wrong. Same if you think it is a bad idea.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
In defense of marriage. Act I
This is NOT a political post. I am not a political person. I am simply piggybacking on some news story I saw mentioned so more people will stumble upon this post and recognize how great my parents are. If you are looking for a political rant, or one even only somewhat informed about politics, look elsewhere. I try to avoid such entanglements.
Today, if you haven't checked your calendar, is June 26th. For many of you, that day holds little significance. For me it is a very important day as it relates to the union between a man and a woman. Today is my parents' anniversary. Fifty-three years together. I want to say that again so that I can be sure you heard it correctly:
FIFTY-THREE years. 5-3.
That's a lot of years. I have trouble imagining that many years except that then I look at my parents and realize that I don't have to imagine it because they were actually there. Remember, this doesn't mean that they are 53 years old. They have been married for 53 years. That's more than 20 or even 21. That's like double some number. As much as I hate politics, I hate math more. Anyway, I read somewhere that that's a lot of years. I might even have been the one that wrote it, I'm not sure.
I want everyone to celebrate that -- I want people to stop and say "wow, I guess I can keep using these shoes for one more week if those people can be married that long." I want people to make a sign saying "They can put a man on the moon but they can't have people married for 53 years? Oh wait, they can!" I want official proclamations saying something like "In recognition that somebody said the 53 years is a lot of years, that's awesome!"
And I think that, after all these years, they do truly like and love each other. Any two people who can live together that long and not kill each other have something really special: a child or children they want to kill more than each other. And for that, I clearly thank my siblings, because I am wonderful.
Let's think about history. When my parents got married (1960. 53 years ago. Do the math) There was no, um, cool stuff that was invented after that point. Truth! We had yet to fight the um, y'know, that war after 1960, and you know who hadn't been born yet? Lots of people, including ME. Crazy, right? So that's obviously a long time ago. And yet, here they are, being themselves and all that.
So in celebration, we are going out to a meat restaurant tonight. Why? Because I looked up on a website to see what the traditional gift is for the 53rd anniversary and it said:
Fifty-three years: Wait, 53? Really? Holy Cow!
A very happy anniversary to my favorite parents. Love youse lots.
Next year in the mid-fifties.
Today, if you haven't checked your calendar, is June 26th. For many of you, that day holds little significance. For me it is a very important day as it relates to the union between a man and a woman. Today is my parents' anniversary. Fifty-three years together. I want to say that again so that I can be sure you heard it correctly:
FIFTY-THREE years. 5-3.
That's a lot of years. I have trouble imagining that many years except that then I look at my parents and realize that I don't have to imagine it because they were actually there. Remember, this doesn't mean that they are 53 years old. They have been married for 53 years. That's more than 20 or even 21. That's like double some number. As much as I hate politics, I hate math more. Anyway, I read somewhere that that's a lot of years. I might even have been the one that wrote it, I'm not sure.
I want everyone to celebrate that -- I want people to stop and say "wow, I guess I can keep using these shoes for one more week if those people can be married that long." I want people to make a sign saying "They can put a man on the moon but they can't have people married for 53 years? Oh wait, they can!" I want official proclamations saying something like "In recognition that somebody said the 53 years is a lot of years, that's awesome!"
And I think that, after all these years, they do truly like and love each other. Any two people who can live together that long and not kill each other have something really special: a child or children they want to kill more than each other. And for that, I clearly thank my siblings, because I am wonderful.
Let's think about history. When my parents got married (1960. 53 years ago. Do the math) There was no, um, cool stuff that was invented after that point. Truth! We had yet to fight the um, y'know, that war after 1960, and you know who hadn't been born yet? Lots of people, including ME. Crazy, right? So that's obviously a long time ago. And yet, here they are, being themselves and all that.
So in celebration, we are going out to a meat restaurant tonight. Why? Because I looked up on a website to see what the traditional gift is for the 53rd anniversary and it said:
Fifty-three years: Wait, 53? Really? Holy Cow!
A very happy anniversary to my favorite parents. Love youse lots.
Next year in the mid-fifties.
Monday, June 24, 2013
I don't act like that. I AM that.
For a long time, i was convinced that I would grow up and be a celebrity. I was wrong. I won't grow up. But why did I think i would be a celebrity? I watch enough TV to know that the actors who are up there are mostly acting -- pretending to be people they aren't for the edification of the common man. They do voices, put on disguises, adopt personas that they aren't. How tough can that be. I do voices. I tell stories. I act like an idiot frequently. So it should be a perfect fit. So why am I not a celebrity?
I figured it out while driving in to work ("work" by the way is common-man speak for "what you do when you aren't a celebrity"). I have been waiting for someone to discover me and say "wow, you'd be great in my new TV show -- you'd play the part of the..." and then fill in the blanks with some fabulous character who has madcap adventures, solves mysteries and gets the girl to buy him a car. I'd be a modern day Buckaroo Bonzai just without the science, the aliens or a side kick named New Jersey. So I chalked up my continued non-celebrity status as a function of the right role not presenting itself and no famous actor stumbling across me while I sat on the sidewalk grading Shakespeare essays. But that isn't it.
I am, I realized, actually unequipped to play any role not because they haven't found the role for me, but because the character which I naturally am is better than any fictionalized version of anyone, ever. I can't suppress my natural identity and pretend to be anything else. The problem isn't that they haven't found a role to cast me as, but that they haven't written ME in as a part of their little show. They don't need a tough-as-nails-but-heart-of-gold drill sergeant played by Dan Rosen, they need to cast a Dan Rosen and then I can play it perfectly. And what production wouldn't be enriched by the inclusion of some Dan Rosen? I don't sing; I don't dance; I don't act. I'm the perfect triple anti-threat. Like an ointment of some sort.
So for all you celebrities who frequent this blog (though I realize many of you, it seems, live in Eastern Europe, based on the statistics for this blog), when you are writing your next script or tweaking the next cast, consider the advantages of including someone who is just like me, because I'm just like me and I want to be a celebrity when I grow up.
I figured it out while driving in to work ("work" by the way is common-man speak for "what you do when you aren't a celebrity"). I have been waiting for someone to discover me and say "wow, you'd be great in my new TV show -- you'd play the part of the..." and then fill in the blanks with some fabulous character who has madcap adventures, solves mysteries and gets the girl to buy him a car. I'd be a modern day Buckaroo Bonzai just without the science, the aliens or a side kick named New Jersey. So I chalked up my continued non-celebrity status as a function of the right role not presenting itself and no famous actor stumbling across me while I sat on the sidewalk grading Shakespeare essays. But that isn't it.
I am, I realized, actually unequipped to play any role not because they haven't found the role for me, but because the character which I naturally am is better than any fictionalized version of anyone, ever. I can't suppress my natural identity and pretend to be anything else. The problem isn't that they haven't found a role to cast me as, but that they haven't written ME in as a part of their little show. They don't need a tough-as-nails-but-heart-of-gold drill sergeant played by Dan Rosen, they need to cast a Dan Rosen and then I can play it perfectly. And what production wouldn't be enriched by the inclusion of some Dan Rosen? I don't sing; I don't dance; I don't act. I'm the perfect triple anti-threat. Like an ointment of some sort.
So for all you celebrities who frequent this blog (though I realize many of you, it seems, live in Eastern Europe, based on the statistics for this blog), when you are writing your next script or tweaking the next cast, consider the advantages of including someone who is just like me, because I'm just like me and I want to be a celebrity when I grow up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)