Annotated Links #12: Bully for Japan

1. Ruble, Cynthia. “Parent-child relationship key to solving bullying problem in Japan.” The Japan Daily Press 30 July 2012. Web. 31 July 2012.

This is a first person, opinion-based piece written as part anecdote and part observation. It identifies two major issues in Japanese culture that may make bullying ubiquitous: a willingness to accept hardships as part of life rather than try to improve them (related to the Japanese concept of “gaman”); and the unwillingness amongst adults to stand up against bullying for social reasons.

This article is of interest because it offers a cross-cultural look at bullying, and at some of the universals (unwillingness to defend oneself, fatalism) that may perpetuate bullying.

2. Gale, Bruce. “Tackling the bullying culture in Japan’s schools.” The Straits Times [found on Asia News Network] 18 July 2012. Web. 31 July 2012.

Gale analyzes bullying in Japan based on Herman Smith’s The Myth of Japanese Homogeneity. Specifically, Gale notes and includes analysis based on the three characteristics Smith writes of: “intense competition for scarce educational advantages;” “that girls are rarely victims;” and “that the victims are usually transfer students who do not yet have friends to protect them.” Gale also makes an interesting connection between bullying, gang violence, and heterogenous/multicultural societies, and another between bullying and the art style found in many manga. The article is written in a straightforward, easy to read style.

This article is of interest because of its analyses and because it offers a good sociological overview of the problem of bullying in Japan.

3. Nelson, Christopher. “To cut down on bullying, transform school culture.” MPR News 23 July 2012. Web. 31 July 2012.

A first person opinion piece based on Nelson’s experiences as a student and educator. Nelson writes that it’s important to tell bullies that bullying isn’t what’s done, and to get them to feel included after being reprimanded, not ostracised. He states that the best solution is to have a strong, school-wide sense of where the school is going and what’s important to it, yet he notes that there is no one formula for this sense and its enactment that can be universally applied. The article includes a brief summary of Nelson’s experience and credentials.

Though it isn’t about bullying in Japan, this article is included because it offers an interesting counterpoint to the otherwise ignored sense of school spirit found in Japanese schools that may also underlie bullying new/transfer students.

Back To Top
Closing

Tomorrow’s editorial will be about the increasing grittiness of popular fantasy, and this Friday check the blog for a search for the good in the infamous Plan 9 From Outer Space. Plan 9 currently sits at a 66% among critics on Rotten Tomatoes, but because of a special request, and the movie’s reputation, I’m going to relax my usual 50% cut off point.

And, of course, don’t forget to check out “Annotated Links #13” on Thursday!

Back To Top

[Moon-dæg] Two Takes on North Korea – Part 4

Recap & Introduction
The Same
Basic Differences
Differences in War
Truly Curious
Wrap Up
Closing

{Where is that camera pointed, and what will it see? Image from the Agnes Kunze Society Hope Project website.}

Back To Top
Recap & Introduction

Two weeks ago we looked at how the North American media reacted to the Bombardment of Yeonpyeong. Last week, we looked at the South Korean treatment of the same. So what’s the same? What’s different? And what can be told from all that? Let’s find out.

Back To Top
The Same

Both North American and South Korean news sources covered the Five Ws: Who, What, When, Where, Why. This is practically a given, but an important thing to lay down. So both sources reported the facts, in one way or another. However, aside from this, there aren’t many remarkable similarities between these two sets of articles.

Back To Top
Basic Differences

North American coverage often buried its facts in analysis, and this analysis was always the core of the story. Why was Yeonpyeong bombarded? What was the North’s motivation for doing it? What does it all mean?

Because of this, North American news sources were much more likely to trumpet various conclusions: the North was growing hostile and dangerous, it was a show of power to help usher in Kim Jong Un’s ascension to power, it was deeply related to North Korea’s growing nuclear testing and supposed capabilities.

On the other hand, South Korean news sources stuck closer to the facts. They reported what happened, and sometimes added in extra details for various effects: official statements, personal anecdotes, etc.

Plus, no real assumptions were made in any of the South Korean sources looked at. Since the event directly affected them, South Koreans were more concerned, or interested in, what the attack meant for them specifically and what their leaders had to say about it.

Back To Top
Differences in War

Curiously, though, none of the three North American sources that were looked at cited Kim Tae-Young, the South Korean Defense Minister, replied to a question about being at war by saying “Didn’t it start already? We must stop it from expanding.”

Since this quote appeared in an article from 23 November 2010, it wouldn’t have been difficult to work it into the slew of stories that came out around the incident. And it even has an action movie kind of a ring to it. But perhaps this omission speaks the loudest to the difference of the two in their coverage of the event.

Not including the quote suggests that it wasn’t deemed newsworthy over here. Even though it is a reflection of present reality in the Koreas – an armistice was signed, but there never was a peace treaty. So, technically, the Korean War carries on, though in a definitely colder sort of way.

But that’s not how North Americans see war. Even something like the Cold War strikes fear into the hearts of many, and for the most part that fear was the product of the media.

The people of South Korea didn’t need to speculate about Kim Jong Il’s plots or ploys or machinations behind the bombardment. They just viewed it as the tragic even that it was and declared it an action that is unforgivable and spoke of how it’s necessary to keep things from getting worse.

But those are the people in power, those completely unaffected by it might have hardly blinked at the story – the same way that something about a shooting in a different part of the country might cause the average North American to simply turn to the next page in the paper, or to scroll onward to the next story.

Back To Top
Truly Curious

This also illuminates another essential difference between reporting styles. For better or worse, the North America news media is all about finding out the “why” of an incident, whereas South Korea news media seems to be more about the “what.”

While the articles that have been looked at are about the same length, North American coverage dwelled on speculation about motivation, and South Korean sources focused on just what happened and how it effected the people involved.

But that’s exactly it. That’s why the media can inspire so much fear in North America – because it works on the imagination. It relies on thinking of things that may or may not be true, and the human imagination is ingenious at scaring the human wielding and/or listening to it.

Back To Top
Wrap Up

So, at heart, the difference between the two is really the North American media’s social curiosity calling itself out.

North American news doesn’t just look into the abyss and paint a picture of what it sees, it stares into it with all of the steady focus of an open-eyed stone gargoyle and all the tenacity of a determined squirrel. And nothing can terrify like that which looks back from the abyss, especially when it’s put under so much scrutiny it could be called duress.

Back To Top
Closing

Check back here on Wednesday for a look at the newest news, and on Friday for another search for the good in a terrible movie.

Back To Top

[Moon-dæg] Two Takes on North Korea – Part 1

Preamble
Two Takes on North Korea – Part 1

Preamble

I’ve decided to change the format for Monday’s entries.

Instead of a series that includes four different entries (one that lays out all the facts, one that attempts a logical approach, one that looks for “truthiness,” and then one final entry that returns to logic), each four part Moon-dæg series will now be a standard length essay of 2000 words split into four parts.

Periodically, short stories and poetry cycles/mini-epic poems might also be posted, so be sure to keep reading.

All of that said, onto the first of the new format four-part series, an opinion on modern perceptions of North Korea.

Back To Top
Two Takes on North Korea – Part 1

{One of the few allowed to look out from the Hermit Kingdom. Photo taken by Marcella Bona}

North Korea, from a political standpoint, is a strange remnant from the post-WWII era, and really, in some ways, the last vestige of the Cold War. The Berlin Wall fell, the USSR collapsed. Nuclear power continues to be a problem both as a source of energy and as a weapon, but it’s something that nations at least have a handle on. Sanctions are in place where needed, and most countries take these sanctions seriously. Not so much North Korea, according to this Australian Federal Police (AFP) article from 21 May.

However, North Korea’s recent failed rocket launch has caused it to lose face internationally. Nonetheless, and as that AFP article points out, North Korea will try again. And this persistence is in the face of more and more information coming to light about the country’s regime and living standard.

Two examples of these information leaks are Guy Delisle wrote and illustrated a graphic novel called Pyongyang, all about his time working for an animation studio in the North Korean capital and Mike Kim‘s Escaping North Korea: Defiance and Hope in the World’s Most Repressive Country.

As it is now, North Korea is seen as a place of social backwardness, starvation, and demoralization. But there’s a curious angle on this story if you go south of the North’s border.

In South Korea, even in the capital of Seoul (just about 35 miles (56 km) from the border between the two Koreas) people seem almost indifferent to their Northern neighbor. In fact, it’s more likely for South Koreans to express a wish for reunification in some form or another than to say that they feel hounded by a constant nagging fear.

The case that will be made over the next three Monday entries is that the disparity between the South Korean and North American view of North Korea is a lingering result of the Cold War. Not necessarily directly, but in the sense that the North American news media has wakened to the importance of finding and pleasing a target audience.

Most young people get their news from blogs, websites, or specialized channels, whereas most of those over the age of 40 get their news from television, radio, and newspapers. The old means of getting news are well aware of this demographic shift and have no intention of letting their base demographic – the Baby Boomers – lose interest in what they have to say. Thus, as a means of replicating the same kind of fear that many Boomers are familiar with from the cold war conventional news media try to play up the fear angle in their coverage of North Korea.

The next two entries in this series will look at the tone and style of coverage of the Bombardment of Yeonpyeong, and through these investigations attempt to show that conventional North American media spins such stories for their fear effect.

Back To Top

[Wōdnes-dæg] (Korean) Robots on the Rise

{The robotic Maria from Metropolis. Image from Dear Rich: Nolo’s Intellectual Property Blog}

Introduction
Robots in the Workforce
Robots in South Korea
Closing
References

Introduction

According to an article in the Korea IT Times South Korea is really pushing to become a major player in the field of robotics.

And why not? More and more robots are entering the workforce in various ways: “lights-out” factories that can operate for up to thirty days without any human intervention (and so the lights and air conditioning are turned off); surgeons operating on patients hundreds or thousands of miles away via robotic arms; teacher and health care robots; as cleaners and cooks.¹

Back To Top
Robots in the Workforce

The transition into a much more robotic society seems inevitable. Granted, the article is from April 2011, but Rodney Brooks – a professor emeritus at MIT – robots will make the American economy more efficient and competitive.² He bases these point on the facts that robot labor can be quicker, and a robotic manufacturing base on American soil will cut out the cost of bringing in goods from China and elsewhere.²

Plus, increasing the presence of robots in manufacturing might make the overseas production of Apple, and Sony products much more ethically palatable to those who care about such things. A fact that Foxconn seems well aware of, since they plan to employ 1 million robots by 2014.³

However, though Brooks and Bill Gates have said that the robot revolution is happening in a way similar to the computer revolution (slow and specialized, marching towards quick and ubiquitous), Brooks said in 2011 that the robots of the near future will have an eight year old’s social skills, a six year old’s dexterity, a four year old’s language skills and a two year old’s object recognition² – not exactly as dexterous or quick witted as a T-1000 or a Bending Unit 22.

Back To Top
Robots in South Korea

Still, the ambition and drive of countries like South Korea when it comes to robotics makes it seem like advanced robots are not so far off.

After all, Korean society’s “pali-pali” mentality is indeed evident in plans to spend 322 million US dollars between 2012 and 2016 to turn the city of Daegu into a “robot city and hub to the nation’s robot industry.”¹ Perhaps, in some way, this push for robotics is meant to complement the global spread of its culture.

As wind turbines crop up in more and more places, and with robots apparently well on the way to becoming everyday fixtures, one question that comes to mind: Does this mean we’re going to be getting flying cars soon?

Back To Top
Closing

Check back here on Friday for the hunt for the good in The Darkest Hour

Back To Top
References

1. Ji-Hye, Shin. “KIRIA Robotics – The Future is Here.” Korea IT Times 24 April 2012.

2. Young, Grace. “Are Workforce Robots the Next Big Thing? Rodney Brooks Gives a Definite Yes.” MIT Entrepreneurship Review 12 April 2011.

3. Schroeder, Stan. “Foxconn To Replace Some of Its Workforce With 1 Million Robots.” Mashable Business 1 August 2011.

Back To Top

[Wōdnes-dæg] If the Bard’s a Barrister, What’s in it for his Audience?

Introduction
Shakespeare’s Education
Elizabethan Litigiousness
Playgoers Themselves
Closing
References

{The Sander’s Portrait. Image from an article hosted on the University of Guelph website.}

Introduction

A recent article from newswise points to some research being done at the University of Mississippi by one Professor Gregory Heyworth. Professor Heyworth’s query: Was Shakespeare an Attorney?

Professor Heyworth bases his question on a comparison of a known signature of the Bard’s with one found on the “Archaionomia,” a famed Elizabethan collection of Anglo-Saxon laws. Using the newest in digital imaging technology, Professor Heyworth and three graduate students were able to impose the signature in question on one that’s certified to be genuine. However, the article never really gives a conclusion to the story since the research appears to be ongoing.

In any case, that’s one detailed look at old ink.

But it does raise the intriguing question of whether or not Shakespeare was a lawyer. It’s intriguing because so little is known about his life between his time at grammar school and his fame as a playwright. If Shakespeare was a lawyer of whatever stripe it could also nicely relate to the abundance of legal references in Shakespeare’s plays.

However, it doesn’t have to be that simple. Even Professor Heyworth and his team admit that it might not be the signature of the famous playwright William Shakespeare that they’re superimposing over the Bard’s authentic mark. “There were multiple people with that name” at the time,” Professor Heyworth noted.¹

Even if it does, someday, turn out to be the Bard’s signature and it comes to light that he indeed was an attorney before he became famous as a playwright, there’s the question of his education.

Back To Top
Shakespeare’s Education

If the records we have for his birth are accurate, he started life shortly before April 26, 1564.² However, rather than going onto university at the the age of 14 (as was standard at the time), he was pulled from the system. For his father had gone too far into debt, and had lost his social standing in Stratford,³ due in part to charging too much interest on a loan and, possibly, due to his being a Catholic.

Although Shakespeare becomes hard to track after leaving the school system, it’s fair to say that if he had gone to university and studied law there would be some record of (or from) his doing so.

A lack of such a record could be chalked up to a loss of these documents in a fire or a theft, but that’s an event that wouldn’t have been forgotten or left out of history books.

On the other hand, perhaps Shakespeare’s education in grammar school and contemporary London was enough to land him a position as a document reviewer of sorts. Someone who didn’t study law to practice it, but who was well enough aware of the way language worked to be a legal copy-editor. That kind of exposure to legal material would definitely brand it into your memory and then you’d be able to pull it out for plays and cocktail parties with ease.

Such a proposition might not be as wild as you think, since, much like modern America, the people of Elizabethan London were often suing each other.

Back To Top
Elizabethan Litigiousness

A lot of their litigiousness had to do with accusations of business malpractice, family relations (usually in-laws and step-children), or with interest and loans. This last one was hotly debated at the time because orthodox Christian belief bans interest, whereas economic theory and practice had no problem with it. Loans with interest helped keep people from being cheated, though charging ‘too much’ interest was regarded in the same light.

Further, from what’s left in documents of the time (diaries, plays, treatises), it seems that the law was not just the exclusive concern of a group of highly trained individuals. These individuals definitely would have an incredible depth of legal knowledge, but the common man or woman might also have a considerable amount of legal know-how when it came to inheritance or the maximum interest rate. Not only were they litigious, but the common people of Elizabethan England did consist of a trading class, and this trading class would’ve had to have dealt with the law in some way or other.

Back To Top
Playgoers Themselves

Now, if Shakespeare’s plays are packed with legal terms and references, why didn’t these discourage or disinterest playgoers? If the playgoers of Shakespeare’s day just wanted bawdy comedy or gory spectacle, why bother going to see the latest play by the guy who puts all of that the legal jargon on the stage? Either people were interested in such things for some now lost reason, or these references resonated or intrigued because of some level of familiarity.

The fact that Elizabethans weren’t shy about bringing each other to court suggests just such a general familiarity.

Back To Top
Closing

So, the question “what were playgoers getting out of these legal references, if anything?” needs to be added to the question of the Bard’s being a barrister. Maybe these nods to the law and its terminology was a bit of a thrill because playgoers were familiar with them. Maybe they worked because such references offered special insight into a society that seemed alien and closed off to them (that of a legal specialist, who knew the law’s theory as well as practice).

Feel free to add your thoughts in the comments.

And, on Friday, check back here for an attempt to redeem the megaflop Gigli.

Back To Top
References

1. “Was the Bard a Barrister? Signature Analysis May Offer Clues.” Newswise, 23 March 2012.

2. “William Shakespeare.” Wikipedia. 23 March 2012.

3. “Elizabethan Education.” William Shakespeare Biography. 28 March 2012.

Back To Top

[Moon-dæg] Some Pros, Some Cons, Some Future Freelance Writing Planning

{Image from CountryLiving.com}

Much like any big decision, after you’ve got the facts, it’s important to look at things logically. When it comes to considering going full time as a Freelance Writer, there are a few things in particular that need to be considered.

Since some might say it’s the most important part of a job, let’s start with the happiness factor.

Freelance writing seems to be an idyllic career move from a personal standpoint. I’ve always wanted to write, and I get a definite rush from selling that writing or being paid to do it. So, the life of a freelance writer would be quite rich in the fulfillment sense.

Plus, there’s the flexibility that comes with being a freelancer – the notoriety and the prestige even. The last two will come over time, as more and more articles, content, and stories are written and seen. That leaves flexibility as the one immediate “intangible” benefit.

Now, flexibility can be hard to manage at first. The willpower to sit down and write is sometimes overshadowed by the willpower to just hunker down and play more Skyward Sword or Mother 3 or to hang around on YouTube.

Still, it seems that underpinning flexibility is “self-discipline,” something my erstwhile kung fu instructor explained as “the will to do what you don’t want to do but have to do.” After six and a half years at that learning forms (aka katas) and how to do a variety of push-ups, sitting down and writing seems easy in comparison.

However, as a person whose only worked service and research jobs in the past, getting used to the idea that a “job” will end but your work will continue takes time. At time it feels like a fisherman might after seeing his latest catch devoured by a cat. Working multiple jobs at the same time definitely cuts down on the deflated feeling after one’s done, but then we get into the fact that freelancing is not stable work.

This is probably the biggest con of going full time with freelancing. After all, unsteady work means an unsteady income. Though as a member of the “Boomerang Generation,” it seems logical that the best move is to go for the opportunity that will pay off the most in the long term rather than the short term.

Freelancing in general is more of a slow burn. Income gradually pops over it rather than needing to be pulled out in wads like a propane tank in a bonfire. Besides, as long as bad months still see at least $800 and good months see at least $2300 coming in, then things will keep balanced.

Of course, anything with great promise carries with it great risk. Though, the lack of steady work and cushy company benefits of any sort right now don’t seem particularly harsh. With a good name and a solid reputation the work will grow steadier, and the pay will get better. Plus, there are writers guilds and groups that can take the sting out of some costs of living.

Yet, there’s a word in that sentence that is still troubling: “will.”

That word is troubling since it makes it clear that freelancing is something long range, long term. Those sorts of jobs are foreign territory. In fact, long term planning has never really been something I’ve done – opportunity has simply linked to opportunity in the past. So the long range is a range I’ve never really needed to worry about. It’s a range I’m not used to worrying about.

As a result, I’ve got some mixed feelings on that front of freelancing. But they’ll be saved for the full moon next week.

Before that happens though, come check out an article about Shakespeare’s possible ties to the legal world on Wednesday, and a Friday review of the strange-sounding Gigli.

Back To Top

[Wōdnes-dæg] Preppers: Not Starchy and Dull Ties, but Freeze Dried Food and Bartering

Introduction
Going too Far
Some Possible Disasters
Conclusion
References

This entry’s topic is a bit of a cheat, since it didn’t come from a newspaper or a Google Alert. I’m letting it slide in since I did get it through email, it was unexpected, quite surprising, and it offers a whole group to learn about.

{Preppers. Even National Geographic is curious, enough to make a show about them. Picture from Doomsday Preppers’ Overview page}

Introduction

Preppers, people who are preparing for what they believe is an imminent disaster or cataclysm,¹ might seem a little crazy to some. People a little too close to the paranoid thinking espoused by people like Glen Beck. But before jumping to any conclusions, let’s see the extent of Preppers’ preparations.

Based on the content of Prepper.org, it seems like they do it all.² But, the three mainstays, understandably, look like becoming self-reliant for food, bartering, and self-defense.

The first two are understandable.

Bartering doesn’t necessarily need to undercut money or the economy, it could be used to buttress it in some ways.

And learning how to grow your own food, make your own flour,³ and so on and so on are all really important things. Doing things in the old ways helps to perpetuate those ways. In a way, people who know how to mill their own flour are living pieces of history while the rest of us still buy it from store shelves. Stockpiling food can be problematic, however.

Nonetheless, if you’re expecting civilization to collapse, it makes sense that you’d want to make sure you can defend yourself, but this sort of preparation is where the movement starts to sound less quaint and becomes vaguely threatening.

Going too Far

Yes, if society as we know it collapses, that means that the law might lose its power to maintain order. And a return to what some call “natural law” would not be pretty. But to take preparations to the extreme of stocking up on guns and ammo is simply going too far.

Getting firearms or archery training in preparation strains the boundary, but still seems somewhat sensible. If it makes a person feel safe, that’s great, but it suggests too firm a belief in the imminent collapse of society.

Some Possible Disasters

Now, there is a lot going on across the world to suggest something might be coming down the tubes shortly.

The problem of having a money based more on an idea or series of concepts than any tangible thing (like gold); a new disease breaking out of laboratories and causing a pandemic; an earthquake that will finally cut large pieces of California and British Columbia away from the North American continent; a zombie apocalypse.

Okay, the last one’s made up, but all of these scenarios seem to lean so heavily on things out of people’s control or their own self interest that zombies may as well be included in a list of possibilities.

A small group of people may have a lot of sway over the global economy but what do they have to gain if that economy crumbles? Without that sort of system in place all of their value becomes meaningless. If you were in such a powerful position wouldn’t you do everything possible to serve your best interest as well as, at least nominally, the best interest of everyone else?

The same goes for the fear over scientists potentially publishing their findings about making avian flu transmittable between mammals.³ Human hubris doesn’t put people beyond trying to spread it in the mistaken belief that they have an antidote and will be safe. All the same, if pandemic strikes and the world’s population is decimated where does that leave the survivors re: its resources? A power vacuum might exist, but society would also be entirely re-ordered.

Conclusion

Times are tough, economies are eccentric, and people might be getting more paranoid as a result. But it’s important to remember that as much as there’s a lot going on in the world, ours is also a world in which its easier than ever to see/read/listen to what’s going on.

Our high level of connectivity means we get more news, the fact that a lot of it is negative definitely isn’t going to help us feel better about the future. But it’s more a matter of volume than of content. Bad things happened all over the world before we could read about them with just a click or a flick.

Nonetheless, Preppers should be commended for their dedication to their beliefs. And, ultimately, for those of us who are perhaps more optimistic, for their preparing themselves as potential teachers as well. And if there is no major disaster, then at the least there will be a whole subculture that keeps extreme DIY attitudes alive while the rest of us rely more and more on each other.

References

1. Forsyth, Jim. “Subculture of Americans prepares for civilization’s collapse.” Reuters 21 Jan 2012.

2. The Prepper Networks. Prepper.org. 2009-2010.

3. Branswell, Helen. “Future work on lab-made bird flu viruses should be done in most secure labs.” Winnipeg Free Press 6 March 2012.

[Moon-dæg] A Tag Team Logical Approach to the Choice of Teachers College

Introduction
Writing And Teaching Together
The Reality of Writing
The Reality of Teaching
Tag-Ins
Writing’s Challenges
Conclusion

Introduction

Through Another cycle the moon has its way made,
and now through the end of a mire of thoughts we wade.

Yes, this is the entry for the waning of the moon – the second logical look at this lunar month’s topic: going to teachers college.

A number of angles have been considered over the past few entries in the series, and it seems that the best one to really clasp onto is the thought that extra training really isn’t the answer. After all, it’s not for a lack of training that teaching is an option.

In fact, last week’s entry definitely had a good point to make. Writing needs to be considered a serious option.

Writing and Teaching Together

Now, teaching and writing do go hand in hand like milk and cookies or butter and popcorn or a sharp cheddar and a fine red wine. But some cookies go better alone, some popcorn is best left naked, and sometimes the wine is all you need.

Yet, considering the fact that drained a PhD of its allure (aside from a sense that all the extra training would never get used) is that writing and teaching would need to be balanced, makes me doubtful of going to teachers college.

If teaching is what I want to get into, then there are colleges that will happily take an applicant with a master’s degree. With plenty of freelance writing work packed for the duration, even a temporary college teaching gig would work. Or I could just hop back over the ocean for a spell.

However, what has made teachers college less appealing is the simple fact that it will not guarantee a job at its end. Though throughout the year-long course opportunities would be had and connections would be made. And I would learn how to teach – or at the least, pick up some useful hints. All the same, if all that’s to be gotten out of teachers college is a few names to add to my network, and a few teaching tips, then it becomes little more than a year-long, several thousand dollar conference on education.

The Reality of Writing

Writing is the better choice. And, tempering my reasoning with some subjectivity, it’s a lot more enjoyable. If the world ran on human laughter or feelings of elation, then writing would be all I’d need to do. But anything indie like that is something that’s built up slowly.

Yet, writing’s slow build figures into my broader philosophy entirely well. A small flame burning faithfully through the night and into the next day is better than a bonfire that needs to be constantly fueled then flags and dies only moments after you’ve run out of feed.

It may be excessive pride, it may be the foolishness of youth, or it might just be the rush that writing gives, but pursuing writing makes more sense to me. Teacher’s college is stable, and kind of dull. It’s like riding the bus somewhere in a city whereas writing is like walking. Slower, and perhaps less intensely peopled, but more rewarding in the end.

Writing might lack the stability of something like teaching, and the challenges might be more multiple in writing but that makes writing more rewarding. Nothing worth doing is ever easy.

The Reality of Teaching

As much as it seemed like a logical next step when I applied to teachers college last fall, I declared that teaching was my passion and calling after having my first good class in South Korea. In hindsight, it seems that the announcement was more likely the passion itself speaking rather than me.

Moreover, 20 teaching hours and 10 prep hours per week aren’t really comparable to the sort of work that would be expected in Ontario – even for a high school teacher. While the teaching and prep hours might be the same (or less, or greater), I would be involved in more things than my Korean school’s meetings in restaurants and such.

Of course, all of that sounds like the writhing of a man pinned down by an uncomfortable idea. Writhing caused by the feeling that, as I mentioned in last week’s entry, I would be simply caving to the social pressure of being told that “teacher” is the default job for an English/History major.

{Blake and Sartre.}

Time to tag in Blake.

William Blake may have a point with: “to be in a passion you good may do” (William Blake, Auguries of Innocence), but if that passion is cast on you like a cloak rather than put on by your own two hands is it necessarily proper to you?

Okay! Bring in Sartre!

And would Jean-Paul Sartre, a man who thought a lot about freedom, regard my choosing to go to teachers college (and therefore make myself mean “teacher” more formally) as a really a free choice, if it’s not a meaning that I’ve made on my own, but rather a meaning that’s been presented to me over and over again so that I’m open to it?

And bring it back to me!

But those last two paragraphs, quotes (*ahem* tag-ins) aside, are steeped in rhetoric and feeling and not necessarily deduced from anything.

Writing’s Challenges

Without the Internet, it would be easy to say that teaching is stable work and writing is not. Of course, there are still thin months for writers, but having to weather a few thin months as opposed to a waiting period of up to five years for regular employment sounds like a better, more stable, deal.

Yet, throughout my life people have said, when asked about writing for a living, “don’t do it” (Thomas King‘s exact answer to the question, given to me when I was a student in Guelph). But that just makes me want to dig in my heels and try harder.

Certainly it takes someone special to teach well, and someone special to really bring material alive for people, but it also takes someone special to write well, and to bring ideas and emotions alive with only ink and paper (or pixels on a screen).

Somehow dealing with words directly has more appeal to me, perhaps (despite the possibility of posting videos and audio clips online) because of a belief that more people can meaningfully understand words alone than can understand a man standing in front of a camera.

Further, those words on a page won’t misdirect with potentially confusing gestures or intonations. A bit of reading experience and maybe a dictionary or thesaurus, and writing can be understood by most anyone, regardless of their learning style. Plus, it gives a more concrete reference point than an online video or audio clip.

Conclusion

Ultimately, I could teach, but I’d rather write. And as much as the two are compatible, I feel like I’m too single-minded and stubborn to mingle them together.

So, teacher’s college, it could be some wild good times. And it could lead to a steady, solid career, but I don’t see it necessarily leading to a maximally happy life. In fact, I think I’d be better off skipping teacher’s college and just going out for college teaching or returning to South Korea. I feel fine about either of those combined with writing. They seem a better fit, and a stronger match.

I’ll still wait for the replies from the teachers colleges to which I applied, but can’t say with certainty that they’ll be hearing much back from me.

Taking writing over formal teaching training may seem illogical, but I’m no robot and not all of my actions can be governed by logic alone. So I will write and write, and probably teach some on the side.

Let me know what you think about combining teaching and writing or the usefulness of teachers college in the comments. And feel free to follow my blog, I’ll follow yours back.

The topic for the next four-parter is still being worked out. In the meantime check back here Wednesday and Friday. On Wednesday an article about the “Preppers” movement will go up, and on Friday a review of “Immortals” will be posted.

[Moon-dæg] Same-Sex Parents And the Idea of "Family"

By the time that this is posted Christmas will have come an gone yet again, but I still want to take a moment to write about an idea that many associate quite closely with the holiday, at least since the 19th century if not earlier. That idea is family. Simple, direct, easy to figure out. But complex, nuanced, and something tricky to really prove.

The first sort barely really needs any explanation. Blood relations are family for sheerly biological reasons at the least. It’s our gene pool and we’re swimming in it constantly. Even if you differ from your parents in some way or another, barring a negative paternity test, they are the ones who conceived, bore, and (probably) raised you. But this would be an uncharacteristically short entry if I just ended it here.

What about the families that are based on less concrete biological data? Couples that can’t have children of their own or who prefer to adopt and do so? Very few would question their being a family in a sense that is on par with those who are joined by clear red or blue lines. There are things in common, the parents raise the children, the children teach the parents in one way or another. The two different sorts of families are very similar.

Now here’s the beef in this issue of what a “family” is.

If it’s pretty widely accepted that adopted children are as much, legally, morally, and socially, the children of their adoptive parents as biological children are of biological parents then why is there such a kerfuffle around same-sex couples adopting children?

Same sex couples are subjected to the same sort of tests and screenings to ensure that a hopeful adoptive couple must undergo to prove that they are stable and child-friendly. All of the same legal paperwork needs to be completed. And so I really don’t see why there is still a societal stigma around same-sex couples adopting children. Or rather, around children raised by same sex couples.

The myth that having two fathers or two mothers will somehow twist a child’s mind or morals is entirely unfounded. In fact, I would say that it’s as true as thinking that “gay” is a thing that can be cured through prayer and religion. Mental contortion of the sort that covers over biological facts and natures is an amazing human feat, and if we are only using 10% of our brain most of the time it is even more so.

If you have your doubts about how having two same-sex parents take a look at this video.

Granted, the young man making the statement in that clip is one of his parent’s biological children. But, speaking in terms of contrast to the traditional nuclear family, that still stands as stark proof that one parent of each gender is not needed to raise to a well-adjusted member of society.

So what’s the point of all this? What am I getting at here?

In the end, what I’m working towards is the idea that, yes, the social construct known as the family is changing, but that change isn’t a bad thing. Many moral philosophies and religions are based on the family as the microcosm of a society.

Confucianism, for example, teaches that if you want peace in the state you need peace in the family. At the center of Christianity (even if these parents are shunted aside in some sects) is the trio of Mary, Joseph, and Jesus.

There’s no doubt that in civilization as it has been known throughout recorded history the family plays an important role. But I don’t see the changes to the family (or “attacks on” depending on who you’re talking to) as being particularly detrimental to the overall continuation/progress of humanity at large.

In a nuclear family if you strip away the blood ties you have a social system with two authority figures in varying capacities. Plus one or more civilian, if you will, who is to be educated in the ways of the world by those authority figures. And you have this unit in mundane situations through which all of those involved need to navigate and rely on each other in varying combinations to ensure the success of all involved.

Start up something similar, but don’t bother with the blood ties, and the same thing remains true. Authority figures. Civilian(s). Situations and interdependence among the units of a society/family.

They aren’t very frequent, but every now and then an article about the need to teach younger generations empathy through reading or other in-depth interactions comes in a newspaper or through email. This is really where people concerned with the crumbling of society or harmonious togetherness need to concentrate their efforts.

Families without blood ties between parents and children, or even without a male and a female parent aren’t going to steer their children down any more blind alleys than tidy upright goodie ablewife and primington husband, Bible thumpers extraordinaire.

Leviticus doesn’t just condemn gays, after all. If you’ve ever gotten a little trim or shaved your beard you’ll also need to get used to searing temperatures and long-lasting torment (Leviticus 19:19 states “Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard”).

So actually read the Bible, with all of its books and letters and stories, and characters. And really get in touch with narrative and with imagining the joys and suffering of others. After all, that same Confucian maxim about a peaceful family leading to a peaceful state goes further and says that a peaceful individual needs to have a peaceful mind. It’s hard to war within your mind when you’ve read of bloodshed and felt the lines of anguish in a person’s face through the lines of text in a book.