bearing blog


bear – ing n 1  the manner in which one comports oneself;  2  the act, power, or time of bringing forth offspring or fruit; 3 a machine part in which another part turns [a journal ~];  pl comprehension of one’s position, environment, or situation;   5  the act of moving while supporting the weight of something [the ~ of the cross].


  • Speechless.

    Sometimes I don't write at length about something because it upsets me to even think about it.

    I can tweet, and I can post links to Facebook, but when I sit down and try to organize a set of original thoughts into a persuasive or at least coherent whole, my heart goes into my mouth and I sit dumbly at the keyboard.

    I place my hands in the home position.  I put them back in my lap.

    I lapse out of prose.

    + + +

    So, if I detach myself long enough to think in a way that feels, to me, like clarity

    (and I should acknowledge that it is a mark of high privilege that today's politics can be for me a thought experiment instead of a trauma)

    I can observe that the principle of double effect is always at work,

    and that it damns those who would do harm to children and families

    in order to seek a particular end

    (an end of any kind; even an indubitably desirable one)

    by means of doing that harm and thereby instilling the fear of that harm;

    likewise does it damn those who would, somehow, reason that

    doing harm to children and families

    is a mere side effect

    of an act meant to achieve a good that is in no way proportional to the harm done.

    + + +

     

    Are we consequentialists?  The law can be consequentialist; it is not a religious teacher, after all.

    But when the lawyers wish to use religion and metaphysical morality to justify the law, 

    the law had better have learned its catechism.

    + + +

    The next thing that I observe comes from a detractor:

    "If it's wrong as you say to separate families

    [unnecessarily; that's what I say; and it usually is unnecessary]

    at the border

    because it harms children,

    then it would also be wrong

    to incarcerate a great deal of other people

    for doing —

    you know

    — crimes!"

    Well. 

    You have said so.


  • Why the NFL kneeling ban is especially bad: five things that aren’t reasons, and one thing that is.

    The NFL's decision to fine teams when a player kneels during the national anthem is a particularly bad policy, one that the American public  should strongly oppose.

    Let's be clear on the reason for its particular badness, and why it particularly deserves our scorn.

     

    640px-San_Francisco_49ers_National_Anthem_Kneeling_(37721041581)

    Photo: Keith Allison

    I give you:  five things that are not reasons, and one thing that is.

     

    (1) Has the policy earned our particular scorn because it requires certain players to violate their own consciences, by making them express a certain message even if they do not agree with the message?

    No. 

    This cannot be the reason, because it's not quite accurate.  Under the new rule, players are permitted to remain in the locker room during the national anthem.  The NFL says they will not punish its employees merely for declining to participate in the NFL's preferred expressive act.  The punishment is exacted only if the employees engage in a particular different expressive act.   The employees are not required to express the NFL's message; they are, rather, forbidden to express a different one.  

    Is there a categorical difference?  Coming from my philosophical background, I say yes.  The duty to speak the truth, like any positive duty, does not compel us at every moment; for proportionate reasons, we sometimes rightly refrain from speaking and acting in truth.  This is different from our duty not to tell lies, which is always in force.  The players are not, technically, compelled to violate their consciences, because they are not compelled to engage in the NFL's preferred expression.  It would be a different matter if the rules did not permit players to abstain; but they do.

    That permission to abstain outright from appearing during the anthem also probably sufficiently (under employment law) accommodates players who might have a religious objection to honoring the flag.

    We shall have to look for another reason.

     

    (2 )Has it earned particular scorn because it violates the players' First Amendment rights?  

    No. It does not violate them.

    The First Amendment protects us from government-compelled speech (including acts that signify meaning, like "stand and show respect.")  The NFL is not the government, and so the First Amendment doesn't constrain it, but rather protects it as it protects all our businesses and employers.  Private entities, such as the NFL, cannot violate the First Amendment by requiring a certain kind of speech as a condition of employment, nor by prohibiting a certain kind of speech.  So even if the rules did compel the players to be on the field standing during the anthem, it would not be a violation of the First Amendment.

     

    (3) Even if the NFL has benefited from taxation structures and public funds?

    No.  It does suggest a means by which the scorning public can react by withdrawing government support or by making that support conditional on different behavior; but government support doesn't turn them into the government.  And so the special indignation that Americans should properly have towards First Amendment violators is still not in play.

    This isn't the reason.

     

    (4) Has it earned particular scorn because the policy is an example of bad faith on the part of management in a labor dispute?  

    No. 

    It's still unclear whether any aspects of the NFL's policy violates the collective bargaining agreement.   The players are unionized, and the union can make use of an established process to challenge perceived violations.   In this sense, it's no different from any other rules that an employer may try to push through only to find later that the collective bargaining agreement will not permit it; and perhaps, even if challenged, the policy will be upheld.  Furthermore, if it is upheld, the players have another recourse: can bring the issue to the table the next time collective bargaining begins.   So:  this isn't the reason why we should be particularly scornful of this rule.

     

    (5) Has it earned our scorn because it represents a kind of retribution for unpopular or offensive speech?   

    No.  The mere fact that it is retribution for speech is not enough to earn most people's scorn.

    It would seem that m0st of us do not scorn people who exact retribution from speakers on account of disliking the speech, provided that the retribution is itself legal.  Recall this xkcd cartoon, which by all accounts was shared by people across the political spectrum:

    Free_speech

    This cartoon clearly asserts, and even honors, a right of private actors to exact retribution for speech that the private actors view as wrong.

    The value expressed by the cartoon, like so many clearly stated values, cuts multiple ways.  Just as I don't have to listen to or host speech that I think is bullshit—just as I have a moral right and a First Amendment right to react honestly with my own speech and meaningful acts — the NFL has that, too.  The NFL doesn't have to listen to what protesting players say; it doesn't have to host them while they say it.  They are not shielded from criticism of their protests, nor from financial consequences; they may be yelled at, boycotted, fired; if the NFL thinks they are being assholes, the NFL gets to show them the door.  

    No, in fact, the NFL, like any other business, is itself protected by the First Amendment.  They get to send the message they want to send.  That's their right of expression.

    The NFL's policy is an expressive act.  The primary effect of its permitting players only a single visible response to the United States flag and national anthem is not, actually, to silence the players.   I mean, they're trying to, but not very effectively. 

    No, the primary effect of this policy is the promulgation of a specific message that the NFL itself wants to express.

    And that's where we come to the reason why the NFL policy deserves our particular scorn:

     

    The reason the NFL policy deserves our particular scorn is because of the content of the NFL's own message.

    By enacting this policy, the NFL says:

    • There is only one way to love, to will good for, to be grateful for, this country. 
    • There is only one way to respond to a symbol that represents the country's values.
    • Only uncritical love for the republic counts as respect, or as patriotic, or as honorable.
    • To peacefully demonstrate a desire for justice for all fails to respect the republic for which it stands.

    And there's something especially bad about this message.

    It is not just a political message.

    It is an anti-American message.  

    It is uniquely anathema to fundamental American values.

    + + +

    Indeed, employers have the right to send all sorts of messages.   They can and do send messages that are false, dangerous, harmful, or downright evil.  It happens all the time.   Of course, the thing about merely bad speech is that honest people can honestly disagree about what constitutes bad speech.  Some businesses say things that I think are good and other reasonable people, who come at life from a direction different from mine, think are wrong.  Other businesses say things that I think are wrong and other reasonable people think are good.   I can object, using my own speech.  They can object, using theirs.  This is, generally, okay, and consistent with the fundamental values on which the nation was founded.  It is one of the ways that we give and take and push and pull against one another's ideas, a way we come to some equilibria where we can live next to one another in relative peace and freedom to go our own ways.

    But—and I get to say this, because it's my thought—

    This message? It is not okay, and it is fundamentally un-American, precisely because it attempts to claim monopoly over American-ness.

    The NFL is trying to speak for the whole country, and trying to say what love of the country means, and how it must be expressed.

    It's trying to control the narrative about how to love, and how not to love, the United States.

    And it's using the symbol of the entire United States to do it.

    They are trying to enact a lie in my name, and in the name of everyone in the country.

    I say we should not leave the NFL's message unchallenged. 

    I say we should start showing them the door.

     

     

    (Photo of San Francisco 49ers kneeling by Keith Allison under a Creative Commons license.)


  • The year of three languages.

    Mark and the three older kids are gone camping this weekend, and Saturday was cold and drizzly, and the house was already clean because Friday I had paid a person to come clean it, so I gave the two little boys leave to play quietly and watch videos while I dove deeply into hours and hours of brain work. 

    About half of it I spent on Latin—plans for teaching it—and about half I spent on Somali—at a tedious but necessary stage of learning it.

    And somewhere on my mental to-do list, Swedish is lingering around, and I'm going to have to turn to this eventually, in June or so.

    + + +

    Somali first.  (My most recent post on learning Somali is here, containing links to earlier posts.)

    I've been cruising through the textbook at seven pages per week, aiming to hit the reading goal by the time my little study group meets again in a month.  Mainly I advance through the book all at once in a few hours on a Saturday, making flash cards as I go out of the exercises, and I review the flashcards daily thereafter.

    I didn't quite make my goal last week because when I ran up against declining nouns with the definite article appended, I couldn't hold all the different rules for spelling changes in my head at once.  

    Summary of what I'm trying to learn. 

    • Noun cases are subject, genitive, vocative, and absolutive (think none-of-the-above).  To change the case or the number, you change the ending, mostly, and also the stress-tone pattern.
    • But when you append the definite article suffix, you have to use a fifth form, called the premodifier, that is unmarked for case.  It may have a different ending, too.
    • The case marker appears instead in the choice of article:  -ta, or -tíi, or -ka, or kíi, for absolutive, and -tu, or -tii, or -ku, or -kii, for subject. 
    • (-t- is for feminine nouns and -k- is for masculine nouns). 
    • But for sound-production reasons, depending on the ending of the noun's premodifier form, a -t- may change to a -d- and the -k- may change to a -g- or a -h- or be deleted.  Also sometimes before -k- the last vowel of the noun changes to match the vowel of the article.
    • In most of the declensions, pluralizing the noun changes its ending and its gender.

    So far, given a noun, I learn the singular absolutive; the plural absolutive; then I learn how to change both to the premodifier form; then I have to decide "is it masculine or feminine?"; then I have to work out whether the ending is one that requires changing the -t- or -k- to something else; finally, if it's a -k-, whether I need to change a vowel too. 

    (I'll get into the difference between, say, -ku and -kii, some other time.  I haven't entirely learned it.  The latter is kind of like a demonstrative, but with some additional layers.)

    So, I didn't do very well on my first set of exercises, and I decided yesterday that what I really needed was to write out a whole lot of nouns from all seven declensions, one case and number at a time, so I could see the patterns.  Then I could sort the nouns in each declension into groups according to what happened to their endings.

    Behold!  Ecce!  Waa kan!   I have about ten pages of this, organized by declension and number.

    IMG_5288

      IMG_5289

    The issue here is that the book teaches the organization of nouns in a way that isn't the way I've had success in other languages.  I need to mentally hang each new noun on a "hook" that's, essentially, "nouns that decline just like this one."  There are more hooks in Somali than there are in Latin or French, but otherwise the process is essentially the same.  

    So my next step is a Big Sort, and then I can start thinking about nouns, "Well, this one declines like saaxibad" and I'll be able to start hanging them up one at a time.

    + + +

    Okay, moving on to Latin.  I'm going to save most of this for another series of posts, but I spent a lot of yesterday working out how to put all the different pieces of next year's Latin goals together.  I really, really love Lingua Latina, the curriculum I've now switched to, and the kids are enjoying it a lot; but it's super freeform compared to the Mother of Divine Grace lesson plans for Henle Latin , which I used with the kids who are now graduating.   

    Last time, I needed the structure of MODG/Henle when I was learning along with the kids.  MODG's spiral-bound syllabus literally laid out exactly what the student was to do every single day, five days a week (which vocabulary to drill, which charts to recite, which grammar concepts to read about, which exercises to do) and had a complete set of quizzes and tests.  It's also set up for self-teaching.  

    But the approach of Lingua Latina is much more fun for the next batch of kids (ages 11-15 now).  And I've got enough Latin under my belt that I can actually guide them through it.  (A motivated, language-loving, puzzle-solving sort of person could probably self-teach with it, but for all others it's better to have a guide.)  Incidentally, LL is fairly popular as a two-semester college course, which means that for me it will function as a two-year high school course and so I can get through about half of it next year.  I have a five-chapter head start so I'll do half of what's left, i.e., chapters VI through XX.

    Anyway, besides working through the text, I need to do assessments, form drills, grammar reviews, some English grammar teaching, and additional cultural/historical stuff.  And figure out the best way to fit it into each week of two 90-minute classes (each class in two sessions with a break between) and two homework assignments.  So yesterday was Massive Spreadsheet Time, but everything I put in was a placeholder; later I have to go in and work out what pages to read for each assignment, etc.

    Screen Shot 2018-05-20 at 8.00.23 AM

    I've generally worked out that I'll do each chapter in four class periods:  introduction, text, text, followup; introduction, text, text, followup.  We'll see if I can fit all the bits for each class into one 90-minute period plus one homework assignment.  

    Don't @ me for putting in my spreadsheet, e.g., "Show me exercitia" instead of "Show me exercitiam."  I can't code-switch that quickly when I'm trying to organize.

    + + +

    OK now, Swedish.

    Not much advancement in that area, just a little tickle in the brain, but I'm pulling together the resources to pull one of my kids out of Latin and enroll him in adult language classes at the American Swedish Institute, which is a 30 minutes' walk from my house. 

    American_Swedish_Institute

    The American Swedish Institute.

    This is a classic case of Adapting the Homeschool to a Child's Specific Needs.  He is having a rough time of it in Latin with the other three kids, and he's not enjoying it at all.  Having dabbled with him in other languages here and there, I'm convinced that the problem isn't just that he Hates Latin; he is going to have to work disproportionately hard on any language, certainly harder than he wants to.

    But… foreign language is not entirely optional.  Two years are required for freshman admissions at most four-year-colleges he might apply to.  Although there are of course numerous other options out there besides freshman admission into a four-year, he wants to have a shot at this path, and so we need to find a way to hit that minimum.  

    So, this has been a mini-epiphany for me, the kind of person who always felt ashamed to be anything other than The Best or at least Near The Top.

    Sometimes… the most important thing is hitting the minimum, and doing so with the least damage to other parts of the whole person.

    And when you shift your focus from "what is the absolute optimal learning experience we can have, with the most joy and excitement and fascination and love of learning?" to "what is the best way for us to hit the minimum requirements?" — you often wind up going in an entirely different direction.

    I'll save some of that for another post, probably after we've gone to the ASI and had our introductory Swedish class.  Anyway, the point now is that I am trying to plan so that he can earn his two credits at half-pace, over four years.  I only have a vague idea at this point of how it's going to work, and to some extent we are at the mercy of the class schedule, which hasn't come out yet. 

    So the extent of my preparation is a lot of muttering of  Please please please don't let his only choice be Monday evenings.  

    This is going to be a very linguistic year.


  • Language teaching milestone, and musings on teaching what you aren’t qualified for.

    A Milestone, upon which I will give my two cents:

    On Friday, I wrote and hit "Send" on the very last assignment for the fourth year of high school Latin, at least for this particular cohort.

    I've been teaching Latin to a small group that included my oldest and H's oldest since they were about nine years old.  (I started with my oldest when he was seven; here's the proof.)  I can barely believe that after this week I won't be sending them any more assignments.

    I didn't take Latin in high school or college. I majored in engineering, not classics. I was an absolute beginner when we started, just like them—with the advantage that I had plenty of experience learning one language, namely French. 

    But I got a couple of kids all the way from beginner stuff through high school Latin IV, by dint of staying a few steps ahead ahead of them in homeschool curricula, and searching for things I didn't know whenever I realized I needed more information. 

    And, of course, by buying books.

    Behold, most of the books I used (or at least bought) over the years to teach myself and the kids (that's an aluminum meter stick in the picture for scale):

    IMG_5261

    (Not shown:  books that fell apart, books I couldn't find this morning, books still in my teenager's school bag, online resources that didn't cost me anything, and a few months' subscription to https://aeneid.co/ .)

    Now the money question:  Did I do an adequate job?

    Did I satisfy the relevant goals and purposes of learning a foreign language in high school?  (See here for a discussion.)

    Did they learn it well, compared to how they might have done in an institutional school?

    Well, I wasn't able to talk either of them into taking the AP® Latin exam, but they did sit for the National Latin Exam every year and always scored pretty close to the national "par"; a couple of times one or the other earned a certificate or a medal by scoring above average.  If either of them ever sits for a placement test for college, I'll let you know.

    Their grammar work definitely interlaced with their work in English grammar and rhetoric, and their studies of literature, culture, and history interlaced with the heavily-classical program of literature study that H. designed for them.  (Ninth-grade English literature was practically all ancient authors, plus Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.).

    At the advanced levels, they translated and read a lot of Caesar, read a big chunk of Vergil, and dabbled in the translation and reading of an assortment of other writers:  off the top of my head:  Horace, Catullus, Ovid, Pliny, Eutropius, probably a dozen more.  They liked some more than others.  

    Both are thinking seriously about college-level language study now:

    • My son has already corresponded with freshman advisors and decided that if he has to take any language in college, he'll start with a 200-level Latin class that provides a comprehensive grammar review followed by studying Ovid's Metamorphoses, which we've only dabbled in at home.  
    • H's son is studying modern Italian on his own and hopes to continue.   Motivation?  A beloved uncle has married an Italian citizen and moved to Sardinia to start a family.  He's already remarked on the head start that Latin gave him for this.

    Finally—I can't be sure of this, because they are kind young men who don't complain to me much—but I think they enjoyed themselves.

    I definitely enjoyed myself.

    + + +

    Anyway, all this is to say: There's this idea that you have to know a subject to teach a subject. Sometimes that's true; but another way is for a lead-learner to set the pace and learn alongside the other students. 

    (Psst:  Eventually, the boys got better at parts of it than I did.  They spent much more time doing homework problems; I could cheat with the answer key.)

    Let me be clear:  I had a lot of advantages that not everyone would have here:

    • It helps to be interested in the subject.
    • It helps to have experience with self-teaching.  (I do.)
    • It helps to be motivated to help the kids succeed.
    • It helps to be rich in resources, time, and connections, all of which I have the privilege of enjoying.  (How much do you think those books cost me, in money and time?  How many of my friends who have studied Latin or classics do you think I reached out to for a question now and again?)

    I would never call it an easy way to do things.

    But I'd also never call it impossible, at least not with sufficient support.  And don't forget, you always get to ask for help.

    If you get a takeaway from this, here's what I suggest: Don't talk, ever, as if it's necessary to hold an external qualification in x, y, or z to help your kid learn it at home.

    Don't say it about yourself, and don't say it about other people.

    Seriously:  I never want to hear you say "Oh, I'm not qualified" or "Do you really think you're qualified?"

    There may be obstacles, but there's no reason to add to them by giving voice, unnecessarily, to a certainty of failure that isn't certain at all.

    (Behold the closeups you're going to ask me for.  Left to right:)

    IMG_5262

     

    IMG_5263

     

    IMG_5264

     

     

    IMG_5265


  • Af-Soomaali, continued.

    You may remember that I have been studying the Somali language — here are a few previous posts about it.

    I took a series of twelve two-hour continuing-education classes at  the closest community college.   The pedagogy was… all over the place?  The instructor didn't really come in with a detailed syllabus, a pre-existing idea of what one should learn,  or a plan with more than minimal structure. 

    But what he was, and this I think is more valuable than an organized syllabus, was friendly, approachable, generous, patient, and interesting.  After the very first class, when he had a lecture prepared about the historical, geographical, and cultural background of the language, he took a very casual approach. He came in and chatted with us.  We had a textbook, we asked "how do you say such-and-such a thing?" and he answered.  We took notes.   We learned about the culture of the Somali diaspora.  We heard his views of the challenges facing members (especially children) of that community here in Minneapolis.  We talked about the vocabulary needed by health care providers, elementary school teachers, and social workers.  

    It wasn't like other language classes I have taken, and it wasn't what I thought I wanted  going in, but I think it had the most important things I needed. 

    I can, after all, study grammar from books and written material, pretty well on my own.  But I was stalled without a chance to have a real conversation with a native speaker of Somali.  I'm not going to accost a random person at the YMCA or bus stop and ask them to do free labor, and (not being all that fond of small talk even in English) I'm not confident enough even to break out  the "please" "thank you" "I'm so sorry I stepped on your foot."  

    So it was really helpful to be able to pay someone to set up a formal relationship where I could ask very basic questions, and where I could hear speech, slowed down for my benefit, while the speaker wrote the words on the board and showed where the syllables began and ended.  

    + + +

    Having got a dose of interaction with the spoken language, and a sense for the flexibility of the grammar and spelling in natural language, I feel ready to invest time in working on vocabulary and grammar independently.   If I manageto reach a point where I can't get any farther without additional instruction from a native speaker, I'll look for another tutor. 

    (Meanwhile, I have the email address of the previous instructor, who implored us to email him if we have any questions later.  I do not take the value of this invitation for granted.)

    + + +

    Studying Somali has already paid off for me as a homeschooling parent, I think.  I love languages, and some of my children have progressed very well in Latin and even gone on to dabble in other languages for fun with free resources like Duolingo; but not all of my children. 

    I have one young person who seems not to be able to hold vocabulary and grammar in his head, nor to recognize cognates when he sees them.  It's been very frustrating for all of us, not the least for me because learning Latin (at least in the early stages) was easy for me.  So it's been very hard for me to understand how to help him; what worked for me hasn't worked for him, and it's tempting in the moment to believe it's because he has the wrong attitude, unhelpful study habits, poor work ethic, etc.   It's also tempting to just stop teaching him, but unfortunately persisting through a couple of years of world language classes is an entrance requirement for pretty much all colleges around here.  To give in to either of those temptations would be to do him a real disservice.

    I have to say, starting from scratch in an almost totally unfamiliar language with few recognizable cognates gave me a necessary dose of empathy and humility.  I had almost forgotten how hard it can be to learn something completely new.   It's probably not enough empathy — I still like working on hard learning for fun, and I can't easily put myself in the shoes of someone who is being made to learn something they aren't interested in learning*, but it is a start. 

    I remember reading the teacher-philosopher John Holt's recounting of this side effect of taking up the cello as an adult.  I hope it helps me help this particular kid.**

     + + +

    A general resource for language learning that's a quick read and contains all the obvious advice as well as some novel tips is Fluent Forever by Gabriel Wyner.  (He also has a website with lots of free helps, and apparently is trying to get an app backed on Indiegogo.)   

    I read Wyner's book because I was looking for new ideas, and also because a classmate in Somali 1 mentioned he had a master list of 600-some words that he suggested learning in any target language as a start. 

    The 625-word list is here — I think it could probably be improved on, but it's not a bad place for anyone to begin, especially if they're willing to adapt it to languages coming from different cultures (e.g. where it makes sense to have the word for "camel" on the list of common animals).

    The most helpful things the book has introduced to me so far: 

    • the very well-designed flashcard application Anki
    • the pronunciation website Forvo.

    Anki:  You can read about, and download, Anki here.  The desktop application is free, supported by a relatively expensive mobile app (worth every penny to me).  There are other, cheaper, and quicker-to-learn flashcard apps out there—I've been using Quizlet with the kids for Latin for a long time—but Anki is so much more powerful and l that I'm probably going to switch at least some of my homeschooled language students (such as the kid who's having difficulties) as soon as I can teach them how to use it.  

    Although it doesn't (yet?) have game-like aspects, Anki is superior to free Quizlet for two big reasons:  first, because it allows you to include photos and audio files (more on those below), but second and most importantly, because it automatically presents flashcards to you at variable intervals based on how well you have learned them; you don't have to have the discipline to work out the schedule yourself.

    Furthermore, Gabriel Wyner is offering among his free resources a few templates for useful Anki flash cards which helped me get very quickly up to speed.   These range from simple picture-word cards for learning concrete vocabulary terms, to more complicated flash cards that have you insert the correct ending for a partly-blanked-out conjugated verb.  The template for creating an "all-purpose card" looks like this:

    Screen Shot 2018-05-09 at 9.18.07 AM

    All you have to do is fill in the fields, and it generates at least one card for you, plus the "reversed" card and (if you wish) a third card that presents an audio file and asks you to produce the correct spelling.

    Forvo:  Speaking of audio files, the website Forvo.com has downloadable audio files of native speakers producing individual words.   Not only is it fun to browse, but you can insert the sound files into Anki flash cards to practice your spelling and pronunciation.  You'll have many more words available to you if your target language is widely spoken (Forvo's searchable Swedish lexicon numbers more than 114,000 words; its Somali lexicon, small enough to be presented as a list, has only 165), but even a small collection can help your ear.  I made several dozen audio flash cards in Somali.  

    + + +

    So I've been using Anki daily to make and review vocabulary and grammar.  I'm drawing a lot of the grammar examples from my (sadly, rather expensive) textbook, Colloquial Somali by Martin Orwin.

    51Glo4MKwsL._SX317_BO1 204 203 200_

    It's a pretty standard grammar text designed for self-study, with exercises (all the answers are in the back), accompanying audio files available for free download from the publisher, and a decent if limited glossary.

    One thing I've been doing differently is turning most of the exercises into flashcards.  I don't know why I've never done this before.  It's really, really helpful.  Wyner's book has some advice about how to make flashcards to learn grammar concepts, and I've been putting them into practice here for the first time.

    + + +

    I'm sure someone will want to know by now what I've learned so far.   I've been introduced to a fair amount, but I would say that what I've learned can be summed up as follows:

    • how to pronounce words from their spellings (granting that I can only approximate the pharyngeal fricatives)
    • a dozen or so verbs, maybe a hundred nouns, and a handful of stock phrases ("good morning," "what is it?," "here you are")
    • the endings for the present progressive tense and the general past tense in the first verb conjugation 
    • how  to form plurals in the first three noun declensions
    • how to make simple questions and declarative statements using subject pronouns with verbs and direct objects

    The next thing up for me is how to use the definite article. 

    I'm also occasionally looking at text written in Somali and trying to pick out words I know, or identify verbs and nouns; browsing Somali Wikipedia and the Somali-language online resources of Minnesota Public Radio; and I'm trying not to be noticed while eavesdropping on unwitting bystanders who are speaking Somali into their phones within earshot (the words for "yes" and "no" jump right out to me***, but nothing else does at this point).

    I'll update this now and again, I hope.  Practically speaking, I've turned a corner:  I've started picking up the Somali book and thumbing to the flashcards in order to procrastinate some other task I ought to be doing, which means I'm likely to keep moving forward daily, or at least every day that there's laundry to be done.

    Now if only I could transfer that last skill to my reluctant language-learning child.

    ____

    *there was that one time I had to take a graduate course in rheology thanks to having passed my oral prelims "with reservations" expressed by the department's chief rheologist

    ** Next year, we're switching him from Latin to a modern language, probably Swedish.  I look forward to writing about how that goes.  Also to learning Swedish.

    *** "haa" and "maya"

     


  • Roast beef for beginners, part II: Boeuf à la mode.

     

    Remember last week when I said I was going to learn to make roasts, and I started with the American, 1950s-style, dried-plus-condensed-soups-in foil?  And it was better than I expected?

    Yesterday I made the second one, and in an attempt to hit the polar opposite in chicness (but still fairly retro), I went with boeuf à la mode, a classic French pot roast.

    How classic, you might ask?  So classic that Samuel Pepys wrote about it:

    Against noon we had a coach ready for us, and she and I to White Hall, where I went to see whether Sir G. Carteret was at dinner or no, our design being to make a visit there, and I found them set down, which troubled me, for I would not then go up, but back to the coach to my wife, and she and I homeward again, and in our way bethought ourselves of going alone, she and I, to go to a French house to dinner, and so enquired out Monsieur Robins, my perriwigg-maker, who keeps an ordinary, and in an ugly street in Covent Garden, did find him at the door, and so we in; and in a moment almost had the table covered, and clean glasses, and all in the French manner, and a mess of potage first, and then a couple of pigeons a la esterve, and then a piece of boeuf-a -la-mode, all exceeding well seasoned, and to our great liking; at least it would have been anywhere else but in this bad street, and in a perriwigg-maker’s house; but to see the pleasant and ready attendance that we had, and all things so desirous to please, and ingenious in the people, did take me mightily.

     Well, if it will work anywhere else but in that perriwigg-maker's house on the ugly street in Covent Garden, I trust it will work in mine.

    + + + 

    I looked at several different recipes before I settled on a plan.  I had decided to make my roasts on Thursdays, my second-busiest day of the week, in order to force myself to stick only to realistic weeknight roasts.  That decision, along with its corollary (only ordinary grocery-store ingredients) helped me narrow down my choices quickly. 

    • One I thought of using purported to be from Cook's Illustrated, which is reliable, but it seemed a little fiddly for a Thursday. 
    • Another, from the New York Times, looked beautiful and authentic (it contains a pig's foot and dried porcini mushrooms), and instructs you to salt the beef two days ahead and cook it one  day ahead of serving.  I did momentarily consider cooking it the night before, which certainly would have simplified dinner on the day-of.
    • In the end I chose one that was streamlined, but that looked to have preserved the essence of the dish, and I adapted it slightly, both for our tastes and in order to do much of the prep the night before.  This let me add a couple of extra steps, such as salting the meat and letting it rest overnight before cooking, that would tweak the recipe a bit more toward the classic.

    If you want to look at a recipe in recipe format, try one of those.   Here, I'm just going to blog.

    + + +

    On Wednesday night, I started with a nearly-three-pound chuck roast ("Select," according to Mark, so not even the best chuck), patted it dry with paper towels, and plopped it onto a piece of plastic wrap. 

    Then I blended 1/4 tsp freshly grated nutmeg with 1/2 tsp kosher salt and 1/2 tsp black pepper.  Tip:  to measure nutmeg while you grate it, deposit the same measure of kosher salt into a little pile on the plate, and stop when the nutmeg-pile looks about the same or a little bigger (since it's fluffy).

    I rubbed the nutmeg mixture all over the roast, wrapped it up tightly in plastic and a zip-top bag for secondary containment, and chucked it in the fridge.

    IMG_5200

    The next step:  fat-rendering and bacon-crisping.  In the Dutch oven I started 4 ounces of bacon cooking.

    (I like to render bacon submerged in water.  It works wonderfully, and is also a good way to make breakfast bacon.  Put your bacon in the pan, cover it with about 1/4" of water, and turn up the heat.  The water comes to a boil and stays there, while the fat slowly and evenly melts out of the bacon; eventually the water boils away, leaving the fat behind, and the bacon begins to crisp.  If not enough fat has come out by the time the water is gone, add a little more.)  

    While the bacon cooked, I chopped one onion and peeled the slenderest carrots I could find, cutting thicker ones into pieces that matched.  I guessed on the quantity of carrots, enough to give everyone in the family a handful.   I wrapped the onion and carrots up and stowed them in the fridge.  And I used the time to gather other ingredients, like red wine, tomato paste, and beef broth.

    Bacon was removed to paper towels, leaving the grease behind.  

    IMG_5198      IMG_5199

    The bacon was also stored carefully in the refrigerator, after a stern warning to other family members not to touch it.  And then I put the lid on the pot, warned people equally (though probably not as necessarily) not to wash it, and left the grease till the next day.

    + + +

    Thursday in the morning I assembled my ingredients:

    IMG_5201

    After lunch I turned the oven to 300° F.   I reheated the bacon fat in the Dutch oven, unwrapped the roast, and tossed it in along with some extra kosher salt.  I browned it well, about three minutes per side in a quite-hot pan, and held it on its edge with tongs to brown on the sides for good measure.   

      IMG_5208      IMG_5209

     

    Then I removed the roast to a plate, and sautéed the diced onion in the remaining fat until it was golden.  Next, two tablespoons of tomato paste; finally, deglazed the pan with 1 tablespoon red wine vinegar and 1 cup red wine (a 2011 Bordeaux that I bought at Jungle Jim's over Christmas, probably at a good price because there is at least one more bottle in my pantry).  A cloud of scent:  wine, evaporating alcohol, beef, onion, well-smoked bacon, filled the kitchen.

    In went the crisped bacon bits,  the roast, a couple of sprigs of parsley, a bunch of fresh thyme tied up with one of its own stems, and two bay leaves.  

    IMG_5210

    Then I poured in enough beef broth to cover about 3/4 of the roast.

    IMG_5211

    Covered, into the oven it went.  This was at 2:25 p.m.

    + + +

    At 4:30 I added the carrots.  I pushed them down under the liquid surface.

    IMG_5215

     

    The lid went back on for another hour. 

    (Somewhere during that hour, I put together a spinach salad with blueberries and pine nuts.)

    And then it was time to finish the dish.

    + + +

    Uncovered, it looked like this:

    IMG_5216

     

    The carrots had acquired that speckled gloss that I associate with the best beef stews.

    I moved the roast with tongs and a spoon to a cutting board; this one did not fall completely to pieces, unlike the onion-soup roast.  I covered it with foil to rest while I steamed new potatoes (the kind that come in a microwaveable bag) and fiddled with the sauce.

    I strained the liquid, and moved the vegetables and bacon to a deep serving dish, discarding the herbs and stray bits left behind in the colander.  Then I put the liquid back in the pot and turned up the heat to reduce it by half while I sliced the roast.

    This time, the roast remained more or less sliceable.  It didn't fall apart like butter or like a school-cafeteria turkey hot shot; it sliced, although it was hard to slice it really thin because it did want to tear.  It wasn't tough.  I could slice it about three-quarters of an inch thick, and at the very ends it did fall apart into shreds.  I arranged it on the platter with the carrots, encircled it with the steamed potatoes, and poured the reduced cooking liquid (not a gravy exactly; it wasn't starch-thickened) over all.

      IMG_5217

     

    Even though they had already eaten their salads, everyone was so eager to dig into the beef that I failed to scatter parsley and lemon zest atop it for the photograph.

    + + +

    How was it?

    I came back to the table after the others had already started, since I was doing things like turning off the oven and softening butter for the bread (whole-wheat challah bought from the natural-foods co-op up the street), and Mark said to me:  "Sit down.  Listen.  Start… with the carrots."

    He held up a forkful of carrots.  "This.   This is what I think of when I think of roast beef.  The onions and the carrots underneath.  This."

    The carrots were definitely beautiful.  Luscious and melting and savory.

    "Can you put more carrots in?"

    "Yes," I said, "but I'd have to use a smaller roast or more liquid.  They have to be submerged."

    "Do it."

    + + +

    Meanwhile, the children (except the four-year-old, who is very into bread and butter) were chowing down, making little grunts of pleasure now and again.

    I turned to the beef.

    IMG_5218

    I have to say, the onion-soup beef was more tender than this one; but this one had a more pleasant texture, something that you could chew and savor.  And the flavors were fuller, cleaner, and richer.  Bacon and red wine and beef, all together, is a beautiful combination.  Mark and I drank the remaining Bordeaux with dinner, and it went down very smoothly.  

    The thin French pan sauce didn't cling like a gravy (of course, if you wanted it to, it would be a simple matter with a little butter and flour or cornstarch), but it sopped up well with a chunk of challah, and everyone cleaned their plates (except for the four-year-old, who had his plate cleaned by others.)

    + + +

    Would I make this one again?  Definitely.  It was not quite as foolproof as the onion-soup roast, and a good deal more fiddly, but not too fiddly for a Thursday night, at least not with some prep the night before.  And the results were company-quality.

    I agree with Mark that more carrots (or some other root vegetable, like parsnips) could only have improved the dish; but I'm pretty sure that I should increase all the sauce-components to keep them submerged:  the onion, tomato paste, wine, and broth.   

    Potatoes are nicer cooked in the broth, too, but really it was a good deal easier to steam them in the microwave and add them at the last minute.

    The bread was a must because of the delicious, thin sauce.  

    + + +

    I think next time I am going to try an Italian stracotto with fresh tomatoes and pesto, on top of polenta.  For now, while the spring weather is still relatively cool, I'll continue with the slow-oven method; later I will be searching out the best Instant-Pot recipes to avoid heating up the kitchen.  Stay tuned.


  • Springtime in the city.

    Yesterday was the first day above 50° F in Minneapolis.  It was Saturday; I got up early and went out to breakfast, and then decided to take a walk, just to walk and enjoy the nice weather.

    I started to drive to the lakes, where I normally go when I want to run outside, and then decided that the paths around the lakes would be insanely crowded.  So instead I turned north on Hennepin Avenue, in the busy district of Lowry Hill. I parked at the first place I found a meter-free spot, in front of an eyeglasses shop.  One-hour parking:  perfect. 

    I jettisoned the books and notebooks out of my satchel, put on my coat (it was still breezy), locked the car, and started walking north.   

    Unmistakable signs of spring made me smile:  bass thumping from a passing car with its windows open; a whiff of cigarette smoke from a coffee shop with outdoor tables; water pouring from hoses at the car wash on the corner.  And just the air of the city, outdoors, after weeks of being bundled up tight indoors.  Diesel exhaust, the splash of puddles, the soft thump of snow sliding off a roof.

    + + +

    After a few blocks I would have been walking on the berm of a highway, so I crossed the street and diverted into a residential area.  I very quickly left the busy streets behind. 

    47B77F7B-3904-4953-B650-73B5870C8913

    This neighborhood has giant Victorian houses as well as giant more-modern ones.   I have driven through here a couple of times but never walked.

    I find it pleasant to stroll through the quiet streets here, wondering how much the houses cost, admiring the landscaping.  Although the landscaping is not very attractive just now, having been buried in a foot of snow less than a week ago.

    Eventually I came to a tiny city park, less than half a city block in size, surrounded on four sides with imposing, beautiful old houses, and two-hour street parking that had plenty of empty spaces.  I made a mental note that this would be a good spot to park the car, if we wanted to take an urban hike with the children.

    The tiny park had crumbling brick paths crossing it at a diagonal and an attractively sculpted watercourse, or drainage ditch anyway.

    3FA86E46-8597-418E-98A1-F694E50AE5D8

     And one of these things.

    13E9CFA4-8478-4183-A334-CF4C4FE1B27F

     

    Look:  snow on the ground, but no boots.  I'm wearing my comfortable walking flats, the ones that took me all over London in the fall.  And the leather coat I thrifted there.  I'm still dressed as if it were autumn.

    A358997D-4DD4-4EE9-A20B-28D52AEDE767

      You can see the highway down below, between the big houses.   I passed very few people:  joggers, people walking dogs.  They smiled and said good morning. 

    Current events are on my mind.  I reflected on the fact that I have no fear whatsoever that anyone in this neighborhood will perceive me as a threat, even though I am looking around as if I don't know which way to go, even though I am taking pictures of their houses.  No one is going to call the police.  And if the police were to cruise by, I would not need to alter my path.

    455A9A41-DF5D-4CCA-9D07-C4A2F5C11532

     

     I came out of the neighborhood at the top of a hill, looking down.  A lovely spot for a cityscape.  There is the Basilica of St. Mary, to the left, where my 14yo was confirmed a couple of weeks ago.  The Irene Hixon Whitney Bridge, in pale blue that stands out and pale yellow that disappears into the trees, a truss that lets pedestrians cross from the Sculpture Garden to Loring Park on the other side of the highway.  The cityscape, crowned by the reflective IDS Center tower.  At the right, one squat corner of the Walker Art Center.

    D5FBC35F-595C-40FF-8034-1F9079A96F5D

     

    I walked down the hill and made a short loop through the Sculpture Garden.  Renovations were completed last year, but the new trees have not gotten very much bigger, and so it still looks denuded to me, compared to my memories of its old layout thick with shrubbery.  But its most iconic piece is still where it always has been.    

    53317F49-51D8-4557-AB30-3892111C31E0

     

     I squinted into the sun and took a selfie.  See what I mean about the place looking barren?  After a few years, when the young trees have filled out a bit, it will be better.

    A8B11591-6650-481A-B1EE-42613A0A44C3

     Come to think of it, it will probably look a lot better later this summer, once the landscapers have done their work.

     I finished my loop through the garden just as my phone rang the thirty-minute timer I'd set to remind me to turn around.  Back up the hill.

    203E05D3-59DB-4FED-8DF9-01D36EF5D381

     

    The Walker is the modern art museum.  I like it, but then I like art of all kinds.  

    In the summer the hillside is crowded with people enjoying the weather.  Not today.  But it won't be long.

     

    B084BBEC-D422-474F-AFBB-477D60A174FF

     

    I took the long way around, wondering how much it costs to rent one of these apartments that are here in the middle of everything with a view of the skyline.

     

    8064AEE8-422F-4E34-A425-79B2491CCAE8

     

    Or how much these houses cost, with the bones of Victorian mansions but retrofitted windows for soaking in a view that must have been very different when their foundations were laid.

     

    A68E9BE3-CF58-49EB-8E8F-0069FD595C8D

     

    I passed a man pulling bamboo stakes out of his yard, the kind you put up so you can see where your path is when the snow covers everything. 

    "Thought it was never going to get here," he said.

    "Oh, you're telling me," I agreed.

    + + +

    As I walked back across the tiny brick park, I was struck suddenly by a deep happiness at living where I do.  The snow weighs heavily all spring, but the pavement is only made more so beautiful when it finally emerges.  

    "Beautiful."  I know not everyone would think so.  But I do, I really, really do. 

    I thought to myself:  I am not always very secure in my preferences.  I sometimes wonder if I say I like things only because I don't want to anger people, or because I have difficulty expressing myself in socially acceptable ways. 

    But I know one thing:  I truly love living in the middle of the city.  I don't mind that it isn't a sprawling metropolis; Minneapolis is compact, easy to get to know intimately, but it still has (writ smallish) everything one could want out of an urban area.  I love that in a half hour's walk I can go from the parks and art museums, through the streets of the mansions of the wealthy, past a ring of more modest apartment blocks and homes; into a business district with ice cream shops and auto repair and cafes and pet groomers,  and that it's only a couple of miles from my own comfortable house full of kids.

    5E51DFC5-60B4-467F-AEB2-C588C2303578

     I just like the variety of it all, and the noise, and the crowds. 

    FB129D66-6625-468A-9D32-C81E3363F0FC

     I went south of the car, crossed the street, came up north behind it. 

    BF8505C3-8003-424B-84BF-E0CE6ABE85BE

     Truly the first day of nice weather, almost a record for how late it is, the end of the third week of April.  In six months we'll be saying goodbye to it again.  I better enjoy it while I can.


  • Roast beef for beginners, part I: 1950s style.

    I am a good cook, but for some reason I am absurdly bad at a few easy things.  One of these is roasting whole birds or big chunks of meat.

    Up till now I have dealt with this by buying birds already reduced to a pile of parts, and meat already reduced to steaks, chops, cubes, and ribs.

    Occasionally we would order a quarter-beef for the freezer, and I would gaily tell the processor on the phone, "No roasts please, just steaks and stew beef," and out of the corner of my eye I would see Mark's face fall a bit.  

    + + + 

    I have decided that to celebrate 20 years of marriage to my uncomplaining husband, and my acquisition of an Instant Pot two Christmases ago, and also because I have been tired and suspect I could use a little more iton in my diet, I am going to learn how to make roast beef without screwing it up.

    I will do this in my usual systematic way, like the time I decided to learn how to be a beer drinker, by experimentation many times.

    Today, despite being a decent cook for 35 years, I made the first one.  Come along with me…

    + + +

    As soon as I made up my mind to work my way through the world of roast beef, I knew exactly which recipe I was going to start with:  the "Forgotten Roast" from this article which is one of my favorite local foodie articles ever.  In this article, six local uber-hipster food writers get together to cook a dinner-party menu from a 1969 socialite cookbook.  The roast beef in the recipe features onion soup mix and condensed cream of celery soup.  In other words, it is roast beef like Grandma used to make.   

    The writers don't know what to make of the roast, about which it is written, "Before serving, you will find it has made its own gravy:"  

    I keep referring to this as the “autogenerating gravy.” Everyone was skeptical about the dehydrated soup and cream of celery. These are the key ingredients in the sorts of mediocre casseroles and hot dishes that are said to autogenerate in church basements.

    I'm not sure, but I think something very similar also made an appearance in Peg Bracken's I Hate To Cook Book, profiled here by Bon Appétit a few years ago.  (I have a copy of the 50th anniversary edition around here somewhere.)

     + + +

    H. was over for the day, so she got to watch me assemble this monstrosity right after lunch.

    IMG_5141

    This is a three-and-a-half pound chuck roast.  You dry it off and place it on a piece of heavy-duty aluminum foil.  You do not brown it.  Instead you sprinkle it all over with a packet of onion soup mix.  

    I thought maybe Mark might go all exotic and get the Knorr, but knope, it's Lipton.

    IMG_5143

    Then you open a can of cream of celery soup.  The recipe says "pour," but you can't exactly pour condensed cream of celery soup.  I spooned blobs of soup globs onto the roast.  I couldn't stop myself from saying "Blob" every time I added a spoonful, which made H. laugh.   Then I sort of frosted the roast with it.

    IMG_5144

    I texted a picture of the roast to Mark.

    IMG_5146

     

    "I remember liking roasts" amused both H and me.

    Anyway, then you wrap the roast up tightly in the foil and put it inside a roaster, or in my case an enameled cast iron Dutch oven, in which it just barely fit.  I snapped this picture before I put the lid on.

    IMG_5145

    Then it goes in the oven at 275° F for four to five hours.  A convenient recipe for Thursdays, when I am home all day but very busy.

    + + +

    After schoolwork was over I made mashed potatoes and added an oiled tray of asparagus to the oven to roast for 30-40 minutes alongside.  When it was time for dinner I pulled the Dutch oven out and called to H., who was getting her coat on, "Do you want to see the big reveal before you go?"

    She came over and first I fiddled with my fingertips trying to unfold the foil, then gave up and cut it open with a knife.  Inside was a mottled, soft, brown mass of gravy-pooled beef, here and there dotted with a residual dab of pale from the cream of celery soup.

    IMG_5147

    It did not really look very appetizing.  I put the knife in it to cut it—and discovered that the knife went right into it and sliced it with nearly no resistance.

    How do I serve this?  I had expected to turn it out onto a cutting board for slicing.  I burned my fingers trying to lift the foil package out of the pot.  Eventually I just sliced it by poking the knife (like buttah) down into the foil over and over, and then used tongs to extract the slices, which fell apart into tender shreds as I transferred them into a serving dish.  The pale globs melted away and left behind a beautiful brown gravy.  I strained the gravy through a colander (because of the chunks of celery), and poured it, glossy and thick, over the roast beef.

    IMG_5148

    It was… amazing?  I don't know if I would say that exactly, but the children all used that word.  Mark was happy, and extolled the virtues of Midwestern midcentury cooking.  "Not to disparage the wonders of living in the city where we can walk to upscale modern restaurants any time we want," he said, but 
    like roast beef.  I like pancakes.  I like good ordinary food."  

    "This is the best," said my daughter.  "Never make any other kind of beef again."  She wrinkled her nose.  "Short ribs are not as good as this."

    IMG_5152

    Here is what the hipsters at The Heavy Table had to say about their own dinner-party roast:

    The star of the evening to that point, though, was unquestionably the Forgotten Roast and its autogenerative gravy. True to Mrs. Randolph’s promise, we opened the foil, and there it was – a tender, juicy and altogether perfect roast, lying in a pool of gravy. It is the simplest, most foolproof recipe imaginable. And yet it’s so perfect. A few weeks later, in fact, I tried it again with reverse-engineered fresh ingredients – a cream soup made from scratch with fresh celery in a food processor, and a homemade dry onion soup mix. It was OK, but nowhere near as good as what I got from pouring stuff out of a can and a paper packet. Our grandparents my have been onto something with this one.

    Yes, I think so.  

    We ate well over half of the three-and-a-half pound roast for dinner.  I will definitely make this again—after I have tried some other techniques for comparison.  Next up… something with (non-dehydrated) onions and carrots in it.  But not until we've finished digesting this one, i.e., sometime in the middle of next week at least.


  • Rejecting the professional model in favor of a different one.

    I have been stirring some uncrystallized thoughts over in my head for a few months.  Today I saw a brief little thread on Twitter, almost unrelated, and it was like scratching the side of the flask:  instant nucleation. 

    I can articulate some of what I'm thinking now.  There's still a lot of it yet to solidify.  

    Here's what I saw:

    Screen Shot 2018-03-29 at 8.37.30 AM

     

    I want to start off by saying that I don't like the term "don't have the balls/cojones for" and I won't apply it to anyone; it's totally inappropriate for the context that I wish to shift to in my analogy.   That's not the part that struck me.  Let's set it aside.

    I want to call attention instead to phrases like:

    • typically 'unstable' jobs
    • do what they love instead of what they must
    • do something with your life that will more often than not bring you
      • jokes
      • side-eyes
      • late nights
      • moments of self doubt
      • financial instability
    • pursue a passion that isn't normalized
    • muster the courage

     

    I feel… a certain affinity with this description as applied to my own life's work.  Let me dig in to the analogy, quickly so I can get the post out, and see where it is useful and where it is not.

    + + +

    I put my finger on what I've been trying to articulate lately:  a new way of seeing my work.   That I walked away from the career I trained for, not without missing many aspects of it, for a different one:  unstable, but essentially a creative career.

    By many measures, I have made poor choices.  I got an advanced degree, which sounds good, but according to some conventions that was a misguided and limiting choice.  I completely failed to build up a work history post-PhD.  I have maintained practically no networking contacts, certainly none who can vouch for my employability.  I haven't kept up with the literature. I've not cultivated an online persona.  

    Everyone, it seems, knows a woman who's had life's rug pulled out from under her.    If only she'd kept up her skills/not stayed home with the kids so long, she'd be in a more stable position.  One such woman raised me, and she never felt secure again for the rest of her life; and is that always in the back of my mind?  Well, yes, how could it not be?   So there's this certain self-doubt, that even though I do appear to be quite secure, this shame that I've gone about it all wrong, insufficiently protected myself, and if everything goes south through malice or through random chance it'll be my fault that I made the choices I made.

    + + +

    I've had the good fortune to meet, in real life and virtually, a collection of really interesting, creative, brilliant, and educated-or-self-educated women who have spent years out of the paid economy or interacting in only a limited way with it, because all their time went to family-based work: for spouse, children, and sometimes siblings and parents.  A few men, too.  I don't meet very many who have not expressed, at one time or another, an internal-or-external attempt to cram the peg of how they spent that time into the square hole of economic/labor language.

    A lot of people in this position go with the model that full-time childrearing, dependent care, bureaucracy-navigating, and/or homekeeping is itself a kind of profession.  A "professional" profession, with all the word's associations of specialization, advanced training/recertification, and (let's face it) social class.

    I tried to make this fit myself, for a long time.  In retrospect, it was obvious that the "professional" model would tempt me, because I grew up and trained with every expectation that I would spend my working years in the professional class.  I was loath to give up that view of myself.  And I had a lifetime habit, if not a compulsion, of reading the literature, of self-teaching and constant improvement, of honing long-developed skills, learning new ones, and analyzing systems and procedures looking for ways to streamline them or to improve their outcomes.  All those elements are there.  It seemed to fit!  And especially when I started homeschooling, it felt that it satisfied that compulsion-to-excellence.   I don't think I vocalized it too much (I hope I didn't) but it was definitely part of my new mental model of myself.

    But… as the years go by and I gain experience, the shine has worn off, and I find the "professional" model doesn't actually fit all that well. 

    First of all, it's just too obvious that I pasted it on hastily as a way to cover up the lingering embarrassment I felt (even though I knew I had good reasons!) about having dropped out of my original profession, one which I hold in considerably high regard.

    Second (and this is the real killer, I think) a sine qua non of professional work is measurable-to-the-outside accountability:  to the client, to the patient, sometimes to a certifying body or to the state.  Whether for its goods or for its ills:  Measurable accountability is not a feature of my life or my work.   I don't wish to establish it:  Life in the United States would be rather horrifying if it, generally, were!  I only wish to point out that the nature of family life, when it is accorded its rightful sphere of independence, is such that the measurable accountability of professional work is entirely absent. 

    (And—I'm very sorry if this opinion bothers any of my readers—it looks ridiculous when this kind of labor is put forth as equivalent to labor that's accountable and measurable.  It is real labor with real economic value, but it doesn't go on your resume.  You are not employed by your spouse-with-a-paid-job, or your children, as a domestic engineer.  Please stop this, and should you need to make a resume or a LinkedIn profile, embrace the convention that you have an employment gap of a very easily explained, no-red-flags type.)

    The final reason, perhaps the most important, for ridding myself of the mental model of my work at home as a "profession:"  my children and my close relationships are not projects, or patients, or clients, or processes, or products.

    + + +

    If one must project this life onto the work-for-hire economy—and no one said we have to, it's just that sometimes we need the analogy in order to explain our choices to people for whom it's senseless, people who cannot conceive of any other kind of economy—"creative, yet unstable career" strikes me as an improvement over the other.  It is, after all, as @whoyoufinna put it, a kind of choice to do something one loves (as far as one can) instead of what one must.  It is an imperfect model, as all models are; the only thing that fits this life perfectly is itself, and that is not really something that can be called a career at all.

    "Creative" is, obviously to anyone who has lived it out of choice, a very appropriate descriptor.

    "Unstable" is also appropriate.  None of us will do this permanently, except the ones who will have to until they can't physically keep up, and that is a kind of unstable.  And the choice entails taking on considerable personal financial risks:  you have tied your financial stability, often, to other people's fortunes and behavior, and whatever individual capital you have built up in a previous life begins immediately to decay.  These risks are perhaps viewed by polite society as greater the higher your economic stratum in the first place, although the absolute risk is probably not so in reality—interesting, that question, and a subject for people more versed in sociology than I am.

    And then there are the attitudes that @whoyoufinna describes.  They are not, of course, universal:  creative careers are thought worthless, unrespectable, ridiculous by one group; they are thought unreservedly admirable by another; and a large group in the middle considers such pursuits as okay as long as you demonstrate sufficiently that you can afford your hobby, whether by being supported by someone or by scraping together enough income to justify your existence,  and that you don't generate a burden on other people and/or the state.   

     Check.

    + + +

    There's also the fact that many folks have to give a great deal of time to some kind of day-job for hire, and the rest of their time to their creative pursuit; and they live with the code-switching that comes with answering the question "what do you do?" one way to one group, and  another way to another.  Their identity, what they would like to make their life's work and the word for what pays the necessary bills, are not the same, and it's deeply felt.

    (Here's where I reject the don't-have-the-balls formulation.  For quite a lot of people, it's don't-have-the-privilege.)

    There's a similarity there, too, for a lot of us.   Some creative people put the main focus of their work onto their passion and their craft, maybe partly supporting themselves with it, and do other jobs part-time or sporadically, perhaps along with support from others, to cobble together a living.   Other creative people have a "real" day job and have turned their leisure time into their creative outlet, perhaps hoping they can make a go of it with more of their time someday, perhaps accepting this is likely the most they can do.  And there's a whole spectrum of people in between.  A few *cough*, supported by someone else who earns a wage, have the freedom to give all their labor to their craft, whether they help to increase the wealth or only to spend it.

    Again:  an imperfect model.  But better than the professional model.

    + + +

    Maybe the biggest point of similarity that I feel, personally, is that all the very real constraints that come from taking on such a life are also accompanied by a sense of, at least intellectual, freedom.  I mean, these are the constraints that I chose to live under:  and I continue to choose them every day, implicitly sometimes, and even better when I do so explicitly.  

    I have no boss.

    I can direct my time as I see fit.  I am relatively free to make choices and engage in behaviors that I think are the best choices in my circumstance.  I am relatively free to make creative choices;  I am relatively free to make choices that turn the world to the good.  I am relatively disentangled from and protected from many broken and corrupt systems that coerce people to cooperate with the banality of evil.  I am not producing a product.  I am not outcome-based.  I do not have to keep the clients happy, perhaps at the cost of justice; I am freed (and thereby have complete responsibility) to treat people with kindness and respect.   

    I am free to make something good in the world.  That is one of the best kinds of freedoms, even if it's sometimes frightening in the responsibility it implies.

    + + +

    This comes with many of the kinds of troubles that other creative careers do.  Instability is a good word for it; risk, and loss of status among one sort of people (maybe you gain it in another), and often but not always net financial loss.  A few of us have the weird luck or maybe talent and work ethic to be able to confidently say that our choices increased our family's economic security, but lots don't and… 

    …is it worth it?  The thing is, I think only the individual can really say whether it is worth it.  Ultimately, the sneers or condescending adulation of the outside world don't matter.  Not even enough to make it worth throwing the shade back, by retorting the sneers come from a place of jealousy or cowardice.  They definitely don't matter that much.

    Hopefully your work is appreciated and honored by at least a few people whose opinions you really care about.  That can matter.

    + + +

    But:  yes.  "Creative work."  That is what it feels like to me now, 14 years after making my side hustle (at the time, just two little boys) into my full-time gig.


  • Bots, trolls, and my fellow Americans.

    One of the things that's bothered me since the rise of Trumpism:   I feel I've lost contact with a part of my identity that was dear to me, lost touch with a deeply held value.  

    I value this:  I desire to take people at their word.  I don't want to have a strawman image in my head of the people that I disagree with on this issue or that.  I want to understand their arguments on their own terms.  I want to begin with the assumption that my political opponents are sincere; that their beliefs are based on values that I can respect, even if they are different from mine; that everyone has a story that is worth listening to; that people may have different priorities from me, but nearly everyone wants some vision of good to prevail.

    I try not to be naive.  Sometimes the values and priorities people have are wrong, worthy of opposition.  Often people say and do things that are very, very wrong.  But the people themselves are worthy of consideration, compassion, and—well—of being taken seriously.  If I didn't think so, what would be the point of engaging, of trying to win people over?

    I've always tried to make sure that I stated opposing opinions as fairly as possible, in the same words that the holders of those opinions would use for themselves.  I've always tried to deal with people in terms that they and I can agree on.  Above all, I've always tried to avoid dismissing people as beyond hope.  Everyone, I thought, has some hope of being reached, either with logic or with compassion.

    I mean, there's a point beyond which you stop trying, to protect yourself and to save your energies for where they might do some good.  But still you try, at least a little, or at least you try to salvage that hope in human nature.

    + + +

    Trumpism, I confess, has destroyed some of that in me.  I have lost all capacity to give any benefit of the doubt to, say, evangelical Trump supporters, or the purportedly conservative commentators who used to give the appearance of caring about classical liberalism, civil liberties, and subsidiarity.  Not to mention the xenophobia, racism, and venom spewed towards immigrants of all types.  I can't find compassion in me for any of that.  I can't see a perspective in which I share any real values with any of these people, even in the most obscured and smudged and tattered way.

    And I feel, in that, that it's me who's lost something.  It's troubling.  I don't want to be in a situation where I have lost so much hope in any of my fellow citizens.  It's like we don't belong to the same country.

    + + +

    Which is why I sense an odd sort of hope in the news that our various organizations and social media platforms had been infiltrated by foreign agents intent on sowing discord.

    The odd sort of hope comes in this:   I have a new way to think better thoughts about my fellow Americans.  

    It's very odd because once upon a time, I found hope by assuming that people who expressed wrongheaded opinions were sincere, if misguided.

    Now I can find hope by assuming that people who express wrongheaded opinions are not sincere at all.

    I find that as I tool around Twitter or idly click through the comments section in newspapers, the dumbest and vilest opinions no longer bother me because I assume that they have been produced in a St. Petersburg troll factory with the blinds over the windows, or generated by some bot programmer's machine learning algorithm.

    I don't have to worry that a significant fraction of my fellow Americans are completely unhinged, because I can merely assume that the totally unhinged messages don't come from Americans at all.  I don't have to despair at being unable to detect good will, because I can simply assume that there is no one of good will behind the messages.  There are only algorithms, and pieces of silver. 

    This assumption makes them easy to ignore.  And it has mostly done away with my despair about the condition of the American people (although I am concerned about the impact of said bots on the electorate).  

    If this vile opinion is probably not real, but is generated by a bot, then I don't have to feel sick that my fellow citizens are holding it.  

    I suppose some of them might be unusually gullible Americans, who are only parroting things they learned from troll farms and bots.  I can't get too upset about gullible people.  I can feel hypothetically sorry for these hypothetical real Americans who are generating multiply-exclamation-pointed, red-hatted tirades.  But I also can't tell them apart from the bots. 

    And I'm not about to waste my time and compassion on bots.

    + + +

    I feel like I'm missing something somewhere.  Messages are coming in.   Messages of ignorance and wrong.   If a human being were saying such things, it would be worthy of engagement and rebuttal, worthy of trying to seek someone's conversion of heart.   But it turns out that only some fraction of the messages are coming from real humans who could potentially be reached by a reply.  The rest are generated by a machine or by an industry.  Is it our duty to reach back with compassion or not?  Does it depend on what fraction of the messengers are human? 

    Maybe I should go watch Blade Runner again.  Perhaps I'll get some moral clarity.

     


  • Free agency.

    Before Lent started I had been revisiting some self-help books from far back, when I was losing weight, or on-and-off trying to, and struggling with a constant onslaught of impulses that I could barely handle.  

    One concept that I tried to wrap my head around, and didn't manage entirely, was the concept of accepting my own freedom of choice. 

    I tended to insist on controlling myself and in forbidding myself freedom, rather than allowing myself freedom to choose, and then freely making the choices that accord with my long-term intentions.  But although this ended in the weight loss I sought, it didn't really make me "better" underneath.  I was and am still dependent on iron-fisted self-control, on slavish adherence to routines and numbers; I still waver between poles of triumph and panic.

    Honestly, I think I succeeded the most in overcoming my underlying eating disorder when I came closest to doing this in reality, even if I never would have put it in so many words.   When I was saying to myself, "I don't do such-and-such anymore" instead of "I can't do such-and-such anymore."  Because although the improved health and strength of my body is an important metric for my success, it's not the only metric.  How things are inside my head, how I view the freedom to make choices; above all how much mental space and effort I allot to something that should really only occupy a small part.  

    I'm trying to break the dependency on control, or at least it was what I was trying before Lent, and it's been difficult.  I'm trying to get away from thinking, "I have to stop… I have to change… I have to do things differently…" and move towards truer things like:  "I could choose to satisfy this momentary urge, or I could choose to experience it–without satisfying it–for the sake of working towards a longer-term intention." 

    It's difficult.  I've barely scratched the surface of this dependency.  But I'm convinced it would be a healthier place than I've been for the past few years, and as much as I am struggling, I don't want to give up.  And at the same time since one of my real goals is to think about it less and not more I am worried that trying hard is counterproductive.

    + + +

    I'm not sure that any of that made sense outside my own head, but let me move on anyway:

      It occurred to me this morning that maybe it's not just about food and exercise, but about so many other things that loom up to me as a kind of duty or obligation. 

    I cannot count how many times a day I think to myself, "I have to…" when… I don't have to!

    Maybe it's time I acknowledge the choices I in fact have?

    + + +

    For example, take this one:  I have to get dinner ready by four-thirty today so it'll be done before I have to leave to take the boys for camping.

    True?

    Well… I could neglect to make dinner at all.  I could work on something else instead, or lock myself in my room and read a novel right up until it's time to leave. 

    And if I did?  Would the world come to an end? 

    I could, then, call Mark at work and say, "Listen, I didn't get dinner ready in time."  And he would suggest something:  that he could make dinner when he got home, or we could order carryout, or I could make a quicker soup and open a box of crackers, and the only consequence would be a somewhat later dinner.

    I don't have to get dinner ready by four-thirty at all.

    I could stop making dinner, period.  I don't have to make another home-cooked meal.  We could live on chilaquiles, delivered pizza, peanut butter sandwiches, and frozen entrées.  Mark and the children could cook more.  Mark and I could eat at restaurants more often, while I let the children make bags and bags of frozen pizza rolls at home.

    I'm not going to do this.  I know I'm not going to stop making dinner.

    But contrary to what I've been telling myself, it's not because I have to cook dinner every night.  It's because I choose to.  (And, arguably, because most of the time it's what I really want to do.) 

    I could choose something different.  I could choose a lot of possible somethings-that-would-be-different.  A lot of those somethings would be objectively worse choices than I have been making.    Others would be completely acceptable and okay, and some might even be better.

    I am lying to myself every time I say I have to cook dinner.

    I'm freer than that.

    + + +

    Or take the second part of that.  I have to drive the boys to their drop-off point so they can go camping this weekend.  

    I don't actually have to do this.

    I could call Mark and say "I changed my mind.  I'm not driving the boys across town this afternoon."  Then he could decide whether he wanted to leave work early and do it himself.  

    Let me point this out:  I'm sure that would not be pleasant for him.  He'd be baffled as to what would have come over me.  (If I had done such a thing for a reason, such as having suddenly been taken ill, though, he'd adapt—that is one of the things that proves to me that I don't have to do it.)  He might even be angry, although I think baffled is more likely because it would really be unlike me.

    And if he couldn't? or chose not to?  If that in turn caused the boys to miss their campout, they would be upset.  And some of the other boys on the campout, adults too, would be seriously inconvenienced, since one of my sons is supposed to be in a leadership role at the campout and others would have to scramble to make up for his absence.

    I'm not going to decline to do what I promised, what others planned around.   It would be wrong to do so without a sufficient reason, and I don't have such a reason, and I don't want to inconvenience people, upset them, or go back on my promise.  These are reasons that I will do what I said I would do.

    I'm going to continue choosing to do it.

    It's not a have to.  

    + + +

    I'm not sure what the point is of all this.  I think I need to think about it and meditate on it some more.  

    I could see it going a few different ways.

    First of all, let's acknowledge the great freedom that I have due to the privilege of my position.  Nearly all the constraints I feel myself to be in, from moment to moment, are imaginary constraints.  I have enough disposable income, and time, and various kinds of privilege to arrange my life as I see fit.  I don't really have to in the way that many other people have to do certain things, because I do not really find myself in any situation where the best alternative paths are frightening, dangerous, or irreversible.  If I grind myself down with "have to" is it not an insult, of sorts, to people whose "have tos" are more real than mine?

    Second, maybe I should give myself–and by extension, other people–a little more credit as a relatively free agent, because only as a person who makes choices am I able to exercise love.  I don't often feel myself to be a loving person, a person who chooses love; and while it is a mark of humility to recognize one's failures to act in love, it doesn't strike me as a mark of humility to falsely deny love and the opportunities for love where they really are.  If I tell myself that I have to make dinner for my family, and I believe that, then doesn't this become the real reason that I make dinner?  But if I were to really acknowledge that I don't have to, can it become a free choice?  A really free choice?  And then do I acquire the ability to do it because I love them and I choose love?  Is this a necessary part of the "little way" of doing even our smallest duties as an act of love?

    Finally, as a practical matter:  "Have tos" keep me from seeing possibilities that could be objectively better than the one I have pre-chosen.  It's not sensible to restrict oneself by false "have-to"s into a preplanned course of action, when circumstances change all the time and we ourselves, the planners, are fallible and can't always choose the best course from the beginning.  At any moment some better course of action might come along, and just  think what we lose out on when we are needlessly fixed on false have-tos.   For one thing, we might miss out on many opportunities for charity when we  say to ourselves, "I can't stop, I have to keep going."

    + + +

    It's just a thought, still rather unformed.  I'm not sure where I'm going with it.  But one thing I think I say too much is "I have to figure out what I'm doing before I start." 

    "I have to know the end before I begin." 

    It's simply not always true.


  • Unexpected language study tip.

    On Sunday afternoon I left the house, because that is the easiest way for me to concentrate:  stuffed a bag full of notebooks and pens, and headed to the car. 

    My favorite places to work are coffee shops that serve food.  Restaurants want to turn over the table; ordinary coffee shops can leave you stuck with nothing but a croissant should you require sustenance.  What’s perfect is a place where I can spread my books over the table, drink coffee and work for a while, then wander up to the counter and order soup and a half sandwich, then stay drinking pots of herbal tea and scritching in my notebooks until I am good and ready to leave.

    + + +

    I was muttering frustratedly to myself when the server brought me my grilled cheese and vegan butternut-squash soup and set it down in front of the chair opposite, where there was room among my books and papers.  She leaned over to remove the little flag with its take-a-number card, glanced down, and said, “Oh!  You’re studying Somali!  That’s so cool!  I know how to say a little bit, we had a workshop at work.”

    ”I literally just started,” I told her.  “I had my second class this week.”

    ”Where are you taking classes?”  I named the local community college.  “It’s a continuing ed program,” I said, “not for credit.”

    ”I heard that you could take it there,” she said.  “But it costs money, right?”

    “Yes.  Not as much as taking it for university credit, though.  Six classes were, uh, something like $140.”  

    “How’s it going?”  She had tucked the table flag under her arm.  

    I put down my pen.  “Good, I think!  Like I said, I really have only just gotten started.  The first class was historical and cultural background information, mostly, and now I’m trying to learn how to pronounce the new consonants.”  

      IMG_2597

    "Yes!"  she said excitedly.  "Some of those are really hard.  I know how to say 'my name is' and I had to practice that one with my coworker who speaks Somali.  Magacaygu Brittany.  She told me to say 'ma-ga' and then" [here she leaned back, lowered her eyelids and gave two thumbs up] "'ayyyyyyy!'  Maga-ayy!gu Brittany."  

    She picked up some mugs from the neighboring table.  "Well!  Good luck!  Have fun!" and bustled back to the kitchen.

    I looked down at my paper.

    C – Voiced fricative pharyngeal.

    Magacaygu.  Magacaygu Erin.

    "Maga-ayygu."

     Who says there's no voiced fricative pharyngeal in English?

    + + +

    Do you remember learning to whistle?  I barely do, but I've been watching my 8yo do it for a month or so.  I showed him how to purse his lips and put his tongue, and he worked until he got the faintest little hint of a whistle when he blew.  "Start there, and keep trying," I told him.  I've been noticing him walking about the house puffing and working his mouth, the little whistles getting stronger and stronger; he's controlling it better and better as he goes.  Now that he's adjusting his lips and tongue and diaphragm in response to the feedback he gets from his own ears, he's improving; but he needed to learn how to make that thin, high near-whistle before he could even start practicing on his own.

    I'll have to check with the instructor next class… but perhaps my waitress's channeling of the Fonz will give me a place to start, at least with the letter C.