"Gospel" music

I really liked Disney's "The Princess and the Frog." I especially liked the fact that Disney finally has an African American princess---all little girls should be able to see themselves on screen as a Disney princess, and it has been too long. I really liked the music---best music since The Little Mermaid, in my opinion. I might actually buy the soundtrack.

That said, there was really something missing from all of the great gospel-style music. For example, the song "Almost there" is about how if Tiana just keeps working hard, she can accomplish her own dreams. There's nothing wrong with that, except that in the end, we need grace, and salvation, and we just can't do it all on our own. Same with "Dig a little deeper:" There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea that we all need to be true to ourselves and not pay attention only to what is on the surface. The point is that in addition to digging a little deeper, we need to know ourselves in the way God knows us. The idea that we might need "good news" of any sort is missing.

Although God is missing from the gospel numbers, Satan seems to be in evidence. The beings that the Shadow Man deals with have power, but only grant it at a price, and don't take very well to being messed with. I have no idea if the picture is accurate, but the lesson seems useful.

As usual, this is not very well explained. Sigh. This is why only about 3 people know this blog exists...

Working with your hands and your mind

Today on the Diane Reams show I heard Matthew B. Crawford speak about his book "Shop Class as Soulcraft." Then I saw a review of the book at the WSJ, so I figured I should really write some of my impressions.

Working with mind and hands as a SAHM. One of the things Mr. Crawford said that really impressed me was asking whether people who "work with their hands" don't work with their minds as well. He says that fixing motorcycles is hands on but involves his mind in solving problems. For me, using my brain is the only thing that keeps this job tolerable. On one level, it involves thinking about other things while doing mind numbing tasks---writing blog posts while washing dishes, for example. On another level, the problems that come up in parenting involve much creative problem solving. I'm not born organized, for example, so I have to come up with solutions to problems like "how can we make sure we don't forget shoes when we go out?" and "how can I tell when Eleanor should wash her hair?" (I'm still working on the second one...). Then there are the in the trenches child problems: how can I help Luke sleep? What is going on with Eleanor at school? How can I tell if Amanda is getting enough to eat? This is not mindless.

Making things at home, self reliance even when you have an intellectual job I have found that if Michael goes too long without making something, he gets antsy. So I let him add a spigot to our irrigation system, or buld a bench or a bed or desk, or fix some electrical problem. When I was studying math, one of my favorite pastimes was cross stitch, because I could see my progress on the project, instead of having non-physical progress to report. And also, I really hate solving problems at home by writing checks---if possible, I'd like to figure out how it works (or have Michael figure out how it works). Sometimes that leads to procrastination (like our garden...although I'm trying to work on that now). But sometimes I learn something new.

The WSJ best job article A while ago the Wall Street Journal published an article about the best jobs, and mathematician came up first. After looking at the article, what the study did was look at the jobs that the people doing the study wanted to have, and find the jobs that most fit them. My sister-in-law, who works as an OB nurse, had to disagree---I think she thinks her job is better than being a mathematician. The article is an example of the denigrating of physical work that is rampant in this country. Of course I like studying mathematics, but really it's not for everyone, and it's not even for me all of the time.

I think that if I ever get my "Parents with unused degrees" book club going, this would be one of the books we would read.

Protesting

I have been interested in the tea parties for a while---I admit that I read Instapundit, otherwise I would never have heard of them, since I don't watch live TV or listen to anything but NPR and classical radio. (I certainly never heard of it from conservative talk radio or Fox TV.)

It is interesting, but I am not really tempted to join in the protests. My view of protests has been influenced in an unflattering way by two examples I have seen in the past few years.

First was a man who came to my mathematics department, ostensibly to get a graduate degree in mathematics, but really to participate in politics on campus. (I know, this is probably not the real reason he came, but he certainly wasn't interested in attending classes or in passing tests.) He would often email the whole department (professors, administrators, adjuncts, graduate students) to let them know about a demonstration or teach in or gathering going on for one of his causes. I know some of the other students were interested in his posts, and in the mathematics department, deleting an email was easier than asking him not to spam the department mailing lists. The straw that broke the camel's back was when he emailed, rather breathlessly, "The Student Coalition has a demonstration going on today at 1 down in the pit. I don't know what they're protesting, but let's all go show our support." Just the idea that you would go demonstrate against something---anything---without even knowing what it was, still blows my mind, and I think it points out the superficiality of the "culture of protest."

The other incident that influenced my view of protest was in the run up to the huge demonstrations against the Iraq war. NPR had hours of reports from all over the country, from large demonstrations and small, and interviewed many of the participants. One of the interviews was with a woman who was taking a bus from a small college in the middle of the country to Washington. When asked why she was protesting, she said "The difference between us and the people who supported the war is that we actually think for ourselves, we don't just believe what our parents tell us." This typifies the arrogance I see in many protesters: the people who disagree with me haven't thought about the issues enough, and if they were to think for themselves, they would agree with me.

Do protests change minds? I know that when people marched for civil rights and were beaten, the video of their treatment changed minds. It is possible that the protests against the Vietnam war changed minds, although I think the fact that we couldn't win changed more minds. And I also think there is a danger that the language at these protests inflames rather than informs the debate. I have seen many sensible signs from the teaparty protests on conservative websites, and many offensive ones on liberal websites. During some anti-Bush protests, I saw the opposite---in other words, we see what we want to see (and what people with agendas want us to see).

I think facts will change minds, and if I thought protests brought out the facts to people who otherwise wouldn't have heard them, I'd protest more. But I don't think so, so I think I'll sit this round out.

The Daily Me

Nicholas Kristof has an article in today's NYT about people confronting opinions that are different than their own less and less. He says that the demise of the daily newspaper makes this more prevalent. I'm not sure that that's true, since people's dose of different views in the paper came only from the opinion pages, but not usually from the rest of the paper, unless I'm misunderstanding him. One quote I especially like:

One 12-nation study found Americans the least likely to discuss politics with people of different views, and this was particularly true of the well educated. High school dropouts had the most diverse group of discussion-mates, while college graduates managed to shelter themselves from uncomfortable perspectives.

When thinking of different cultures' attitudes towards different views, I remember in particular one Thanksgiving we spent at my friend's house. There were a Palestinian woman (mathematics grad student) and a Jewish man (law student) who spent hours of the visit arguing. It made me a bit uncomfortable to watch---polite people don't do that! but they were enjoying themselves and actually listening to each other even while they disagreed mightily. I wish in our culture we could disagree so strongly and with so much grace: nowadays, if you disagree, you're either stupid or immoral and not worth listening to, it seems.

Another thing that is interesting is the completely different universes that commentators and even news editors live in, depending on their viewpoints. Just read the NYT and the WSJ on the recovery effort from the government, for example. It's hard to see that they are commenting on the same things! In order even to have an intelligent discussion, it seems that they would need to agree on some basic definitions and facts, their viewpoints are so different. It also seems as though merely acknowledging that the other has a valid point is equated to conceeding defeat (or claiming victory, depending on which side you're on), which is very unhelpful for fruitful discussion

I always like to say that I would listen to 6 things I disagreed with before breakfast. His last quote: think of reading things that you disagree with like going to the gym, also rings true for me: I wish that the heart rate elevation I get from reading other people's opinions would translate into better cardiovascular health. Ah, well, that's why I have this blog, to calm me down again.

To my father-in-law

My husband's father called last night, and after talking about the kids for a long time, he started talking about one of his new favorite topics, the economy and how bad it was. I became a bit snarky (for me, he may not have noticed) and started playing devil's advocate for a while. I should not have done that, it was not helpful for either of us I think. I'm sorry. But I have been getting more and more annoyed about the discussion on the radio of the economy, and I've tried to figure out why.

Here's what I've come up with:

• Everyone seems so surprised that there is likely to be a recession. I personally have been predicting this recession since I was in seventh grade and the stock market crashed. Occasionally it looked like one of the past recessions was going to be The One, but they never ended up as terrible as I thought they would. If a seventh grader can look forward and say, "sometime in my lifetime the country will go through horrible economic trouble," why do all the radio experts seem surprised?
  
• Many people seem to think that this is going to be the worst downturn ever. It is possible that this is true: however, I don't think we are in nearly as dire straits as we were in the Great Depression. On the other hand, it is not likely that the worst economic problems our country has had are behind us, just statistically speaking (of course, this depends on whether you think the world is coming to an end imminently or at some time in the long distant future). Every serious downturn is the worst for some reason. That said, the downturn that affects you personally is the worst ever.
  
• When people disagree about the causes or solutions for the economic problems, they imply that the other side is immoral, stupid, greedy, and has no understanding of what the real problem is. Here's some news: intelligent people can take the same inputs, mix it with some of their own analysis of the past, and come to different conclusions without any moral implications. Everyone has their own presuppositions (like, "Government is the only actor big enough to solve this problem" or "Government is historically very bad at solving huge economic problems") but most analysts are not trying to help out their friends in big oil, for example, they are trying to figure out what is the best course for the country. You might disagree with their conclusions, but at least give them the benefit of the doubt that they came to them honestly.
  
• When people talk about solutions for the problem, they assume that their solutions will work. My father-in-law pointed out that one of the reasons we may have gotten into this mess is the loosening of trade restrictions. On the one hand, the global boat rose and we in the US have access to cheaper clothes, electronics, and useless junk. On the other hand, sectors of the US economy are completely broken, and it is unclear how to fix it. The economy is complicated, and what seems like a simple solution will almost definitely fail or cause some other unintended consequences. On the other hand, we can never know what would have happened if we hadn't pursued that policy...
• The media is calling this a crisis. What word will they use when unemployment gets to 10 percent and the economy has been shrinking for 2 years? My grandma once told me that the stock market always seems to be falling. This was when the market was hitting record highs! But she only saw (and the media only reported on) market drops. I am very frustrated with the apparent glee with which the media is over reporting on every slight problem, while ignoring bright spots (like the foreclosure rate falling in NC...) My husband would tell me not to be surprised, why should I expect anything different. I suppose he has a point, but it is still frustrating.
  

I come out of this discussion confused and a bit hopeless. Here are my conclusions, for what they are worth:

• In general, recessions are caused by sin (or greed or other moral failings, if you don't believe in sin) committed by everyone (including me) and are not avoidable, although it may be possible to mitigate the ending.
  
• My major responsibility for this recession is to look after my neighbor (i.e., individual people (who I know personally or through organizations) who need my help) and not to try to solve the global problem.
  
• I have a responsibility to live frugally, which I am not living up to at all right now (but I'm working on it!)
  
• That said, I do have a responsibility to look at what the global leaders are doing and point out things that will make things worse, when they are obvious.
• We need to teach more personal finance in schools. Anyone who gets an adjustable rate mortgage when interest rates are historically low is not thinking clearly (ok, almost anyone---I can see that there are some situations where it might be necessary.) Right now I'm trying to teach my 5-year old that you can't spend money twice. Many college students (and older people ) haven't learned this lesson.

So the other problem with my posts is that I feel the need to add the kitchen sink. I think I'll stop here, even though I'm sure there is more I could have said. I'm also not editing it closely, since I need to shower before my 1 year old wakes up. Take it for what it's worth.