The Court

The current conventional wisdom is that George Bush’s Iraq fiasco is his greatest blunder and has been America’s all-time foreign policy catastrophe. That may be true, but I think he has done even more damage to the United States by changing the composition of the Supreme Court. Through the Court he will leave a powerful legacy of reactionary thought that will thwart justice and common sense for decades to come.

Yesterday’s decision that rolls back school desegregation is the most public but certainly not the only example of how the Court has changed. For me, it is not so much the substance of what these justices say (I don’t support many of the methods used to promote desegregation, like busing, either) but where they’re coming from in making their decisions.

They are determined to stick a poker in the eye of what they consider to be misguided liberal thinking. And they do it in a mean-spirited way, seemingly to get even for what they feel has been an era of bad rulings. It is a blunt, sledgehammer approach that lacks subtlety and wisdom, even conservative wisdom.

It is doubly frustrating because there isn’t much that can be done short of overthrowing our form of government. We do, after all, have an independent judiciary, there is this thing called checks and balances, and those of us who are complaining now had it our way not all that long ago. True. But it doesn’t help.

Interchange With Lys

Recently I sent my daughter, Lys, a NY Times article called, “This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It) by Benedict Carey. His point is that we have a natural affinity for narrative construction, so how we tell our story to others or ourselves is an indicator of our past, present and future. It sparked the following interchange:

----- Original Message -----
From: Lys
To: dm9888@hotmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:20 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

Really interesting...

Once I read the article, I realized that the concept is not a big ahha, but thinking about how it applies to you (or me, or whomever) is pretty interesting.
I have often wondered this about blogging. It's so potentially 'public' and yet it's ostensibly an intimate reflection on life (or whatever).

What thinkest thou?
xoxo~Lys

To: Lys
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

This is not the kind of article I usually pay attention to. In this case I did because I thought it might say something to throw light on the story I'm writing. I see it as a validation of one's approach to oneself and life. Decent life, decent self esteem, decent story. And the reverse. So yes, not a big ahha.

Re blogging, for me it is a clear sign of how much people want to have the freedom to express themselves and until this medium haven't been able to do it and a sign of people wanting to be listened to and known. It's like the lid has been taken off and baboom, everybody has something to say.

----- Original Message -----
From: Lys
To: dm9888
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

Right..

So would you then say that all the diarists throughout time wanted to be heard, hoped that someone would find their writings, and wrote as self-consciously vis a vis their audience as a blogger does today? I mean, I think we always write for a perceived audience, it's just a question of who (and how large) we think that audience may be....

----- Original Message -----
From: dm9888
To: Lys
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

Yes, I would say that's true. It's a function of being human - only the technology has changed. Don't you think?


----- Original Message -----
From: Lys
To: dm9888
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

Absolutely. We want to believe that our lives are interesting and valuable to others and this is one way we can feel that...

The question then is: how does the fact that we are absolutely global in our reach today affect how we communicate what we communicate? Or, does it? Or, maybe, it is all relative and what seemed like a 'far reaching' document previously (which now may look so provincial) is no different than what we feel is the far reaching power of the internet today.

----- Original Message -----
From: dm9888
To: Lys
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

I suspect there is a difference because of the global reach. We are in the early stages of this kind of communication opportunity. And at this point in time I think it expresses itself in unfettered, irresponsible ways. I can make the argument that this new found freedom is a good thing, but as a throwback I am often annoyed and bored by it.

There is some reason for hope that given the possibility of being responsible people will manage themselves responsibly. I'm thinking of the open source movement. I am amazed that Wikipedia, for example, is able to self-correct and stimulate incredible contributions from people. Linux is the same basic phenomenon.

----- Original Message -----
From: Lys
To: dm9888
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

I agree. I think we'll gain more mastery, and be more judicious after the 'newness' is gone. People will also pay the price down the road of having tossed reports of their innermost thoughts and/or activities out into cyberspace and will self-correct.

I think there's a huge change in our way of being as a result of all this data and input, which makes people focus less and need more stimuli to feel rewarded, (or to come at it from a different perspective, makes them able to multi-task and work on multiple sensory and physical levels at once). I notice that people who have never known life without the internet, have a vastly different way of doing things. I don't necessarily think either way is better, but I do know that from an adaptive standpoint, the ability to jump around makes you less crazy when being bombarded with info and input. Maybe I'm just getting old, and I actually have noticed that I manage myself differently than I did when I was in my 20s and learning to use PCs, so I think I'm resilient, but I definitely notice the difference between my style and that of a 20 something today.

----- Original Message -----
From: dm9888
To: Lys
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell It)

This has been an interesting interchange. Any problem if I put it on my blog site?


----- Original Message -----
From: Lys
To: dm9888
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: NYTimes.com: This Is Your Life (and How You Tell

Not at all... :)

Thanks for asking.

Falling Behind?

I’m not a technophobe. I like to be current with how the world works. I’m not afraid of new things.

Yet, I have the feeling I’m falling way behind the curve in terms of modern living. Am I, like, old fashioned?

Here’s what I mean:

I don’t have an iPod.
I’ve never played a video game.
I have a cell phone, but keep it in the car for emergencies.
My cell phone only makes calls. It doesn’t take pictures, play music or access the Internet.
I don’t have a PDA.
I don’t use Instant Messaging.
I don’t have a camera attached to my PC. And I only have a PC, not a laptop.
I just recently bought a digital camera.
I don’t have earphones.

And there must be more.

I think that if I was working and traveling a lot I’d want and would have many of these new devices. But I’m not, so I don’t.

Do you think this is an age thing? I don’t think so. But am I kidding myself? Am I resisting something?

I really don’t want to know your personal business. Yet, out in the world I am surrounded by people who look like they’re talking to themselves. They talk loudly and tell me their business, which I’m not interested in. I remember a time when we’d think there was something wrong with people who walked down the street talking to themselves.

And this is not an America-only phenomenon. The other day I was in a train going from Gatwick to Victoria Station in London. Some woman nearby was on her ‘mobile’ telling some friend all the gory details of an operation a mutual acquaintance just had. Disgusting. She went on and on, loudly. I wanted to tell her to shut up, but didn’t.

I like to listen to music. So I put on some CDs at dinnertime and run the sound through speakers in the wall. I like to listen to music, but not all day long, through earphones wherever I am. Bouncing up and down.

When I look around I have the uncomfortable feeling I’m out of step – not them. A gray-haired old fogy behind the times. But here’s the thing: I am not envious of them and their toys. I’m happy doing it my way. So that’s what I’ll keep on doing.

I do wonder though. Hummmm. . .