Who Are You?

I love Halloween.
I don't dress up. I don't try to scare people. I don't assume a new identity.
Let's say I am a Halloween Appreciator. 

It does intrigue me to see the alter egos chosen to honor the night of fright.  What makes us choose a pop culture icon over a witch? What is the attraction to being someone or something else for a few hours?  How do we choose the face that will meet the other faux faces? 

Letting down our guard and grabbing a new identity is the stuff actors and actresses are made of, so there must be a large dose of the theater arts in each of us. But who or what we choose to try on as characterized training wheels goes right to what do we see as an alluring persona (for a few hours, anyway!) 


Philadelphia Inquirer writer Robert Strauss' article, titled "Halloween's Changing Face," notes that a cursory check of local Halloween costume retailers bore similar results. "When it comes to children's costumes, goodbye scary bats and ghosts and skeletons. Hello SpongeBob, Dora the Explorer, and Harry Potter."  The more familiar, the more desirable.

Strauss questioned Daniel Cook of the Rutgers University Dept. of Childhood Studies about the character choices kids make.  "Cook said that many parents tend to be more comfortable knowing there is an already established story line associated with characters from sources such as Disney movies and reality TV, even though those costumes convey an inherent lack of creativity."  Instead of going with creatures more indicative of Halloween's essence - ghouls, zombies and things from the netherworld - kids (and their parents) seem to lean more toward what is known.  There is a sense of fantasy because the characters probably surround the child throughout the year from movies, television, books and the like.  Cloaking themselves as a character they admire offers the sweet satisfaction of total immersion into an alter ego.http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/20101027_Halloween_s_changing_face__Spooky_costumes_yield_to_mass-market_characters.html#ixzz13kU5aVYK

In her post titled "Halloween Judgments," Motherlode blogger Lisa Belkin pointed out an essay written by an editor at Redbook magazine about alternative Halloween choices that work for her 7-year-old son, (diagnosed with cerebral palsy) and her daughter. The editor, Ellen Seidman, explained that after a few years of Halloween excitement turning into a night of tears for her son, a "quieter tradition" was chosen with no costume.  This flexibility made the holiday enjoyable for all.   http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/halloween-judgments/

Enter those who see it differently.

Seidman's article brought a reader response chastising her choice as "rude, boring, and shows a lack of spirit."  The reader furthered her consternation with the idea that if no one dressed up for Halloween, then it would negate its purpose.  I learned so much from how we can all read the same thing and walk away with different interpretations.  The Motherlode blogger received close to 200 replies to her piece about the Redbook essay and the cavalcade of responses spanning from declaring the ruination of Halloween to applause for a mom considering what is helpful for her special needs child makes for some interesting reading.    

Within all of the opinions (and outrage) there was an agreement about caring; it was those who employed the sharper edges of "caring" that caused me some sadness. Overall, readers agreed that Seidman's choice showed creativity and grace, and while I bet she does not need the blogosphere's approvals, I hope they were welcomed. 

Sometimes we don't need to don a mask or costume to satisfy our curiosity about another personality.  Let's 'face' it - it's what's inside that counts.

You've Got A Friend

Googled. Texted. Friended.

These are 21^st century verbs.  ('Tweeting’ continues to be, for me, the sound a bird makes.)

We are ‘friended,’ we ‘friend,’ we (gasp!!) ‘ignore.’ Facebook provides some delicate and well thought out options as we are contacted or we contact other social network users.   It seems easy enough – we see someone we know (or knew or want to know) on Facebook and send a friend request.  Then we wait.  It has a sort of “will I get asked to the prom?” dimension to it.  It surely reminds me of a most elemental question attached to growing up – will I be accepted?

Ah, there’s the rub.

I’ve been on Facebook for two years and, just recently, an acquaintance who friended me when I first signed on asked me why I ignored her request.  Of course I don’t remember the request (the whole memory thing is another issue) but was intrigued by the timing of her search for a plausible answer. And, sadly, I was flattered.  Yep, I am inches away from my rightful place on my childhood playground. It is true – everything I ever needed to know about life so far, I learned there.

This month, Facebook has included an advanced “Group” feature which allows users to delineate their friends into appropriate (or, I guess inappropriate if the user so desires) groups.  Parents all over the world hear the siren’s call here – my child can finally separate me from the real action on their Facebook page!  Saturday Night Live presented a keenly funny version of this parental block-out in the October 9th skit titled, “My Mom’s On Facebook Filter.”  Actress and comedian Jane Lynch posed as a Kohl’s buying, autumn sweater wearing mom who, instead of seeing a photo of her son and a girl, both underage, with drinks and sloppy facial expressions viewed the filtered version of her son with a ventriloquist’s dummy on his lap. It is hilarious and illustrates the real issue of how to separate those you’ve friended from what you want them to see. http://www.hulu.com/watch/184577/saturday-night-live-moms-on-facebook 

Facebook co-founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg in a recent New York Times article noted his company had long been planning to put this seemingly simple ‘group’ feature in place but the technical machinations that had to happen were complex. And he sees the usable dimensions of Facebook increasing exponentially.  “We think this is going to be a pretty fundamental shift for how people use Facebook,” Mr. Zuckerberg said. “The amount of sharing will go up massively and will be completely additive.” Reporter Miguel Helft explains in the same article, that “Groups allows anyone to create a group and include other people. For example, someone’s cousin may create a group for their family and put every family member in it. In that way, Facebook contends that if even a small percentage of users create groups, most people on Facebook will end up in several groups.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/technology/07facebook.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=facebook%20groups&st=cse

So everyone is eventually included but in a very specific way? Does this electronic social behavior mirror our face-to-face interactions? It sure does give users more control.  But what about those waiting to be asked to the prom? Or join the group? Or be friended?  I believe there are more opportunities out there to fortify our backbones and drop our insecurities, but let’s follow this thread for a sec.

Psychology Today magazine contributor, Melvin Konner’s article, “The Social Network, 10,000 BP,” addresses the Facebook group changes as nothing new under the sun.  He suggests that just as ancient nomadic men and women gathered in small community groups by way of what their needs and wants were, the ability to parse out which people go into which groups keeps the information shared manageable and meaningful.  “With the advent of multiple levels of privacy, intimacy can be nested in concentric circles just as it was for scores of thousands of years on the African plains.  It’s just that it no longer depends on geography, and you have a lot more choice,  Whether you are gay, vegan, a kick-boxer, a Baptist-turned-Buddhist, or all those things, you can find and build a network of people like yourself.”  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-tangled-wing/201010/the-social-network-10000-bp Hmmm.....but isn't it the 'choosing' that is being done the thing in question?  If geography dictated the community circles our ancestors chose, isn't the fact that we are limitless in our ability to reach out and be reached the difference?  We are choosing our circles based on our whims and desires, not by necessity. I think this differentiates us from those who went before us long ago. 

Now, if we are not accepted by someone on Facebook, are we conversely being rejected?  Not necessarily.  We thin out and fill in our daily lives with people on all levels.  Some people we must interact with (at work or school), some we choose to interact with, and some we literally bump into on our way.  We give these moments and people our attention but more as a way to navigate the day. We figure much of it out as we go along.  It has me thinking about where are these skills first honed?  Is there a razor thin line between casual non-acceptance and being mean?

A recent New York Times article titled, "The Playground Gets Even Tougher," by Pamela Paul considers the age group of 3 to 8-year-old girls in which incidents of 'relational or social aggression' also known as mean-girl behavior possibly becomes seeded.  The pre-school and early elementary school age group is often overlooked in studies of this behavior, Paul infers, but "The fear is that the onset of bullying behavior is trickling down."  She writes,  "We no longer live in the pigtailed world of Cindy Brady where a handful of (television) channels import variations on sugar and spice, with prompt repercussions for the latter.  So much of what passes for entertainment is about being rude, nasty and crass," said Meline Kevorkian, who studies bullying at Nova Southeastern University in Fort Lauderdale-Davie, Fla.  "What we see as comedy is actually making fun of other people."  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/fashion/10Cultural.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=the%20playground%20gets%20even%20tougher&st=cse

And is what is shown in the omnipresent media the kernel to what spurs someone to be a bully?  Bullying is as much about fear and rejection as it is about control and power, and it has sadly been blanketing the headlines of late.  Social scientists who study social aggression fall on both sides of whether or not this young age group is where the starting line begins for mean girl behavior. The article notes, "Experts point to a shift in childhood play with a focus on controlled environments, techno-goodies and material objects.  Instead of working out issues themselves during free play outside, children are micromanaged by parents who step in to resolve conflicts for them.  Debbie Rosenman, a teacher in her 31st year at a suburban Detroit school, said that helicopter parents simultaneously fail to provide adequate authority or appropriate forms of supervision.  'The girls who are the victims tend to be raised by parents who encourage them to be more age appropriate,' Ms Rosenman said. 'The mean girls are 8 but want to be 14, and their parents play along.  They all want to be top dog.'"  And so the nastiness begins.

The subsequent reader's comments to the Times article are interesting as they contain some thought-filled ideas about how to help all children with this type of behavior - those giving and receiving it. After glancing over some letters, it seemed to me that addressing the incidents early on with consistency seemed to stop the flow of this behavior.   
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/fashion/10Cultural.html?scp=3&sq=playground&st=cse  

It is also noteworthy to mention that some psychologists who feel this behavior is not as widespread as feared, but is more of a result of, "A heightened awareness among hyper-parents, ever attuned to their children's most minuscule slight."  Another explanation in the Times article offers that, " It could be a side effect of early-onset puberty, with hormones raging through otherwise immature 8-year-olds." 

Gavin de Becker's 1997 book The Gift of Fear made quite an imprint on me and one of the points de Becker drives home is listening to our gut feelings. He makes a compelling case for us to limit our media exposure and to most definitely turn off the reporting of fires, robberies, violence and the like as it numbs our sensibilities and skews our inborn awareness i.e. our gut.  If we lose the connection to the thing that lays our soul bare then the outside noise can rule our judgment.  I try to go by the axiom, that if it feels bad it probably is, so address the thing that is creating the bad feeling. 

I recall reading an essay written by a teenage boy reflecting on a period when he was in middle school and was bullied.  Circumstances arose in which he was paired with the boy bullying him outside of school for a club sports practice. In their time together, the two adolescent boys unintentionally found themselves working it out, one-to-one.  What came out of their brief conversation was that the bully felt like the boy was a threat because he was becoming popular with the bully's friends.  The boy explained that he was just being friendly because he was new to the school and wanted to connect with his peers.  Once each child heard the other, on their own terms, civility ensued.

Heard.  Understood.   Accepted...................Friended.

The Quiz (A Follow-Up)

My 9/30/10 post to this blog highlighted a survey done by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life regarding basic knowledge of the facts and figures about religion.  New York Times Op-Ed columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote a follow-up piece to the quiz this month.  His broader intention is shared at the end of the quiz, but he does note that he included extreme and fundamental religions (which were missing from the responses to the original survey) to make the larger point.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/opinion/10kristof.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=nicholas%20kristof%20religion&st=cse

Mr. Kristof is one columnist I regularly follow not only for the quality of his writing but, more importantly, for the work he and his wife, Sheryl WuDunn, have reported on pertaining to international human rights, US policy abroad, and environmental issues for years.  They are the first married couple to receive the Pulitzer Prize for International reporting (1990) and have worked consistently to keep a focused awareness on those suffering beyond our borders, especially women.  I often think about the question, "If you could have dinner with three people, who would they be?" and have come to see that I would need a banquet-sized table for the many names that come up.  But, if it had to be a table of journalists, Mr. Kristof would be one. (Maureen Dowd would be there as well.) 

After I bombed the first four questions of the quiz (the test taker in me squirms restlessly), I settled into my frustration and thought about what is it that religion provides for some and repels for others? When couched in a context of love, caring, and humility, I think religion has something for everyone.  But when our human hands touch it so heavily, religion can morph into a weighted, cumbersome thing that can and has separated us.  So is there one answer? Well, not for me.  Is there one love? Always.

As We Grow

It was a cool, damp evening as I stepped out from my kitchen into the backyard, barefoot, to snip some herbs.  The moon’s gorgeous crescent seemed like a cockeyed smile while I pattered across the moist grass with flashlight in hand. The tomatoes, herbs, and peppers are planted among the portulaca, zinnia, and purple sage so it is a bit of a search party to find the edible plants after sunset. The slim flashlight handle wound up in my mouth (blaaach!) as the spotlight so I could see what I was picking. The simple harvest created a little bit of magic as I looked at the uncomplicated garden bed and was tickled that I could still pluck some produce in mid-October.  With basil, sage and rosemary in hand, I snagged a few nasturtiums to top off a salad and turned my back on the garden marveling at the sweet simplicity of it all.



The next morning in the sun’s full light, however, I noticed how tired and scruffy the garden looked.  It said to me “You’ve really let things go here and after all we’ve given you!” The lettuce has long since bolted with no re-seeding done, the basil is blackened in spots, the tomato branches still bearing fruit look like a jumble of dancers' limbs overlapping on a ballet bar.  And the zinnias so tall and erect in August are still blooming but in a weighted, horizontal recline.  This autumn garden was much sexier by flashlight. 

The Mina Ohana

It did make me appreciate those who do not lose garden interest; those who do not wane when the sun’s presence diminishes from our autumnal days.  About 5,000 miles away one of my brothers connects to the land and the life it gives him every day.  He is an organic sprout farmer on magical Maui.  Before you get a vision of acres and acres of tropical land bearing a fine harvest, picture a modest one story single family home on a small plot of land (7,000 sq. ft.) that includes a 1,200 sq. ft. shade house which does bear a mighty fine harvest. His farm produces around 260 pounds of several organic sprout varieties per week.  This family farm has been growing healthy greens for sixteen years.  As kids, we lived in a Delaware County rowhouse with a postage stamp front yard in which my brother was the ‘head farmer,' planting lettuce and, perhaps, tomatoes each summer.  He did not know then that he was also planting the seeds of his interest in organic farming. His Maui endeavors are the result of his sheer will, infectious enthusiasm and the persistent listening to the vibrations in his soul.  His wife, son and daughter’s dedication to this ‘family farm’ rounds out their success story. 

Since 2001, he has organized and sponsored a “Body and Soil Conference” in Hawaii that merges how one feeds the other and what we can do to make this dependent relationship between our body and the soil the healthiest it can be. The collection of speakers and their topics reveal the profoundly diverse nature of farming and its impact on health.  Photos and information about past conferences can be found on the Maui Aloha ‘Aina website: http://www.mauialohaaina.org/  I thought about my brother’s farm that night in the garden and silently breathed in our shared, albeit distinctively different, agricultural experiences. 

On a much more local level, it is interesting to see our school district, Great Valley, get dirt under its collective fingernails with the creation in 2009 of a one acre plot dedicated to growing vegetables and herbs on the grounds of an elementary school.  Students plant seedlings and, along with community volunteers and school staff, tend the land.  The harvest is part of the school food service menu planning and kids see what garden foods make it to the lunch line each week. In addition, two retired teachers are the Farmer’s Market ‘veggie ladies’ and stroll the lunch room in the middle and high schools twice monthly and butler huge trays filled with items such as butternut squash pizza, made from the homegrown produce.  So many things are being served with this clever, hands-on farming – kids get a full circle look at food being grown, harvested and prepared in the place dedicated to learning. This front row seat to farming nurtures the whole student.    Philadelphia Inquirer staff writer, Dan Hardy, notes in his recent article about Great Valley, “The aim is to get children interested in growing and eating healthy food and to educate them about its nutritional benefits.” http://www.philly.com/philly/home/gardening/20101012_Great_Valley_schools_make_healthy_food_fun.html

Even in cities blighted by job loss and a decimated tax base, the common thread of food production persists in stubborn fortitude. Christine Muhlke, food editor of the New York Times Magazine cites Detroit as one of the strongest examples of a food community she has seen.  “In a neighborhood that is a true food desert — there are no national chain grocery stores within city limits; more than 90 percent of food providers are places like convenience and liquor stores — I watched young men and old women socialize while picking collard greens in abandoned lots brought back to life by the Urban Farming organization. There was no fence, no supervision, no charge. ” She sees this doggedness as the basis for a prolific food community – people making the source of their body’s energy a primary focus. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/magazine/10FOB-WWLN-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=growing%20together%20how%20the%20food%20movement%20jumped%20the%20plate&st=cse\

Whether food is produced on an Hawaiian organic sprout farm, from an acre tract at a Chester County elementary school, or from the ashes of a city searching for its communal soul, the relationship between the body and soil is inextricably woven.  We are what we eat.  So, with flashlight in hand, I head out back to my meek garden, tend to it with more thought, appreciating the modest bounty with profound gratitude. 

10/10/10

The date just cries for attention….yes, there will be an 11/11/11 and 12/12/12 but the number ten compels me to consider things I understand such as lists, music and movie titles, numeric ratings as well as things I don’t understand i.e. binary code, binary code, binary code.  Before I get to a fun music list, I’d like to let you in on a noteworthy social event today.

                                                   

There will be a party on this ‘once in a hundred years’ day and everyone on the planet is invited! The "Global Work Party" hosted by 350.org is designed to “couple grassroots environmental activism with political engagement in communities across the world.” notes LA Times reporter Louis Lucero. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/08/entertainment/la-et-mckibben8-20101008

Party goers are invited to come up with climate saving ideas and enact them on this triple ten day whether it is the singular effort-planting a tree, carpooling, or as part of a group – such as participating in a climate solution project in our community, to name just a few ideas listed on the group’s website. It is bursting with insight into how we can act as world citizens in our everyday lives. The photographs alone inspire. http://www.350.org/

In 2007, 350.org sponsored a “Step It Up” campaign in all fifty states to alert legislators of the need to reduce carbon output by eighty percent by the year 2050. The impressive response to this call to action resulted in what CNN dubbed that year as “the most widespread day of political action in history.”  The organization’s name has a precise meaning defined on the website: “350 is the number that leading scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide—measured in "Parts Per Million" in our atmosphere. 350 PPM—it's the number humanity needs to get back to as soon as possible to avoid runaway climate change.”  

What is the Earth’s current level of carbon dioxide?  386.80 ppm.  A glimpse at the ‘co2now’ website brings this into clear focus. Atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements are taken at the Mauna Loa Observatory sitting at the 13,680 ft. summit of one of two volcanoes on Hawaii’s Big Island.  In September, 2009 the amount of carbon dioxide was 384.77ppm and in September, 2008 it was 383.07ppm.  This stark data sharpens the lens through which we are looking at global warming.  We are creeping further away from 350ppm goal with alarming regularity. http://co2now.org/

Keep the ‘party’ mojo even in light of this dour data and check out the 350.org site.  They provide such easy, effective ways for us to participate and the photography from around the globe is, well, a ten!

Every party needs music so I decided to conclude on an appropriately decagonal note. I wondered what the ten most played songs were on my iPod and am finding that when it comes to repeat song play, I am a lovesick, melancholy gal who can’t resist a show tune and who daydreams about being in Hawaii  – oh dear.  Here's the list, nonetheless.

1. I Think of You – Renaissance

2. Children Will Listen – Barbra Streisand

3. Kaulana Kawaihae- Israel Kamakawiwo’ole

4. Get Happy/Happy Days Are Here Again – Judy Garland/Barbra Streisand

5. White Sandy Beach of Hawaii – Israel Kamakawiwo’ole

6. In My Life – Keali’I Reichel

7. Sky Blue and Black-  Jackson Browne

8. Don Juan’s Reckless Daughter – Joni Mitchell

9. Auld Lang Syne – Mairi Campbell

10. Love is a Losing Game – Amy Winehouse

What are the ten most played songs on your iPod? Please share! 

Imagine This

I am happily awash in all the attention being given today on what would have been John Lennon's 70th birthday.  To my teenage mind he was the edgy, dangerous Beatle.  When my girlfriends and I would pretend we were the Fab Four(yes, you read that correctly) during grade school recess, John was always second choice after Paul. Everyone wanted to be the b-e-l-o-v-e-d Paul, so I often found myself in a runner up role. I can only recall two things we did as the femme version of those Liverpool blokes - we sang their songs at the top of our lungs in the schoolyard and we ran around, being chased by other friends, as our homage to the many chase scenes in both Beatles movies, "A Hard Day's Night" and "Help!'  After all, if we couldn't wildly pursue those mop heads in real life, our adolescent fantasies would have to suffice.  I love these memories for their unblemished, narcissistic awkwardness.  We felt so free. 

And while I am feeling free I may as well get it all out there - I recall happily dancing solo while listening to Beatles songs in my basement holding a sign, " I love (enter the Beatle name)" depending on who was the musical flavor of the day for me. 

Today's Google doodle is, as usual, perfectly executed with a pencil drawing of the long-haired John.  Included is a short video of more pencil drawings of flowers, butterflies, pinwheels and other things flowing which conclude in the form of his 'google-ized' portrait. Google gets it right every time.  

"CBS Sunday Morning," in its October 3, 2010 edition, provided a current look at John's son, Julian and his premiere photography exhibit in New York City's Morrison Hotel Gallery which closed on 10/7.  In the piece, 47 year old Julian comes across as an appreciative,  genuine fellow who has forged a relationship with his equally famous half-brother, Sean.  I watched as Julian answered all the regular questions about how his father's life has affected his and how he is at peace with his musical pedigree.  The report's most touching sight, however, was not one of Julian's photographs hanging on the gallery's perimeter but a live image within the gallery's four walls. There was another notable foursome and seeing it pierced my heart. Julian, Sean and their mothers, Cynthia and Yoko, came together and linked arms. A first. Recalling the reported acrimony that John's romantic relationships seemingly caused, the 'mothers and sons' image contained immeasurable healing. 

Another fun fact is that today is Sean Lennon's birthday - his 35th.
He was born on his famous father's 35th birthday.
Instant karma.  

It's Not That Easy

 

Kermit the Frog sure had it right when he sang, "It's not that easy bein' green."  Recent happenings in the world of environmentally friendly packaging and dish detergents have crystallized some basic ideas regarding what it can sometimes mean to 'go green.'

Frito Lay announced this month that it hears its customers over the noise of its Sun Chips bags and is discontinuing using the  bioplastic containers for five out of six flavors of the popular pseudo-chip. Since the new packaging was introduced about a year and a half ago, consumers have complained about the noisy bags to the reported tune of an 11 percent drop in sales in the last year - that's some unhappiness! 

I purchased Sun Chips many times this summer and the noise from handling the bag was most definitely noticeable, but not enough to make me join a Facebook page titled "Sorry But I Can't Hear You Over This Sun Chip Bag" which has, as of this writing, 48,894 followers!  Late night snacking at my home, however, was not a private matter anymore when someone in my family opened the bag for a handful of chips, it was the snack heard 'round the house.  I also remember repeatedly making a comment about how noisy the bag was each time I moved it to get something from the pantry. Again, it did not deter me from buying the chips, but I guess if the conversation moves from the snack's taste to its loud packaging - the negative squeezes out any positive.  And in this case, chip snackers made their opinions known loud and clear.   

Frito Lay's initial advertising showed time lapsed photography of the bag breaking down in a compost pile over 14 weeks - it was a great visual. The bioplastic bag was created from plants with a different molecular structure thus giving it a high grade for quick decomposition and making the material more rigid and, well, crackling loud. 

There is a funny, short video on You Tube by two women called "The MIdlife Gals." One of them is just about to share the exact location of the Fountain of Youth as the other opens a Sun Chip bag. The humorous bit makes the point (though I am trying to read the woman's lips for those darn directions to the famed fountain!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bexmOgqBuGU

USA Today writer Bruce Horovitz reports that environmentally friendly packaging is something consumers say they want, but they also want items to be "convenient, predictable and consumer-friendly."  The article continues, "Everybody seems to be on the bandwagon for environmentally friendly packaging," says JoAnn Hines, a packaging consultant who refers to herself as the Packaging Diva. "But the problem is that bags like this come out without researching all the consequences. Consumers can be of two minds, too," she adds. "While most mothers say they want "greener packaging," Hines says, mothers also are the biggest purchasers of single-serve chip bags."  It appears Frito Lay is continuing with its efforts to find the just the right material to use as the "green" container for Sun Chips.  The fact that they have not given up gives environmentalists and caring consumers relief.  http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2010-10-05-sunchips05_ST_N.htm

While our ears have been given a temporary reprieve, our eyes are seeing something that has been dubbed for years as unattractive in the world of dishwasher detergents - spots on drinking glasses.  Dishwashing detergent manufacturers often market their products as the answer to removing spots from glasses.  Consumers have been taught to view the spots as "unsightly" equating it with "unclean."  The spots are not a sign of dirt but rather an indication of hard water which has a high percentage of dissolved minerals. 

 In July, a ban went into effect in Pennsylvania and fifteen other states legislating the dramatic reduction of the amount of phosphates used in dishwasher detergent to just a trace. (Phosphate amounts in laundry detergents and hand soaps have already been reduced.)  Phosphates that wind up in our water supply allow for an increased growth of algae which crowds out other plants and fish, dramatically reducing the amount of oxygen in the body of water.  Many cleaning product companies, such as Shaklee, have been phosphate-free for years.

The nationwide reformulation of the detergents has taken some of us by surprise as dishes and glasses may not be sparkling as they are removed from the dishwasher leaving some consumers to incorrectly think their dishwashers are on the fritz.  In some ways, we are being re-trained about what does clean really look like?  Does something being foamy and bubbly make it a better cleaning agent?  Do spots on our glasses matter?  It really depends on what our expectations are and if they are open to change.  

Philadelphia Inquirer consumer reporter Jeff Gelles notes in his article "Cleaner Rivers=dirtier dishes? Maybe Not" that Consumer Reports magazine gave 'very good' ratings to the top six low phosphate dishwasher detergents.  While none received an 'excellent' rating, the products cleaned dishes and glasses effectively. The specific products are listed in the  article. Of course there is always baking soda, bleach and other basic cleaning items to do the job - again, it all depends on our expectations.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/consumer/Cleaner_rivers_dirtier_dishes_Maybe_not.html

Another positive side effect from the low phosphate cleaning products are some reports of reduced emergency room visits for burns and skin irritation.  Housekeeping employees in two New York hospitals received better training and have been using 'green' cleaning products since 2004 with dramatic results in better personal safety. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/science/earth/19clean.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=phosphates&st=cse

I must admit I have not noticed any difference in the way my dishes look after they are cleaned in the dishwasher, partly because I hate unloading that appliance so much that I  rush to finish the thankless task. But when I am not grumbling about something so inane, I am pleased to know the energy efficiency of the dishwasher is now enhanced by the low phosphate detergent. Spotless glasses?  I'll have to check but if it requires a wipe or two to get them clear again, who cares?  Phosphates be gone!

Just as Kermit came to terms with his greenness, corporations and we, the consumers,  are also making steps to embrace ours even if the ride is loud and spotty. 

When green is all there is to be,

it could make you wonder why, but why wonder, why wonder?

I am green, and it'll do fine

It's beautiful, and I think it's what I want to be

On Language

While questions like If a tree falls down in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make noise? can be mildly confounding, an article questioning if language shapes how we think has gotten my ear without making a sound.

In the article, “Does Your Language Shape How You Think?” author Guy Deutscher provides examples of how language is a unique prism through which we view the world. This uniqueness does not have to divide us but it certainly shades how an English speaker, a German speaker, and an aboriginal speaker each think and process information about the world they inhabit.  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/magazine/29language-t.html?scp=1&sq=does%20language%20shape%20how%20you%20think?&st=cse

In the 1940s a popular idea about the power of language posited that language restricts how we think of the world.  Benjamin Lee Whorf, an anthropology hobbyist caught public attention when he suggested that if a language does not have a word or a specific concept (say, future tense, for example) assigned to it, the speaker has no way to express either.  This theory took hold seventy years ago until it was determined that Whorf had no hard evidence to support his ideas.  Deutscher writes, that according to Whorf’s theory, “If a language has no future tense, for instance, its speakers would simply not be able to grasp our notion of future time. It seems barely comprehensible that this line of argument could ever have achieved such success, given that so much contrary evidence confronts you wherever you look.”  Deutscher goes on to give the example of the present tense question “Are you coming tomorrow?” The idea of a future (tomorrow) is adequately stated without using the future tense – we understand the idea that this is a time period in front of us even though the words are present day.  While Whorf’s idea was debunked, the idea of how language does shape our thoughts is intriguing. 

Take gender, for example.  One of the first things English speakers discover when learning French, Spanish, German and other European languages is the assignment of gender to inanimate things. In English, the word “mountain” is not given a masculine or feminine gender – a mountain is an “it” as are most English inanimate nouns.  However in the other European languages, a gender assignation is given.  In French, a mountain is la montagne (feminine) as it is in Spanish (la montaña) but in German it is der berg (masculine).

So, if a German speaker is describing the mountain, do they instinctively portray it in masculine-type terms such as mighty or sturdy?  Do French and Spanish speakers equally use more feminine characteristics such as graceful?  Does the gender of the inanimate noun guide the speaker to only think of it in terms of its gender?  Deutscher notes, that research has found that French and German language speakers did use feminine and masculine descriptions for the objects that were feminine or masculine.  “In a different experiment, French and Spanish speakers were asked to assign human voices to various objects in a cartoon. When French speakers saw a picture of a fork (la fourchette), most of them wanted it to speak in a woman’s voice, but Spanish speakers, for whom el tenedor is masculine, preferred a gravelly male voice for it. More recently, psychologists have even shown that “gendered languages” imprint gender traits for objects so strongly in the mind that these associations obstruct speakers’ ability to commit information to memory.”   Is it possible that the French feminize a mountain while Germans see it more from a masculine perspective?  Deutscher questions this further by asking, “Do the emotional maps imposed by a gender system have higher-level behavioral consequences for our everyday life? Do they shape tastes, fashions, habits and preferences in the societies concerned?”   

Cardinal directions are another interesting way language shapes our thinking.  I am more comfortable giving directions using landmarks, rather than using north, south, east, west.  Even though English contains specific words for precise directions, I just like using “Turn left at Rita’s Water Ice and drive until you get to the Amoco Gas Station, then turn right.” Yet there are languages in which the cardinal directions are only used to identify place.   Deutscher offers the example of Guugu Yimithirr, an aboriginal language from north Queensland, Australia.  Instead of stating things are to the right or left, the speaker of this tongue uses cardinal directions all the time.  “If they (Guugu Yimithirr speakers) want you to move over on the car seat to make room, they’ll say “move a bit to the east.” To tell you where exactly they left something in your house, they’ll say, “I left it on the southern edge of the western table. Or they would warn you to “look out for that big ant just north of your foot.”

The aboriginals’ compass is not dependent on where the sun is in the sky at the moment – the compass is inside their minds so their sense of orientation is something they feel.  This ancient language strikes me as so advanced and deeply intuitive.  It also has no room for my petty preference of ‘left at Rita's and right at Amoco!’ 

I worked as a company newspaper editor for a manufacturing firm in the eighties and interviewed many engineers and technicians on how and why the company products were made. I befriended a product engineer who had a high regard for knowing where to find information and he celebrated the English language by his precise use of it. In the pre-Internet era, Gene kept a miniature copy of the US Constitution in his wallet, just as a reference. Gene also kept a dictionary and thesaurus close by so the best word use would not elude him. I was intrigued that someone so science based had such fervor for language. 

I came to find that Gene's manner is always about passion and being interested.  One of Gene's pet peeves is using the cardinal directions.  It is unthinkable for him to give directions which state, "go down Main St. to the grocery and turn left."  Gene invokes the four (and often eight if he can include the ordinal directions of northeast, southwest etc.) when he offers directions. And just to make it interesting, he insists on receiving directions in that same fashion.  Gene's pleasure in being precise forces me to be more aware of my comings and goings.  Ironically his initials are 'EPS' -how could he have known that years later 'GPS'  (Global Positioning System) would come to be the bellwether for getting from point A to point B using the cardinal directions?  I am certain that pinprick irony is not lost on him.  

Gene operates from a place of using language to its fullest and most precise capacity.  As he would say, "We have it all right in front of us - we must use it!"  The aboriginal use of cardinal directions makes me think how Gene will delight in reading about the exact beauty of it all. 

So many nuanced things affect how we see the world and the language we are given can shape our perspective in such detailed ways.  It is no wonder that while we can misunderstand and be misunderstood when speaking in the same tongue, using another language opens up more opportunities to see the the point being made in different way.  Now, I don’t believe the glass is half empty here – it is just filled with a different liquid when it comes to language.