|
Editor of Editor
of Author of unschooling books Interview on
Radio Free School
|
Welcome to these regular musings, meanderings, wonderings and wanderings by Wendy Priesnitz. Archives - November, 2006 No Straw Bales or Birkenstocks Here – November
28, 2006 Here is an example: There’s a magazine out of San Francisco called Dwell. A six-year-old architectural and design magazine that is going increasingly green (but without Birks and sackcloth), it is one of those gorgeous publications chock full of ads for expensive products and artful photos of expensive houses. And there, on page 96 of the current issue, in a piece about a California condo loft project, is this comment: “It’s a testament to how mainstream green living has become that GreenCity doesn’t ‘wear its green on its sleeve,” says Swatt (the architect who says he didn’t have a clue about green building when he began the project). “You won’t find any straw bales here.” Huh? Has straw bale become the new Birkenstock? I’ve never been able to figure out what there was
in the early days of the environment movement that causes certain
people’s noses to twitch and elevate…unless it was our earnest
belief that there was a problem needing to be fixed. Nor do I think
it’s productive, now that the problem still hasn’t been fixed, to
further separate into snotty factions within a movement whose work has
never been more urgent. C’mon folks: If we don’t start serious
problem-solving and lifestyle changing, in 2050 it won’t matter
whether, in 2006, we sat on a $5,000 haute-design organic faux leather couch
with FSC-certified trim or some hand-me-down pine chairs. Meanwhile, feel free to search the
Natural Life magazine
website for a bunch of straw bale articles…and look for an interview
in the January/February issue with a Canadian woman straw bale builder.
She seems pretty chic to me, and she’s built some houses that could
easily be featured in Dwell and its ilk. I didn’t ask if she wears
Birkenstocks. It’s irrelevant. The Clichés Have It Right Green being the new black means environmental awareness has become hip. Rachel Sanderson wrote in a Reuters news story that a market research firm in the U.K. has found that sales of organic, free range or Fairtrade foods are surging because “Green is the new black in ethical Britain.” Fashion writer Suzy Menkes told her International Herald Tribune readers “Why Green is the New Black.” Why? Well, according to Bono of U2, supporting his wife’s Edun line of clothing, “We have got to find ways of making our activism sexy, and fashion is it.” Apparently the venerable Sierra Club agrees, because its magazine portrayed fashion designer Katharine Hamnett as “making green the new black.” Wouldn’t want to go back to wearing “hairy sacks” said Hamnett. Gee, I must have missed that fad. Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter proclaimed that (guess what?) “Green is the new black” when he introduced the magazine’s green issue last Spring, complete with a star-studded cover by celebrity photographer Annie Leibowitz. I’ve seen the phrase used as a headline in the magazines Time and Inc., in the Guardian and Sunday Times newspapers, on many websites and blogs, and in materials published by the UK Environment Agency, the Australian City of Sydney, among many others. Somewhere along the line, that phrase gained the status of a cliché. Then there’s that business about the new tobacco. Unlike the color metaphor, there doesn’t yet seem to be a consensus about what exactly is the new tobacco. Writer Matthew Lynn wrote in Bloomberg News last fall, “There is a very real possibility that aviation is about to become the new tobacco – a product once universally popular that is now socially unacceptable.” Or maybe it’s junk food. In an effort to fight the rise in childhood obesity, five of the largest snack food producers have said they will start providing more nutritious foods to schools. Responding to the move, Dr. Thomas Robinson, associate professor of pediatrics at the Stanford School of Medicine, likened the problem as “similar to what happened to tobacco over the last several decades.” Along the same lines, the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation has warned that “fat is the new tobacco.” A British shareholder activist group argues that “oil is the new tobacco”. Oil companies could find themselves facing large legal suits – similar to those launched against tobacco firms - if they ignore the potential consequences of global warming. Meanwhile, an Australian blogger feels that cell phones could be “the new tobacco.” Then there’s Printing World magazine, which asked “Is offset litho the new tobacco?” (It had something to do with environmental regulations that apparently weren’t being met.) Aside from an obvious need for creative headline writers
and as irritating as clichés are, they herald some
strong steps in the right direction. Public opinion polls show that the
health and the environment are at the top of people’s list of
priorities right now. And although I don’t think this concern involves
merely having the right to buy eco bubble bath, I do believe it means
that most of us – while we want our governments to stop embarrassing
us and get serious about the environment – are willing to make
fundamental changes in our lives in order to ensure a future for our
children. If it takes clichés to make people trade in their Hummers,
eat locally and organically, stop smoking and begin to question how
their children are being educated, I’m all for them. Buying While the World Melts – November 22, 2006 You’d think this report would galvanize people to
action. But what’s coming across my desk these days? The Ideal Bite is
advertising its Green Gift Guide, where these self-appointed “trusted
advice-givers” and introducers of “light green living” share their
personal recommendations about green bath and body products, eco
gadgets, eco fashion and online movie rentals. The Vancouver-based GLOBE
Foundation announces its EPIC sustainability expo, which “isn’t
about being ultra-environmental, it isn’t about abandoning your car,
eating only food grown in your backyard, or leading a life you
wouldn’t want only because its better for the environment.” (The
press release also claimed it was the first ever sustainability expo,
which, of course, is a stupid comment because there have been hundreds
in the past…including some that my company Life Media produced a
decade ago…) Oh and Greenlight, a new “digital magazine,” is
touting a “moveable and sexy fireplace.” Also in my in-box is a public opinion poll that has
announced that the environment is the second most important issue for
Canadians. I don’t think their concern involves having the right to
buy eco bubble bath. I believe it means that most of us – while we
want our governments to stop embarrassing us and get serious on this
issue – are willing to make fundamental changes in our lives in order
to insure a future for our children. Sorry, GLOBE Foundation, I’m
hoping that by the time your event happens next Spring you’re even
more out of tune with everyday people than you are today. There are
serious changes to make. Before it’s too late. Making Connections – November
19, 2006 When News is Not – November 13,
2006 Fortunately, there are some media outlets that agree with
us, and some good media watchdogs out
there that are fighting this increasing blight. The Center for Media and Democracy has been working to
educate the public about when news is not really news – because it was
created by PR people working directly for corporations and not treated as
advertorial. And they’ve recently won another battle in the war.
Frustrated by TV news outlets that run “commercials disguised as news,”
the American Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is investigating
stations that don’t tell viewers they may be watching corporate
propaganda instead of independently reported information. The
investigation was prompted by a new study by the Center for Media and
Democracy, which says viewers are still being shown corporate Video News
Releases (VNRs) disguised as news reports on newscasts across the
country, despite an earlier investigation. In most cases, the television
stations failed to identify where the VNRs came from. Sometimes, the
stations even edited out disclosures included in the original “report.”
And in four cases, the television stations failed to disclose the
reporters on the screen were actually publicists. The most recent
investigation found a story on a TV station in Missouri that questioned
global warming and was largely based on an unidentified VNR created by
oil industry lobbyists. The Federal Communications Act, which regulates
American media, requires broadcasters to inform their audience “that
such matter is sponsored, paid for or furnished, either in whole or in
part; and by whom or on whose behalf such consideration was supplied.”
Failure to identify the source of such material is also an ethical
violation. Media watchers say that “fake news” may not be as
prominent in Canada, but Canadian media outlets – including television
stations, radio programs, newspapers and magazines – are definitely
guilty of running prepackaged public relations material as authentic
news. We know, because many of our competitors do it. Makes life more
difficult for us, but we like being able to sleep at night. What’s Happening at Summerhill? – November 13,
2006 I have yet to read the book, and only this morning
was able to track it down – it doesn’t seem to be available here in
North America yet. That is why I’ve been reluctant to comment on this article, which
may be taking a small part of it out of context. (I was also trying to
find a more succinct way to write this post!) Anyway, the British media
picked up on Zoe’s description in the book of how the
democratically-run free school has changed over the years. According to
the article, the book “reveals” that Summerhill is having to adopt a
more disciplinarian tone towards its current pupils, who have been so
pampered by their parents, Zoe is quoted as saying, “that they no
longer know the boundaries of acceptable behavior.” In fact, a book review in the
Times Educational Supplement in early June quotes the head of the
school, which has become famous for non-coercion, as writing, “We see
the result of parental interference and over-indulgence all the time. In
the 1940s and 1950s, Summerhill was the place where children learned
that adults would not brutalize or frighten them. Now the Summerhill
community finds itself in the role of disciplinarian, teaching kids that
they can’t do what they like and that they have to have regard for
other people’s rights and feelings.” If it’s the whole community
– children and adults alike – that is doing the teaching here, this
is nothing new, because that’s how Summerhill and, indeed, all
democratic schools work. But more than that seems to be involved. And I
find that troubling and puzzling. The Times review quotes Zoe as writing that even
“quite traditional” parents do not give enough thought to the
boundaries for children, resulting in the “proverbial ‘spoilt
brat’ kind of situation…Even though the ‘old days’ were
authoritarian and repressive there was at least some security in knowing
where everybody stood in the hierarchy of life.” In Life Learning, our writers and columnists
regularly demonstrate that when children are respected and trusted, they
do not need to be coerced to behave appropriately…unless, of course,
what we want them to do is not in their best interests. Or if they’ve
been not respected, distrusted and subjected to “hierarchy” for so
long they have trouble with “the boundaries of acceptable behavior.”
That is as true today as it was when A.S. Neill founded his school. As Neill wrote in the introduction to his 1960 book
Summerhill – A Radical Approach
to Child Rearing, “The difficult child is the child who is
unhappy. He is at war with himself; and in consequence, he is at war
with the world.” The only curing to be done by teachers or
psychologists, he wrote, is the curing of unhappiness. Has the school
lost that focus? Maybe not. As I browsed through Summerhill this afternoon for the first time in decades, I realized
that Neill felt that parents are part of the problem and that
he knew better
than many of them what is best for children. (Perhaps that’s why one
begins a school!) His daughter’s phrase “parental interference”
reminded me of a discussion I had a few years ago with Sudbury Valley
School co-founder Mimsy Sadofsky, in which she spoke about the need for
and difficulty of children separating from their parents, as well as the
need for compulsory attendance at her school. Additionally, she said,
“not being accountable to your parents during the day can be
empowering.” (See page 12 of Life Learning’s July/August 2004 issue.) I guess I see the role of parents in kids’ lives
as quite different, although I realize not all parents are capable of
what’s required. Instead of blaming kids and parents for their poor
fit with a school and coercing them towards a better one, maybe the
money and hard work that keeps such schools alive should be put into
supporting parents so they can raise happy, respected, trusted children. Fear of Everything – November 8, 2006 Alienation Leads to Fear – November 1, 2006 So this report has got it right, yes? No. Its
bizarre recommendation is
that every secondary school pupil (from 11 to 16 years old) should
participate in at least two hours a week of structured and purposeful
extracurricular activities – like martial arts, drama clubs, sports,
Scouts, and so on. This would take place through extended school hours
of between 8am and 6pm and would involve a legal extension of the school
day. Parents who did not ensure their child attended two hours a week of
activities could be fined, in the same way as parents are punished for
their child’s persistent truancy. Now there’s a solution that
doesn’t have anything to do with the problem if I’ve ever seen one!
All it does is formalize the very alienation that caused the fear factor
in the first place. What are these people thinking? Stick these
supposedly troublesome kids away from the community in age-segrated
groups for even longer, rather than integrating them into the lives of
their communities. When will we understand that our mindless dependency
on institutionalization is most often the problem, not the solution? Return
to current weblog copyright ©
Wendy Priesnitz 200 |
Topics & Passions: natural learning ~ What I'm Reading: The Motherhood Manifesto by
Joan Blades and Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner (Nation Books, 2006) ~ What
I'm Listening To:
Half the Perfect World by Madeleine
Peyroux (Roundeer Redords, 2006) ~
Fav
Bookmarks:
Malcolm Gladwell's Blog
~ Fav Quotes:
Art, Writing, Creativity
|
