Pentagon policy changes and Harvard's Green Initiative
Two news items caught my eye, although they may not seem related to most people. I could call them "doing well by doing good."
The Pentagon (Globe, July 28, page 1) has decided to change to "soft power" after having "learned the limits of force" in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. OK. This is like having Machiavelli go on "Oprah" and decide to read "The New Earth" or some other new age book. Are they changing to humanitarian policies (which will be used "on a par with combat") like medical clinics because it's the right thing to do? No. They are doing it because killing civilians as they burst into homes and stop cars all over Iraq is not working. ("Gee, they don't seem to love us when we kill their grandmothers! How strange.")
I can snark onward, but the point is that the US went into these nations completely unprepared culturally. They did not study religious taboos, the language, the history of these countries, and therefore they easily saw these funnily dressed people as Other. Makes it easier to shoot them. I believe that most soldiers believe they are doing the right thing; my anger is at the policy makers. And now, after so many civilian deaths, they decide that being nice is better stragegy. Pardon me for not saying, "Awwwwwww."
Source: Boston GlobeDate: Jul 28, 2008By: Bryan Bender
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/07/28/pentagon_flexes_its_altruism_muscle
And then there's my benevolent plantation, Harvard, where President Drew Faust has emphasized that Harvard will reduce its carbon footprint and continue its "top green schools" status. Are we doing this because it's the right thing to do? No, we are doing this because kids today like green schools. If they all of a sudden up and decided to like purple buildings, would we paint all our buildings purple? Probably. Recruitment is always a concern, even for Harvard. Again, I won't snark on, but I do find it funny that the young capitalist entrepreneurs who believe they are doing well by doing good are motivated by other reasons than my contemporaries. If they stop doing well, they will do less good. As Brecht wrote in Kurt Weill's musical "Mahagonny": "First feed the face, and then talk right and wrong/For even honest folks may act like sinners/unless they've had their customary dinners!").
My generation had had our dinners and were "idealistic." But there was a difference between our motives and young entrepreneurs who are doing well and also doing good. Pampered and immature and idealistic as we were, we were concerned for the people who were left out. We did not do market surveys. We had empathy (a la Golden Rule) for those without power and who were not at fault. Many of us lived a bit above poverty level, but we felt useful and happy.
Let's just tell it like it is: Harvard is saying "Whatever the kids want today, we'll do it!"
Source: Boston GlobeDate: Jul 29, 2008By: Tracy Jan
www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/articles/2008/07/29/not_to_be_out_greened
Elizabeth Soutter's Visit
She was a bundle of energy! I enjoyed hearing how the nuts & bolts of blogs work. I was disappointed in two areas. I must admit some envy that someone "controls everything" because they can afford to not get income from her blog. I'm glad to have my baby blog (my "Blagh") for now and I hope I can expand it into a lean green PR machine. To be fair, she did and does work, selling her good writing to magazines and other sources.
I also admired her motives--to have fun and say something worth saying. But I disagreed with the "Fat Bastard" story simply because I was a fat kid and I was mercilessly taunted. "Genetic" or not, fat kids can't help eating. They have an itch that other kids don't have. And my family loved and accepted me, yes, but no one at school asked me to dance. I felt deep shame for years over something I could not help. I think she's off about this one and I was touched that she reconsidered it when it hurt her friend.
My downfall as a serious news journalist may be that I value others' feelings more than I value my writer ego. Doesn't mean I can't do profiles and features, but I will not hurt people (even my--uh--challenging family!) by my writing.
Some links: I co-published a book in 1976 and got 5,000 copies printed and probably $500 advance. We three authors chose Diana (a two woman feminist press) over Random House so we could "support women's culture." We sold them at concerts and I made a bit of money until women who ran Diana Press broke up. The company lost all its money, and although the 5,000 copies were sold and are out there somewhere, it's out of print. It is available on Amazon, used. I have the printers' plates in my basement, but no one seems to want to reprint an academic women's songbook of traditional and contemporary (meaning 1975!) feminist folk songs. And even if they did (or if I self published), it would take tons of work for permissions and updates and I'm not sure I am interested that much now.
http://www.sugartreebooks.com/si/706776.html
My friend is, however, Here's the link to my friend's memoir. If you want to hear our old band's music, it's on the site. Her book isn't awful, it's just not in a voice that I would want to use.
http://staging.anurja.com/radicalpassions/media.html
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Saturday blogs
A blog from Peter D. Kinder, a friend of mine who told me years ago to read his blog. He writes about ethical investment. Not the most exciting concern for me, but I was curious to see what he writes about. If you are interested, see below:
http://ethisphere.com/be-ethical-and-you-can-pay-your-employees-less/
Loved the Capote and the Susan Orleans pieces. It's more lush writing than news writing, but even when it's florid, it's not self conscious or calling attention to the writer. The writer is in there, but as a very faint point of view. The subjects are insane and fascinating! The kinds of people I'd love to visit but not live with. And each profiled person is a sort of flawed genius in his own way. I like that there's no judgement; the reader can judge. Even with the Evel Knieval piece, the writers seem to have affection for the rascals they interview. If you hate your subject, it will not make for uplifting reading. I don't mean to not be critical, but a writer cannot be motivated by an agenda, especially revenge or subconscious jealousy. There have been lots of tell-alls full of revenge, but they doesn't reflect well on "soul" of the writer.
I guess that is an opinion. But when I read a book reviewer that I trust (Sven Bikerts here at Harvard is one), I find they are of this type who puts principles over personalities. Why read something? Do you learn something? Does it expand your mind in some way, whether scientifically or ethically or geographically? I find that I cannot watch television (except for NPR news) these days. I'm too aware that some advertiser is manipulating me and that most evening shows depend on "schedenfreude"--feeling better by making fun of someone else, especially some "out group." I watch for kitsch value with friends, but that's just a simple cheap escape, which we all need. It's just that I don't need it more than a few hours a week.
If one is a parent, ah, one gets to read children's books and watch children's shows. That's why I like the "damamma.com" blog. Being a mother eats up time and puts the children's needs ahead of the mother's most of the time. But spending time with kids is real, not a false world manipulated by advertisers. The kids, that's another story--my grand nieces have all the Disney princess parapehalia and it makes me gag.
Another erudite observation . . .
Marcia
http://ethisphere.com/be-ethical-and-you-can-pay-your-employees-less/
Loved the Capote and the Susan Orleans pieces. It's more lush writing than news writing, but even when it's florid, it's not self conscious or calling attention to the writer. The writer is in there, but as a very faint point of view. The subjects are insane and fascinating! The kinds of people I'd love to visit but not live with. And each profiled person is a sort of flawed genius in his own way. I like that there's no judgement; the reader can judge. Even with the Evel Knieval piece, the writers seem to have affection for the rascals they interview. If you hate your subject, it will not make for uplifting reading. I don't mean to not be critical, but a writer cannot be motivated by an agenda, especially revenge or subconscious jealousy. There have been lots of tell-alls full of revenge, but they doesn't reflect well on "soul" of the writer.
I guess that is an opinion. But when I read a book reviewer that I trust (Sven Bikerts here at Harvard is one), I find they are of this type who puts principles over personalities. Why read something? Do you learn something? Does it expand your mind in some way, whether scientifically or ethically or geographically? I find that I cannot watch television (except for NPR news) these days. I'm too aware that some advertiser is manipulating me and that most evening shows depend on "schedenfreude"--feeling better by making fun of someone else, especially some "out group." I watch for kitsch value with friends, but that's just a simple cheap escape, which we all need. It's just that I don't need it more than a few hours a week.
If one is a parent, ah, one gets to read children's books and watch children's shows. That's why I like the "damamma.com" blog. Being a mother eats up time and puts the children's needs ahead of the mother's most of the time. But spending time with kids is real, not a false world manipulated by advertisers. The kids, that's another story--my grand nieces have all the Disney princess parapehalia and it makes me gag.
Another erudite observation . . .
Marcia
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Blog for July 20
My birthday is today, and if the cat will get off the paper bag with a present in it, I'll see what a friend gave me. The order of the day is family and friends' cards and calls, a little work, and a picnic along the river with an old beau. Always stay friends with old loves who are nice people, young 'uns.
Report from last week:
1) Touring a dinosaur (ouch!)
2) Inspiring reading, or how not to be intimidated by prize winning journalism when you are beginning
3) profile - learn by doing
touring the dinosaur
We toured the Globe on Thursday, and I'd looked forward to it since I am a compulsive Globe reader. I usually read the bullet headlines, then the Metro, letters, editorials, Living/Arts, obits, and comics, then peek at the national and international news. That's a confession I guess, but I do look at all of it. Here's a rendering of what you get on a Globe tour.
Lori Canarie-McGrath, a publicity staff member who also leads the tours, introduced herself to us and a couple of women. She was what you'd call a "people person," and her stories were peppered with asides and giggles. But the sadness of the difficulty of putting out a daily newspaper in Boston also came through in her stories. We passed a huge marble map of Boston with silver markers at the entrance, took a left past the lino type machine (how did they ever get either of those monsters in the door?), and sat on soft couches for a little spiel about how the paper is made. She showed us "the book," the aluminum backing that gets laser projected from the computer desktop (as I believe she said), and talked about using one plate for black and white and four for color printing. Ads comes first, set up two days ahead of the night of the press run, then after several meetings throughout the day, the best and most important stories for that day are decided at the 7:30 p.m. editorial meeting. The paper is inked during the night, the we saw people cleaning the presses for that night's run during the day. Just last week, I got a big blob of black ink all over a photo and part of a story, so maybe Joe Schmoe was nodding off on the job.
We peeked below at a community room, and walked down long corridors filled with Globe photographs and awards in cases. After passing by Boston.com online writers on the left, news editors along a far window, and the friendly sports writers at the end of one large rooms of cubicles, we entered another room where others of the 150 reporters worked quietly. The oval shaped editorial desk was to our right, and far from deciding some scoop for the next, they were hosting "yet another" going away party. (More on that later.) Lori noted that in the old days, the language would be rough, there would be few women or black people, and the air would be choked with smoke, like in "All the President's Men." Yes, it's more healthy and fair today, but I join her in mourning some of that old lost eccentricity and character.
I also loved the rather charming robots with red beeping lights that that picked up the rolls of heavy paper for the press run. All I could think of was a giant's toilet paper roll on its side. We were told that if they bumped into us, they would stop, but that stepping in front of them was not advised. The mail room was so enormous, full of future Sunday paper inserts and comics, ready two weeks in advance.
I was impressed by the number of women and non white staff people I saw working there--not a lot but more than at Harvard. All ages and all levels, I would guess. The man who kidded Beth Daly (?) about leaving Afghanistan exuded a collegial respect that I noticed. Some young men of color may have been interns; since the building is located in Dorchester, I asked if it employed many Dorchester people, and the tour guide said, alas, not as many as in the old days.
There were many "alas"es, for paper newspapers are gasping for financial air in waters full of internet, cable and satellite television, and downloadable news. In order to stay solvent, there is a lot of contract work to other papers and a lot of synergy, with NECN and Boston.com. If you can't beat 'em (television and internet), join 'em. But there is a definite element of creeping morbidity about newspapers, given the public's desire for fast breaking visually stimulating information, 24 hours a day.
I do not fear for the death of paper or books and newspapers in my lifetime, but it doesn't look good for them. Being "green" is not the problem; paper is recycled and the old myth of killing trees is largely outdated. But the demographic is changing. At 59 (today), I am one who loves and needs the control and texture of paper. I like to pause and ponder, feel the ink and hear the crackle of the Sunday paper. There may be a few of us, but we will endure. How? I don't know--it all comes back to money. As for the Globe, it has gotten smaller and more ad-based. And who has the money for ads? The producers of goods and services for the well off. So the experience of reading it for me is to thumb by "rich people" homes and diamond ads and look for the local news, such as it is.
I wanted to pop into Kevin Cullen's office and thank him for his column of the day on gay marriage, but I didn't want to interrupt him in his office. I would have felt like a groupie.
The presses were the hugest conglomeration of machinery I had ever seen, several stories high, and they weren't even going. I enjoyed knowing how the paper was built thematically--ads first, then space left for most important stories, as decided in editorial meeting throughout the day. A late breaking story would have to bump a less important one, and the finished paper would need to be printed in the evening. Adrenalin rush number one, getting it done for that day's run, and adrenalin rush number two, seeing one's name in print. It is not easy, but the people I saw working there (and, unfortunately a going away party or two, ouch) seemed to feel lucky. I'm wishing Jenifer a good fit when she joins the staff. They said no one had been hired for a year, so mazeltov to Ms. McKim. (Sorry if you think I'm buttering up the teacher, but I'm old enough to know that it is years of hard work coupled with talent that could land such a position.)
great writing: aiming high
Reading the profiles by Barbara Brotman and Andrea Elliot was eye opening. The combination of work ethic and sensitivity to those profiled stands out. I would have read such a piece for my own enjoyment before this class, but now I see all the machinery behind it, and unused notes, the piles of drafts. It's daunting. I must remind myself that (here it comes) the longest journey starts with the first step. If I write today and do my best, tomorrow is another day and as Virginia Woolf said in "To the Lighthouse" I might get from "E" to "F" while others are way down near the "T" or even the "Z" in the alphabet of quality. The point is not to compare but to do one's personal best, given the time allotted. I wish I had more time.
profile of Susan Marine
I gave Susan Marine, Director of the Harvard Women's Center a set of questions and explained that this was a profile, not an interview. I asked about turning points, best and worst times in her two years on the job, family background, education, home life. She came through so clearly as perfect for her job as a mentor of undergraduate women and I hope I can convey the quality of assurance and caring that she seems to have. She was generous with her time, but I couldn't "shadow" her because her summer schedule does not involve teaching or doing what she usually does during the term.
Report from last week:
1) Touring a dinosaur (ouch!)
2) Inspiring reading, or how not to be intimidated by prize winning journalism when you are beginning
3) profile - learn by doing
touring the dinosaur
We toured the Globe on Thursday, and I'd looked forward to it since I am a compulsive Globe reader. I usually read the bullet headlines, then the Metro, letters, editorials, Living/Arts, obits, and comics, then peek at the national and international news. That's a confession I guess, but I do look at all of it. Here's a rendering of what you get on a Globe tour.
Lori Canarie-McGrath, a publicity staff member who also leads the tours, introduced herself to us and a couple of women. She was what you'd call a "people person," and her stories were peppered with asides and giggles. But the sadness of the difficulty of putting out a daily newspaper in Boston also came through in her stories. We passed a huge marble map of Boston with silver markers at the entrance, took a left past the lino type machine (how did they ever get either of those monsters in the door?), and sat on soft couches for a little spiel about how the paper is made. She showed us "the book," the aluminum backing that gets laser projected from the computer desktop (as I believe she said), and talked about using one plate for black and white and four for color printing. Ads comes first, set up two days ahead of the night of the press run, then after several meetings throughout the day, the best and most important stories for that day are decided at the 7:30 p.m. editorial meeting. The paper is inked during the night, the we saw people cleaning the presses for that night's run during the day. Just last week, I got a big blob of black ink all over a photo and part of a story, so maybe Joe Schmoe was nodding off on the job.
We peeked below at a community room, and walked down long corridors filled with Globe photographs and awards in cases. After passing by Boston.com online writers on the left, news editors along a far window, and the friendly sports writers at the end of one large rooms of cubicles, we entered another room where others of the 150 reporters worked quietly. The oval shaped editorial desk was to our right, and far from deciding some scoop for the next, they were hosting "yet another" going away party. (More on that later.) Lori noted that in the old days, the language would be rough, there would be few women or black people, and the air would be choked with smoke, like in "All the President's Men." Yes, it's more healthy and fair today, but I join her in mourning some of that old lost eccentricity and character.
I also loved the rather charming robots with red beeping lights that that picked up the rolls of heavy paper for the press run. All I could think of was a giant's toilet paper roll on its side. We were told that if they bumped into us, they would stop, but that stepping in front of them was not advised. The mail room was so enormous, full of future Sunday paper inserts and comics, ready two weeks in advance.
I was impressed by the number of women and non white staff people I saw working there--not a lot but more than at Harvard. All ages and all levels, I would guess. The man who kidded Beth Daly (?) about leaving Afghanistan exuded a collegial respect that I noticed. Some young men of color may have been interns; since the building is located in Dorchester, I asked if it employed many Dorchester people, and the tour guide said, alas, not as many as in the old days.
There were many "alas"es, for paper newspapers are gasping for financial air in waters full of internet, cable and satellite television, and downloadable news. In order to stay solvent, there is a lot of contract work to other papers and a lot of synergy, with NECN and Boston.com. If you can't beat 'em (television and internet), join 'em. But there is a definite element of creeping morbidity about newspapers, given the public's desire for fast breaking visually stimulating information, 24 hours a day.
I do not fear for the death of paper or books and newspapers in my lifetime, but it doesn't look good for them. Being "green" is not the problem; paper is recycled and the old myth of killing trees is largely outdated. But the demographic is changing. At 59 (today), I am one who loves and needs the control and texture of paper. I like to pause and ponder, feel the ink and hear the crackle of the Sunday paper. There may be a few of us, but we will endure. How? I don't know--it all comes back to money. As for the Globe, it has gotten smaller and more ad-based. And who has the money for ads? The producers of goods and services for the well off. So the experience of reading it for me is to thumb by "rich people" homes and diamond ads and look for the local news, such as it is.
I wanted to pop into Kevin Cullen's office and thank him for his column of the day on gay marriage, but I didn't want to interrupt him in his office. I would have felt like a groupie.
The presses were the hugest conglomeration of machinery I had ever seen, several stories high, and they weren't even going. I enjoyed knowing how the paper was built thematically--ads first, then space left for most important stories, as decided in editorial meeting throughout the day. A late breaking story would have to bump a less important one, and the finished paper would need to be printed in the evening. Adrenalin rush number one, getting it done for that day's run, and adrenalin rush number two, seeing one's name in print. It is not easy, but the people I saw working there (and, unfortunately a going away party or two, ouch) seemed to feel lucky. I'm wishing Jenifer a good fit when she joins the staff. They said no one had been hired for a year, so mazeltov to Ms. McKim. (Sorry if you think I'm buttering up the teacher, but I'm old enough to know that it is years of hard work coupled with talent that could land such a position.)
great writing: aiming high
Reading the profiles by Barbara Brotman and Andrea Elliot was eye opening. The combination of work ethic and sensitivity to those profiled stands out. I would have read such a piece for my own enjoyment before this class, but now I see all the machinery behind it, and unused notes, the piles of drafts. It's daunting. I must remind myself that (here it comes) the longest journey starts with the first step. If I write today and do my best, tomorrow is another day and as Virginia Woolf said in "To the Lighthouse" I might get from "E" to "F" while others are way down near the "T" or even the "Z" in the alphabet of quality. The point is not to compare but to do one's personal best, given the time allotted. I wish I had more time.
profile of Susan Marine
I gave Susan Marine, Director of the Harvard Women's Center a set of questions and explained that this was a profile, not an interview. I asked about turning points, best and worst times in her two years on the job, family background, education, home life. She came through so clearly as perfect for her job as a mentor of undergraduate women and I hope I can convey the quality of assurance and caring that she seems to have. She was generous with her time, but I couldn't "shadow" her because her summer schedule does not involve teaching or doing what she usually does during the term.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Saturday, July 12, 2008
July 13 - Sleep and sleep
Report on week three:
Started writing my sleep research piece and I've wanted to sleep most of Saturday . . .
Other thoughts:
1. I liked reading all the other blogs. There's always the outer person and the inner person, and when I read someone's writing, it's a whole other self. I think of it as a geode--a rock with beautiful gems inside. Oh, unless there's lots of mud and crap inside. But that's still fascinating. I related to some of the feelings even though my chronological numbers are way past most others.
2. Issues I"m thinking about:
a) Famous obese men not having shame about their weight (apparently), and getting props for losing 35 lb. when they still weigh 300-400, while women have more shame and self blame around obesity than men. Is it because women are seen (and still identify more) as sex objects, while men identify more as a "mind" or a "leader"? Self concept of gender binaries. Bad stuff. Also, the moral blame and shame game of TV shows about fat people, their complicity in self hate disguised as "entertainment," and the lack of real solutions. My belief is that obesity is largely due to early trauma + food used as a drug. The the poor have more of both going on. It's not a moral issue and not their "fault;" it's a class one. There are treatments that work and have nothing to do with diets, religion, paying money, drugs, or operations.
b) Churches in schools and schools in churches. Whatever happened to separation of church and state, esp. with Obama embracing faith based government programs? It's tricky; the right has usually run these things with Fundamentalist mores (sorry, kids, "abstience only"--or "Procreation, not recreation!" as we used to mock-chant). But the left been represented in liberation theology in South America and the US as well, to promote more socialist style value systems and not just help the poor, but ask why they are poor. It just hasn't been as loud or rich as the right. My Dad was a minister and he always advocated separation of church and state "so that we'd never have to follow one church." The government used to help the poor, withour having to insert religion. FDR did a lot, with no strings attached except compassion, and we're clinging to Social Security and Medicare for dear life.
Ah, back to my point. I know a school across the street, King Open School, where a largely black church congregation streams out every Sunday. The liberal/radical church where I sing in the choir houses a ballet theater. Churches are too big to pay their bills, and schools must need the rent as well. Kind of odd. I could do a survey (after seeing if I'm re-inventing the wheel) on local (Cambridge) churches and public schools and finding out who is where.
c.. My old apartment. In 1972, I was paid $1000 to move from 200 Columbia Street by the Cambridge Redevelopment Auth0rity. There were four of us, paying $50 each, and we all got a thou'. It was the era of the Great Society (Johnson at the federal level) and the Model Cities program in Cambridge. We knew all along that we were middle class hippies and that poor people deserved to live there. We moved across the street to another hovel, and paid nothing for the move. My roommate Joe spent his on pot, I used mine for a feminsit studies masters, and I'm not sure what David #1 and Davis #2 did with theirs. I'd like to do a property ownership trace on it, see who owns it now, and who owned it between, and if it is being used as affordable housing for non middle class overeducated types like me. When I ride by, I see a largely black community. But in this country, "black" has many version and origins. The houses are well kept.
Nuff for now.
Started writing my sleep research piece and I've wanted to sleep most of Saturday . . .
Other thoughts:
1. I liked reading all the other blogs. There's always the outer person and the inner person, and when I read someone's writing, it's a whole other self. I think of it as a geode--a rock with beautiful gems inside. Oh, unless there's lots of mud and crap inside. But that's still fascinating. I related to some of the feelings even though my chronological numbers are way past most others.
2. Issues I"m thinking about:
a) Famous obese men not having shame about their weight (apparently), and getting props for losing 35 lb. when they still weigh 300-400, while women have more shame and self blame around obesity than men. Is it because women are seen (and still identify more) as sex objects, while men identify more as a "mind" or a "leader"? Self concept of gender binaries. Bad stuff. Also, the moral blame and shame game of TV shows about fat people, their complicity in self hate disguised as "entertainment," and the lack of real solutions. My belief is that obesity is largely due to early trauma + food used as a drug. The the poor have more of both going on. It's not a moral issue and not their "fault;" it's a class one. There are treatments that work and have nothing to do with diets, religion, paying money, drugs, or operations.
b) Churches in schools and schools in churches. Whatever happened to separation of church and state, esp. with Obama embracing faith based government programs? It's tricky; the right has usually run these things with Fundamentalist mores (sorry, kids, "abstience only"--or "Procreation, not recreation!" as we used to mock-chant). But the left been represented in liberation theology in South America and the US as well, to promote more socialist style value systems and not just help the poor, but ask why they are poor. It just hasn't been as loud or rich as the right. My Dad was a minister and he always advocated separation of church and state "so that we'd never have to follow one church." The government used to help the poor, withour having to insert religion. FDR did a lot, with no strings attached except compassion, and we're clinging to Social Security and Medicare for dear life.
Ah, back to my point. I know a school across the street, King Open School, where a largely black church congregation streams out every Sunday. The liberal/radical church where I sing in the choir houses a ballet theater. Churches are too big to pay their bills, and schools must need the rent as well. Kind of odd. I could do a survey (after seeing if I'm re-inventing the wheel) on local (Cambridge) churches and public schools and finding out who is where.
c.. My old apartment. In 1972, I was paid $1000 to move from 200 Columbia Street by the Cambridge Redevelopment Auth0rity. There were four of us, paying $50 each, and we all got a thou'. It was the era of the Great Society (Johnson at the federal level) and the Model Cities program in Cambridge. We knew all along that we were middle class hippies and that poor people deserved to live there. We moved across the street to another hovel, and paid nothing for the move. My roommate Joe spent his on pot, I used mine for a feminsit studies masters, and I'm not sure what David #1 and Davis #2 did with theirs. I'd like to do a property ownership trace on it, see who owns it now, and who owned it between, and if it is being used as affordable housing for non middle class overeducated types like me. When I ride by, I see a largely black community. But in this country, "black" has many version and origins. The houses are well kept.
Nuff for now.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
July 6 - The Party's Over
MD
Week ending July 6, 2008
BLOG #2
July 6, Sunday:
I woke up thinking, "Never start a paragraph with a numeral! Uh-oh." I'd started one of my graphs (is that the lingo?) with "150" and I don't know why I didn't catch it with all the proofreading I did. Then I thought I should have said "boats on the river" instead of "in the harbor," since the Boston Harbor is in Charlestown. Still, I was so glad we had an extra day to write up the July 4 assignment. I spent 3 hours talking to people (on my bicycle with 2nd gear missing, putting on and taking off my rain poncho, carrying a little notebook and pen in my khaki army pants) and 4 hrs. writing the first draft from 26 pages of soggy notes and programs.
Background musings:
1. The Accident:
I realized that I was an eyewitness, more or less, to a breaking news story about a car accident, and my first reaction was to head toward it and see if police or other help was there and if everyone was OK. After that, I identified myself as a Harvard summer school journalism student and and showed them my Harvard ID. I wore that ID all day, thinking that it would give me an air of legitimacy. Perhaps it did, but one State Police guy ran away when they saw "the H bomb." Anyway, I talked to the young male driver of the car who was hit and the two women who were in the back seat with a baby. When I knocked on the back window (ballsy of me!) and asked if they were OK, the mom (I presume) said, "The baby was probably the safest of all of us," as she pointed to the backwards-facing baby seat. She did not want to give her name. (I don't blame her.) I did not talk to the driver of the truck, as the police were doing that and I didn't want to interfere, but I spoke to a DRC truck driver who was driving behind both cars and who pulled over to call the police. Everyone was saying the same thing: "He pulled a U-y from the middle lane! Idiot" or something like that.
Question: If I were the first one on the scene, I would for sure dial 911. I feel that I could have pressed further for people's names, ages, story, etc. but my assignment was a July 4th story, not an accident. An accident, by definition, is a surprise. My instinct was to go with the most important story, but in the end, this was a minor accident and I did not see it in the Globe the following day. I did call Cambridge Police on Saturday and they gave me a phone number to call on Monday if I wanted more information on the people involved. I did write down the two licence plate numbers.
If I were a "real reporter," would I have called my editor to ascertain whether or not I should switch stories? Or would I call the "accident beat" or a general news editor? How hard should I push for news if someone had been badly injured? Would I phone hospitals? How much information would be public? These questions are something I'm sure we will talk about in class.
2. The National Guard troops:
My gut reaction to police and military uniforms goes back to my days as an antiwar protesor in the early 70s. A dear friend and I talked over lunch yesterday about how horrible "we" (middle class, mostly white, educated protestors) acted toward the returning vets. I certainly never yelled "baby killer!" or any such thing, but our attitude was, "You should object or go to Canada or else you are a pawn of US imperialism!" Such entitlement we had. As for police, I can never forget watching kids' heads get bashed in in Harvard Square in 1971,n or heavily armed Tactical Police uniforms at various demonstrations in the 1970s. Once Kent & Jackson State happened (4 dead white kids, two dead black kids), I knew it was not a tea party.
As I talked to Lt. Col. Como, I watched the young men (and a handful of women) walking about behind him. So young, and so . . . dear. Instead of feeling judgmental toward them, I just felt angry that many of them had no other economic options and what they felt was "helping people" in occupied nations was decided at levels high above them for what I consider suspect motives. Not "freedom" but "oil and military bases." But it was not their fault, and they were so kind and sincere. Not to mention, Lt. Col. Como was a man I trusted somehow, with his engaging and seemingly-real smile. This was a far cry from how I felt when I was younger, and I had to admire these guards for their service.
It's not their fault that they haven't read alternative publications or worked with Howard Zinn and realized that their training to protect their buddy is also a means to a military end that was not "democratically" decided upon. This is my opinion, of course, and that's why it's in my blog and not my news article. I really had to try hard not to let my opinion in there, and I think I succeeded. Again, I had such respect for everyone I spoke with, especially Como and Pilo Chavez. On the other hand, I didn't include Pilo Chavez's comments about "lazy Americans who won't do the jobs the immigrants do, and just want to lie around and get welfare checks."
In sum, I really enjoyed talking to the guys in uniform, including the police, who razzed me a little bit about being "Harvard" and getting my facts straight. I had asked if the National Guards were headquartered at the Community Boating building (it had a boat on a sign) and they said, " "Hey, get the facts straight! It's the Lee Pool." The only reason I talked with the National Guard at all was the fact that it was raining and I took shelter under the Blossom St. overpass (near Mass. Eye and Ear). Most of the day, I talked with people who were near to wherever I took shelter from the drizzle. I have rarely written anything without inserting my opinon, except for meeting minutes. I've written book reviews, memoir pieces, and essays--which rely on my opinion. It's refreshing for me to write this sort of news piece, and I notice that as I get more information, my opinion changes. As Homer Simpson would say, "D'oh!"
3. Globe Coverage the Next Day:
They stole my headline idea! A quote from an excited onlooker. Full disclosure: I removed the attribution (Pilo Chavez) from mine when I saw that they had delayed theirs. But reading the piece, I was aware of what was going on in the mind of the writer, noting the lede, the paragraphs, the quotes, and ending, and all of the things we had studied.
4. Random kvetches:
In another article on Saturday, the Globe referred to "busting up" a prostitution ring in its preview index. The word is "busting" (as in a dope ring) not "busting up," which to me would mean breaking tables and chairs. The piece used "busting" once but later used "busting up" the ring in Wellesley (!). I would have said "breaking up" or "busting." Can't help noticing these things, and they are probably of no interest to anyone else, much less the editor. I think it may be another generation gap thing. I know all about "busts." But I ain't tellin'.
In today's Sunday Globe, a small article talked about clean up, but there was no mention of the recycling stations that I read about in the Liberty Mutual program. I wonder if this was covered anywhere.
Last full disclosure: My dear friend (referred to above, who happens to be a prize-winning academic scholar), came for lunch yesterday, and gave me the idea of how to connect the accident to the piece. I told her I'd have to leave it out (many details were not included, of course) because it didn't relate to July 4. She said, "Yes is does and here's now." I hope that's allowed. I would imagine writers have friends and partners who contribute at times. What do others think about this? I am attributing here here, of course, so I'm not trying to claim the idea as my own.
I think I need a sign off for Mellowview. . . . so I'll try out a few as I go.
Bloggily yours,
Marcia
July 1:
Tuesday working in class with “Shabaz” (wish we had a list of class names so I can get spelling correct), I realize that a soft lead may not always be the best. Since I like personal stories, that’s how I wanted to start (innocent children playing in the summer vs. child prostitution). I will be more aware that clarity is as important as human interest.
I heard an obituary for Clay Felker on NPR last night. They said he helped originate the personal story as the lede. According to Mimi Sheraton, who worked with him and wrote a story in today’s New York Times, he told her, “More people care about finding a great brownie than about most world affairs. They can do something direct about the brownie, but not much about the rest.” Printed out her piece from the Times.
Interviewing techniques: I’ve done interviews, and been the object of them (like last Sunday afternoon), but I learned: don’t overdo tape recorders and/or notepads until a rapport has been established. Don’t accuse people directly; always ask how they think the public will perceive their reputation. Remember that until convicted, everyone is “alleged” to have done things, unless you have proof. Dress appropriately, or in a way that will enhance the trust of the person being interviewed. Don’t insert your own editorial comments, try to be a witness, not pundit. Keep all notes for a few weeks, keep them legible (this will be a challenge for me!), don’t transcribe tapes, as this can take hours and a two page piece with a fast deadline would not warrant it.
Thursday, July 3:
July 4th topic: I hear Dick Cheney is going to be in Boston Harbor, for a U.S. Constitution event on July 4th and I fantasize showing up and getting into trouble and spending too much time and energy for my own good. I make one call about Cheney, just for fun, and the young woman said, “I cannot give you any details. Perhaps you can call back later.” I’m sure Homeland Security has got things under control and I don’t want to mess with them.
After a conference with Jenifer M., I decide to ask people along the Esplanade about patriotism, in view of Michelle and Barack Obama’s comments (being proud of one’s country “for the first time” and not wearing a pin just for show. What is their definition of patriotism? How does it relate to this holiday?
Cleaning up the first assignment on the contemporary Native American Indian youth artists’ exhibit at the Peabody Museum. Some changes for clarity, historical accuracy, and better quotes.
Week ending July 6, 2008
BLOG #2
July 6, Sunday:
I woke up thinking, "Never start a paragraph with a numeral! Uh-oh." I'd started one of my graphs (is that the lingo?) with "150" and I don't know why I didn't catch it with all the proofreading I did. Then I thought I should have said "boats on the river" instead of "in the harbor," since the Boston Harbor is in Charlestown. Still, I was so glad we had an extra day to write up the July 4 assignment. I spent 3 hours talking to people (on my bicycle with 2nd gear missing, putting on and taking off my rain poncho, carrying a little notebook and pen in my khaki army pants) and 4 hrs. writing the first draft from 26 pages of soggy notes and programs.
Background musings:
1. The Accident:
I realized that I was an eyewitness, more or less, to a breaking news story about a car accident, and my first reaction was to head toward it and see if police or other help was there and if everyone was OK. After that, I identified myself as a Harvard summer school journalism student and and showed them my Harvard ID. I wore that ID all day, thinking that it would give me an air of legitimacy. Perhaps it did, but one State Police guy ran away when they saw "the H bomb." Anyway, I talked to the young male driver of the car who was hit and the two women who were in the back seat with a baby. When I knocked on the back window (ballsy of me!) and asked if they were OK, the mom (I presume) said, "The baby was probably the safest of all of us," as she pointed to the backwards-facing baby seat. She did not want to give her name. (I don't blame her.) I did not talk to the driver of the truck, as the police were doing that and I didn't want to interfere, but I spoke to a DRC truck driver who was driving behind both cars and who pulled over to call the police. Everyone was saying the same thing: "He pulled a U-y from the middle lane! Idiot" or something like that.
Question: If I were the first one on the scene, I would for sure dial 911. I feel that I could have pressed further for people's names, ages, story, etc. but my assignment was a July 4th story, not an accident. An accident, by definition, is a surprise. My instinct was to go with the most important story, but in the end, this was a minor accident and I did not see it in the Globe the following day. I did call Cambridge Police on Saturday and they gave me a phone number to call on Monday if I wanted more information on the people involved. I did write down the two licence plate numbers.
If I were a "real reporter," would I have called my editor to ascertain whether or not I should switch stories? Or would I call the "accident beat" or a general news editor? How hard should I push for news if someone had been badly injured? Would I phone hospitals? How much information would be public? These questions are something I'm sure we will talk about in class.
2. The National Guard troops:
My gut reaction to police and military uniforms goes back to my days as an antiwar protesor in the early 70s. A dear friend and I talked over lunch yesterday about how horrible "we" (middle class, mostly white, educated protestors) acted toward the returning vets. I certainly never yelled "baby killer!" or any such thing, but our attitude was, "You should object or go to Canada or else you are a pawn of US imperialism!" Such entitlement we had. As for police, I can never forget watching kids' heads get bashed in in Harvard Square in 1971,n or heavily armed Tactical Police uniforms at various demonstrations in the 1970s. Once Kent & Jackson State happened (4 dead white kids, two dead black kids), I knew it was not a tea party.
As I talked to Lt. Col. Como, I watched the young men (and a handful of women) walking about behind him. So young, and so . . . dear. Instead of feeling judgmental toward them, I just felt angry that many of them had no other economic options and what they felt was "helping people" in occupied nations was decided at levels high above them for what I consider suspect motives. Not "freedom" but "oil and military bases." But it was not their fault, and they were so kind and sincere. Not to mention, Lt. Col. Como was a man I trusted somehow, with his engaging and seemingly-real smile. This was a far cry from how I felt when I was younger, and I had to admire these guards for their service.
It's not their fault that they haven't read alternative publications or worked with Howard Zinn and realized that their training to protect their buddy is also a means to a military end that was not "democratically" decided upon. This is my opinion, of course, and that's why it's in my blog and not my news article. I really had to try hard not to let my opinion in there, and I think I succeeded. Again, I had such respect for everyone I spoke with, especially Como and Pilo Chavez. On the other hand, I didn't include Pilo Chavez's comments about "lazy Americans who won't do the jobs the immigrants do, and just want to lie around and get welfare checks."
In sum, I really enjoyed talking to the guys in uniform, including the police, who razzed me a little bit about being "Harvard" and getting my facts straight. I had asked if the National Guards were headquartered at the Community Boating building (it had a boat on a sign) and they said, " "Hey, get the facts straight! It's the Lee Pool." The only reason I talked with the National Guard at all was the fact that it was raining and I took shelter under the Blossom St. overpass (near Mass. Eye and Ear). Most of the day, I talked with people who were near to wherever I took shelter from the drizzle. I have rarely written anything without inserting my opinon, except for meeting minutes. I've written book reviews, memoir pieces, and essays--which rely on my opinion. It's refreshing for me to write this sort of news piece, and I notice that as I get more information, my opinion changes. As Homer Simpson would say, "D'oh!"
3. Globe Coverage the Next Day:
They stole my headline idea! A quote from an excited onlooker. Full disclosure: I removed the attribution (Pilo Chavez) from mine when I saw that they had delayed theirs. But reading the piece, I was aware of what was going on in the mind of the writer, noting the lede, the paragraphs, the quotes, and ending, and all of the things we had studied.
4. Random kvetches:
In another article on Saturday, the Globe referred to "busting up" a prostitution ring in its preview index. The word is "busting" (as in a dope ring) not "busting up," which to me would mean breaking tables and chairs. The piece used "busting" once but later used "busting up" the ring in Wellesley (!). I would have said "breaking up" or "busting." Can't help noticing these things, and they are probably of no interest to anyone else, much less the editor. I think it may be another generation gap thing. I know all about "busts." But I ain't tellin'.
In today's Sunday Globe, a small article talked about clean up, but there was no mention of the recycling stations that I read about in the Liberty Mutual program. I wonder if this was covered anywhere.
Last full disclosure: My dear friend (referred to above, who happens to be a prize-winning academic scholar), came for lunch yesterday, and gave me the idea of how to connect the accident to the piece. I told her I'd have to leave it out (many details were not included, of course) because it didn't relate to July 4. She said, "Yes is does and here's now." I hope that's allowed. I would imagine writers have friends and partners who contribute at times. What do others think about this? I am attributing here here, of course, so I'm not trying to claim the idea as my own.
I think I need a sign off for Mellowview. . . . so I'll try out a few as I go.
Bloggily yours,
Marcia
July 1:
Tuesday working in class with “Shabaz” (wish we had a list of class names so I can get spelling correct), I realize that a soft lead may not always be the best. Since I like personal stories, that’s how I wanted to start (innocent children playing in the summer vs. child prostitution). I will be more aware that clarity is as important as human interest.
I heard an obituary for Clay Felker on NPR last night. They said he helped originate the personal story as the lede. According to Mimi Sheraton, who worked with him and wrote a story in today’s New York Times, he told her, “More people care about finding a great brownie than about most world affairs. They can do something direct about the brownie, but not much about the rest.” Printed out her piece from the Times.
Interviewing techniques: I’ve done interviews, and been the object of them (like last Sunday afternoon), but I learned: don’t overdo tape recorders and/or notepads until a rapport has been established. Don’t accuse people directly; always ask how they think the public will perceive their reputation. Remember that until convicted, everyone is “alleged” to have done things, unless you have proof. Dress appropriately, or in a way that will enhance the trust of the person being interviewed. Don’t insert your own editorial comments, try to be a witness, not pundit. Keep all notes for a few weeks, keep them legible (this will be a challenge for me!), don’t transcribe tapes, as this can take hours and a two page piece with a fast deadline would not warrant it.
Thursday, July 3:
July 4th topic: I hear Dick Cheney is going to be in Boston Harbor, for a U.S. Constitution event on July 4th and I fantasize showing up and getting into trouble and spending too much time and energy for my own good. I make one call about Cheney, just for fun, and the young woman said, “I cannot give you any details. Perhaps you can call back later.” I’m sure Homeland Security has got things under control and I don’t want to mess with them.
After a conference with Jenifer M., I decide to ask people along the Esplanade about patriotism, in view of Michelle and Barack Obama’s comments (being proud of one’s country “for the first time” and not wearing a pin just for show. What is their definition of patriotism? How does it relate to this holiday?
Cleaning up the first assignment on the contemporary Native American Indian youth artists’ exhibit at the Peabody Museum. Some changes for clarity, historical accuracy, and better quotes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
