Pages

Sunday, July 14, 2013

Snowflakes


Facebook post from PS:
Si lleva cadenas y candados...realmente es amor?
If you wear chains and padlocks... really is it love?

AV: tal vez ésa es sólo la parte fetichista Translation: Maybe that's just the fetish part ;)

Starthrower But there is some powerful binding force of love?

AAS: No. Amor es libre, sano, sin ataduras Translation: No. Love is free, healthy, no strings attached

Starthrower: AV but what is it that holds two people together who love each other?

AV: I think that when you really enjoy somebody, you end up with no free time for anyone else.

PS: If it ain't free, it ain't love.

AV: Tell that to the earth's rotating axis.

PS: I did, she told me we're cool and we're all going to fall off some day anyway...so enjoy the ride.

Starthrower: AV Process of elimination? : /

AV: no one gets eliminated, they just go somewhere else

Starthrower: Maybe I meant process of default... or of preference. Maybe the binding force is simply that this is one's favorite person to be together with? "Me, I'm the one you chose, out of all the people, you wanted me the most..."

Starthrower ...but somehow I still think there's more to it!

*****
...and now I am thinking how love is something undefinable, unique each time. And that so many spiritual gurus have expounded upon the concept of pure, free love with no strings attached – and that in reality, humans seldom experience love in this way. I'm not even sure that they should.

But we hear these definitions and spend our lives feeling deficient at and in love – just as our culture and religions make us feel deficient at every other aspect of being human. We end up trying to apply pure spiritual “free” love to basic earthy human relationships, because we're convinced we need to achieve pure love but we still don't want to sacrifice the human experience.

Better to acknowledge that we experience emotion. The emotion that we experience surrounding our relationships with others can be very powerful, intense and sometimes confusing. It can also sometimes be painful but pain is simply another emotion. We are always free to choose to either experience it as such, or to move on, or to avoid it altogether.

Those philosophical gurus may sound great but almost all of them lived their lives alone – or at least without an obvious enduring partner. Not something that most humans aspire to. Not something that humans seem designed for... though admittedly humans don't seem designed for permanent or even long-term monogamous relationships either. But being human is a playground for exploring all the different nuances of love. Have at it.

Thursday, July 4, 2013

Building Resilient Kid-Systems


There's much discussion on how to teach our children the skills they will need for the future, and how to pass on our skills to them. Everyone is aware that this is not happening any more the way it used to in the recent past. And so we end up with elaborate structured programs: summer camps, nature programs, teen centers, etc. These artificial structures awkwardly attempt to duplicate the effortless organic learning that kids used to do so naturally.

What has changed? What keeps kids from getting out in, and engaging with, their surrounding world, and assimilating all that knowledge? Computers, computer games, internet, and other similar technology generally get blamed, but that's an easy excuse. It's like blaming the fast food industry for America's weight and health problems.

I'm a human ecologist by definition - at least that's technically what my degree is in. And my human ecology instincts whisper that there are two major factors that open the doors for kids to engage with their world. One is physical space. The other is, simply, other kids. Provide these two elements in the correct magic configuration and you can then pretty much sit back and let everything else unfold.

Here's what you need for the other kids part: One, a minimum number; I'm not sure what that is exactly, but I suspect it's somewhere around a dozen at least and more is better. Two, close proximity to one another - ideally within a few doors, but certainly within easy walking distance. And three, you need kids of various ages. Kids tend to interact with, and learn much more from, older kids, especially siblings, than from parents.

Here's what you need for the physical space part: a widely diverse and safe habitat. Just like the biologists always say when speaking of healthy ecosystems. Kids need houses, decks, barns, garages, sheds, tree forts; they need yards, gardens, hedgerows, woodpiles, neighborhoods, sidewalks and streets; they need woods, fields and bodies of water. They need small towns with small stores, libraries, movie theaters, railroad tracks and ice cream stands. They even need abandoned buildings and lots.

Put a bunch of kids into a diverse habitat and watch the chain reaction. The kids know what to do. All they need are the basic resources - much more basic than we seem to think. Then, they can walk, run, ride bikes, swim, skate, play games and get creative.

I can't help thinking that all the countless dollars that communities invest in structured programs for kids - the nature programs, camps, teen centers, etc. - would be so much better used for the longer term investment of transforming their physical space; for diversifying their habitat; making it safe; and for creating the sort of housing that fosters neighborhoods with lots of kids. Our problem is one of isolation and of physical space "monoculture."

Here's some of the things we taught ourselves as kids.
Political, social, administrative and organizational skills: secret clubs, which of course had to have secret club notebooks, passwords, languages, codes, badges, mottos, rituals, officers, and admissions tests and ceremonies. We designed and made all these things ourselves. The clubs ran more smoothly than our town governments do and were much more fun.
Electronics: we built our own "radios" and other communications devices from painted blocks of wood and various components from our dads' workbenches. When my electronically-obsessed brother got older, he built a Star Trek communicator that looked and sounded exactly like the real thing and actually worked. Well, he couldn't talk to alien life forms or get beamed up, but he could communicate with other nearby humanoids with radios or CBs. He also built a radio station in the basement with a broadcast radius of about a block, which would play requests when we wrote them on paper airplanes and flew them down the basement stairs.
Engineering design & construction: golf ball and marble rolling trails on hillsides, with bridges, tunnels and jumps. Forts - on the ground, under the ground, and above the ground in trees - one of my fondest memories is the warren we created in the neighbor's enormous brush pile which included entire trees. Bicycle trails and jumps. Toy boats, airplanes, helicopters, parachutes, and kites. Building bricks and tinker toys and erector sets. Bird feeders, bird houses, pet shelters. Twig houses and villages. Rafts, bridges and dams. We knew the properties of stone, water, snow, ice, soil, wood and plant materials - and sometimes fire. I didn't even realize I knew these things until a few years ago when I tried working with a friend who didn't.
Wilderness survival skills: shelters, stalking, making weapons, foraging - and fire. For a time it was all the rage to snitch the big glass lenses off the local railroad semaphores. About ten or twelve inches in diameter, flat on one side and convex on the other, and two or three inches thick in the center, they could focus sunlight to a pinpoint of glare that would start a fire in literally about three seconds flat. Do not try this at home. Oakland had nothing on us. The neighborhood nearly burned down several times every summer until kids figured out how to control the fire... or maybe the fad died out.

Truly, it's amazing we didn't kill ourselves. I pale now to think of some of the things we did; skating on the brook right to the edge of the gaps in the ice comes to mind. But we never seemed to really get hurt. The worst injury was probably Carrie Sarchesian who fell off her bike while riding no hands and got a mild concussion.

Parents, on the other hand, were always getting wounded in the most embarrassing ways. Mr. Brunelle fell through his swimming pool deck and broke his leg, and my Dad borrowed my bike one day, forgetting that these newfangled bicycles had hand brakes instead of foot brakes. He went all the way down the hill without remembering this, at rapidly increasing velocity, wildly and ineffectually pedaling backwards, and flipped over the curb at the bottom in what must have been a spectacular display of aerial action adventure, if anyone had been there to see. He survived; my bicycle did not.

Kids today will never exactly duplicate most of the things kids did thirty years ago - nor should they. Intimate relations with computer and internet are a part of today's kids' lives and an important skill for their future. They are not the only skills, but we will find that the kids know this if we give them half a chance. Today's children will interface with the world, their world, in ways we can only imagine - and in ways we can't imagine. They will fuse past and present and future in new and unexpected configurations. All we need do is turn them loose together in a diverse habitat.