Archive for May, 2008

Teaching Parallel Structure

So I look for congenial, possibly exciting assignments to stimulate them. And this morning I stumbled upon a great idea: use litany style poetry to teach parallel structure. Explain the concept—similar syntax repeated with varying though related content.  It would also afford the opportunity to look at coherence, emphasis and certain enduring “documents” like MLK’s “I Have a Dream,” the Declaration of Independence, which resurfaces in Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address,” the opening lines of “A Tale of Two Cities,” Ecclesiastes on appropriate times . . . Quite a list.

A positive approach to teaching grammar allows students to experience a rhetorical tool and then, on revision, to discover the pitfalls and ways of correcting them in peer groups rather than rote exercises. Correction, being based on the students’ own writing, will be meaningful to them so the skill is more likely to “take” (as all you writing teachers will recognize).

I believe such an assignment could work for basic as well as advanced writers. In fact, I think it might work at almost any level. At any level, poetry is a challenge and appeals to creativity. It would demonstrate form as a stimulus for truly creative production–as opposed to the unexamined, stream of a not very interesting consciousness drivvel that often passes for poetry among adolescents. It could work for a single day’s class activities and even, potentially, lead to a portfolio piece. After all parallel structure–properly used–is a powerful rhetorical structure. Why shouldn’t they master it? And then be proud?

Leave a comment »

My teaching persona

I spend a lot of time wishing I was writing poetry, looking for topics, jotting down inspirations, scanning the interior landscape for my own, special tree. Oddly enough, in quest of poetry to read and to write I continually end up with ideas for teaching.

I am not a confident teacher—though I move sure-footed through my tutoring. Self-doubt is my most persistent pedagogic muse—glaring like an unfriendly district superintendent over my shoulder at every move, asking: Are you in control? Why don’t ;you get them to stop playing computer games? What did that teach them? Why haven’t they improved? Why do they hate this assignment?

I like my experience with students to feel like a social hour with me as host but able to command my guests and that way still accomplish a lot. This oxymoron traps me repeatedly. Wanting to mother, it seems I often alienate. After all, these are usually 18 year olds anxious to shed parental oversight. What they want is someone other, perhaps, a bit more exotic, less accessible, even scarier. It’s not a persona I adopt easily.

It’s summer now. I look forward to teaching, in spite of my trepidations. I stockpile articles and books on pedagogy, I read and re-read textbooks, trying to match their version of learning with mine and what I think my students will respond to. I’m likely to be wrong again in some cases. I know I’ll encounter those who don’t get me and many, perhaps, whose progress as writers is incremental at best.

But I don’t want to stop. And I continue to believe I’ll improve.

Leave a comment »

Mothers’ Day

On Mothers’ Day (and as a mom I’m well aware that tomorrow IS that day and fully count on being “honored”) we celebrate an impossible ideal. Culture and media as well as our own rose-colored emotions conjure an image of a saintly, cookie baker that resembles almost no one I know. As one drive-by business sign summarized the prevailing attitude, “Mothers are angels without wings.”

As a flesh and blood, flawed and sometimes regretful member of that class, I cringe at such misrepresentations. They both call on me to be what I am not and tend to kick me out of a group to which I belong in spite of my flaws and transgressions. And, by invoking the entirely demystified and slightly immature cherub—in the tradition of the fairy godmother aunts in Disney’s Sleeping Beauty—the superficial stereotypes reduce the mystery, power, real sacrifice and intense and instinctual relationship compounded in mother-and child-hood. Motherhood is miraculous, but it’s not always pretty. Or even kind.

It occurred to me this morning that many of us suspect compassion in general of hackneyed bathos, syrupy sentimentality—and that the formulation of Mothers’ Day is partly responsible. . When someone speaks of loving neighbors and compassion for all sentient creatures, we think too much of Hallmark Mothers’ Day and not enough of . . . something else.

What? What component of love do those flowery cards lack that reduces them from true compassion to kitsch and, even, hypocrisy?

One component is sustainability. On selected days, for fleeting moments, a child or sister or mother, declares a gratitude and recognition that during the rest of their lives—outside the theater of the holiday—is soundly contradicted by “real world” behavior. Everyone shares a tear-filled moment, like the emotion conjured in a tear-jerker film, but no one can carry that sentiment into the everyday. Heck, it may not last through dinner. Leave the theater, buy an ice cream or coffee, and you’re right back in yourself, no permanent transformation accomplished because the experience is based on a fiction.

The frilliest of cards for mothers describe saintly self-sacrifice—without any of the emotions or conditions that made her behaviors sacrificial. The cornball postulate that by becoming mothers women achieve some level of apotheosis belies the moments in any mother’s (or other person’s life) when she (or he) was anything but angelic. And watching the relationships of those who exchange such platitudes, I often experienced a sense of subdivided personality. No doubt there is real feeling somewhere, but on a daily basis it’s revealed as considerably different from the representations on the cards.

Another missing component, then, is honesty.

True compassion, I suppose, detaches from all moments—the celebratory and sacralized as well as the ordinary and secular—and having observed truly but without judgment, accepts and honors, despite what in the course of life have been and will continue to be conflicts, pain, struggle and enduring existential isolation.

In this sense, the humorous card serves as the better vehicle for true connection. In shared laughter, by choosing to recognize what falls short of glory people generate true connection. Of course, it’s quite possible (though difficult) to find (or compose) cards that express heartfelt, real gratitude, but that real sentiment will never hold up an impossible standard as having been met when the recipient will know (almost certainly) that the image in the mirror is a lie. Instead, true sentiment remembers the concrete and recognizes that true heroism occurs among the flawed and the human.

In films, people always tell little boys that true courage is not an absence of fear but a moving forward despite it. Why can’t we tell mothers the same thing? No matter mistakes you have made—and will continue to make—your relationship matters. If you have worked against your grain, suppressed your own desires, bitten your tongue, even over-reacted in fear for the safety of your child, you have been a good mother. And because that’s one key relationship in any person’s life, celebration of whatever it was and preparation to improve whatever will be are worthwhile. So in honor of your true—and imperfect—reality, we will not propose an impossible standard but will take this moment to say we love you anyway. In that way, Mothers’ Day (and holidays like it) could further the quest for true compassion. The teacher who first explained Buddhism to me called it a recognition of “suchness:” the absolute individuality of an entity. He spoke of experiencing this knock-you-off-your-feet insight in response to a dandelion pushing through a sidewalk crack. We can begin that project by acknowledging our real mothers–and children. By rejecting the phony rose for the scrawny but miraculous—and actual—flowering weed.

Leave a comment »

Beyond and Upside Down

I am drinking coffee, eating cereal, reading Worship Arts—an article that calls the parables “upside down world.”

(So much to record—so much in so few minutes!)

I consider what the woman preacher-author says about the Parable of the Sower, looking not at the kinds of soil but at the farmer, whose liberal (some might say “careless” or “wanton”) dissemination connotes, for her, largesse and an openness to possibility.

(She speaks of brainstorming in that connection: when “all things are considered possible.” All things . . . possible.)

Then, I read in The Sun a story that, parable-like, also upends expectation. The reader-writer describes stealing potatoes in Germany during WWII—when her family was hungry, when she was a child—and again at a reunion years later—for fun and nostalgia when they were not hungry and she no longer a child. Having remembered the taste of fire-roasted stolen tubers, she and her family re-enact the thefts, for the joy! for the possibility! for the taste!

I am weeping as insight floods me: the potatoes do not belong to the farmer. The joy of these thieves—one a preacher—eating their potatoes and reminiscing about a time when need drove them—completely surpasses the value of the potatoes themselves. Joy and community redeem the trespass.

This is transcendence.

(THIS is a MasterCard commercial!)

Flooded with the tears of amazement, I look up to see Jesus, MY Jesus—a small, brightly painted Mexican crucifix on the front door. He is transformed through devastation, transcending death by filling with All that is. Above his head, a dove—sky and spirit. His arms, so painful in death, now stretch wide in welcome, palms uplifted. His robe, bright yellow, displays and contains the universe He embraces: the sun, a great orange flower, opens at his heart. Two humans, male and female, stand beneath, then white homes like migrant cabins below them in the skirt. And then, the vegetal world: a tree and plants just above the soil into which he has deeply planted his bare, pristinely white feet:

Jesus is All the World to me
THIS Jesus, who literally descends, who binds together, sanctifying transgression to the Glory of God, subsuming worldly good and evil in a bounty of blessing overwhelming to our meager human hearts.

Leave a comment »

Troubling Thought for a Progressive

Tuesday morning, NPR ran a creepily light-hearted feature on bioengineering students cloning new strains (that is, essentially, new species or at least sub-species) of E.Coli. In particular, they were adding new genes to change the odor. The students’ cavalier attitude—“what fun! Now they smell like banana!”—expressed itself in the end (and I quote) as, “we’re just making stuff,” emphasis firmly on “stuff.”

At that point, I realized that while I shuffle through ancient arguments about intangibles like God, these folks are out there literally redefining—reinventing—life itself, becoming agents of evolution and assuring that evolution will now serve (or try to serve) human whims.

But in the long run it may fail to serve human interests.

The consequence of this school-child tampering?

A loss of “life”. Once we marveled at and called it miraculous. Something even the most knowledgeable alchemist could not bestow upon a rock, no matter how humanly shaped. Life the “Chi,” the anima, the spirit. Life is now, simply, “stuff.” We can no longer distinguish its value or miracle from that of base metal.

So as science fiction has warned us since the early 1800s, we’re playing with dangerous fires. But where the nineteenth century read Mary Shelley’s dream of an ill-treated patchwork man, we draw our stories from the morning news. Truly, we are not far from the cyborgs and androids, the odd performing hybrid “toy” creatures of Blade Runner. Nor, it seems, from the callous disregard that characterizes the corporate engineers of those fictional societies in whose radically materialist eyes humans, too, are merely cogs, functioning or not, in the system. Harrison Ford barely has a better life than his condemned, blond paramour. When he fails to perform for the state, a price falls on his head as well. Life, it’s just “stuff” after all.

Apparently we pay no heed to the moral warnings embedded in those tales.

Tragically, the young people performing these Frankensteinian pyrotechnics were completely unaware of their power or any consequences other than, it seems, sweeter smelling excrement. (We already have women buying pills that virtually eliminate their gendered rhythms. Imagine the thrill of purchasing a kit that will forever eliminate your need for bottled bathroom fragrance.)

Someone has to stand up for the sacred spark in life—for freedom as a value and a right that undergirds all progress. As elusive and indefinite as God, it is sacred both to God and to evolution. Without freedom to mutate as they will, living organisms will be more than ever in thrall to the dangerous humans. And like any monopolistic autocracy, the human empire will visit havoc on the order of the universe–or at least the little corner of it we call the earth.

This is a moment to rethink all assumptions. Some will conclude that those intangible, comprehensive categories—life, for instance—never had any more absolute value than the concept of God or transcendance. They will point to better smelling e.coli—potentially better smelling excrement—as a wonderful commodity. Never mind that foul smells inform us—warn us, often, of poisons and danger. Within that new world order human value will be challenged by its own . Our value may plummet with the value of the “stuff” we are made on. And the seemingly innocent pleasures we derive may trigger destructive consequences as the universe—all that other “stuff”— seeks equilibrium.

“Free the E. Coli” seems an absurdist mantra, but I’m thinking of printing it on a t-shirt.

Leave a comment »