Up and Jogging

Actually, jogging is overstating it. I'm limping a bit. Seven years ago I got really sick with the flu and it damaged my nervous sytem and now I can't run. Swimming is the only form of exercise where I feel symmetrical. It's very frustrating. So my advice to all of you reading this is GET A FLU SHOT!

My computer is back up to speed, however, having recovered from the latest 'upgrade.' 'Upgrade' is a euphemism for 'setback.' It amazes me that the book "Future Shock" was written before home computers, because there is no medium like a computer to make you feel jerked along by the runaway horse of technology.

But that's not the rant I was going to allow myself. My plan for this post is to sketch out the rants I was unable to air on NPR's Talk of the Nation today. TWICE today, actually, I spent a futile twenty minutes redialing the number (1-800-989-8255) and never got anything but a busy signal. My first attempted comment was during the segment on public art controversies. People were invited to call in and talk about their positive and negative experiences of public art. I am an artist myself, and live in an area which has a 1% rule--1% of construction costs for public buildings must be spent on public art. It seems at first blush a good idea--especially if you design public art--but I am seeing--literally--serious flaws. Namely, a lot of mediocre already-decaying sculptures plunked down in odd places. Apparently 1% of most construction doesn't add up to enough to buy a really great work of art. Or--and I suspect this is the greater problem--the committee that approves the public art tries to eliminate any works that might be controversial. Hence we wind up with a lot of stuff that is safe, bland, and lifeless. In a town where all structures are beige, the last thing we need is bland art. What I wanted to suggest on TON was that avoiding controverial public artworks is impossible and undesirable. Instead, a work of public art should be judged by the strength and quality of the positive comments it receives. Negative comments can be disregarded, unless they overwhelmingly predominate, in which case there is a problem. There was, for example, a sculpture erected in a Tucson neighborhood which was supposed to be about water--water gushing out of pipes. Not a bad idea, since water is such a precious substance in this area, and it would make for a dynamic sculpture. But the artist chose to cover the sculpture with a skin of stone (like flagstone), which (I can't believe he didn't anticipate this) made it appear that what gushed from the pipes wasn't water but sewage. The comments from people who lived in the area were almost entirely negative, and the piece was eventually removed. The sad thing about the public art in my neighborhood (with a couple of exceptions) is that it doesn't inspire any comment at all, positive or negative.

My other comment would have been aired in the segment about teaching math--why are our children still not doing well in math? Great subject, and as far as I could tell, some good ideas were proposed--although I was so busy redialing I couldn't concentrate. All I wanted to say was that in helping my two sons with their math homework (which fortunately I am rarely called to do), I discovered that their textbooks were appallingly badly designed, if you agree that the main purpose of textbooks is to impart information in a clear format. Instead, the pages were cluttered with distracting decoration and text boxes and colored fonts. What I gathered from my perusal was that textbook designers are afraid of being boring and so they try to jazz up the information to make it more like TV, which means the logic and concepts get lost. Icould say that in general the biggest problem with education in this country is that educators get so caught up in trying to make it fun that they forget how to make it clear.

So, to sum up: boring public art: Bad! Boring textbooks: Good!

Bookboy, if you have mangaged to forbear the wait and the rants, you have earned at least a promise from me to take another stab at (no, don't get Freudian on me!) The Denial of Death. What I realized, after our brief skirmish on Julia Sweeney's blog, is that I hadn't read beyond about page 50. I can say, however, that the parts I found misogynistic two decades ago struck me even more strongly so today. I swear there are passages that describe a child's reaction tohis/her mother as "horror, terror and disgust" because she is (and here I don't remember the exact words) tied to the earth and therefore a symbol of mortality. ...And men are not?? Iwill allow that it's possible my sensitivity to this issue was exacerbated by the fact that I was at the time of that first reading enrolled in an English course whose professor continually proclaimed his admiration of three women: Sylvia Plath, Anne Sexton and Emily Dickson. Good writers all, but the first two committed suicide and the third was a recluse. Perhaps as a result, I felt desperate to know or know of sane, vibrant, powerful women, and The Denial of Death only intensified that desperation.

Desperation seems like a bad note to end on, but I'm falling asleep. Hope all you readers (all two or three of you--hi Beth!) aren't doing the same.

Rebecca

Welcome, worldwide audience!

Ok, I'm being a bit facetious. Chances are,if you're reading this blog you're one of the frequent readers of Julia Sweeney's blog. I was/am a regular reader there; it's a great blog, one of the few I've read that really gets me thinking. Problem is, her blogs are so interesting that they get people talking...and talking...and talking. As I commented to her, her blog reminds me of the philosophy parties I had as a phil major in college, when people would be arguing in my living room and I was just waiting for them to go home so I could go to bed.

Anyway, I set up this blog so I'd have a place to carry on discussions with people I meet in the other venues I frequent. And, if no one shows up, to engage in scintillating soliloquies about my life.

And the title, Wombasta? That was the word offered for verification when I was setting up my Blogger account. I have spent the better part of two days trying to come up with an untaken clever name for my blog and recognized instantly that this was the solution to my problems. (My husband is warning me that it probably means something obscene in some language. No doubt. Apologies in advance to any who are offended.)

OK, bookboy, I'm expecting to hear from you. I do want to say about the Ernest Becker book, Denial of Death, that although I personally had problems seeing myself as the provoker of "horror, terror and contempt," I do understand that there is a lot of material in the book which has obviously been of great value to many readers. I recognize that it is, if nothing else, a book which makes an attempt to lay bare the fears and assumptions from which we suffer--and that is a noble cause.

(Do I sign this here? Well--here goes--)

Rebecca