Thursday, April 18, 2013
Check out "Holy Mountain"
If you're tired of waiting for a new post on "Bruce's 13 Things," please check out my new blog: "Holy Mountain". In this blog I discuss public issues, particularly issues of place and city design, that affect how and if we Americans will manage to co-exist in the coming decades.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Last dance
A clue to my mindset, even after an enjoyable and mind-expanding series of summer exercises: Jane got to this assignment sooner than I did. She told me triumphantly a couple of nights ago that she had finished it, but couldn't do the Wordle on our laptop here at home. I knew we were supposed to write a reflection, and thought I could manage it, but the sound of the unfamiliar term Wordle chilled my heart. I began to despair until Jane explained the Wordle was optional, and told me what it was, and I've seen them before and just didn't know what they were called. So I'll have a crack at the Wordle some time if I have a free moment at work.
In the meantime, here I am at the end of the summer having been exposed to a dozen new uses of the computer, most of which I mastered and some of which I may find professionally useful. I clearly remain a bit phobic. This is not what I expected to be doing... I must not have read Lisa's memo carefully enough, because for some reason I thought we were going to learn the Latin names of plants.
I'm glad there are people like Lisa who can troll the universe and keep track of Web 2.0. I wonder, however, if it's worth the investment in time and brain space for ordinary mortals. How much of this stuff will be old hat in 5 years? Barely a decade ago I learned html, and who uses that anymore? (Not me. I use SeaMonkey.) I feel like someone who's learned a craft, say woodworking, except that people are constantly breaking into my workshop and switching out the tools for fancy new ones. I learn how to use the tools, work a little wood, and all of a sudden the tools I know how to use are gone and I have to learn new ones. These things don't occur to people who are, say, 15 like my son Robbie. By the time one is, say, 51, one has been through several versions of life, and wonders if it might be possible to skip a few of them?
The coffee's gonna taste better for what I've gone through. Stay tuned for my Wordle. I may even have another go at Jing, which truly kicked my butt last week.
In the meantime, here I am at the end of the summer having been exposed to a dozen new uses of the computer, most of which I mastered and some of which I may find professionally useful. I clearly remain a bit phobic. This is not what I expected to be doing... I must not have read Lisa's memo carefully enough, because for some reason I thought we were going to learn the Latin names of plants.
I'm glad there are people like Lisa who can troll the universe and keep track of Web 2.0. I wonder, however, if it's worth the investment in time and brain space for ordinary mortals. How much of this stuff will be old hat in 5 years? Barely a decade ago I learned html, and who uses that anymore? (Not me. I use SeaMonkey.) I feel like someone who's learned a craft, say woodworking, except that people are constantly breaking into my workshop and switching out the tools for fancy new ones. I learn how to use the tools, work a little wood, and all of a sudden the tools I know how to use are gone and I have to learn new ones. These things don't occur to people who are, say, 15 like my son Robbie. By the time one is, say, 51, one has been through several versions of life, and wonders if it might be possible to skip a few of them?
The coffee's gonna taste better for what I've gone through. Stay tuned for my Wordle. I may even have another go at Jing, which truly kicked my butt last week.
Friday, August 20, 2010
William of Rubruck on all the fuss
[I posted this on Facebook a few days ago; now it's your turn, unless you already saw it there.]
This summer I've been taking a day every week or two to study medieval political thought, because I'm scheduled to give a talk fairly soon on the subject. I find the era fascinating, but under-studied, especially by me, so it's been interesting getting prepared. It has also given me a chance to escape from an unusually seamy political scene, even by the standard of election years.
Along the way this summer I met an interesting character named William of Rubruck. He was a Dutch monk who was sent by the French King Louis IX on a mission to the Mongol Empire in 1253. (That puts him ahead of the more famous Eastern explorer Marco Polo by a couple decades, but "William of Rubruck" doesn't sound as good yelled at a beach, particularly when you have to find a third person to yell "of.") The king had heard a rumor that the heir to the Mongol throne had converted to Christianity, and wanted William to check it out.
The truth turned out to be even weirder than King Louis or Brother William could imagine. The Khan's strategy for holding the empire together and maintaining its strength was to tolerate and even encourage a variety of languages, customs and religions. The rulers were fascinated by religious studies, and encouraged different religious leaders to debate their theologies before them. William himself participated in these debates. He found he had to rely on reasoned arguments rather than the coercive power of church and state, and found himself acknowledging some salient points other religions had to offer. He particularly had to acknowledge that the Khan's strategy, weird as it was by European standards, seem to be working for an empire greater than Europe had ever seen.
I juxtaposed the insights of the Khan, and William of Rubruck, with the utter nastiness that is dominating today's political discourse. I particularly am disgusted by what passes for debate on the Arizona immigration law and the New York City mosque. Senator Cornyn of Texas has said these issues show Obama and the Democrats are out of touch with the American people, and that Republicans expect to use them to leverage victories in this fall's congressional and gubernatorial elections. Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, has warned Republicans against pushing this too far; I hope other sane Republicans will speak out. These situations call for leadership, not pandering, to the fearful and prejudiced.
American immigration policy is awful. No matter what your position on immigration in general, or on Arizona's law, you may take your favorite negative adjective and comfortably apply it to American immigration policy. The problem, in a nutshell, is that there is more demand for immigrant labor than our current laws will accommodate, so laborers and businesses get by by ignoring the law on a massive scale. This brings chaos, disrespect for the law, and an uncertain and dangerous life for the illegal immigrants. However, there is not political support for any solution, so we are in a classic Prisoner's Dilemma. Greater law enforcement cuts off the supply of workers, may tend to harass Latinos who are here legally, and contributes to economic tensions in Mexico. Taking the lid off is opposed by many labor and environmental groups, as well as those who fear a massive wave of Spanish-speaking poor people.
Into this mess pops the government of Arizona, which contributes a law allowing police to demand proof of immigration status of anyone they suspect. This is not law enforcement, folks, this is button-pushing; it gains attention and political support from the gullible for the proponents. Arizona does not have anything like the resources to make this work. More damningly, the state has passed at least two other laws aimed at Latino culture, including one forbidding the teaching of Mexican heritage in schools, and another restricting the use of Spanish in public fora. This isn't about law enforcement, it's about one ethnic group sticking it to another. No other state bordering Mexico is following Arizona's lead, which is significant.
The New York City mosque business is even more egregious. The mosque is only vaguely near the site of the former World Trade Center, and even if it was across the street, who cares? As President Bush eloquently declared in September 2001, we are not fighting a war of Christians against Moslems. Except that some people are, notably Newt Gingrich, who ought to know better, and Sarah Palin, one of the most irresponsible public figures ever to walk the earth. They're promoting themselves, folks, by getting you riled up. Don't fall for it.
Here's Gingrich on "Fox and Friends": "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center." His analogies are as false as his facts are.
What makes America great is our spirit, which embraces a bigger share of diversity than even the Khan could have imagined. The vile perpetrators of 9/11 are narrow-minded; we show we are better than they are by embracing Islam as well as Christianity. It is hardly "disrespectful" for American Moslems to act like they're part of the American fabric, and only the most twisted of minds could call it a victory marker or whatever sputum Gingrich is spewing. Building this mosque represents a victory for the American spirit over the crabbed spirit of hatred offered by bin Laden and his ilk.
As for S.B. 1070, it is useless except to stir up emotions, unless somehow or other it gets us thinking as a country what a rational and fair immigration policy might be. It's hard to see us getting there from here, but maybe. Meanwhile, go ahead and press "1" for English, because America is number "1," and will be as long as we keep clear heads and don't fall for the wiles of those who would manipulate our fears for their own political gain.
This summer I've been taking a day every week or two to study medieval political thought, because I'm scheduled to give a talk fairly soon on the subject. I find the era fascinating, but under-studied, especially by me, so it's been interesting getting prepared. It has also given me a chance to escape from an unusually seamy political scene, even by the standard of election years.
Along the way this summer I met an interesting character named William of Rubruck. He was a Dutch monk who was sent by the French King Louis IX on a mission to the Mongol Empire in 1253. (That puts him ahead of the more famous Eastern explorer Marco Polo by a couple decades, but "William of Rubruck" doesn't sound as good yelled at a beach, particularly when you have to find a third person to yell "of.") The king had heard a rumor that the heir to the Mongol throne had converted to Christianity, and wanted William to check it out.
The truth turned out to be even weirder than King Louis or Brother William could imagine. The Khan's strategy for holding the empire together and maintaining its strength was to tolerate and even encourage a variety of languages, customs and religions. The rulers were fascinated by religious studies, and encouraged different religious leaders to debate their theologies before them. William himself participated in these debates. He found he had to rely on reasoned arguments rather than the coercive power of church and state, and found himself acknowledging some salient points other religions had to offer. He particularly had to acknowledge that the Khan's strategy, weird as it was by European standards, seem to be working for an empire greater than Europe had ever seen.
I juxtaposed the insights of the Khan, and William of Rubruck, with the utter nastiness that is dominating today's political discourse. I particularly am disgusted by what passes for debate on the Arizona immigration law and the New York City mosque. Senator Cornyn of Texas has said these issues show Obama and the Democrats are out of touch with the American people, and that Republicans expect to use them to leverage victories in this fall's congressional and gubernatorial elections. Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, has warned Republicans against pushing this too far; I hope other sane Republicans will speak out. These situations call for leadership, not pandering, to the fearful and prejudiced.
American immigration policy is awful. No matter what your position on immigration in general, or on Arizona's law, you may take your favorite negative adjective and comfortably apply it to American immigration policy. The problem, in a nutshell, is that there is more demand for immigrant labor than our current laws will accommodate, so laborers and businesses get by by ignoring the law on a massive scale. This brings chaos, disrespect for the law, and an uncertain and dangerous life for the illegal immigrants. However, there is not political support for any solution, so we are in a classic Prisoner's Dilemma. Greater law enforcement cuts off the supply of workers, may tend to harass Latinos who are here legally, and contributes to economic tensions in Mexico. Taking the lid off is opposed by many labor and environmental groups, as well as those who fear a massive wave of Spanish-speaking poor people.
Into this mess pops the government of Arizona, which contributes a law allowing police to demand proof of immigration status of anyone they suspect. This is not law enforcement, folks, this is button-pushing; it gains attention and political support from the gullible for the proponents. Arizona does not have anything like the resources to make this work. More damningly, the state has passed at least two other laws aimed at Latino culture, including one forbidding the teaching of Mexican heritage in schools, and another restricting the use of Spanish in public fora. This isn't about law enforcement, it's about one ethnic group sticking it to another. No other state bordering Mexico is following Arizona's lead, which is significant.
The New York City mosque business is even more egregious. The mosque is only vaguely near the site of the former World Trade Center, and even if it was across the street, who cares? As President Bush eloquently declared in September 2001, we are not fighting a war of Christians against Moslems. Except that some people are, notably Newt Gingrich, who ought to know better, and Sarah Palin, one of the most irresponsible public figures ever to walk the earth. They're promoting themselves, folks, by getting you riled up. Don't fall for it.
Here's Gingrich on "Fox and Friends": "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center." His analogies are as false as his facts are.
What makes America great is our spirit, which embraces a bigger share of diversity than even the Khan could have imagined. The vile perpetrators of 9/11 are narrow-minded; we show we are better than they are by embracing Islam as well as Christianity. It is hardly "disrespectful" for American Moslems to act like they're part of the American fabric, and only the most twisted of minds could call it a victory marker or whatever sputum Gingrich is spewing. Building this mosque represents a victory for the American spirit over the crabbed spirit of hatred offered by bin Laden and his ilk.
As for S.B. 1070, it is useless except to stir up emotions, unless somehow or other it gets us thinking as a country what a rational and fair immigration policy might be. It's hard to see us getting there from here, but maybe. Meanwhile, go ahead and press "1" for English, because America is number "1," and will be as long as we keep clear heads and don't fall for the wiles of those who would manipulate our fears for their own political gain.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
By Jing!
I have tried to create a screencast using Jing, which seems to be a bit past me.
First, I had to think of something to say. That was harder than you might think! Since I've been working on my American Government class this summer, I decided to make a short presentation about the Constitutional Convention.
I captured some pictures of the era using Jing. I downloaded the Jing interactive tutorial but don't seem to be able to "get it" because whatever I do it says "Please try again!" I'm not sure what Jing did with the pictures but they were on the Desktop so I uploaded them to Screencast.
I wrestled with this for 90 minutes this afternoon, until my wife ordered me off the computer because of the unpleasant sounds I kept making. Since then I've snuck back on, and have this to show you. I'm sure if I knew what I was doing I could put content with the actual pictures, and then have a slide show, but what I'm offering you instead is a bunch of links with narration.
In the 1780s, the recently independent United States faced a number of difficult problems. Or didn't face them. Many people were frustrated by the decentralized system of government and blamed it for the country's inability to solve its problems. These people included such luminaries as George Washington...
...James Madison...
...and Alexander Hamilton.
Other people liked the decentralization, and thought the first group were elitist national snots. These included Patrick Henry...
...Luther Martin...
...and Sam Adams, brewer-patriot!
The dispute was unresolved until the winter of 1786-1787, when civil unrest broke out in Massachusetts, led by Revolutionary War veteran Daniel Shays.
The unrest scared enough people that they went along with the movement to strengthen the national government. Delegates from 12 states met in Independence Hall, Philadelphia...
...and wrote the Constitution.
Today, the Framers of the Constitution are remembered as heroes, and their memory excites people young and old...
...and even kitties!
I doubt I will use this in class.
First, I had to think of something to say. That was harder than you might think! Since I've been working on my American Government class this summer, I decided to make a short presentation about the Constitutional Convention.
I captured some pictures of the era using Jing. I downloaded the Jing interactive tutorial but don't seem to be able to "get it" because whatever I do it says "Please try again!" I'm not sure what Jing did with the pictures but they were on the Desktop so I uploaded them to Screencast.
I wrestled with this for 90 minutes this afternoon, until my wife ordered me off the computer because of the unpleasant sounds I kept making. Since then I've snuck back on, and have this to show you. I'm sure if I knew what I was doing I could put content with the actual pictures, and then have a slide show, but what I'm offering you instead is a bunch of links with narration.
In the 1780s, the recently independent United States faced a number of difficult problems. Or didn't face them. Many people were frustrated by the decentralized system of government and blamed it for the country's inability to solve its problems. These people included such luminaries as George Washington...
...James Madison...
...and Alexander Hamilton.
Other people liked the decentralization, and thought the first group were elitist national snots. These included Patrick Henry...
...Luther Martin...
...and Sam Adams, brewer-patriot!
The dispute was unresolved until the winter of 1786-1787, when civil unrest broke out in Massachusetts, led by Revolutionary War veteran Daniel Shays.
The unrest scared enough people that they went along with the movement to strengthen the national government. Delegates from 12 states met in Independence Hall, Philadelphia...
...and wrote the Constitution.
Today, the Framers of the Constitution are remembered as heroes, and their memory excites people young and old...
...and even kitties!
I doubt I will use this in class.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
RSS feed me
I have got a Google reader account--thanks to Jane, with a bunch of 13 Things-related blogs, as well as Andrew Revkin (environmental blogger from the New York Times), Radio Scotland, and Kathy Guttosch (hs friend).
Here's the issue, friends. Am I worried that information will occur, and I won't be there to learn it? Or am I tired of, say, checking Kathy's blog every week or so (I don't, and anyhow she posts new entries on Facebook) to see if she's added anything? Or do I want one more way to keep up with Gavin's wonderfully-titled "Desperately Random" blog?
Well, if the answer to any of the above questions was yes, Google Reader would be the answer to my prayers.
Now, to the point of whether I would use it in a class. I'm not sure I would. The class would need to be one where keeping up with events hour-to-hour was important. Probably this is not true in a class like, say, Ancient and Medieval Political Theory. As for American politics classes, the potential is there, but here we must disabuse anyone out there who believes that political science is a class in current events. Political science teaches a language and approach for understanding political phenomena, which are better understood after they've been digested for awhile. As my writing colleague Paul Quirk once said when I complained that if you subscribe to the New York Times by post it comes a day late, "That might be better than getting it the same day. It would keep you from over-focusing on current events." (Paul said this in, like, 1992, so I don't mean to imply he's anti-RSS.) An RSS feed that gave us a blizzard of up-to-date blog posts might well distract us with ephemera, rather than help us learn the concepts that will serve us for a lifetime. Case in point: The news right now is full of the ethical troubles of Representatives Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters. Two months from now, no one will care.
And there's time to reflect. How do we reflect on anything, come to a deeper understanding of it--which is what I hope my students will do--if we're constantly bombarded with information?
Here's the issue, friends. Am I worried that information will occur, and I won't be there to learn it? Or am I tired of, say, checking Kathy's blog every week or so (I don't, and anyhow she posts new entries on Facebook) to see if she's added anything? Or do I want one more way to keep up with Gavin's wonderfully-titled "Desperately Random" blog?
Well, if the answer to any of the above questions was yes, Google Reader would be the answer to my prayers.
Now, to the point of whether I would use it in a class. I'm not sure I would. The class would need to be one where keeping up with events hour-to-hour was important. Probably this is not true in a class like, say, Ancient and Medieval Political Theory. As for American politics classes, the potential is there, but here we must disabuse anyone out there who believes that political science is a class in current events. Political science teaches a language and approach for understanding political phenomena, which are better understood after they've been digested for awhile. As my writing colleague Paul Quirk once said when I complained that if you subscribe to the New York Times by post it comes a day late, "That might be better than getting it the same day. It would keep you from over-focusing on current events." (Paul said this in, like, 1992, so I don't mean to imply he's anti-RSS.) An RSS feed that gave us a blizzard of up-to-date blog posts might well distract us with ephemera, rather than help us learn the concepts that will serve us for a lifetime. Case in point: The news right now is full of the ethical troubles of Representatives Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters. Two months from now, no one will care.
And there's time to reflect. How do we reflect on anything, come to a deeper understanding of it--which is what I hope my students will do--if we're constantly bombarded with information?
Monday, August 2, 2010
Creative commons
I think this has definite potential. Many's the time I wanted to use some copyrighted material for some trivial purpose, maybe like advanced clip art, and would have much preferred using something like this to stealing some copyrighted picture.
From the student's perspective, I think--though I have no proof for this--most people would rather do something legal than illegal, as long as it's not too difficult (complicated, expensive). Creative commons can make it reasonable to be legal.
I'm a little concerned about the images at the beginning of the first video. I strongly believe in copyright laws, though I agree they could be more flexible... just as long as the elephant in chains is not depicting all intellectual property. I'm no socialist, and don't agree that intellectual property should be held in common, particularly when no other kind of property normally is.
From the student's perspective, I think--though I have no proof for this--most people would rather do something legal than illegal, as long as it's not too difficult (complicated, expensive). Creative commons can make it reasonable to be legal.
I'm a little concerned about the images at the beginning of the first video. I strongly believe in copyright laws, though I agree they could be more flexible... just as long as the elephant in chains is not depicting all intellectual property. I'm no socialist, and don't agree that intellectual property should be held in common, particularly when no other kind of property normally is.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Library Thing thing
I joined LibraryThing--as "BruceNesmith"--and added 10 books with reviews from the list on my website [http://www.public.coe.edu/~bnesmith/career.htm]. I probably won't pursue this, as I've invested too much time and too many books on WeRead, a similar Facebook ap. I find the stats on LibraryThing intriguing; even for some of the more obscure books I've added there are dozens of other readers.
I can't think of any classroom application for this, but it's late on a hot day, so maybe I will.
I can't think of any classroom application for this, but it's late on a hot day, so maybe I will.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
