Grammar, authoritarianism and me…

Posted on April 25, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

In my life, “Grammar” has been very much related to authoritarianism.  I’m currently enjoying Eats, Shoots and Leaves, and it has brought back memories of my  relationship to grammar.

Growing up in a relatively authoritarian society meant that we had to learn “rules of grammar”.  They were considered important enough that failing in grammar meant failing a whole year of school.  “Compulsory”.  The very word has an authoritarian ring to it.

As a young adult, if you had some strengths in the area of “correct” use of grammar, you might advance careerwise.  Unless you were a woman, in which case you might aspire to become a ‘senior’ secretary — someday maybe even secretary to a president!  Young men with grammar skills, on the other hand, could aspire to a writing career which, although not lucrative, we romanticized.

Once I’d been working for awhile with people from other parts of the world, I became aware of conflicting rules of grammar: we Canadians of British heritage spelled words like programme with a double m and e, whereas the Americans had dropped the extra m and e.  My British authority at the next desk insisted on the extra parts, while I found myself attracted to the rebellious American spelling.  Program.   It certainly uses less ink.   ‘American spelling’ began to seem more practical and sensible and of course I began to realize there was no logical reason to add the extra letters.

This may well have been a significant step in my ‘radicalization’.  I had begun to see that my hard-earned grammatical correctness was actually, after all, a relative thing – as with many of life’s values.  While I was becoming more flexible and daring in my use of grammar, schools were beginning to relax the rules – all rules in fact.   Little did we realize this was merely a small part of the flowering of the counter-culture revolution.

As I always say, perspective is everything.  And as my values and lifestyle evolved, shifted, and changed, so did my English usage.   And by the time I’d been through some traumatic life changes, I had become downright ‘impossible’ – even starting sentences with prepositions and conjunctions!

The days when I thought in terms of ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ usage are long gone.   Now I see language usage as clusters of skills.  There’s the everyday communication cluster, which contains its own variety.  There’s the language of instruction – which also has a variety of styles.  There’s a vast array of creative language.  And more.  Some of these clusters include certain ‘skill packages’ – like when someone knows how to construct a recognizable object out of odd pieces of wood, with special tools.

Some of us have a few of these language skill sets, some of us don’t, but have other skill sets.   These differences no longer represent some vague positive or negative  aspects of people.  ‘Rules of grammar’ have faded into the background – a relative thing, as they always were really.  It’s just that my old authoritarian rigidity took awhile to crumble, like rose-coloured glasses.  Make that ‘colored’.

Posted in authoritarian, grammar, reflections, relativism, values | Tagged , , , , | 10 Comments

Embracing the ‘opposition’

Posted on April 23, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

A conference I’m attending in May* that revolves around the increasing urbanization of the world and related issues, asks the question “How can citizens most effectively be involved in this massive re-shaping of the urban environment?”

As it happens, this relates to what I’ve been asking myself for the past year or so: “How can we motivate citizens to get effectively involved in the planning and development of our neighbourhoods?”  I spend more time thinking about this every week, because it seems more urgent to me all the time.  (Density vs. environmental damage from suburban sprawl etc.)  Of course the harder it is to get people involved the more urgent it seems, but that’s the way life is.

I’m in a small group of people trying to develop a pro-active approach to ‘urban planning’ policies around our little neighbourhood.  And as we chat, I am increasingly convinced that our explorations – while worthwhile – will not be enough to bring about change.  Not without some kind of communication strategy.

Urgency makes me think in terms of ‘shortcuts’.  So on the subject of motivating people to start thinking about urbanism with an open, creative mind – I begin to muse about communication shortcuts.

There are such ‘tools’  in the field of psychology.  Like “dialogues”.   It may sound cold and manipulative, but needn’t be at all.  Structured dialogues can be learned and used to reduce conflict in communication, so what harm could there be?  (I know, sounds like ‘famous last words’).

‘Active listening’ dialogues, for example,  can help us hear and understand the fear or stress someone is feeling, and actually make us more compassionate and accepting – of the  ‘other’.  Less threatened ourselves by their opposition.  And there are experiments in communication among ‘opposites’ taking place.**  What an exciting world is possible, thanks to the internet.

When all is said and done, the greatest barrier to progress will really come down to the non-threatening communication of ideas.  It’s not  really about whether six stories or ten stories is more appropriate for our community.  It’s not about whether it’s dangerous to  welcome supportive housing for people with psychoses.  It’s about fear, and how to deal with it.  It’s about helping others buy into our dream, instead of seeing it as a nightmare.

To reach ‘the opposition’, we need to welcome it, embrace it.  At the end of the day if we don’t get better at that, we are lost.

*   http://www.cityage.tv/toronto     ** http://www.livingroomconversations.org/about

Posted in change, communication, community, NIMBY, urban planning, urbanism | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Classical Revolution + Measha – Really!

Posted on April 10, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

Sometimes, you’re just in the right place, at the right time.  And last night was one of those times.

The place was Toronto’s Tranzac Club, and not ten feet from me was  soprano Measha  Brueggergosman, transforming the room, entertaining, teasing the musicians, educating.  Oh that voice!  In the background, the occasional piercing squeal of her baby caused chuckles, and her smile widened in obvious pleasure.

This was not a formal concert, planned months in advance.  It had been organized on Facebook, by an informal group known as Classical Revolution Toronto* (if you’re on Facebook, you can search for their name).  The event’s main organizer was violinist Edwin Huizinga*, who was part of the original Classical Revolution start-up event in San Francisco years ago.

Some of the best musicians in North America gave the concert out of the goodness of their hearts.  Measha Brueggergosman joined them — yes no charge —  to share the music they love.  Other musicians won’t soon forget the experience of  playing with these wonderful artists, led by none other than TSO’s guest conductor James Gaffigan.**

Surrounded by other musicians, music lovers, and some surprised, delighted beer drinkers, the room came alive the way it does sometimes at Classical Revolution events – with laughter, musicians of every stripe crowded together, informal clothing, cello cases scattered about, occasional pauses, adjustments, mistakes and more laughter.   It’s reminiscent of ‘jamming’, but with classical music.

In Classical Revolution events,  great music meets people close up and personal, intimately, in a way that never happens in a concert hall. There’s something precious about seeing the great opera singer teasingly offer her glasses to a violinist, impulsively hugging the conductor, who turns and reaches for his drink, which happens to be on our table.  It is magical to see up close the physical power of a great soprano, as her rich voice surrounds you.  My tears welled up.

You can feel the strength of the cellists sweeping their bows across the strings, your diaphragm vibrating with the music.  Up close, you can see this is not effortless work. You can hear details in the playing, individual styles. You can see the look of admiration one musician has for another.  In this case, we could also hear the baby’s squeals – and actually see Brueggergosman’s passionate love for her child.

And was all that not part of the origin of “chamber” music?  Chambre is French for bedroom – where music in that era was played amidst children and perhaps aunts, uncles, grandparents, coming and going.  It was not so much about the precision or perfection of the composed music, listened to in formal silence, but about a total experience.  I imagine such children grew up with that music a part of their souls.

Yes, not like any concert I ever attended.  Here the “vibe” of living happens, leaving us with an unforgettable memory.  Now that’s a world class moment.

* http://www.colineatock.com/1/post/2013/04/in-praise-of-bad-music.html

** http://tso.ca/Concerts-And-Tickets/Events/2012-2013-Season/Measha-Brueggergosman.aspx

Posted in Classical Revolution, James Galligan, Measha Brueggergosman, Toronto Symphony Orchestra, Tranzac Club, urban | Tagged , , , , , | 7 Comments

Walkability + Livability

Posted on April 9, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

I think a lot about the question of what might make my neighbourhood livable and thriving long term.  And how does that relate to affordability?  And the environment?  I’ve been trying to get my mind around some of Jane Jacobs’ and others’ thinking about urban planning, in an attempt to understand and change my neighbourhood.  Why?  Because middle- and lower income people have been leaving.  They can’t afford the rent. They can’t afford to buy.  And that is changing the character of the place.

I’ve been trying to imagine what might enhance Roncy and prevent it from becoming just another expensive but perhaps less creative community.  This might seem counter-intuitive to some, but after a lot of reading, I think we need many more diverse people, densely “packed” into much more ‘mixed-use’ development.

One of Jane Jacobs’ points is the need for lots of pedestrian traffic in a neighbourhood, for as many  hours of the day as possible, for safety and  “walkability” and potential to thrive.   Densification benefits the safety of residents. It benefits the environment + development costs as well, with more people per unit  of  infrastructure.

Even 15 years ago, countless homes in the neighbourhood consisted of three or more apartments, often with a basement unit as well.  There were many ‘rooming houses’ as well as duplexes, triplexes and so on, not to mention socio-economic diversity.  There were industrial and semi-industrial buildings most of which have now been replaced or renovated into residential.

With so many renters – as opposed to merely owners – there was probably a greater variety in lifestyles and hours of work, for starters. There was much more foot traffic throughout the area, with many working night shifts.  Today, when my daughter waits for a streetcar before sunrise, the streets are virtually deserted, thus a safety issue.  Deserted streets are not ‘walkable’ streets.

Local access to doctors, drugstores, community centers, restaurants, all accessible on foot, also translates into walkability and less greenhouse gas.  I expected that the local population would be less now, but it has apparently increased.  Would that be mainly due to the condos built in recent years?  If so, I would also guess that the lower income residents who lived in rooms or basement apartments may have been replaced by ‘high-end’ residents with significantly greater incomes. What can we do about that?  Why should we care if artists, musicians, teachers, social workers, retail clerks, and writers can’t afford to live here?  Because they enrich our lives.

Does anyone do the actual arithmetic?  If we anticipate an increase in an urban population over five years of, say, 20,000 residents, can we estimate how much and what sort of construction it will take to house that many people while maintaining a rental vacancy rate of five  per cent?

Vancouver’s former mayor Sam Sullivan did do some math according to journalist Daniel Wood.*   He estimated the number of people on his block to be about 1,000.   “So one residential block downtown equals 30 West Side blocks,” Sullivan says.  “All those boomers in expensive Dunbar homes that young families can’t afford.  Doesn’t make sense.  Schools there are closing.  The whole West Side needs density!”

He could have been talking about Roncesvalles Village/Parkdale – except that our schools are supposedly bursting at the seams.  I’m guessing many of the homes that used to contain singles, ‘roomers’, and little old ladies, now contain families with children.

Daniel Wood also comments, “Most people understand that urban densification is necessary.  Globally, suburbs are an environmental catastrophe.”   While I wholeheartedly agree, I’m not sure this understanding is that widespread.  And certainly, most people I know seem to feel it’s not necessary in my neighbourhood.  They don’t seem to get the connection between climate change or affordability and the everyday choices they make.

Will a relatively conservative culture encourage more affordable development, evenly integrated into increasingly denser neighbourhoods?

Back to Jane Jacobs, people might argue about what she would support or recommend.  Some talk of her as if she were a “NIMBY” type (not in my back yard), but she apparently supported the St Lawrence neighbourhood development.  This is a mixed-income, mixed-use development, with a certain percentage (about 30% at the time,  I think) subsidized.  The development was to enable people of quite different socio-economic backgrounds to live together as a community.  Diversity.  One of the operative theories was that this would help break cycles of poverty.

In my view, that happened in a more socially conscious period that has completely disappeared – replaced by a strong anti-government sentiment that almost precludes any government involvement or influence in humane activities like housing.

The St Lawrence development was not only beneficial socially and economically. Ideally – for reasons from walkability to climate change – we’d build many like it.

Urban hubs.  Clusters of mixed-use buildings and diversity, created around the shared infrastructure, reminiscent of the way people might cuddle up together to share a campfire.

It would mean an adjustment.  But we’re human. We can do that.

*http://www.straight.com/news/vancouvers-density-debate-pits-sullivanism-versus-ideas-jane-jacobs

**Greater Toronto Area

Posted in affordability, gentrification, neighbourhood, Roncesvalles Village, Toronto, uban planning, urbanism, Vancouver | Tagged , , , , | 7 Comments

Rachel + Jane

Posted on March 27, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

Two important  books  seem to be meeting each other in my mind these days.   Almost as though the two authors began with a conversation in my head about the environment vs. urban planning, and they’ve gradually come to embrace each other as two sides of the same coin.  Or perhaps two chapters in the same book of life.

Silent Spring, written by Rachel Carson, was published in 1962.  She could probably be credited with almost single-handedly making the environment a public concern.

In 1961, writer Jane Jacobs’ book The Death and Life of Great American Cities  was published.  The book critiqued urban development trends of the day and attributed the decline of many great neighbourhoods to those trends.  Her ideas for improved urban planning have become the “bible” to many urban planners today.

Today, most people seem to realize that environmental degradation and climate change are now a serious threat to human survival.   Most people I know try to do their part by recycling or reusing, and many are even trying to be less materialistic.  Some have watched http://www.storyofstuff.com and felt appropriately shocked or shamed.  So Rachel’s book has had a significant impact.

But Jane’s book, less so.  Is that because it’s easier to make amazing documentaries about wildlife and the ‘natural environment’ than about urban development?  Is it easier to have TV shows like CBC’s The Nature of Things, than to televise concepts of densification, or how we live together in the ‘built world’?

It just doesn’t seem to register at the level of citizenry, that our negative impact is about so much more than recycling a few million tons of tin cans and bottles.  It’s not just about using dishwashers, instead of handwashing dishes because that uses less water.  It’s not because I buy liquids in glass bottles instead of plastic.

No.  It’s also about looking around and seeing how we ‘grow’ and expand our accommodation, our habitat, and how we use far too much material and space and vast excess miles of infrastructure that shouldn’t exist.  It’s about urban density vs urban sprawl.  It’s about using sustainable energy instead of petroleum products, creating high-speed ‘environmentally friendly’ transit, and so on.  And we need to cuddle up and intensify the way we build our neighbourhoods – more people per meter of sewer, might be one way of looking at it.

I find that even well educated, caring people seem to look at environmental issues and urban planning/development issues as if they were unrelated to each other.  They can care passionately about polar bears and the Amazon Rainforest, but just can’t get into urban densification or affordability.  I guess it’s hard to relate to, compared to the antics of lovable bears.  Or the visible, concrete horror of cutting down trees.

Much of the world has recognized links between sustainability and poverty (and affordability).*  The UN has established goals for “sustainable urban development,” monitoring hundreds of world cities.**  Many cities in the world are busily pursuing progressive goals for sustainability, like high speed electric transit, “green” buildings, etc.

Where are we locally?   It’s hard to know there’s a problem.  Federally, it’s “studies” and “analysis” and “monitoring”.   Ontario’s ‘green belt’ seems awfully flexible, and Toronto sounds like it’s mainly about tin cans.  There appears to be no marketing the densification idea and turning it into new bylaws.  Raising alarms seems to be the job of voluntary organizations.  Otherwise, it’s business as usual. As long as my house is worth $100,000 more than awhile ago, and I can walk to cool restaurants and clothing stores, everything is fine.  Writer X had to move away?  Not my problem.  The more shopping I can do, the more interesting my city is.

Is the whole ‘urban thing’ just not exciting or entertaining enough?  We are fed a constant diet of more dazzling stuff.  Are we entertaining and consuming ourselves to death?  I wonder what Rachel and Jane would think….

* http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/03/21-3?

**http://www.unhabitat.org/content.asp?typeid=19&catid=10&cid=927

Posted in densification, envronment, Jane Jacobs, Rachel Carson, urban development | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Thinking about ‘critical-judgmental’…

Posted on March 18, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

I posted this on Facebook recently*:
“Ploughing through the shock-value, mud and bugs in the swamp of this gentleman’s lifestyle/behaviour, I was rewarded by the Precious inside him…. Smells like integrity to me – a quality I profoundly respect and admire, especially in ‘the young’. Why waste a second on critical-judgmental reactions? They just age us prematurely!”

I had just read the “life story” of a young man – the story of a life that might have completely defeated most people; but somewhere inside him was a strong seed of what I think of as integrity –enough to get him running his life in a creative way. Kind of inspiring. His first few sentences alone would have provoked a critical-judgmental reaction from people I know – negative enough for them to stop reading.

It got me thinking once again about this ‘critical-judgmental’ phenomenon, and how much this reaction can be a block to our own enrichment. Enrichment so often comes from simply being introduced to a different perspective – which can at times arrive in “ugly” clothing. And I thought about how much this orientation results from concepts of good and bad – a simplistic aspect of many religions.

But it’s not only among the religious; atheists can be even more judgmental in my experience – as if being ‘smart enough’ to resist religion gives us some kind of moral right to judge others. Yet if I got anything out of my religious childhood, it was a belief in the concept, “Judge not that ye be not judged”.

Despite contradictory decades of theorizing about it, only recently did I become truly conscious of my own judgmental tendencies. Just realizing that judging could be a negative characteristic took long enough. I gradually became aware of many tiny ways in which I tended to react self-righteously – a symptom of the attitude – often without realizing it.

Not that long ago, a friend spontaneously shared that she was having an affair. I reacted with righteous indignation. On reflection, I think that was partly because of feeling that the onus is even greater on us atheists to ‘be good’. So right-and-wrong were still a part of my perspective.

Fortunately I have enough imagination to realize that such an experience could happen to anyone – even me. I was embarrassed enough by my reaction to apologize to her.

Any experience that causes us to realize that our own values, our own beliefs, are not necessarily absolute, can help us outgrow judgmental perspectives.

Of course ‘judgment’ has a role somewhere in our lives. But I think, rather than a mindless emotional reaction, it serves us better as a useful skill – a normal part of analytical, or what some would call ‘cerebral’, ways of dealing with life.

Another aspect of all this is how sensitive we can be to the judgmental attitudes of others. In fact, as my feeling of being judged happened less frequently, I realized I had often been ‘projecting’*. As I became less judgmental, I felt less judged.

A close friend and I sometimes joke about which of us is more judgmental. I love that we can do this. Being able to look at our flaws with humour I think helps us feel (uncritically) that we are still lovable – with all our imperfections —

*after reading http://playingyourhandright.wordpress.com/about
**Psychology . to ascribe one’s own feelings, thoughts, or attitudes to others. (dictionary.com)

Posted in awareness, beliefs, consciousness, criticism, judgment, personal growth, psychology, reflections | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

That Cat…

Posted on March 11, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

Are you

The fabled “tiger burning bright

In the forests of the night?”

You hint at ‘soul’

Through matted fur; your stripes.

I reach to stroke,

You growl;

Yet I would swear

It ended with a purr.

Almost imperceptible;

But there.

I could be wrong;

You may be contemplating me

For lunch.

How does one read

The body language of a cat?

You tease.

You hint at being intimate,

Then turn and walk away,

Purring,

Working at your paws

As if I were not there.

Well fed and aging beautifully,

Your sweet, soft belly

Inviting me to touch.

Ah yes,

A handsome cat you are.

You hide your yearning well.

After all

No self-respecting cat would deign to tell!

You leave that role

For puppy dogs

Who love,

And love again,

Forgiving all.

Posted in animals, body language, commercial, consciousness, empathy, Feelings, intimacy | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

Sisters laughing….

Posted on March 2, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

The other night,  in Sarasota,  my sister and I laughed under the stars,  just like we often did in our childhood.  That night we were in the Jacuzzi, after a lovely evening out with our spouses, a memorable dinner, and afterward strolling in the warm evening air with ice cream cones, accompanied by the soft babble of tourists and residents.

When we were little, after the lights went out, one of us would whisper, tentatively, “Wanna talk?”

We played games in the dark, like “Chocolate house”.   We’d pretend to play house, but an imaginary house in which everything was made of chocolate – even the roast chicken.  We played “funny names”.  We’d try our best to think of funny sounding names or words, and when one of us thought of one, we’d burst into peels of laughter.  I’m sure Mom and Dad heard us, but only rarely did they come in and sternly tell us to get to sleep.

The only ‘funny name’ we can still remember is “Cheeka Weeka”.  For years, every time one of us mentioned those words, we’d both burst into peels of laughter.  I imagine we got that from Mom, who was quite a laugher.  She’d start, and soon,  unable to stop, the tears would stream down her face.

God we were lucky.

Posted in laughter, Memories, mother, reflections, relationships, remembering childhood, sisters | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

One war souvenir with blue eyes…

Posted on February 17, 2013 by fearlessanalyst

The guy sitting in the underground path to the Manulife Center, just after our lovely lunch, had obviously been in a horrifying accident – perhaps something like an  “IED”* in Afghanistan, I imagined; or a car accident that involved a fire.

Entirely covered in burn scars, he was missing much in the way of body parts including nose and fingertips, but you could see his beautiful blue eyes.   He was actually wearing what looked like army fatigues, but I didn’t have the heart to ask.

I guess he in turn didn’t have the heart to speak forcefully to the people passing by  – though it was painfully obvious why he was there anyway.  One by one, they walked by, looking straight ahead.   I stopped long enough to awkwardly search in my pockets, found a few toonies** and gave them to him.  I guess he knows about his gorgeous eyes, because he opened them wide and looked up at me.  “How’re you doing today?” he asked.  I said “Not bad for an old lady” (my tiresome stupid joke), “how are you?”  He said he had a cold, and paid me a compliment.  I smiled and walked on.

But  a feeling of heartbreak welled up, along with my usual sense of injustice, anger at the people who just walked by (do they think he’s getting rich?), analytical thoughts along the lines of, “There oughta be….” and “How can they….?”  I feel I owe him so much more than a few loonies and a story.  And then my inner voice shoots back, “It’s not about you!”

And it’s not about not walking on by.   It’s more about not accepting how we create ‘young sacrifices’ like him, and then let them fend for themselves.  Is that any way to thank a nice young man?

He might have been in his thirties.

Posted in accountability, anti-war, compassion, consequences, injustice, war | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

How do I recognize a friend?

Posted on January 31, 2013 by fearlessanalyst
Well first,
I love his company.
I look forward
To seeing him anon.
I am enriched
By spending time with him.
And when confused,
I wonder what he’d say.
When happy,
With him I share my joy.
When he’s in pain,
I long to make it better.
When he is happy,
All the world seems fair.
And when he’s poor
My wealth becomes a burden.
At parting,
I look toward the dawn.
And recognize him steady as the day.
Posted in communication, friendship, open, Poetry, reflections, relationships, values | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments