Saturday, May 07, 2005
INTENT TO TILL Agriculture...farming, that is... has lost it's sense of purpose with young people, it seems. Oh, the basic yearnings are still there to a degree, I suppose. A young lad sees things growing and feels an affinity with the Creator in a real, tangible way, and he would like for such feelings to remain, even to grow stronger. They are good feelings. There is a bit of this yearning in most men, I'd say. It has something to do with survival and of being related to the Source. We are all farmers at one time, watching things grow and feeling a responsability to keep them doing so and to help them grow bigger, better, more rapidly and then something else enters with the idea that such growth and maturity must be profitable. At that point the art becomes a job. It now entails work and worry. This is the point at which many lose interest in farming and think of other ways to earn profits easier. The temptations toward being a butcher, a baker or a candlestick- maker become practical lures - whatever seems to need doing that has more certain promise of profits. No, that is a not "selfishness" or "greed", nor is it to be condemned. It is a natural system of selection which should be encrouraged - not stopped. Farming today requires dedicated doers just as it always has. In true farming one is more closely associated with the basic "makings" of civilization. Other occupations, while essential in most cases, are one step removed from the creative process, in a sense, and are given more to frills and thrills along the way like icing on a cake that is already delicious and worthy within itself. While farming is fundamental; other occupations seem to be add-ons, supplements, or "fixings." Young folks no longer want to farm in the traditional sense. It has become something it never was before - something we call "big business". Any sensible youngster today, given a choice, is going to see farming as the organized costly and somewhat risky business it has become. Other types of work appear to be - and are in most cases - more profitable. This change has taken place, too, in my lifetime, too. (1916 to now..- and holding.) It is a whole, new world! A.L.M. (at 3 a.m.) 5-23-2000
Friday, May 06, 2005
PERCHANCE TO SCHEME We are, as the esteemed bard so eloquently put it centuries ago, but actors playing roles upon a haphazardly constructed stage we call life. We are often cast to act out some strange situations. Look honestly at the characters we play as citizens, for example. If you can honestly say that you understand exactly what is expected of either one of us as to the proper fulfillment of our governmental duties and obligations, I'm proud to know you. You are exceptional and your name should be entered on the list political thespians as one of those to receive and Oscar award some day. In all honestly I have never been clear on many points concerning what I am expected to be doing as a citizen of my nation, of my state or of my local community for that matter. Many years ago,I think I learned, perhaps in grammar school days, that one was expected to live a clean, orderly, decent life in those formative years up to twenty-one. I cannot say that I remember became a voter. I was so designated during a time when my state had a "Poll Tax" law which provided means for making it difficult for black people to qualify as voters. When I inquired about the proper forms designated to be filled out to achieve such a status was told no such forms existed. I think all I did was sign my name and address on a plain sheet of paper an hand it to party person. Come election day, my name was on the proper list when I went to vote. Two other problems have faced me in this civic duties phase of living. One, I have never been able to decided what I believe concerning the very existence of the Electoral College plan in our national elections. Since youth-hood I have argued on behalf of each, both and every combination for both sides. Should we have it or not? That is the question. Or, one of them, I'd best say: the other is this thing which is being batted around in Congressional courts right now called - rather loosely, I think - the Filibuster. he Jimmy Stewart did it on the screen it was fine, but when I see one of our esteemed statesmen engaged in the routine I am ashamed for him and worried about some other governmental concepts we hold regionally dear. A.L.M. May 6, 2005 (c410wds]
Thursday, May 05, 2005
BEHIND SKED It amazes me that we continue to experience with all sorts of difficulties in our educational system without anything seriously being done about correcting obvious wrongs. We have had a plethora of suggestions as to what needs to be done, some of them quite valid, I'm sure, but very little, if anything, actually gets done about making the adjustments needed to bring about such urgently needed changes. We should regret the day the term "educators" became common in our language with the intent of giving the word "teachers" - a more glamorous aura. It has become a common term which now seems to include everyone from the "almost"or "soon- to-be" or, "barely" certified teacher - on up to the ladder to the holders of Masters Degrees - as well as everyone else who happens to have a job , doing almost anything in or around the school area. All are spoken of as being "prominent educators in our community" It is time to put "teaching" back in the respective niche it once occupied... an area set apart to mean someone trained to teach youngsters - a graduate of a college or university dedicated to the specific training of teachers for the specialized job of teaching the youth of our land. All colleges which used to proudly bear the name "Teacher's College" have erased the name and the concept that went along with it. The term "educators" has seeped into politics, as well. and our President and Vice-President talk at great length - and loudly, at times, - about their expertize concerning "education". Our previous president talked about "hiring one hundred thousand new teachers", but he never mentioned where those trained teachers were to be found or where they are going to find classrooms in which to do their teaching. Few colleges, today, make any pretense of trying to prepare young people for teaching. "Teaching" is , in the main, now considered to be a by-product of the educational process which centers on a wider variety of subject matter than was ever thought possible. The attitude seems to be "they can always teach." if they are unsuccessful in their specialized field. Far too many individuals do not find suitable employment in their exotic field of study at college and they apply to the local high school to become a teacher. Here they are welcomed with open arms by administrators - who, remember, are "educators" - who are looking for a body to fill a job-slot which is open on the staff. So, magically, the Phys. Ed. major from college starts teaching English, French, Math or Biology - whatever happens to be open at the time. Hiring a mob of new teachers to work in non-existent classrooms is hardly the way to go about it. As long as we continue to have this ostrich attitude it is all costing vast amounts of money, time and youthful minds. We need basic reform and a large part of it all, it would seem to me, would be that we redefine what we mean - really mean - when we say "educators." If, in the next decade we can find a way to actually train even a cadre-size group; just a fraction of the mythical 100,000 young people, to be genuine teachers in the finest sense of the word we will have taken a first step toward solving some of our problems. What University will have courage and leadership enough to start and to sustain a legitimate "Teacher's College"? A.L.M. May 4, 2005 [c588ds]
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
OTHERS LIKE US Sooner or later someone is going to ask you if you believe there are other "civilizations"- somewhere out there in the expanse of the Universe? When they do, what will your answer be? In these post Hubble times when we have had a glimpse of what may be out there in the beyond beyond the beyond, we continue to judge what we think about the future judged by standards we have considered to have been exceptional. I have already been asked the question many times and my answer is "Yes, I do." But, if I have the opportunity to add a thought, I say that so much depends on exactly how we define a "civilization". Our present definition may be less than we think might. If it were so advanced - so near to what we might see as perfection why have we never learned to live in peace with one another world-wide. What we call by such names as seem to fit properly at the moment - or, something close akin to it -. seem,often to mutate even at the moment the are being tagged. Itis a complex thing developed over centuries and never really perfected, I think, if we go by the examples we have set here on Earth. I also think that many of those asking about it really want to be told is that the civilization way out there in space is not as "good" as ours. A few would like to think of it as being "better", but that cuts off the brag instinct which comes so naturally to most of us. We tend to think that our version of being civilized is, naturally, a good thing, but since we have only our selves to compare it with - and no inter-galactic counterpart which which to compare or contrast it, we are never quite sure about our possible standing on a scale of, let's say, one-to-ten. At our very best,do you think we and our way of doing things better than anything the other side of nowhere has yet devised. We are a superior lot, we feel, by nature. Otherwise, we would not have been able to achieve what we have thus far. We often have a very narrow view of "civilization", too - as we think of those social systems other than the American brand. The Englishman thinks somewhat differently, perhaps, as does the older Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Egyptian not to mention the Aztecs, Mayans and an endless assorted of Oriental and African cultures. Since we have survived, we feel that we must be better than those which have gone before. We are plural, too, remember. As mankind's adventures down through the ages show, leaders were often at the head of things but the civilization was a group effort involving masses of people. Cultural divisions formed in a maze of ,sometimes, conflicting ideas, and out of it came both advancements for civilization as well as set-backs. If you were called upon to describe our civilization, what you end up with could be far from flattering. Regardless of how well-formed much of it appears to be , there are flaws. Our "place" among civilizations, if others do exist, may not be as secure as we like to think it would be, and that worries some people who think along these line lines, perhaps, too much. Those who think of little else, end up writing books which scare the civilized pants off of the rest of us at times. Don't take it all too seriously. Our Creator never did or does anything without sufficient reason for doing so. A.L.M. May 4, 2005 [c617wds]
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
WHO SAID SO? I have often wondered how those people who accept the use of the term "they say" as sufficient proof that they are hearing quoted is true. It happens so often in relation to news stories that before too long one has valid reasons for questioning which portions are and which have been added by "they." Just who this "they" might be is never made clear and the sayer, obviously, does not know who said it or they would want to add extra stability to assertions they are proving by appending a well-known name as back-up for the their statement. We've heard so much "they talk" about the relationships of various individuals in the current "Runaway Bride" story out of Georgia, thatch "maybe" information. When someone knows for sure who said a thing, they go out of their way to mention names to add validity to what they are saying. They feel that will compel you to accept it as truth. The entire concept of home remedy medication is based on this premise of "they say", it seems, but it is often augmented by using such terms as "the old folks used to say," instead of just plain "they say." Still others attribute what is being said to"grandmother", "your grandmother," ,"my grandmother" or "our grandmothers" - anything which seems to give the statement validity. A even more direct approach is to name a group: "Doctor's say: ..." makes a good lead in for something about which you are not quite certain. We run into that one daily on radio and TV when we are told: "Leading doctors and hospitals say..." one painkiller is supposed to be better than all others because they use more of it. We are not to wonder even day or two las them supplies of the medications at no charge or at a very low cost, so they "use" more of it than others. It lends assurance to the statements made - however wild. Gossip is based on "ify" ins and outs. These days, it is sometimes difficult to tell gossip and rumor from fact. Fiction and fact are often blended ,even in the best of news presentations today, and the mood oF the "anchor person" seems to add interpretations to the "writer's "materials set before them to read. Personalities often take over, so when we to echo that story later one we often "quote" that small-screen star. "Brokaw said.". Or, better still, set it back a few years with:, "as Walter Cronkite used to say..." or," was it Ed Murrow who used to say?" Make it years ago.. . any one of them can become "theys" and will append credence to whatever you wish to say. The overall result is that truth does not have to be true at all in order to be believed. It is little touches such as "they say" which substantiate weak and wobbly assertions far too often. One must keep a wary ear out for such sounds these days. A.L.M. May 3, 2005 [c522wds]
Monday, May 02, 2005
"DUM SPIRO SPERO" To allay any first-seen ideas, the above title has nothing whatever to do with Spiro Agnew. The term "spiro" seems to be bring up memories of the flamboyant Governor of Maryland and Vice-President of the United States for a time. His is remembered positively as a prime user of subtle English terms and negatively because of corruption in office. All that was years ago ...now, notice that the opening word "Dum" is a followed by "spiro" and "spero" - with the "i" in the first one and the "e" in the other. It is the proud motto of the Lindsay Clan in Scotland and translates as "While I Breathe , I Hope." I know one member of the Lindsay clan who recently moved to Texas from Southwestern Virginia. Sam Houston, I'm told, is an important name down there and I find it interesting that she has moved from a hundred from Sam Houston birthplace and at about the same distance to the south is Austinville,Va birthplace of the Vice President of the Republic of Texas.. With a house by a lake, she hasn't moved so far away after all. And she can still It reminds me so much of what my father used to tell people when they asked him how he had attained the 95 years or so of age. He admonished them to "Just keep on breathin', Brother." It is so close to the same idea of the Lindsay motto that I have wondered if the McCaskey's, on behalf of the MacLeod, ever mixed it up with the Lindsays at one time or another long ago. Visiting Dunvegan Castle in the Skye area might indicate some pattern of association of the one clan, and its septs, with the other. I will assume it is in Latin. until someone tells me differently. I don't remember enough High School Latin to recall the "dum" ..."Dom" seem logical, but "dum" conjures up the image of Spiro Agnew once again because he did some dumb things in his public career. Dumb Spiro. Like a fox, perhaps? I have often though that it would have been rather rough for a person to have to live up to some of the family slogans we read about. This one for the Lindsay's would, however, seem to encourage members to look after their good health and maintain standards of survival. Of course, it could have been that were being told to exercise special care in clan warfare if they expected to be around for a few more centuries. The Lindsay family is one I have never inquired into thus far, and I don't know that they were one of the more warlike clans of the Highlands or not. The motto told them that, if they should fall, they should get up again and continue in the fray. It urged them, I would say, not to give way to despair in times of negotiations and disagreement, but to stick right in there to the bitter end and they would win out eventually. If they fell they were to get up quickly. Only in doing so, could they maintain the bulwark of "hope" which would serve as the means of their ultimate success. A.L.M. May 2, 2005 [c547wds]
|
