Flawed people running for office

Our Founding Fathers (maybe with women behind the scenes) wanted an educated citizenry (at least men with land) to hold office, to serve the public good, to be citizen leaders. We've gone so far beyond that to become a country of office holders who serve their own private good. I'm suspicious of most who run for office. Too often they go in intending to serve and come out rich beyond their fellow citizens. It's too bad for them and more so for the rest of us.

But we're all flawed. In our current mayor's race  I'm left with almost no one to vote for. There are two viable candidates, both black, one male and one female. I received in the mail a flyer just days before the election, leaving almost no response time. It's about the woman, on the edge of calling her corrupt and incompetent. Supporters of the male candidate are the PAC behind this smear. Shameful.  

Last Saturday, another candidate hit the campaign trail at the local Farmer's Market. In his chat with me, he pointed out how another of the candidates had a melt-down at one campaign and has a history of mental breakdowns. In the middle of his pitch, he inserted this embarrassing information. I say embarrassing information because I mean it for him. I did not appreciate this campaign smear.

The most interesting piece of information is that many of the several candidates running for mayor chose no party affiliation. What are they saying? That they want nothing to do with either party? That they are afraid to declare a party because of the dirty deeds attributed to both or current officeholders?

What makes a person think she or he is capable of holding office? That takes a certain swagger, a lot of ego and self-confidence. Imagine holding yourself up to light and really seeing a person who can hold power, who can control events, who can handle a lot of taxpayer money?

What's up, Doc?

You know the old cartoons with Bugs Bunny rolling up to another character and asking--characteristically--"What's up, Doc?" He reminds me of my new principal, Ricky Carson, who hosted, emceed, --what word fits here?--our professional development day on Friday. Students were out, enjoying their first day of fall vacation. The staff was in, enjoying (more or less) their day of development.

I say "development" and mean it. I was inspired (not every minute because some minutes were devoted to less interesting topics). I was particularly inspired by the assistant principal's (the one in charge of discipline) promotion of the High Five. Now here is something new and I perked up. With High Five the teacher picks five students who are not particularly fond of school or its staff. It's a positive promotion thing: the teacher is kind and thoughtful and generous in spirit toward five generally "difficult" students with the idea of positive enhancement.

I knew immediately who my Number One would be (whose name I will hold secret here). Then I continued through my memory banks until I finished my list of five. The moment I turned it in to the assistant principal, I was committed. There's no turning back now. Besides, every child needs at least one adult to care, to actually show tenderness, respect, and loving kindness. I will be those things to five students until the end of next spring. Will it make a difference? We shall see.....

Teaching the gifted...

"Teaching the gifted..." appears to be the beginning of this blog. It is and it isn't. What do I mean? Let's see...whoa, I'm using a stall tactic. I teach all three grades, 6th, 7th, 8th, of middle school. That's six preparations each night!!-- two for each grade: one hour of English (grammar, spelling, vocabulary, punctuation, and the like) and one hour of reading: all things related to reading and writing. If I did a worthy job in preparing for each hour, I would spend six hours per night. I take up two or three papers per grade, so that's another two hours grading. The total: eight hours per night. I've done that a few times, but mostly, I spend about four hours each night and go to school feeling overwhelmed and under-prepared. The students can tell it, too (they're gifted that way).

Just recently, we had a heart-to-heart. I shared my doubts and stress; they shared their complaints about me. I'm a free person--I work on the edge of the box, just inside it, and even outside the box. Nearly all the students in this class wanted routine, organization, structure. Well, I've before taught a class of structured students. Usually, it's half and half. The next day I came to class prepared to be structured. I was, and it worked. Students were  lot more cooperative. I think their blood flowed better, knowing that they had an agenda. They knew exactly what we were going to do that class period. I'm thinking, yuk, I like surprises better. But they outnumber me, so I'm going with the flow--their flow. Everyone was more settled and calm. Amazing.

A lot to do about....

Once long ago, I was full of myself and had something to say about many things. Now I just come up empty. Getting old saddens me. Worse is whining and complaining about it. I heard an inspirational tape a few years back about the accomplishments of all these people in their 50's or mostly beyond. I need to hear it again.

Detachment

"Detachment" is the new film starring Adrian Brody, who is becoming large in my eyes for his keen acting ability. His own eyes reflect the detachment of the title and the great sorrow detachment brings. He is not part of us; he belongs elsewhere, but while he's here, let's cling fiercely to him for all he's worth or let's ignore him totally.This is the view of his students, the substitute who has come to these modern existentialists, those who are also detached. Those not are ignored in this film.

Brody plays a permanent substitute teacher who moves from school to school, filling in for first one teacher then the next. His job mirrors his commitment-less life. One point he makes is that we all have secrets. His is seeing his pitiful mother naked and dead as a young boy. It's a story etched in his face and blast through his eyes. It helps him present depressing literature to a class full of pained and hurting teenagers. They sense his depths of pain and want to commit to him, drain his life, pulse it into their own veins of emptiness and loneliness and despair.

A female colleague tells Brody's character that she is afraid of going home. Her soul is also devoid of emotion--it's just hollowness. She's Eliot's hollow man. She is all right in the classroom where she is engaged and engaging, yet all those hours alone at home are just too frightening to consider.

Lucy Liu plays the counselor who abhors counseling because of the horror she encounters in these teens' abysmal lives. Finally, she tells one girl who has a dwarfish soul to get "the f.... out of her office." It's a powerful scene of one educator completely coming unglued and letting the knives out of the drawer.

One iota of joy concludes this celluloidic adventure: the prostitute teen whom Brody's character befriends, well, the film is worth this last scene, this little iota of joy or something like joy.

The film is presented much like a documentary on the  barren life of a teacher and the teens in his/her arena. There is much about the film that rings so true (spoken by a teacher of 40 years), and perhaps much that is exaggerated. The director pushes a heavy hand to draw attention to the utter despair that is our modern times in far too many lives.

Jack Reacher: A Tribute

Why is Stephen King so popular? Because he can put words on paper that mesmerize  readers into scooping up those words as fast as they can to follow the story. "It's the story," one might say, like "it's the economy."

Lee Child writes like that, although the style is totally different. Just how fast can I read a Reacher novel? First who's Reacher? Jack Reacher is Child's main character through his series of novels about the military police officer (even his mother calls him Reacher). Like King, Child writes mesmerizing stories. Once I start a Reacher novel, reading it is all I want to do and must be intentional in order to do other things. My mother is my reading partner and says she reads so fast just "to see what happens" and often returns to read the book a second time to pick up those details she missed during the first reading. Therefore that whole series of novels is good for two rounds.

King writes with flair, with talent and skill. He could have written one of the Great American Novels (and perhaps he did). However, Lee Child has no such skill--and that's not a bad thing. He writes short, choppy sentences (like Hemingway), but they match  his main character, Jack Reacher, a military cop, who retires at one point to become basically a drifter/hero on a quest, who rights wrongs. He doesn't need to tilt at windmills because he is too big and strong, but he certainly does not fear any opponent who comes up against him. At six feet five inches and 240 pounds, he is a brute that others (with any sense) come to fear.

I'm nearing the end of my journey with the Reacher novel I found in a republished format. It's "The Enemy" (a multi-purpose title that encompasses so many different enemies, both physical and psychological.) There's not much I can say in reviewing the novel without giving away really important pieces of plot, so I'll just focus on the female character. Nearly always, Reacher has a companion in the novel who works with him in solving the crime. This time it is another military police officer who wants to work in the division Reacher is in. They are opposites except in brain power and the ability to think globally. He is white and big; she is black and petite. (She is my favorite female character in the Reacher series.) They make a formidable partnership.

This Reacher novel made me shed tears at the end. I'll leave it at that. An excellent entry in the series.