Speak on, your Majesty!

The state of the union? Chaotic, at best.

Anyone who chooses to watch what our King promises will be a very long State of the Union address (last year it ran 1 hour 40 minutes) is either a masochist, a pundit, or a Cult member. I honestly can't imagine spending one moment with it, though I assume I will see clips and read endless analysis in the days to come.

Just thinkingn about tonight's big event leads me to a famous scene from "Monty Python and Holy Grail" (we saw "Spamalot" last Sunday at Littonton Town Hall theater... fun stuff).

King Arthur is "riding" through the countryside on his quest when he happens upon some peasants toiling in a field next to the road... they are cutting sod, apparently. 

Arthur: Old Woman!
 
The peasant turns around, revealing that he is in fact a man.
 
Man:	Man!
Arthur: Man, sorry.... What knight lives in that castle over there?
Man:	I'm thirty-seven!
Arthur: (suprised) What?
Man:	I'm thirty-seven! I'm not old--
Arthur: Well I can't just call you "man"...
Man:	Well you could say "Dennis"--
Arthur: I didn't know you were called Dennis!
Man:	Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you?!
Arthur: I did say sorry about the "old woman", but from behind, you looked--
Man:	Well I object to your...you automatically treat me like an inferior!
Arthur: Well I *am* king...
Man:	Oh, king, eh, very nice. And 'ow'd you get that, eh?
	(he reaches his destination and stops, dropping the cart)
	By exploiting the workers! By 'angin' on to outdated imperialist dogma
	which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society.
	If there's ever going to be any progress,--
Woman:	Dennis! There's some lovely filth down 'ere!
	(noticing Arthur) Oh! 'Ow'd'ja do?
Arthur: How do you do, good lady. I am Arthur, king of the Britons. Whose
	castle is that?
Woman:	King of the 'oo?
Arthur: King of the Britons.
Woman:	'Oo are the Britons?
Arthur: Well we all are! We are all Britons! And I am your king.
Woman:	I didn't know we 'ad a king! I thought we were an autonomous collective.
Man:	(mad) You're fooling yourself! We're living in a dictatorship! A
	self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
Woman:	There you go, bringing class into it again...
Man:	That's what it's all about! If only people would--
Arthur: Please, *please*, good people, I am in haste! WHO lives in that
	castle?
Woman:	No one lives there.
Arthur: Then who is your lord?
Woman:	We don't have a lord!
Arthur: (surprised) What??
Man:	I *told* you! We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune! We're taking
	turns to act as a sort of executive-officer-for-the-week--
Arthur: (uninterested) Yes...
Man:	But all the decisions *of* that officer 'ave to be ratified at a
	special bi-weekly meeting--
Arthur: (perturbed) Yes I see!
Man:	By a simple majority, in the case of purely internal affairs--
Arthur: (mad) Be quiet!
Man:	But by a two-thirds majority, in the case of more major--
Arthur: (very angry) BE QUIET! I *order* you to be quiet!
Woman:	"Order", eh, 'oo does 'e think 'e is?
Arthur: I am your king!
Woman:	Well I didn't vote for you!
Arthur: You don't vote for kings!
Woman:	Well 'ow'd you become king then?
(holy music up)
Arthur: The Lady of the Lake--her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite,
	held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by
	divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why
	I am your king!
Man:	(laughingly) Listen: Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
	is no basis for a system of government! Supreme executive power
	derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some... farcical
	aquatic ceremony!
Arthur: (yelling) BE QUIET!
Man:	You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some
	watery tart threw a sword at you!!
Arthur: (coming forward and grabbing the man) Shut *UP*!
Man:	I mean, if I went 'round, saying I was an emperor, just because some
	moistened bit had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!
Arthur: (throwing the man around) Shut up, will you, SHUT UP!
Man:	Aha! Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Arthur: SHUT UP!
Man:	(yelling to all the other workers) Come and see the violence inherent
	in the system! HELP, HELP, I'M BEING REPRESSED!
Arthur: (letting go and walking away) Bloody PEASANT!
Man:	Oh, what a giveaway! Did'j'hear that, did'j'hear that, eh?  That's
	what I'm all about! Did you see 'im repressing me? You saw it, didn't you?! 

That one scene manages to parody the very idea of a king and Divine Right while also poking fun at ultra-liberal politics and governmental processes that take forever and require endless debate.

BTW: how DID Trump become King?

Oh, thanks, Tim. I have to actually write something?

Tim, the fourth of the eight Kennedy siblings, has been writing memoirs and "life reports" on trips and family events for over a decade now. As a dogged blogger, I appreciate his efforts and admire his "voice" on the page. I have saved all 116 of his short essays (so far)... and honestly don't know what I will do with them. Perhaps a published volume for a special occasion. I have the storage on my desktop computer, so why not? And it's easy enough to publish a book with all the printers looking for work.

Today, he sent out a request through our sibling text chain asking for all of us to contribute a story about our father, to be compiled by Tim and published in conjunction with the anniversary of dad's passing, which is approaching. I love a good compilation and will certainly put something together. 

As with any memoir, it would be difficult to confirm most of my memories. They have been sorted and edited and filtered through my head over so many years that I honestly couldn't differentiate myth from reality... well, I would like to think I have the facts right, but who knows?

It occurred to me to use this blog to share some of those random stories from an increasingly distant past, for myself and any loyal readers. I will try to do so, when time permits.

But the timing of Tim's request is perfect as my Metro class is now working (well, they have the assignment) on a "next draft" of their Significant Moment essay which they wrote two weeks ago. The students were all over the place, with some understanding that a "moment" does not constitute weeks, months, and years, and some demonstrating that they read my samples of short memoirs and my own instructions and examples. 

The word count was about 800, just to give the students a ballpark as to the detail and depth they would need to do well. Some wrote fewer and many went over the limit. Interestingly, this is a classic case of writing MORE not necessarily leading to more success. For inexperienced writers, writing more is often just expanding the possibility of error or logic problems or simply wandering off and writing about stuff that might be true but has nothing to do with the point.

If I had a nickel for every student who begins a short memoir by describing getting up and driving to work or to a game or to school or to a date, usually making certain to emphasize that they had no idea something sad, happy, crazy, or tragic was about to happen... well, I would have quite a stack of nickels.

Not enough to offset the tariffs I have paid lately, but still. 

My standard advice is to think like a TV writer and drop readers into a dramatic or funny or provocative moment (in media res), hoping that first scene can be intriguing enough that viewers will return after the commercial break.

I don't ask for a "next draft" all the time, and the exercise is not a strong fit for an asynchronous online writing class, but at least some of them will read my many comments and think about my suggestions concerning recreating dialog or developing key characters or simply lmiting themselves to one morning in their life. 

I will use Tim's request to practice what I teach, so to speak. That is always a good practice for a writing teacher. I suspect that lots of teachers are fine creating assignments and fine assessing them, but actually writing the essay or poem or report? Not so much.

The first step for me will be to list some key moments and incidents and situations or teams, and also to consider varying time periods. That "gathering of material" is an important step in the writing process, of course, and I always emphasize to students that they should try to "write from abundance," as famous writing coach Donald Murray always said. 

The next step is to choose what portion of that abundance will become part of THIS assignment. I have often had to remind young writers that they don't need to try to change the world in one short essay. I hope I will pay attention to that advice. Choosing one key moment is the key, and it won't be easy.

The good news is that there is always a chance to write a "next" essay or memoir. Put enough together and you have an entire book.

Tim's ongoing saga is now at approximately 300 pages, a personal history that informs and entertains and analyzes. And now he is pushing his siblings to "sign on" to a shorter but related project.

Good for him, or as our dad would say, "Good go."

Successful media means great presentation

The common wisdom is always, "you can't tell a book by its cover," and there is something to that.

But when it comes to student magazines, that old saying is overrated, at least based on many years of critiquing publications from all over the country.

When I am browsing through a high school magazine that is a mess from a visual standpoint, I rarely find that the content, the writing and reporting, is far superior to what the presentation of the publication promised. 

Maybe that should not be a surprise, considering that if a magazine's editors and staff put a lot of work into page design and visuals, we would expect them to also invest some effort in strong reporting and writing.  

But many high school media contests over the years have been made fun of by at least some participants (particularly those who didn't win awards often) as "beauty contests." There were stories shared about judges making very quick decisions on, for instance, Best of Show entries during national conventions where judges make their top ten list in an hour or two from among dozens of publications. 

Having been a Best of Show judge myself, I knew that people weren't just glancing at page designs and making their calls, but it was always true that we could quickly cull the potential winners from the "others." 

The reality is that when you sort to the point where you are looking at, say, 15 entries, a judge really does need to start reading samples and headlines and looking closely at coverage topics, etc. Turns out that the top publications are all quite well-designed as well as solidly reported. 

Bottom line: I am working on a white paper or pamphlet or something that argues for editors and staffs who wish to do well in competition and critiques would be smart to invest time early in the year on typography details, styles that automate choices in InDesign, etc. They need some sort of vertical grid structure to hold everything together. 

Another way to think of great student media is that it all has to happen together and it's all interrelated. 

Just like everyday life.

Big changes are often easier than small ones

One of life's paradoxes is that it is usually easier to make big changes, all at once, than nibble away at challenges. This is particularly true when things are going OK, but not what we hoped, or when we fear all sorts of unanticipated problems if we aren't careful.

Today, I read about how some places have instituted free bus fares as a way to break through the continuing environmental and traffic and parking problems that plague most cities. That was in the New York Times, based on the new mayor's promise to make public transportation free. Not surprisingly, that promise prompted many "but what about..." objections.

In today Denver Post was a story about the frustrations many in the Denver metro area have with RTD, which governs buses and light rail across eight counties and that cannot seem to recover from the pandemic (among other challenges). 

Making public transportation free sounds costly but often turns out to be quite economical. The trade-off is between revenue and all the costs associated with enforcing revenue rules and laws. New York City tried an experiment in "surging" more transportation police, and that backfired spectacularly. One incident featured a transit cop firing at an offender who jumped the subway turnstyle. The shots missed the offender but wounded two bystanders. 

Not the same as ICE in Minneapolis but at least distantly related.

Could the RTD magically decree that all light rail and bus service will be free starting Monday? Yes.

Would everything be smooth and simple? No.

Would it be a big change that might prompt x number of additional riders? Maybe.

Systems tend to acquire complexity the longer they exist and the more those in charge try to tinker with all the details. That has happened with light rail in Denver. If you are a student, you can get a free pass (maybe an app?) and ride to your heart's content. If you are over 65, you get a discounted rate. There are varying rates depending on how long your ticket is good for and according to your "zone," or how far you are from the city center. 

Then there are transit cops who randomly ask to see tickets and who can issue fines. You can ride on the light rail for months and months and never see such an official, BTW. And I have never seen anyone asking to see tickets during rush hour. It's just too crowded and clumsy. 

All the administrative costs connected with enforcement of the fare system need to be balanced against the revenue, which continues to dip with decreased ridership. There is also some sort of civic cost as many people take the chance on not paying and not getting caught. 

If we are serious about the need for public transport and reducing traffic, pollution, and driver frustrations, maybe it's time to make the "big change." 

Yes, someone needs to pay for public transportation, but until officials make the big change, why explore creative options for revenue, tax money, sponsorships, etc.? 

When life seems to lack a bit of "oomph"

I know this sounds almost un-American, but I basically skipped the Super Bowl last Sunday. That loss two weeks ago by the Broncos to the Patriots might have had something to do with it, but I also anticipated that it just wouldn't be much of contest. It wasn't 

Big day for our Seattle kids and grandkids, of course, and I know they hosted a fun watch party.

I did watch the halftime show and thought it was good... technically spectacular with people in giant tree costumes to create an instant forest. My Spanish is basically non-existent but I could sort of follow that there was a narrative going on. 

I wouldn't recognize a Bad Bunny song on a bet, at least partly due to not frequenting dance clubs. I can appreciate the symbolic power of a Puerto Rican artist performing during America's biggest religious holiday (and that not really a joke). 

I enjoyed the discomforture of many of the Trump minions, who somehow turned the whole extraveganza into blasphemy (see what I mean about religion and the Super Bowl?). I am certain there will be a brand new national scandal that will push the social commentary and over-the-top praise off my screens, probably within the next week or so. 

We are in the mid-winter doldrums and our Octoberplike weather isn't really helping. This is the time of year that seems to drag, leaving me impatient for reopening the deck and patio. 

The Olympics are everywhere now, but I have almost no interest in them. I certainly accept that these athletes are demonstrating unbelievable skills and even bravery... I just can't bring myself to feel emotionally invested. 

This is the time of year when Kathleen and I have finally decided to get a whole home water softener, followed by conversations about why we didn't do this, say, 18 years ago. Pulling the trigger on that led to us overdoing it today in moving shelves and bins and boxes out of the furnace room to make way for the new "life-changing" unit coming next Monday.

It's an awkward space but for almost two decades we have stored Christmas decorations there. I took apart an ancient metal shelving unit that leaned precariously due to metal fatigue (maybe?), and that was a thing. Next Monday or Tuesday we will need to make some decisions on rearranging or even culling some decorations. 

We don't put them all out each year and some are pretty beat up, but many of them have some sentimental value and the editing of those items will be agonizing. 

Imagine this: one of my goals for 2026 now is to imagine the fresh, softened water washing away 18 years of sediment. Maybe our appliances and faucets will gain some life.

And my experiment trying a very expensive coffee maker from Denmark failed completely. The $375 unit simply doesn't make very hot coffee... and that was the whole point.

So we went back to the $70 Cuisinart and I have to report that I found this morning's brew quite hot and tasty. 

See what I mean about being in the winter doldrums?

Show me the money... though I won't do anything about it

In addition to watching the country sleepwalk into a dictatorship (ah, it couldn't happen HERE), I continue to be be puzzled by our unwillingness to comprehend and resist the unprecidented wealth disparity in the U.S. 

Economists call it the K-shaped economy, though no one really seems to understand the nuances of that shape. Bottom line, though, is that most of the momentum of our economy comes from the wealthy (people making over $125,000 per year was one marker I found) increasing their spending. They can't spend enough to slow down their rapid dividends and high salaries and stock options. 

As the song goes: "The rich get richer and the poor have children." Wait. That is not true any longer. Now it's back to "...and the poor get poorer."

So, the rich have plenty of money as the stock market continues to churn along and the middle class just struggles to hang on. The lower classes economically? Forget about it. The very wealthiest in the billionaire class might as well live in another reality compared to the "average" American.

The slow drip of scandal from the Epstein files may embarrass some of the world's elite, and many continue to hope that, somehow, Donald Trump will feel so much shame from his longtime friendship with a pedophile that he will resign, but what comes through most clearly is that the elite, the very rich, live in an insulated and separated world... and have done for many years. 

Morality is for the poor. Ethics is for suckers. The extremely rich are interested in hoarding more riches and feeding their egos while the vast majority of the world struggles.

I assume this has been worse in world history. I would imagine ancient Rome presented an even deeper and broader gulf between the very rich and the very poor (slaves, at the time). 

Most commentators are quite fine noting the gulf between urban and rural populations, as if concentrating so much education and money into small areas automatically creates conflict. And, yes, much of the world's unrest can be traced to levels of education. 

But, as in most human interactions, it is wise to simply follow the money. There are rich Democrats and rich Republicans and rich autocrats and rich tech gurus. They sort of squabble, but they all seem to do quite well, no matter which political party is in power.

Full disclosure: My wife and I happen to have just enough equity plus investments plus pensions to have something to lose were the economic system to change very much. It would not be wise to hope that Baby Boomers will suddenly support some sort of redistribution of wealth any time soon. And most Boomers don't have what we have.

Jeff Bezos yesterday oversaw over a third of the Washington Post staff being let go. The given reason was that the paper lost $100 million last year and things don't look good in the future. Bezos, of course, is worth over $340 BILLION and seemed to have little problem investing in the Trump family by funding the Melania documentary for $75 million. 

Investing... bribing... it's all the same when you are stupidly rich. 

Bezos might have simply claimed that $100 million invested in supporting American democracy and free speech was well worth it. After all, his wealth will likely increase by that amount in the next month. 

But Bezos made the choice the very rich almost always make: They keep their money. They help themselves. They don't think too deeply about the difficulties a rich man might face in squeezing through the eye of that needle that Jesus referred to as the challenge for the very wealthy. 

Bezos and his tech siblings were chummy with the Obamas. Now they suck up to the Trumps. They will rapidly shift their sucking up to the next government leader. And the rest of us will continue to pretend that it's all about values and government programs. 

Wait... you said WHAT now?

I happened across two very different but startling things in the past 12 hours. The first was a nearly five-minute report on CBS co-anchor Savannah Guthrie's 84-year-old mother being missing, perhaps kidnapped, from her Arizona home. It was the story that led the news.

I was surprised merely to find that this story led the night's news and then became more and more disoriented as the report went on and on, including a sherif nears tears worrying about the poor woman. Perhaps this was part of the "new" CBS that Bari Weiss has envisioned, but to devote over 20 percent of the entire "live news" slot to a story that had zero effect on, well, anyone other than the Guthrie family, was startling. 

I realize that reporters and viewers may tire of the constant stream of horrific behaviors across the world, but how was that report supposed to help or assuage or even entertain? 

Kathleen was amused by my bemusement and suggested that it was a good thing that there were few earth-shattering events to cover that day. Maybe she's right, but it struck me as the worst sort of self-service to focus so much on something that would not merit a second normally. But she's the mom of a CBS "star"!

Then, this morning, I was reading a commentary on the Atlantic site by a college professor that basically was a love letter to himself as a teacher. He started with the plain fact that college students do not seem capable of reading long passages, much less novels, and immediately claimed that this was mostly because professors didn't ask them to.

He teaches a literature class that covers 400 years of American literature in a semester and rhapsodized over the fact that by sheer force of his argument he convinced his students to delve into Thoreau and Melville and even Jonathan Edwards ("Sinner in the Hands of An Angy God"). That they not only were able to respond with joy and insights but that they did so in on-the-spot essays written in class. 

I had several questions starting with the very idea of survey of literature class that claims to cover 400 years in 16 weeks. That's 25 years per week, from one perspective, sort of like touring Europe is eight days. "Well, I've done THAT."

But then I wondered about his purpose in making this argument. I tried to imagine his approach being applied throughout our vast university system, not to mention K-12. 

Here is the final paragraph: "The students I taught last semester turned enthusiastically to Faulkner and spent their time reading about the journey of the Bundren family to bury their mother’s body. Why did they do this? Because I asked them to, and told them it was worth it. I said that time was precious, and that we needed to take some of it back for ourselves. So we did."

Imagine my chagrin when I realized that success in education will flow through the sheer power, the magnetism, and the sincerity of a teacher championing reading deeply. Why did no one share this with me 50 years ago when I began my career?

Heaven forbid that I would doubt the professor's success, but this resembled the CBS report on a missing elderly women in its navel gazing. 

In both cases there was a blissful lack of audience awareness and a fixation on talking about themselves. 

My current thoughts are "I hope the old lady is OK, though I honestly had to look up who Savannah Guthrie is," and "it's great to know that what education needs are magnetic and passionate teachers who can lead their captive student audience to illumination." 

Journalism and education are far too complex for easy solutions to their challenges. Those two reports remind us of that.