I've mentioned before my love of my iPod Touch. Well I just updated to the new operating system and although there's been lots of news about new phone features (Voice Dialing), I am totally enamored by a few simple additions to iPod capability.
The first is better control of podcast listening. I was thinking about cutting down the number of podcasts I subscribe to, but now I can listen to them at twice the speed (or half to understand fast talkers). It's amazing how little it affects the sound a of person's voice -- it's faster but it's not like listening to Alvin and the Chipmunks. Also, the feature I've wanted forever is now included: rewind 30 seconds. Especially for long shows like This American Life, I find myself wanting to go back to listen to something I missed but a 60 minute "slider" is hard to manipulate with accuracy. (Hmm... just realized how obscure this is. Oh well, this is my current pre-occupation.)
A second great update came on the Remote feature. It's a lot easier now to choose speakers and control iTunes with this app.
Okay, enough gushing about my toys. I haven't gushed about my kids in a while.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
The Parents We Mean To Be
The Parents We Mean To Be by Richard Weissbourd
This book focuses on how we teach children to become moral beings, defined by the author as people who ask moral questions, see perspectives that are not their own, feel responsibility for others and maintain good relationships.
Weissbourd's prescription for how we teach children morality is two-fold: teach by example and exercising moderation in all of our parenting behaviors.
The best way to teach is by example, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who has changed his behaviors in some ways upon becoming a parent. Some important points in the book are that we should recognize our children's moral development as fluid and not get fixated on "bad kids" or feel like the teenage years are the end point in that process. Similarly, we should acknowledge that our own moral development is a work in progress and occasionally give voice to that, explaining our choices, right or wrong and showing that we as parents can also experience growth.
As for moderation, I think this is one reason I like this book so much. Instead of veering in one direction or another -- touching is good, therefore never let go of your child! -- Weissbourd points out how various behaviors that seem positive -- praise, an emphasis on children's happiness and self-esteem -- can backfire if they are excessive. Children become egocentric and selfish if they think their own happiness is paramount and they become paralyzed with failure if they never encounter it until their twenties.
The chapter on sports was one of my favorites. On the one hand, there are crazy sports parents who live through their kids. On the other hand are parents who downplay competition and try not to care at all. Weissbourd points out that competition is fun in context and teaches kids that opposition is contextual (if their best friend is on the opposing team, for example). Of course, getting too caught up in the game is unhealthy for lots of reasons, too.
There is plenty of advice for parents, teachers, coaches and just adults in general on what they can do to help children grow up to be better people. (One I liked was to make a pact with other parents to be honest with each other so you have a warning that you're going overboard one way or another.)
The most compelling reading in the book came from the anecdotes that begin each chapter, from parents, coaches, and especially from children themselves (who see through all sorts of hypocrisy and "parenting techniques"). The explanations of academic studies are fine and lend weight to the arguments presented. Although, I have to repeat myself and say that the most compelling part of the argument was that it was not extreme in any way, but rather thoughtful and reflective.
Well worth reading.
This book focuses on how we teach children to become moral beings, defined by the author as people who ask moral questions, see perspectives that are not their own, feel responsibility for others and maintain good relationships.
Weissbourd's prescription for how we teach children morality is two-fold: teach by example and exercising moderation in all of our parenting behaviors.
The best way to teach is by example, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who has changed his behaviors in some ways upon becoming a parent. Some important points in the book are that we should recognize our children's moral development as fluid and not get fixated on "bad kids" or feel like the teenage years are the end point in that process. Similarly, we should acknowledge that our own moral development is a work in progress and occasionally give voice to that, explaining our choices, right or wrong and showing that we as parents can also experience growth.
As for moderation, I think this is one reason I like this book so much. Instead of veering in one direction or another -- touching is good, therefore never let go of your child! -- Weissbourd points out how various behaviors that seem positive -- praise, an emphasis on children's happiness and self-esteem -- can backfire if they are excessive. Children become egocentric and selfish if they think their own happiness is paramount and they become paralyzed with failure if they never encounter it until their twenties.
The chapter on sports was one of my favorites. On the one hand, there are crazy sports parents who live through their kids. On the other hand are parents who downplay competition and try not to care at all. Weissbourd points out that competition is fun in context and teaches kids that opposition is contextual (if their best friend is on the opposing team, for example). Of course, getting too caught up in the game is unhealthy for lots of reasons, too.
There is plenty of advice for parents, teachers, coaches and just adults in general on what they can do to help children grow up to be better people. (One I liked was to make a pact with other parents to be honest with each other so you have a warning that you're going overboard one way or another.)
The most compelling reading in the book came from the anecdotes that begin each chapter, from parents, coaches, and especially from children themselves (who see through all sorts of hypocrisy and "parenting techniques"). The explanations of academic studies are fine and lend weight to the arguments presented. Although, I have to repeat myself and say that the most compelling part of the argument was that it was not extreme in any way, but rather thoughtful and reflective.
Well worth reading.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Book ethics
Today's Ethicist column is about a woman who got a library book autographed by "her favorite author" on an airplane and then replaced the library book with a new copy of the title.
Here's my problem with the dilemma: Her favorite author and she got it out of the library? Look, I probably have seven books out from the library right now (for myself, not for the kids). However, if any of the dozen authors I consider a "favorite" publishes a new book, I buy it. Partly because I will want to keep it, but also so the author actually earns some of my money.
There's nothing unethical about using the library, but if you really want to support an artist (of any sort), give them sales figures and, frankly, money.
A little disappointed that Randy Cohen didn't address that.
Here's my problem with the dilemma: Her favorite author and she got it out of the library? Look, I probably have seven books out from the library right now (for myself, not for the kids). However, if any of the dozen authors I consider a "favorite" publishes a new book, I buy it. Partly because I will want to keep it, but also so the author actually earns some of my money.
There's nothing unethical about using the library, but if you really want to support an artist (of any sort), give them sales figures and, frankly, money.
A little disappointed that Randy Cohen didn't address that.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
The Great Brain books
The Great Brain Is Back by John Dennis FitzgeraldMy review
rating: 2 of 5 stars
This review is for the entire Great Brain series by John D. Fitzgerald. The series is comprised of eight books, the first seven of which were published from 1967 to 1976 and the last one was published posthumously in 1995 from notes left by the author. There is also a great Publisher's Note that I will discuss toward the end of this review.
Overall, I would say that the first two books are the best by far and the first five are worth reading as a set. The last three books are like return visits to a favorite village but are hardly great novels. The first two books, The Great Brain and More Adventures of the Great Brain, read like one high quality novel, telling the story of Tom D. Fitzgerald, aka the Great Brain, from the point of view of John D. Fitzgerald. The stories take place in the town of Adenville, Utah in 1896. The Great Brain is acknowledged as clever by everyone but, as J.D. points out, his money-loving heart directs that brain into developing schemes to bankrupt the other kids and fill Tom's coffers. A lot of the fun of these first two books is the narrative conflict between the hero worshipping John and the tricks his brother plays on him and his friends.
The next three books develop the idea logically. Me and My Little Brain is the story of John trying to be like the Great Brain. Tom has gone away to boarding school and the Fitzgeralds adopt an orphan named Frankie. John doesn't have Tom's talent for scheming and is constantly caught and punished but he does have a good heart, and courage, and manages to save Frankie from an outlaw and earn a reward.
The Great Brain at the Academy tells the story of what Tom was doing at his Catholic boarding school -- tricking other kids there and sneaking around the Monsignors who ran the place.
In The Great Brain Reforms, the series comes to a logical conclusion. Partly because of Frankie's perspective, and in large part because he's just older and wiser, John recognizes that Tom is a bit of a jerk. He's constantly tricking other kids into losing bets to win their baseball gloves or other Christmas gifts when Tom has more than enough money just to buy those items from himself. It's also clear that the Fitzgeralds are more prosperous than many other in Adenville. John finally organizes the kids of the town and they put Tom on trial. His sentence is to be shunned by all the kids but the sentence is suspended if he agrees to reform.
The last three books of the series tell more stories of town, but now that J.D. is no longer naive, the stories just seem like trickster tales without any narrative irony or moral weight.
The last book has a publisher's note that explains some of the observations I've made here. Apparently The Great Brain originated as the second sequel to Papa Married a Mormon, Fitzgerald's best-selling novel for adults. In that book, he explains why John D's father came to Utah -- to fulfill his mother's dying wish that he keep an eye on a wayward brother who was a brawling saloon keeper. That book explains the presence of Aunt Bertha, tells stories of Brownie the dog, and tells of the adoption of an orphan boy, but unlike Frankie, this boy is orphaned when his father drinks himself to death. John's brother Tom refers to himself as The Great Brain but all of his schemes go awry. All is set in the familiar Adenville, as well as Silverlode, the mining camp that is described as a ghost town in the Great Brain books.
By the time Fitzgerald finished writing the third book in his series for adults, two things had changed. The adult market no longer found a place for family stories and his editor had moved to a different publishing house. Fitzgerald's agent sent the book to the editor, E.L. Doctorow, at the new publishing house where the manuscript was read by the editor of children's books. She loved the book, asked that it be cut in half and the adult themes be excised and The Great Brain was born.
This may explain why the first two books of the series seem of the same high quality and almost to be the same novel. (Papa runs to almost 300 pages whereas the Great Brain books are usually just over 100.) The publisher's note also mentions that "I had a constant struggle with him not to let Tom reform." It seems clear to me that Fitzgerald would have been happy with the morally and narratively satisfying conclusion of book 5's trial.
All in all, I've enjoyed re-reading these books (and reading Papa and TGB is Back for the first time). I've also looked over Fitzgerald's co-written Structuring Your Novel. He had some pretty solid rules there. The Great Brain books, 1-5 constitute a great epic story for children or adults. And for those who can't get enough (like me), there's three more helpings of Adenville lore.
View all my reviews.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
We just watched Chitty Chitty Bang Bang tonight. It was a lot of fun and the kids enjoyed it. We've been kind of obsessed with it in our house for a while because it was one of the free offered DVDs from Kellogg's cereal. We had to collect five proofs of purchase and every time we finished a box, we would talk about getting Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.
In the midst of this cereal box collecting, I got the original book from the libary. The book is by Ian Fleming, of James Bond fame, and like the Bond books, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is filled with marvelous inventions, groan inducing punning names and, well, not so hot writing. It's fine, but it's kind of dry and not really very compelling except for exciting plot points (a car that flies! a cave that opens up into a hideout!).
The book was a bit of a shock to me, because I remember the movie as being full of weird castles and scary child-catchers, geek dads and missing mothers-- in short, being more like a Roald Dahl book than an Ian Fleming book. Well, as it turns out, the movie's screenplay was written by Dahl (and the director, Ken Hughes).
What was also suprising is that most of what I remember of the movie is just the last 40 minutes -- the car becomes a boat, flies, they go to a weird country where children are outlawed and the adults have to pretend to be toys to be let into the castle.
The first hour and a half of the movie concerns the whistling candies, a failed contraption at a fair, meeting the love interest, Truly Scrumptious, and "grandpa" making his daily trip to the outhouse ("I'm off to India!"). There are also lots and lots of songs. I remembered title song and "You are my oochy coochy little teddy bear" but not much else.
A note on Truly Scrumptious: the actress was Sally Ann Howes. According to the IMDB, she replaced Julie Andrews in "My Fair Lady" on Broadway and even earned a higher salary than Andrews!
The songs in the movie were written by the Sherman Brothers, Richard and Robert. They wrote lots of songs for Disney, including the songs from The Jungle Book, Mary Poppins and "It's a Small World." Apparently there is a documentary out now about the Sherman Brothers, called "The Boys."
Well, the kids liked the movie (they've yet to dislike a movie) although Mari closed her eyes when Dick van Dyke and Sally Howes kissed and Austin thought it was boring when she was singing about love. We strongly reminded them that this was all made up and that there is no country where children are outlawed. Hopefully, they won't be scarred the way we were (Julie mentioned afterwards that she remembered the child-catcher scene lasting forever and being much scarier than it did tonight. I remembered it the same way she did).
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang came out in 1968 and watching it, I felt like I was watching a pre-cursor to Wallace and Gromit (similar breakfast making machine) as well as a proto-version of the robot when Truly Scrumptious pretends to be a doll.
Here's Richard Sherman playing his title song from the movie for an audience of toddlers:
And, just because Mark Evanier posted it recently on his awesome website, here's some random Japanese celebrities singing the song (the Sherman link was from Evanier, too) [just the latest in my constant reminders that I will never understand Japanese culture]:
In the midst of this cereal box collecting, I got the original book from the libary. The book is by Ian Fleming, of James Bond fame, and like the Bond books, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is filled with marvelous inventions, groan inducing punning names and, well, not so hot writing. It's fine, but it's kind of dry and not really very compelling except for exciting plot points (a car that flies! a cave that opens up into a hideout!).
The book was a bit of a shock to me, because I remember the movie as being full of weird castles and scary child-catchers, geek dads and missing mothers-- in short, being more like a Roald Dahl book than an Ian Fleming book. Well, as it turns out, the movie's screenplay was written by Dahl (and the director, Ken Hughes).
What was also suprising is that most of what I remember of the movie is just the last 40 minutes -- the car becomes a boat, flies, they go to a weird country where children are outlawed and the adults have to pretend to be toys to be let into the castle.
The first hour and a half of the movie concerns the whistling candies, a failed contraption at a fair, meeting the love interest, Truly Scrumptious, and "grandpa" making his daily trip to the outhouse ("I'm off to India!"). There are also lots and lots of songs. I remembered title song and "You are my oochy coochy little teddy bear" but not much else.
A note on Truly Scrumptious: the actress was Sally Ann Howes. According to the IMDB, she replaced Julie Andrews in "My Fair Lady" on Broadway and even earned a higher salary than Andrews!
The songs in the movie were written by the Sherman Brothers, Richard and Robert. They wrote lots of songs for Disney, including the songs from The Jungle Book, Mary Poppins and "It's a Small World." Apparently there is a documentary out now about the Sherman Brothers, called "The Boys."
Well, the kids liked the movie (they've yet to dislike a movie) although Mari closed her eyes when Dick van Dyke and Sally Howes kissed and Austin thought it was boring when she was singing about love. We strongly reminded them that this was all made up and that there is no country where children are outlawed. Hopefully, they won't be scarred the way we were (Julie mentioned afterwards that she remembered the child-catcher scene lasting forever and being much scarier than it did tonight. I remembered it the same way she did).
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang came out in 1968 and watching it, I felt like I was watching a pre-cursor to Wallace and Gromit (similar breakfast making machine) as well as a proto-version of the robot when Truly Scrumptious pretends to be a doll.
Here's Richard Sherman playing his title song from the movie for an audience of toddlers:
And, just because Mark Evanier posted it recently on his awesome website, here's some random Japanese celebrities singing the song (the Sherman link was from Evanier, too) [just the latest in my constant reminders that I will never understand Japanese culture]:
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Form letter post-mortem
After sending out a form letter about our move and our past year, I noticed a few things.
One is, a bunch of people looked up our address on Google Maps and commented on the neighborhood and the lot. Also, all the people who did this live in the SF Bay Area.
Second, even though I don't feel that old, in going through my address book, I saw quite a few names of friends who are deceased. This is not counting people who were in their 60s or 70s when I met them. At least three or four people died at my current age or younger.
Third, quite a few people asked about pictures of the new place. I didn't want to include attachments to the form letter, so I'll post some here. I just took these this week of the backyard. Give us some time to fix up the house and paint and we'll post pictures of the house then. But meanwhile, some pictures of the yard (we added no plantings; these are all perennials):
The raspberry patch with the neighbor's cherry tree petals all over it.
Luscious ferns along the path.
Our roomy lawn. Kids are by a little water feature and fountain in the middle there.
One is, a bunch of people looked up our address on Google Maps and commented on the neighborhood and the lot. Also, all the people who did this live in the SF Bay Area.
Second, even though I don't feel that old, in going through my address book, I saw quite a few names of friends who are deceased. This is not counting people who were in their 60s or 70s when I met them. At least three or four people died at my current age or younger.
Third, quite a few people asked about pictures of the new place. I didn't want to include attachments to the form letter, so I'll post some here. I just took these this week of the backyard. Give us some time to fix up the house and paint and we'll post pictures of the house then. But meanwhile, some pictures of the yard (we added no plantings; these are all perennials):
The raspberry patch with the neighbor's cherry tree petals all over it.
Luscious ferns along the path.
Our roomy lawn. Kids are by a little water feature and fountain in the middle there.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Personal vs. Political
Yesterday, Ross Douthat, the new conservative voice on the Times Op-ed page wrote an article about Obama's positions on gay marriage and abortion. Part of his thesis is that demographic trends favor gay marriage so if Obama waits long enough, it won't be hard to legalize gay marriage and he contrasts this with polling trends that suggest that more young Americans (under 35) call themselves pro-life rather than pro-choice.
The trouble, I think, is that young Americans (under 35) are dumb. Or rather, they don't seem to know the difference between policy and personal choice. Case in point: Meghan McCain. Here's a recent article she wrote about GOP platforms. In it, she claims to be pro-life (presumably because she would never choose to have an abortion) but insistst that if she became pregnant she and her family should be allowed to make that choice. I have a feeling that many people feel the same way: I should have the choice to be "pro-life;" this is a pro-choice position.
(And ultimately what they mean is, "I can't imagine, right now, a situation in which I would have an abortion." However, imaginations are limited.)
If polling matters (and it does for politicians), the pro-choice groups should create advertising that clarifies this position.
The trouble, I think, is that young Americans (under 35) are dumb. Or rather, they don't seem to know the difference between policy and personal choice. Case in point: Meghan McCain. Here's a recent article she wrote about GOP platforms. In it, she claims to be pro-life (presumably because she would never choose to have an abortion) but insistst that if she became pregnant she and her family should be allowed to make that choice. I have a feeling that many people feel the same way: I should have the choice to be "pro-life;" this is a pro-choice position.
(And ultimately what they mean is, "I can't imagine, right now, a situation in which I would have an abortion." However, imaginations are limited.)
If polling matters (and it does for politicians), the pro-choice groups should create advertising that clarifies this position.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Chile photos
I'm finally posting some photos from Chile. They are more or less randomly selected.
Amy and Julie at a cafe in Vina del Mar. Turns out the chef worked on Martha's Vineyard for years.
John and I got Chilean hats.
The cousins. This is at a little fishing village on Chiloe Island.
Mari flying. There was a trampoline at the cabanas where we spent Christmas.
Penguin!
Christmas day with a volcano in the background. We were on our way to go swimming.
Austin in front of the world's largest pool.
View from the volcano.
Amy and Julie at a cafe in Vina del Mar. Turns out the chef worked on Martha's Vineyard for years.
John and I got Chilean hats.
The cousins. This is at a little fishing village on Chiloe Island.
Mari flying. There was a trampoline at the cabanas where we spent Christmas.
Penguin!
Christmas day with a volcano in the background. We were on our way to go swimming.
Austin in front of the world's largest pool.
View from the volcano.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
What Julie Always Says
She says that the most realistic medical show on television is Scrubs. A Slate piece explains.
(If I had known this was of interest to the world, I would have pitched the idea to Slate long ago!)
(If I had known this was of interest to the world, I would have pitched the idea to Slate long ago!)
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Guitar humor
As I bludgeon my way through guitar books, I find the dots very helpful. Therefore, I find this video very funny:
If you're not amused after the first surprise guest (2:35 or so) don't bother with the rest.
If you're not amused after the first surprise guest (2:35 or so) don't bother with the rest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)