September 28, 2021 - Who Decided on Letter Names?

 

Who invented the names of the letters in the American English alphabet? Why do A, J, and K end with an -ā sound while B, C, D, E, G, P, T, V and Z end with an -ē sound? Why do F, L, M, N, S, and X end with their respective sounds while the previous letters begin with them? Why do H, Q, and W not contain the sound they make? Come to think of it, what sound does Q make on its own? If it's only the same as K, why do we need qu- when we could just use kw-? Why does the letter C exist, when we already have K and S? Why does the soft G exist when we already have J? Why is W called double-u, but M is not called double-n?

You might think I'd have better ways to spend my time, what with school back in session and a baby at home, but here we are...

April 4, 2021 - Why I'm Staying on Facebook

About a week ago, a friend posted a link to this article about how Facebook has been not only allowing groups and pages that support white supremacy, but auto-generating them on their own. In addition, they've been linking supporters of one page to similar pages through their "you might be interested in..." feature. People talk about how the January 6th insurrection was an organized event rather than a spur of the moment happening; this is one of the reasons that was possible. 

Upon reading this, I underwent a crisis of conscience. I understand that many people, including some of my Facebook friends, have opinions that differ from mine. I accept that. I have, numerous times, attempted to engage them - and total strangers - in civilized discussion (see my July 27, 2020 entry). My issue was that this time it's Facebook encouraging these hateful views. I had friends support my incredulity at what was happening, but say that they simply scroll past the objectionable content. That's the problem, though; we don't see the objectionable content. It's those we have to worry about who see it, who see that their hateful views are shared by others, and who find ways to expand their circles of hate and ignorance. I had to ask myself if this was a deal breaker. At the time, I thought it likely was.

And that was too bad. Facebook offers many benefits: staying in touch with family, friends, and former students; a place to see what is happening in my town; keeping up with my favorite bands; a place to promote my photography (this includes Instagram, which is owned by Facebook). I was ready to pull the trigger and move everything over to Twitter, knowing full well that it would limit what I was able to do and limit who would be able to see it; I think most Facebook folks would not follow me there. 

The more I thought about it, though, the more I realized that would be a mistake. The best analogy I can think of is the Thanksgiving dinner with the relative who makes casually racist comments. When that happens, I have three options. Option one is I can ignore it and try to enjoy the rest of the meal with my family. I could continue with Facebook as I have for the past almost fifteen years. The expression says that ignorance is bliss, and that would be 100% true. But I would know in my heart that the problem exists.

Option two is getting up and leaving the table. I could simply walk away. This is where I was heading. I want nothing to do with this entire situation; sorry, folks, but I'm outta here. In the short run, while I would be disappointed to not have the turkey, mashed potatoes, and three different kinds of pie, I simply can't be part of this situation. I can find a restaurant that might be open and have something there. Sure, the food isn't as good, and despite my best offer, no one else at the table is going to come with me, but I can hold my head up and proudly claim that I want no part of this. But, I thought, where does that really get me? Who benefits from that? The problem still exists, and I'm the one suffering.

That leaves me with option three: I stay, but I speak up. I look Uncle Zuck right in the eye and I tell him that what he said is inappropriate and absolutely unacceptable. I've read that it's not enough to be not racist; we have to be anti-racist. We have to call it out when we see it, not simply say, "Well, that's not my belief." Full disclosure: I don't yet know what to do, but I have reached out to the Tech Transparency Project, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Anti-Defamation League for suggestions on how this small town English teacher with a few hundred "friends" on the platform can challenge a multi-billion dollar international monolith. I will bring the fight to them. I hope others will join me. 

January 24, 2021 - Reclaiming My Time

A while back I noticed that I was getting some strange ads in my Facebook feed. Ads for demographics to which I do not remotely belong: guns, beer, daughters, God/Jesus, horses.... I also see innumerable ads that are blatant copyright and trademark infringements: Star Wars tee shirts, Van Halen sneakers, any variety of posters and apparel with photoshopped images of Paul McCartney, Robert Downey, Jr., Mark Hamill and more appearing to hold the merchandise. For a while it was fun posting comments about how poorly they were photoshopped before reporting the ad as a scam. For the past few days, I've been sharing some of them under #FacebookDoesNotKnowMeAtAll, an attempt at humor to decry their algorithms. 

Then some more tech savvy than I clued me into the fact that what I post is not the primary factor in the ads I see. If it were, I'd be seeing many more ads for baby products. A friend suggested I watch the Netflix documentary The Social Dilemma, which sheds light on how social media companies market us to their advertisers, and how simply hovering over an ad results in more ads similar to it showing up. It was contrary to everything I'd been trying to do; time spent reporting the ads only served to generate more of them. 

The documentary also explains how advertisers seek to alter my own personal habits by providing my data to those who would exploit it. I'll be honest, I don't completely understand how it works, but it still frightens me. What frightens me most is that I don't know if my behavior has been altered. I don't think so, but I can't say for sure. I'm somewhat heartened by the fact that I only see Facebook ads on my phone; the Facebook Purity extension blocks most of them on my laptop. But the lengths they go to in order to keep me looking does strike a few chords: the dots when someone is typing a comment (it does keep me there a while longer to see what they're writing), the notifications that someone did something related to my feed to trigger that need to see what it is (I turned the notifications off long ago), the "people you might know" function designed to link me to as many as possible which keeps me looking longer, and the god-awful infinite scroll that keeps me looking at posts I've already seen; I do that way too much, and I hate that I do it.

Having been spending so much time at home - partly because of the pandemic and partly because of a new baby - I find myself with my phone in my hand more than usual. I find myself falling prey to the habits I've long railed against. To that end, I have decided to try to purge myself of these behaviors. Part of me would love to take social media off my phone entirely, but I post many pictures from my phone, and I will admit it's much easier to post that way instead of emailing them to myself to post from the laptop. That said, I have taken the step of limiting myself to ten minutes per day on Facebook and Twitter on my phone. The plan is to see what folks are up to in the morning & post what I have to post and to check once more in the evening to see what folks are up to and to get that quick high from the likes and comments on what I posted.

I like Facebook. It keeps me in touch with family and friends from all over the world. I enjoy seeing what they're up to. I appreciate being able to celebrate with them, even if it's via a post. This is especially true during the pandemic when I am unable to see people in person. I like Twitter. I don't follow too many accounts; the majority are work-, book-, or grammar-related who don't tweet too much. I don't want to give them up, but I don't want them to have as much control over my time as they've been having. To that end, I have subscribed to the Boston Globe, so I can get my news from professionals instead of the echo chamber that is my social media feed. I should have plenty of time to read it as I won't be on social media as much anymore. 

I have long encouraged my students to spend more time in the real world and less time on their phones. It's time I practiced what I preach.

January 22, 2021 - Survivor's Guilt

 

Last week we had to say goodbye to Winnie. This is not the first cat I've lost, but it's the first time I've been present for it. I said goodbye to Daisy, the cat I grew up with (she was 18 years old), but I was at college when it happened; I got a phone call from my mother after the fact. I said goodbye to Norm, the cat we fostered my senior year at college, but we returned him to the shelter, and I hold onto hope that he found his forever home and had a long and healthy life. I said goodbye to Squiggy (he was 14 years old), but I had re-homed him with a friend from work; I got to see him before he left, but I wasn't there when it happened. Being present to say goodbye to Winnie was, unsurprisingly, devastating. 

I have no doubt we made the right decision for her. While she had overcome numerous health problems throughout her nineteen years, we could not in good conscience watch her suffer as her health visibly deteriorated. She was having litter box issues. She began falling off the bed and not landing on her feet. She had increasing difficulty walking. I say all this not to convince anyone, myself included, that what we did was for the best. I say this because even though I know it was for the best, it still sucks. 

When we took her to the vet to say our goodbyes, it was one of the most emotionally trying times of my life. Being in that room with her as it happened is something I could not be prepared for. The vet told us what would happen every step of the way, that she would be gone before the syringe was fully pressed. And it was true. She was gone. After it was done, there was a body on the table, but it was no longer Winnie. It looked like her, but it wasn't. At least not as far as I was concerned. I still can't process how she was there one moment and was gone the next. 

Knowing we did right by her - and this sounds selfish; this is selfish - doesn't lessen the hurt that has continued. Every night, I used to say, "I'm going to feed the kids." Now I say, "I'm going to feed Logan." It hurts. Every night when I clean the litter boxes, I clean half as many. It hurts. When we come home, I say, "Logan, we're home!" instead of "Kids, we're home!" It hurts. When Logan jumps on the bed at night, I instinctively move to keep him away from another cat who's not there. It hurts. When I look at Logan, I am now forced to consider how much time we have left with him. It hurts. When I walk by the bedroom and glance in, God forbid there's a black tee shirt on the bed, because I come this close to saying, "Hey, pretty girl!" And it hurts. 

What hurts most at the moment, though, is the fact that the hurt will abate over time. Knowing this makes me feel conflicted. I know that grief passes over time, but I feel that the lessening of grief equals a lessening of the love I feel for her still. I feel that as time goes on, I will remember her less as that time inserts itself between us. I can't (and don't want to) forget her, but remembering is still painful. I know that someday the memories will no longer be intertwined with the pain. I know others have gone through this, and they will rightly say something along the lines of time heals all wounds. And I know that they're one hundred percent correct. But it doesn't help me now. 

So for the time being I will dwell in this self-pity and push myself to remember while fighting through the pain. I will remember with fondness the following times:
*visiting her and Jessy in Waltham and leaning over her to say hello. And she bit my nose

*when we wouldn't know where she was (in the closet, under the bed, in the other room...), all we had to do was whistle, and she'd come running - or stealing her from Jessy's lap by whistling and bringing her to my lap

*watching her curl up with her mother every night

*hearing her growl at her brother who also wanted to curl up with their mother every night

*knowing she had a chance to meet her human brother

*coming back from the vet, and giving her a treat for being so good and giving her brother a treat, too, because we can't give one cat a treat and not the other. And seeing her turn and smack him across the face so hard that he spat out the treat, and watching her walk over and eat it

*being bewildered by her lack of object permanence, as she would growl at Logan until I covered her eyes; I'd uncover them, and she'd resume growling until I covered them again

*hearing her meow hello from the bedroom window as we came up the walk to the front door

*after years of Logan trying to eat her food, her turning the tables and eating his, to the point of literally pushing him aside to do it

*giving her chin scratches, feeling her lean into them

*having her remind us who was in charge as she insisted I hold her dish while she ate

*having her lie on my lap, purring contentedly, as I read or graded or watched television

Normally my blog entries are intended to spark a conversation by putting forth an argument or trying to raise awareness about an issue. This one is simply a means of trying to unburden myself of something I can't define. That said, I will endure the pain in order to have my memories. And someday I will do it with only a smile instead of a smile and tears. 

November 1, 2020 - Punctuating Politics

For the past almost twenty years, I've seen numerous memes and jokes about the importance of punctuation. One of the more famous ones is the inspiration behind Lynne Truss's grammatical primer, Eats, Shoots and Leaves. There's also the traumatically (non) punctuated issue of Tails magazine, featuring a cover story of Rachel Ray's apparent psychopathic enjoyment of cooking her family and her dog (see the sadness in the image on the left).

Years ago The Simpsons hopped on this issue when Marge and Homer consulted Lionel Hutz as an attorney. When he tells Marge the fee is a thousand dollars, Marge presents his business card saying that he works on contingency. Hutz clarifies that the printer made an error and the truth is he does not work on contingency as the poorly punctuated card indicates.

It was this I was thinking about when I saw a Trump/Pence lawn sign not far from my house.

It got me thinking. I understand differing on policies. Trump signed a new tax bill during his term. Some people think this is great; they get more money in each paycheck. Others think this is bad; the already wealthy should not be the primary beneficiaries from this change. Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran Nuclear Deal, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. These are issues that are at the heart of isolationist/globalist policy conversations. Trump greenlit the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport. Supporters say Trump removed a serious international threat; others think he had no right to assassinate a general on the grounds of another sovereign nation. These are all literally debatable points, and I have no problem having the discussion with those who support him.

However, the irony in that lawn sign is palpable. I cannot fathom the idea that people believe that those other than Trump are the primary spewers of the majority of bullshit in politics. I'm not naïve; I would never deign to imply that other politicians are immune from the projectile vomiting of bullshit. Both sides are guilty of this, but Trump takes it to a new level. I am forced to ask myself who believes Trump when he says he has a plan to replace Obamacare. He's been saying for over four years that he has a plan, yet he has brought forth nothing. He's been saying for months that Coronavirus is a hoax, yet he contracted it; also, it's got to be one hell of a hoax if the rest of the world is in on it. He's been saying for months that we're turning the corner, yet the rates of positive cases continue to increase (we've turned so many corners, it's as if we're doing laps). He posts videos of the horrific future we can expect in "Biden's America", yet all the footage is from his administration. 

Donald Trump has 144 "Pants on Fire" ratings at PolitiFact.com. That's 16% of all his claims. Compare that to Obama's 1%. Compare it to McConnell's 3%. Compare that to Biden's 3% (of his 173 ratings in total). Of everything Trump is rated on, over 1.5 out of every ten is bullshit. Trump has a mental disconnect with reality; I honestly believes he believes what he's saying. The sad part is others believe it, too. But, to that end, I fixed the punctuation in the lawn sign to make it accurate:

October 18, 2020 - It's the One

 

In the wake of Eddie Van Halen's death, I've been having numerous conversations with friends about Eddie, the band, and the impact he and they have had on me, on us, and on music. Yesterday, a friend asked what my favorite Van Halen song is. He might as well ask me to choose a favorite food. Ice cream. No, lasagna. Wait, lobster. Hang on, ribs. Barbecue in general. I can't decide! 

That said, I think I can choose the Van Halen song that best embodies them: "I'm the One" from 1978's Van Halen. This one song has everything a classic Van Halen song needs. In no particular order, here are those elements.

Eddie's crunching riffs at the opening of the song. While the sound isn't the cleanest, that's part of the appeal. It drags the listener into the depths immediately.

Alex's violent drumming: For years I've been reading the pointless back-and-forths of Van Halen fans arguing the Dave vs. Sammy issue. I think one factor that's overlooked is Alex's style. It seems to me that his drumming lessened in intensity when Sammy was with them; this, as much as anything, impacted their sound and their style.

Roth's lyrics and vocals: While the lyrics in this particular song are minimal - two three line verses, a bridge repeated twice, and the chorus - they're classic, fun-time Dave. "We came here to entertain you/Leaving here we aggravate you/Don't you know it means the same to me" That braggadocious, bombastic tone that says they're here to party and eff you if you don't like it. Combine that with his unique howls and yelps (listen to that first "Ah, ha!" at the 0:14 mark). Roth was never considered a great singer. It didn't matter. It's the energy that his singing conveys that makes him one of the greatest front men in the history of the business. I know I'm biased, but I'll put him alongside Freddie Mercury, Mick Jagger, and Robert Plant when it comes to commanding the stage.

Michael Anthony's harmonies: Years ago I read that the reason he chose to play bass is that everyone else wanted to be the guitar hero; he wanted only to be in a band. I never thought his bass playing was truly stellar (evidenced by his own admission that for years of solos in their live performances, he wasn't playing as much as inflicting pain on himself). Where he becomes invaluable is his high harmonies. This is another reason Van Halen is a unique entity. Many bands have an element that makes them stand out; Van Halen has four (at least). 

Eddie's solos: I feel this is self-evident. His unique style is what elevates this band above other hard rockers and him into the pantheon of legends. This particular song has two solos, each one clean (in contrast to the opening chords), crisp, and blistering. I would not take the over/under in regards to how many people Eddie inspired to take up the guitar to sound like him and how many he inspired to quit knowing they never could.

The bridge: Listen from the 2:50 mark to 3:07. Listen to what is essentially a barbershop quartet bridge stuck in the middle of this hard rocking song. Listen and then ask yourself not only what other band would attempt this, but what other band could make it work. 

If someone asks you, "What was Van Halen?", play them this song. It has all the answers.

Journalistic Integrity (?) - September/October 4, 2020

 

I originally wrote this on September 4, 2020, but held back because something felt off. That reason is at the end.

In many local town newspapers this week, an article appeared (look on page six), which is a travesty on numerous levels. First, it's awful from a journalistic perspective. Start with the headline: "Guess What May Be Coming Back". It's beyond vague. I don't know. Is it poodle skirts? Base six math? Jesus? In today's COVID-19 climate, is it local business? In-person schooling? The possibilities are endless. Then let's look at the fact that there is no byline. To be fair, half of the articles in the paper have no byline, but it's not exactly a confidence builder when we have no idea where the information we're reading comes from. And the tone of the article is not exactly objective. Rarely do news articles resort to all caps (these changes are coming "in a VERY BIG way!"). And this article has six exclamation points, another sign that we should be wary about the lack of objectivity. 

But here's part of the problem. This is not journalism; it's an advertisement for an estate planning firm. The article professes to be in our best interest by letting us know about potential changes in the estate taxes, but it preys on fear. While they admittedly don't know what will happen in the November election, they "do need to let you know what may happen if Democrats wind up winning" control of the executive and legislative branches. They even want us to be aware of what others have said could happen: "For example, here's an article that appeared this summer in the New York Times, entitled 'Tax the Rich and Their Heirs'." One problem: there is no article from the Times included here, only a title. Also missing is the fact that this is an op-ed piece, not a news story (it's here if you want to read it).

The article discusses the federal Estate Tax exemption of $11.58 million dollars (possibly doubled for a married couple), and then they write a paragraph discussing the Massachusetts exemption of one million dollars. The opening line of the following paragraph claims that "that exemption may be significantly reduced at any time." This brings us back to the poor writing in this article. "That exemption" appears to refer to Massachusetts exemption referenced in the prior paragraph. If that's the case, the Democrats winning the federal elections in November has nothing to do with it; they have no control over state law. If they're referring to the federal rate, the previous paragraph about Massachusetts rates serves zero purpose.

The sidebar at the end of the article doesn't even try to hide its purpose. It's a blatant call for people to contact them to protect their wealth and do it now as "[it's] likely that any Estate Tax change is likely to made effective retroactively to January 1!" It's not even subtle. Call us now! NOW! And let's not overlook the poor writing with the repetitive use of "likely".

And despite all that, I come back to my biggest issue. This is an advertisement, plain and simple. Why not take out an actual ad, saying "Estate Taxes might go up. Call us for help."? Same message, less subterfuge, more efficacy. 

UPDATE: October 4, 2020:

I did some research to see if this article made it anywhere beyond the ten towns this publisher services. Turns out that this "article" was taken, almost word-for-word from a webpage/blog from a California estate planning firm. This accounts for some of the original problems I had. The article that was referenced but never provided? It's linked in this original publication. That paragraph about Massachusetts estate taxes that had nothing to do with the federal election? It's not in the original blog. The sidebar at the end that's not even pretending to be journalism? It makes sense in its original context. 

I made a couple of phone calls when I found this. The California firm has no association with the firm that put this in my local paper. I emailed the local firm asking if they have any association, but they never responded. I also emailed the publisher of my local papers to let them know. Given the number of plagiarism stories in recent years both national (Melania Trump copying Michelle Obama's speech) and local (a superintendent getting fired for plagiarizing an Oprah Winfrey story), this should never happen, regardless of the limited reach of these town papers. At the least, I plan to make my students aware that someone is always watching.