We All Had Stuffed Animals

In class discussion (and a few blog comments) I’ve noticed that lots of people don’t really understand Jack’s attachment to inanimate objects. After some light research, I found the name of this behavior. Its anthropomorphism, which I though was largely human characteristics applied to animals, but turns out it can be used on objects too.

We’ve all anthropomorphized before, most often with our pets, stuffed animals, or the animals in documentary videos. I think what throws everyone off is that Jack finds this connection mostly in objects. This is basically because the only other person in the room is Ma, and she only lets him watch TV (which also has people) for a limited amount of time. But as I looked back at Jack talking about the things in his room, I found that the way Jack talks about and treats his objects is the same way he talks to people (or the characters in his books, the closest Jack has to the real thing). This makes sense, because as I was researching, I found out that when people are anthropomorphizing, they use similar brain regions to those used when they think about the behavior of other people.

I think that for some people in our class, it’s hard to understand the connections Jack makes, because these objects don’t have a “face,” or anything that makes it seem more human and conveys emotion. Indeed, the articles I read showed that most people exercise selectivity when anthropomorphizing; that is, they tend to interact more with objects that appear similar to humans. It’s one thing to say a teddy bear looks “friendly”; it’s another to read the emotions and intentions of Rug.

But one of the driving reasons behind anthropomorphism, according to my readings, is a search for social connection. I’m sure we can all think back to times when we were very young, or lonely, and played with stuffed animals or toys because everyone else was busy. Now Ma has done a great job of raising Jack, and they are always together, but having just one “social connection” is not enough for any human, especially a young child. All children anthropomorphize, and more so than adults, but Ma encourages Jack to exercise this ability to the utmost.

A major part of the reason that Ma can keep Jack entertained in Room, is because she helps him make friends from all the objects they have, and give them personalities and backstories. Not just that, but Jack has been in Room long enough to kind of watch these “characters” evolve. He knows the stories of their various scars and imperfections, such as the stain on Bed or the hole in Floor. When I first started reading Room, I remember being struck by the detail of all these personalities and backstories, maybe even a tiny bit in awe/jealous of Jack’s abilities? These object stories were way ahead of anything I did when I was five, and honestly pretty impressive, especially given the circumstances.

The story behind the refinement of Jack’s story-building abilities is heartbreaking, but Donoghue deals with it in a really touching way throughout the novel. Often people like to focus on the darkness of situations, or abhor everything that came from an impure source, if that makes any sense. This happens especially often with mental illness; it’s still pretty controversial to talk about strength or certain abilities learned through the struggle, because the gut reaction of many people (even though often unexpressed) is judgement that the person had the problem, or a kind of disbelief that they actually gained anything from it. The embodiment of this is how the TV interviewer tries to characterize Jack, as another horror coming from Nick. But for Ma, Jack is what gave her a reason to live.

I guess what I’m trying to say here, moving away from a lot of dark rambling, is that I really appreciated how Donoghue just showed us Jack’s skills at making friends from what there was in Room. Since we saw everything from Jack’s perspective, we were more inclined by nature to be impressed by everything he could do, and had to work to step back and figure out what was going on. For me, it kind of felt like regarding Jack’s ability to make friends and be entertained by random objects as a gift, I really appreciated that this wasn’t treated as just another aspect of “the freakshow.” ~Fin

Persia vs. Iran

A tension that Marji struggles with throughout Persepolis is what is truly ‘Persian’ and what is ‘Iranian.’ It seems that Marji views things Persian as the true identity of the country, and things Iranian as a recent construct. It’s telling that she titles her book Persepolis, the capital city of the First Persian Empire, and the tone of her introduction gives us an idea of how she views Iran’s history. As I read this introduction (again), I was surprised to learn that ‘Iran’ is a name that actually originated around the 3rd century with the rulers of Iran, referring to the people of the empire, despite Marji generally treating the term as foreign. ‘Persia’ was actually used by the ancient Greeks beginning around 500 BCE, to refer to Cyrus the Great’s empire.

And yet Persia is the name that stuck, and that Marji associates with the “strong culture” of Iran, which goes beyond its modern association with “fundamentalism, fanaticism, and terrorism.” We’ve seen before in Persepolis that for a time Marji’s view of political issues (especially the Iraq/Iran war) was largely framed in a big-picture historical context. In page 90, Marji presents her project, titled “The Arab Conquest and Our War” which argues that “...This war is the same as the one 1,400 years ago.”

Going out on a limb, I know that often in post-colonial countries there’s an effort to remake their image and leave behind everything colonial, to bring back the ‘old and true’ image of the country. But often in doing so, the country’s history is grossly oversimplified, aspects of it are glossed over altogether, and customs actually observed by the populace can be discredited because they ‘aren’t original.’ This process has been going on since the shah took power, largely to bring legitimacy to his rule. The lower left panel of page 32 makes the point clear: “All the country’s money went into ridiculous celebrations of the 2,500 years of dynasty and other frivolities… all of this to impress heads of state; the population couldn’t have cared less.”

This conversation is one of the first major lessons teaching Marji to look beyond what everyone tells her and to know what’s really going on. Given that Marji’s family is very educated and politically aware, it makes sense that they would help teach her to view history through a wider lense. Marji’s confusion over what the ‘real’ history of her country is intensifies and takes a new direction under the Islamic regime, starting with the ‘editing’ of schoolbooks on first two panels of page 48: “After all this joy, a major misfortune took place: the schools closed during this period, reopened, and… ‘Children, tear out all the photos of the shah from your books.’ ‘But she was the one who told us that the shah was chosen by god!’”

The search by many government for various countries “true” history continues, and I appreciated this look into how someone living there actually feels about it. Often one wonders how people of a country simply “accept” things their government tells them, and Persepolis shows us how the confusion affects everyone -- and how sometimes other things and life just get in the way. For the adults of the society, the government story isn’t accepted or believed so much as ignored, among everything else that needs to be worried about it.

The Old Man

One 'episode' that really stuck out to me from Persepolis was the story of the old man's funeral at the protest. It started with a funeral for a younger man who was actually killed in the violence – and then the crowd begins parading another old man from the hospital, who turns out to just be a cancer victim. The man’s widow first protests, then joins the demonstration.

Everyone hearing the story laughs, except for Marjane. We’ve discussed in class how she tends to see things in black and white, and is still working to learn the nuances of situations. The old man’s funeral celebration is a key example of this. All Marjane seems to see is that someone has died, and she doesn’t understand why people are laughing about it. The real irony here is that the old man didn't die fighting the shah like the young man, but they are both praised equally. The old man’s inclusion shows how adults too can put on ‘black and white lenses’ when they’re wound up enough, binding everything that happens in life as somehow related to the revolution.

Marjane’s family laughs because of the contrast here between the reactions of people under pressure and reactions of normal people. Perhaps also because it shows how strong the revolutionary will is. But Marjane is still left missing all the nuances. She’s too young to understand what’s going on, and so far her personality searches for clear cut, easy to understand distinctions. I really noticed another parallel here with Marjane and the demonstrators (besides, you know, dressing up like Fidel Castro and marching around her yard). In her search for easy, clear answers, I could potentially see Marjane in the mob, celebrating the old man as well. She and the revolutionaries both have a simple view of the world, and the more symbols for the revolution, the better. 

Grant: Should I Stay or Should I Go? (*guitar riff*)

From the beginning we’ve known that Grant dislikes the town he lives in, and is torn by wanting to leave. He even had the chance, when he visited his parents in California, but then he came back. I never really understood why he still felt so strongly about his town until the Christmas show.

Throughout A Lesson Before Dying, Grant has been cynical, feeling trapped and powerless, and for good reason. Many times he’s alluded to the cycle, or really cycles, that the community and its people are stuck in, that keep them trapped in a hard life. I could understand how and why Grant became so cynical, but I didn’t understand why he came home, if it depressed him and made him feel that he could not make a change. Speaking of feelings, I was pretty indifferent to Grant at first, because he seemed so apathetic or angry at everything (except for Vivian). I was almost as frustrated as Grant because I couldn’t understand why he was here if he had a chance to leave and hated it. He never really showed any affection for his hometown in the present.

But during the Christmas show, despite his best efforts to stay detached through anger, there were a few moments that still touched Grant (and through him, me). I had to reread the passages a few times to be sure, since Gaines (as any writer should be) is a master of ‘show don’t tell.’ All that signaled to me that these moments meant anything to Grant were the extra details he gave us while describing them. He described in detail the recitation of “‘Twas the Night Before Christmas,” the children’s efforts to buy Jefferson a present, and the food one of Grant’s student brought to him.

I think these moments affected Grant so much because they represent a surprise, something new in the routine. He can see in a way, however small, that there are people in his community who are talented. And this renewed sensitivity to people carried over in Grant’s interactions with Jefferson. He seems to really start caring about what happens to Jefferson, and not feel put up to this crazy task by Miss Emma and his aunt. Later when Grant goes to see Vivian after talking to Jefferson, he doesn't just complain about having no idea of what to do. He acknowledges that success and change are also up to Jefferson, and opens up more to about his own feelings. By Grant realizing and taking for himself a manning in working to help Jefferson, he seems so far to be doing the same with helping his community. Maybe through the effort to “make Jefferson a man,” Grant will realize that staying in his hometown doesn't make him any less of a man.

Addie’s Death is More of a Reward than a Tragedy?

I for one started out this novel with a general view of “oh no their mom is dying, that’s so sad!” And Addie’s death definitely causes an emotional crisis within some of the Bundrens; Darl and Vardaman are the most visibly disturbed. But as I looked back on Addie’s actual death seen (as narrated chapter), she seemed to view it as finally getting a chance to rest. “...[Addie] pulled the covers up and shut her eyes. ‘You all will have to look out for pa the best you can,’ she said. ‘I'm tired.’” It sounds here like Addie is going to bed, not laying down to die. I also found it odd that all she said was that she was tired, and nothing about being sick. In fact, when Anse asks her, she outright denies it. "’Are you sick, Addie?’ I said. ‘I am not sick,’ she said. ‘You lay you down and rest you,’ I said. ‘I knowed you are not sick. You're just tired.’”  This is why the rest of the Bundren’s are so confused about the seriousness of Addie condition, and why Anse put off calling Peabody for so long (besides being a cheapskate).

I noticed that in As I Lay Dying, people tried hard to fulfill various ‘social contracts,’ imagined or not, in an attempt to look strong and respectable to others. Addie’s refusal to acknowledge her illness seems to be part of this, and on par with Anse’s “I don’t want to be beholden” philosophy. Perhaps she doesn’t want anyone to call her weak, and perhaps she doesn’t want Anse to blame her for calling the doctor. But looking at Addie’s death as a reward shows this behavior in a more understandable light (especially because we know Addie doesn’t care about Anse). Possibly Addie doesn’t want the doctor to come -- at least not too soon -- because she wants to die, and is afraid he could actually make her better. Peabody thinks along the same lines when Anse finally calls him: “...and at first I would not go because there might be something I could do and I would have to haul her back, by God.” Peabody understands what a hard life Addie’s had, and sympathizes for her in some odd way. When Peabody actually gets to Addie’s room, she even directly communicates that she wants to die. “She watches me: I can feel her eyes. It's like she was shoving at me with them. I have seen it before… [they] drive from the room them coming with sympathy and... actual help.”

When Cora and Vernon learn about Addie’s death, their immediate thoughts barely center around Addie. In fact, all Cora expresses about Addie directly is: “‘It's Addie Bundren. She's gone at last.’” Afterwards Vernon starts thinking about Vardaman, and how weird Darl is, and how sad that this tragedy would strike the Bundren family and leave them without a mother. There’s an unspoken kind of agreement that Addie’s death is for the best, and a kind of release for her -- largely from the hardship of being married to Anse.

And finally, Addie herself more or less views death as a way out. In her only narrative chapter, she mentioned what her father told her about death: “the reason for living was to get ready to stay dead a long time. And when I would have to look at [the children] day after day, each with his and her secret and selfish thought... that this seemed to be the only way I could get ready to stay dead, I would hate my father for having ever planted me.” In this passage it sounds like Addie views her responsibilities as a wife and mother simply as a duty expected of her, what one has to do and work hard at the be meritorious of the rest of death, eventually. She hates that she has to go through this, but it’s part of the required, unspoken social contract. Women who did not get married were likely considered outcasts, and had a hard time socially. Addie wants to avoid disgrace, which is why I think she married Anse -- in the end she’ll need a husband, why not marry this man? After we hear about the soul-killing monotony of her marriage with Anse (and subsequent affair with the preacher), we get additional confirmation that Addie’s life has largely been continual, grinding unhappiness. When she gets sick, she ‘decides’ not to fight it and to finally accept her ‘reward;’ both the rest of death, and the final separation from Anse by being buried in Jefferson. Addie will get to return to her (hopefully, possibly happier) original family, and leave behind the Bundren family she hardly cares for.

Unpopular Opinion: Old Yeller had a Better Life than Argos

So after finishing the entire Odyssey, the character I felt for the most was surprisingly not the title character, but his dog. The main characters waiting at home for Odysseus are all exceedingly loyal (see Penelope, Telemachus) but Argos’s loyalty matters no less just because he’s an animal. Odysseus and Argos reunion was one of the most emotional for me, unspoiled by any kind of scheme. Penelope and Odysseus’s reunion was certainly dramatic, but there was too much scheming and distrust and need for proof that when it actually happened my thoughts were just “FINALLY….. Could have been more emotional.”

Speaking of emotion, meeting Argos is the first time Odysseus really shows emotion in Ithaca without being prompted by someone (Athena) that it’s ok to do so. When Odysseus sees Argos, weakly wagging his tail and on the verge of death, he literally sheds a few tears and has to try and straight face it to Eumaeus. During most of Odysseus’s time in Ithaca so far he’s been super stoic, sticking to the deceit, enduring the abuse, and honestly not showing as much emotion as I thought he would/should. The most charged moment it seems is his reunion with Telemachus. But even that is kinda spoiled, because Odysseus is in disguise, Telemachus doesn’t know who he his, and Odysseus has to make small talk until Athena allows him to reveal himself. Then they have a nice tearful father-son reunion for a while, but this too is marred by a quick switch to planning the death of 99 men. The transition is just too grizzly, and there was too much emotional holdback.

Odysseus also had to suppress his emotions when he sees Argos, but it was forced by the situation. Also, both parties reacted immediately in some manner, if not the one they wanted. Odysseus literally sheds a few involuntary tears when he sees his dog; when he sees his son, he just kinda stares at him. Holding back from Argos was the biggest tragedy for me because with humans there will be always be qualms in this situation (i.e. do I know you anymore) but there’s none of that with Argos. Here is the dog that Odysseus raised and trained since he was a puppy, lying neglected and nearly dead on the dung heap by his master’s palace. Odysseus can’t comfort his dog at all by scratching him on the ears or letting Argos lick his hand, etc. He just has to keep walking into the palace. At least with Telemachus Odysseus got to hug im and cry before they fought the suitors, and Odysseus got to talk with Penelope (in disguise) and encourage her that he was coming back.

The most frustratingly heart rending part of Argos’s situation for me was that after Odysseus has taken back his palace and “restored justice,” Argos gets none of the rewards. Fagles translation makes it sound as though Argos died basically immediately after he saw Odysseus had returned. So his only reward, after 20 years of waiting, is to see his master cry a little bit and walk on by. Fagle also doesn’t make clear if Odysseus saw Argos die or not….. So there’s this gaping hole if Argos died after Odysseus walked on, or if Odysseus watched him collapse and couldn’t do anything. Ultimate angst (no I’m not crying).

So I’ll finish rambling explication with my final inflammatory claim, is that Argos’s story is sadder than Old Yeller’s, our friend from the title. Old Yeller was happy for most of the story before he got shot, but Argos spent his life on that dung heap, waiting for Odysseus, and suffering.  

Your fave is problematic: Odysseus

• Cheats repeatedly
• Excessively proud
• Overly reckless

So for years I’ve been hearing about how great The Odyssey is, and what a Cool Guy™ Odysseus is -- and now that I’ve read (half) of the epic, and I can mostly agree. But as I was reading Odysseus’s exploits I was growing more and more uncomfortable with “the man of twists and turns.” I understand that heroes often have a fatal flaw (or two or three), but usually someone points them out along the course of the story, and helps to outline/bring attention to what they are. That doesn’t happen to any great extent in the Odyssey, except for Poseidon being angered by Odysseus’s pride, demonstrated in blinding and then taunting Polyphemus.

Heroes in general tend to be reckless, that’s what gives them some of the courage to take their risks. But Odysseus crosses the line between bravery and stupidity way to often, and it takes the lives of his (now non-existent) crew. He invited himself into Polyphemus’s cave to steal cool guest gifts, and only gets out after several of his men are eaten (although Odysseus is the one to get them out). Although I understand he was stuck between a cliff and a hard place, he goes by Scylla’s cave without letting his men know what’s going to happen. And when he reaches Circe’s island, he sends his men ahead to go party without asking them to scout first, to report if the owners are friendly or hostile. After his experience with Polyphemus, I feel that he should have known better.

But then again, if Odysseus wasn’t such a wild guy, we’d have no story. The qualities that lead to these blunders, the pride and the recklessness, can in different circumstances be courage and a self-confidence which inspires obedience/help from others. But no matter what I think of Odysseus’s flaws, it seems that the gods -- or at least Athena -- like them. As mentioned in class, their interaction seemed to be that of equals conspiring. So Odysseus, flaws included, is almost like a god.

Which brings me to the actual gods…. I could do a whole other “callout post” for them. The flaws that in Odysseus that irked me and contributed to his crew members’ deaths, actually bring him *closer* to the gods. Yet by now we know the gos are not necessarily (not even usually) benevolent -- they like to interact with the mortals for their entertainment. The lives of regular people are like a reality show to the gods, and they love stirring up trouble -- as well as defending the power of their name. Sure Odysseus was “overly proud” when he gave Polyphemus his home address after blinding him, but it really doesn’t compare to Poseidon, who gets so (pardon my French) butthurt after the Phaeacians “disrespect” him that he destroys their harbor……. Their entire livelihood.

So I’ll end with a kind of “out there” theory. Clearly the Greeks are not a fan of the gods’ attributes that lead to “mountains around your harbor” and eternal psychological abuse, but they never really criticize the gods outright. There’s always a search for a reason why Zeus or Poseidon or Hades is mad, and never just anger at the gods or “the system” for kinda being generally “rigged” and cruel. But there is definitely criticism of Odysseus, even at that time -- the way Homer seems to shore the character up, and spend effort justifying some of Odysseus’s mistakes, seems to be evidence. Maybe Odysseus, with his god-like qualities but problematic episodes, acts as a stand-in for the actual gods, but one within criticism.

When a 2,000+ Year Old Greek Legend has Better Representation of Women than a Modern Novel

So completely the opposite of what I expected, I found myself relating more with the female characters in the Odyssey than with those in Memory of Running. Which seems odd, because the main women in the Odyssey are either gods or queens, while the women in McLarty’s novel are “just regular people.” But I found that Chris, Norma, and especially Bethany all fell flat as characters. Their actions and emotions weren’t very believable, and I didn’t get the sense that they were full people in their own right, that they could be a protagonist in their own story. It seemed that their actions and lives were all in relation to Smithy, and not just because he is telling the story. Not to mention the annoying fact that ¼ of what we learn from Smithy about any given female is detailed commentary on their breasts.

Like Lauren mentioned, Norma’s continuous obsession with Smithy struck me as irritating and unrealistic. Why does she still love a man who ignored her existence for 20+ years, and takes months to respond in any way when she says she loves him? And why is Chris so interested in this random guy she meets on the road who is 20+ years older than her, and go so far out of her way for him? Unrealistic. Bethany was a tougher case because I don’t know the particular nature of her mental illness, but it didn’t seem realistic. Her episodes seemed forced, and mostly there as a way to mark Smithy’s life and spark his development. Bethany’s illness felt like a different version of the movie trope where a man’s wife dies, mostly to further his pain and give him a motive for revenge or a journey.

Women of the Odyssey have their own annoying idiosyncrasies, but in general the poem does a much better job fleshing them out and exploring their motives. Penelope is a great example in this respect. She’s in a very difficult position, being plagued with suitors while Odysseus is gone, and at first glance it looks like all she does is stay in her room and hide. But she has a strategy. I interpreted Alcinous’s complaint of Penelope “leading them on” as her method of holding the suitors at bay. If she says no outright, they will demand to know why and escalate the situation. But this way, it looks like Penelope is weighing her decision carefully. And then there’s the sly funeral shroud trick -- which Penelope keeps going for three years!! It really takes skill to keep people from being too impatient for that long. And although her goals center around her long lost husband and son, Penelope reads as a character with her own personality and her own goals.

And then of course there is Athena. She’s a pretty special case, given that she’s a goddess and no regular woman. But she is clearly a being with her own agenda, and someone to be respected or feared. We don’t yet know why Athena takes such an interest in Odysseus or Telemachus, but we trust that she has a reason. Essentially, the women in the Odyssey, while not numerous, come across far more realistically than those in The Memory of Running.

Hero's Journey

Hello, I'm just letting you all know that this blog is no longer for Non Fiction Writing but for The Hero's Journey.

Project Overview: Goals and Desired Outcome

CUTY intends to use this grant to provide need-based scholarships for the congregants of Sinai Temple that contribute substantial help. The scholarships will be provided to returning campers who are Bnei Mitzvah or older. After Bnei Mitzvah age, many summer camps approach the age bracket where children can no longer be campers. However, URJ camps offer a special counselor-in-training and leadership program which is just as much of the experience, and would also be covered. The CUTY scholarship would allow for continuous camp attendance by the younger members of the congregation, and could help alleviate overall declining attendance at synagogue events.

CUTY plans to provide scholarships with this grant for four years, and observe the impact on their congregants over time. A $1000 scholarship would be provided annually for a post-Bnei Mitzvah campers returning to their regular URJ program. A $2750 scholarship will also be provided annually for congregants who wish to attend their camps leadership program. This scholarship is significantly larger because the leadership programs usually last two months, and are therefore more expensive.

CUTY believes that these scholarships can contribute to keeping the Sinai Temple youth involved beyond their Bnei Mitzvah. Every single member of the current CUTY youth leadership board has been to Jewish summer camp, and many have stated that it is what prompted them to stay involved and want to learn more about Judaism. CUTY hopes this grant can extend this conviction and excitement to the younger students of the synagogue, keep them involved when the current board graduates, and teach these new students how to expand the youth group themselves.

Needs Assessment

Since URJ summer camps have long sessions and function as sleepaway, the fees are high. Some parents cannot safely spare the money to pay for the entire session. In addition to the cost of the camp itself, parents often need to purchase new clothes or items for their children before they go to camp, such as sunscreen, bug spray, toiletries etc. The camp shopping costs are especially high on the parents of first-time campers, who must buy reusable items such as sleeping bags and fans.

Scholarships are available for URJ camps, but Sinai Temple is located far enough away from all of them that area scholarships do not apply. Sinai Temple does have scholarships for summer camp, but they only cover a fraction of the cost. Grants through the Foundation for Jewish Camp are available, but they are usually for first or second year campers, while grants for returning children give minimal help.

In order for URJ summer camps to have the maximum effect, it is important for children to return multiple times -- especially after their Bar/Bat Mitzvahs. There is currently a huge problem in Jewish communities all over the country, where children stop attending synagogue services or event after their bar/bat mitzvahs. Sinai Temple suffers from this phenomenon as well; the Bnei Mitzavah class of 2012 numbered thirteen students, while the Confirmation class of that same grade numbered three students. Studies by the Pew Research Center show that children who went to Jewish summer camp are far more likely to remain active in the community as they grow up. Former campers get involved with and lead their youth groups, become assistant teachers in their Hebrew schools, and are active in the Jewish community when they go to college

Executive Summary

Champaign Urbana Temple Youth (CUTY) works to connect Jewish teenagers from the East Central Illinois area, and is part of Sinai Temple. CUTY works to create educational, religious, community, and social programs. CUTY also provides opportunities to learn leadership skills, as it is led by a youth board which holds yearly elections. CUTY also travels to regional North American Federation of Temple Youth (NFTY) events. Teenagers involved in a Jewish youth group often develop a strong sense of Jewish identity and a connection with their community.  

But only so many CUTY events can take place during the busy school year, and in the summer the kids and staff travel. Studies from the Pew Research Center in DC show that the strongest contributor to a sense of Jewish identity and connection is Jewish summer camp, which perfectly fills the time between school years.

Union for Reform Judaism summer camps aim to:

• Enrich the lives of Jewish youth lives by strengthening their sense of identity
• Give a broad Jewish education and illustrate Reform values
• Cultivate lifelong friendships and teach leaderships skills

The goals of URJ summer camps are essentially the same as those of CUTY. Most URJ summer camps are sleepaway, and can last between two weeks to two months. Thus they are expensive, on average $3,000 for a one month session.

In light of these costs, Champaign Urbana Temple Youth requests the Robert & Toni Bader Charitable Foundation to consider a grant of $15,000 to fund scholarships for the youth of Sinai Temple that will enrich their lives and strengthen their Jewish identity.

Editorial: Give Dandelions A Chance

Hundreds of potential salads are waiting for us. In our public parks, in our backyards, and probably right beneath the windows of this classroom. You all know the flower: Taraxacum officinale, or the common dandelion. Yet familiar as they are, I know many people who strongly dislike dandelions. They classify the flower as a weed. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a ‘weed’ is:” A[n] herbaceous plant not valued for use or beauty, growing wild and rank, and regarded as cumbering the ground or hindering the growth of superior vegetation.”

While it’s definitely true that dandelions are widespread and grow wildly, I would like to remind everyone that they are strikingly beautiful, fragrant, and soft. Dandelions’ classification as a weed rests mainly on the biology of their growth pattern, which leads them to open/disturbed soil, which is usually found in areas inhabited by people.

The negative attitude towards dandelions is actually very recent, arising in the 20th century. The ancient Greeks ate dandelions, and the flower was used in traditional Chinese medicine. In Medieval Europe, people loved dandelions and removed grass from their lawns to give the room to grow. The pilgrims brought dandelions to America on the Mayflower; likely as a foodstuff and medicine.

The dandelion’s rumored medicinal benefits have recently been proven by numerous modern scientific studies. The plant has many nutrients, and the leaves are full of antioxidants which help protect the cardiovascular system. Most notably, dandelions helped the liver function, reduced insulin levels, and stimulated fat metabolization in mice.

In Europe, dandelions were prescribed for almost all ailments as a kind of catch-all. The plant was so popular because of its commonality, and gentle chemical nature. In short, it acts as a diuretic to clear the body of toxins, provides nourishment, and helps the digestive system function efficiently. In fact, dandelions have more nutrition than many common garden vegetables; more vitamin A than spinach, more vitamin C than tomatoes. The range of ailments they are reported to have cured is astonishing; dandruff, baldness, sores, toothache, fevers, rotting gums, lethargy, weakness, and depression. It was only in the 20th century that people discovered the underlying cause of much of these problems: vitamin deficiencies.

Now that we know the dandelion has practical benefits, why did attitudes about their character change so suddenly? Originally, dandelions were praised for their beauty, and there are hundreds of folk traditions and myths involving the puffy seeds. In Europe people used to write poems for the flower. The “war on dandelions” came with the rise in popularity of a closely cropped, uniformly green front lawn, often used as a status symbol. The practice of lawn maintenance has its roots with the aristocracy, who used to be the only people rich enough to pay someone else to clear their yard with a scythe. After World War II and with the rise of the suburbs, many Americans were moving into their own homes, with their own yards. Naturally they wanted to impress their neighbors, and lawns seemed to be the way to go.

Unfortunately, dandelions are attracted to areas with open or recently disturbed soil – almost the definition of a lawn. They are tough plants which grow quickly, produce a lot of seeds, are impossible to get rid of, and largely got in the way of the perfect lawn or flowerscape. I think the dandelion’s interference with lawns and landscaping in general is largely what got them such a negative reputation.
Nevertheless, I really appreciate dandelions and think we should re-evaluate our stance on them. Just because they are common doesn't make them any less wonderful -- take the sun, for example. Dandelions are gorgeous flowers just as much as the rose, and they don't even have thorns. Besides their beauty, dandelions can have medicinal benefits, and who isn't up for free salad? Think it over.

It's Almost June And I Haven't Exploded Yet

As long as I can remember and ever since I started going, waiting for my summer camp, Goldman Union Camp Institute (a.k.a GUCI, although I’ve learned to give this acronym LAST), to start was and is the hardest thing I’ve ever done. I guess you could say I’m really good at it, since I have no choice in the waiting.  “Live eleven months for one,” as we say. Nowadays it’s a lot easier to make it to camp and still be in touch with everyone because of technology (no more frantic catching up on an entire year of someone’s life). I can finally talk with my cabinmates -- we have a group chat and talk every day, it’s like family dinner. We cover everything; what’s happening in their lives, what’s happening in mine, ideas for camp next year (we’re bringing a mini cactus as our mascot and my friend’s bringing her matching cactus onesie), and the obligatory “songleader so and so from GUCI came to my synagogue today!” whereupon I get lowkey jealous.

There’s also plenty of videos GUCI online (including that hour long video of Shabbat song session that I watch way too much), and I have memory boxes full of letters from my parents and my cabinmates’ parents (yes that’s a thing occasionally), our cabin essays from when we led prayer services, those cheesy mystic ballroom dance face masks, toothbrush bracelets, etc. Basically as time went on there’s a lot more to remember to camp by and it’s gotten exponentially easier to exist until June 14.

But I almost feel like I’m cheating at the waiting game since I have so much memorabilia. I can talk with my friends anytime, and I honestly don’t have a choice in the waiting. That said, it’s not like a skill isn’t proved unless it can be done blindfolded after being in solitary confinement for 3 days (In 1st grade someone told me that’s what I had to do to become a piano master). There’s also many things from GUCI that I can’t recreate, like the lifestyle and the entire community and the constant guitar music.

I also remember how waiting wasn’t always so easy. When I was younger, I couldn’t keep in touch with people as well since I didn’t have a cell phone or Facebook (and the first year I got my phone, I couldn’t remember my number to give to anyone…...classic). I remember crying in the middle of December because it had been so UNBELIEVABLY LONG already and there were so many months between myself and June.

Yet no matter how badly I wanted GUCI to  start, I couldn’t speed up time right? Wrong. As i’ve gotten older time has seemed to speed up a LOT, to the point where junior year was a blur and I can’t believe it’s spring already. I was shocked when it became September.  I don’t know why this perspective shift is happening to me so suddenly but it’s really freaking me out. Especially because I’m finally starting to understand that super depressing song (Which we also sing at camp) which I hate and love, The Circle Game.

Overall, I believe I’m great at waiting for things I have no choice about -- a wonderful skill right?! Funny how many other people seem to have this skill too! Either way, I’m pretty proud that I didn’t spontaneously combust one of those winters while looking through our cabin photos, and this year there’s only three months left.

The Telltale Pocket

We were walking out of Borders after window shopping when I saw it -- the most beautiful bookmark in the world. It was shiny and in 3 dimensions. When I moved my head, the shiny fish swam with and at me. My six year old self was filled with awe, and a need to show this bookmark to everyone I knew. I turned around. “Mom, can we get that bookmark? The fish one? It’s only $2.50.” “No, we don’t need it and we’ll be late to the movie.”

I was torn. I wanted that bookmark so badly, no, I convinced myself I needed it. At that moment it was (next to The Lion King) the most fascinating thing I’d ever seen. Without thinking things through at all I made my decision. I darted towards the circular shelf with the bookmarks and pulled the fish one into my pocket. For a moment I felt triumph; no one had noticed. But then, immediately, I was crushed with guilt. To this day I don’t think I’ve ever felt so guilty as I did then. It was like I had betrayed everyone I ever knew. Even people I didn’t know, like Moses, who was crying and holding out the Ten Commandments we learned about in Hebrew School last week. But in my mind it was too late; I had committed a crime, and wretched criminal that I was, I had to stick with my decision and save what remained of my honor.

I somehow left the store without any alarms going off, and we went to the movie and no one was the wiser. Or so I thought. Apparently I was clutching the fish bookmark in my pocket with all my strength and as conspicuously as possible. My mother asked me several times what I was holding, but I just said “Nothing” or “I just like my hands in my pockets” (even though the other one was swinging by my side). I honestly don’t remember the movie at all; I was sweating, waiting for a lightning bolt from somewhere, and clutching the bookmark as though my life depended on it. “Thou shalt not steal” kept running through my mind, and I wanted to fix it and pretend this never happened, but how could I get back to Borders? Apparently I was acting weird throughout the movie, and mom noticed. When we left she demanded to see what was in my pocket. I literally thought I was going to die right then and there.

Instead she saw the fish bookmark, realized what I had done, and talked with me seriously about how stealing was wrong and I should never do it again. I found this far worse than yelling and a punishment, because I felt like I had let down my mom and our entire family honor and reputation (I had a tendency to blow things way out of proportion when I was younger). My punishment was to walk back into Borders and return the bookmark to the store and apologize to the clerk. I remember nothing of the return because I think I literally repressed the memory. It was only later that my mom told me she and my dad laughed about this event for hours. My mom was a prosecutor for ten years, and she said I looked guiltier than any of the murderers she’d convicted.

While my career as a professional thief was over, I had learned valuable lessons beyond the fact that I should never go into the intelligence services. The experience gave me something concrete to base my moral compass on, and really hammered home how stealing was wrong, even when “It’s only $2.50” and no one notices.  All in all, it was just really embarrassing and I’m glad it’s over.

Would You Mind If Your Family Blogged About You?

Largely it depends what they blog about. Are they discussing my present self, or me when I was a child? As it happens, my parents are professors and occasionally mention me in their classes, so I’ve grappled with this question before. They usually tell tales of the stunts my brother and I pulled when we were younger. Sometimes these stories even pertain to the class material. For example, when I was eight and my brother Benjamin was eleven, my parents got a miniature “safe” to guard the Halloween candy. The small box was complete with a set of buttons to open the door. Ben and I tried various methods to crack the code. He hid a camera in the room to try and capture the code, but it was blocked by angles every time. Eventually I realized that each button had its own tone, and I listened to the code input until I figured out what it was. It turns out there is an actual criminal who used the same method, which now causes all buttons to have the same tone when pressed.

Those stories don’t bother me; they happened a long time ago, and I (mostly) trust my parents not to say anything embarrassing about me. When something new happens that my parents want to share with their class -- perhaps Ben or I made a noteworthy snarky comment -- they check with us to make sure that we’re ok with it, which I appreciate. A system of checks and balances, no?

Nonetheless, blogging is something different. A class of students may soon forget the tale they heard, but a blog is far more permanent. Even if my parents took down a post or edited it, someone could already have read it and screen-shotted it. To be fair, what my parents would post on that blog would probably be innocuous, but I’d still rather not have my baby photos posted on the internet -- those would be among the first things, I’m sure. “It’s only our profile picture, Miriam! I didn’t post any other pictures. Please, this is such a great photo of you!!” “This was taken right after I was born it is not a good photo!” …..Maybe I’m exaggerating a little, but similar things have happened.

It also bugs me a little that my mom would probably still write about me as though I were a little kid. The other day she was talking to a stranger and referred to me as “her little girl” – read 5 years old – and my brother had to mention I was sixteen. I understand that she’s just being sentimental, but people have mistaken me for younger then I am for a long time. It wasn’t until this year really that I looked my age. For example, when I was twelve people thought I was eight. It put everyone off a little bit to see someone who looks eight use “parsimonious” as an adjective, I am told. It hurt when everywhere I went people asked me if I was old enough to do this or that, or if I really belonged in this class, and wouldn’t I like to check out a children’s book instead of Pancho Villa: A Biography. Thus it especially annoys me to still be referred to as a young child. But overall, as long as I could edit what my parents posted beforehand, I’d be all right with a blog.

My Grandfather the Atheist and his beloved Holy Book: How do I make Sense of this?

What possessions does my family treasure? Treasure is a strong word, with powerful emotional connotations. For me, treasure is not only something cherished, it is an object that has some quality that makes it rare and irreplaceable. As I think is the case with most people, my family treasures objects from our past, objects that are seen as their heritage. The item that instantly came to my mind was my great-grandfather Leo’s tanakh.

“Tanakh” is an acronym composed of the first letter of Judaism’s divisions of the Old Testament. It comes from “Teaching” (Torah), “Prophets” (Nevi’im), and “Writings” (Ketuvim). A tanakh is an extremely common book, just like the Bible; they’re everywhere. So what makes ours special? To begin with, Leo’s tanakh is incredibly old -- well over 100 years. It’s very small -- about 5” by 7” -- but very thick; I can hardly hold it in one hand. Leo’s tanakh also has that Vogue mystical book look: dark yellowing pages, that beloved musty smell, warped pages from water exposure, peeling brown covers missing small chunks around the edges. And of course the biggest appeal of them all: it’s written in a language I can’t read and don’t (yet) understand. This is Indiana Jones level for a six year old, and I still have a reverence for the tanakh today.

Yet when my family discovered the book, our first emotion was surprise that Leo had a tanakh in the first place -- nevermind one that he brought with him everywhere. As a committed atheist and Communist, we would never have expected him to carry a religious book. Why did Leo keep the book with him? It’s a question I pondered a lot out of simple curiosity when I was younger. Now the question resonates more as I’m making important life decisions, such as what colleges I want to go to, and what I’m looking for there. These concerns are quite ordinary and far removed from ancient Jewish texts of the Old World. But in making these decisions I’ve been thinking a lot about how Judaism fits into my life right now, how I want it to work in the future, and how important a factor it is to me in the college search. For example, Notre Dame is a great school, 18 on the national list. On the other hand, 89% of the students are Christian. I need to decide how much statistics like these mean to me, and how much they will influence my decisions.

For both Leo and I, our schools and our Jewish identity were linked. It turns out that Leo got his tanakh when he was three years old (around 1898) on his first day of cheyder, a religious school that all Jewish boys went to. When Leo was fifteen -- younger than we are currently -- he saw the Romanian peasant uprising brutally beaten down by the monarchy, a sight that turned him into a revolutionary and an atheist. He then left the religious school to work in his father’s woodshop, a choice that hurt his father, who was a learned man and bible scholar, and wanted Leo to become a rabbi. Instead, Leo became a historian. Although he wasn’t religious, he still loved the tanakh, and occasionally read the Prophets. This book stayed with him his entire life, from his journey to Austria as a young man, his midnight flight from Berlin to Prague after Hitler took power, his years in the US, then Mexico, then Israel, and then his return to Austria after World War II -- another decision I have spent a long time trying to understand.

Leo traveled the entire world, and during all this time kept with him the tanakh he received when he was three, and didn’t believe in. His son, Friedrich, also carried the tanakh when he grew up, despite being an atheist. For a long time I wondered about Leo’s attachment to the tanakh. How could he treasure something so much that he did not believe in? And then I started asking myself questions. Why is reading from the Torah important to me, and why do I love Shabbat services, even though I don’t believe everything they say? I think that for both Leo and I, these practices formed a link to the past (albeit a rather imagined/recreated “past” for me), and were our way of staying connected with the Jewish tradition. The sense of community and history we revisit through these practices outweighs the practical teachings themselves. We may neither of us believe in God, but as the saying goes, we believe in the Jewish people.

PS: Here are some photos: