« Octubre 2005 | Main | Noviembre 2006 »
Noviembre 17, 2005
Information Overload = Attention Defecit
I have long been interested in the cognitive impact of new media. It started when I read Orality and Literacy by Walter Ong. The changes in the mind as men moved into the written world, and then as men moved into the printed world have been well explored by the specialist- but I think little understood in common culture.
Of course it is far too early to understand the full impact of recent media. But surely - just as so much of the common practice of our lives is dictated (or a product) of print technology - so our lives will change as the full impact of the new media is felt.
I have been reflecting on my own mind in light of this post read last week. The VC posting decries the loss of attention caused by an overwhelming amount of information.
What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention
I agree with the idea that the wealth of information I consume on a day to day basis affects my attention span. As a generalist, I love the new media. I can spend all day learning and discovering and generalizing. But as the opportunities have grown wider, my ability to focus has grown slimmer. I find myself more impatient with long reading, less able to digest and recover argument and content. And I find myself less able to write forcefully.
In the words of the great boss.
57 channels and nothing’s on.
Posted by rob at 10:14 PM | TrackBack
Noviembre 14, 2005
For Sale - Urban Hipster Family Scooter
For all those image conscious urban hipster families that need to cart around the burgeoning family in scooter style - we have the perfect answer! And its for sale cheap.
Continue reading "For Sale - Urban Hipster Family Scooter"
Posted by rob at 06:40 PM | TrackBack
Noviembre 10, 2005
Thoughts on Rudy
Marialice asked me over the weekend how I was feeling about Rudy's impending death (now realized). I had a few very specific memories at that point that I thought would be worth sharing.
1. I first moved to Chattanooga in 1991 just after graduating from Wheaton. As I got involved at New City I started interacting with this man of inordinate dignity and Godly seriousness. However the first time I addressed him as Mr. Schmidt he called me right out - "Please call me Rudy." To a 22 year old punk freshly minted college graduate this was a shock! To feel myself respected as an equal by this elder was so revolutionary. I felt the generations were collapsing around me to a generous equality. It was the most explicit confirmation that I belonged at New City in that year of transition and movement. (Marialice responded to that memory with a reflection on Rudy's genius and humility in respecting, trusting and learning from folks who were far his junior, both in age and maturity. This gift is one we should all learn!)
2. Recently I have been involved with Rudy reviewing administrative aspects of our church. I have been amazed at his willing service, behind the scenes and under the surface, never needing to be recognized, never considering a responsibility too minimal. That unspoken service is a terrific example to me of leadership by example rather than by position or prominence. I think it will take us years to recognize and restore all the functions that we never realized he took care of.
3. Rudy was an unabashed encourager. He regularly grabbed me by the elbow to express his appreciation for my family. (I'm sure I was not the only one who had this experience). Seeing his face light up talking about my wife and children always made my heart warm to them, caused me to express gratitude to the lord, moved me to love them better and more. I'm not sure that was his intention - but I appreciated it none-the-less.
This is just a small piece of my gratitude for Rudy's life and legacy.
Posted by rob at 08:41 AM | TrackBack
Noviembre 08, 2005
The Morality of Sprawl
Context:
This picture of San Ramon California is making its way round the net. I saw it first on Kottke , on Barlow and finally on Josiah
When several questioned the morality of such sprawl on Barlow's post, I quipped off as shown below
Several other moral issues.
1. Sprawl demands aggressive use of oil - consuming an increasingly precious resource.
2. Sprawl has always been predicated on isolation - separating us from them.
3. The aesthetics of contemporary housing is all about pretension. What does this teach us about identity and character?
4. Sprawl forces those who cannot drive into a completely subservient relationship. Our kids and our granparents can have NO life in the suburbs unless there is a willing and ever present soccer mom / taxi driver.Just a few thoughts. If you want to get angry - (either at him or with him) read J.H. Kuntzler...
Joseph responded:
Rob,
Let's go point by point:
1. I assume by "aggressive use" you mean "increased consumption" of oil. Either way, how is increased consumption a moral problem? Resource scarcity creates market situations that may be unfavorable to consumers in the short term, but eventually alternative resources will pop up and bring things back to the consumers' favor.
2. Is all sprawl predicated on isolation? Perhaps its predicated on economics. Perhaps the cost of housing diminishes with each mile away from the city. Or perhaps it's predicated on crime rate. Or, perhaps people want the benefits of being close to both the city and more rural areas. Again, not necessarily a moral issue.
3. Is "pretention" the only thing contemporary housing is designed around? Perhaps, it's built around affordability. Perhaps it's built around function. Would you tell someone who is buying a house in Murphreesboro, TN (south of Nashville) that they are doing so out of "pretention"?
4. Does sprawl create subservient relationships? I would venture that if anyone cannot drive, no matter where you live, (rural, urban, suburban, whatever,) you are dependent upon someone who can drive for your basic needs. Even if you live downtown of most cities, you still have to drive a ways to get to a decent Wal-Mart or building supply store. In fact, you are more likely to have a grocery store within walking distance in the suburbs than in most downtown areas.So, I fail to see how you have established any true moral problems with sprawl. Yes, it's big and ugly, but I remain unconvinced of its immorality.
I respond.
1. Depending on the promise of future alternatives that will enable us to continue our lifestyle of conspicuous consumption seems not only naive, but an attempt to excuse our current greed. This is a choice not to recognize available resources as limited because we HOPE we'll find the unlimited pool of resources sometime in the future. This is not stewardship. So, I reiterate - It is a morally problematic to build a lifestyle that implies the rapid depletion of limited resources.
2. Sprawl may not be exclusively predicated on isolation. I agree that most do not move to the suburbs just to be isolated. But unintended consequences are still moral consequences. A lifestyle that allows me to never see the needs of my brother because I'm in a sprawl allowed bubble is very problematic. I don't think Jesus would give the goats a pass because they had never seen need as they drove from garage to parking deck without ever facing an uncomfortable sight.
3. Pretension may not be the primary aim of contemporary sprawl, but it certainly is a reality of current development. Again, it might not be intended, but the moral aspects of its aesthetic must be considered. Those houses in San Ramon are not built to last more than 30 years. The aesthetic of "faux" permeates this development entirely. I believe we are teaching our culture to pretend to be, rather than cultivating genuine character. Whether architecture is a driver or manifestation of this broader cultural issue is open to debate. But the implications are certainly morally problematic.
4. The fact that subservience of those unable to drive might be ubiquitous in our country (in cities and suburbs) does not make it a-moral. To refuse to consider the implications of our lifestyle on "the least of these" simply because there might not be an alternative in our country is not excusable. I believe this is a matter of justice, and therefore very much a moral issue. ASIDE: I've spent a good portion of my life in a non-auto dependent culture and I absolutely LOVED it. The ability to walk and use public transport to complete everything I needed made for a much healthier and comfortable pace of life. Of course those years were lived in foreign urban settings, but the model is certainly there, and I wish it occurred here!
So there is my response to Joseph's response. Sprawl a moral issue? I still think so.
Posted by rob at 03:34 PM | TrackBack
Mr Littlefield - can you make McCallie look this way?
We need a Bicycle Alliance guys
Posted by rob at 03:16 PM | TrackBack
Noviembre 05, 2005
Rudy Schmidt - an update
Laini allready posted an initial prayer request on Chattablogs, as well as an eloquent homage, so I won't repeat that news for the lurkers. But prayer for Rudy Schmidt is definitely the order of the day. Here is what I know.
He was indeed diagnosed with acute leukemia yesterday, and this was in addition to the pneumonia that he had been suffering with for several days. His condition in the afternoon was grave - he was having difficulty breathing and apparently was very ashen. The medical concern was that the infection was overwhelming his lungs and the he might not last the night. Polly Noonan barely recognized him.
The doctor suggested putting him on a breathing machine - but said he would probably not be able to get him back off. Michelle Pickett helped Collyn through the decisions she and Rudy had allready made and they decided not to pursue that radical intervention. Jim and Michelle, the Drexlers and several others prayed for Rudy in the afternoon not knowing how long he'd be with us. Michelle told us that she was banging down the gates of heaven asking for more time.
Yet when the doctors gave him a more aggressive antibiotic, and espcially put him on a better and more reliable oxygen source, Rudy's condition improved markedly. When the elders arrived to pray for Rudy at 7:00 last night he was sitting up in bed, his color returned, eyes bright and normal joviality. We rejoiced. We read Psalm 27 (I am still confident of this: I will see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.) sang Holy Holy Holy, and Jim annointed Rudy with oil. Rudy obviously rejoinced.
Yet he does have a very difficult road ahead. Before treating the Leukemia the phemonia must be attacked. And all that is conditional on his regaining some strength. So do continue to pray.
Thanks.
Posted by rob at 08:54 AM | TrackBack
Noviembre 02, 2005
The Motorcycle Diaries
If you want to see a beautiful picture of Andean South America, watch The Motorcycle Dairies. The story of two young men's trip through the length of the Andes mountain is beautiful not only for its scenery and cinematography - but for its picture of the people of those lands.
For sure, I am biased. I was born and grew up in Quito Ecuador, smack in the middle of the Andes and therefore the movie had the familiar attraction of a long lost home.
Throughout the epic trip there is a consistent vision of the poor - the indigenous - the popular. These images brought back to pain of poverty and injustice that was always around us in Ecuador. As Americans - we weren't necessarily facing that same injustice - but its presence was an inescapable. Walter Salles shoots some haunting black and white scenes of the characters throughout the film, normal, poor folk. These just left my heart welling up with emotion.
At one point, when the two adventurers are in Machu Pichu one asks "How can I feel so identified with people so unlike me?" This is a feeling I know well. I was not like those who were around me, but they impacted me. I am not in that same place now, but the movie was a great reminder of one of those places I love.
Wendell Berry writes in this months Sojourners magazine (go ahead sign up) about our image of the rural southerner. He says:
Reading some fiction, and this applies especially to some Southern fiction, one cannot avoid the impression that the writers don’t know any country people and are afraid of them. They fill the blank not with anybody they have imagined, but with the rhetorically conjured stereotype of the hick or hillbilly or redneck who is the utter opposite of the young woman with six arms in the picture by the late (“alas”) Emmeline Grangerford, and perhaps is her son. He comes slouching into the universe with his pistol in one hand, his prong in another, his Bible in another, his bottle in another, his grandpappy’s cavalry sword in another, his plug of chewing tobacco in another. This does harm. If you wish to steal farm products or coal or timber from a rural region, you will find it much less troubling to do so if you can believe that the people are too stupid and violent to deserve the things you wish to steal from them. And so purveyors of rural stereotypes have served a predatory economy.
In the motorcycle diaires I saw a man wake up from the predatory stereotypes about the poor in his world (a world I remember too well). It would do us good to take the same sort of trip through the underside of our world.
Posted by rob at 02:50 PM | TrackBack
A realistic view of poverty
Common Grounds Online published a three part
article by David Lumpkins on the church’s response to poverty. The usual evangelical responses to poverty are so minimal and simplistic. Lumpkins has spent years working in Houston, founding an inner city Christian private school and so speaks from good experience about the reality and challenges of facing that situation.
He says:
here are the facts: 1) There is deep pervasive generational poverty in the inner cities in every major city in America; 2) There are hungry children living just a few short miles from our affluent neighborhoods in the richest country the world has ever known; 3) There is a whole segment of our society that has no concept of what we know of as ‘the American way of life’; and 4) The Church in America gets an F in its response to this crisis both in terms of method and degree.
The sad irony is that the Church is uniquely capable of addressing the root causes of poverty in ways that can make a difference. That is because at its core, poverty in America is not due to a deficit of resources. Poverty in America stems from the moral, spiritual and behavioral deficits in the lives of those ensnared in it. And to the extent that the Gospel represents Truth - that is, the true reality; the way the world really works, and the way that individuals work in that world created by God – then the Church has the best answers for those for whom the world doesn’t work.
He goes on to say:
by its very nature, though, the Gospel is a radical message. And the goal for the Church, therefore, must be to deliver the Gospel to the poor in its full radical measure, addressing the spiritual, physical and practical needs of the poor.
To do that, the Church at large must become deeply and permanently invested in the inner city. Let me emphasize those two elements– Deeply and Permanently. We have got to have an active and substantive presence in the neighborhoods where the poor live. We have got to have consistent and intensive interaction with the poor from the platform of institutions that are accepted and highly regarded by the poor. And we have got to be there, in person, week in and week out and year in and year out, in relationships with the poor. And to really break the cycle we have got to start investing in the lives of the poor at an age before the habits become simply too hard to break.
To summarize, the elements of successful intervention in the lives of the poor in a manner that will effectively achieve the desired life change include:
1. intensive interaction
2. over a long period of time
3. starting at a very early age
Now, these things are done very well by Phil Edwards and Anna Smith at New City Fellowship (and I’d love to hear their reaction to what Lumpkins says) – but how well does our church as a whole participate in such a strategy? How much are we sitting on pews hearing good sermons, not active in the struggle to break poverties grasp – one child at a time.
Posted by rob at 09:53 AM | TrackBack