Sesame Street circa 1969

I was probably not quite 6 years old when Sesame Street first aired on PBS. It was created for a specific audience, the inner-city four year old and if you look at the episodes from those first seasons you will notice a decidedly inner city setting, but one that was undoubtedly cleaner and more hopeful than the reality it was pseudo-mimicking. All I remember about the show were muppets and singing and adults who were never too busy or spoke to roughly, so imagine my surprise when I ran across an article today about the recent DVD release of those first episodes and the fact that they carry a warning sticker. Yes, you heard correctly. There is a disclaimer on these Sesame Street DVD’s cautioning parents about allowing their preschoolers to watch it. Apparently the simpler times that so many people refer to lovingly when talking about their childhood eras don’t include the years in which I was actually a child. Late 1960’s and on need not apply for “wonder years’ status after all it seems.

I was not a huge Sesame Street fan as I remember it. I preferred one of the Children’s Television Workshop’s next creations, The Electric Company a lot more. I was a devoted Captain Kangaroo fan. I can still recall the titles of some of the books he read like Mike and the Steam Shovel, Make Way for Ducklings (which I just read my own daughter the other night) and Caps for Sale (which I ran across one day at Barnes and Noble and bought - for myself). Sesame Street’s mission in the earliest days was to expose disadvantaged kids to the idea of life outside the city and instill in them the idea that learning was fun. While the teacher in me cringes at the latter (learning is not always fun but it is necessary), I feel that those early episodes are probably not the politically incorrect minefield of horror and potential psychological trauma that the warning label is meant to invoke. However, I probably won’t rush out and buy it either. Mainly because I doubt that my five year old would sit and watch it for long. She is, unfortunately or not depending on your old world views, like some many of her peers in that she is accustomed to CGIish characters and settings and the frenetic pace of today’s child-oriented productions. In short, she would probably find it boring. I don’t know if this is too bad or not. Bert and Ernie were two unrelated males lived in the basement of a dingy gray concrete building who shared the same bedroom. Cookie Monster was an unrepentant carbohydrate addict. Oscar was mean and morose and in desperate need of medicating and therapy. The grown-ups on the show often approached children who did not know them and offered them food and drink. The montages of rural life didn’t scream warnings about environmental decay via the toxicity of humanity but instead showed rather bland farm scenes that seem antique even for the time period. The running theme of being kind to your neighbors and helpful and learning without the aid of technology runs at odds with today’s neighborhoods of strangers and looking out for yourself and the idea that an education is complete if it isn’t chocked full of relevancy and head-splitting excitement.

On our recent trip to B.C. to visit Rob’s mother, she hauled out a video of old home movies that Rob had transferred from 8mm years ago. They were interesting for several reasons. First they gave me an opportunity to see all the new players in my life, my in-laws, as they were when they were young. It puts much of the current dynamics at work between them into a frame of reference. The tape also allowed me to learn more about Rob. But finally, it made me realize once again how this world is really about adults. It was built by us and for us, and children are, and have always been not much more than flesh and blood versions of vanity plates and the consequences of our adult needs. And I am not saying this makes all of us bad parents or that the majority of us don’t love our children. While I will never be totally convinced that everyone has the right to be a parent (the right, not the physical ability to breed), I think most of us are conscientious about our responsibilities. I do believe though that in our current efforts to child-proof the world, we are forgetting that children today are not more fragile than we ourselves were back in 1969. That glimpse into the inner city probably did me as much good as the pastoral scenes did those tenement dwelling preschoolers. Which is to say, a lot and that allowing our little ones today those same peeks into the past will probably not have much different of an impact.

Raising the Gas Tax

The Iowa Legislature is considering applying an additional 4 cents on the state's gas tax. The reason for this is to raise additional funds for road projects. Predictably this has angered people and brought out the usual outraged responses such as this tax: 1) gouges consumers in the same manner as oil companies do; 2) hurts the lower socio-economic classes and 3) t won't stop global warming anyway.

Taxes generally outrage people almost as a matter of principle. The citizenery of this country (or any country really) expect, demand even, a lot of services from their government and somehow think this should be accomplished with as little monetrary contribution from them as possible. I am not going to argue the fact that governments can and do waste resources and that includes tax dollars, but many big businesses have the same problem when there are so many divisions and people that even the most vigilant system cannot always keep track of the left and the right hand's actions at the same time. Governments are imperfect because they are run by imperfect people who not coincidently are elected by imperfect people. But that is a debate for another day. Today we have people mad because they don't want to pay another 4 cents per gallon of gas despite the fact that gas here is cheaper than nearly anywhere else on the planet and per person, we use more than our worldly fair share. Americans are spoiled.

But let's look at the arguments I have seen against raising the tax. The first one was that the oil companies gouge us and then the state joins the party. My husband has spent many hours explaining the ins and outs of gasoline prices to me. He spent time in the oil business at the refinery end, so he has a fairly good grasp of supply/demand and market theory. Basically gas prices based on supply and demand. In the U.S., or any car dependent society, cars are not luxuries for the majority of people. Our penchant for sprawling communities and cities means that few of us live, work and shop within walking distance of our homes. Even with the limited mass transit systems that most people are accustomed to outside of the very large cites (which might have better and more adequate systems), we still need individual vehicles to get to the places we need to go. So, there is always demand which ebbs and flows based on seasons and holidays and on our ability to buy. When prices get too high, people cut back and prices come down again. And yes, I know this doesn't effect the tax which remains the same. The tax is a separate issue. Gas taxes are used to maitain and build new roads primarily. I wonder if anyone else sees the irony in Iowa raising more money for more roads? The state has an abundance of roads including a veritable surplus of 4 lane highways that are near empty and go nowhere the majority of the state's inhabitants need to go. Where I live in western Canada, people talk about the new bypass (the only one actually) that scoots by the Alberta capital of Edmonton, as though it were some fabulous breakthrough in travel. They number highways up here in the single digits and even though they live in the heart of oil country (much of which gets sent to the U.S.), they pay prices at the pump which make a 4 cent state tax look laughable.

But what about the poor? Well, what about them? They are hit hard by every use tax there is and no one seems to mind unless we are talking about gasoline. When that happens the poor become wonderful arguments in our war to not have to find ways to reduce our own comsumption. The poor are handy like that.

And finally, the idea that global warming can't be stopped by the reductions in comsumption. I agree with that but only because global warming can't be stopped now at all. We are no longer in the "cause" phase of global warming but the "effect" stage where the best we can hope for is to manage as many of the awful things that are here and are coming. I don't agree with idea that reduce our consumption is a waste of time or that the upper classes are such hedonists that rising prices don't cause them to change their driving habits at some point.

The Chevy Malibu I owned before leaving Iowa held about 14 gallons of gas, according to my husband, and an additional 4 cents per gallon is about 56 cents. I watched my students at Hoover High School spend ten times that much money in the snack machines alone on a daily basis. I spent more than that at the Starbuck's on my way to work and most people throw away far more money on their junk food habits or weekend Target fixes. What's interesting to me is that we readily dispose of our cash on the non-essentials without so much as first thought, but when it comes to gas for the car, we cry foul whenever the price goes up a few pennies or the government requires more payment for services.

Just Say No to Immigration Raids?

Apparently the city council of Des Moines, Iowa is considering issuing an order to the city's police force that will allow them to not cooperate with federal immigrations authorities during raids the latter might stage in the city to snare illegals. An interesting approach that ultimately does nothing to solve the current dilemma being caused by people who are, and in some cases have been for a long while, living in the United States without the proper Visa or permanent residency papers. Obstructing justice will not bring any sanity to an already insane issue.

Justice, you ask? Where is the justice in rounding up people, many of whom are hard-working citizens, good neighbors and family members and shipping them back to their countries of legal origin? Well, simply put, they broke the rules and when that happens, and you are caught, consequences ensue. It's not about fair, but if that is the going to be the argument on which leniency or even clemency is going to be granted then think about it another way. What about all those people who are patiently waiting for entrance to this country, spouses and children, who filled out the mountain of paperwork, paid the fees, submitted to the police checks and medical exams, essentially did everything the rules asked? What about them? How is it fair that they did the right thing and have to wait their turn but those who did it illegally are now the recipients of calls for rule changes?

I will not argue in favor of the current system. The wait times are ridiculous and it does not take into account that the U.S. does need unskilled labor (though some would argue that this is the current job of our education system). I do think that the solutions have to be applied farther up the food chain then the current hunting down and deporting of illegals and can only conclude that the current system continues in its broken state because it benefits someone.

My First Public Reading as a Writer

The Fort Saskatchewan writing group I belong to, the Paragraffers, held a public reading for it’s members Sunday at Shell Theatre located at the Dow Centennial Center. Any member who wished to was able to participate and our leader, Kathie, even invited the nearby Strathcona group to participate if they were inclined. I decided early on that I would be reading from the novel I am working on and chose a shorter chapter that I shared not only with the Fort group but with my writing group, WOW back in Des Moines. It was one of the first scenes I wrote for the novel and it might not survive to the final draft, but I like the flow and the way it advances character and plot and I love the dialogue.

I admit to a little bit of nervousness when I was introduced by Dick Easton, one of the Fort members who is also the editor of the group’s newsletter, but as soon as I began speaking, and then reading, I felt right at home. It was a feeling almost akin to the one I had when I did my practicum for teaching, which is the first class they have prospective education majors take to give them a bit of a taste of what it is like in a real classroom with real kids. The first time I stepped foot in a seventh grade language arts class, I knew I was right where I belonged. That I could do this. Teach. Manage large groups of kids. And that I could do it really well. Reading my piece today in front of an audience, that was small - between 15 and 20 - I knew I could do this part of the writing. The author thing. I love writing, and oddly, for me, I love reading my stuff to people and talking about the process. I say oddly because I am a very shy person. I don’t like the spotlight. But, when it comes to writing, as with teaching, that shy part of me evaporates as though it was never there.

Rob and Katy came to hear me and the others. Rob shot a digital video of my segment and took pictures of the other participants as there was no one else there taking photos. I am going to write up a short piece for the local paper and send it along with a few of Rob’s photos (he is kinda thrilled about the prospect of having one of his photos in the paper with a credit).

All in all, a perfectly lovely afternoon. I still feel wonderful about how it went and my performance. Another step on the road to writing for a living.