Monday, November 28, 2016

Now it's 3 weeks ...

(If you received this blog by email, you might want to visit the actual site. The pictures work much better there. 
Just click on the title “Now it's 3 ...”)

Still bummed. Still struggling to find a way through the post election shock and toward some positive trajectory forward. Whatever “forward” means in this uncharted territory, where a billionaire reigns as the “people’s president-elect.” Where we have no idea what our future president will actually do about all the issues that lie ahead—national and international—or what he actually believes about just about anything. A landscape piled high with the toxic detritus of the pre-election campaign, with the post-election rise in hate crimes of all sorts. In a world where the Oxford English Dictionary just declared the word of the year to be “post-truth,” and where “fake news” guides the decision-making of voters—and, arguably, some winning politicians.

Yet, the uncertain future of our fellow humans, global politics, and the fragile environment notwithstanding, I continue to aspire to an active, engaged, determined, hopeful … maybe fantastic approach to the world we have, even though (or more accurately, precisely because) it threatens the world I wish we had. 




Maybe this is the place to mention that my soul seems not entirely settled from the upheaval of Nov. 8. This despite many miles walked (even—happily!—in the snow) ...











...  and a staycation in Denver, sleeping in, having coffee with the morning news, and going to movies … with a bit of work in the down times. The other morning, I woke up from a half dream, half conscious conversation with myself about a sudden clear awareness that there’s a limit to how much people can endure and remain sane. Maybe it came directly from the election, knowing that some people are literally fighting for their lives here. Maybe from trying to explain my own recent illness to a friend, when it seems to have so many roots. Maybe from hearing that an acquaintance recently had a “nervous breakdown” (whatever that means) from too much life stress.  Or maybe, I speculated at the time, because much as I would like to rise phoenix-like from my post-election crash, the whole situation still feels pretty much too awful to consider.

Still, being active is all we have, if we’re to (a) stay sane ourselves and (b) make some kind of difference in this totally unacceptable, insane circumstance. So, onward! 


A friend recently asked me to share what I was doing in the way of being active, so I thought I’d mention a few things I’ve been doing to stay sane during the past couple of weeks. In my last blog, I told you about picking up dog poop in the bike path (a major step at the time), upping my contributions to some orgs I believe in, and trying to understand the folks who supported Trump (at least some of them) instead of villianizing them. Well now, I’ve graduated to actually entering the social and cultural world, breaking (slightly) out of my post-election isolation.  This daring escape into shared reality (broadly construed) has included seeing some thought-provoking movies (“Moonlight,” with race and sexual orientation intertwined; “Loving,” a 50-year-old story for these so-called modern times; and “Arrival,” which says far more about openness to communication than about aliens); a visit to the Universe Canticle, a massive hand-sewn work depicting the origin and evolution of the universe (including the current threat of climate change) crafted by women from rural South Africa whose lives are affected by HIV/AIDS; volunteering to review a nascent website for Community Food Share, an activity that could easily lead to more vol work there; and joining in a group project to send letters to President Obama in support of the water protectors at Standing Rock. None of these was huge, but together, they help dissipate that ominous feeling of powerlessness.


Upcoming community events where I plan to participate include Tuesday’s community gathering, “Moving Toward Collective Liberation,” and a Friends-sponsored movie/discussion about relationships between the dominant culture and indigenous peoples. Again, nothing huge, but all snowflakes in the avalanche. For the longer haul, I’m working with my partner and folks from Out Boulder, A Queer Endeavor, and other local orgs to create a “People’s Inaugural,” where individuals and groups will launch their personal/collective “First 100 Days” programs. The idea, borrowed (with permission) from a friend of a friend of my partner, is to mirror presidents’ promises for their "first 100 days"—typically a very ambitious package of goals which, if met, would move their agenda along toward their imagined "legacy."

In this case, folks will be invited to create—individually or in groups—their own "first 100-day plan" to begin on inauguration day, Jan. 20, 2017. Ultimately, all of these 100-day plans combined will collectively move us toward our ultimate aim of leaving a "people's legacy" of actions that protect existing human rights and move us toward greater equality, that protect the environment, and that support peace in the world.


An immodest goal, I know. But isn’t it an awesome image, really? Lots of people, each taking responsibility for making positive change in their own world, as we collectively launch our parallel agenda to whatever happens in Washington and Trump Tower.

Awesome enough to ease me into a restful night’s sleep with no rough awakening to angst and dread.





© Janis Bohan, 2010-2015. Use of this content is welcome with attribution and a link to the post. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment on this post
If you got this blog via email, go to the blog website by clicking on the title at the top of this particular post.
To comment once you're on the website, click on "No comments" (or "2 comments" etc.) below the blog. Comments from "anonymous" welcome.


Friday, November 18, 2016

Ooof. The electoral apocalypse, a week later

(If you received this blog by email, you might want to visit the actual site. The pictures work much better there. 
Just click on the title “Ooof ….”)

So, I’ve been missing from the blogosphere for a long time. Sometime, I may try to pull my thoughts together to explain why. But not today, one week after Hillary Clinton gave her concession speech. A week and a day after Donald Trump became the official president elect. Today, I have to talk about that event, because it pretty much dominates what I’m thinking and feeling as I go through these days. I don’t presume that I have anything novel and newsworthy to say here. Lots of people who are lots smarter and more informed than I have already written volumes. But I’m hoping that writing about this experience will clarify it for me … and maybe speak to someone else as well. Maybe I’ll throw in some pictures, just to break up the ocean of text. Visual notes from a sunnier summer.



OK, how to begin describing the plunge in hope and mood that started last Tuesday evening – an experience I know I shared with many – and my efforts to crawl back to the surface? Background: I worked a lot on the Dem campaign because I knew I had to do something. Otherwise, if Hillary lost, I’d feel awful, knowing I hadn’t done whatever I could. So I started in early September, registering voters. Then in November, I moved on to canvassing, going door to door and encouraging people to vote … preferably to vote Democratic. Let me just mention that this activity is my second-least-favorite pastime in the world, surpassed in its awfulness only by phone banking. I’ve done lots of both over the years, and I hate it. But out I went, into local neighborhoods, clipboard in hand, knocking on doors and checking folks off my list. Each time I got out of my car, I’d take a deep breath and tell myself, “Just do this, Janis. Just do it.” Then I’d put on my friendly face and start knocking on strangers’ doors. I was glad I was doing it.

Then election day, at last. I worked all day, coming and going from the campaign office with a new list every few hours. The mood there was so up-beat, so casually confident, I caught the easy optimism, and left there late in the day, looking forward to going home and cheering as the results came in. You all know what happened next.


I went to bed late, slept poorly, and awoke feeling like I had a sandbag on my chest. I recognized the raw feeling that comes when you realize that a terrible thing happened yesterday, and it’s still there. It wasn’t a dream. I spent hours buried in news stories, hoping for a glimmer of hope, disbelieving what I read. Some moments, I felt angry – at Trump’s very existence, at the people who voted for him, at the media, at the Democratic party, at Hillary … looking for someone to blame. Sometimes, I felt deeply fearful, a bit for myself, but mostly for the very vulnerable people that Trump so actively, egregiously targeted during the campaign. Mostly, I felt depressed. Heavy of heart, unable to move from my computer chair, not interested in … anything. I was hugely relieved when my partner quietly said to me, “It’s not depression. It’s grief.”

Grief, I thought. I might be able to manage grief. Struggle through it rather than sink beneath it. I know some ways to keep grief from becoming full-fledged depression. Like getting active, physically and in other constructive ways. The first thing I did was go for a long walk. And on that walk, I began to sketch some thoughts for surviving the coming days of this to-my-core sadness and for getting active as it lifted.

My first thoughts focused, not surprisingly, on this question of grief. I asked myself what I was grieving for, what had I lost? Well, for starters, the possibility of a continuation of relatively progressive politics in this country. The possibility of shifting the Supreme Court toward a more positive stance over the next several decades. The chance to see a woman as president, which would be a remarkable experience, given that I personally remember being unable to get a credit card or a bank account in my own name. But more: I had lost my country. Or, more accurately, my fantasy / beliefs / assumptions about my country. I knew that there were lots of folks who disagree with me on many levels. But  I did not know that there were so many of us who could endorse this man, whose unself-conscious bigotry, ignorance, and meanness you all know too well. And now, I realized that I had just lost that imagined country.

(By the way, none of this was as rational and linear as my description. I cried as I walked, felt simultaneously too alone and very glad for time alone, simultaneously strong and off balance, generally disoriented. And I noticed that I wasn’t noticing my walk – which is unusual for me.)






The walk helped, but that heavy, hopeless feeling was still there. I had to figure out what I could actually do about this state of affairs – my own internal state, and the state of the nation (heck, the world!)  I’m really lucky here, because I know there's a ton of psychological thought and research on how to survive these miserable moments, much of it done by my partner. Years of osmosis have paid off, so I had lots of these ideas at my mental fingertips. For those who aren’t quite that lucky, she just wrote a column for Out Boulder, so you too can have access to this wisdom. If you read it, you’ll spot the influence of these ideas in virtually every step of my own process.

So, following my Wednesday morning walk, I knew that my first step had to be learning  to understand the people who had voted for Trump – not just as bigots, but as people with real needs that they imagined Trump’s presidency could meet. I knew this would be a stretch for me. I was feeling far too fragile to start reading hateful diatribes against Hillary or “big government,” too angry to hear how inspiring Trump is or how he’s the perfect person to save his “fans” from The Machine. But I really did want to understand his supporters, what their lives are like. I needed to do this to interrupt my tendency to demonize and stereotype them. That path gave him too much power over my well-being,  and me too little.

My partner and I began a concerted effort to locate and read information about Trump voters. This turned out not to be too hard, once I got outside the “echo chamber” of people as demoralized and outraged as I. I soon located  a series of articles that addressed just this aim (you can find some of them here, here, here, and here). 


Gradually, I/we began to see and talk about these people in a new light. Not just as white men (mostly) who resented the progress of women and people of color over recent decades, who were suffering from “privilege deprivation.” But as people who have been … are being … genuinely ignored, dismissed, trivialized, discounted, and taken for granted by governmental systems that purport to support them. People who feel isolated from urban centers of power and privilege, and who want their governments, local and national, to “see” them and reflect them. Some folks have described the loss of dignity that people in this situation might well feel. In this vein, I was so struck by a comment made by Arthur Brooks in an exchange with Gail Collins (both of the NY Times): “A few years ago,” Brooks reflected, “I was having lunch with [the president of a progressive think tank]. I asked her to given me a simplest explanation for why some people who never prospered over the past few years nonetheless loved President Obama so much. She said, ‘He gives them dignity.’ I thought that was very profound, and I think that’s a big part of what’s going on today as well with Trump,” he finished. Maybe that was what Trump's supporters heard beneath his hyperbole: a promise of simple dignity.

I could  say much more, but I’ll let this sketch suffice for now. If you’re interested, you’ll find more discussion at the bottom of this blog entry, or you can read more about it in the articles linked above.  

So, with a tenuous handle on my fear, rage, and disbelief, the next step was to manage my sadness and sense of powerlessness. I needed to get myself active. The physical part was pretty simple I happily slid into my now-regular pattern of daily activity. Beyond that, I needed to be politically and socially active. Buoyed by the hope of coming out of this a better human being, I imagined great leaps into activism, sailing forth on a wave of indignation and inspiration. But I knew I’d have to start slowly. Really slowly, as it turned out. Those first days, I managed to write checks to some orgs that I really respect. I considered where I might volunteer down the road. I pondered a lot and read some. I talked to myself and with friends. But actually acting, as opposed to considering acting, was harder.


My first tiny step came while I was walking home from the gym on Friday, three days after the election, I encountered a pile of dog poop left by a pooch whose human hadn’t bothered to pick it up. I added a detour to my walk to fetch a plastic bag, returned to the scene of the drop, picked up the offending pile, and carried it to the nearest trash can. A small act, but it seemed important. I felt like I had made a gesture toward the universe, saying I can make a difference, a change for the better in my world.

The next day, I passed a woman on the bike path whose dog was keeping a careful eye on me as I approached from the rear. I greeted them both and then said, “It’s nice to have someone watching your back right now. The world is more dangerous for a lot of people since the election.” I realized I had just made a mini-ally statement, calling to her attention the reality that for some people, the potential for real danger is greater this week than last. Another tiny step toward showing up.

Then on Monday, my partner and I met with some other folks to help plan an upcoming event related to the election’s outcome, and I agreed to help organize an event in January – although the last time I organized an event, I swore I’d never do it again. More steps. Today, I went to Denver for a rally in support of immigrant families. Small steps. But slowly, I feel more present to life as I go through my days,


This is not to say that it's been a steady path forward. During the past week, I've had moments of progress and enthusiasm, and moments of descent back into deep sorrow. I’ve felt empowered (picking up poop), and I’ve had tears come to my eyes for no apparent reason (stretching in an aerobics class). In the low times, I’ve tried to call up the advice offered in the aforementioned Out Boulder article: to pause and think of what I value, what’s important in my life. It helps me get away from the obsessive focus on what’s wrong and back to what I want to create from this. In those moments of reflection, I’ve realized that writing this blog has been something I’ve valued, for a whole host of reasons. As of today, I’m planning to resume blogging, as time permits. I’ll be good for me, I know. It always was. I’ll try to catch up with some blog-worthy stories from the past year – or at minimum, some pictures. I’ve passed up on so many opportunities. Anyway, here I am, writing a blog. Whether or not anyone reads it, writing this particular post has helped me pull together a week’s worth of struggling to dig out from the sticky post-election morass I sank into Tuesday night. It’s another step.


Now it’s Thursday morning, and Nicholas Kristof, a NYT op-ed writer whom I love, has weighed in with a column that summarizes beautifully much of what I hope to take from this week (I told my partner he’s channeling her work). For an added boost in your own process, read it here.

...

Now it's Friday morning, a week after the dog poop incident. There's snow on the ground, and a sunny day ahead. I'll be taking a long walk with a friend's dog, a fun companion for me. And I'll be telling her all about it, sorting it out some more. And waiting to see what happens next, where I need to show up.

-----------------------

Post  Script:

If you’re interested, here’s more about what I’ve come to understand about the people who voted for Trump.

Many of the people who voted for Trump – especially those in rural areas and the Midwestern “rust belt” (who have historically been reliable supporters of Dem candidates) – are people who work dawn to dusk at back-breaking labor, playing by the supposed rules, who are still unable to make ends meet. Their parents did the same work and were able to get ahead, leaving more to their kids than they had – but now those kids find themselves stuck, with no hope for getting ahead.

They see highly educated people who live in big cities with tons of resources and opportunities – schools, museums, culture, support services, government offices – who are far wealthier than they are, although those urbanites don’t appear to work anywhere near as hard. They see the seats of power located, always, in these cities, readily accessible to city dwellers as sources of information, services, and high-paying jobs. They read about people of color and other minority populations, mostly clustered in cities – unfamiliar to folks living in rural areas, and therefore easily stereotyped and misunderstood, even vilified. They hear about government programs like affirmative action, that (in their understanding – but how would they know otherwise?) – assure jobs for these folks who look nothing like the people they know, whether or not they’re deserving. They see officials of all stripes who never ask them about their lives. Who never visit their homes, never work beside them, never talk to them. Politicians who drop by during the campaign, visit the state fair and eat a corndog, maybe have coffee with locals at the diner, and call that “connecting” with their rural constituencies.

Add to this the implicit biases we all learn just by growing up in this culture and absorbing its mores: racism, sexism, and abelism; xenophobia, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia; homo-, bi-, and transphobia. We all learned them. But some of us have had opportunities to unlearn them, or at least to temper them. Those opportunities are available almost entirely in cities; anti-racism intensives would be hard to find in rural mid-America. So those of us who have had those learning opportunities condemn those who have not, labeling them bigots – when what really separates us from them is our (often unrecognized) privilege.

Why wouldn’t these people believe that the deck is stacked against them? Why wouldn’t they think that city dwellers – even “foreigners” in the cities – have a better shot at the American dream than they have? Why wouldn’t they believe that they system has left them behind and left them out?

All it takes, then, is for someone to tell them just that: the system is rigged against you. Of course, they shout, Yes! Finally, someone has seen us! Has recognized our distress!
To fire up the enthusiasm even more, that person need only violate all the norms of “polite” (or “politically correct”) conversation – ill-defined norms that are foreign to their lives – by saying the things that they dare not say, have been condemned for saying. We’ve created, in the words of political scientist Katherine Cramer, a politics of resentment. And resentment is a mighty motivator.

In a sense, this isn’t even about Trump himself. It could have been anyone who poked the right tender spots, who saw the distress and resentment of these people and named it, pulled for it, capitalized on it. Who made them feel visible, important, central – and named the system that had previously left them feeling the opposite: their own government. The added energy evoked by allowing them – in fact, encouraging them – to think, to say, and to do the things that are forbidden by “polite” society energized a movement that made them feel powerful, like they could change the system.

It just required someone who seemed not beholden to the system (at least in the usual ways), someone who was willing to thumb his nose, flip the bird at the system. Someone to tell these abandoned Americans that they, like he, are the real Americans.

Deal sealed. No need for millions of demons. Just ordinary people, rendered invisible by the powers that be, plus a rank narcissist willing to use their distress for his own aggrandizement.

Oops. I guess I’m not totally done villianizing yet. Like I said, it’s a slow process …



© Janis Bohan, 2010-2015. Use of this content is welcome with attribution and a link to the post. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment on this post
If you got this blog via email, go to the blog website by clicking on the title at the top of this particular post.

To comment once you're on the website, click on "No comments" (or "2 comments" etc.) below the blog. Comments from "anonymous" welcome.

Monday, January 4, 2016

News under glass


We spent the holidays visiting family in (rainy) Maryland, and took advantage of a break in the weather to drive up to DC and visit the Newseum, a museum about the development and dissemination of "news"—which the museum's publicity describes as "the first rough draft of history." Like other museums in DC, this one deserves more than a day, but we did it significant justice during the 6 or 7 hours we spent there.

The first display I spotted set the tone for my day. It was about the Berlin Wall—especially significant to me because I visited that Cold War-divided city in 1963, shortly after the wall was built. I was among a group of high school exchange students, making a stop in Berlin as we headed home from our stay in Germany. I remember our carefully orchestrated and closely guided visit to the eastern sector, where the streets seemed deserted and the mood somber compared with the lively progressiveness of West Berlin. I recall standing on the American side, looking at a section of the wall where, instead of the huge concrete slabs we saw come down in 1989 TV broadcasts, "the wall" was simply the sides of deserted buildings, the windows bricked over. In some places, I saw flower pots on the windowsills, blank rows of bricks behind them. I actually picked up a brick from the ground near where I stood, imagining (accurately or not) that it came from one of those buildings—and hence, from "The Wall." I don't know what happened to that brick over the years, but seeing the display of concrete sections from the wall and the accompanying pictures showing East Berlin, just beyond the American checkpoint, took me back to those days in Berlin. It also took me back to the televised scenes of the wall's being demolished decades later. I was at a conference, in a hotel room. My mom had travelled with me, and we were watching this amazing historical moment together. She knew I'd been to Berlin long before, but had no idea, I think, of the emotional impact of that moment—or rather, those moments, separated by decades.




These memories ushered in a day's reflection about the portrayal of "history" in journalistic media—i.e., in the news, history's rough draft.  The Newseum is really a meta-museum: it houses a significant trove of historical journalistic artifacts (photos, videos, sound recordings, etc.), but for me, the intriguing part of this place was not so much those bits of information as their role as examples of how events are covered—and shaped—by media coverage. We encountered repeated references to journalism as objective, to journalists striving for objectivity, the aim always to present "just the facts." But my own long-term conviction that this sort of value-neutral position is impossible actually fit better with my experience of the Newseum. News journalism,  rather than news content, was under the magnifying glass—and that journalism inevitably embodied (subjective) values and judgments.

The memories evoked by Berlin Wall installation had already convinced me of this. When the first bricks were laid in those windows in 1961, no one but the locals knew about it. But when the concrete slabs began to fall almost three decades later, with international television cameras rolling, what could have been a local event (if one of major proportions) instantly became a worldwide happening, with the media coverage both displaying the moment and shaping the direction of the Cold War by how it displayed the moment.  Imagine, for instance, if the authoritative voice-over from major television networks had described the event as a rampage by a group of right-wing hooligans intent on gaining publicity for their cause ... instead of the outpouring of joy from crowds of democracy-loving people intent on freeing the captive city of East Berlin. The same perspective provided a basis for the rest of the day.

With so many things to see, we singled out a couple themes of particular interest to us: the Civil Rights movement and Viet Nam. In keeping with my earlier comment about the impossibility of "objectivity," the representation of these topics had a great deal to say about how media coverage actually shaped, even as it presumed to objectively depict, these historical events.

In some cases, the use of media to shape history was intentional. For instance, the exhibit offers audio clips from leaders of the Civil Rights movement, such as SNCC leader John Lewis, and folks in the Federal government, like president Lyndon Johnson, specifically arguing that television coverage of police brutality toward African Americans would have an important—and positive—impact on the movement's progress. It did. The public outcry that arose in the wake of that media coverage gave Johnson the political leverage he needed to push through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That this coverage was influenced by the values of the journalists reporting on the events was evident in several displays that juxtaposed various reports of a given event. The headlines for coverage of the "Bloody Sunday" confrontation between peaceful Civil Rights marchers and law enforcement officers in Selma, for instance, differed drastically according to the source. The Dallas Morning News headline reported, "Tear Gas Halts Negro March"–a pretty benign description. Tear gas isn't so awful, after all ... although the picture actually shows the police beating marchers with clubs. Compare that headline with Life magazine's front page coverage of the same event: "The Savage Season Begins." 

 

The Civil Rights exhibit evoked not only the 1960s movement but also recent events, such as Ferguson, MO, and other examples of police brutality in recent months. We also know about these events from media coverage—in this case, much of it social media, with videos, texts, and tweets telling the stories in real time. The public awareness that arose from that outpouring of (lay) journalism had immeasurable impact on how the history of those events unfolded. It wasn't only the events themselves—the deaths of Michael Brown and others—that brought about challenges to and (hopefully) changes in policing, but also the direct, unedited presentation of these stories on our screens, large and small. The process brought to immediate life the meta-story of the Newseum: the story of how news reporting influences, rather than just presents, history.

We found a similar  meta-narrative in the Viet Nam war installation. Folks who were around during that (undeclared) war may recall that early news coverage of the confllict was generally very positive, glorifying both the troops and the military progress being made. But soon, the official information provided by the military began to conflict with what journalists were seeing on the ground. As the credibility gap grew, journalists increasingly questioned the war and noted the declining morale among the troops. Back home, anti-war protests, which had been seen as radical acts of fringe youth groups, began to gain steam—and middle-class support. Here, too, a credibility gap emerged between official government positions and widespread public perceptions, mirroring the chasm between the views of the media and those of military officials in Viet Nam.


 

The military began to regard the media not as supportive but as hostile, with critical war reporting from overseas feeding the anti-war movement at home. Mainstream media portrayals of the youth-led anti-war movement shifted, from depicting protesters as radical hippy trouble-makers to recognizing their activism as a significant and justified political force. Over time, the very media outlets that had initially bolstered the war proved damaging to the government's pro-war position. Thus, news journalism influenced history, aiding the anti-war movement and thereby likely helping to speed the end of the war.

We ran out of time before we got to see everything we hoped to—like the section on the evolution of news from the 1500s to the present—but I'm willing to bet that you'd find similar themes in every corner of the Newseum. And I bet we'll be back.

The Newseum poses a crucial question: In what ways is the act of telling about something itself a story worth telling? To what degree is our "knowledge" not so much a description of reality but a value-laden hypothesis that has its own shaping power? To me, this is a fascinating question to explore—whether about news or about any other rendition of "objective truth." This meta-museum provides ample grist for this sort of intellectual mill. 

But I should mention that there are also moments of levity here. For instance, tiles in the restrooms bear examples of headlines that could have used some help before they saw the light of day. Others offer examples of "corrections" to previous stories (some of which themselves need correction), illustrating the remarkable mistakes that can be made in the name of covering the news.


All in all, it was a fine way to spend a day. I encourage you to visit if your travels get you close to DC. It's always hard to choose in DC—so many museums, so little time—but put this one high on your list. And plan to spend a day at when you get there.



© Janis Bohan, 2010-2016. Use of this content is welcome with attribution and a link to the post. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Comment on this post

If you got this blog via email, go to the blog website by clicking on the title at the top of this particular post.

To comment once you're on the website, click on "No comments" (or "2 comments" etc.) below the blog. Comments from "anonymous" welcome.



Friday, October 2, 2015

Approaching sanity

(If you received this blog by email, you might want to visit the actual site. The pictures work much better there. 

Just click on the title “Approaching sanity”)

Evening light on the Colorado River above Moab

All summer, I’ve been expecting to write a blog about the trip I just took—a hiking adventure in Capitol Reef, a lesser-known national park in Southern Utah. I’ve written before about how much I love this corner of the world—I even referred to it as “the center of the cosmos.” Capitol Reef is a distinctive place relative to, say, Arches and Canyonlands—more lush, with the Fremont River at its center, higher in elevation, making for cooler temperatures overall, and more remote. The closest “city,” Green River (pop ~1000), is about 100 miles away. I hadn’t been to Capitol Reef for years, and my wish to hike the Frying Pan Canyon trail, a favorite walk there, was one incentive for the “return to fitness” program that framed much of my summer. If you missed that part of the story, I spent an uncharacteristically sedentary winter recovering, gently, from some late summer knee and hip crises. The lack of activity was bad for me, body and mind. So my summer project was to regain the physical well-being that has been a central part of my life—and I wasn't certain that I'd be able to do that, aging being what it is. So, not too surprisingly, the blog I expected to be a rousing celebration of my big hike became something else as well—a reflection on the slow arrival of acceptance, the (sorely belated) ability to, as the Beatles urged, let it be.

Cliffs and cottonwood along the
Fremont River entering Capitol Reef



The rounded sandstone formations that give
"Capitol Reef" its name




Not that the trip wasn’t blog-worthy in its own right. The soft evening light on the Colorado River above Moab, the deep morning shade contrasting with the sunlight glancing off the red rock formations along Wall Street trail in Arches, the early-fall light on the cliffs entering Capitol Reef, the cottonwoods slowly turning golden, and the vast expanses of the San Rafael Swell and the Water Pocket Fold, grand geology on display. It felt perfect for this hike, which had been in my plans for months. And the walk itself was, as I'd recalled, wonderfully varied and welcoming and gorgeous.


Chimney Rock. A day-before-the-big-hike
walk took me to the plateau above this spire


In concrete terms, my aim on this trip was to hike from the campground at Capitol Reef up into and then through Cohab Canyon (so named, legend has it, because early Mormons who “cohatited”—i.e., lived in polygamous families—retreated to this high, hidden canyon when the feds came calling), climb out of Cohab and drop into Frying Pan Canyon (so named, according to local stories, because the very exposed trail gets so hot), and finally out of Frying Pan and across the slickrock plateau to Cassidy Arch (named for Butch Cassidy, who hung out in these parts with his pal, the Sundance Kid).

Overlooking the Water Pocket Fold,
a vast monocline that gave white settlers fits

At a more profound (and less visible) level, my aim was to be capable of taking a long hike in the desert I love, on a trail I that remembered as gorgeous but that I hadn’t hiked for years—and, most importantly, to do that feeling strong and relaxed enough to genuinely enjoy the walk. I had prepared for that all summer, following a remarkably (for me) sane and flexible exercise plan. And now I'd see how well it paid off, what limits remain even after all that.

The weathered Navajo sandstone walls of Cohab Canyon




Looking back down into Cohab






















The summer produced many small pleasures on my way back to hikability. Interestingly (to me), none of them had to do with pushing through exhaustion or enduring painful exercise, as would have been my tendency earlier in life. Instead, they came from backing off when pain suggested a problem, turning back from a long walk when a bee sting threatened an allergic reaction or thunder signaled lightening nearby, accepting with equanimity the unavoidable schedule changes that spoiled my workout plans. I told myself, many times, “Don’t be stupid, Janis”—and I stopped the painful exercise on the spot, let go of the anxiety about the abandoned workout, and traded a planned walk for access to my epipen or to shelter from the lightening. And, remarkably (to me, at least) I felt fine about these moments, totally content. Maybe even wise. 

This sense of peace was entirely a matter of perspective. For reasons I don’t fully understand, I found myself not obsessing over these things but calmly aware that what I wanted was to be fit enough to enjoy a hike like the one I had planned. I wasn’t trying to show off, to be best at anything. Achieving this specific weight room success, making it to that aerobics class, or completing a particular walk didn’t really matter. What I cared about was the slow, gradual progress toward being well again.

A local goblin on the plateau beyond Frying Pan Canyon

The final experience that confirmed my tectonic shift in attitude came on the day of my long-planned hyper-hike, when I faced a moment that would have seemed intolerable in years past: I actually couldn’t find the trail junction that would take me to the end-point of the hike I had planned, Cassidy Arch. I hunted for the junction for a long time, walking hither and yon, up and down, until I realized I was getting dangerously tired for someone with a serious return hike yet to come. I said to myself, “Don’t be stupid, Janis.” And I started the long trek back to the trailhead where I started. I had done what I set out to do—had a wonderful, long hike in the desert I love. I’d walked far enough to have reached the end-goal arch (and then some)—just not entirely in the right direction. And I got back to my car feeling happy and strong, satisfyingly tired. Exactly what I had hoped for to close the summer. Sure, I was a bit disappointed (I really wanted a picture of Cassidy Arch), but it was really fine. My summer is happily complete.


Morning sunlight along the Wall Street trail in Arches,
where I was welcomed by the cascading song of a canyon wren
I don’t quite know how to explain the transformation I’m trying to describe here, from super-jock intensity (out to prove something?) to this delightful acceptance of the limits imposed by reality. I think it was  at least partly this: The very real possibility of not ever being able to take such a hike again seriously heightened my awareness of my age and of the realities of my aging body. That insistent striving for more (even for excess) that seemed so important earlier in my life suddenly looked so pointless when I was faced with losing so much. As I drove through Southern Utah, everyday sights—familiar rock formations, ordinary plants, simple ripples in the stream—were suddenly strikingly beautiful. When I took a short walk early one morning in Arches and heard a canyon wren, a tear sprung to my eye. I threw out my arms and sighed at the sheer, deep pleasure of just being there. “There,” where I hadn’t been sure I'd be able to go again. One night, I lay on my back gazing up at the Milky Way and saw a shooting star course across the desert sky; my heart smiled ear to ear. Those experiences were somehow linked directly to this new level of acceptance, this shift in perspective that I sometimes dare to call “wisdom.” Grandiose, maybe, but closer to “wise” than I’ve been in my past, for sure.

Being sufficiently old and physically compromised to contemplate the loss of things that are so valuable to me—my physicality and my access to wilderness—granted me a new perspective. A canyon wren makes my heart sing, and missing a long-awaited trail junction at the end of a very long hike is of no import. Huge and tiny are so relative as to be meaningless. Now that’s a lesson in perspective.


© Janis Bohan, 2010-2015. Use of this content is welcome with attribution and a link to the post. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Comment on this post

If you got this blog via email, go to the blog website by clicking on the title at the top of this particular post.

To comment once you're on the website, click on "No comments" (or "2 comments" etc.) below the blog. Comments from "anonymous" welcome.



Monday, August 31, 2015

Retirement risks and highway metaphors


You’ve probably noticed that summer is sliding toward fall. The kids are back in school, the leaves are starting to turn, the sorrel is head high, and last spring's yucca blooms have been transformed to drying pods. And I’m content. I’ve had a marvelous summer. Several good trips and a bunch of other fun events contributed to that. And as a bonus, I’ve had a most successful “return to fitness” campaign, and I’m feeling healthy and strong—and very happy about that. Reflecting on this process has helped me articulate something about the mixed joys and pitfalls of retirement—and some life lessons about the balance between ease and commitment.

Obviously, one of the real pleasure of being retired, as anyone craving the moment when they’ll retire might imagine, is the luxury of pretty much setting my own schedule. My days are busy, but my schedule is flexible and elastic, remarkably free of coercive scheduling. There are exceptions, of course—doctor’s appointments, trash pick-up, meetings, and other events scheduled by or with someone else. But mostly, I get to shape my days as I'd like them to be.

This sounds lovely—and it is—but it has its costs. One of those, oddly, is trouble finding time to do things I want to do. The problem is that the wide-openness of my schedule allows me to not actively think about setting aside time for things that aren’t obligatory. I have to do my online editing work at some point each day, and I have to do assorted life-maintenance chores at times. So I plan time around getting those things done. But then there are the things that I don’t have to do, but I intend to do. Like getting some exercise every day. This is where the ease of my retirement un-schedule trips me up. The tasks that live in intention get set aside. The day slips away, and somehow, I didn’t have time for those things.

So several things contributed to my getting seriously on track this summer—and I’m hoping it’s for the long haul. First, my fall orthopedic crisis made me inactive through the winter, and I paid the price—in energy level, mood, strength, and general engagement in my life (the scarcity of blog entries being one indication of this disengagement). That was a wake-up call.

Then, a planned spring trip to Southern Utah promised an opportunity to see a part of red rock country I haven’t visited for years. As it turned out, we didn’t make precisely that trip, but thinking about it brought to mind a trail there that I really want to walk again. And with that thought, I had to acknowledge that I was nowhere near fit enough to do it and enjoy the experience.

The final nudge came from a bit of wisdom circulated on a listserve I read regularly. It’s nominally for psychologists and largely about psych topics, but the moderator also interweaves other interesting themes—special needs animals, Buddhism, feminism, racism, and—apropos of my point here—health and fitness. This particular post offered fitness tips. Now, I know that there are zillions of lists and fitness experts offering “10 tips for getting fit,” and these were probably no more or less wise than all the others. But the timing was just right, and two of these ideas really stuck with me. In my mental shorthand, these are “no exit ramps” and “merge with traffic.”

The first is pretty self-explanatory, familiar to anyone who’s tried to stay focused on any challenging goal: don’t give yourself excuses, or you’ll be off the track for sure. The second was more of a surprise to me. It has to do with living in the real world and avoiding extreme, excessive, impossible rules, “merging” with the flow of realistic demands of the moment—an out-of-town trip, a task that genuinely erases time for anything else, fatigue that seems to require a break, extended time spent with someone important. Gently merging with these moments can save your sanity and honor your relationships.

Now, I recognize that item 2 seems to contradict item 1: isn’t merging sort of like an exit ramp? I’ve found that it’s not, as long as I’m really conscious about it: “OK, this (whatever) isn’t perfect for my plan, but it’s important/delightful right now, so I’m going with it. It’s not an exit ramp. I’m merging, not getting off the road. In the next moment, I’m back on track.”

Probably the key to all of this was managing that pesky scheduling-in-retirement thing. I had to override my automatic cruise setting and actually, intentionally plan to get some serious exercise every day. I had to prioritize my efforts at returning to a state of physical well-being that I’d let slide. And I’ve been happily, remarkably consistent in this: I make time for my activity of the day, and then I schedule other things (the ones under my control, that is) around that. No letting it slide, thinking I’ll get to it “later.” Yup, I’ve missed a few days (see “merge with traffic”), but it was a conscious decision to do so, not a struggle over whether I was sabotaging my goal. I named it as merging with traffic, and I never doubted that when circumstances were appropriate again, I’d still be on the same path, not having taken an exit ramp.

I suspect there are valuable life lessons here—not that being healthy isn’t sufficient in its own right. For me, the message of my successful summer has to do with keeping some perspective on time and structure, on the interplay between responsibility and ease, and on the tricky line (at least for me) between clear commitment and obsessive adherence. Accommodating both sides of those dichotomies/dimensions is no easy task—whether in a fitness plan or an overall life plan.

I wonder, if I worked on that balance in all realms of my life, how truly healthy could I be?



© Janis Bohan, 2010-2015. Use of this content is welcome with attribution and a link to the post. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Comment on this post

If you got this blog via email, go to the blog website by clicking on the title at the top of this particular post.

To comment once you're on the website, click on "No comments" (or "2 comments" etc.) below the blog. Comments from "anonymous" welcome.