Monday, December 21, 2009

Looking for a Late-Minute Christmas Gift?

Click here to buy it on Amazon.




LETTERS TO A YOUNG DOCTOR
By Richard Selzer

Despite its title, a thoughtful person shouldn’t consider this book only as a gift for someone in the medical field. No, this is a book an introspective person might offer to a kindred spirit. To read this collection of essays is to acknowledge the essence of St. Paul’s supposition that there are “angels among us.” And they need not be celebrated like Mother Teresa or the Dalai Lama.

The essay “Toenails” illustrates that, as the essay “Imelda”—” she pressed to her mouth a filthy, pink, balled-up rag as though to stanch a flow or buttress against pain”—reminds us that angels sometimes have rough edges and tattered wings.

If your “thinker”—the kindred spirit who receives the book—gives you a hug and a whispered “thank you” after reading Letters to a Young Doctor, you can turn to more of Selzer’s profound work for the next occasion. There are eleven other volumes waiting to be gift-wrapped. Nearly every word illustrates what it means for us to be spirits immersed in these strange fragile bodies.


  • Already have it? I'll send a signed copy of my memoir, Seven Wheelchairs: A Life beyond Polio, to those who want to purchase it directly. Contact me here on the blog with your email address.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Looking for a Christmas Gift for a Christian?

I reviewed this book for The Internet Review of Books, and I found it deeply stimulating ...

REASON, FAITH, AND REVOLUTION:
Reflections on the God Debate
By Terry Eagleton
185 pp. Yale University Press, $25.00

Terry Eagleton opens his defense of humankind’s God-search with “Religion has wrought untold misery in human affairs.”

Be you evangelical, fundamentalist, mainline Protestant, Orthodox Jew or Reformed Jew, Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, or even a theo-centric Muslim, you might sigh and wonder what sort of ally has enlisted in the defense of the divine.

No need to worry. By page two, Eagleton says “ ... I may know just about enough theology to be able to spot when someone like Richard Dawkins or Christoper Hitchens, a couple I shall henceforth for convenience reduce to the single signifier ‘Ditchkins,’ is talking out of the back of his neck.”

That’s the impetus for this short book: a response to two popular tomes authored by the evangelical atheists Dawkins and Hitchens. Only a few pages in, a reader begins to see the author’s least favorite of the pair is Dawkins, a man whose opinions he apparently cannot tolerate, and finds gleefully easy to denigrate.

“ ... let me draw a contrast between the stylish, entertaining, and splendidly impassioned, and compulsively readable quality of the former’s God Is Not Great and Dawkins’s The God Delusion, which merits absolutely none of these epithets.”

In a few short pages, though, Eagleton reveals he also is willing to pillory the righteous, which he finds most prevalent in American Christianity, in most of its forms.

Jesus was a social, cultural, and political revolutionary, the author writes, and an apocalyptic one at that. Eagleton’s theology posits a true follower of the Nazarene carpenter must live out the Truth of God: love and mercy; justice and compassion. Eagleton believes understanding and accepting that the holy truth message left Jesus a flayed and bloody scapegoat of Calvary is central to living in faith.

Eagleton writes plainly, but his arguments are a tightly knit garment woven from threads of mysticism and strands of liberation theology. The book is an adaptation of lectures he gave at the invitation of Yale University as part of the Dwight Harrington Terry Foundation Lectures on Religion in the Light of Science and Philosophy. It is presented in four parts: The Scum of the Earth; The Revolution Betrayed; Faith and Reason; Culture and Barbarism. The author joined good company, for the Terry lectures have featured Paul Tillich, Erich Fromm, and Carl G. Jung among others.

Eagleton is a literary critic, but his style here incorporates the unsheathed blade that entertains us when CSPAN televises the activities of the British House of Commons. That can occasionally come across as too witty by half, as if the author might be extending a point merely to inflict one more cut. Deep into Eagleton’s argument, the appellation of “Ditchkins” even begins to wear on a reader, becoming almost a schoolyard taunt.

Despite its slim size, the book is inordinately thick with intellectual concepts. Eagleton sees Jesus as the divine presence of God on earth, and he preaches Christ’s message in a tightly reasoned liberation theology-cum-socialism. Much of the author’s argument requires the reader to stop, re-read, and even close the book in contemplation. The power, complexity, and originality of Eagleton’s apologia will find an eager audience only among the intelligent, the open-minded, and the curious.

This is especially so when a reader is confronted with matters such as Eagleton’s view of the truth of the Christ’s life and message.


The New Testament is a brutal destroyer of human illusions. If you follow Jesus and don’t end up dead, it appears you have some explaining to do. The stark signifier of the human condition is one who spoke up for love and justice and was done to death for his pains.

With that, the reader finds the heart of Eagleton’s argument, albeit one few fundamentalists or evangelicals or Protestants or Mass-attending Catholics or Eastern Orthodox will share. Why? Because Eagleton seems to show little concern for a Jesus who walked on water or turned water to wine. Eagleton sees Jesus and his revolutionary message of love and justice as miracle enough, especially when compared to Hitchens’s and Dawkins’s faith in mankind’s progress through the mechanics of secular humanism, the great machine that produces antibiotics and stem-cell research, the integrated circuit and the internet, free speech and assembly and racial integration.

And Auschwitz.

He refers to Hitchens and Dawkins as “ ... astonishingly tight-lipped about the cock-ups and catastrophes of science ... “

One of the more straightforward and closely reasoned arguments against the liberal establishment’s position that Islam (as a religion) is at war with the Enlightenment.

“It is rather that, without the vast concentration camp known as the Gaza Strip, it is not all out of the question that the Twin Towers would still be standing.”

Eagleton then traces anti-western sentiments to the CIA’s part in bringing the shah to power in Iran and to our support for Wahhabbi feudalism in the Arabic pennisula. Why? Perhaps we can point to a colonial-like search for raw material and markets.

“Advanced capitalism is inherently agnostic ... Modern market societies tend to be secular, relativist, pragmatic, and materialistic.”

This side of the Atlantic we add religion to the mix whenever we want to spice up an argument. Evolution? Intelligent design? Is it a baby or simply a fetus? Eagleton thinks little of that sort thing.

“This brand of piety is horrified at the sight of a female breast but considerably less appalled by the obscene inequalities between rich and poor.”

For me, the most difficult segment was “Faith and Reason.” I quickly grasped his argument that atheists and agnostics have too much faith in reason; or to state it conversely, reason requires faith. But then Eagleton presents a thesis that God is “not a possible object of cognition,” and “that faith is for most part performative rather than propositional.”

Does that mean that we prove God exists by acting in love and compassion, justice and mercy? The issue is further dissected when the author discusses “knowledge” and “belief,” and suggests the “reduction of belief to positive knowledge” destroys the truths to be found in faith.

Readers interested in He Who Was Before the Big Bang and She Who Lives Beyond the Universe’s Edge will find the author’s work is erudite and powerful and will profit from reading and thinking about his thesis.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Joe Girardi, Teddy Ballgame, and Quantum Physics

MATHLETICS:
How Gamblers, Managers, and Sports Enthusiasts Use
Mathematics in Baseball, Basketball, and Football
By Wayne L. Winston
375 pp. Princeton University Press $29.95

Does Joe Girardi, manager of the 2009 World Series winning New York Yankees, buy into Mathletics? Girardi didn’t write a blurb for Winston’s book, but television viewers did catch a glimpse of the Yankees’ manager consulting a large loose-leaf binder before making a pitching change during a Series game.

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Year of the Dog, IV

Daisy Dog, the once super slender Boxer puppy, has passed her fourth month birthday fast gaining weight and size. She is thriving on a brew of homemade dog food, with sweet potatoes being the most recent addition to the vegetable-and-fish stew.

Last night I woke up with her sprawled across my chest. Presently she weighs less than 20 pounds, somewhat (but not much) smaller than our two Boston terriers. The Bostons sleep on our bed, the male between us, the female between my feet. Daisy has joined the crowded, which provoked this observation from my wife:
"She's going to be a full-grown Boxer who thinks she weighs 20 pounds."

I hope not, especially since this particular Boxer has proven herself somewhat difficult to housebreak. Daisy does nicely at night, whining when she wants to be let outdoors, but during the day, her attitude grows more ... casual.

In fact, I could be provoked in saying that this particular Boxer doesn't seem as intelligent as the terriers, or as intelligent as some other dogs I have known. A local Boxer fancier says the housebreaking issue is related to the dog's metabolism and relatively inefficient waste system -- in his words, a "small bladder."
"Don't even bother to try to housebreak a Boxer until they're passed four months old."
We shall see. It may be the price of a Boxer should include the price of new carpeting.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

A Brief Review


HARVARD BEATS YALE 29-29

The Story of the Most Famous Football Game Ever Played in the Ivy League...as Told by the Players
By Kevin Rafferty
175 pp. The Overlook Press $35

The Iron Duke’s apocryphal words—”The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing-fields of Eton”—apparently could be turned upside down and stretched to cover what happened at Harvard Stadium, November 23rd, 1968.

The story is this: Yale is an undefeated football powerhouse. Harvard is having a decent year, but odds are they fall. And so it seems, score 29-13 in favor of Yale with 42 seconds left, whereupon Harvard back-up quarterback Frank Champi engineers a two-touchdown recovery to tie the unbeaten Yalies.

Many post-Viet Nam movers-and-shakers were connected to those elite Ivy League schools that day, including a future president and a vice-president (George W. Bush and Albert Gore), a chunk of the legal and financial establishment-to-be, the cartoonist who would go on to create Doonesbury, and even an Oscar-winner (Tommie Lee Jones was an All-League lineman for Harvard) and an Oscar-winner-by-proxy (Meryl Streep was dating Yale fullback Bob Levin).

All that’s not really relevant to Rafferty’s story, except for the inclusion of Trudeau’s cartoons satirizing the god-like status of Yale star Brian Dowling. Truth told, this isn’t a book so much as a nicely bound story-board for Rafferty’s documentary film that preceded the literary effort. Rafferty was a Harvard student in 1968, much to the dismay of his Yale alum father, and “ ... in 2006, I was casting about for the idea of a new film ... suddenly, there it was ... an idea.”

The book is interesting in the way that personalities shine through, but I suspect it would best serve as a companion to the film.

For example, Tommie Lee Jones comes across as blasĂ© and taciturn, qualities that might be less enigmatic on film. And a Yale linebacker—”My intent was to inflict so much damage on him that he wouldn’t be able to play the game anymore.”—might not seem so thuggish if we were to hear his voice and watch his mannerisms. But again, he’s now “involved in the investment world,” and, well ...

Friday, December 4, 2009

Modern Love: Another Reaction


A teacher in our school has adopted “A Day in a Wheelchair” and is providing a couple of wheelchairs per day for staff and later, students, to “break from comfortable routine, the courage to act, the courage to be an agent of change, and a leader in our community...”


I had the privilege today. And I share my experiences. But first, I read Seven Wheelchairs over the Thanksgiving break.. Congratulations on a beautiful memoir and the recent attention in New York Times. You do have a magical gift with words; your story speaks of courage, pain, triump, humor, anger, and beautiful love! You are a role model in many ways for everyone. Keep writing and publishing!

Today’s thoughts ...
In the chair for the first time, I was positioned to see down a long, empty hallway. My initial thought, “Oh, what a long journey.” I have never looked at this hallway in the same view. I think this journey is symbolic of a bigger thing…the journey of life in a wheelchair.

As I took off on this journey, I saw I was in for a slow walk. A kind student came right up and asked to push me to the library. In a second, we were off. I didn’t forget the two important words…thank you!

I seem to be noticing natural things more. I hardy take the time to see the sun rise in the library, but today, my view is at a slower pace. And thus, I marvel at the sun shining in my office. But with my inexperience as a wheelchair driver, I am not moving too quickly and the sun begins to be a nuisance as it needs to move, rather than me move!

My first big lesson, BE CAREFUL when bending over to pick something up. I almost fell out of the chair. These chairs are wicked! Is it okay to laugh at yourself? I think so.

It is amazing the looks and stares from people. On the way to the lunchroom, I wanted to say, stop staring. Many students do indeed treat the wheelchair occupant as nothing out of the ordinary but others simply stare. It is a comfort when a person pops up and says, “Hey, let me help you carry that lunch or push you through the hallways.”

Our pathways are tight throughout the school. I see from this experience that it would be nice if people would push chairs back in and tidy the rooms. It is easier for accessibility when the pathways are clear.

I went to the Library CafĂ© for a cup of hot cider. I didn’t think about being a one-handed driver with a cup of cider. It didn’t work; I went in circles. Again, I discovered helpful students to get me from one location to another. More thank yous!

Oh, about the bathroom experience -- Being a staff member, I thought I would tackle the office restroom. No way! Even though the sign said wheelchair accessible, it was not!

I then proceeded to the girls’ student restroom with a similar sign. I had to have help with doors getting in and out! In the stall, I got stuck in the room backwards. What an experience! I hope it is not cheating that I had to use my feet to push myself backwards out! And then, I couldn’t exit the outer door. I opened the door enough to holler, HELP! Thanks to the young man who came into the bathroom to hold the door open wide enough so I could maneuver my way out! I had a large wheelchair that was forever getting stuck!

I enjoyed talking with a fellow student in his wheelchair. We talked about muscle strength, interests, and the normal school talk. I encouraged him to pursue whatever his heart desires for future after high school.
What I learned?
I am clumsy. Southeast Polk students are helpful for the most part, either by volunteering or with a simple please and thank you. I can maneuver a wheelchair with practice but do leave some nicks and dings along the way!

Door entrances are tight. We need to push chairs in for easier handicap maneuvering. Let’s just do it, without being asked.

Life moves at a slower rate in a wheelchair. I see things at this level that I might have missed a few feet higher up! Seeing the sun shine in the library today was a good feeling; ordinarily, I might have moved away from its glare and missed this feeling of appreciation.

Matters not if we are in a wheelchair or on two feet. We are all the same and valuable to this Earth, yet diverse from one another in some way. There should be no pity or sympathy for an obvious disability. We all have disabilities that just don’t show. Each life on Earth is important and should be lived and appreciated to the fullest. I am happy to have participated in this experience. Thank you, Southeast Polk, for this opportunity.
Thank you, Mr. Presley, for shedding light on the diversity, important gifts, and beauty within each and everyone of us!



Seven Wheelchairs: A Life Beyond Polio, Gary Presley (Univ. of IA Press, 2008)



Words spoken by Mr. Presley…


…murky line between compassion and pity, sympathy and condescension…


Sincere sympathy may be a little better, but I don’t want it. Whatever warmth it provides you, it is of no value to me. Empathy, silent empathy, which unvoiced assumption of our commonality, I suppose is best of all. Empathy does not ask me to decide if I am worthy. Empathy simply recognizes we all ride this world together…


p. 224

My response ...
I thank you sincerely for your kind words about my book, and I appreciate you taking the time to write, Ms VanHook.

Truth be told, many in the disability rights movement are ambivalent about "wheelchair demonstrations" -- primarily because such experiences do not reflect some of the most ugly aspects of life faced by people with disabilities (employment issues, discriminatory health care, etc.) but I think you've hit upon one important aspect of their value: an example of the need for universal design.

While I cannot remember if I stated it outright in my memoir, I know the implication of the story of my early isolation illustrates the ... idiocy of the resistance to making every home and business totally accessible. I would have recovered emotionally and perhaps even physically far sooner had I been able to visit friends and family without undertaking a major logistics enterprise.

Another thing that struck me about your thoughts is the idea that courtesy and empathy seems to bubble up when a person with mobility disabilities is in need of a bit of help.

Too bad, I think, that we are not as thoughtful in general.

Long ago, I used to refuse help. I reached a point where I accepted it. I apparently have evolved further -- now I ask for it, from friend and stranger alike. I suppose it's another aspect of my belief that I can "advocate" for disability rights (for that "commonality" which you quote from my memoir) by simply being present in the world, by refusing to sit in the background, by making my needs known whether that be assistance in opening a door or the insistence that society will continue to segregate people with disabilities because we are not visible in society unless we turn to (among other things) universally accessible design.

Thursday, December 3, 2009

"We All Need a Sappy Story ... ?"

image from Wikipedia

A comment on Modern Love from Voulez-vous and Tigger Too ...
"I love this story, Reader's Digest-sappy though it may be."












Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Editors, Words, and Being Present in the World

I have been surprised by some of the reaction to an essay of mine that appeared in the Sunday, November 29, 2009, issue of The New York Times.

The essay came out on the page at over 2500 words, and the Times keeps Modern Love essays to 1800 words. I worked with the column editor, and then the essay went through copy-editing. There the process came aground temporarily on a sandbar in the form of the word "crippled."

The New York Times does not use the word in relation to people's physical condition. I had used the word purposely, for the same reason I used words like "gimp" and "crip" in my memoir: to take possession of the person I am.

I recognize myself as being "crippled." I do mind being "disabled," which was the suggested substitute, because it seems to echo in its perception of limitation my father's constant admonition against using the word "can't."

I suppose my objection to "disabled" was somewhat hypocritical since I would rather term myself a "person with a disability" rather than be identified one of those ugly terms like "wheelchair bound" or "confined to a wheelchair."

On the other hand, I think the word "disabled" seems infinite, applying all the time in every circumstance, while " ... with a disability" suggests possibilities remain.

Neither the copy editor nor I got exactly the word we preferred. I suggested "paralyzed," and he agreed.


You can read the essay here.