Wind Farms and Scenic Places

The current controversy over whether or not to tolerate wind farms in the vicinity of Oregon's Steens Mountain is especially interesting to me, as a photograph of a wind farm graces the cover of the second edition of Environmentalism, my survey of nature loving in the western world which appeared last summer.  An editor at Pearson gave me a choice between a beautiful mountain or canyon and a wind farm.  I chose the wind farm because it meshes with the story I open the book with, a story which reveals the complexities and ironies of modern environmentalism.

That story is of a controversy over a wind farm in a much more celebrated and well-known scenic area than Steens Mountain: Nantucket Sound.  Residents and sympathizers raised some 3 million dollars to oppose the proposed wind farms.  "Our national treasures should be off limits to industrialisation," remarked Walter Cronkite, the famous retired news anchor--and a resident whose view of the sound would be marred by the electricity-producing turbines.

My problem with Cronkite's argument--that scenic areas should be off limits to industrialism--is that industrialism has everything to do with his enjoyment of Nantucket Sound.  Massive economic development made possible his career and wealth and allowed him and others to purchase expansive homes that consume a great deal of energy on the rim of this "national treasure."  Where is that energy going to come from?  Advocates of wild and scenic places often elide that inconvenient question.

The thesis of Environmentalism is that nature loving has more often than not distracted us from the hard work of establishing a sensible and sustainable relationship with the non-human world.

To see my op-ed on Oregonlive on this subject, published April 29, go to:
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/04/steens_mountain_debate_is_bigg.html

The Growing Debate about College "Outcomes"

This morning's paper includes an interesting column by David Brooks of the New York Times.  Brooks is fairly conservative, but not extremely so.  He surveys a number of revealing studies which suggest that although students are spending more and more for college, they aren't learning much.  Reformers suggest that we should address this problem by more closely measuring what students are supposed to learn in a given course or course of study.  In fact I've been working on this very endeavor at Portland State over the past few months.  As a result, my courses have much more detailed rubrics or goals, as well as assignments tailored to strengthen student performance in particular areas.  The hope is that an outside evaluator could come along and assess student's capacity to, say, address both sides of a complex question.  This would be done at the outset and close of one of my courses to see if students are actually getting better at what I want them to learn.

Many academics dismiss such efforts as a waste of time and energy--in part, I think,  because many of us are inclined to dismiss out of hand any idea that comes from an administrator, especially if it has a lot of jargon from education professionals.  I think there is also something to be said for the idea that not all aspects of education can be measured; wisdom and insight are difficult to quantify.  In general, though, I think that colleges and professors should be much more accountable for what we do--and don't do--with our students.  But I think that this reform will face a great deal of resistance from academics.

Revolutionary Fiction

The final installment of Laurie Halse Anderson's trilogy on the American Revolution, Ashes, will be out late this year.  Anderson is a highly acclaimed and popular writer of historical fiction for youth.  The two earlier books in the trilogy, Chains and Ashes, have been extensively used in middle schools, especially, as they are engaging reads on one of the two big events in U.S. history.

The books are unusual in that their young protagonists are both black, and the author doesn't seem to feel much obligated to make white patriots seem progressive.  The fact that many more slaves won their freedom fighting for rather than against the British has long been a discomfiting fact for many Americans.  Historical fiction for children on the American Revolution has been much truer to the historical record than the highly popular film "Patriot" on issues of race and racism, but most of the novels have either pretty much ignored black people (Johnny Tremain is an obvious example) or suggested that the Revolution was ushering in--if fitfully--an era of freedom for all.

Anderson's books are much more realistic and depressing; she seldom lets the reader forget that the protagonists well realize that fighting for their own freedom and the young nation's freedom are two very different enterprises.  It will be interesting to see if she maintains this cheerless historical accuracy through this final book.  Balancing the requirements of patriotism and historical honesty is often a difficult proposition--though at least Anderson is making a good living at it.

What We Care About

Whenever I use Internet Explorer I start at MSN home page, which features photos of the top stories in the news.  As of right now, here they are: the recent jet crash in Virginia; a swimmer interrupted a boat race in the UK; the Master's Golf tournament; man survives nail gun (men and nail guns seem to give each other a lot of trouble--and it makes for great news stories and photographs); recent tornados in Texas; a Minnesota waitress gets to keep a $12,000 tip; Jackie Kennedy's Secret Service agent shares his experiences; Saturday Night Live has some "Hot & Hilarious" hosts; Martha Stewart's Easter desserts; keys to good health.

At the risk of seeming to be a point-headed intellectual, I'll just point out that none of these stories is going to make any of us much wiser.  Of course people use the internet for other reasons, too; researchers estimate that a third or more of the time we are using it to view pornography.  At least the "Hot & Hilarious" SNL women are shown with their clothes on.

I think what troubles me the most about  North Americans' addiction to trivial news is that most of us have extraordinary opportunities to affect the world.  We live, on average, more than twice as long as our ancestors, enjoy comforts that previous generations (and much of the world today) would find unimaginable, and have unprecedented access to education and information.   Yet most of us are woefully ignorant about politics or other forces reworking our world, forces that we have the freedom to shape as well as understand.  We are too busy amusing ourselves.