Monthly Archives: September 2003

patriotism and civic

Some people who talk or write about civic education insist that the

United States has the very best democracy (or society) in

the world. In my opinion, the US is one of a few dozen polities

that stand head-and-shoulders above the rest (due to good luck as

well as wise ancestors). I think it’s a goal of civic education to

help students understand how fortunate they are compared to people

who live in tyrannies or anarchy. I feel loyalty and gratitude toward

the United States and not toward any other nation, and I think this

is a good attitude for Americans to hold. However, it’s far from clear

to me that our polity is the single best in the world. We have low

voter participation; our crime and incarceration rates are amazingly

high; and we live shorter lives with more disease, compared to people

in some of the northern European nations. Nor do we compare favorably

with these countries if one thinks about the long term. Sweden, for

example, has been stable and at peace for 200 years, progressing steadily

toward liberty and democracy. These other democratic states are all

to our left politically. Thus I wonder whether some people want to

teach students that the United States is the best society

in order to head off discussions about whether we should move somewhat

leftward.

Congressional Conference on Civic Education

I spoke today at the first annual Congressional Conference on Civic

Education, which was attended by delegations from all fifty states,

including state legislators, educators, and executive branch officials.

I had served on the advisory committee for the conference, so I was

glad to see it come to pass. It was also my third opportunity in 10

days to make a speech about the Civic

Mission of Schools report. (The other two were the 50th anniversary

of the National Conference on Citizenship

and the Youth for

Justice state directors’ meeting.)

At all three events, there was discussion of the importance and difficulty

of teaching controversial issues in schools. Today,

I mentioned Gun Owners of America’s attack on the

civic education bill as evidence that there are people who do

not want such discussion in classrooms. After the session, a state

legislator from the West approached me and said that I had been un-civil

in treating the Gun Owners as "nuts"; I should have made

sure I understood and conveyed their position fairly. He said that

my incivility was an example of what is wrong with civic education.

I was taken aback, since I feel that much of my work is aimed at

promoting civil and respectful dialogue, and I strive to understand

opponents’ point of view. For example, I strongly disagree with the

National Rifle Association’s positions, yet I think its views are

sincerely held, based on principles, sometimes unfairly caricatured,

and conceivably correct. I suppose I would defend my criticism of

the Gun Owners by noting that I didn’t attribute a hidden agenda

to them; I simply paraphrased their public statement, which is a pretty

explicit attack on critical thinking in schools.

the many Bachs

For some reason, I was thinking about all the dramatically different

ways in which people have seen and admired J.S. Bach since his own day.

  • There is Bach as a virtuouso improviser, the man who could sit

    down at a keyboard and swiftly invent a multi-part fugue on any

    theme. This is Bach as forerunner of a jazz musician, an exciting

    live performer.

  • There is Bach as pedagogue, the man who taught three sons who

    were much more successful than himself and who wrote great instructional

    works such as the "Well-Tempered Clavier." These musical

    texts have been consistently consulted by composers even when Bach’s

    other works were forgotten (for instance, in Mozart’s time).

  • There is Bach the profound spiritual master, the Lutheran churchman,

    the author of great narrative choral works such as the Passions,

    which realistically depict human emotions in relation to God’s providence.

    This is the Bach whom the Romantics admired most. They even disparaged

    the "Christmas Oratorio" because it recycled music from

    secular works—so it couldn’t be spiritually inspired.

  • There is Bach as an anti-Romantic, an unpretentious musical worker.

    Whereas Romantic musical geniuses were supposed to be free of all

    worldly motives and inspired only by Art, Bach happily turned out

    church music for every Sunday, often re-using material, borrowing

    from other sources, and making do with amateur performers. For this,

    he was admired by leftish anti-Romantics such as Paul Hindemith.

    If I recall correctly, Bertold Brecht used to call himself a Schreiber,

    not a Dichter—someone who makes his living by writing,

    not a literary Artist. The same could be said of Bach.

  • There is Bach as mathematical genius, author of technically and

    formally complex instrumental works, especially the "Musical

    Offering," that seem as other-wordly as mathematical proofs.

After writing a list like this, one is expected to say, "Of

course, Bach was all of these things, and that’s why he is

so great." I’m going to be a little less predictable and say

that Bach was all of these things, of course, but he was

at his greatest as the composer of narrative works that were grounded

in his understanding of human life and emotion.

the Net and participation

Right now, Hurricane Isabel is howling around us and most work has

ceased. The University has taken its server down, blessedly cutting

off my email. Yesterday afternoon, when the skies were still clear,

I met with Marty Kearns of Green

Media Toolshed, who is full of fascinating ideas about how the

Internet and other distributed technologies (including billboards

and buttons) can be used for political activism. Meanwhile, I was

reading reviews of Bruce Bimber and Richard Davis’ new book, Campaigning

Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections. Apparently, they argue

that the Internet is effective for mobilizing strongly committed partisans,

but it does not increase net participation in politics and elections.

This is consistent with CIRCLE research on young people, and also

with my predictions in a 2002 essay

on the Internet and politics.

Marty Kearns makes me optimistic about the political power of digital

technologies and their value for progressive organizations. But I

also worry about the chief barrier to participation. It’s not the

digital divide, or technological literacy, or the power of major media

companies to constrain the ways that the Internet is used. It’s rather

the lack of motivation to participate politically—the lack of

identity as citizens—among many marginalized people. In the

past, people developed that kind of identity and motivation by enrolling

in disciplined organizations with strong cultures: unions, political

parties, religious denominations. I’m not convinced that we’ve found

replacements for such organizations in the digital age.

mapping with kids

We’ve made it past the first stage of a grant competition to provide

funds for our local mapping

work with high school kids. That’s great news, except that now

I have to write a full proposal on short notice. Among other questions,

I need to answer this: "What is unusual about your project?"

We intend to help high school students who are not college-bound to

play leading roles in original scholarly research on a matter of public

importance, and see whether that work increases both their academic

skills and their civic commitment. The topic, which I’ve discussed

here before, is healthy nutrition and exercise and the degree to which

these outcomes are affected by the physical environment.

The Orton Foundation provides a great collection of youth-generated

maps at communitymap.org.