How to use this Page

Warmer weather is here, so that means one thing: we are going to embark on a family trip. I always thought I did a pretty good job at planning these, but at a very informal meeting (right after I come back from BJ's with a fresh arsenal of pizza rolls the kids usually herd around the kitchen island), I discovered there may be some problems with my planning.

Before I begin, let me say that it is very difficult to plan lessons for a long time and not try to weave in some kind of theme when planning trips. I have been accused of making family vacations "like something our English teacher would force us to do" and I've been working on that. I keep forgetting that while I think it's amazing fun to go see Edgar Allan Poe's headstone, the kids are like, "Wait, did he write Twilight Zone?"

So for this year's Easter break, we came up with the idea of getting a Philadelphia City Pass that offers tickets to six attractions. Emma wanted the aquarium, I wanted the zoo, Christopher and hubster wanted the National Constitution Center, Philip wanted the Franklin Museum and everyone wanted the double decker bus tour. For the sixth, we had to choose between the National Science Museum and visiting the Eastern Penetentiary which houses Al Capone's cell. Of course, I picked the museum. They just put in a whole new butterfly wing.

"We knew you would," Christopher said, "because you want us to learn on a vacation."

"There are worse things."

"Nope," Emma said, "there aren't. You also make it so we have no time to relax. It's like every two seconds, we have to go somewhere or watch something."

"What did you want to do?"

Emma rolled her eyes. "Relax in the hotel. Float in the pool. And you're like, 'Philip, show Emma how to do the butterfly stroke.' "

I do remember saying that.

"So we're going to the penetentiary," Christopher said. "It's supposed to be haunted."

I was worried this would be too dark a destination for Emma. She looked right at me. "I definitely would LOVE to see a ghost. That would be the best vacation ever. A very not Momish vacation."

Momish? I make up words, so I guess I can't say anything.

So after a consensus, we are going to visit Al Capone's cell. Here is a picture of it:


I DID find out that the Eastern Penetentiary was the first place that believed in rehabilitating criminals rather than punishing them. It was based on Quaker beliefs that if you isolated prisoners, they would be able to refect on their crimes in the silence. They even put hoods over their heads when taking them out for meals so they didn't interact with other prisoners.

In fact, I found out a lot of facts about the Eastern Penetentiary, including ghost sightings and lots of legends. I did a little research so they might learn something - a very Momish thing to do.

I should probably get a Twitter account or something instead of using my blog for announcements, but I just don't want to be any more connected than I am. This is a quick blog to explain why I may not have answered or responded to something you sent me.

First, I'll tell you that Boston was really fun. Philly was great, too. I went there the night before the train because it made life easier, and I am all for easier. The kids came, but not to the hotel - I had forgotten what it was like not to have to bring juice and fruit snacks to a hotel room. It was a little weird that no one jumped on the bed or kept begging to order room service. We did get to see a lot of stuff about Ben Franklin, his house and some of the things he did.

And I found out that I really, really like being on a train. I sat in the cafe car by random chance and I got a whole table to myself and with no one around, I was able to write without anybody interrupting. I think I might just go around and buy train tickets and ride to nowhere so I can hang out and write while watching New England go by. (Of course, they also serve beer on Amtrak which I had not realized, and by Providence, there was singing...)

Ben Franklin was in Boston, too. He had a house there also and did wonderful, patriotic things like he had done in Philly. In fact, I crossed the Ben Franklin Bridge to get to my hotel in Philly, and it was on Ben Franklin Boulevard.

But I am really behind -- I have a ton of emails in my mailbox that I haven't gotten to. I will get to them. I had to write a new curriculum when I got back, then there was a full day of work, and I just got home from jury duty about an hour ago. I was selected as a juror, which surprised me because I told them that I don't really watch tv and I read teen fiction in my spare time. I figured they would think I was way to weird to make an informed decision, but no...so I spent most of the day in the suspended animation of a courthouse, but at least the trial is done and I am back.

Tomorrow, Thursday, is another full day of work, so I promise Friday I will be back to write back and come visit your blog.

Elvin Lim is Assistant Professor of Government at Wesleyan University and author of The Anti-intellectual Presidency, which draws on interviews with more than 40 presidential speechwriters to investigate this relentless qualitative decline, over the course of 200 years, in our presidents’ ability to communicate with the public. He also blogs at www.elvinlim.com.  In the article below he looks at Senator Barack Obama. Read his previous OUPblogs here.

The talk of town these days is that Senator Barack Obama is either just too cerebral, or refreshingly so.

Assessing the Senator’s weak performance at the Saddleback Faith Forum, Michael Gerson wrote in the Washington Post, “Obama was fluent, cool and cerebral — the qualities that made Adlai Stevenson interesting but did not make him president. ” Yet to others, cerebral is good. “Obama’s cool, cerebral style may be just what we need,” wrote Eleanor Clift of Newsweek.

It has occurred to me that people who agree or disagree with my thesis about The Anti-intellectual Presidency have tended to be divided on the question of whether or not a president’s political judgment should be based on intellection or intuition. This division may appear to some to map crudely along partisan lines: some liberals and Democrats tend to value reliance on the intellect; some conservatives and Republicans prioritize instinct. I think there is more agreement than meets the eye.

Insofar as there is a partisan disagreement, populist Republicans are probably right that as a general political rule, visceral trumps cerebral. The Obama campaign is starting to recognize this, with their choice of vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden, someone who speaks with passion and sometimes, apparently, without much prior thought.

But I don’t think many people are against intellection as a method for decision-making. It is surely a strawman argument that President Bush does no thinking and that Karl Rove was the brain behind his decisions. The key is that Bush pulls off the semblance of intellectual diffidence, even though he must do a lot of thinking behind the scenes. Like others have said of President Dwight Eisenhower, President Bush has mastered the highest political art that conceals art itself.

Now, there is still an argument to be made for judgment to be based on intuition rather than intellection, but it is a weak one. “Go with your gut” may be a familiar refrain, but even if intuition is less error-prone than intellection, there is one reason that recommends against its excessive use. Intuition is non-falsifiable. No one can prove what he feels in his or her gut. So when President Bush told us that he looked into Vladamir Putin’s eyes and saw a soul, we could only take his word for it that he saw what he saw. We couldn’t test the claim; we couldn’t even debate it. This can’t be what democracy is about, because democracy is conducted with the deliberation of public reasons, not the unilateral assertion of private emotions.

If I am correct, then no one disagrees with the importance of intellection as a decision-making method, even as there is disagreement on the political utility of projecting or hiding such intellection. The disagreement is about the image, but we can scarcely deny the importance of the process of intellection. Because they have failed to make this distinction between image and process, those who disagree with the appearance of intellection have also wrongly concluded that the process of intellection should have no place in leadership.

Anti-intellectualism is politically powerful, but it is in the end self-defeating. Suppose I feel in my gut that intellection is key to decision-making. How will someone who disagrees with my gut instinct prove my intuition wrong? Only by argument, debate, intellection.

ShareThis

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Coordinates: 39 57 N 79 5 W

Population: 5,687,147 (2006 est.)

With Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game tonight, and the end of the softball season for the Oxford Blues (OUP’s baseball team) looming next week, I decided to take a sportier slant with my post this week. But why Philly? Well, as it happens, the City of Brotherly Love was the site of the first steel and concrete baseball stadium in the United States. Shibe Park, which later became Connie Mack Stadium, opened its doors and entered the history books on April 12, 1909 as the home of the Philadelphia Athletics. Located north of the Central Business District and slightly east of the Schuylkill River between West Lehigh Avenue and West Somerset Street, this famous field hosted games until the end of the 1970 season. Fire damaged the structure the following year, and in 1976 it was finally demolished as that year’s All-Star Game took place across town on former marshland at Veteran’s Stadium.

Ben Keene is the editor of Oxford Atlas of the World. Check out some of his previous places of the week.

ShareThis

Author: Kathryn Lasky (on JOMB)
Illustrator: David Clark (on JOMB)
Published: 2006 Charlesbridge (on JOMB)
ISBN: 1570915954 Chapters.ca Amazon.com

Surprisingly descriptive, thought-provoking text and a cast of goofy, grinning hooligans provide a peek into a career in nautical crime as a reflective rogue ponders pillaging — its logistical details, dangers and doldrums — and grapples with issues of greed, freedom, friendship and distrust.

Other books mentioned:

• Tough Boris