Monday, February 10, 2014

...And the Connections Continue

Here's a link; go there; read.

http://vivalibrarianism.blogspot.com/2014/02/media-binges-good-bad-and-library.html

Consider: so what? (i.e., what's the relevance/connection?)

Then go back through that article and, if you haven't done so yet, click through the link blue'd out thusly: "watching TV is more like reading a novel that ever" and play through the same prompt--what's the relevance?

Don't bother to respond here; instead email me your thoughts. You know, via that icon over at teacherweb.com

Yes, it counts.

ADDENDUM: Posted 2/12/14; 11:05 a.m. for ALL--new and previous readers:

Once you've sent me your comments on this reading, go on back to Librarianism and leave a comment there--a copy/paste of what you said to me (or a near approximation of it) with something transitional to help it make sense in the context of why *I* asked you to read there would be sufficient.

Keep in mind, the 'blogosphere exists as a community; community only coheres via communication...

Friday, January 31, 2014

Chocolat Integrity--It is ALL Connected


First, Nikk said a thing.
Then Than read it and had a little sumpthin' sumpthin' to say.
Then we watched CHOCOLAT and met a character named Rue...or was it Roux?
Read, think, comment and discuss:
"nicholas mi---you don't need my last name. the one with the Merchant of Venice nose said...
I'm going to leave this post as some mindless fun with my patented Modified Socratic Method (i.e., raise questions because you have no answers).

Mayhaps this will spark a litt'oh idear in someone who reads it--preferably me--and a post less vacuous will follow. Yes, consider that a formal notice that you're wrist deep in a vacuous post.


When a society is integrated, the individuals each form an integral part. In fact, any sort of aggregate collection is just a whole buncha indervid'ls amalgamated. The structural integrity of the society depends upon the behaviors that prevail. There's Than's isocracy (by the way, O how an actual isocracy would suck eggs!). I was hoping to spar with Andrew, but I rather like his idea of common threads that bind together society. Plus it's the bastard's birthday.

I won't boast about how good I am in the kitchen (apophasis!), but I will invoke a culinary analogy. You can make a variety of different soups from what's called a roux. At its most simple, it's flour and butter that forms into a paste and creates a base. You add yer veggies and liquid and good stuff and it binds the soup together--WHEW! thank God that intersected somehow.

Cripes, I want to make soup now.

In any case, something else to think about is what is this common thread that binds different societies together? What is the shared roux? Maybe they use cornstarch.

Insert Great American Melting Pot Crock o' Cliche here.

--n. wm. m.
January 6, 2014 at 10:40 PM"
"Than Schrauth said...
There's something to be said for using the blog as a tool of procrastination, one finds things that one never would have. What Nikk said is an amazing metaphor that has piqued my curiosity enough to write something.

If I may put forward a paradigm shift that Nikk only just made me realize, we've (the people's whose comments I've read or opinions heard, sorry if I missed someone else seeing this first)only been looking at the systemic integrity that Mrs. C threw at us and so have been trying to extrapolate the definition of integrity to fit a society. Nikk's alternative wording, structural integrity, is a term that is generally reserved for buildings, but is, in my oh so humble opinion, a better way of looking at systemic integrity. If a building has structural integrity you can be confidant it won't fall to pieces when you clean your gutters (five points to Gryffindor if you see the double language). The creation of systemic integrity is not the reason the pieces are put where they are but it is a necessary result without which the pieces are meaningless.

Now time to prove the plebs wrong as any pretentious prick ought to. If we look at integrity as the ability of a society to hold itself together to achieve whatever its primary purpose is (the point of a restaurant isn't to stay standing and book clubs exist to read books as a group, their integrity is not the purpose of their existence)then it stands to reason that as we grope towards integrity, the ability to keep our s*!# together, it never changes and is not dependent on the time period. When Adhemar and his crew hijacked nobility their goal was to keep the system together so they killed the peasants, just as the KKK lynched people to maintain the status quo. These systems inevitably fell apart because they were not integrated and could never be until they changed, the world kept groping towards true integrity.

For my grand finale I do believe tying this into the constitution is in order: "We the people... in order to form a more perfect union...". The Revolution, amendments and civil rights movement have been tools we have, as a society, used to rid ourselves of the elements that divide us to create a more perfect union.
January 20, 2014 at 10:52 PM
 "

Friday, January 4, 2013

The "I" Word, Or: Where All the Effs and Ns Intersect

An old post re-posted for your growing insight:,

Integration. Now, there is an interesting word.

Because we too often limit ourselves, the sense of "integration" that immediately springs to the 21st century mind is the one related to forced busing and a small black girl in a gingham dress with ribbons tied to the ends of braided pigtails clutching a belted book bag as she is escorted by a cadre of uniformed, armed agents through lines of fat and viperous white, middle-aged men spitting filth and lougies at and on her. And if that's where our association lies with that word, it's a damned fine place to go for meaning.


But consider, please: "integration" and "integrity" share the same root, and their relationship goes deeper than that. Integrity is, after all, the state that is achieved when and only when an individual has fully integrated all the values regarded by the larger community as being of the highest worth. It is not an easy state to achieve, nor it is an easy one to maintain. But it is the ideal within each and every society; it is the means by which we recognize and applaud heroism within the community.


Different communities, of course, have different value-sets. My brother's biker club recognizes its heroes according to different standards than my mother's writers' group does. But those little communities are enfolded together within larger ones, and taking a god's view might give them the appearance of a mass of freshly-laid frog eggs or a zygote in hyper split-and-replicate mode or a Venn diagram on crack. You get the idea. There is a set of shared values recognized by the whole, regardless of the deviations that reveal themselves when individual groups meet on Saturdays at the library for poetry readings or at the clubhouse for cheers and beers.

It has been through our struggles across millenia with the "eff" words (fate, fortune, faith, free will and that fifth one, freedom) and the degree to which we are individually and communally empowered to wield them that we have spiraled onward toward the "N" word--through and around and leaping over the [faux] "n" word--and the path only tends upward because we manage to imbue ourselves, baptize ourselves, slake ourselves with integrity.

Integration. Need some? It's yours for the taking.