Archive for the ‘Book Talk’ Category

posted by amanda on Jun 24

Today I was reading in Mindless Eating about comfort foods and the differences between what women choose and what men choose.

What’s the big difference between men and women? When asked why they preferred pizza, pasta, and soup over cakes and cookies, men generally talked about how good they tasted and how filling they were. But when we probed a bit deeper, many also said that when they ate these foods they felt “spoiled,” “pampered,” “taken care of,” or “waited on.” Generally they associated these foods with being the focus of attention from either the mother or wife.

And women? Although they liked hot-meal comfort foods just fine, these foods did not carry the associations of being “spoiled,” “taken care of,” or “waited on.” In fact, quite the opposite. When women thought of these foods, they were reminded of the work they or their mothers had to do to produce them. These foods didn’t represent comfort, they represented preparation and cleanup.

For women, snacklike foods–candy, cookies, ice cream, chocolate–were hassly-free. Part of their comfort was to not have to make or clean up anything. It was both effortless and mindless eating.

Isn’t that interesting? Men chose foods that made them feel cared for or spoiled. As I think of Joe’s favorite foods, they are all warm and full meals. Mine are not. Last week I made lasagna because he asked for it, and I couldn’t fathom why someone would want lasagna when it is 99 degrees outside. I even talked to some friends at my yoga class about how all I want is a salad or to eat out. I need to keep our different preferences in mind, even if Joe’s tastes sometimes confuse me. I do this for my children, but I don’t always think a ton about Joe’s preferences, especially since he likes a lot of unhealthy comfort foods. Making those foods healthy and serving his comfort foods is another little way of honoring my family :) I hadn’t really considered the deeper “why’s” behind that before.

In Turansky and Miller’s Say Goodbye to Whining, they point out that the Bible tells us many times to love, honor, serve, and encourage others. I sometimes think of that as being a loftier goal than it is. The fact is that many of my day-to-day decisions can be done in a more honoring way. They say,

It’s amazing how one family member can behin a chain reaction of change, resulting in a greater sense of honor. Maybe that one family member is you.

There are so many little ways to show honor and love. I am glad that I am starting to recognize some more ways to do this. It blesses me to bless my family.  Who would’ve thought that a book on subconscious eating preferences would give me more ideas on how to bless my family?

posted by amanda on Jun 3

Back when I was first married - when dinosaurs roamed the earth - someone gave me this book. I think I picked it up for a moment and realized that my problem was not in setting boundaries, but rather in respecting others boundaries ::ducking::  I put the book down and didn’t think about it again.

I was looking at my bookshelf the other day and decided that I might as well read this book so that I can paperbackswap it. I’m really glad that I picked it up  :)

There is a section early in the book where the author is speaking to a client of his who is talking about boundaries she “set on” her husband and said that he could not talk to her “that way” anymore. This is how the author responds

“What you have done is not boundaries at all,” I replied.

“What do you mean?”

“It was your feeble attempt at controlling your husband, and that never works.” I went on to explain that boundaries are not something you “set on” another person. Boundaries are about yourself.

My client could not say to her husband, “You can’t speak to me that way.” This demand is unenforceable. But she could say what she would or would not do if he spoke to her that way again. She could set a boundary “on herself.” She could say, “If you speak to me that way, I will walk out of the room.” This threat is totally enforceable because it has to do with her. She would be setting a boundary with the only person she could control: herself.

Hmm, yes. Perhaps I have not been setting boundaries quite as much as I thought I had been. I have told people that they may not speak to me disrespectfully, although I suppose that was just an attempt to control. I’m going to be pondering this for a few days.

posted by amanda on May 11

The older that my kids get, the less that I am worried about “socialization”. I went to a mix of public and private schools. My dh was homeschooled up until 7th grade and then went to private school. I never even considered homeschooling before my children were born, because I thought that the way that I was raised was the best way. Meeting my husband definitely changed my mind on that one :) Today I was reading some more Charlotte Mason while at the park with my kids, and I really loved this section on children with their peers.

The Society of his Equals too stimulating for a child.––Let us follow the little person to the Kindergarten, where he has the stimulus of classmates of his own age. It certainly is stimulating. For ourselves, no society is so much so as that of a number of persons of our own age and standing; this is the great joy of college life; a wholesome joy for all young people for a limited time. But persons of twenty have, or should have, some command over their inhibitory centres. They should not permit the dissipation of nerve power caused by too much social stimulus; yet even persons of twenty are not always equal to the task of self-management in exciting circumstances. What then, is to be expected of persons of two, three, four, five? That the little person looks rather stolid than otherwise is no guarantee against excitement within. The clash and sparkle of our equals now and then stirs up to health; but for everyday life, the mixed society of elders, juniors and equals, which we get in a family, gives at the same time the most repose and the most room for individual development. We have all wondered at the good sense, reasonableness, fun and resourcefulness shown by a child in his own home as compared with the same child in school life.

I love this.  It is so true.  Why is it that our country has become so fixated on the thought that healthy development can only come by being surrounded by people only your own age?  John Taylor Gatto addresses this in his book, Dumbing Us Down, and I wrote about it once before.

Discovering meaining for yourself as well as discovering satisfying purpose for yourself, is a big part of what education is. How this can be done by locking children away from the world is beyond me.

Yesterday I went to the library and saw the vast number of books in the collection that were devoted to getting kids excited about going to Kindergarten.  It was really really sad.  Kids aren’t made to be taken away and taught by their peers just because they turned 5.  Now that my son is 5, I am feeling more sure about this than ever.

posted by amanda on Apr 30

Sorry for another “local” post, but I just want to get the word out.

The authors of the 100 Mile Diet (also called Plenty here in the states) will be speaking in Boulder and Denver this week. They wrote a book about their experience on eating local (within 100 miles) for a year. I think it is a really interesting concept.

If you’re interested in the movement to eat local, then you should definitely come check it out. Even if you don’t live in Colorado, feel free to check out their website. They have a lot of other book tour stops, and the website is interesting even if you never hear them speak or read their book :)

http://100milediet.org/home/

Boulder, CO
Tuesday, May 1
Boulder Bookstore
7:30 - 8:30 pm
1107 Pearl Street
with Boulder Going Local!

Denver, CO
Wednesday, May 2
7:30 - 8:30 pm
Tattered Cover LoDo
1628 16th Street

posted by amanda on Apr 12

I have this terrible habit - sometimes I am in the middle of reading a really good book and I put it down and completely forget about it! I don’t know why this happens, but I guess I end up getting distracted by another book. This happened to me several YEARS ago with Anna Karenina, and I am just now picking it back up. It is SO good. I loved it when I was reading it. I love it now. What was I thinking?

In other news:

A book group that I am a member of, The Classical Review, is starting back up again. If you are a homeschooling mom who is using Charlotte Mason philosophies and wants to read (or re-read) some of the greats that you will be teaching your kids, then I invite you to join us. We are starting Mansfield Park, and I am super excited :) I think there should be so many more groups out there to encourage moms to read what we want our children to read, and this is a great way to do it :) Come and join us!

posted by amanda on Apr 3

Today as I was reading in Home Education by Charlotte Mason, I was thinking about how many different parents (including myself) now shy away from the word “obedience”. So many of the less desirable parenting styles have taken it over, and so it is hard to use it and still convey the proper message. I realized that I tend to use other words in place of obedience because of this. The section that I read today really reminded me that it is all in how you use it. I really like how Charlotte Mason approaches it as the child’s responsibility to obey, and not our job to make them obey. This is very much in agreement with grace based discipline :) She has a couple of points that I’d slightly rework, but hey, the text is 100 years old, so I can see how there could be some difficulty communicating.

Charlotte Mason says

It is said that the children of parents who are most strict in exacting obedience often turn out ill; and that orphans and other poor waifs brought up under strict discipline only wait their opportunity to break out into license.

Um yeah, totally true.

Exactly so; because, in these cases, there is no gradual training of the child in the habit of obedience; no gradual enlisting of his will on the side of sweet service and a free-will offering of submission to the highest law: the poor children are simply bullied into submission to the will, that is, the wilfulness, of another; not at all, ‘for it is right‘, only because it is convenient.

I am so glad that she addresses this. The fact is that many of the popular Christian parenting philosophies are all about bullying into submission and forcing the child to do it, not of their own free-will. This can never last. If the child is not choosing it for themselves, then why would they continue doing it when they no longer have to?

There is no need to rate the child, or threaten him, or use any manner of violence, because the parent is invested with the authority which the child intuitively recognises. It is enough to say, ‘Do this,’ in a quiet, authoritative tone, and expect it to be done. The mother often loses her hold over her children because they detect in the tone of her voice that she does not expect them to obey her behests; she does not think enough of her position; has not sufficient confidence in her own authority.

Yes, yes, yes. I find this so true in my own voice. When I am calm and respectful, so are my children. If I am getting flustered or upset, then my kids don’t have a calm role model anymore and they start following in my bad habits. I was sitting around watching moms today while I was at a drop-in Kindergarten for my kids, and I was struck by how true this is. It is true amongst the teachers, the parents, anyone in authority. Those who spoke calmly and were clear of what they expected had no problem with the children following through. Those who seemed to be asking the child a question did not get the same results.

Like I said, I don’t take every word of Charlotte Mason like the Bible. Even still, I think that her beliefs, especially considering how old they are, are very sound and impressive. As I mentioned above, I would choose not to use the word “obey”/”obedience” because of the negative connotations that it now has for so many people, but I also realize that when she wrote this it wasn’t the same problem. She gives me a lot of food for thought though. Most of it is not “new”, but rather a gentle encouragement that I am on the right track. That is so perfect, since that is what we are to do for our children as well :)

posted by amanda on Mar 31

Ever since my first reading of Charlotte Mason’s works, this was an idea that really stood out to me. Good habits are often viewed as being a chore in our society. Many parents feel guilty if their young children automatically pick up after themselves and decide to let them off of the hook because they view it as being so laborious. Soon those good habits are replaced with bad ones. Either way, you are still dealing with habits.

A while back I wrote about Ms. Mason’s description of habits. I love the way she describes it. It is so easy for me to forget that once a habit is a habit, it is no longer difficult to do. It is harder not to do it. If we allow ourselves or our children to lose good habits, then we are doing more harm than good. We are making it so that it will be that much more difficult to retrain our minds to do the right thing once again - the thing that used to be natural to us. Here is what Ms. Mason says about the ease that comes with habits

For a habit is a delight in itself; poor human nature is conscious of the ease that it is to repeat the doing of anything without effort; and, therefore, the formation of a habit, the gradually lessening of the sense of effort in a given act, is pleasurable.

This is so true, not only for our children, but also for ourselves. As most of you know, I am pregnant.  I have been struggling with keeping up my old habits. Today starts my second trimester (woohoo!) and this week has been the first time that I haven’t felt completely drained, sick, and useless. Now I am having to reform the habits that I had before we moved. Just a few months ago I was able to keep the house meticulous so that people could pop in for a showing at any moment. Since getting out of that habit, it is difficult to even get my house ready for planned guests, and that still isn’t “show worthy” like my house was before. My kids were also into the same habit. They were picking up after themselves. My son would run the sweeper each time before we left the house. My daughter would move all of our shoes. We knew what to do. Now we have will have to put in extra effort just to get back to where we were. I am so sad about this, because we were all so proud of our house and it really wasn’t a chore. It was natural.

Of course, Charlotte Mason discusses this next

This is one of the rocks that mothers sometimes split upon: they lose sight of the fact that a habit, even a good habit, becomes a real pleasure; and when the child has really formed the habit of doing a certain thing, his mother imagines that the effort is as great to him as at first, that it is a virtue in him to go on making this effort, and that he deserves, by way of reward, a little relaxation–she will let him break through the new habit a few times, and then go on again. But it is not going on; it is beginning again, and beginning in the face of obstacles. The ‘little relaxation’ she allowed her child meant the forming of another contrary habit, which must be overcome before the child gets back to where he was before.

And now for the real reason I love Charlotte Mason. She goes into how you form habits, and it is so gentle… so loving… not harsh in any way. I have learned through experience that my whole family functions best if I speak in this way.  I am so happy to see it addressed in a book, especially a book that was written so many years ago.

As CM talks about her example of a mother teaching a child to shut the door behind him when he leaves

For two or three times Johnny remembers; and then, he is off like a shot and half-way downstairs before his mother has time to call him back. She does not cry out, ‘Johnny, come back and shut the door!’ because she knows that a summons of that kind is exasperating to big or little. She goes to the door, and calls pleasantly, ‘Johnny!’ Johnny has forgotten all about the door; he wonders what his mother wants, and, stirred by curiosity, comes back, to find her seated and employed as before. She looks up, glances at the door, and says ‘I said I should try to remind you.’ ‘Oh, I forgot,’ says Johnny, put upon his honour; and he shuts the door that time, and the next, and the next.

No yelling. No freaking out. Just gently reminding the children. In the part above this section, CM shows how the mom introduces the idea of the new habit. It is loving and gentle, and she promises to help the child remember. You are working together, not punishing the child into compliance.

So today I am working on habit training again: first for myself, and then for my children. I need to regain my lost ground, and then my children will follow behind. I can’t expect their habits to be better than mine.  I need to model right behavior once again.

posted by amanda on Feb 23

I went out and did my grocery shopping today. I was bummed as I went around Wild Oats and realized that soon it would be swallowed up by Whole Foods. I realize that Boulder is home to Wild Oats, and that is probably why I like it so much. They do a wonderful job of buying local (and marking it so you can tell what you are buying!) while still keeping prices reasonable. Their sales are so much better than WF and their bulk section rocks. I have heard that this is not the case on the east coast, but here in Colorado, I think Wild Oats is way better.

To be fair, Vitamin Cottage beats them both up and down the block when it comes to prices (and they only stock organic!), but VC is a lot smaller and doesn’t offer the deli and butchering services that Wild Oats and Whole Foods offer, so it is harder for them to be competitive if you are an omnivore.

In The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Michael Pollan talks about how Whole Foods uses a big distribution chain for their produce which means that only a very small percentage is still from local farms. They fly produce around just like Safeway, and they are more than willing to sacrifice the local ideals in order to better industrialize their chain. That’s fine if they want to do it, but I’d rather have Wild Oats as a competitive option.

Then again, in some ways Whole Foods has it right. Their organic milk doesn’t come from Aurora, unlike Wild Oats. They also do a better job of luring in yuppies, which I suppose is a good thing. Whole Foods offers more “regular” products like Quaker Oats. I don’t know…

See, this is why I like being able to get the good things frome each store. Now that option is being taken from me :P  I realize this is all a part of capitalism, but it bums me out.  I like having choices.  I’m pouting.

posted by amanda on Feb 19

I just finished Monique El-Faizy’s God and Country: How Evangelicals Have Become America’s New Mainstream, and it contained a lot of different points that I’d like to discuss. It is really interesting to read an athiest’s view of the Evangelical world. She was a Christian until she went away to college and stepped away from the faith. Its kind of nice to be able to hear from someone who was both an insider and now an outsider to Christianity. It makes for an interesting perspective.

I was going to write about her chapter on church history, but I just changed my mind. I want to talk about her discussion of megachurches and their future :) So let’s jump on in:

Despite the continuing success of megachurches, as they get bigger and blander some people are starting to look for a new kind of experience, one more immediate or transcendent. They’re finding it in some unlikely places, in the podcasts of sermons they download from the Internet, in cyberchurches, and in Bible studies at their workplaces, what Barna calls “marketplace ministries.” Many have left the church building and are meeting in parks and houses. In fact, the house church movement, in which several families meet on a regular basis in someone’s home, often to be led by the same person each week, is growing by great leaps.

Even before I read this section, my mom and I were discussing this idea of alternate ways of attending church. I had told my mom that the Bible study group that we led last year in our house was the truest church I’ve ever attended. We were living lives where we could be accountable to each other, learn together, really probe into scripture with debate, and pray for one another. It wasn’t just a matter of showing up on Sunday and checking “church” off of our list. It was non-hierarchical and met in our home, and yet it fulfilled more of the ideas of church than any “church” (what we now consider to be a church) that I’ve attended ever has. Still we feel this pull that it was “only a Bible study” and that if we didn’t attend Sunday services in a big building then we wouldn’t really be in church.

This is a seminal time for the church, a moment of reflection and self-assessment such as hasn’t been seen in decades. Its attempts to germane to society have been so successful that the church is in the midst of an identity crisis sparked by its own achievement. Long accustomed to being on the fringes, evangelical Christianity has become so big, so powerful, and so mainstream that many on the inside are wondering if they’ve lost their flavor and have abandoned what made them distinctive.

I can definitely see this feeling spreading in the church. We are losing a lot of our flavor. We are giving many of our churches over to the pop culture of Christianity and the world. If you don’t attend a mega-church, then the far likelihood is that you attend a church that uses a curriculum from a mega-church. There is no local flavor. It is bland.

The response to these concerns has taken several different forms. Many Christians are looking to put the sanctity back in church and are returning to the traditions that the megachurches abandoned. Where churches such as Willow Creek and Saddleback desanctified the physical church, others are looking to resanctify it, placing new value on incense, stained glass, candles, and other high-church trappings. They are reintroducing liturgy to their services, or moving into denominations that never abandoned it, such as the Episcopalian church (although there they opt for conservative congregations that are on the restrictive side of the split over gay clergy).

I find this to be very true in my own life. I have started searching out more traditional ways of worship. We light candles for the Sabbath like my father’s family did, we recite the same prayers that were recited when I was young (and since the times of the early Jews), I am longing for more liturgy in service. I have even looked at denominations that still use liturgy, although I have generally been more drawn to Messianic Jewish congregations instead of Episcopalian, but the root desire is the same. The desire is to be a part of something deeper… something that isn’t just the flavor-of-the-day. I want a faith and a practice that stands the test of time, not just what gets people in the door today.

Megachurches were invented by baby boomers and designed to appeal to that generation. They rely on the notion of choice and individualization and on the tools of marketing to hone and promote their product. This comes, though, at the cost of the idea that the church is a body, the needs of which supersede those of the individual. Along with defecting boomers, younger generations, which are remarkably religious, are beginning to rebel against the church of their parents’ generation and are looking for more direct encounters with the divine. They don’t need the pat answers megachurches provide but are willing to embark on their own personal spiritual journeys.

The fact is that my parents and my husband’s parents were fundamentalists who switched to a more evangelical route when the tide started to change. They followed what was going on around them. In our attempt to return to a “deeper” spiritual experience, we are doing the same thing. We are doing what our generation feels prone to do. We’re not any different, the trends are just changing.

I have a lot more to say, but my fingers are getting tired, lol. Next time I want to write about what El-Faizy sees as the different options in the post-modern and emergent church. I think you’ll find it interesting to read from the perspective of a woman who is no longer in the church (El-Faizy, not me, lol).

My morning sickness seems to be coming at night, and I am starting to feel a little yucky. I’m relieved to feel a little sick though, because it gives some reassurance that this is a “sticky” baby. I’ve really been trying to put this in God’s hands, but it is so hard. I know I have no control over this little life growing in me, but at the same time I get a sense of control if I am thinking or worrying about it. I am trying so hard to give that up. I really appreciate everyone’s prayers for me, for the baby, and for the rest of our family. You’re the best!

posted by amanda on Feb 10

I feel terrible saying this, but I am so glad to be done with this book. It wasn’t a bad book exactly, but I now come away from it thinking “Hmm. I guess I already knew how to read a book.” That fact seems like it should’ve been pretty self-evident.

I think that the problem with this kind of book (and I’d say the same for books that teach you how to read the Bible) is that it is explaining things in explicit detail that should come naturally to a good reader. I think that what is said is true, but I also think that if you tried to follow it without having already developed the skills then you’d just end up frustrated.

The authors use skiing as an example of a similar activity to the kind of reading they want you to learn. I think this is very accurate. When you first learn to ski, you are trying to think of so many things that you must do: don’t lean back, push your shins forward, put your weight on the bottom ski, don’t face your skis back uphill, etc. You’re only a good skier when you can do all of these things without thinking about it. As long as you are trying to follow the rules, you will never be comfortable on skis.

I think the same thing would happen if you were a below-average (or even average?) reader and you tried to follow the rules of this book. The theory is sound, but it is more of an art than a science.

In my last post I included their quote on the dictionary ::I’m rolling my eyes right now:: but at the end they have a few words on children in the section on how to read philosophical books. Since that goes well with my blog, I thought I’d share.

(When talking about the simple questions kids ask like “Why are people?” or “What’s the world’s first name?”)

Why should we have to try to develop such minds, when children are born with them? Somewhere along the line, adults must fail somehow to sustain the infant’s curiosity at its original depth. School itself, perhaps, dulls the mind–by the dead weight of rote learning, much of which may be necessary. The failure is probably even more often the parents’ fault. We so often tell a child there is no answer, even when one is available, or demand that he ask no more questions. We thinly conceal our irritation when baffled by the apparently unanswerable query. All this discourages the child. He may get the impression that it is impolite to be too inquisitive.

Very true… well with the possible exception of the line about rote learning being necessary. Then they must go on to say

Children are much concerned with the difference between good and bad; their behinds are likely to suffer if they make mistakes about it.

Rawr.

Moving right along:

I hope that the rest of the books on the Serious Times list are a little better. If they aren’t then I might be abandoning their list for another one. I feel like How to Read a Book might have actually sucked away the skills that I already used in reading. Blah.

Last night I started on Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think, and it is very fascinating so far. It reads a lot like Freakonomics.

Good night and happy reading!