the training

and its quiet cousin

We went where the children were, into the concrete buildings that announced themselves from a distance by their rectangles of fluorescent light before dawn, each classroom another illuminated cell in which a small republic would soon attempt the impossible. 

We drove there carrying lesson plans, coffee, sharpened pencils, and private theories about service. Some of us had hints about some calling. We also hoped to one day be worthy of homes and worthy of citizenship, despite the wayward, wandering nature of our pilgrimish selves. We privately fingered some phrases about the nature of this calling, as with prayer beads. We learned to do this while sidestepping certain reflections, their attendant questions. To serve whom? Serve what? Serve how?

Inside the lit boxes of concrete, copy machines predictably jammed and bells divided the hours into predictable portions. Loudspeaker voices droned on, with a scripted confidence that seemed to expose our own uncertainty. Lord, I believe, I prayed on my knees, rosary between my shrinking breasts, heal my unbelief.

There were forms for absences, interventions, accommodations, referrals, observations, evaluations, emergencies. Somewhere beneath the paperwork, a quieter practice breathed its ragged breath. It was not the sort to be documented, so tended to be found lacking when it came time to speak in its defense. We were quiet in meetings, or coughing.

Some of us imagined that if we served long enough, well enough, we might eventually become free of ourselves. It seemed noble at the time. No one warned us that the self is not only the thing that interferes with attention. It is also the place from which attention is given. Grind it finely enough and something essential becomes dust. 

It settles everywhere. The children breathe it. So do we. Outside, the century acquired stranger habits. Bats slept with white upon their noses. Birds disappeared from places that had always expected birds. The seasons arrived carrying unfamiliar weather. We learned new acronyms less quickly than new names, although they arrived almost as often. Every year another expert assured us that the future had finally been measured correctly. The children kept coming.

***

The week before I began teaching, I attended a county training wearing the best clothes I owned: a purple spaghetti-strap dress beneath a crocheted sweater arranged carefully across my shoulders, an improvised modesty. I needed a paycheck before I could afford professional costume. I can’t remember what I did for shoes. 

I arrived late after misjudging the parking and found the last empty seat beside two young men who already seemed entirely at ease in the room. They were funny, bright, and quick-witted with soft jibes and easy answers. They were the sort, I see now, upon whom institutions instinctively confer authority. 

“That’s a rough school,” one of them said when I told him my assignment. Then he explained how I ought to meet the moment. I listened carefully because I assumed he knew something I did not. 

Twenty-two years later I remember almost none of his advice. What remains is the question that kept me listening. It was too raw to say aloud. What do the children need, to live here now? The two questions (of what to do, and why) occupied the same room and rarely acknowledged one another.

Years before, when I was the age that my children are now, a teacher had handed me a box of tissues and gave me space to sit awhile. She did not explain my sorrow or try to fix it. She did not ask me to become more positive or more resilient or more realistic. She recognized that bewilderment sometimes accompanies seeing and let me sit in her office as long as I needed before marching on to my scheduled class. This was some of the most profound instruction of my life. 

***

In the decades since that first training, I know more now about curriculum, assessment, language acquisition, trauma, literature, and revision. Mostly, though, I know about the limits of certainty. Enough, perhaps, to stop mistaking it for wisdom.

Meanwhile, the children continue arriving, carrying entire worlds that no data set, policy document, or professional development session could possibly anticipate. They arrive laughing with friends. They arrive grieving grandparents, translating for their families, having crossed borders both visible and invisible before first period. They arrive eager, despite everything their forebears have constructed around them.

This, the part that steadies me on my better days, still knows nothing of expertise. She places all the eggs of her shaking faith in a single basket, calls it nothing. It is neither measurable, or scalable, or capable of surviving particularly well in committee. It’s nothing, but a stubborn belief that another consciousness can still be met with attention.

Each morning another consciousness walks through the door asking, Will someone meet me here?

The loudspeaker begins its announcements. The attendance form waits to be filled, then saved. Somewhere beneath all of this, another lesson clears its throat. The children are here. For now, that is enough to begin again.

how to cross a river

riddles in time, space, and scale management

If you have a fox, a goose, and a bag of beans, what is the best way to cross a river?

In a year of desert driving, I played this question on loop. I wanted a mind for numbers, but seemed to retain only the set-up sequences of word problems.

With a tendency to wondering and feeling too much at once, and with enough sky to lose myself in, I thought mathematical thinking might ground me.

One recurring problem was this: by a fire, under stars, I would go dizzy looking for the farthest ones until my vision blurred.

By then, I did not remember most equations, only the premises for which they were needed. If two trains x miles apart are traveling in opposite directions at different speeds, how much time until they meet? If Jack has eleven pieces of fruit and five are bananas, how many apples for Jill?

The antidote to dizziness, I was trying to learn, had something to do with overriding my first response, which was to be knocked off my feet by the size of it. The sky, that is. And, when it came to math, it was that fact that someone thought like this, imagined a way to sort a world such that these considerations, one parcel at a time, were all. The brilliance.

If a pie and so many guests, cut pieces. Not everyone will want the pie. To calculate circumference, use the number pi. An irrational number to spin the head, but if you knew how to use it, it could help you figure some finite amount of pie, stones, or tire tread.

In the passenger’s seat, I looked through glass and could not take it in. The riddle at least was a smooth and solid thing I could turn in my pocket like a river stone. The river was part of the set up. Mr. Stone was my teacher.

If you have to get across a river by boat. . . the set up went. How do you do it so the fox does not eat the goose, and the goose does not eat the beans? 

What relief. To hold one thing at a time, solidly. I wanted a valve for my mind, some pacing for the flow. One challenge. Then another. A way to stop and then go. At that point, the flooding was out of control. My perception far exceeded my abilities to make any sense.  

The answer to the riddle was: start with the goose. Mr. Stone told us why. But I was back in the river by then. Where to now, goose?

Who do you think you are? This was a challenge that frightened me some, because it tended to come at critical moments with a tone of authority, as if the person voicing it knew exactly what time Train A would cross Train B, how many apples on each, and whether or not the geese should be eating the beans.  If I could focus on one thing at a time, perhaps I would start to see it coming? And have a few answers ready, just in case?

I thought string beans would create less disturbance in the goose. But my mind tended toward the pintos I would buy in five-pound bags from Wal-Mart, which I would scatter in batches over a plate every time I prepared to soak them, checking for rocks. To find one was good. Here was a solid thing I could remove.

Who do you think you are? When these demands came, I would experience the full force of new awareness of the errors of my ways, in dizzying magnification. I meant to apply this force to finding some solution, but I had none.  Which river? Which goose, fox, season? Is anyone else on the boat with me? Am I allowed to touch the goose? Are there eggs to come?

The image of trains hurtling in opposite directions calls to mind rail spine, the nervous condition that did not appear until the advent of railroad travel, caused by the feeling of hurtling through space at speeds disconcerting to a body familiar with horse and foot travel. Not to mention the related and perhaps equally anxiety-producing imposition of standard time.

I had once seen a fox while running on a horse trail in lower New York. Much of the trail ran adjacent to the Hutchinson River Parkway, but certain parts meandered into woods and along lakes such that the roar of cars was more muted, the way crashing surf may be if you are several blocks away.

Perhaps if I had gone beyond 12th grade calculus, I would have developed a more familiar and integrated symbolic language with which to explore the interference effect of a series of infinite variables on a given problem and been more erudite in my explanations about baseline insecurities. But I hadn’t at the time and was still young enough to believe that eventually I might, If I focused harder, see with greater clarity. 

The river, between then and now, has continued to flood me. But the goose is still on it, and the fox, and the bag of beans. They rest at the banks, where the goose and the fox appear to wear bemused expressions, waving. I don’t know why it is this way, or where the boat has gone, but here I am, waving back.

***

This riddle, which I encountered decades ago, is one of those earworms that shows up again and again. I love the setup, the characters, the play, and the mystery. If, in a given year, I scratch 1,000 pages across several notebooks, an estimated 9.5 of them will feature this goose. Who knows why?  Rarely do I publish these, but sometimes it happens. Prior to today, I think the most recent iteration of these creatures in a published work happened in The Closed Eye Open, Issue 10,  Fall 2023, under the title Mathematical Goose.

Between the Word and Here

Language and reach

What blots out its name to carry on with you?
I meant to make amends with her. For her.
Yes, pen, I want to remember. No less or more than myself.

What comes drifting to stand soul and clear?
They say I have or had a self.
Yes, pen, I believed them.
Yes, pen. When I said believed I meant I tried.
I mean I meant to try. To believe them.
About this they would call self, but something resisted.
Pen, do you think that resistance might be a sort of self?

What breath rose from here?
No, pen, I cannot point to her. I cannot tell you where she is.
But here, I think, yes.

What could we make and know as well as any name?
I meant to offer her up to you and you could trace her, bless her in this basement altar.
I meant to descend low enough through caves and cellars to find.
Her, or the altar, or you.
That we could meet.


The first two questions are adapted from lines by Paul Celan.

Without a Bridge

Against reproach

How much floats unsaid between these islands. Yet there are moments when it is all there, a deafening amen, edged in icy light. An incurable fool, I keep setting out on these little rafts made of so few words so poorly bound. I am no sooner afloat when I hear the wind laugh. But the only place for hesitation was that shore.

Survey of Poetry

With cephalopod.

I mean to tell you about the artist whose paintings, according to some, have a brittle, airy alloverness. How insistent they were, melancholy like the memories of a landscape.

I am thinking about the way that every human eye has a blind spot. How the blind spot, instead of appearing as a black dot in the vision field, is conveniently filled by a process of extrapolation, based on visual information at the border regions.

Taking a break from the paintings, I notice someone at the fountain, playing guitar. I would like to tell you about the poetic arc of the neck, leaning over the instrument, the taut curve of intention.

But I am distracted by thoughts of cephalopods. I have recently read about Otto, the six-month-old octopus at the Sea-Star Aquarium in Coburg, Germany, who was caught juggling hermit crabs. Otto was known to rearrange the contents of his tank to, as the aquarium director put it, “make it suit his own taste better.” Otto made international news for short circuiting the aquarium’s electrical system several nights in a row. It turns out he had learned to turn out the light above his tank by squirting water at it. It seems he did not care for the light. 

Octopus have eyes like ours, but no blind spot.  

Each arm has a mind of its own, unobstructed by central control. And now I cannot stop thinking about this looming intelligence of the sea, how when we’re not reminding ourselves to fear its presence, we are replacing it with a cartoon caricature. 

I want to talk about the art of this cephalopod, the poetry of its symphony of intelligent parts in motion. But between this blind spot and the limits of my language, I cannot take it in.

***

Otto’s story is available here (to Telegraph subscribers). I found it in James Bridle’s Ways of Being––Animals, Plants, Machines: The Search for a Planetary Intelligence.

More than Words

Pre-verbal meditations.

Before we thought we had any, there was no need for reminders back to what language occludes. We knew our names were clumsy, we felt the thud of them against surfaces and the weight of words blundering around us, knocking so much over in the effort to reach their objects, trampling entire worlds underfoot. We felt the cascading fall of us, trying to arrive, claiming at once home and this home is not mine. Disarmed, disobedient, dislocated, we could not saw what we were, and this was our best chance. The world was dizzy, and we met it on these terms, calling come out come out to one another, wherever you are.

Inside Out

Placing ourselves in space.

These solemn geographies our limits, and yet. We persist in aiming to be where we are not. If the first myth was of some beyond outside, the next was that it was assembled of infinities––in defiance of the limits that confront us at each breath.

What creatures are we, to be embedded with impulses to defy our own natures and nature itself?  The first way we did this was to presume to give her a proper name, capital-N, and place her outside. 

After that, we would not recognize what breathed against the window, fogging the glass through which we meant to keep an eye on her wild beyonds, out there.

Risk of Becoming

With Antonin Artaud.

All he wanted was a change in the human condition. They can laugh at me, he said to the mirror. When it came to the question of what a human might be, he didn’t claim to know. Over time, he grew distant from those who did, and these were many.

All he could say, when it came to describing his predicament was, it’s possible. He sought reconciliation––between matter and mind, body and soul, fact and idea. But people loved their borders, and he kept being detained at the boundaries of his body.

Then he turned on words, preferring only sound detached from the old symbolisms, and he let these run through him, imagining that their resonance, after all, might affect some inside-out change.

Really? Someone asked. 

It’s possible, he seemed to respond, and he did not say a word.

***

In honor of the birthday of French artist, poet, dramatist, and writer Antonin Artaud, I spent some time this morning in Naomi Greene’s 1967 article in Yale French Studies, “Antonin Artaud: Metaphysical Revolutionary.”