Lukianoff & Haidt - The Coddling of the American Mind

Before going into what could be useful to consider from The Coddling of the American Mind (Lukianoff & Haidt, 2018), it’s important to acknowledge three important issues that I would assert are shortcomings of the book. First, nothing about privilege and whose voices are typically heard in academic and public life is addressed. Second, cognitive behavioral therapy is advocated as a lens through which to understand contemporary students; broad application of a therapeutic method to students in general is likely to lead to faulty assumptions and flawed implementation. Third, the authors characterized youth from diverse cultural/experiential backgrounds and first generation students as less prepared for the realities of the world. They implied that this lack of preparedness was similar to the fragility of students from sheltered and privileged middle and upper class backgrounds, a pejorative assumption that defies logic. These three points are problematic and must be recognized if other points made in the book are to be seriously considered.

The major premise of the book is that the iGen (internet generation) cohort (those born after 1995) has been sheltered from life experiences and therefore coddled in ways that has slowed their progress toward maturity and self-sufficiency. The authors assert that three “Great Untruths” (p. 4) have been fostered in young peoples’ thinking:

1.    The Untruth of Fragility: What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker.

2.    The Untruth of Emotional Reasoning: Always trust your feelings.

3.    The Untruth of Us Versus Them: Life is a battle between good people and evil people.

The authors recommend examining these untruths through the lens of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), a type of therapy used with counseling clients exhibiting anxiety and depression. CBT trains clients to challenge cognitive distortions (i.e. catastrophizing) and limit or control the tendency toward negative filtering (paying more attention to negative rather than balanced or positive feedback). The authors believe that parents, early school encounters, and the growing “safetyism” of school and university environments are perpetuating belief in the untruths, causing young people to be more fragile in ways that will not serve them as fully functioning adults.

The “safetyism” that the authors assert is prevalent in families, schools, social organizations, and universities includes the characteristics of; overprotectionism, lower interpersonal skills resulting from the decline of free play with peers, the rise of social media isolation, and concern for physical safety expanding to emotional spaces as well. The authors assert that responding to these conditions by creating safer physical and emotional environments does little more than deny young people the chance to learn to cope as well as possibly engendering “feelings of victimization, anger, and hopelessness” (p. 46).

The particular problem that we now face as a country (and select other countries as well) is that increased partisanship, sharpness of rhetoric, and an emerging “call out” culture set the stage for very contentious interactions in media, at school and on campus, and in public discourse. The tendency has been to protect against this rise in adversarialism by avoiding controversial speakers and attempting to control hateful acts through policy positions and discipline. The attempts to protect have fired up the opposition, which in turn has increased the number of incidents (hate crimes have soared since 2015), and have ultimately made it nearly impossible to achieve the safety that most communities hope to offer. Instead of helping prepare young people for the reality of the world they will face, overprotection has not cultivated the resilience necessary to cope with these difficult circumstances.

The failure of attempts to create physically and emotionally safe environments coupled with adversarial political and class dynamics is complicated by a significant rise in university students experiencing anxiety and depression. Striving to provide support and safety is then complicated for educational administrators who try to assist their students with counseling, all the time fighting the pervasive use of smart-phones that create unrealistic expectations of life – beautiful people with no problems and whose posts on FACEBOOK receive hundreds of likes within hours.

As I indicated at the beginning of this review, the authors of The Coddling of the American Mind missed important points in their analyses – most notably the impact of privilege and acknowledgement of strengths in the cultural backgrounds of young people from diverse socioeconomic and other backgrounds. Chapter 12 (pp. 235-251) offers a number of general recommendations (each with finer points) that are worth considering with a more critical eye:

1.    Prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child

2.    Your worst enemy cannot harm you as much as your own thoughts, unguarded

3.    The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being

4.    Help schools to oppose the great untruths

5.    Limit and refine device time

6.    Support a new national norm: service or work before college (the unacknowledged privilege of middle and upper class students is particularly evident here)

Chapter 13 (pp. 253-262) offers recommendations to universities:

1.    Entwine your identify with freedom of inquiry

2.    Pick the best mix of people for the mission

3.    Orient and educate for productive disagreement

4.    Draw a larger circle around the community

Other reviews call out the link between the authors and conservative writers who have protested identity politics that has emerged on U.S. campuses. I have previously reviewed Haidt’s The Righteous Mind and found it insightful; indeed, it proposed ways for people of liberal and conservative political perspectives to relate to one another. Haidt’s collaboration with Lukianoff has a different focus than The Righteous Mind but the context of his previous writing should be considered.

Gaillard - A Hard Rain

Picking up A Hard Rain: America in the 1960s, Our Decade of Hope, Possibility, and Innocence Lost (Gaillard, 2018) was a natural for me, having come of age as a young adult during these years. I expected a lot of nostalgia, particularly because the book recounts important history and the art that served as its backdrop. What I didn’t expect was a book full of the most collectable inspirational quotes of that era. This post highlights moments in history, along with the art/culture and quotes that reflect them.

1960 – The beginning of the civil rights movement and non-violent protest. James Lawson and Martin Luther King advocated that “Nonviolence nurtures an atmosphere in which reconciliation and justice become actual possibilities” (p. 11).  Peter Seeger’s lyrics as sung by Joan Baez “If I had a hammer,” “Turn, turn, turn,” and “Where have all the flowers gone?” set the stage for asking questions that had previously never been considered.

1961 – John F. Kennedy is elected, one of the youngest and most charismatic in history, the first Catholic to serve as President of the U.S.A. In his inaugural address he said, “And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country” (p. 48). The Ugly American, by Lederer and Burdick inspired Kennedy to redefine the role the U.S.A. would play in the world through the creation of the Peace Corps.

1962 – Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) formed by Hayden and others to support racial equality, economic justice, and pursuit of peace. James Meredith entered ‘Ole Miss’ and Reverend Duncan Gray from his pulpit in Mississippi preached, “The seeds of anger and hatred, bitterness and prejudice are already widely sown, and as Christians, we need to do our utmost to uproot and cast them out” (p. 107).  Carson’s Silent Spring called for activism to save the environment and Harington pushed poverty into the public conscience in The Other America.

1963 – George Wallace activated the “collective resentment” in the south and John F. Kennedy countered with the introduction of the civil rights bill. Martin Luther King wrote in Letter from a Birmingham Jail, “when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an air-tight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society... when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of ‘nobodiness’; then you will understand why we find it difficulty to wait” (p. 136).

August 28 ‘March on Washington’ drew 250,000 to hear Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream..” speech. Bob Dylan sang “Blowin’ in the Wind” and Joan Baez sang “We Shall Overcome” with Dylan joining in, Mahalia Jackson sang “I been ‘Buked and I Been  Scorned.” Betty Freidan published The Feminine Mystique and Gloria Steinem exposed sexism in the Playboy Club.

November 22, 12:30 p.m., shots rang out as the Kennedy motorcade moved through a Dallas open plaza – Kennedy was assassinated and the entire nation sunk into an extended period of mourning.

1964 – Lyndon Johnson acted on his conscience and pursued one of most productive periods in U.S.A. legislative history, including passage of the Civil Rights Act. ‘Freedom Summer’ sent student volunteers into the south to register Black voters. Mario Savio led the Free Speech Movement, starting at Berkeley and quickly spreading throughout colleges and universities coast to coast. The Beatles came to America, creating a frenzied youth following with “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and other hits. Motown captured others through multiple hits from the Four Tops, Martha and the Vandellas, the Supremes, and the Temptations.

1965 – Malcolm X, initially a charismatic figure of the Nation of Islam, declared, “the worst crime the white man has committed has been to teach us to hate ourselves” and was murdered at age 39. Martin Luther King orchestrated the Birmingham and Selma, Alabama, marches including pronouncement that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice” (p. 258). Lyndon Johnson proposed the voting rights act. Cesar Chavez championed the cause of farm workers in California through nonviolent protest and appeal to media. Alex Haley conducted extensive interviews and published Autobiography of Malcolm X. Pete Seeger’s “Turn, turn, turn” and “If I Had a Hammer” became protest staples as the U.S.A. sunk deeper into the Viet Nam War.

1966 – Robert F. Kennedy denied the risks of public visibility and responded to the call to public service; recognized the plight of California migrant workers. Declared “It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends a tiny ripple of hope… ” (p. 311) in Cape Town, South Africa. Stokely Carmichael and others coined “Black Power” as a contrasting philosophy to Martin Luther King and John Lewis’ nonviolent demonstrations. W.C. Handy (the “father of blues”) provided recording opportunities for both black and white southern musicians such as Elvis Presley, Percy Sledge, and Wilson Pickett while west coast groups The Righteous Brothers (You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feelin’), The Beach Boys (Surfin Safari, Surfin’ USA, and Good Vibrations), Everly Brothers, Four Freshmen, and Sergeant Barry Sadler’s patriotic anthem “The Ballad of the Green Beret” grabbed hit status.

1967 – Civil rights protestors advocated confrontation after little progress had been achieved through nonviolence (Black Power: The Politics of Liberation, Carmichael and Hamilton, Soul on Ice, Cleaver). Israel attacked three Arab neighbors to seize control of Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, and West Bank of Jordan River to open new threats of war. Yet, the year came to be known as the ‘Summer of Love.” As a young lawyer willing to take on the most difficult cases of discrimination, Thurgood Marshall became the first black justice on the Supreme Court. Sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll were glorified in places such as San Francisco where ‘hippies’ practiced free sex, took LSD, and grooved to the music of McKenzie (If You’re Going to San Francisco), Country Joe and the Fish, the Grateful Dead, Grace Slick, and Jefferson Airplane; the first rock musical, Hair, was a runaway success. Perhaps more than any other artists, Janis Joplin (Take Another Little Piece of My Heart, Me and Bobby McGhee) and Jimmy Hendricks would forever set the standard for hard rock that would embrace loving by baring the pains of the heart and soul. The Graduate became a classic film depicting the angst of the day – the journey of discovering purpose, following love instead of lust, and being true to oneself.

1968 – The nation slipped into deeper conflict over Viet Nam with McCarthy and Robert Kennedy challenging Johnson in the Presidential primaries. Kennedy pushed forward, criticizing the continued U.S.A. role in Viet Nam by pronouncing, “Can we ordain to ourselves the awful majesty of God – to decide which cities and villages are to be destroyed, who will live and who will die, and who will join refugees wandering in a desert of our own creation” (p. 477)? Martin Luther King joined the chorus of voices opposing the war but he added the ‘Poor People’s Campaign’ coalition of blacks, whites, Latinos, and American Indians, and he began to acknowledge that “we just have to admit that the day of violence is here” (p. 486). King’s ‘mountain top’ speech during which he said “I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we, as a people, will get to the promised land” (p. 487) would be the prelude to his assassination the next day on April 4. The horror of those who saw the assassination as the end of King’s work mourned and demonstrated throughout the country, many protests occurring on university campuses where optimism had previously been so strong. Robert Kennedy, speaking poignantly about King, was perhaps driven more deeply into his crusade and willingness to risk all in the fight against the wrongs he felt so deeply. The depth of his conviction and the risks he took to express them ultimately led to his own assassination only two months later (June 4). The cultural commentary on this darkest of years included the Beatles’ “Hey Jude” and the Apollo 8 photo “Earthrise,” one of the most influential environmental awareness icons of all time.

1969 –Richard Nixon won the 1968 election by purposely sabotaging the potential resolution of the Viet Nam War, which he feared would benefit his Democratic rival, Hubert Humphrey. Only Franklin Pierce’s 1853 inauguration would rival the number of demonstrations seen on Nixon’s first day in office, a clear indication that he would be a polarizing President. Nixon “sympathized with the growing alienation of whites toward blacks” (p. 552). Kevin Phillips, a young campaign advisor and subsequent staffer, advocated particularly negative views of minority group members. Phillips’ political strategy was based on exploiting the dynamics of hatred between different groups and stirring up fear. Nixon and his aids used Phillips’ book, The Emerging Republican Party, as the new playbook, one that transformed the party and provided a new strategy for conservatives to activate their electoral constituents. Abortion emerged front and center in political discourse. The Boston Women’s Health Collective published Our Bodies, Ourselvesas a statement on women’s rights to make their own decisions about pregnancy. The Cuyahoga River caught fire in Cleveland, fulfilling the worst nightmares of environmental degradation. The abuses of police scrutiny and violence erupted at the Stonewall Inn in New York City, catapulting gay rights into the public consciousness. Numerous musicians offered new forms and messages in music to demonstrate that cooperation across cultures could work and could even add to the value of American life. Johnny Cash and Bob Dylan bonded in this effort and Woodstock, with 400,000+ fans, torrential rains, and not one incident of violence, proved it. The list of performers drawn together for the three day celebration of music and culture included Creedence Clearwater Revival, Rich Havens, Arlo Gutherie, Joan Baez, The Who, The Grateful Dead, Janis Joplin, Jefferson Airplane, Santana, Jimi Hendrix, and more. Both Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin died of drug overdoses within a year, sending a ‘danger’ signal about the excesses of the life that was so unabashedly celebrated at Woodstock. One step forward, one step back, and “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind” as Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon. Although the Viet Nam War would linger, resulting in significant loss of life and American credibility, Woodstock and the moon landing rekindled the hope and commitment of the era.

Bob Dylan’s lyrics that inspired Gaillard’s title were:

I heard the sound of a thunder that roared out a warning…

It’s a hard rain’s a-gonna fall

Reflecting back on the 1960s, I can’t help but see the corollary to our present times. The prosperity of the 1950s and the naïve opening to the 1960s brought hope, exuberance, and a commitment to change. The gains made through the progressivism of Kennedy and Johnson found reactionary and dissenting voice in Goldwater, Wallace and Nixon in the late 1960s.

Barack Obama’s election brought economic recovery, broadened access to health care, and ushered in a period of striving for greater economic equity. The progress of the Obama years rang well for many but found dissenting voice in the rhetoric of Donald Trump in ways eerily similar to Wallace and Nixon. The 1960s ended with the assassination of three prominent leaders and the Viet Nam war that increasingly divided the country and demanded more funding and lives to maintain it. The big question is if we can look back to see the patterns, recognizing the same words and dynamics that led to such a difficult close to the 1960s. Can we avoid a similar outcome in the current day?

Cultivating Students' Capacity for International Leadership

I had the incredible opportunity to co-edit the recently released volume 160 of NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP, Cultivating Students’ Capacity for International Leadership, with Dr. Darbi Leigh Roberts. We worked with a great group of authors who contributed insightful chapters that urge leadership educators to broaden their approaches to embrace our connected world, one that needs and welcomes diverse and new leadership.

The book is available through Wiley Publishers' On-Line Library. The Editors' Notes section is available without purchase and offers a broad framing of the purpose and content included in the book. The idea for the book emerged from our shared conviction as co-editors that, in order for the doors to leadership to open to a more diverse and younger population, leadership educators need to see the challenges of leadership in both a realistic and optimistic light. The discourse of failed leadership sends a very debilitating message - leadership is dirty, manipulative, and an altogether unsavory topic. Even those who presume to lead portray it through a negative lens; this approach reinforces their claim to legitimacy and supremacy as the "leaders" who can save us.

Many journalists and rank and file citizens are warning that democracy is at risk. It is only at risk if we walk away and reject the call to leadership. Leadership educators need to be advocates for engagement, not avoidance, and this book provides plenty of evidence that leadership matters, that it connects across cultural and national boundaries, and that there are tools and approaches to cultivate leadership that will make a difference.

Standards for Leadership

On Saturday, October 27, two hours after the terrorist attack by a white supremacist at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Dr. Barbara Kellerman took the stage to conclude the 2018 conference of the International Leadership Association. While a moment of silence was observed to honor the victims, questions swirled in my head.

Add October 27 and the 11 lives taken that morning to the incomprehensible list of sad anniversaries and legion of victims we mourn as a result of gun violence in the U.S.A. And let there be no question – this is a failure of reason and leadership and I won’t waste the time to explain why. This situation in the U.S.A. and many other examples in countries throughout the world highlight where leadership has failed – in business, clergy, education, and elsewhere. Bringing this into full detail, Dr. Kellerman asked the audience to look at the meteoric rise of the leadership industry over the last 40 years, an arc that just happens to match the rising realization of failed leadership. These are not curves that should match; if leadership specialists were as effective as we aspire to be, the curves would mark a huge “X” with inverse correlation between the two phenomena.

This was the context for a call to standards for leadership. Professionalizing Leadership (Kellerman, 2018), which I’ve previously reviewed, challenged the effectiveness of the leadership industry. It proposed that leadership specialists must strive for coherence, purposefulness, and long-term cultivation in order to have an impact. The International Leadership Association conference provided the platform to call for standards within the leadership industry that will require deeper and more sustained effort, will require appropriate credentials for those claiming leadership expertise, and will form the basis for assessment of outcomes, and refinement of practice.

Kellerman was deliberately provocative when she urged leadership specialists to establish standards. What she advocated wasn’t the recognition of elite institutions, programs, and processes, or a growing uniformity among all programs. Instead, the idea is to create standards that will provide reasonable expectations and professional practices that can inform all efforts to cultivate and recognize leadership capacity. Although formulating standards will involve some complexities, most people will readily agree to certain leadership expectations that should be the foundation of a standards statement – decency, respect, humanity, seeking the common good...

The leadership industry is maturing, there are now many specialists involved – faculty, staff, consultants, and coaches. Agreeing to standards will require effort, compromise, cooperation, and creativity but the ultimate outcome will be sustained transformation, documented impact, and credibility that will allow the field to survive. And, there is no question – standards are critical at a time when the basics of reason are being violated each and every day.

I left Dr. Kellerman’s speech almost euphoric, rushing to my shuttle. Excited about the conference and complacent about my travel, I missed the stop on the train that was to deliver me to the airport. When I realized my error and the fact that it might prevent me from getting home that evening, I became impatient, angry, and at least mildly disrespectful of a staff member on the train who I thought should have informed me of when to exit the train.

Then I realized – what standard do I expect of myself in relation to treatment of others? I became increasingly uncomfortable with the way I behaved. I had violated my own standards of conduct – decency, respect, appreciation, good humor, and hope. Fortunate for me, once I sought out the staff member I’d offended, and apologized for my impatience and rudeness, she embraced me with grace and appreciation, wishing me well on the rest of my journey.

Resetting my own standards, taking responsibility for my own actions, and offering apology set in motion six subsequent encounters with people who would help me. I would like to think that returning to my minimum standards of conduct allowed me to recenter all the subsequent interactions so that I was receptive to being helped. Six encounters followed that took me on a pleasurable path to home not only on time but one-half hour earlier than I would have had I made my original flight.

The link between the need for professional standards and holding myself accountable for personal standards may seem unrelated. I don’t think so. Standards, professional or personal are about expectation, holding ourselves accountable, modifying where we have not achieved what we had hoped, and improving the effectiveness of our ongoing practice. It’s that simple and it’s time we got on with it.

Kearns Goodwin - Leadership in Turbulent Times

Doris Kearns Goodwin, noted U.S. Presidential historian, weaves the lives of four U.S. Presidents into an enlightening exploration of Leadership in Turbulent Times(2018). Presidents Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Baines Johnson faced extraordinary circumstances during their terms in office. Their experiences as youth could not have been more different yet their experiences cultivated resilience and persistence that allowed them to rise to the moment when they could make a difference – and they did.

Kearns Goodwin does not explicitly reference any leadership theory in her analysis yet she notes some of the most prominent leadership theories in a section titled “Business Books on Leadership Skills” at the end of the book. I would not characterize most of the books she lists as either related to business nor would I recognize them as skill-based in their approach. However, any differences in word choice I have are eclipsed by the depth of her documentation of historical and biographical conditions that shaped the leadership of these four Presidents. Among the questions she visited in preparing to write the book were: “Are leaders born or made? How does adversity affect the growth of leadership? What is the difference between power, title, and leadership? Is leadership possible without a purpose larger than personal ambition?” (Forward). While exploring these questions, Kearns Goodwin concluded that what distinguished the four Presidents most was their fierce ambition, high drive to succeed, perseverance and hard work, and tenacity in enhancing the qualities they were granted by personality or experience.

Leadership provides a chronology of the four Presidents’ lives that aligns with the four broad areas on which they are compared: ambition and the recognition of leadership; adversity and growth; how they led; and their legacy. In fascinating ways, the four compose a family tree or lineage that spans over a century. Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt were Republicans and Franklin Roosevelt and Johnson were Democrats, yet all four strove to grant full rights to all within the provisions of the U.S. Constitution and they worked tireless to address the inequities of economic privilege that existed in their time.

The combined details of each President’s youth and young adult years resulted in a collection of attributes that are often associated with leadership promise; Lincoln’s remarkable memory, ability to break down complex issues into more simple elements, empathy and affection for others, and willingness to admit errors and learn from them; Theodore Roosevelt’s voracious appetite for reading, laser focus, and abandonment of his own privileged background; Franklin Roosevelt’s humility, congeniality, optimism, and emotional and connective intelligence; and Johnson’s negotiation skills, ability to exploit the levers of power, work ethic, and wisdom in securing wise and faithful mentors.

Each of the four experienced deep tragedy or disappointment in their youth or early adult years that helped prepare them for the greater challenges they would face in political life. Kearns Goodwin identified a broad set of strategies that became the collective tools for success in the Presidency. These tips are most useful for positional or political figures. Examples included: for Lincoln – find time and space in which to think, anticipate contending viewpoints, set a standard of mutual respect and dignity, shield colleagues from blame, and keep your word; Theodore Roosevelt’s ‘embattled hero’ view led to – calculate risks of getting involved, remain uncommitted in the early stages, adapt as a situation escalates, be visible, cultivate public support, frame the narrative, keep temper in check, find ways to relieve stress, share credit for success; for Franklin Roosevelt – infuse shared purpose and direction, tell people what to expect and what is expected of them, lead by example, forge a team aligned with action and change, address systemic problems and launch lasting reforms, stimulate competition and debate, adapt and change course quickly when necessary; and finally, for Johnson – make a dramatic start, lead with your strengths, simplify the agenda, know for what and when to risk it all, impose discipline in the ranks, identify the key to success, set forth a compelling picture of the future, know when to hold back and when to move forward, and celebrate by honoring the past and building momentum for the future.

Throughout her writing, Kearns Goodwin provides quotes that, compiled together, comprise some of the most enduring phrases of all time; Abraham Lincoln’s “Counsel woven into the fabric of real life is wisdom” or “I must die or be better,” Theodore Roosevelt’s “Do what you can, with what you have, where you are” or “Speak softly and carry a big stick,” Franklin Roosevelt’s “Above all, try something” or “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” and Lyndon Johnson’s “Time is the most valuable thing you have; be sure to spend it well.”

Abraham Lincoln brought a young nation through civil war, Theodore Roosevelt challenged the “Gilded Age” titans of industry, Franklin Roosevelt steered the nation out of the 1930s economic depression and to victory in war, and Lyndon Johnson’s tragic entry into the Presidency after the assassination of John F. Kennedy led to negotiating essential civil rights legislation – these were the turbulent times each faced and transcended. Capturing a common challenge to all four Presidents, Franklin Roosevelt implored citizens to work for the common good because the “rock of class hatred” was “the greatest and most dangerous rock in the course of any republic.” Capturing the spirit of all four of these U.S. Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt proclaimed during his unsuccessful bid for a return third term as President that, “Win or lose I am glad beyond measure that I am one of the many who in this fight have stood ready to spend and be spent.”

Bernstein - 100 years

As a music major at Colorado State University in the late 1960s and early 1970s, I was exposed to lots of different music. I liked many things, even though I was not as serious a student as I would have liked. One thing I vividly remember was buying a recording (LP – vinyl) of the Bernstein Mass that had just been performed in 1971 for the opening of the Kennedy Center for Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. I was so captivated by the recording that I sent Leonard Bernstein a personal letter thanking him for the inspiration of the piece and what it meant to me. He responded with a personal and hand-written note, expressing his appreciation for my letter.

More than fifty years later, and observing the commemoration of Leonard Bernstein’s 100^th birthday on August 25, 2018, it seems as if Lenny and I are old friends; the adulation around the world demonstrates that he was, indeed, a friend to many. We’ve had the extraordinary opportunity to be able to attend the Ravinia Summer Festival where Marin Alsop, Lenny’s last and only female conducting protégé, has curated a series of concerts celebrating Lenny. We’ve heard Marin Alsop conduct Bernstein favorites such as Copland’s Appalachian Spring, Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue, Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring, and Beethoven’s Symphony #9, and we’ve heard Alsop interpret Bernstein’s own Chichester Psalms, Symphony #1 (Jeremiah), and the crowning performance of The Mass. The program was carefully constructed to reflect Bernstein’s character, his commitment to innovation, and his undaunted attempts to reach his audiences.

Before the performance of The Mass a panel including Jamie Bernstein (Lenny’s oldest daughter) discussed his life and what inspired The Mass. Jamie’s book, Famous Father Girl: A Memoir of Growing up Bernstein (2018), was available after the panel and I snapped it up as quickly as possible (with autograph). The memoir is partially about Jamie’s life journey in discovering herself as a musician and social activist. The majority of it is an inside look into the very complicated life of a genius who demonstrated deep angst in the jarring and disturbing dissonances and rhythms of his music but always soothed and reassured with the beauty of some of the most soaring melodies of the 20^th century.

Born in 1918 to a modest Jewish family in Brooklyn, Lenny married Felicia, a Chilean who came to New York to study piano with Claudio Arrau, in 1951. The marriage would last, although tested by Lenny’s tempestuous and active life until her untimely death in 1978. A considerable portion of Jamie’s memoir recounts Bernstein’s active embraces, slurpy kisses, and effusive responses to men and women alike. Jamie expresses the ambivalence she and her siblings had to the growing realization that their father, endeared and revered, was either bisexual or gay and this ambivalence became even more significant in the latter part of Bernstein’s life when this fact became more public. Life was enthralling and challenging for Felicia and their three children.

Bernstein became an instant sensation in 1946 when he stepped in at age 28 for ailing Bruno Walter to conduct the New York Philharmonic at Carnegie Hall.  Not long after his conducting debut, Lenny was recognized for his composing talent in the Broadway hits Fancy Free, On the Town, and West Side Story. Subsequent compositions met with a mixture of praise and criticism. In an effort to reach young people with new music, Bernstein incorporated musical ideas from the Beatles, folk, soul, and other popular artists. Combining these ideas with classical notions and striving to offer accessible and memorable melodies and politically progressive ideas, Bernstein’s music was not easy for others to grasp. The political ideas Bernstein advocated landed him on J. Edgar Hoover’s list of people to be watched; the final file accumulated by the FBI would number 800 pages.

Bernstein died in 1990 and the last words out of his mouth were, “What is this?” What a fitting conclusion to a lifetime of exploring the deeper questions of human existence. I’m not sure why I connected with Bernstein’s Mass in 1971; as a 21 year old at the time, it was a kind of music for which I yearned. Jamie Bernstein’s reflection on why The Mass was criticized when premiered but is now lauded by wide audiences who are hearing it this year is that, “In the new millennium, the world has caught up to Mass. It was, in many ways, ahead of its time. The mixtures of styles, the unapologetic tonality, the urgent questioning of authority, the openhearted political outrage – all these elements freshly resonate today” (p. 137). An artist, a genius, a personality capable of ecstatic joy and desperate sadness, and a failed and yet brilliant leader – Bernstein was a gift to many and his 100^th is a wonderful time to reflect on what he gave us.

Moss Kanter - MOVE

I find myself constantly looking for hope in this era of political dysfunction and economic uncertainty. I’ve reviewed a number of books over the last year that offered the possibility of positive change, with humankind drawing together to save our planet and those who inhabit it. Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s Move: How to Rebuild and Reinvent America’s Infrastructure (2015) is specifically focused on the U.S.A. and it provides numerous resources and documentation that the U.S. can deal with its decaying infrastructure challenge. 

Moss Kanter is a respected scholar and consultant; her network allowed her to get inside the details of many issues that require attention and this book focuses specifically on mobility infrastructure – rail, air, highways, and information. She wrote, “Mobility and its patterns determine who gets educated, who can get to a job, who can take advantage of what cities have to offer, and who can make deals or relationships and with whom” (Chapter 1 – locator 502). Her proposal for mobility infrastructures - repair, renew, or reinvent each.

Moss Kanter begins her analysis by providing a picture of a shared situation – a common fate that will attract consensus for action (much like Van Jones did in Beyond the Messy Truth). She indicated that those nations presently outperforming the U.S. in infrastructure have greater faith in government and its ability to address common concerns and a willingness to allocate public money to implement solutions. One example of the cost of failing infrastructure is that the estimated wasted time and fuel caused by congestion as American’s go to the workplace is $121 billion per year. In looking for solutions, how does the U.S. compare with other countries in its infrastructure investment?  The U.S. is 2.9% of GDP, the European Union is 5% of GDP, and China is 9% of GDP investment. Digging out of the infrastructure hole cannot be achieved if the investment is not increased. This investment may need to be partially financed through taxes but much of it could be raised through PPPs (Public-Private Partnerships).

First taking a look at rail, Moss Kanter substantiated how passenger rail failed so miserably while commercial/freight rail in the U.S. is the most efficient system in the world. How did freight break out of its previous mold? By cooperating with trucking to establish interlocking coalitions where both trucking and rail could benefit. In Chicago, freight and passenger rail now cross local and regional government lines and use new technologies to achieve greater efficiency and fewer delays. The examples of innovation and improvement in rail have been mirrored in air travel, with a particular focus on using new technologies to avoid bad weather (Total Turbulence) and improve flow from airport to airport. Again, using Chicago as an example, its O’Hare Airport is in the top 20 busiest in the world, it is in close proximity to rail and interstate highways and it is “within a one-day drive of 29% of North American consumers and within a two-day drive of 42% of consumers” (Chapter 3 – locator 1756). The response of a wise Chicago business community was to agree to expansion of the airport, new runways, and a much-anticipated renovation/reinvention of the terminals, even when some airlines resisted the cost of the infrastructure improvements they would share. Auto and information mobility provide additional opportunities to identify traffic routes that are less crowded (thus saving time and fuel) and will eventually offer opportunities for autonomous vehicles that will easily slide in and out of traffic patterns and reduce accidents. Zipcar and Uber (information information technology backbones) already provide alternative transportation for the growing number of urban residents who no longer want to own and pay taxes and insurance for a car.

In reflecting on interactions with those from other countries around the world, Moss Kanter indicated that the U.S. is now seen as more focused on banking and accumulated wealth of the few rather than building for the future public good. The international community has thus turned to other countries for how to build infrastructure to support development and bring prosperity to all. By contrast, while federal and state-level politicians are mired in their partisan bickering, mayors have stepped up to support important infrastructure initiatives. Michael Bloomberg of New York City, Manny Diaz of Miami, and Rahm Emanuel of Chicago are singled out as excellent examples of leaders who push to get things done. These cities and others “are increasingly viewed as sources of innovation and quality of life” (Chapter 5 – locator 2812). But, in order for cities to thrive, improved public transit is a must. “Opportunity for access to the tools of upward social mobility – jobs, a good education, health care, affordable groceries – is activated by geographic mobility” (Chapter 5 – Locator 2912). And public transit needs to not only include subways but rapid transit buses, Divvy bicycles, and safe/pleasant pedestrian walkways.

America has two great resources that no other country can match – the spirit of entrepreneurship and innovation and the leading system of higher education in the world. These systems, and the infrastructure repair, replacement, and renewal they can fuel deserve the support of the government. A particularly poignant quote related to my intellectual interests was, “Whatever else leaders do, they are educators. They must educate themselves and then educate their constituencies. And teaching leadership should be part of every field and every profession” (Preface - locator 126). I couldn’t agree more! And, U.S. citizens have a right and responsibility to require politicians to respond in a non-partisan way to America’s needs. Moss Kanter closes her last chapter with a list of required conditions in order for the U.S. to move forward and she indicated – it’s not about money but will.

Armstrong - Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths

My blog is focused on exploring leadership questions. This review may not appear consistent with that focus but this is my thought… Differentiation and competition for dominance among religious sects has contributed to more suffering, war, and death than any other issue throughout history. Armstrong’s Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths (first published in 1996 and I read the 2005 update) provides detailed evidence that the world’s primary monotheistic religions’ claims to Jerusalem as their spiritual center are at the center of world-wide strife.

Armstrong provides a detailed historical analysis of how the three monotheistic religions - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - came to see this city as one of the most important, or central, cities to their faith. Throughout the book, she returns to two themes that she says contradict any singular claim to unique primacy by any one of them: 1) each faith is based on a commitment to social just, compassion, and charity, and 2) placing one’s faith in a place rather than practicing it in the heart and soul and in a community of believers is antithetical to true spiritual enlightenment.

Armstrong recognized that these three faiths are based on a yearning to reconnect with the ultimate and achieve a reconciliation with one’s maker, and each has constructed various myths about Jerusalem. This “Mythology was never designed to describe historically verifiable events that actually happened.” (Introduction, locator 210) While Armstrong provides considerable evidence supporting claims in the Torah, Bible, and Quran, many of the stories are not verifiable. Their importance is in symbolizing deeper spiritual messages that have been used to create liturgy portraying the transcendence of faith.

The original name of Jerusalem from the Bronze Age was “Rushalimum,” which Armstrong translates as “Shalem has founded.” (Chapter 1 – Zion – locator 350) When cities were just beginning to form, they were revered as special places; those who sought power and influence in these new environs often created imposing spaces and structures to convey a sense of mystical or sacred importance. Many of the myths of early Syria related to Baal, who was prominent among many gods worshiped at the time. Stories were created about Baal and other gods fighting for survival, stories that helped to explain the struggles against natural elements such as earthquakes, floods, and pestilence, and famine.

The origin of the name of Jerusalem, its symbolic/mythical importance as an early city, multiple gods, and how they reflected human kind’s struggle all set the stage for the contested ownership of the city. The facts are that the Hebrews (later known as Israelites or the Jewish people) didn’t settle in the area until the 1200s bce. It is unclear if they conquered or comfortably integrated with the Jebusite people who already inhabited the land of Canaan when the Hebrews came out of bondage in Egypt. The Hebrews worshipped multiple gods all the way up to 586bce when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem. Shortly after this time, and partially because of their exile to Babylon, they began to believe that there was only one god – Yahweh. King David played a mythical role for the Israelites because he unified Israel and Judah into what would become the Kingdom of Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital.

Israel and Jerusalem survived multiple destructions and rebuilding at the hands of Greece, Rome, Persia and others. The Temple for the Jewish people was built, destroyed, and rebuilt depending on who was in power. Christians made claim to Jerusalem initially through Constantine; later Crusaders would fight to control what they perceived to be their “Holy” relics. Although Muslims would build the “Dome of the Rock” to assert the importance of Mohammed’s (PBH) journey from Mecca to Jerusalem, it is ironic that the best of times for the Jewish people were when Muslim conquerors took the area. Because Islam embraced both Judaism and Christianity, their leaders sought to make Jerusalem a place where all three religions could coexist with their co-located holy sites. The succession of conquering heroes would lead to the three religions contesting who owns the city of Jerusalem and this conflict persists to this day.

I am convinced by Armstrong’s exhaustive research, and also by the “Dead Sea Scrolls” exhibit that I recently toured in Denver, Colorado, that the claims of the Jewish people to Israel contradicts the core principles of faith in Judaism. Christianity and Islam’s claims to primacy are equally unfathomable. The tensions we now see, the genocide of Palestine, naming Jerusalem as the capital of Israel by the U.S. administration, and the recent Knesset action of passing the “Jewish Nation- State” bill are the result of striving for dominance rather than the pursuit of peace. This is a leadership issue and the conflict between Israel and Palestine will not be resolved until the facts of history are understood and those in authority are willing to speak the truth rather than pander to those who elect them.

Pinker - Enlightenment Now

I read Matt Ridley’s The Rational Optimist (2010) two years ago and found it very provocative and encouraging. The point Ridley made, and substantiated it with considerable evidence, was that humanity has progressed over the millennia and that, regardless of the apocalyptic pronouncements of the media and some of today’s politicians, the world is getting better.

Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress (2018) confirms the same prognosis for the future of humanity as Ridley. The difference between the two books is that, while Pinker similarly provides ample evidence for his assertions of hope, he built his argument around the belief that the “Enlightenment” era that began in the 19^thcentury has had great influence on the progress of humanity and that its principles are worth defending and pushing forward.

“History shows that when we sympathize with others and apply our ingenuity to improving the human condition, we can make progress in doing so, and you can help to continue that progress.” (Part 1: Enlightenment) This assertion is based on the Enlightenment principle that human flourishing is often, if not almost always, the result of applying reason in a sympathetic way in a cosmopolitan and classically liberal tradition. The principles of Enlightenment offer a contrast to the qualities of human nature of loyalty to tribe, deference to authority, magical thinking, and blaming misfortune on evildoers. Reason, science, humanism, and progress replace the irrationality and illiberalism of this tribalism and assumed need for individualistic competition.

How did Enlightenment come to be? Once humanity was more effective in agriculture and had established exchange through barter or economics, the surge in human thriving allowed for the creation of larger settlements (cities), it offered the chance to establish a class of intellectuals and sages, and it allowed men and women to move from short to longer-term harmony and mutual work. There have always been those who did not embrace Enlightenment ideas but, most importantly to the current issues we face in the Western world, the 1960s brought a decline in trust for our public and private institutions and the 21^stcentury has now seen the rise of populist movements that contradict Enlightenment’s core ideals. This populism is based on beliefs that fundamentally challenge reason, science, humanism, and progress. First among these is religious faith that proposes mystical causes for what humanity experiences. The second belief is that “people are the expendable cells of a superorganism – a clan, tribe, ethnic group, religion, race, class or nation.” (Chapter 3: Counter-Enlightenment) The final challenge to Enlightenment is the rejection of science and the scientific discovery and refinement of knowledge.

The entirety of Part II of Enlightenment Nowincludes chapter after chapter documenting that progress has been, and is being, made. Areas included are; health, life expectancy, food, wealth, inequality, the environment, peace, safety, terrorism, and civil rights. The assertion is not that all of these areas are resolved and perfect – far from it. The point is that substantial progress has been made which offers all humans a better quality and longer life compared with the past. Pinker acknowledges that good news doesn’t sell books and papers nor does it play well on the nightly news. Thus, professing panic, condemnation, and disillusionment are the currency of media and this over-attention to what isn’t going well is largely responsible for the fear that many people feel. Yet, the fact is, the successes far out-number the failures and we continue to make progress.

Pinker minces no words in warning that the principles of Enlightenment are under attack. He does not blame Donald Trump’s bid and success in his election as President of the U.S.A. Instead, he proposes that Trump has simply exploited the illiberal, evidence-free, and stark individualism that has emerged in response to the real progress that was made over the last 200 years of Enlightenment. The “mobilization of an aggrieved and shrinking demographic in a polarized political landscape” (Chapter 15: Equality) is a symptom of success rather than evidence that a “century-long movement toward equal rights” is being undone.

Education is, as one might expect, a central pillar of the Enlightenment. By becoming more educated, “you unlearn dangerous superstitions such as that leaders rule by divine right, or that people who don’t look like you are less than human.” Education also teaches that “charismatic saviors have led their countries to disaster.” (Chapter 16: Knowledge) For whatever reason, Enlightenment, and education that supports it, does not necessarily result in greater happiness, at least in the context of the U.S.A. The antidotes to this disillusionment are most likely to be found in the level of freedom citizens believe they have and in the degree of meaning they see in their lives – connected to others, feeling productive, and not being alone. The good news in that young people in the U.S.A. today appear to be happier than their baby-boomer parents. There is a reality to the disappointment of the baby-boomers – more progress is needed on important human issues. However, as Pinker proposes, “progress is not utopia, and that there is room – indeed, an imperative – for us to strive to continue that progress.” (Chapter 20: The Future of Enlightenment) The “challenge of our era is how to foster an intellectual and political culture that is driven by reason rather than tribalism and mutual reaction.” (Chapter 21: Reason)