Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Tales of ConQuesT (48)--The Art Part

My home science fiction group, the Kansas City Science Fiction and Fantasy Society, put on their annual convention this weekend. I always enjoy ConQuesT, held each ear in Kansas City on Memorial Day Weekend--but I must say that this year's ConQuesT 48 was even more fun than usual.


There are many reasons why it all came together so well for me, but here are a few highlights from the "Art Part." Always first and last, for me, there is the ConQuesT Art Show.



Literally first, because I was once again the "shipping address" for the show. A few years ago I was the Art Show Director, and although I've now gratefully handed that job over to a talented and responsible young man named Mikah McCullough, his apartment is a tad on the "small side" for a large pile of incoming boxes of art. Thus, on the first day of the convention I haul not only my own artwork, but also all the mailed-in work from all of the wonderful artists who participate from afar.

My "White Clematis" variations available so far.

I'm showing a collection of new multiple-original artworks at sf conventions this year, the "Guardians" series (four separate designs) and the "Clematis Collection," which so far consists of three Artist's Proofs of White Clematis Panel with Golden Dragons, (honored with a rosette as Art Director's Choice at DemiCon 28 earlier this month), and an edition limited to six smaller pieces titled White Clematis with Dragons. A one-of-a-kind original from this collection, featuring purple clematis flowers and titled Gold and Purple, should be ready to debut at SoonerCon 26 in late June.


I also had a new, one-of-a-kind original to debut at ConQuesT 48, Nose for a Rose. Here's a glimpse, along with a look at my display at the convention. This is all you'll see of it, however--it was purchased by a collector on its "maiden voyage."

It's always fun to show and sell my artwork, and to help put the Art Show up and take it down. But another joy for me is participating in panel discussions at science fiction conventions--and I was part of several at ConQuesT 48. They'll be the subject of my next post, coming soon!

IMAGES: Most of the photos on this post are mine. Since I'm the Communications Officer of KaCSFFS, I'm the one who put together the ConQuesT 48 banner. It features a logo design by Keri O'Brien and a photo of the lobby of our convention hotel, the Sheraton Kansas City Hotel at Crown Center, which provided the photo. All the other photos were taken by me, of my artwork (and other personal effects). The cat is my daughter's. Her name is Sora and she is Queen of the Universe (just ask her). All of the photos are available for re-posting, as long as you attribute them and provide a link back to this post or ConQuesT.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

"When I am big . . . "

The Artdog Quote of the Week


A person could (people have and do) write many books about the value of outdoor play, the things children learn from it, and the reasons why "nature deficit disorder" really is a serious matter. We can't save what we don't value, but there are so very many reasons why we should and must value our natural environment, and cherish the many lessons nature teaches.

IMAGE: Many thanks to How Wee Learn on Pinterest, for this image. The board from which this was taken is loaded with other cool thoughts and ideas about teaching our children, too!

Friday, May 26, 2017

The balancing act: keeping them safe

The Artdog Image of Interest


As a parent, I know that delicate balance between letting kids explore and keeping them safe. It can be a dangerous world. A responsible parent can't disregard the hazards, even as we gradually expand kids' boundaries.

Playing in nature definitely presents a list of potential hazards, from sunburn to tick-borne illnesses (a particularly knotty problem this year!), animal bites, falls . . . a worried parent could go mad. I believe it's important to remember that our primary job as parents is to render ourselves unnecessary--to rear independent persons who are as healthy and well-adjusted as possible, equipped with the skills and judgment needed to succeed as fully-functioning adults.

But achieving that goal requires that they stay alive long enough to become adults.

So, where do we draw the line? And how do we adjust appropriately--because that line always keeps changing! Developmental stages flash by so fast, we have to work, to stay on top of "what's developmentally appropriate today?" I managed (with a lot of help) to shepherd two reasonably-functional human beings into adulthood, and for me the key always seemed to be information.

I have yet to meet the child who responds positively to "because I say so!" And they're RIGHT. That's an extremely unhelpful answer.

As appropriate for the developmental level, I always tried to take the time to explain to the child why certain restrictions had to apply, if I possibly could. Granted, sometimes there's no time. But that meant we needed a follow-up conversation. I discovered even the youngest child has the capability to be a rational human being (to the extent that someone can be, at any given stage of development). If we want them to grow into that capability as adults, we must treat them accordingly when they're kids.

As appropriate for their age, that means teaching kids how to prevent their own bad outcomes (wear sunscreen and bug repellent; know basic safety principles about approaching animals or walking on rotten branches or uneven terrain). They may ignore it, but at least they'll know why it happened, if they do.

It helps to remember the favorite saying of a friend of mine: "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." Giving them wide enough boundaries to explore and "push their envelope" means sometimes there'll be unfortunate results. That's why it's just as important to teach them what do do if something does happen. There's no emergency situation that can't be made worse by the victim's panic! The goal is not to terrify them, but to empower them.

It isn't easy, but it's worth the effort.

IMAGE: Many thanks to Citypages (Minneapolis, MN) for this image! (no info available, on who's the photographer).

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Political correctness

Let’s talk about “Political Correctness,” since it's been thrown in my face recently. It came up at my writers’ group Saturday, when a fellow group member whom I normally respect brought a story that was riddled with ugly, offensive racial stereotypes directed toward a particular minority group. During the critique session I called him on this (I wasn’t the only one), and his defense was that he didn’t want to have his story “limited” by political correctness.

This quote cuts both ways in the "political correctness" debate.

I asked him what he meant by “political correctness” in this context, and he said he didn’t want to limit his range of expression. As if “artificial” rules of “correctness” constituted an intellectually narrow approach that fettered his freedom of expression. A story-critique session wasn’t the forum for a full-blown debate. The group’s leader very firmly changed the subject.

I probably wouldn't ever convince that particular fellow through direct confrontation, in any case. In my experience, when someone who already feels his privilege is under attack and whose area of greatest pride is his intellectual ability, is accused of intellectual malfeasance, his invariable reaction is to dig in his heels and prepare to die rather than yield to a different point of view.

I do, however, continue to challenge the validity of any “expressive freedom” that depends on not restraining oneself from employing demeaning stereotypes. My associate seemed to think that what he called “political correctness” was a kind of intellectual laziness, an unwillingness to “push the envelope” in certain directions, or to challenge social norms. Perhaps ironically, I see it as just the opposite. In my opinion, folks who decry too much “political correctness” generally don’t seem willing to exert themselves intellectually to stretch beyond their own comfort zones or seriously engage a different experience.

Which of those two approaches should one more accurately call an “intellectually lazy” attitude?


It’s a hallmark of privilege when a person sees the need to adapt to others’ viewpoints as an unwarranted inhibition. That’s a “take” on life and social discourse that  ignores or dismisses the fact that anyone from a non-dominant cultural group has to accommodate and adapt near-continually, just to survive and get along in the world. Yet the most blindly privileged folk are the ones who seem to complain the most aggrievedly about political correctness.

This is not to say that all members of minorities or persons of color are perfect. It isn’t even to say that sometimes the “sensitivity line” can’t be too narrowly drawn—although I’d say the most vulnerable among us probably have a better gauge of where to draw that line, and what’s offensive, than the most privileged among us. But it is to say that our art shouldn’t rely on the cruel crutch of cheap shocks at the expense of innocent bystanders. 


It is to say that vicious racial stereotyping is both a morally and intellectually bankrupt way to approach storytelling . . . or to anything else. For God’s sake, can’t we writers dig deeper? If we can’t be merciful, then at least let's be original.

There’s a truism that if a phrase or expression comes too easily to mind, it’s almost certainly a cliché. Using clichés is an obvious hallmark of weak writing, precisely because it betrays the author’s unwillingness to push past the easy or obvious, and explore new ideas.

What the apologists for ignoring so-called “political correctness” seem to overlook is that every offensive stereotype ever created is both mean-spirited and a cliché of the worst order. The only valid and original thing to do with any cliché is turn it on its head or expose its vacuity it in a fresh new way. That’s not easy, but then—isn’t that a given, if you’re trying to produce real, lasting, meaningful art?


IMAGES: Many (ironic) thanks to The Federalist Papers, for the Voltaire quote, and to Sizzle for the "Freedom to offend" meme. I am indebted to A-Z Quotes for both the Ian Banks quote, and the one from Toni Morrison. Many thanks to all!

Sunday, May 21, 2017

A most important event

The Artdog Quote of the Week


Engaging kids with the natural world is serious business--but don't tell them that! Kids interact with nature in the way they do everything: with imagination and curiosity. Also, I'd like to hope, with spontaneous joy.

Getting kids out into the natural world is a matter of enormous importance--they won't save what they don't value--but we must couch it in children's native language, which is that of play.

IMAGE: Many thanks to the Natural Healthcare Store, for this image, which shares a page with some other great kids-and-nature quotes in the source.

Friday, May 19, 2017

4 Powerful benefits from a simple nature walk

The Artdog Image of Interest



Some folks will look at this photo and see nothing but weeds, potential sunburn, probable bug bites, an annoying tick-check later, and dirty feet in the making. Grab the sunscreen and the bug repellent! They've let the kids loose in the the woods again!

Others will realize that these kids are receiving many more benefits than they are facing potential hazards. What are the benefits of taking a walk in nature? Let me count out a few for you!

1. Walking in nature improves emotional well-being. Children today suffer from higher rates of depression and anxiety than past generations--yet walking in nature has been shown to counter "morbid rumination" (brooding on anxious or negative thoughts).

2. Walking anywhere promotes better fitness, but walking in nature is intrinsically satisfying. This makes it a more attractive activity than, say, walking on a treadmill or a track. The variations in terrain also can help foster greater agility.

3. The endless variety and movement in nature provokes a child's natural curiosity. Some experts suggest it may help foster greater focus and improve kids' attention span, while other folks have pointed out it can help improve listening and other cognitive skills. It's also true that things a child personally experiences in nature can make academic studies of topics such as biology, ecology and other sciences more relevant and understandable.

4. Exposure to nature can also improve the body's ability to function. While overexposure to the sun is a hazard, sunlight is essential to the production of Vitamin D in the body--a vital component for robust immune health. And speaking of the immune system, did you actually know that a little dirt is actually a good thing? A too-sanitized environment for children can actually backfire if the child's body has no chance to build up natural immunities. It's the same principle that applies to the immune-system benefits of household pets. Finally, being in nature can even improve kids' eyesight, if they spend sufficient time outdoors!

Nature walks provide so many powerful benefits, it's hard to overstate their value. So what are you waiting for? Grab the kids and get out there!

IMAGE: Many thanks to the writer/blogger Angela Amman for permission to use her photo "Walking in the Woods," posted on her Playing With Words blog.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

To automate, or not to automate? Working with kids

A Glimpse of the Future?
In recent weeks many of my mid-week posts have focused on the contemporary trend among all kinds of industries to increasingly use robotics or other types of automation, rather than hiring extra workers.

It's a phenomenon that impacts all kinds of workers--in ALL socio-economic brackets, except maybe for that seemingly-impervious top 1%--and across widely-varied industries. Today, in the last of this series, I intend to address the topic that originally inspired me to look into it in the first place.

I am a retired teacher. Indeed, from its inception in 2009 through mid-2013, the title of this blog was Artdog Educator, and it focused pretty exclusively on education topics. Although both I and the blog have shifted our focus since then, I have been and always will be professionally interested in how people learn.

Thus, I was dumbfounded to read in Education Week recently that there actually are people in New York who think it's a good idea to save money by replacing substitute teachers with e-learning. What is e-learning? In case you couldn't figure it out, it's training conducted via the Internet.

Now . . . educators have anything but a stellar history in the use of digital media for teaching. For a variety of understandable but lamentable reasons, it has taken heroic efforts to get educators anywhere close to up-to-speed in this area. I examined that dynamic in some detail, in a 2011 series that kicked off with the post Teaching Like it's 1980.

Slowly and painfully, however, educators at all levels have finally--somewhat--in spite of all countervailing forces--embraced digital media. Given that, and the global movement to automate all possible jobs (whether it's a good idea or not), some brilliant genius, sooner or later, was going to come up with this.

As with the periodic call to "run education like a business," I can guarantee you that no one who has ever actually BEEN a substitute teacher came up with this plan. I, on the other hand, have racked up ten years' cumulative, hard-won substitute-teaching experience. 

A little boy and his teacher observe as a Nao robot (by Aldebaran Robotics) writes an equation.

First, let's backtrack a bit. In my research for this series I've run onto the idea that robots or automation could take over several different aspects of childcare or education, from babysitting through early learning, distance learning, and substitute teaching.

It's intuitive, right? I mean, kids seem inextricably attached to their digital devices, and, after all, parents have been parking their kids in front of the "electronic babysitter" (AKA television/videos) for years.

Great idea! The Trix Cereal Rabbit as your babysitter. What could possibly go wrong?

Sure. And if you think "Nao" or the TV could actually be a good babysitter in the total absence of parents or other supervising adults, just try it. See how quickly you come up on child endangerment charges!

A robot, at the current level of development, couldn't control the situation. The kid knows that thing isn't a real person, and has no authority. S/he would play with it for a while, get bored, and go wandering off unsupervised to face the myriad dangers of whatever the world threw at him/her.

Digital media present the same problem in the substitute-teaching scenario. Used in conjunction with a good lesson plan and alert (adult, human, in-charge) substitute teacher, they've gotten many a class through many a lesson with some actual learning and student engagement taking place.

E-learning can't replace an engaging, knowledgeable human teacher who's firmly in charge of things.

Absent the alert, adult, human, in-charge substitute teacher, you've got guaranteed chaos. No matter what the grade penalties, 99% of any class will do anything BUT the busywork on the computer. Any class I ever stepped into as a substitute was extremely reluctant to conduct "business as usual." They generally required a very firm hand and a lot of creative engagement to successfully establish a genuine learning environment. 

The intrinsic fascination with learning via the Internet has long since faded for digital natives; to them, it's old hat. They need to believe it's worth their time--AND more interesting than all the other things they could be doing--for any plan to "replace substitute teachers with e-learning" to actually work.

Digital natives are doing their own thing, when they're totally wrapped up in their digital media. Doesn't mean they'll do lessons unsupervised.

Substitute teaching, done well, is hard work (kinda like nursing! Or developing and writing news stories! Or . . . you get the idea, I hope). It requires a dedicated professional who knows the discipline s/he is to teach, if it's not to be a wasted "babysitting day"--and we haven't been able to afford those, for a long time.

If the Independent Budget Office of the City of New York (or any other bright-eyed bean-counters in a similar position) think otherwise, they should try it for themselves. I dare them.

Meanwhile, if they can't get enough qualified substitute teachers, maybe they should try offering them "combat pay."

IMAGES: Thanks yet again to Before it's News, for the "vision of the future" graphic. The e-learning photo is courtesy of UNITAR/UN ESCAP E-Learning. Many thanks to International Business Times, for the photo of the NAO robot in a south Australian classroom (note adult human teacher also in the picture), and to Frenzy Advertisement for the photo of the kids watching a Trix commercial on TV. Many thanks to TheSHRINKRap's post "Engaging teachers means engaged students," for the photo of the teacher with an engaged group of students, and to CathNews USA for the photo of the student with an iPad.