Eddie Dean grabs the brass ring with a new Ralph Stanley memoir

The first college class I ever taught on my own was back in 1982: a section of freshman composition at the University of Virginia. I’d just gotten my M.A. and I’d led a discussion group as a TA, but this was the first time I was truly flying solo. The overall format was pretty well set: one two-to-three page paper a week on a topic or theme of some kind. I decided to get creative. With co-conspirator Alice, I devised an assignment that asked students to write as observant and detailed a paper as they could about a statue of a winged aviator that stood just outside Alderman Library. The bonus prize went to the students who were shrewd enough to discover that the same guy that did Mount Rushmore did the statue. A few of them got it, though most got stuck at the statue’s shiny crotch, polished by years of student “veneration” as they made their way into the library. The rest of the statue was green, but the crotch was burnished bronze.

In any event, one paper I got exploded all my expectations. In this paper, the statue came to life, slung a backpack over its shoulder, and made its way to Manhattan, where it walked among the city streets with panache and caused quite a spectacle. I took the paper home and read it to Alice. I said, “I’m not sure what to say about this paper, but I am sure there’s something quite extraordinary about this writer.”

That writer was Eddie Dean. Having talent like that just appear on a class roster as if by magic is one of the great, great rewards of the vocation of teaching. I did the best I could to keep up with his talent, but even then I knew that my first job as a teacher was to Do No Harm. I didn’t want any of the things I *could* teach Eddie to alter one bit of his native genius. In some respects, I suppose I was trying to enact that wonderful motto of Heidegger that Hillary B. unearthed in the course of her reading and blogging: I was trying above all to “let learn.”

I hope my teaching was of some use to Eddie, but given his many accomplishments as a professional music journalist over the ensuing years, I am confident I did no harm. I’m also very, very proud to say that Eddie’s second book is now out: the Ralph Stanley memoir that he’s been working on for years. Here’s the article in the NY Times, and here’s a tasty little piece of nastiness from The Boot. I look for widespread acclaim for the book and for Eddie’s labors in putting it together. And I can’t wait for the third book to appear–though I imagine Eddie’s ready for a book breather at this point, a breather of great extent.

Order five copies for the Halloween season, ten for Thanksgiving, and a gross for all your December holidays.

They say strangers should be welcomed, as one may thereby entertain an angel unaware. Turns out English 101 should be welcomed too, for I entertained an Eddie Dean unaware.

Yes, let learn!

And rock on, brother.

Eddie Dean and me, Christmas 2008

A Christmas Reunion with Eddie Dean, 2008

Happy birthday, Dad

My father would have been one hundred and two years old today.

I grew up with an older dad. When he was my age, I was not yet two years old. I have a brother two years younger than I am. What would it be like to begin to raise a child at 50? He’d married late, at 43. For seven years he and my mother had tried to conceive, with no success. Then, as sometimes happens, the long and frustrating wait was suddenly over, and within three years of his 50th birthday he had two young boys to raise.

He worried about being older. He worried about a lot of things, truth to tell: were we warm enough, had we had enough to eat, did we have enough money for the Scout camping trip, did we know how to be careful, especially around water (he’d had a nephew who’d drowned at Myrtle Beach, and the death haunted him, then doubled the haunting when he had boys of his own). But I remember that he worried a *lot* about being older. Once we’d grown to our twenties, he fretted that he hadn’t played ball with us enough, and I knew from that just how intense his worries had been.

Sometimes we’d run in the yard, throw the ball back and forth, get nutty. I remember how quick he was on his feet, though most of the time he moved at the same pace all the other adults did. He could always catch me, though he never pursued me to punish me. It was always in sport, as I remember it now. He was a bit grouchy, often, sometimes outright grumpy, but when he decided to play the fool he carried the part off with panache. I remember one Christmas Eve, coming home from the Lutheran midnight service where we’d had real wine at Communion, unlike our usual Baptist grape juice. My dad carried on all the way home and insisted we should open our presents as soon as we got into the kitchen–which we didn’t, of course, because we never opened presents before, oh, 5:30 or 6:00 on Christmas morning. And he hadn’t had more than a thimblefull of wine, anyway. But for whatever reason, he felt the spirit, and he got goofy, playful, wacky. My brother and I laughed until the tears ran down our faces. So did our mother, come to think of it.

My father was usually the one who gave me my bath when I was a small child. As he dried me off, he’d talk about the mysteries of how blood circulated through the body, of how the stars were so numerous and tiny and far away, of how George Beverly Shea could make such a massive sound with his voice as he sang. He’d often talk about how he “studied” something, by which he meant “wondered at it.” Sometimes he’d talk that way about special effects or trick shots in movies. “How do they get a picture like that?” he’d ask.

I never knew whether he was as naive as he said he was. He might have been: he was raised on a poor subsistence farm on Jennings Creek in Botetourt County, Virginia, the youngest of five children. His father was older when he was born, too; in fact, my Grandfather Campbell, whom I never knew, was born in 1867, just two years after war in Virginia had subsided, and not all that far away, at least by Texas standards, from where Lee had surrendered to Grant. On that farm where my dad was raised there was no electricity, no running water, no indoor toilets. I saw the house once. It was more than a shack, less than a house;  a cabin, I guess. The porch sagged, just as you’d expect. I remember the cabin had about four rooms, and that the room at the back was full of bees. No one had lived in the house for decades, but no one had disturbed it either. My father knew the way back. I don’t think I could find it myself, now.

My dad loved school and did well in it. A couple of his report cards survive. He was a great reader. When I knew him, he read the newspaper every day pretty much completely, except for business and sports, two subjects he never showed any interest in that I can recall. He followed world and national news closely. And he loved to read the funny papers, which is what he called the comics. On Sundays, my brother and I would sit on his knees while he would read us from the funny papers. We’d always marvel together that Barney Google rarely appeared in the comic strip that still bore his name. Seems Snuffy Smith had taken over.

Loving school wasn’t enough for the youngest child, though, and after sixth grade there was no more local schooling for my father. His brothers went further; one went to college and became an engineer of some kind. But for some reason, probably because he was the baby and the last to leave home and loved too well by his parents, my father stayed put. He went to sixth grade twice so he could stay in school one more year. And then that was that. For about a year before he died, my father would tell me that he wanted me to hurry up and finish my Ph.D. so he could call me doctor. I did, and he did, though I’m not at all sure he knew what a Ph.D. was. But I’m not sure he didn’t, either. He could surprise you that way. I remember one night playing Trivial Pursuit, the kind of game he’d never play. He wasn’t much for board games of any kind. A quiz game would be even less interesting. But he could surprise you. The question came to him: who was leader of the Soviet Union after Stalin? I was dismayed, figuring that my father would quit in disgust, his lack of education too painfully on display. “Malenkov,” he said. We all thought,  is he joking? We looked it up and he was right. He snorted that we would doubt him, and then he smiled, a little mischievously, and pretended to doze in his chair.

His wife of thirty-eight years, Genevieve Gay Gardner Campbell, died in 1989, when she was sixty-nine and my father was almost eighty-two. He lived in the house they’d shared, the house I was raised in, built by my mother’s father (the only grandparent I really knew–and another story altogether), for about another eighteen months. After that, he was too feeble to stay at home even with a sitter who’d cook and clean for him, and he went to live in a nursing home, with the predictable decline soon thereafter. He died ten days after my wife, my son, and I had arrived in California, where I was to begin my first tenure-track English professor appointment at the University of San Diego. I spoke to him only once after I got there. After that call, he was in the hospital and too sick to speak, weighed down with the pneumonia that would eventually kill him.

During those eighteen months of Indian summer, though, my Dad and I had some grand days, cutting up and playing the fool sometimes, and sometimes going in search of the perfect Roanoke Valley hot dog. The best time of all, though, was the night of October 24, 1990, when I called him from the delivery room of Chippenham Memorial Hospital in Richmond, Virgina, to tell him his grandson Ian Woodworth Campbell had been born. He was overjoyed, elated, and within about a minute said, “I wish your mother was here to get this news.”

My dad came up to Richmond for Thanksgiving that year. The photograph captures the first meeting of Ian and his Granddaddy Campbell, with Ian’s mother Alice holding our infant boy, our beamish boy with the preternaturally alert eyes. My father has two straws in his shirt pocket because a hand tremor meant he could no longer negotiate a drinking glass without spilling it. He carried straws with him wherever he went so he wouldn’t have to ask for one or risk not having one to use. Yet he could hold Ian, and did on several occasions. And in this photo he reaches toward his grandchild with a gesture of great tenderness, with a peace and gladness in his eyes that matches the maternal joy in Alice’s face. There’s something very still and lovely about this photograph, something that makes me think of how my father might have looked at me when I was that small and that tenderly held by my loving, patient mother.

Fatherhood was sometimes a worry for my father, but his love for me and my brother was clear, strong, undoubtable, always. He taught me wonder, and taught me by example that regrets were never the whole story, or at least they didn’t have to be.

I love you, Dad, and I miss you every day. Your grandson Ian, your granddaughter Jenny, and your daughter-in-law Alice join me in this.

Happy birthday.

Granddaddy Campbell, Alice, and Ian

Learning At Baylor

With apologies to Kevin Creamer at the University of Richmond, whose newsletter title I shamelessly copy here (imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, they say), I offer this first podcast from the Academy for Teaching and Learning at Baylor University. It’s a conversation with Dr. David Arnold, Ralph and Jean Storm Professor of Mathematics, and it ranges widely, from cryptology to teaching to math for non-math-majors. David was great fun to interview–smart, engaging, and a great sense of humor–and I had a great time getting to know him and his work. I hope the fun and conviviality come through in the podcast, as well as David’s deeply thoughtful approach to learning and teaching. My thanks to him for his time and energy.

I’ve got several more of these interviews “in the can,” as they say in the biz, and I’ll be conducting more of them in the weeks ahead. As always, your feedback is welcome.

The symphony of voices

So what happens when you link? In the blogosphere, the party invitation is delivered. With a nod. With a wink. With a secret handshake. With just enough eye contact to be inviting, maybe even intriguing, but not at all off-putting or threatening or coercive. Or creepy. Not in the least.

It’s what Bakhtin calls “addressivity.” The “quality of turning to someone.” The thing that makes the party hearty.

The thing we need.

Ted Nelson and Simone Weil

Two thinkers I’ve never dreamed of associating … but the Web’s recursive intertwingling reveals a deeply intriguing link.

I’m teaching Ted Nelson’s Computer Lib/Dream Machines in my Introduction to New Media Studies class right now. My students are pretty well electrified (so to speak) by Nelson’s observations and arguments, and especially by his unusually direct and non-academic prose style. And although at some points Nelson can be too anti-curricular even for me (and that’s saying something), I find myself getting swept away all over again by the energy of his imagination and by the many home truths, at least in my experience, that he speaks. Nelson is very much the Walt Whitman of new media. He sings the learning community electric.

As I prepared for class a few days ago, finding more choice nuggets in an essay in which I’ve already underlined about 70% of the sentences, I was especially struck by these words:

But there is always something artificial–that is, some form of artifice–in presentation. So the problem is to devise techniques which have elucidating value but do not cut connections or ties or other relationships you want to save…. The design of things to be shown–whether writing, movie-making, or whatever–is nearly always a combination of some kind of explicit structure–an explanation or planned lesson, or plot of a novel–and a feeling that the author can control in varying degrees. The two are deeply intertwined, however. [Emphasis added.]

I was first struck by the connection (ah, there I am, mapping and exploring the very territory Nelson describes and inhabits) between Nelson’s words and an article on the role of emotion in learning that I read recently in a new journal called Mind, Brain, and Education. In that article, the authors describe emotion not as the unruly toddler in a shop full of the glass ornaments of reason, but as the very shelves upon which our fragile glass ornaments of reason are supported and made effective for our use. Nelson’s idea of “fantics” is especially resonant here.

But then I was truly brought up short when I read this quotation from Simone Weil over at “Blogging on the Brain,” ATL Graduate Fellow Hillary Blakeley’s blog:

Attention consists of suspending out thought, leaving it detached, empty, and ready to be penetrated by the object; it means holding in our minds, within reach of this thought, but on a lower level and not in contact with it, the diverse knowledge we have acquired….

Poise, emptiness, readiness, holding without contact but within reach: Weil’s marvelously evocative language, like Nelson’s, like poetry’s, enacts the very thing it describes. Weil also reminds me that attention is more than hyperfocus, or can be. To paraphrase Milton, they also attend who only mull and wait. At the same time, both Weil and Nelson insist that one can combine analytical rigor (the activity they’re engaged in by writing these ideas down, for example) with puzzlement, suggestiveness, deeply felt experience.

And though to my knowledge Weil and Nelson never met or spoke to each other, and may not have read each other’s works, they too are books in Donne’s library, lying open to each other, reading and speaking to each other over the years, voiced and conversing by means of linkages mediated to me by the expressive capabilities of these new technologies. Books, face-to-face classes, blogging, institutional structures, traditional disciplines, cross-disciplinary conversation, youth and adulthood and middle age, history and the present, serendipity, impulse, intuition, rigor, beauty,courage, anxiety, energy, faith: all in the choir, singing a complex harmony I must both strain and relax to hear.

A personal cyberinfrastructure

Here’s my podcast of the “New Horizons” column I wrote for the Sept./Oct. 2009 EDUCAUSE Review.

Even if the specifics need changing, mild or moderate or drastic, I’m as confident as I can be that we should be educating our citizenry to be systems administrators of their own digital lives.

Edification by Puzzlement

I wonder how this essay has been received by anthropologists. James Fernandez seems to me take extraordinary risks in the argument, or at least they would be in some intellectual circles. Perhaps not in anthropology? (Paging Dr. Wesch.) In any event, this essay is remarkable in my view for the way it analyzes non-schooled reasoning without reducing its sophistication or objectifying its practitioners.

Fernandez closes with two wonderful paragraphs that I’d like to share with you:

In a compartmentalized society like our own we are very able to compartmentalize our intellectual exercises. We are well schooled to heuristics–to looking for rules and applying them in limited and apparently self-contained contexts. That’s intelligence for you! But more traditional societies with pretensions to cosmogony, and most traditional societies have that pretension, are more totalistic. Intelligence is a matter of relating to the context, in developing it, revitalizing it. Hence, it is an intelligence that employs images to a high degree in actual or suggested analogic relation. It plays upon similarities in experience, and in that play it suggests or requires answers that suggest overarching contiguities–cosmologies, totalities which encompass, absorb, and defeat particularities. All this is rarely done in a direct and explicit manner. “By indirections find directions out.”

As well schooled as we all are in the modern specialized compartmentalized societies, we tend to misread in a schoolmasterish way the masters of iconic thought. We look for a limited set of applicable rules, or we are simply puzzled, and we fail to see how these masters edify by puzzlement. Our inclination is to deprive puzzles of their mystery–that’s science for you–and thus we fail to see how the masters mysteriously suggest an overarching order–how they give concrete identity to inchoate subjects, how they reconcile these subjects. It is hard for us to tolerate ambiguities of this kind, let alone understand their function.

As I read these words I think of Percy’s “The Loss of the Creature” and his advocacy of the “indirect approach” that itself must be complicated and dialectically reversed should the puzzlement ever become a mere parlor trick. I think also of the ways in which Michael Wesch has introduced a “grand narrative” into his anthropology classes as (I suppose) a kind of cosmogony or at least an overarching order. And I think of the way poetry plays with the most precise suggestiveness one can imagine. A far cry from schoolmasters, textbooks, and bon eleves, from which heaven save us.

James Fernandez, “Edification by Puzzlement,” in Explorations in African Systems of Thought, ed. Ivan Karp and Charles S. Bird. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1980. 44-59.
Church ruins

APGAR for Class Meetings slide now on Slideshare

I’ve got some thoughts and ramblings in the works on two articles I’ve read this week that have rocked my world: “Edification by Puzzlement” (I cannot overpraise this article–I feel it will be of critical importance to all my work moving forward, and I’m very grateful to Nathan for suggesting it to me) and “We Feel, Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education” (Mind, Brain, and Education 1:1). I also have a post in the works about an Australian blogger named David Jones whom I’ve learned a great deal from lately in a most wonderful distributed conversation. Alas, there’s no time to get it all down just now. But I did want to share a small continuation (and instance) of the framing/nudging idea I’m working on.

Three years ago I had an idea for a self-scoring checklist I called “APGAR for Class Meetings.” As I’ve developed the idea and tried it out in various classes, I’ve decided that the presentation of the checklist at the beginning of class is very important for framing the device not as a scold or a panopticonish surveillance but as a bit of helpful cognitive feedback that hopefully students will begin to incorporate into their own self-directed learning. Thus I presented the checklist as a PowerPoint slide with Dr. Apgar’s image at the top and the questions below. My hope was that the photograph would personalize and humanize the checklist and thus frame the self-scoring positively. The photograph is wonderful, I think, in conveying the kindness, determination, and keen intelligence that her friends and associates say characterized Dr. Apgar’s personality and work. In truth, I wanted to enlist the spirit of Dr. Apgar, as an innovator, scientist, physician, mentor, and altruist, as one patron of the classes I teach. A frame for my expectations, and for my hopes, hopes I hope my students will share. A trust that we can achieve breakthroughs if we are of a mind to do so.

So now I’ve put the slide on Slideshare. If you decide to try this approach or something like it with your students, please let me know how it works out. I’d love to learn from you.

Viva Dr. Apgar!