Let Them Play!

In a review of The Rights of the Reader by Daniel Pennac. Roger Sutton of the Horn Book quotes Pennac as saying, among other things "Worried that a lack of scheduled activities will lead your kid to boredom? But being bored is great."

(Click here for the review.)

I so agree. Being bored is actually a gift -- if your time isn't always filled with someone else entertaining you or constantly being drilled with new facts, then you can use that "boring" time to put your imagination to work, something I think we all need more time to do, young and old.

I am against scheduling your child within an inch of his life. I am all for lazy summer days spent running around in backyards, climbing trees and riding bikes. Throwing tennis balls against the wall and trying to figure out how to play jump rope when you only have two people. Cutting "paper dolls" out of catalogs and creating Barbie houses with odds and ends from around the house (I always liked setting up the house so much more than actually playing with the dolls).

Scheduled activities might seem to give your child a more impressive "resume", but I think some really great learning still happens organically. Kids are curious about their world. They are little scientists. That is, when they aren't being sucked in by video games and (oops, I'm guilty of this myself), television. Those are things, sorry to say, that are actually thinking for you, and all too often, not letting you think for yourself.

I also know that scheduled activities seem so much safer -- I can't imagine letting my little girl run around and explore the outdoors unsupervised as much as I did. And honestly, the fact that I'm too scared to let her do that makes me sad. I know that she'll be missing out. I may have been bored at the outset, but I'm glad for having ridden my bike down my street as fast as I could, even though I ended up falling over the handlebars of my bike, making snow angels and exploring the quiet after a snowstorm, including knocking down icicles (dangerous! You'll knock your eye out, kid!) or eating snow (dirty!) or putting on musicals for the neighbors and my family, even if we looked a little silly, laying out on the front lawn finding dragons in clouds, or trying to make mudpies because I read about it in a book. But if I hadn't, I wouldn't have these stories to tell, now would I?

More on the benefits of play and letting kids be. "Are You Turning Your Child Into A Wimp?"Time.com, June 23, 2008

Spring is Here!

And Google has commemorated it using Eric Carle artwork from The Hungry Little Caterpillar. First Dr. Seuss artwork and now Eric Carle -- this Children's Librarian is thrilled! Now if they could just use a little LeUyen Pham, Kadir Nelson and Elisa Kleven (who is, incidentally, one of the nicest people around), I would really lose it! I'm such a sucker for children's book illustrators -- always have been!

Who is LeUyen Pham?

Who is Kadir Nelson?

Who is Elisa Kleven?

Question.

What is the purpose of baby pockets?

My little girl has a lot of pockets for someone who is just learning how to use her hands (and who mostly has them in her mouth). Do clothing manufacturers put pockets on baby pants and jackets just in case a baby has something they might want to stick in there? They're very cute, don't get me wrong, and usually, I would be all for real pockets -- I get angry when clothes have those fake you out pockets. I need pockets; don't tease me like that. But for a baby? I'm just sayin'.

Am I supposed to stick her pacifier in her pocket? Baby pens in the chest pocket of her hoodie? 50 cents in case she needs to call home (if she can find a phone booth -- can anyone nowadays?). Just because I was curious, I tried to get my baby to put her hand in one of her front pockets. No luck. I guess my question will remain unanswered.

Do I have way too much time on my hands? Do ya think?

How the Other Half Lives

I think I'm living in the wrong reality.

Something made me pick up San Francisco Magazine at the library recently. A demented desire to look at things I could never afford, I guess. Or maybe it was the headline, "A Secret Shopping Avenue (with 75 cent parking)".

Inside I saw this chair: It's the Lafayette Chair designed by Gary Hutton, which actually means nothing to me. I just thought it was a cool and different looking chair, until I saw how much it costs. It STARTS at $12,675. Then I thought, "Oh, that's an ugly chair."

You know how when you were in middle and high school and the guy you liked preferred someone else? You might have silently obsessed over him (more my style), or you might have turned all sour grapes and been like, "Oh, he wasn't cute anyway." Sour grapes, anyone?

But I couldn't play that game with the ad I saw for the new private first class cabins on some of Emirates Airlines flights. I was blown away. Sigh.

Click on the picture to see it up close. You have to see this! This is on a plane! Forget sitting with your knees to your chin in coach. Of course, coach is where I will be on my next flight, but a girl can dream, can't she?

In other news: A short review in the same magazine of the book Vintage Paris Couture used the term "recessionista", I guess, to describe those of us who love fashion but who aren't super rich enough to afford the crazy prices, especially in this economy. Or maybe just for those of us who love fashion, but who aren't crazy. Some of the places in the book are apparently "under the radar" -- in other words, flea markets, resale shops, and as the review says "charity shops" (you mean like The Sal?). Sing it with me in a Dolly Parton twang: "I was a recessionista, when frugal wasn't cool." I was a recessionista before the recession. That makes me oh, so ahead of my time. And what proves it?! In this same magazine of treasures (I'm realizing just how cool I really am!), some guy talks about his addiction to chicharrones -- translation: pork rinds. Go on, affirm my 7 year old self. People would turn their nose up at me for eating them, but he throws some lime and hot sauce on them (an idea he probably got from the Chicanos in the Mission where he "discovered" the pork rinds) and suddenly they are chic and worthy of a mention in SF Mag.

BTW, they also had an photo spread on the return of pantsuits (or should I say, jumpsuits?). May I say, for the record, that, no sour grapes, these are hideous.

Yves Saint Laurent / Warhol

Last Saturday I went to the De Young Museum with a couple of friends to see the Yves Saint Laurent exhibit. I was really enjoying it until I noticed the video of a runway show. It must have been kind of a retrospective fashion show of all his works, because the video showed outfits that were in the De Young's exhibit from several different years -- so I know not to blame Saint Laurent, as this probably happened either after his death in 2008 or after his last runway show (2002).

What I saw that bothered me was a bunch of Black models in his African inspired dresses -- now, this in and of itself did not bother me, in fact, I was momentarily happy to see so many Black faces on the runway at once, given that attention was given to the dearth of Black models on the catwalk last year. I didn't even bother me that they were wearing the African inspired dresses (I don't know what I would have thought had a White model come out wearing them). What did bother me was the "exoticization" (I know that's not a real word) of the models -- they were wearing very large "African" style headdresses, and to top it all off, a White model preceded them on the runway, wearing an outfit that could best be described as something you would wear on safari. That made me cringe - were these Black women to be hunted? Was that the implication? Why have the White woman in the safari outfit precede the Black women in the African inspired pieces at all? Why even go there?

For a second I thought that the video could have been from another time period, because the dresses themselves were from YSL's 1967 collection, but the models' hair and makeup looked altogether too modern for that to be the case. Then I started thinking about the rest of the video -- the use of Black models in other outfits was few and far between -- I only remember a Black model in a toreador outfit and Naomi Campbell in a green, fuzzy coat, black nylons, heels and nothing else. As my friend said, the way the African collection was presented in the runway show was "disturbing on so many levels." It's too bad, because several of YSL's pieces were the mixture of elegant and dramatic that I love.


On the other hand, the Andy Warhol exhibit was a feast for the senses - with music from Judy Garland flooding the darkened exhibit where Warhol's 60's era silver screen/screen prints were hung, the Velvet Underground being played in a groovy room with psychedelic lights, guitars encased in glass, and pillows on a seating area, and disco being played in a section dedicated to Warhol's Silver Factory and Studio 54. There were also clips from movies Warhol filmed, his famous screen tests, record covers that he designed (very cool -- I think the art of the record cover is largely uncelebrated and unrecognized), videos of the Rolling Stones in concert, clips from Warhol's MTV show 15 Minutes, quotes from Warhol ("If I ever have to cast an acting role, I want the wrong person for the part. [...] if you can't get someone who's perfectly right, it's more satisfying to get someone who's perfectly wrong. Then you know, you've really got something."), and of course, lots and lots of paintings, illustrations and photographs. I'm not saying I wouldn't go to the YSL exhibit, just that I felt like I connected more with the Warhol exhibit.

Laughing Baby

I must have really needed a laugh today, 'cause this kid had me rolling.