A tree grows... wherever (and a special shout-out to urban dwelling)

Photo by Andreas Laszlo Konrath for
The New York Times Style Magazine

Once one starts writing, the repetition of themes creeps in and takes root. One such theme that seems ever so pervasive in my thoughts is city-dwelling in all its pains and glories. We live in the third-largest city in the United States. No, we're not on the coast, but our lovely "little" lake helps us feel a bit closer to this supposed ideal. A few of my earlier posts such as A tree grows in Chelsea and A space of one's own and learning to love the little things, ironically published almost exactly a year ago, celebrates city living in all its diversity, complexities and, at times, inconveniences. While skimming The New York Times Style Magazine last week, I came across a small story about Ramdane Tahoumi and Victoire de Taillac who decided early in their relationship to live the life of nomads, and three children later, they have lived in Paris, Jaipur, Brooklyn, etc. This takes the idea of urban dwelling to a new level; after all, most of us stay put for more than two years at a time, but they seem to make it work for them:

Some 15 years and three children later, however, the “T-n-T” clan, as they are affectionately known, are living a life of nomads, hopping from continent to continent and city to city — Paris, Jaipur, Tangier — setting up camp in temporary lodgings and then, when it’s time to move on, literally pulling the rug out from beneath their feet. “We do two years per country,” Touhami says. “That is my rule.” And that would sound like a compromise in the couple’s relationship if it weren’t for their incredible talent for making themselves at home no matter where they are in the world.

God knows that this is a lifestyle we can't all achieve, regardless our aspirations, but I do fantasize at times about being able to just get up and go live in India for a bit, then perhaps Tokyo, New York, or Sweden... lovely places with lovely friends. Like the "T-n-T" clan, our children share a heritage divided between two diverse continents, and the thought of them growing up in the midst of both places is certainly something worthy of dreams. What makes this particular family so unique is the way they crave and embody creativity. The nomadic life not only allows them to fulfill various professional goals, but provides for them a richness of diversity and beauty that few can brave to imagine.

And there's that magical word "imagine," which brings me to another string of thought. On the way to pick up my children from preschool the other day, I was listening to a local public radio program and an interview with a writer whose name I hadn't yet caught. This guy was speaking so articulately about, in essence, how living in cities can actually make us smarter. I was provoked by this strand but had to leave my car before catching who was actually doing the talking. Turns out that the interviewee was Jonah Lehrer, prolific writer-extraordinaire for The New Yorker and Wired magazines. His new book, Imagine: How Creativity Works, explores the catalyst for invention and innovation. Today, I sat down and read the review of his book in The New York Times and was drawn to these last few paragraphs of Michiko Kakutani's review of the book:

...Mr. Lehrer makes a strong case for cities as incubators of innovation. Echoing Jane Jacobs, he argues that the sheer density of urban life, “the proximity of all those overlapping minds,” forces people to mingle and interact with a diversity of individuals. This, he goes on, creates exactly the sort of collision of cultures and classes that often yields new ideas. He even quotes a theoretical physicist, Geoffrey West, who says he has found data that validates Jacobs’s theories.

“What the numbers clearly show, and what she was clever enough to anticipate,” Mr. West says, “is that when people come together, they become much more productive per capita.”

One study by Mr. West and another physicist, Luís Bettencourt, Mr. Lehrer writes, suggests that “a person living in a metropolis of one million should generate, on average, about 15 percent more patents and make 15 percent more money than a person living in a city of 500,000.”

In the later pages of this engaging book Mr. Lehrer turns from analysis and reportage to prescription. The jostle and serendipity of city life, he believes, can provide a model for how the Internet might be retooled to accelerate creativity.

“Instead of sharing links with just our friends, or commenting anonymously on blogs, or filtering the world with algorithms to fit our interests, we must engage with strangers and strange ideas,” he writes. “The Internet has such creative potential; it’s so ripe with weirdness and originality, so full of people eager to share their work and ideas. What we need now is a virtual world that brings us together for real.” 

Obviously, not everyone can or wants to just quit their lives and move to a bigger city. After all, there are so many pros and cons on both sides of the coin. I regularly dream of the space we could have for such a lower cost if we were simply to leave this city and move somewhere significantly smaller. And as I approach the inevitable process of determining the right school situation for my nearly five-year old, I wince at the prospect of finding the optimal opportunity for him (after-all, as a dear friend mentioned to me just this morning, in the public school scenario, at least, the idea of choice is often a fallacy, as we are at the mercy of our lottery-driven system). What these stories and books attempt to convey though, in no uncertain terms, is that wherever we are we can dare to imagine a better, more innovative life for ourselves, quite simply in the very ways in which we interact with those people and objects around us, wherever we are, that challenge our boundaries of thought and place. What takes root then may grow into something that allows our creativity to soar above the humdrum. And that, my friends, is a life worth living.

My son communicates in keywords and other kid-related tech talk

Photo by Nalin Bhutt

Perhaps this is an ever-more familiar scene: mom sits down at the computer to catch a glimpse of the news, write a quickly-formulated email, even browse Facebook for a guilty second; within minutes her four-year-old son pops over and says, "Type 'fireman,' 'sam,' 'helicopter' and see what comes up, mama." I really cannot believe it, but my child is conveying his desires in keywords. My how things have changed. And it's not just that. My two-year-old sits in front of our iMac and brushes his index finger across the screen to get the page to change. Unbelievable. And this is in a house that has a very limited technology and television presence for the kids. They are allowed one-to-two hours of video a week (we don't have a television, so the video is on the computer or the iPad), and that usually happens on the weekend, and they maybe get 10-15 minutes on some sort of tech device every day or two at the most. And yet...

It's a different world than when I grew up, and their minds and bodies have the dexterity and drive to handle it all. My kids go to a Waldorf-inspired preschool, so technology and television is quite frowned upon at most stages of development and education, but somehow I don't know how it will be possible to avoid the inevitability of it all, and, honestly, I'm not sure I'm altogether opposed to the ways in which technology will inherently alter the ways in which they learn and gather information. Nalin and I are in agreement when it comes to too much video or television. The passivity it engenders is not at all good for creative development. And yet it is a much more complicated landscape. Last fall, The New York Times had an interesting article about a Waldorf school in the Bay Area that many of the top tech executives send their children. The Waldorf philosophy favors learning and physical activity through creative, applied tasks, as opposed to more traditional forms of memorization, testing, phonics, early adoption of reading, etc. And, by extension, the focus of technology in most classrooms in the country is not something that is subscribed to by these types of schools. I have yet to determine whether this is the absolute right path to travel with our kids, but there is certainly something to say for children learning how to think critically and dialogue and imagine prior to learning letters and multiplication without a larger context. And we also understand that Waldorf may not have all the answers, either. I realize that this is just the beginning of a long process with respect to our children's education; a path that we must take a central role.

Recently, these keyword searches of Ettu's and the subsequent "browsing" have created an interesting quandary. I picked him at school the other day, and he was sitting at the table sewing with another girl in his group, while his brother and another schoolmate napped on the floor nearby. He was engaged and invigorated, creating something of his very own. As soon as we got into the door of our apartment, he started asking to look at the Playmobil site on the computer to make a "wish list" of his favorite characters and sets. It occurred to me as it has in the past that our children are way too smart sometimes. The more we open the door to certain types of exposure, the harder it is to squelch. He ultimately knows that this type of thing is not an acceptable pastime at school and has the ability to focus on other more constructive and creative activities but obviously feels that we will be more lenient at home. Here is where the job gets harder. Media serves as an effective learning tool at given times and with the appropriate collaboration, but let's face it, most of us use it as an easy way to occupy our children while we get things done. And honestly, this is my biggest and most conflicted dilemma as a parent. My ideals and the realities of my day-to-day struggles often don't correspond and can even inspire a frustration that never ceases to surprise me.

Recently, there has been much in the media about the roles of women and mothers in society — at home and/or in the workplace — brought to light by comments by Hilary Rosen, directed at Ann Romney. (Catch Frank Bruni's recent op-ed in The New York Times, which is an interesting read on the subject.) I can't say that I have followed all of the comments or news surrounding this oft-heated debate about our roles as women and as mothers (and frankly, let's not forget stay-at-home dads in this as well), whether we are at home with our kids or also working outside the home, but I can say that all of us, moms and dads alike in all our varied experiences, have a profound role: educating and providing for the creative and emotional well-being of our children. Now, if only I could find the keyword that would provide me the answers for that.