What happened to the hoops?

So I had a conversation with a friend today that caused me to look for some more information on Dabrowski's overexcitabilities. I came across this site on the "metagifted" in the process. The site seems a little bit "out there," and I can't really attest to its value because I didn't make it beyond the first article, where I was captured by these 2 sentences. They describe my present circumstances perfectly:

"My projects were always started the night before they were due, and finished sometime around noon the next day. Nobody really knew what to say, think, or do in response; I took an assignment, said "nah, this is boring" and did something totally different. And nobody knew, at the time, how to handle exceptions."

For much of my life, I've started my projects the night before they are due (I actually work on them for weeks, but don't get much "real" work done on them before the night before they are due). Contrary to what you might think, this is not because I'm lazy, but because I have SO many ideas for them that narrowing down to a single selection is difficult. I also have such grand visions of what the final products will look like that the projects sometimes feel overwhelming and are difficult to start.

Nonetheless, it was so validating to hear someone else say that they take assignments that are "boring" and do something totally different instead! I've spent the last 3 years in graduate school doing just that (much to the dismay of my professors). However, as I think back to my high school projects, I suddenly realize that I did the same thing in high school. I don't know that I consciously judged the assignments as being boring at that time. I think they were just springboards to opportunity for me.

I saw "other" possibilities in them that I don't think my teachers necessarily intended [such as the day we were supposed to deliver a commercial for an imaginary product in speech class and I invented a product that was completely abstract (as opposed to the latest household cleaner or something) and then performed a jingle I wrote myself based on a song I had learned as a child in church, or the day we were supposed to give a book report on a biography we had read, and I performed what I now know to be a dramatic interpretation where I took on the roles of multiple characters at once and used voices, positioning, and audience participation to make it all work.]

I just thought that the reason the assignments I turned in were different from everyone else's was because I was inherently "creative." I didn't realize at the time that actually, I was probably just bored. It would be a relief not to realize it now. However, in my present circumstances, I've been painfully aware of that fact for a long time, and that awareness has severely impeded the very creativity that has always sustained me.

Over the last 3 years, I have also become well-acquainted with the phenomenon of people who really don't know what to say, think, or do in response to such "products." Silence is generally the reaction. It can be pretty disconcerting and after awhile, you start to wonder if you are completely crazy--what it is that everyone else gets that you clearly don't?!

That isn't as bad, though, as the condescending tone most experts assume when explaining something to me because they presume that I couldn't possibly understand the answer to the question I have just asked about an engineering design, a mathematical theory, a scientific phenomenon, or a philosophical argument. They respond as adults often do to children who ask seemingly simple questions with highly complex answers. That isn't nearly as bad, though, as being nonverbally (and verbally) dismissed by people who will not engage in a conversation because I am female and/or because they assume that I couldn't possibly know anything (much less have anything of interest to say) regarding a "technical" topic.

It is a strange place to be--different enough that most people aren't interested in talking about the things you care about, but not different "enough" that those who CAN talk about the things you care about will allow you to participate in the conversation.

So it was quite refreshing to talk with several people today about such topics and to realize that for once, I hadn't felt as though I had to overcome large quantities of resistance--attempting to "convince" those involved in the conversation that I could manage it. The conversation just flowed and I didn't really even notice the lack of resistance until I reflected on it later. It was very odd. I wonder what happened to the hoops today? Why WEREN'T they present? Or were they present and I just didn't notice them?

Cyberplanning & Virtual Community Development?!

So, I came across this article as the result of a Google Alert on light: A Red-Light District in the Comfort of My Own Home. I think American society is more influenced by childhood games like Red Light, Green Light than we might care to admit, for articles about "red-light" cameras and organizations getting the "green light" to move forward with some plan or other are quite pervasive. Just as I was ready to hit the delete key, however, I caught a glimpse of the annotation of the article and decided to give it a closer look. I was struck by the following ideas:

1) The "mapping" of cyberspace to the physical geography of a community. Sometimes I think we view them as completely separate, not recognizing how much our experiences in the physical world influence our expectations for and interactions with one another in the virtual one.

2) The issues the article raises regarding the growth and development of cybercommunities. Can you imagine a degree in "cyberplanning and virtual community development?" That is what reading this article evoked for me and it seems rather plausible in a weird sort of way!

3) How deeply entwined everything is with policy and how many questions about it are implied by this article. Who influences policy the most? Who makes final decisions about it? How many of the decisions surrounding policy are made behind closed doors before an issue even becomes a public one? Can the population at large really move policy in a particular direction? How much "public" would that take?

4) What makes the author think that a new "community of shadows" won't spring up in the "dark alleys and sewers" of the xxx district if it were created? People who wish to avoid scrutiny aren't necessarily going to hang out in the "approved for loitering" areas of a community!

5) The psychology implicit throughout this article is especially intriguing.

And Now We Outsource Even Our Play?!

To the Chinese, of course! Somehow, the esteem-influencing properties of "ascending the ladder" (be it real or virtual), combined with a chronic inability to defer gratification, now mean that we even PAY people to play for us?! What is MOST interesting to me about this article is what it says about the blurred lines between work and play . . . play has become work (and I don't mean for the Chinese, I mean for the Americans who are applying their conceptions of success that have always permeated the workplace to their leisure time).

What does that say about the values we place on production as opposed to experience, about American psychology, about the kinds of products Americans are likely to be in need of that enterprising folks could anticipate and provide as a result of the fractures in psychological functioning that this might indicate?! Yes—the economics of the article are VERY interesting, and business people and educators alike had better watch out—the tech has given individuals a lot of power they never had before and they are using that power.

Guiding young people in the use of that power will be even MORE critical than ever before, and leads me to believe that we have to relinquish the teaching of static content (a.k.a. facts--especially since they are outdated daily anyhow) and start teaching a conceptual curriculum that can accommodate flexible thinking, that promotes problem-solving, and that gives kids significant experiences with recontextualization and transfer. It has to be a curriculum of immersion in order for them to acquire the skills they need (and yes, the parallels to second language acquisition are purposeful).