Archive for the ‘Parenting’ Category

What Happens If Your Mother (Not Your Favorite Reality Star) Has Plastic Surgery?

Saturday, February 6th, 2010

Delia Ephron

Delia Ephron

Screenwriter, Playwright, Author

Posted: February 3, 2010 01:13 PM in HuffingtonPost.com

I haven’t been watching many reality shows lately because of the crying. There is simply too much of it. Last season on Project Runway, Christopher cried because he was sure that he was the only person in the world who would design a dress inspired by a rock (something I am sure he is wrong about). I have no idea how much crying there is on The Hills, since I was never a fan, but it did catch my attention in People magazine that Heidi Montag, star of the show, cried after she had ten plastic surgery procedures in one day. Heidi, I know from a quick Google search, is 23, although since her plastic surgery she looks 33. Which is actually something to cry about.

I have been interested in and done research on this subject spun slightly different: What happens if your mother (not your favorite reality star) has plastic surgery? This is the subject of my new novel for teenagers, The Girl with the Mermaid Hair.

If, as a teenager, you spend hours in front of a mirror deciding, say, whether one nostril is larger than the other or worrying whether your breasts point in different directions (typical teenage obsessing), do you outgrow this madness or make more radical choices if your mother comes home with larger lips, a smaller ass, a new chin, a different nose, bigger breasts? How do you feel if your mom suddenly doesn’t have any expression in her face? Or if you look into your mother’s eyes and no one is home?

Your main job as a teenager is to learn to love yourself. How can you do this if your mother hates herself?

In my research, what was so startling was how aware all the teenage girls were of their mother’s fear, or, more accurately, their hatred, of aging. One girl said, “Every time I wrinkle my forehead, my mother points it out and tells me not to. Even if I’m in the middle of a really important conversation.” Another spoke about “competitive dieting” with her mom, how she couldn’t help but engage in it even though she thought her mother’s obsession with fat was “crazy.” There is a study out this week from the Girl Scouts of the USA telling us what we already know, which is that the fashion industry and its use of ultra-thin models is making teenage girls too obsessed with being skinny, and distorting their body image. In my more limited unscientific research, the mothers are as strong an influence. Going on shopping trips with mom, usually a bonding experience, became all about hearing moms moan about their fat and rolls. Or seeing your mother trying on something, look in the mirror and say, “”I look ugly.”

I have vivid memories of my own adolescence when the main purpose of shop windows was not to see the clothes in them but my own reflection, when hours could be spent in front of a mirror deciding if my eyebrows matched. Emotionally, teen life is no different today, but now you can act on your own insecurities. You can fix them.

A lot of healthy acting out occurs in the mirror, as my research showed. Singing and dancing and even telling off people who hurt your feelings or trying on new identities. But there was also a lot of obsessing about body image. One girl got dressed using four mirrors, running from one to the next: one had good indoor lighting, one was a “skinny” mirror, one had natural light, one she could get the closest to. “If something is wrong with you,” a teenage girl said, “the mirror magnifies it.” Another said, “If I think something’s wrong with me, like my thighs are too fat, when I look in the mirror that’s all I see.”

God knows, I am not advocating growing old naturally, just to remember what a tender fragile time adolescence is. In my research, one teenage girl confided, “Seeing my mother after her surgery scared me to death.” We need our moms to be stable and secure. I have so many friends who will tell me with surprise, when looking at photos of themselves when they were younger, “Hey, I was really cute. I didn’t realize it.” No one does. You have to get older to realize it. Imagine if you got older and realized that you’d destroyed your younger self. You had operated it away.

Now that’s something to cry about.
Books & More From Delia Ephron
Frannie in Pieces (Laura Geringer B…
The Girl with the Mermaid Hair

‘i want my mommy!’

Monday, October 27th, 2008

Normally, this phrase is a desperate cry, often through tears, in times of frustration, sadness, fear, disappointment. From a little kid.

Now, it’s often a soft internal utterance. Just stating a fact. From the part of me who will always be your daughter. From the little me for whom you will always be ‘my mommy.’

When I want to ask you a question about something that happened, that no one else would know, to clarify my memories, I want my mommy.

When I feel a new appreciation for something you did or who you were, when I want to thank you, I want my mommy.

When I want to share, mother-to-mother, I want my mommy.

When my son does or says something I am proud about,  I want my mommy.

When I see the late autumn day sun illuminating wildly colored leaves, I want my mommy.

When I realize no one has critiqued the recording on my answering machine, I want my mommy.

When I want to revisit a conversation we had 45 years ago, I want my mommy.

I know, I know. I can speak to her. I can hear her. She is alive in me, certainly. In a way.

Still, I want to see her make a goofy face, hear her sing quietly to my son as he falls asleep. I want to hold her hand and play with it during services, hear her talk in funny dialects and watch her laugh till the tears come.  I want to see her (my) feet. I want to smell her skin, smooth her eyebrow with my finger, to give her head a scratch and scratch that same place on her back under the bra strap, to love her.

Still, I want to give you happiness. Make you happy. See you being happy. Give you love. Love you. Lay with my head in your lap, your hand stroking my hair. Get your love.  That unique, uplifting, universe-filling, life-saving love I always got, could only get, from You and Dad.

I want my mommy. I want my mommy. I want my mommy.

8 local firms make list of best for working moms

Thursday, October 25th, 2007

(Crain’s) — Eight Chicago-area companies have been named among the 100 best for working mothers on the 2007 list.

New York has the most companies on the list, with 23, followed by Illinois and New Jersey, both tied for second place with eight companies.

Among Illinois’ eight was Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, a Chicago-based law firm that applied for the first time this year. It is one of four legal firms that made the 2007 list.

“It’s wonderful recognition that our efforts have paid off,” said Nicole Auerbach, a partner at Katten and co-founder of its Women’s Leadership Forum. “It’s really just an affirmation of all the things that we are doing.”
Working Mother magazine commended the law firm for its flexible work schedule, subsidized child care and for having women represent 25% of its partner ranks, an accomplishment the law firm credits to its Women’s Leadership Forum.

The other Chicago-area companies on the 2007 list are:

Abbott Laboratories, which has been on the list for at least 15 years.
Allstate Insurance Co.
Children’s Memorial Hospital
Grant Thornton LLP
Kraft Foods Inc.
Northern Trust Corp., which this year made its 15th appearance on the list.
Northwestern Memorial Healthcare
No Illinois companies were among the top 10 companies.
Carol Evans, president and chief executive officer of Working Mother Media Inc., said the application process usually yields some interesting data about workplace trends, and this year was no different.

“We know there is a lot of overwork and stress in the world because there are a lot of new programs to address overwork and stress,” she said. “It’s not just no-meeting Fridays, but one company, when you log on over the weekend, a message pops up and says, ‘It’s the weekend.’ ”

Ms. Evans also noted that paid paternity leave has increased to an average of five weeks from three weeks and that more programs are being adapted to benefit non-mothers.

The annual Working Mother magazine list, now in its 22nd year, was released Tuesday. It ranked companies on workplace policies including child care, family leave, compensation and company culture. More than 200 companies applied; applicants were required to answer 575 questions and were assigned ratings based on responses.

am i working?

Saturday, July 21st, 2007

Work vs. Play
sounds like a face off. or a competition. at least, two opposites? mutually exclusive opponents?
Work=hard, gotta, have to, what one does so, and before, she can play? wouldn’t do it if i didn’t have to? Not play. Big.
Play=effortless, fun, want to, what you do after work is done. not work. Little. Inconsequencial.
It is said ‘play is the work of children.’
When does that change? when mom starts making you clean your room? Is sharing-your-toys your first job?
At school, they sneak work in. In those earliest years, ya think it’s all play. You don’t even realize you are learning. Then the learning becomes more formalized. and, for some, less fun. Work.
Some people are lucky enough to love their jobs. ‘I can’t believe i get paid for doing this’ they say. Some would rather work than play.
Sometimes work looks like play. Like taking little ones to the park. Someone elses’s little ones. for some, pushing little Jenny on the swing is work. Or, just on some days it feels like work. but not on others.
If it feels like work is it work?
Golf is a game. People work on their game. Is practicing a sport work?
Momming. some days it’s work, others not. some hours, some moments it’s the very hardest work.
work (wûrk)n.
1. Physical or mental effort or activity directed toward the production or accomplishment of something.
v.intr.
1. To exert oneself physically or mentally in order to do, make, or accomplish something.
Hmm. when you put it that way, work sounds pretty darn good. and fun. it could include knitting a sweater or baking a cake. not just balancing the checkbook or writing an expense report. it could be telling a joke– making someone smile. It could be giving a hug.
2.a. A job; employment: looking for work.
b. A trade, profession, or other means of livelihood.
npw, there are jobs and there are….jobs. there’s taking out the garbage and making a pot of tea. There is researching to find a cure for cancer.work, in fact, can be important or trivial, joyful or painful, of one choosing or something one has to do. it can bring many rewards, including a paycheck. but it doesn’t have to. it can feel like nothing comes of it. work can be noble. righteous. or at least make the worker feel that way.
sometimes work, or play, is more a state of mind than anything. the same activity can be work for one and play for another. or at different times, for the same person.

another definition:3.a. Something that one is doing, making, or performing, especially as an occupation or undertaking; a duty or task: begin the day’s work.
like taking a bath? locking up before going to bed?

here’s a good one: 4a. The part of a day devoted to an occupation or undertaking: met her after work.
b. One’s place of employment: Should I call you at home or at work?
what is someone’s ‘occupation or undertaking’ is not limited to a particulat part of the day? what if her place(s) of employment include “at home.’ (hence the hww tee shirt: 9->5=24/7)
ON THE OTHER HAND—
play (pl)
v. played, play·ing, plays
v.intr.
1. To occupy oneself in amusement, sport, or other recreation: children playing with toys.
Ah. so, for it to be play it has to be recreation? as opposed to the accomplishment of something? Can one work and play at the same time? what is play for one is work for another?

Then, there is just ‘what we do.’ No matter what label is put on it. productive, somehow, even if for our own heart, or soul. Profound or trivial. all worth celebrating during this short life, while we have it.

Men Want Change Too

Tuesday, June 5th, 2007

Monday, Mar. 22, 2004

We were young; we were smart; we were looking forward to the world of work. And when we graduated from Oxford University in the early 1970s, my wife and I (we’ve been together 33 years) thought we’d have it all. We’d both have successful, satisfying careers. We’d have enough free time to travel the world and do fun stuff (you should have seen the shirts and dresses she used to make). We’d share in our kids’ upbringing and divide the chores. We were convinced that the world of stay-at-home moms and job-trapped dads had ended, oh, sometime around 1969.

We were wrong, of course. In her 30s, my wife gave up a high-powered career as a government official to have children. Consciously trying to balance work and family, she took part-time jobs that in some cases were enjoyable but that never gave her the recognition or professional advancement that you get if you’re in full-time employment. Meanwhile–first for fun, later because the extra income helped–I allowed work to take over my life, spending nights and weekends working on books or TV films. I’ve spent nothing close to the time I wanted to with my two daughters. Granted, there should be some rule against well-paid journalists complaining about their lot in life, so let the record show that I love my work and that my children are charming, healthy teenagers. But the three-way balance among work, family and the nonjob, nonkid stuff that provides much of the spice of life–what ever happened to my tennis game or the trip to Machu Picchu?–is nothing like what my wife and I imagined it would be. It’s not just women who are disappointed that modern life has not accommodated their various needs. So are millions of baby-boomer men who wanted their marriage to be a genuine partnership of equals.

Why did we get it so wrong? We weren’t all smoking something–O.K., some of us were–and we weren’t unutterably naive. But we left college at a very specific moment in time. We were the beneficiaries of eight decades of astonishing technological change, and we subconsciously thought it would continue. But a long wave of improvement in everyday life came to an end in the 1970s. Look around your home; you will not see a significant labor-saving device invented since the 1960s. Nothing has happened since then to make feeding the kids, washing their clothes or cleaning the home easier. Think about the time you spend schlepping around; note that New Yorkers travel in the same way and at much the same speed as they did in the 1930s.

The most significant technological development of the past 30 years has been a collapse in the price of a unit of information. That, it turns out, has been disastrous for the work-life balance. Information is now ubiquitous. Home life is no easier than it was, but work has invaded the domestic space–which is what my daughters mean when they scream at me to stop answering e-mail in the evening. The incessant demands of an always-on, 24/7 world of free information have made some middle-aged women who would like to go back to work consider whether the benefits are worth the hassle. But so long as they stay out of the labor market, their husbands are trapped in it–otherwise family incomes would fall. Hence that familiar social phenomenon: a married couple in their 50s in which the wife is resentful because she does too little paid work and the husband is resentful because he does too much.

Thirty years ago, we dreamed of something different. Pity it didn’t work out.

DESPERATELY SEEKING LORI

Tuesday, June 5th, 2007

TIME Magazine    Monday, Oct. 14, 1996

Swing voters hold a nation’s secrets. Sometimes they are important because of what they tell us about an election. But when the race isn’t even close, they are important because of what they tell us about ourselves.

Thirty years ago, the crucial voter was a white, male factory worker–urban, ethnic, patriotic–who ripened into a Reagan Democrat and started swinging the White House to the G.O.P. But in 1996 the archetype has changed: she is a suburban, conservative, Midwestern working mother, 35 years old, earns her age, finished high school, maybe some college. Between 1992 and 1996 she has swung more dramatically than any other voter; 20% of this group voted for Clinton last time; he’s pulling 52% now.

And yet the lives of the voters who are deciding this race can’t be read in the numbers. In some ways it matters less how much they earn than how many kids they have, less how they voted in the past than how they feel about the future, less where they live than how they manage.

In the morning they strap the baby into the high chair with a handful of Cheerios on the tray, then stay alert for the sound of his choking while they take a two-minute shower. They consider a week at their in-laws’ a vacation and joke that they live at the Target store. They drive a big car not because they haul a lot of lumber but because it gives them a fleeting sense of control. Everything changes when they become parents–when life gets both richer and harder, and everything becomes a trade-off, and the self is no longer the center, and the future is no longer possible to ignore.

The campaigns are tracking this voter so closely that they can measure the “persuadability” of her neighborhood, block by treelined block. Millions have already been spent hunting for her, with an intensity matched only by her immunity to the whole effort. Campaign consultants are stalking her, the conventions were staged for her, the speeches scripted for her, the ads aimed right at her. And because she is so different from the swing voter who shaped this nation for a generation, she has miniaturized its politics into a kitchen-table bargaining session over what it might take to help her get through the day.

From there, the candidates draft the playbooks. Clinton signs a bill guaranteeing new mothers 48 hours in the hospital, one last chance to catch her breath, a last night’s sleep, courtesy of the President of the United States. It’s hard to find any money to put away for college, so Dole offers a deduction for student loans and a $500 tax credit per child. Mom can’t be there screening what the kids watch on TV every minute, so here’s a V chip. It is not the craft of politics, it’s the art of coping.

To trace this political transformation, TIME set out to find a woman who could tell the story of this election by telling the story of her life. Lori Lucas lives in Shrewsbury, Missouri, an undecided voter in a bellwether town in the ultimate swing state. She is not just an archetype; she’s a revelation, a spirited wreck of political contradiction. She’s an unmarried mom who thinks the country is on the wrong track because the family unit has broken down. She drives a gas-guzzling station wagon because it’s safe but worries so much about the environment that she collects cans at work to recycle at home and uses the same plastic-foam Diet Pepsi cup for a week. She doesn’t believe in God, but believes in the Ten Commandments because “I know they’re the right thing to do.” And while she doesn’t have time for newspapers or TV network news, she intends to do what she always does before presidential elections: head to the local library two weeks before the vote. “I pull out two weeks of newspapers and read about the issues,” she says. “But I probably won’t make a decision until I’m in the voting booth.”

Her politics are complicated, but her dreams are not. “What I think about is my baby being safe when he is grown up. I don’t want him to have to fight in a war. I don’t want there to be a depression. I don’t want us to be without money.” She is not in control of her life, but she is in control of this election.

“The single most important thing that has changed the lives of these women is the birth of a child.” –Mark Penn, Clinton’s pollster

Lori is in the kitchen cooking dinner: chicken baked in mushroom soup and soy sauce, and fresh broccoli. At all costs, she will find a way for her little family to eat meals together, to glue their life in place. She has a wide-open face, with eager eyes, a tangy huskiness in her voice and a fast, shy smile. She is 35, but for as far back as she can remember, people have called her kid.

Lori bought her house in Shrewsbury five years ago, and is slowly replacing all the old single-pane windows. The hilly neighborhood has a virtually all-white population of about 7,000, with an average household income of $52,537. Lori’s is a street of $79,000 starter homes that people stay in for 30 years, brick bungalows with metal awnings and a ribbon of lawn that skips from house to house. For years the mainline Forest Park patriarchs of St. Louis looked down on the German immigrants who settled this south side because they were forever washing those neat cement porches and tight little windows. They called them the Scrubby Dutch. Policeman Harvey Laux lives across the street from Lori. He figures there has been one burglary in the 17 years he has lived here.

Sam is in his high chair, eating whatever pasta he is not wearing. Sam’s dad Mike, 30, is out shopping for tomorrow night’s dinner. He and Lori had been dating for three years before he moved in, when Lori got pregnant. When the baby was born last September, they named him after Sam Malone, Mike’s favorite character on Cheers. Lori’s heart hasn’t been the same since. Neither has her life. “I used to be a list maker,” she says, and then she smiles at herself. “And now I don’t even have time to make lists.”

Her family is tighter, her friendships looser than ever before. Her idea of leisure is a nap on Saturday afternoon. She stopped getting the St. Louis Post-Dispatch–she subscribed mainly for the coupons and TV listings–because “Sam would get the ink all over him if we had the paper here.” The news in general, and the presidential campaign in particular, is barely background noise. She voted for Bush in 1988 because her father did, but everything about her life has become more independent since then. She voted for Ross Perot in 1992 because he seemed as detached from politics as she was. Now she’s completely undecided, more available to Clinton than to Dole, but there has been no time to dwell on a decision that she thinks will have so little effect on her. She doesn’t need a pollster to tell her that this is her own personal paradigm shift. “I used to have total control over my life,” she says. “Some nights I could scream and cry and have a nervous breakdown.”

She was 33 when Sam was conceived. “I was happy and amazed that it happened.” He was not really planned, since she and Mike weren’t married, not really intending to marry, though they now plan to. Like just about everything else in her life, marriage is on her running, imaginary to-do list, somewhere after spending about $600 next week on a new toilet and towel racks for the bathroom, and before seeing Stonehenge. But this time, after two failed marriages, she wants to do it right.

“I never had a nice wedding. The first time I wore Mom’s dress. I was a dumb kid; I just wanted to get out of the house. The second time I fell crazy in love. We lived together for a few years, got married when I was 25, divorced at 30.” He drank too much, she says, and he couldn’t have children. “That wasn’t the reason we split–but it was a reason not to work at the marriage anymore.” Her father used to tell her that the only reason to get married was to have a family. “Now for once I’m not married, and I have a happy family.”

Sam is helping her unload the dishwasher, which means most of the knives and forks wind up on the floor. She has been thinking about change. “The week before Sam was born, I washed every piece of clothing there was, including what I was wearing,” she recalls. “That was the last time the laundry was caught up.”

“They’d love to have more time to spend with their families. More time to teach them the values they don’t think they get at day care. No matter how well you pick the day-care center, you’re still not there.” –Tony Fabrizio, Dole’s pollster

“Just getting out of the house in the mornings–it’s terrible.” Some days Lori wakes up and thinks of what is coming and suspects it may not turn out to be such a great day. Those are the mornings she really needs her shower, not to get clean but to get psyched for the day. “Because sometimes it seems like everyone else’s mood kind of depends on mine. If you’re in a foul mood, you get the crabbiness right back. So when I wake up that way–well, it’s a shower thing. It’s the only time I really have to myself.”

Just about every day begins with a quiet, dreaded question: whether Mike or Lori will drive Sam to Lori’s mother’s house for the day. She gets a knot in her stomach thinking about it, hoping to avoid a fight. Mike says he ends up doing it about half the time, though he complains about how much gas the 20-minute trip uses up. They rarely kiss each other goodbye in the morning. There’s no time. Lori is usually out of the house by 7:30 and at work by 8. She skips breakfast but sips a Diet Pepsi and buys some peanut-butter crackers at Mr. Gas on the way.

Lori’s mom Doris echoes what Dole tells women: they should work only if they want to, a 1950s notion that defies the economy of the 1990s. “If I had my choice, both of my daughters would stay home,” says Doris. She reared her five children while her husband Ed worked for 27 years at Sears. But she realizes Lori has little choice, so she thought about what matters to her most, and then made a decision about her own life that makes all the difference in Lori’s.

Five months before Sam was born, Lori went to the state bureau of child care in St. Louis and studied its records for several local day-care centers. She chose one just a few moments from her job, so she could slip over and nurse her baby at lunchtime. It cost $152 a week. Doris would go to the center in the afternoons and stay for hours. And very soon she had seen enough. “The room was too small and was crammed with cribs,” she recalls. “The workers sneezed into their hands and then wouldn’t wash them.”

Before long, Doris had made up her mind. She would watch Sam during the day, while Lori worked, along with her daughter Barbara’s children two days a week. “I knew it would make me tired,” Doris says. “But what’s more important than my grandson?” She won’t take any money from her daughters, although she buys most of the grandchildren’s clothes and has turned her tidy home into a day-care center.

Doris worries about everyone. She worries about her mother, 93 and suffering from Alzheimer’s in a nursing home, whom she now has less time to visit; she worries about the stress in her children’s lives. “I worry that Lori works so much. But I know she can’t help it.” What does Ed worry about? “I worry about Doris.”

“You need to look at the positive forces in their lives, the great possibility there. Obviously they still have concerns, but more than anything, there are grounds for affirmation.” –Don Baer, White House communications director

“Welcome to our midday family meal,” Lori says, as she sits in her office at Rudivani Precision Motorworks, the car-repair shop she manages in Webster Groves. The two mechanics are eating take-out sandwiches; Lori is eating a hamburger and returning phone calls in her little office. Propped up in the corner is a framed poster called 21 Suggestions for Success. The top four: “Marry the right person. This one decision will determine 90% of your happiness or misery. Work at something you enjoy, and that’s worthy of your time and talent. Give people more than they expect, and do it cheerfully. Become the most positive and enthusiastic person you know.” Her boss Rudi Cavataio found the poster at Target and couldn’t resist, but Lori hasn’t had time to hang it up yet. “Maybe sometime I’ll succeed in getting that success sign up,” she jokes.

Lori comes to work in clean white Reeboks, then changes into the greasy pair she keeps under her desk. She arrives early and stays late, managing the shop, working the phones, soothing the customers, ordering parts, keeping the books, making haircut appointments for the mechanics, test-driving all the cars. “She makes things happen,” says Cavataio. “She’s allowed the business to grow.” Grow so fast, in fact, that they have been fighting the city to let them keep more cars on their cluttered lot than the city fathers would like. “I guess we didn’t understand the politics of it all,” Lori says.

But she does now. She and Cavataio are seeking a new conditional-use permit, a battle that constitutes her baptism in politics. She has been pounding the pavement, knocking on doors, getting petitions signed. She makes no distinction between Democrat and Republican meddling. “They have no right telling us how to run our business,” she says. “The only way for us to keep the number of cars down is to turn customers away.”

Lori grew up in a house with five sets of encyclopedias. She was an A student into her sophomore year in high school, thought she would go to college, maybe become a teacher, until she fell in with a fast crowd, smoked a lot of pot and let her grades fall. But she was always a hard worker. At 13 she lied about her age to get her first job, at the snack bar of the local swimming pool. After high school she worked as a bookkeeper at a car-parts store, but she was fired, she says, because she didn’t dress up enough. There was a reason for that. When she did wear a skirt, the boss had a habit of trying to put his hands up under it.

She got a job at European Car Parts and spent 15 years there, starting at $5.25 an hour and eventually making $35,000 a year. But the job was boring, and the predominantly male shop didn’t seem understanding about her pregnancy and how everything was different now. When she went back to work after Sam was born, she quickly jumped at Cavataio’s offer to go to RPM, as long as he would match her salary. She started three weeks later, and has barely taken a lunch break since. “I care about what’s going on here,” she says. “I want it to be just right. I want everyone to be happy. I’ve always operated like it was my business.”

“A male voter says, ‘I’m getting taxed to death. I’m not making enough.’ It’s very cut and dried. With female voters, we hear, ‘I’m working harder, but we’re not getting ahead, and I don’t have time to do everything I need to do.’ Politics is much more contextual to a female voter than a male voter.” –Fabrizio

Lori wheels her station wagon into a spot outside the Wal-Mart, a 20-minute drive from her home. She likes to go late at night, after Sam is asleep, for some solitude among the bargains. But on this Saturday morning she’s there by 11, filling her cart with four winter shirts for her son, four ladies’ shirts, baby wipes and formula, paper towels, a flea comb for her two cats, 136 diapers, and a box of graham crackers to occupy Sam, who’s strapped happily into the front of the cart. The total comes to $146.13. “I thought,” she says as she writes the check, “that it would be more.”

Lori worries little about inflation; instead, she shops for speed. She rarely clips coupons, except for baby formula, and stops at a small grocery on her way home from work rather than go out of her way to a larger and slightly cheaper supermarket. “You have to walk half a mile just to get some onions,” she says. “Time is so valuable to me now.”

She feels she’s losing ground by standing still. “I guess I’d say I’m lower middle class,” she says, even though when Mike is doing well with his windows, doors and siding business, their household income can hit about $60,000. “I didn’t feel that way four years ago before I had Sam, when I was making the same amount of money. I thought I was doing pretty damn good. Now it’s nothing to get excited about.” Lori keeps the household books. “I’m an incredible bill payer,” she says, “but a terrible saver.” Last week she called her mortgage officers to learn why her monthly house payment rose from $592 to $616, even though interest rates are falling; the answer was higher insurance fees and taxes. After that she socks away $150 every other month into a mutual fund, while trying to erase $14,000 in credit-card debt by next year. Bob Dole’s 15% tax cut would help, but she doubts it will ever happen. “That’s probably what I would say if I were running for President.”

She believes less in politicians than in personal enterprise, even though her experience has been mixed at best. She and Mike have tried a few “get-rich-quick schemes,” she says, selling a line of home products–water filters, shampoos, vitamins–to friends and relatives; signing up new customers for a long-distance telephone company; even investing $5,000 in a scheme to provide leasable race cars to weekend thrill seekers, which has so far produced only two takers. All these businesses have yielded more loss than profit.

Lori permits herself few luxuries, large or small. “It used to be important to slap on something feminine once in a while. But not anymore.” Once a month or so, the couple will drop $35 on dinner for three at the Red Lobster. “I stopped in the store to get meat for dinner one night this week, and I bought a pint of Swiss chocolate milk for myself. I saw it on the shelf, and it looked so good. I drank it in the car and it spoiled my appetite, but it was great. It was sinful.”

The drug ads? Those “are aimed right at her.” –Fabrizio

“V chips, computers in classrooms, school uniforms. They are all about giving her control of the lives of her children.” –Baer

Lori is sitting in the cafe at Schnucks Markets’ 24-hour Super Center, talking about what scares her. Like the national debt. “It’s in the trillions, right? I barely know how to write that number.” Then there’s Social Security, the issue that hits her each Friday when she does RPM’s payroll. “Every week it gets taken out of my paycheck, and will I ever get it back? Then I do the books, and I see it deducted from the payroll, and I think, Someone else is using my money.” Glancing across the restaurant to a pair of women in their 70s having coffee, she adds, “I wonder if there will be anything left for me. Sam certainly won’t see a penny.”

Lori has never been the victim of a crime; she doesn’t even know anyone who has. But she still thinks about it a lot. She has been downtown only twice this year, and locks her doors when she drives across the city limits. Having a child of her own has turned Lori into a law-and-order hard-liner who believes in capital punishment and thinks prisons coddle criminals. But on abortion, Lori belongs to the church of the second chance. “I’m upside down and tossed on this one. People I love have had them. I can see why it’s done for rape, incest and life endangerment of the woman. I’d never have one unless my life were in danger.” She ends up landing right at the heart of America’s silent consensus: she doesn’t want abortion outlawed, but she doesn’t want it easy. “Maybe the government should say that you can have one and only one abortion,” she says. “But if you screw up and want to have one again, that’s too bad.”

Lori doesn’t know whom she’s going to vote for, but she does know she has trouble even remembering that Bob Dole is in the race. “It’s like he’s not even there,” she says. “I have to force him to enter my mind.” She knows a little of his story, admires his gritty recovery from his war injury, but is worried that he might not live out his term. “I want someone more contemporary.”

Clinton’s missteps don’t much bother her–she doesn’t care about Whitewater or his affairs, doesn’t know who Dick Morris is–but the President’s manner does. “I hate that Clinton said he didn’t inhale.” She likes Hillary Clinton and isn’t keen on Newt Gingrich. “His name alone irritates me. I know that a newt is a lizard. We had them growing up. If you touch their tails, they break off as a defense mechanism, but then they grow back.” Not that she’s thrilled by her Congressman, Richard Gephardt, who would replace Gingrich as Speaker if the Democrats take over. “He’s been around an awfully long time, but nothing seems to be any different.”

Foreign policy doesn’t interest her; the office manager thinks the country should be run by a CEO. But she isn’t sold on Perot, and once again imagines the research she’d do. “I’d like to call one of his companies and speak to 10 of his employees and hear how they feel about him.”

“The fact is, you could watch the presidential campaign and not see anything touch on most peoples’ frustrations and concerns. Whatever politics or government means to them today, it’s a fraction of what it was 20 to 30 years ago. It’s less relevant, and they don’t think it matters very much.” –Pollster Bob Teeter

It’s evening now, everyone’s home, Sam’s cold is better, the lights are coming on up and down the street. Lori’s house is sheathed in olive-green steel siding; there’s a Japanese maple squatting like a sumo wrestler out front, and a sweet gum tree, and a big red oak in the back shading the gas grill and the lawn chairs. The house is a home–a sweet, messy testament to the compromises of parenthood; the curtains are lace, the couches paisley, the walls papered in cream with pink roses and wreaths of dried flowers, all soft edges and tones that fade behind the yelping primary colors of Playskool and Fisher-Price.

The TV is on, the movie of the week with Tori Spelling, but the sound is muted. Lori’s favorite show is ER; it’s paced at about the same rate as her life. Sam doesn’t watch much of anything other than Barney and auto racing. The clock ticks; the ceiling fan whumps. Mike has given Sam his bath; the baby arrives, damp and in mismatched pajamas, to snuggle. Lori says his hair smells like candy.

She is talking about government. “I guess I see it all as a bunch of red tape,” she says. “I think if I got food stamps or something I would be grateful.” She has to pause and think a long time to imagine anything government has done for her, any difference it has ever made in her life, anything politics or politicians could ever do for her. Then she gets it. “Maybe I’ll be able to get an SBA loan someday, start my own business.”

Sam cries when Lori slips outside to sit on the porch steps and have a cigarette and a glass of Tang. She won’t smoke in front of him, but this is what counts as her down time, and it’s a soft, cool, edge-of-autumn night full of wishing stars. The 1986 Ford Country Squire station wagon, gray-green with faux wood paneling, sits in the driveway. She bought it when she was pregnant. Some people build bookcases or drop $250 on a souped-up stroller. But this is the way a car girl nests. “I don’t care what I drive as long as it’s safe.”

When she was young and began falling in love with cars, she could tell the make and model in the dark, just by the headlights. She and her friends chased the cars around the neighborhood, played tag and kick the can. “Those were the days. Life was good and easy then,” she says. And she laughs to herself. “It’s still pretty good. It’s just not easy.”

Erma in Bomburbia

Tuesday, June 5th, 2007

TIME magazine, Monday, Jul. 02, 1984

For a survivor of housework and motherhood, laughter is still the best revenge

Notice: Car-pool moms entered in the U-Haul Mother-of-the-Year brake-off should complete the following literary quiz. Answers must be written in eyebrow pencil, and nuttiness counts,

1) For ten points, and a year’s supply of mental floss, what American philosopher, whose latest book has been ensconced on the New York Times best seller list for 40 weeks, described the stance of a pregnant woman as “like a kangaroo wearing Earth Shoes”?

2) Who first defined the contribution of American mothers to the psychological well-being of their children as “guilt: the gift that keeps on giving”?

3) From whom did Tocqueville, while touring American suburbs, steal his famous one-liner that “the grass is always greener over the septic tank”? Hint: Henry David Thoreau is a good guess, but wrong.

4) What noted existentialist and television celebrity, when asked in supermarket parking lots whether she is the legendary Erma Bombeck, blushes prettily, lowers her gaze and says, “No, I’m Ann-Margret, but thank you anyway “?

“I’ll be honest,” says Bombeck (for it is indeed she, the syndicated star humorist of 900 papers in the U.S. and Canada, and the baggy-toreador-pants clown of ABC’S Good Morning America), “when I started, I thought I was squirrelly. I thought it was just me. After the first columns, everyone on the block confessed it was them too.” Those early columns, written in Centerville, Ohio, back in the early ’60s, were not quite Corinthian, but they sure were Ermaic. Their message was that housework, if it is done right, can kill you. It was that the women who kept house in the happy hunting ground called suburbia were so lonely that they held meaningful conversations with their tropical fish. It was that “you become about as exciting as your food blender. The kids come in, look you in the eye, and ask you if anybody’s home.”

The message has not changed in substance, although many of the women she wrote about 20 years ago have gone on to divorces, master’s degrees and careers, and Bombeck and her husband are now the wealthy proprietors not of an $18,000 tract house near Dayton but of a lavish hacienda on a hilltop near Phoenix. “Women around the world are coming to the point where they are looking at their domestic situations and saying, ‘My God, I’m going crazy, it’s climbing-the-wall time,’ ” says Bombeck. She is 57 now (”somewhere between estrogen and death,” she mutters); her three children are grown and flown, and the elegant white walls of her fine house do not have crayon marks or grape jelly on them. But motherhood is a sentence without parole—have some guilt with your chicken soup; eat, eat!—and Bombeck and her fans have no trouble understanding each other. “I could move up to Alaska,” she says, “where the nearest neighbor is 300 miles away, get there by dog sled, walk into the cabin, pour a cup of coffee and then hear her say, ‘These kids are driving me crazy.’ ”

Dropping in is what Bombeck does. Three times a week in the newspapers, and twice more on television, she plays the nation’s dingbatty neighbor, who comes in the back door without knocking and cheers everyone up by saying, “Never mind the mess here, honey, let me tell you about world-class squalidness.” And then yarns away, maybe, about babies so wet that their diapers give off rainbows (a Phyllis Diller line she loves to steal). Or about her husband, the football watcher, who sits in front of the tube “like a dead sponge surrounded by bottle caps” until “the sound of his deep, labored breathing puts the cork on another confetti-filled evening.” About her schoolboy son who flunked lunch. About her washing machine, which eats one sock in every pair; her kids ask where the lost ones go, and she tells them that they go to live with Jesus. About how, when one kid ate an unknown quantity of fruit on a supermarket expedition, she offered to weigh him and pay for everything over 53 Ibs. About why it is all right to store useless leftovers in the refrigerator: “Garbage, if it’s made right, takes a full week.” About how young mothers want desperately to talk to someone who isn’t teething, and the woeful results when they try to generate conversation with those lumps, their husbands, by asking, ” ‘What kind of a day did you have dear?’ One husband reportedly answered by kicking the dog, another went pale and couldn’t find words, another bit his necktie in half . . .”

This is classic Bombeck, the wild exaggeration compressed into the stinging one-liner that only slightly overstates the awfulness of the truth. You don’t think husbands and kids are that bad? Listen, let me tell you about bad. “After 30 years of marriage, I felt like a truss in a drugstore window.” You think that’s-overstated? Let me tell you what it’s like to be a working mother, “racing around the kitchen in a pair of bedroom slippers, trying to quick-thaw a chop under each armpit . . .” Shared responsibilities? “Transporting children is my husband’s 26th favorite thing; it comes somewhere between eating lunch in a tearoom and dropping a bowling ball on his foot.” Listen, let me tell you. . .

Trench warfare of this kind is waged not against men and kids, but against loneliness and self-pity. The quick, hit-’em-again-with-another-joke style fits the desperate nature of the combat. The young mother who reads it may have a degree in psychology from Michigan State, but as she cleans up after the puppy while trying to separate two children who are fighting over a linty piece of bubble gum, she may not be in the mood for compound-complex sentences. She may smile over a column by Art Buchwald, the master of the discovered absurdity, or one of Russell Baker’s elegantly sane demonstrations that the world is crazy. But if she enlists in an army, it is likely to be Bombeck’s. Am I really down on the kitchen floor with an old pair of Jockey shorts doing this? Yes, and there’s Bombeck with pork chops under her arms. Such realizations (epiphanies, a James Joyce scholar would call them) explain Bombeck’s syndication in those 900 papers, the wild success of her seven books, and reader loyalty that does not stop short of fanaticism. No doubt they also explain her eight-year run on Good Morning America, where her appearances are consistently cheerful but not so sharp or funny as her columns. Bombeck’s fans want Bombeck, and they are prepared to excuse home movies.

Her self-caricature, the rhinoceroid slob in housecoat and curlers who hasn’t seen her feet since grade school, is not even a fun-house mirror image of reality. She is a good-looking, brown-haired woman (though the hair color varies according to whim) who is, if not gaunt, at any rate acceptably trim at 5 ft. 2 in. and 127 Ibs. Is it a surprise that her daughter Betsy, 30, and her sons Andrew, 28, and Matthew, 25, have lost their baby teeth? And that her husband is not a football-stupefied turnip but rather an articulate, quick-minded fellow? Bill Bombeck retired in 1978 after a successful career as a school administrator, and now manages their income of $500,000 to $1 million a year. He is more likely to be found jogging than watching the tube, and four years ago he ran the Boston Marathon in the creditable time of 3 hr. 29 min. Not all of the one-line zappers come from her side of the table; Bill will breeze into the house and announce with a big smile that he has just been to the library and that all of her books were in. She replies that he looked like a dead fish after his last road race and that he had better slow down. “You don’t understand,” she says. “I’m too old to shop around. You’re it.” The strong affection between the two is evident.

There is a hint of where the columns come from when Bombeck is persuaded to talk about herself. “My life story?” she says. “Fifteen minutes top. You’re looking at shallow. I’m just not that deep. You’re looking at a bundle of insecurity. I always think that everything good is going to evaporate and disappear overnight. I am the quietest person at the party. I position myself at the chip dip and don’t leave all night. I still have a very ordinary, simple person trapped in this rich, gorgeous, successful body.” The joke is practiced and sure, but she does not want her listener to miss her point, so she spells it out. “The whole thrust of my existence is that I’m ordinary.” It seems important to her to believe this. Another joking statement of the theme: “Everyone thinks of ordinary as some kind of skin disease.” Then she quotes the sort of thing she says when she gives a commencement speech: “Most of you are going to be ordinary. You are not going to the moon. You’ll be lucky to find the keys to your car in the back parking lot. But some of you are going to be great things to yourselves. You are going to be the best friend someone ever had . . .”

The journey that did not lead Bombeck to the moon began in Dayton, and the date could be set accurately enough as June 4, 1936. She was nine, and that was the day her father, a crane operator named Cassius Fiste, died of a heart attack at 42. “One day you were a family,” she recalls, “living in a little house at the bottom of a hill. The next day it was all gone.” The furniture, including Erma’s bed and dresser, was immediately repossessed, and her half sister went off to live with her natural mother. Erma and her mother, 25-year-old Erma Fiste, shared a bedroom in her grandmother’s house, and each day Mother Erma would get up at 5 a.m., fix breakfast for her daughter, see that she was dressed for school, and then leave in time to work the 7 a.m. shift at the Leland Electric factory. An adult observer would have seen a spunky young widow doing her best in bad times, but not until years later did Erma think of her mother’s tough-minded energy as wise or heroic. What she felt at the time was a daily desertion. When her mother married a moving-van operator, Albert (”Tom”) Harris, two years later, Erma gave him the classic drop-dead greeting: “If you think you’re going to take my father’s place, you’re crazy.” His attitude, she says, was “This kid needs sitting on.” Eventually Erma and Tom made their adjustment. The incredible self-centeredness of children, normal and natural but often savagely cruel, has been a consistent theme in her humor.

When her daughter showed signs of shyness and loneliness, Mother Erma signed her up for tap-dancing lessons as therapy, then took her to an audition for a Kiddie Revue at a local radio station. Erma stayed on the program for nearly eight years, tap dancing and singing. “She was quite a little hoofer,” says her mother, who still has Erma’s signed song sheets for On the Good Ship Lollipop and I’m Gonna Sit Right Down and Write Myself a Letter. Bombeck says it is obvious that the wrong Erma broke into show biz. When her mother, now a lively 73, began to appear with her on talk shows, Bombeck would tell the producers, “Don’t worry about Mamma not talking. Worry about her taking over the show.”

Which is exactly what she does. Mother Erma, who lives with her husband in nearby Sun City, admits that she “never had a sense of humor growing up. But as I get older, I get crazier. Me and Erma are both sort of silly together. The humor helped us to get closer. We began to see life as it is and not take it so seriously.”

At Emerson Junior High in Dayton, Bombeck started writing a humor column for a school newspaper called The Owl. Says Bill Bombeck: “The format hasn’t changed a lot. You’re talking about someone who has been writing a personal column since she was twelve or 13 years old.” Bombeck had been fairly offhanded about singing and dancing, but wising off in print was the best thing since soaping windows at Halloween. A couple of years later she was at it again, clowning about shoplifting, clearance sales and the lunch menu for the newsletter of Rike’s department store, where she worked to pay college expenses. “You can’t imagine how it fractured those people,” she says now. “I knew exactly what I wanted to do. God, I wanted to write. That’s all I wanted to do. I really loved the exaggeration. I still write about passing my varicose veins off as textured stockings.”

Her pursuit of a college education took her through uncertain territory. Middle-class teenagers of the time went on to college from high school the way they went to the drive-in for frozen custard and French fries. Everyone enrolled somewhere, and no one thought much about it. But Bombeck was working class, the first person in her family’s history even to graduate from high school. College was not seen as a necessity for many young women, or even as especially desirable. “Your goals were supposed to be modest,” she recalls. “If you were a girl, you either got a job and paid board, or you got married.” She took typing and shorthand at a vocational school and worked as a copygirl at the Dayton Herald to meet expenses. (Bill Bombeck worked at the morning Journal as a copy boy.) Erma saved enough money to begin courses at Ohio University, in Athens, but after a semester she was broke again. She returned to Dayton, got the department-store job and enrolled at the University of Dayton, the Roman Catholic school where Bill was a student.

Living at home and paying her own way, Bombeck made it through college in four years, including three sessions of summer school. The experience was not rich in what is usually thought of as college life, but she got the degree, and she did it on her own. In a second profound act of independence, she converted at 22 from the United Brethren Church to Roman Catholicism. “I saw something in it I wanted to have,” she says. “There is something very soothing about the whole thing. A love of God is easier for me to accept than the fear.” She remains a believer, who says, quirkily, “I never laugh when I pray. That’s God’s turn.” Like many Catholics, however, she is troubled by doctrinal issues affecting birth and reproduction. She agrees with the church prohibition of abortion but cannot accept strictures against birth control. “The group I ran with would have six, seven, eight kids and be drowning underneath. Let’s face it, the earth cannot afford this Catholicism.”

The Dayton Herald took on a gifted but erratic recruit after Bombeck graduated from the university. As a reporter, she recalls, “I was terrible at straight items. When I wrote obituaries, my mother said the only thing I ever got them to do was die in alphabetical order.” Even with her shorthand, she says, “I could never get the knack of listening and taking notes at the same time.” She would get excited and forget to write things down, and “everyone I interviewed ended up sounding like me. I did that with Mrs. Roosevelt and Mrs. Eisenhower.” The idea of Eleanor Roosevelt sounding like Erma Bombeck clearly had its bizarre appeal, but before anything truly lunatic could come of it, Erma quit the paper for good in 1953. She and Bill, by then a struggling high school social studies and American history teacher, had been married four years, and, she says, “I was sick of working. Putting on pantyhose every morning is not just whoopee time. My dream was to putter around the house, learn how to snap beans, put up curtains and bake bread.” The young couple adopted Betsy, and Erma, who had learned domesticity as a child, returned to the home, an event that was to prove only slightly less momentous than Douglas MacArthur’s return to the Philippines.

As everyone who has made the mad leap into parenthood knows, it is not the first child but the second whose arrival skews life into a grotesque caricature of its former civility. When Bombeck was several months pregnant with Andrew, the family moved to a tract development a few miles from Dayton that she was to satirize as “Suburbian Gems.” Its real name is Centerville. The Bombecks lived on Cushwa Drive (”probably named for some dentist”) in a house like all the others except for one prized interior feature, a $1,500 “two-way” fireplace, and on the outside, a front door they painted red so that Mother Erma and Tom Harris could find them when they visited.

None of the residents of Centerville, least of all the Bombecks, thought they were doing anything hilarious as they mowed their lawns and carted their kids to Cub Scout meetings. Bill tinkered around the house, and pieced out his teacher’s salary by painting houses and working at the post office on school vacations. Erma, he says, was always repainting or redecorating, moving the furniture around. There was, of course, a septic tank, and in the summer, says Erma, “you could see that little sucker sink into the ground and you’d think, ‘There goes another $400.’ ” But there weren’t many one-liners: “Who was there to listen?”

By an odd chance, the family in the house across the street was that of a young radio broadcaster, Phil Donahue, with five growing children. Donahue, an old friend now, whose morning TV appearances bring housework to a halt across the country, confirms that Bombeck was by no means the neighborhood clown. She and Bill, he says, were among the most hardworking of the development’s house-proud do-it-yourselfers. All the houses had Early American furniture, including the inevitable rocker with a cushion tied to the back. The idea of Bombeck as a hopelessly disorganized housewife “is, at the very least, highly exaggerated. When you went to Erma’s place, you never had to step over dirty underwear. At least in the evenings.”

The pressure that was to fizz through the crazy columns was building, however. Listen to Bombeck, who wanted to give her kids the secure childhood she had missed: “I was overwhelmed. You get from your mother what things should be. I’m killing myself. We all did. Are you ready for this? I’m sitting there at midnight bending a coat hanger, putting nose tissue on it to make a Christmas wreath for the door. You know what it looks like? It looks like a coat hanger with tissue that is going to melt when it rains. It’s a desperation you cannot imagine. I had a husband who worked at his job until 7 and 8 p.m. taking care of other people’s children. That’s when I remember reading Jean Kerr, who would sit out in her car and hide, reading the car-manual section on tire pressure. It’s ridiculous. The whole thing is ridiculous.” Then a deep breath: “It’s the core of laughter. If you can’t make it better, you can laugh at it.”

On Being Mom

Sunday, May 13th, 2007

by Anna Quindlen, Newsweek Columnist and Author

If not for the photographs, I might have a hard time believing they ever existed. The pensive infant with the swipe of dark bangs and the black button eyes of a Raggedy Andy doll. The placid baby with the yellow ringlets and the high piping voice. The sturdy toddler with the lower lip that curled into an apostrophe above her chin.

All my babies are gone now. I say this not in sorrow but in disbelief.

I take great satisfaction in what I have today: three almost-adults, two taller than I am; one closing in fast. Three people who read the same books I do and have learned not to be afraid of disagreeing with me in their opinion of them, who sometimes tell vulgar jokes that make me laugh until I choke and cry, who need razor blades and shower gel and privacy, who want to keep their doors closed more than I like. Who, miraculously, go to the bathroom, zip up their jackets and move food from plate to mouth all by themselves. Like the trick soap I bought for the bathroom with a rubber ducky at its center, the baby is buried deep within each, barely discernible except through the unreliable haze of the past.

Everything in all the books I once pored over is finished for me now. Penelope Leach, T. Berry Brazelton, Dr. Spock. The ones on sibling rivalry and sleeping through the night and early-childhood education — all grown obsolete. Along with Goodnight Moon and Where the Wild Things Are, they are battered, spotted, well used. But I suspect that if you flipped the pages dust would rise like memories.

What those books taught me, finally, and what the women on the playground taught me, and the well-meaning relations –what they taught me, was that they couldn’t really teach me very much at all. Raising children is presented at first as a true-false test, then becomes multiple choice, until finally, far along, you realize that it is an endless essay. No one knows anything. One child responds well to positive reinforcement, another can be managed only with a stern voice and a timeout. One child is toilet trained at 3, his sibling at 2.

When my first child was born, parents were told to put baby to bed on his belly so that he would not choke on his own spit-up. By the time my last arrived, babies were put down on their backs because of research on sudden infant death syndrome. To a new parent this ever-shifting certainty is terrifying, and then soothing.

Eventually you must learn to trust yourself. Eventually the research will follow. I remember 15 years ago poring over one of Dr. Brazelton’s wonderful books on child development, in which he describes three different sorts of infants: average, quiet, and active. I was looking for a sub-quiet codicil for an 18-month old who did not walk.

Was there something wrong with his fat little legs? Was there something wrong with his tiny little mind? Was he developmentally delayed, physically challenged? Was I insane? Last year he went to China. Next year he goes to college. He can talk just fine. He can walk, too.

Every part of raising children is humbling, too. Believe me, mistakes were made. They have all been enshrined in the, “Remember-When-Mom-Did Hall of Fame.” The outbursts, the temper tantrums, the bad language, mine, not theirs. The times the baby fell off the bed. The times I arrived late for preschool pickup. The nightmare sleepover. The horrible summer camp. The day when the youngest came barreling out of the classroom with a 98 on her geography test, and I responded, What did you get wrong? (She insisted I include that.) The time I ordered food at the McDonald’s drive-through speaker and then drove away without picking it up from the window. (They all insisted I include that.) I did not allow them to watch the Simpsons for the first two seasons. What was I thinking?

But the biggest mistake I made is the one that most of us make while doing this. I did not live in the moment enough. This is particularly clear now that the moment is gone, captured only in photographs.

There is one picture of the three of them, sitting in the grass on a quilt in the shadow of the swing set on a summer day, ages 6, 4 and 1. And I wish I could remember what we ate, and what we talked about, and how they sounded, and how they looked when they slept that night. I wish I had not been in such a hurry to get on to the next thing: dinner, bath, book, bed.

I wish I had treasured the doing a little more, and the getting it done a little less. Even today I’m not sure what worked and what didn’t, what was me and what was simply life. When they were very small, I thought someday they would become who they were because of what I had done. Now I suspect they simply grew into their true selves because they demanded, in a thousand ways, that I back off and let them be.

The books said to be relaxed and I was often tense, matter-of-fact and I was sometimes over-the-top. And look at how it all turned out. I wound up with the three people I like best in the world, who have done more than anyone to excavate my essential humanity. That’s what the books never told me. I was bound and determined to learn from the experts.

It just took me a while to figure out who the experts were.

happy mother’s day

Saturday, May 12th, 2007

we’re all multitasking, but what’s the cost? READ THIS NOW!!!

Monday, April 23rd, 2007

this, from the Los Angeles Times, july 19,2004:
We’re just not wired to do so much at once, as stress and mistakes show.
By Melissa Healy, Times Staff Writer

Executives revel in it. Parents with jobs and children rely on it. And circus jugglers make it art.

Multi-tasking, for most Americans, has become a way
of life. Doing many things at once is the way we manage demands bearing down on us at warp speed, tame a plague of helpful technological devices and play enough roles — parent, coach, social secretary, executive — to stage a Broadway show.
But researchers peering into the brains of those engaged in several tasks at once are concluding what some overworked Americans had begun to suspect: that multi-tasking, which many have embraced as the key to success, is instead a formula for shoddy work, mismanaged time, rote solutions, stress and forgetfulness. Not to mention car crashes, kitchen fires, forgotten children, near misses in the skies and other dangers of inattention.
So turn off the music, hang up the phone, pull over to the side of the road and take note: When it comes to using your brain to conduct several tasks at one time, “there is no free lunch,” says University of Michigan psychologist David E. Meyer. For all but the most routine tasks — and few mental undertakings are truly routine — it will take more time for the brain to switch among tasks than it would have to complete one and then turn to the other.When the two get squished together, each will be shortchanged, resulting in errors. And a prolonged jag of extreme multi-tasking, warns Meyer, may lead to a shorter attention span, poorer judgment and impaired memory. A Clint Eastwood fan and admitted poor multi-tasker, Dirty Harry, confronting his nemesis climactic scene: ” ‘A man’s got ” Meyer says, adding, “and that’s basically the deal with multi-tasking. If you try to go beyond them, you just screw yourself up royally.”

The term multi-tasking comes from the world of computers, where single-minded engineers could devise systems flexible enough to perform several tasks at once. But the proliferation of computers and
their spinoffs — mobile communications devices and hand-held gadgets — have made it necessary for their human users to multi-task as well.
For George Parsons, the founder and chief executive of Secorix Inc. in San Mateo, two desktop computers, a cellphone, a wireless computer device and an electronic pocket organizer pump out a vast and endless stream of demands, choices and information. A practitioner of Transcendental Meditation and a firm
believer in frequent visits to the gym, Parsons says he heads off meltdown by quieting his mind and escaping his gadgets several times a week. But sometimes, he says, his wife will call as he teeters on the edge of overload, and he’ll snap, hanging up on her with a brusque “can’t-deal-with-this-right-now!” dismissal. That’s when flowers are called for, he says.

In recent months, the public debate over multi-tasking has focused largely on cellphones and driving. On July 1, New Jersey became the second state —behind New York — to ban drivers from using a cellphone without a headset. Washington, D.C., has adopted a similar ban.

Meanwhile, in workplaces across the country, multi-tasking and its potential costs have become a prime concern for insurance underwriters, management consultants, efficiency engineers and cognitive scientists. In addition to contributing to communications lapses, rudeness and employee stress, multitasking is considered a factor in more serious workplace mishaps — from medication and treatment errors in hospitals to near misses in the skies. Indeed,
the Federal Aviation Administration has underwritten several studies to explore how air-traffic controllers, the multi-tasking virtuosos who orchestrate the nation’s air traffic, do what they do — and where their skills may break down.
The epidemic of multi-tasking even is sending patients to doctors and therapists with complaints of depression, anxiety, forgetfulness and attention deficit disorder. Mostly, says psychiatrist Edward Hallowell of Sudbury, Mass., they have a “severe case of modern life.” But their distress is very real, and their organizations are suffering too, he adds. “The more constant phenomenon is simply impaired performance and a workplace that becomes toxic in a hurry,” he says. “They may be meeting their numbers, but they’re not as creative, flexible, humorous or innovative as they might be.”

Cynthia McClain-Hill, a 46-year-old attorney, law firm owner, mother of two, wife and civic activist, multi-tasks with a vengeance. The Long Beach resident says it would not be unusual for her to be checking her BlackBerry (a portable e-mail device) while talking on the cellphone with the newspaper spread out on the passenger’s seat of her car (hopefully, she says, while stopped at a red light).
But the steel-trap memory that got her through law school without ever taking notes — and that helps her order dinner for her extended family without any prompting — is showing signs of wear and tear.
“I often find myself unable to remember my five phone numbers,” McClain-Hill says. “That’s one of my silent frustrations.” And there are more occasions now when she enters a room and realizes she has forgotten the purpose of the trip. For many women McClain-Hill’s age, such bouts of forgetfulness are attributed to age and the effects of changing hormones. Indeed, complaints of forgetfulness
among women in their 40s and 50s are so prevalent that Peter M. Meyer, a biostatistician at Chicago’s Rush University Medical Center, in the late 1990s conducted a study intended to gauge how deeply the hormone changes of menopause disrupt women’s memory.
Instead, he got a lesson on women and multi-tasking. The tests of short-term memory and verbal memory stubbornly showed that women of this age, though they complained of forgetfulness, were not missing a step. Their forgetfulness appeared to be a function of depression, stress and “role overload” — the multitasking
of many roles at once — Meyer concluded.

The ability to multi-task stems from a spot right behind the forehead. That’s the anterior part of the region neuroscientists call the “executive” part of the brain, the prefrontal cortex. When a human is assessing tasks, prioritizing them and assigning mental resources, these frontal lobes are doing most of the work, says Dr. Jordan Grafman, a neuropsychologist and chief of the National Institute of
Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health.
The same region of the brain is where we pull off another uniquely human trick that is key to multi-tasking: “marking” the spot at which a task has been interrupted, so we can return to it later.
The irony, Grafman says, is that the prefrontal cortex is the part of the human brain that is most damaged as a result of prolonged stress, particularly the kind of stress that makes a person feel out-of-control and helpless. The kind of stress, say, that you might feel when overwhelmed by the demands of multi-tasking.
Such stress, Grafman says, also will cause the death of brain cells in another region — the hippocampus, which is critical to the formation of new memories.
Damage there can hobble a person’s ability to learn and retain new facts and skills.
“Multi-tasking, almost by its very nature of course, creates stress,” Grafman says. And long-term stress, in turn, is likely to make us less able to multi-task, he says.
It’s a humbling lesson in the limits we face, he acknowledges. “If you’re multitasking, and it’s very stressful,” Grafman says, “you’re not going to get better at it.”

But you’re smarter than those being studied by psychologists and neuroscientists.
The ‘executive’ brain
You can navigate traffic, take a meeting by phone and stop at the dry cleaners along the way, right? Psychologist Yuhong Jiang is likely to deflate such confidence. She recently watched the working brains of students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as they tried to do two simple tasks simultaneously — identify shapes and identify either letters or colors. When students were shown the two tasks and instructed to do them at the same time, most shrugged and laughed. “They thought it would be easy,” especially with the half-hour of practice involved, says Jiang, co-author of the study published in the June issue of Psychological Science. But when it came time to perform under the scrutiny of a brain scanner, the subjects lost their composure completely, Jiang says. These students — among
the world’s brightest — “were getting very distressed,” she says. “They’d be hitting keys very hard and trying to figure it out. And they’d be committing a lot of errors…. And these were very, very simple tasks.”
When they were asked to switch between the two tasks, Jiang’s student subjects were a bit more accurate. But they were shifting very slowly between tasks — and the faster they were forced to toggle between the two tasks, the more they slowed down. When those who peer into the working brain see a person slow down the way these students did, they expect to see signs that greater
concentration and higher-level thinking have taken over. Neuroscientists expect, in short, to see the brain’s frontal lobes “light up” with activity.
But the shadowy images of these subjects’ brains at work told a different story. In between tasks, the part of the brain that prioritizes tasks and engages in higher-order thinking was taking a momentary rest. Like a dowdy family computer toggling between functions, the students’ frontal lobes effectively went blank, waiting for instructions for the next task to upload.
Madelyn Alfano, a soccer coach, volunteer and mother who owns 10 Italian restaurants scattered throughout Los Angeles, recognizes that feeling. Interrupted by a phone call during a recent meeting, she completed the conversation and walked back to the session — leaving her coffee behind and wondering along the way whom she had been meeting with and what the meeting was about.
When she sees that blank look on the face of an overworked employee, she tells him, “Go to the fridge, open the door, and think about why you’re here.” Then, she hands him a small spiral-bound notebook, like the kind she uses, to write it all down.
*
When he leaves his lab at Carnegie Mellon University, psychologist Marcel Just steers a wide path around motorists jabbering into cellphones. “I grip the steering wheel a little tighter and breathe lighter when they go by,” says Just, who has studied the brain science of multi-tasking extensively. Just is a believer in multi-tasking, and considers himself — rare among researchers in this field — pretty good at it. The brain, he contends, is a marvel of flexibility, and it is constantly multi-tasking. But even the human brain’s
resources are limited, and Just is under no illusions about the quality of the outcome when it does two or more things at once. When it does several tasks that involve conscious attention, the brain “discounts” the attention it applies to each. And, in effect, you get what you pay for, he says.
When a person multi-tasks well — without errors or disastrous results — it is usually because one or more of the tasks she is engaged in has become automatic. Humans, he says, can eat lunch and read the paper at the same time, because eating scarcely involves conscious thought. Some of us can transcribe a conversation and grasp its content as well because typing, for these people, has become a skill performed by rote.
Asked whether people can train themselves to become better multi-taskers, Just becomes philosophical. Yes, it should be possible, he says. But there will be a cost: A lot more of the tasks on which we now expend thought (or foresight or empathy or creativity) would have to be put on automatic pilot. We might be able
to do more, but we’d forfeit a lot of the subtlety and richness that comes with thought.
This, says psychiatrist Hallowell, is why those in the grips of multi-tasking often appear rude. Having put their communications skills on automatic pilot, “They start behaving like e-mail: impulsive, curt, abrasive, no lead-in, no small talk, no body language,” he says. Where creative rethinking might be the better approach to a problem, the multi-tasker will resort to routines and rote solutions.
And that, says attorney McClain-Hill, is when it’s time to stop. “I sometimes ask myself, ‘Am I able to look up and respond civilly to this person? Am I able to continue to bounce it back [to take a request and respond as necessary] — with a degree of ease and grace?’ If you can’t bounce it back,” she says, “you’ve got to immediately employ some measure to ease the stress, to step out of that traffic, to get a grip.”