The Icing

I spent the last day and a half at the Fresno Superior Court. Seems like every year and a half or so, I get called in--which is quite frequent given that I think I'd only been called for jury duty once before I moved here.

After sitting around for a couple of hours in the morning, my group was finally called for a case. Right off, about 40% of the group tried to get out of duty for hardship. We spent the rest of the morning and part of the early afternoon listening to people's reasons why they should be excused from duty. I really sympathize with those who work part-time, have no job security, and who live from paycheck to paycheck. I was glad to see them excused from duty.

I didn't feel quite as much sympathy for those whose employers would pay them during and who were merely inconvenienced by jury duty. I have to admit, though, that I deferred duty until this week because I knew I'd have my grading done and would actually have mostly unencumbered time this week. Still, I had to change a doctor's appointment--and I risked not being able to go to hear the presentations of some high school students who are doing projects for me. I know I'm lucky to have the flexible schedule that I do, so I tried not to be too judgmental about these attempts. I was just irritated that it took up so much time to address the excuses of those who were grasping at any reason to be released. Why is it that we (and I include myself here) are so inconvenienced by doing our civic duty?

* * * * * *

The actual case involved a Fresno State football player who was accused of 3 misdemeanors: two related to DUI and one concerning the resulting hit and run (of a building rather than a person). Of course, I didn't know any of the particulars during the questioning. I found out afterwards that the defendant was the only CSUF player drafted by an NFL team this year . . . and that the lawyer planned to argue that his client's accident was the result of a football-induced concussion not intoxication. The defendant had a number of run-ins with the law last fall (including two DUIs within one week) and was suspended from play three times as a result. In fact, he was eventually dropped from the team. Since I didn't hear any of the evidence, I don't claim to know whether he was guilty or not, although I have my suspicions.

Because this was a high profile case, the jury selection was actually quite cantankerous and lengthy. When the jury was finally approved by both sides (after a full day of jury selection for a case that was estimated to last no more than 5 days and did not consider anything more serious than a misdemeanor), only 5 people remained in the pool who hadn't been questioned yet (including me). The jury selection process was troubling in what it revealed about our society. Both attorneys asked inane questions at some point in the process. The prosecution asked several people their opinion about the law--I wasn't aware that juries were able to dismiss the law (please sense my sarcasm here). The defense attorney asked awkwardly phrased questions trying to relate people's experience with all kinds of machines (including computers, refrigeration equipment, etc.) as a way of assessing prospective jurors' ability to understand that sometimes equipment breaks down. It's a fair question (if he plans to argue that the equipment measuring the defendant's level of intoxication didn't function properly), but the questions were so complicated and confusing that the p.j.s frequently didn't know what he was asking.

There were also multiple questions about whether jurors could be impartial, consider evidence, assess witnesses' veracity based on what they said rather than on their position (for example, police officers weren't automatically more trustworthy than, say, a student) and make a decision based only on what was presented in the case. Again, these are fair questions, but p.j.s were asked the same question repeatedly, sometimes in the same form, sometimes in an unclear manner. At certain points, it almost seemed that the attorneys' goal was to see which jurors would acquiesce with the question, whether they understood it or not.

Both attorneys seemed to want jurors who would evaluate witness testimony based not just on credentials but on the credibility of testimony and their own common sense. But what I saw over and over was that the smartest people, the ones whose experience would actually help them consider the issues involved in the case were dismissed. The student who had studied alcohol and substance abuse? Out? The two criminology students? Out. The ag econ professor who called an attorney on the difficulty of answering his compound (convoluted) question (who clearly would have been a fair, insightful, analytical juror)? Out. The graduate student in forensic psychology? Out. In other words, the attorneys seemed to be dismissing a certain category: those who would analyze the testimony presented with a level of understanding and insight.

I'm sure that the attorneys had their reasons for dismissing some of these prospective jurors. But my worry is that there is an increasing bias against those who are actually informed in our society. We re-elected a president whose former press secretary (Scott McClellan) has recently published a book asserting that the president makes decisions based on his gut/instinct rather than using facts or rational processes. We see a large number of people (including policy makers) who dismiss scientific evidence of global warming. In my profession, I encounter students who care more about the diploma than actually gaining the skills and knowledge that will make them effective at whatever profession they've chosen.

I'm not arguing here that "smart people" are inherently better than anyone else. In fact, I think that those with "emotional intelligence" and other characteristics not related to book learning are important, valuable, desirable. What I am arguing is that the ability to consider, analyze, and assess data in an informed and thoughtful manner ought to be valued more by our society and judicial system.

A couple of months ago, I decided that I wanted to have some kind of garden this year. I only planted a couple of things. I bought several tomato plants that I had to put in planters because every patch of dirt in my yard has too much shade. I love watching the tomatoes grow bigger.

My friend Chris gave me a pack of radish seeds. Here's what I have so far.

This is what is growing in my yard without my intervention.

Nectarines.

Grapes.

Chinese apples.

Regular apples.

Peaches.

Mint.

Various types of citrus.

I also have rosemary, chives, lemons, and I'm not sure what else.

And I have flowers.

Poppies.

Violets.

Please ignore the weeds. And send recipes. Or come help me can. Or steal my fruit when it's finally ripe.

But stay away from my tomatoes.

On Sunday, my friend Samina threw a going away party. No, I don't leave for another few months--but Samina wanted to have the party while everyone was still in town. Turned out she made a great choice--just about everyone in my department came as did some of my friends in other departments. I'm having a hard time saying everyone came for me; I think it was a combination of Samina, me, the end of the semester, and the chance to socialize with each other. Still, I'm not sure I've ever seen that many of us out for an event, even for department meetings.

I was really moved by my department's support. In fact, they have always been supportive of me and my work. I felt at ease in the department from the very beginning, able to speak my mind at department meetings and to work to help the department change without any antagonism. I feel like my colleagues respect me and even like me (for the most part). And over the years, I've seen some really good changes happen. Due to some of my colleagues' acceptance of jobs elsewhere, I've become the first of the new generation of hires. But I think all of us who have stayed feel like the department is on our side when it comes to decisions of tenure, etc. By the way, this party was also a way of honoring Steve, who just got tenure, and Magda, who was promoted to full professor.

A few of us stayed late, noshing, talking and laughing around the dining room table. It was a really nice way of ending such a pleasant evening. As I leave for this new experience in Norway, I'm glad to have this good memory of my friendships at the university. I know when I have bad days in Norway, so far from the people who have become my community, I'll think of the party and all the good about home. I'm so grateful to my colleagues and friends for their warm send off.

Yesterday, several of my students asked me what my blog address was. I had told them earlier in the semester that I'd give it to them at the end of class--and they actually remembered.

To my students from ENGL 117W and ENGL 155:

I really enjoyed our classes this semester. The 117W class was such a pleasant surprise. You all were such a fun group. I really enjoyed your energy and willingness to try new things in your writing. I think you made me laugh in every class period . . . but I also really enjoyed our one-on-one, more serious interactions about your writing. I've seen a lot of growth both in your abilities and in your enjoyment of writing. I appreciate so much your generosity with me as I taught this first 117W class. Next week, I'm meeting with the person who will teach 117 in the fall--I'll have a lot of good things to say about teaching this class, thanks to you all.

Although I'd taught 155 a number of times at Fresno State, each class is different. I really enjoyed our class discussions: your intelligence, insight, and enthusiasm made class an interesting and educational place to be. I learned a lot from you. I especially enjoyed ending the semester with Tony Kushner's Angels in America. Our discussions about the responsibilities we have to each other and the new kinds of communities that we can create were particularly enlightening. I'm glad to have experienced our classroom community this semester . . .

I had hoped to feel well enough to go to the Arts and Humanities convocation today (which is actually being held even as I type). My pesky cold prevented me from doing so. But know that my thoughts are with those of you who are graduating (Rachel, Katie, and so many of my former students). I celebrate your accomplishments and am so glad to have gotten to know you.

Roger Nelson and I were friends years ago. We had both returned to live with our parents after spending some time studying at BYU. I think each of us missed the academic stimuli that we had encountered at BYU, but that was absent somehow from Utah State. We hung out occasionally, going to concerts and movies, eating, or just talking. Roger was one of the smartest people I knew at that time. He, too, was an English major--and I loved having deep conversations with him. Roger challenged me to think in new ways about life. He was also funny, cute, liberal, and intellectually generous. At the time, I was a practicing Mormon--Roger, on the other hand, had already started defining a life outside Mormonism.

After I returned to BYU, Roger's life took another direction. He had flunked out of BYU (incredibly given he was so bright) and began a series of jobs at bookstores in Salt Lake. I saw him several times after that, once at the Y and a few times in Salt Lake. He stayed much the same: an inquisitive, avid reader with the ability to cut through the superficialities of life to examine it honestly and passionately. He was truly someone who lived a life of the mind.

I still have the book he gave me when I decided to return to BYU: Thomas Mann's Death in Venice. Folded in the pages of the book is the letter he wrote when he gave the book to me:

Kathee,

All the best English major.

Here's a Nobel Prize winner for you . . . a short (story) introduction.

For aesthetic transcendence listen to Mahler's 5th symphony (adagietto movement) while reading "Death in Venice." Then see the movie when it comes to International Cinema.

Run well at Brigham Young
(as fast as a leopard)
(to feel His pleasure)

Roger

I've had a lot of grading to do for the last few weeks. I finally have a routine that works for me (thanks, Johnnie). Almost every morning I grade three papers as soon as I get up. Then I have the rest of the day to do whatever I want/need to do. Today that has meant that I've read, developed a prompt for the SJVWP Summer Institute, done other Writing Project work, and blogged. The thing I love about this schedule is that it allows me to have a guilt-free day.

I'm not sure how this is going to work after Thursday when I receive 19 portfolios (complete with rewritten essays) and 12 final exams. The finals will go quickly, but I'm not so sure about the portfolios.

It's 3 a.m. and I can't sleep. Yesterday I was in San Francisco with my friends Toni, John, and John for the ballet. We had a fabulous lunch at Burma Superstar (my second trip there during the last two weeks), had a nice time at the ballet, and met Toni's friend Richard for hot chocolate. Afterwards, Toni and I were on the way to the freeway when someone ran a red light and broadsided us. My glasses flew across the car, and the impact basically sealed my door shut. In order to get out, I had to climb across the seat to the driver's side. Here are some things I'm grateful for.

1. The windows didn't break.
2. No one that was involved in the crash had any external injuries--no cuts or abrasions.
3. The police did a great job of getting information from both drivers so that we didn't have to interact directly with each other (which kept everyone calm, I think).
4. My glasses didn't break or get stepped on.
5. I was able to call my friend Kent (who just was hired as an assistant professor of surgery at Johns Hopkins--congratulations, Kent!) about a half hour after the accident to process what I needed to be paying attention to in terms of possible internal injuries. He did a great job of explaining what to consider--and he and Janet were both very reassuring.
6. Toni's car was running well enough for us to drive back to Fresno (although I had to sit in the backseat). Although Toni hit her leg against the steering wheel, she felt well enough and brave enough to drive.
7. Toni saw the car coming and tried to swerve because she was worried about him hitting me--that was her main thought when she realized we were going to have an accident.
8. Things could have been so much worse.

I have to admit that I'm feeling a little emotional about this. I didn't see the car coming. I can still feel the impact both in my side (I think I either bruised or broke a rib--I'll go to the doctor today) and in my teeth (of all places). I can still hear the crunch of the car. I feel really lucky to be alive and pretty much okay.