Live and Learn

Last fall we found an awesome apple tree to forage from.

It's in a city park along a trail and we saw it was loaded with fruit!

So we went to help ourselves.  (If memory serves me right I'm almost entirely sure that I was not yet pregnant while climbing this tree, maybe.)

We took home such a haul!  And were equally excited to head back to our favorite forgotten apple tree this year to gather more.  There was just one problem.

There were no apples.

Seriously!  We pulled about four edible apples off the tree, there were probably like 12-18 we could see up in the tree that were in various states of not-good-looking-ness.  And that was it!

We were so confused.  It should have been harvest season.

Where were all the apples?

Then entered my latest bedside table reading material:  The Holistic Orchard, by Michael Phillips

Yeah, I also dream of orchards.  If I was to be a subsistence farmer--I wouldn't farm--I would orchard.  (That being said with all my orcharding experience of the one time we went to a u-pick apple orchard when I was sixteen.)  But I'm talking about dream.  I dream of deciduous trees and crisp autumn days, apple cider pressing, and big pots of apple butter boiling over bonfires. . .

Anyway, reading this book is amazing.  I've been learning tons of information about my future apple trees.  I'm glad to be reading it now, because of how much preparatory information there is.  But there was also a fascinating section about rehabilitating "wild" apple trees.

Apparently (insert eyebrow waggle here) apple trees left to their own devices will naturally fall into a biennial bearing pattern.  Essentially, well-established trees usually produce a ton of fruit and if the crop is not thinned out all the energy goes into producing the current huge crop of apples, and not saving energy for next year.  So only after a "year off", the tree is ready to bear again.  . . . Fascinating!

So our question was answered.

I've also been learning a lot about soil fungi, mycorriza and such, that are essential for fruit tree health. A happy web through the soil that breaks down and makes available more nutrients to the roots of the trees.

And wouldn't you know, I was turning over piles of straw in the backyard that I'd watered for a month or two and I audibly gasped! 

Look at all that happy "fungal duff"--as the author calls it.

White webs under the layer of straw that had been left there just a few months.  So now I can trust the author's recommendations of mulching to create a heathly fungal community in the future when I have fruit trees. 

But I don't have them right now.  So why was I watering piles of straw in my backyard? 

Well, I was trying to grow fall potatoes, and had read this great tip for easier harvest.  Mound your potatoes with straw! I thought that did sound like it would make for an easy harvest. 

So as my potato plants grew I mounded them with straw, until they all keeled over and died. 

(Who knows why.  I think that even though the weather cooled down, it was still too shady in my little glen of a backyard.)  I finally figured I would go turn over the piles of straw and see if --even though the vines were dead--maybe that early vigorous growth produced some little potatoes that were just hiding in the  hay, waiting for me to harvest. (I'm not really that disillusion--it was a garden autopsy for sure.)

But sure enough. . .

Look at those little beauties.

And true to the Pinterest tip--it was a very easy harvest. 

One day (when I'm 40) I'm going to get an awesome piece of property to build a little homestead on, and it's going to be the most successful piece of property you ever saw.  The success of which will be attributed to all the years and years of knowledge I am accumulating and archiving, from the school of hard knocks. 

The Dirty Life

Someone lent this book to Jeremy to read a long time ago.  One technique I'm using for de-cluttering my house is returning things from my home that don't belong to me back to their actual owners.  (Obvious, right?) So I finally sat down to read this so we could return it. 

The author tells her story of "city-girl-mets-hippy-farm-boy."  Interviewing him on his sustainable farm, and becoming interested in him and his "manly work", eventually hooking up with him and moving to a new area to start a larger farm, and finally get married. 

Her boyfriend's vision was a whole-diet farm.  So where some local farms will offer the community weekly or bi-weekly baskets of produce for their membership, he wanted to provide everything for the whole diet: milk, meat, eggs, fat, and something sweet like maple syrup, along with a basket of produce.  Along with that goal he wanted to run his farm sustainably through using draft horses and renewable energy sources.  The author does a good job of not glossing over the tough aspects of starting up a farm from scratch--which are plentiful--without sounding too whiny.  And it was interesting to see the progress of how they went about trying to create this farm. 

(On a side note, there were two sentences in the book I had a problem with because of their sexual nature, one sentence describing an intimate moment, and one retelling a dirty joke.  I really had to ask why they were necessary.  Sometimes it really feels like people are trying to prove something through including unnecessary lines like those.)     

In terms of philosophy, although I respect the idea of the whole diet-farm, I wonder if it is actually counter-productive to some of the ideals her husband believes in.  The cost of the yearly membership to Essex Farm is $3700 for an adult (I looked up their website) and $3300 for a second adult. And for children it is $120 per year of their current age.  So for a membership my family would have to pay $8,920 for the year.  And yes, it is meant to supply all our food needs, and they let you take all you want to can and preserve extras for the winter etc, but that is $743 dollars a month to feed my family, and next year with the boys a year older it would be an additional $40 dollars a month, or $783 a month.

Where is that money supposed to come from?  I'm not saying the food is not worth that much, I believe in paying farmers a good wage, but I'm asking where it is supposed to come from.  He detests commercialism, and consumerism, and "the man", and electricity, but for people to afford buying his food they have to go out into the economic world that he claims to be against in order to earn the cash to buy from him.  He requires that by the very nature of being a whole diet farm.  He leaves no way for people to offset the costs of their membership in a natural, sustainable way.  For example, I can't be a dairy farmer, or an orchardist, and earn money from that and just go to his farm for my other produce needs or my meat.  I have to go to him for everything, and he wouldn't even be interested in bartering or trading with me, because he does it all.  So he requires that all the members have the type of job that pays large amounts of cash in order to support his "sustainable farm".

And along with that he is monopolizing the business from any other small farm farmers in the region.  If he offers only one type of membership--a whole diet--and requires such a large fee to do so, then his members will not have money or need, after picking up their food from his farm, to go support any other regional farmers that sell, just eggs and chickens, or similar.  Instead, he employs ten full-time farmers working for him on his farm.  It seems if he were really so against the commercial system (he only buys second-hand clothes, etc.) that he would be more encouraging of similar choices in others.  In which case it would make more sense to perhaps support and be a part of a local network of a number of small farmers in order to provide the whole diet for a membership in the network, rather than just supporting his farm.

Simply, in our family, we raise our own chickens for our egg needs and some of our meat needs, and we keep bees to provide for a major amount of our yearly sweetner-usage.  We also do gardening that supplies small amounts of produce for our family.  We do these things naturally and chemical-free.  We do it because we think it is good for the earth, and it offsets some of our food costs.  However, a membership at Essex Farm would be a discouragement from our doing those things since they would be redundant to our farm membership benefits, and increase our yearly food budget even more.  Ultimately, if multiple people stopped their small-scale home efforts to just use the farm membership benefits, I feel that is a net loss both to the earth, and the type of sustainability and stewardship mentality that farmers like her husband are trying to promote.

                    

Divergent

I love a good futuristic dystopian novel.  They are a little bit in the pop culture right now, but it's always been my thing.  Fahrenheit 451 and the short stories of Isaac Asimov for example.  What I love about them is the exploration of society.  The question of what would life be like if these people were in power, or this mindset reigned supreme, or suddenly this aspect of culture or technology were to change. . .

In the book Divergent by Veronica Roth, the society has restructured after a great war into factions of people based on what they considered to be at fault for war and contention.  Thus their faction works to eliminate that weakness from among their ranks, developing instead the positive opposite character strength that they believe will help rebuild a better society.  These traits are selflessness, honesty, bravery, knowledge, and kindness.

Children are brought up in the faction of their parents, but when they turn 16 they take part in aptitude testing and then a choosing ceremony in which they can choose to remain in the faction of their parents or based on their aptitude results and preferences can choose to leave their faction and go through initiation to join another faction. 

The main character, Beatrice, grew up in the faction of Abnegation with her mother, her brother and her father, who--as a man valuing selflessness-- is a member of the government leadership.  Beatrice has never felt as effortlessly-selfless as her mother appears to be, yet her aptitude test results surprise her, and ultimately, so does her faction choice. 

As Beatrice learns more about herself, she also learns more about her society around her.  The factions are not all working together toward a common good, as she once believed, and she has a secret role to play in the unfolding events.  As she hones her strengths she comes to realize, with the help of a friend, that what she believed were her weaknesses may not make her so weak after all. 


                                               *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *

That was my Reading Rainbow style book review in which I end by telling you to go pick up this book in your local library today!  Of course it may be a little difficult right now because the second book Insurgent just came out two weeks ago.  Jeremy and I are reading them together.  There is enough action for him, but not too much of the other kind of "action" that guys don't like reading about.

As I said this is Divergent WEEK, so I have a few more things to talk about in relation to the story.  But the next one will contain a good deal of spoilers, so I wanted to separate it from this review.   

The Language of Flowers

I've heard of the language of flowers before.  Like the time Jeremy was reading an article on the Art of Manliness about wearing boutonnieres which warned of not wearing just any flower because you may not realize the "message" you are sending with that flower.

The Language of Flowers written by Vanessa Diffenbaugh, is about a difficult 18-year-old girl being "emancipated" from the foster care/group home system.  She has often used the language of flowers to communicate with people around her without them realizing her meanings.  As she works on creating a life for herself as an "adult" we also get glimpses of a significant period of time from her past, then watch the connection between the two become apparent.  

As her story progresses, she has the opportunity for happiness, but she holds herself back from allowing that to happen.  She allows her damaged past to keep her from feeling deserving of happiness or success in her relationships and her life.  For a period of time she looses everything that she had been able to achieve, and it is only after she learns to accept herself and to allow herself to have imperfections that she is able to allow herself to have happiness and success in her relationships an life.

I loved this story and immediately began to reread it upon completing it.  I wanted to go back to reread the passages now that I understood how the whole story worked out together.

Lately I have pondered over the topic of whether or not it is appropriate for me to "like" books in which the characters are not living the moral standards that I believe are important.  This book would fall in that category.  But the ending message of the story is definitely appropriate and important.  Victoria's past was not perfect, and she felt like that meant she could not have a perfect future.  I have an imperfect past.  There are many things in my life that are far from the ideal circumstances I would have hoped for.  So do I allow myself to believe that I have no chance for a happy future?  I love how Victoria came to understand that she could accept her past and just let it be and not allow it to keep her from the possibilities of her future.

I now have an aching desire to propagate Moss in my garden.  Moss which means "maternal love" grows without roots.  And I can use motherhood as a metaphor for my whole life and accept that goodness can grow notwithstanding a lack of what I might consider necessary roots.

The Weird Sisters

I'll admit--Shakespeare's not really my thing.  I read a few plays required in high school, but Shakespeare is really more Jeremy's thing.  He read it, acted in it, even sacrificed his body for it when he had his nose broken by broadsword during Macbeth--turns out that stage blood wasn't necessary after all. 

But I thought this book The Weird Sisters by Eleanor Brown sounded interesting, about three adult women all returning for their own reasons to the home of their parents, where their father, who is a college professor on Shakespeare speaks to them and tries even to give cryptic advice to them through lines of Shakespeare.


The book is fascinating in that it is narrated by the sisters collectively. The sisters tell of sister number one and her problems and then move on to sister number two, still speaking strictly collectively but omnisciently.

It’s a story about life and struggles, and though my life is quite different from everyone in the book, I still found some parts that really spoke to me.

After a conversation with her fiancé Rose, the eldest, considers the way she has lived her life, “[C]hasing some shadow of the way things were Supposed to Be? There were days, yes, when Rose felt as though she had been on this earth forever, since the dinosaurs at least, but she knew she was young. It seemed so early to have signed her whole life away, but it seemed so exhausting to change anything” (p 119).

I’ve found as I get a little bit older that I really have held myself back according to some standard of the way things are “supposed to be”. In many different areas of our culture there are a lot of unspoken rules that I find myself rebelling against these days.

At one point, reflecting on their parents’ marriage they say, “We have always wondered why there is not more research done on the children of happy marriages. Our parents’ love is not some grand passion, there are no swoons of lust, no ball gowns and tuxedo’s but here is the truth: they have not spent a night apart since the day they married” (p 156).

Though Jeremy and I spent our first night apart less than a month after being married (he was traveling with BYU Men’s Chorus) I like this thought of the simple things being meaningful in a marriage of true love—though I’d still like a ball gown!

After Cordy, the youngest sister, witnesses her Mom’s true frailties the sisters ask, “How old were you when you first realized your parents were human? That they were not omnipotent; that what they said did not, in fact, go; that they had dreams and feelings and scars? Or have you not realized that yet? Do you still call your parents and have a one-sided conversation with them, child to parent, not adult to adult?” (p 262)

I still remember the moment I realized this. The experience is too personal to share. But, though I do still call my parents as a child, I hope that I also often call as an adult as well.

Perhaps because I’ve been appreciative of my own ecclesiastical leaders recently I really welcomed Bean, the middle sister’s, “confession scene” and counseling from Father Aidan. In confronting the true source of bean’s behavior he advises her, “We all have stories we tell ourselves. We tell ourselves we are too fat, or too ugly, or too old, or too foolish. We tell ourselves these stories because they allow us to excuse our actions, and they allow us to pass off the responsibility for things we have done—maybe to something within our control, but anything other than the decisions we have made” (337).

If that doesn’t cause pause for a moment of reflection on our own lives and behaviors then I don’t know what will.

I recommend this book with reservations. The “F-word” (and variations) was used about 6 or so times, and there was talk of sex—not descriptions of sex, but talk of it. If you feel capable of skipping past a few things like that then I think you’ll be able to find plenty of interesting things in this book.

I'm so excited to have read this book as a part of the Blogher Book club.  There will be great discussions  going on at the book club webpage for the next four weeks --plenty of time to get involved!

"This is a paid review for BlogHer Book Club but the opinions expressed are my own." 

Book Club Reject

So I was in charge of picking the book for book club to read this month.  I brought in In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan. I'm a little nervous that the other ladies are going to kick me out. I mean, it's non-fiction, and how interesting can a book be that has only a head of lettuce on the front cover?

I read the book for the first time a few years ago and found the whole thing fascinating.  Pollan's explanation of the current food culture in America and where it came from.  And then his knocking it all down back to common sense and non-fanaticism--just simple real food.  It's so interesting --and radical even-- while not being radical at all.  .

And I'll admit--I buy it. 

I love the book because it ratified so many of the feelings I've had about food as a young adult responsible for feeding myself and now a young family.  It justifies my desires to learn traditional foods and preparation methods.  It encourages our family and dinner-guests-included dining practices.  It supports my lack of guilt about not consulting the FDA or AAP (or whomever) for the "latest research on what to start when" once Wyatt showed interest in solid foods.  (Because "latest research findings" have been completely different for each of my three boys born  in '05, '08, and '10 respectively.)

And mostly I love the book because I love food!  (And having a blog is bad for that--I constantly want to take pictures of the visual poetry created by my peeled sweet potatoes sitting on the cutting board, because they just look so orange and so good, and the anticipation of thinking up something delicious to make with them fills me with excitement!)  And Michael Pollan shows that enjoying food is completely desirable --that the alternative (an unhealthy obsession with healthy eating) is more detrimental than to love "food, not too much, and mostly plants."

But really, I don't mind if the other ladies don't see it like I do.  They don't have to agree with the book like I do.  But this is my passion.  It's what I enjoy reading about, talking about, watching movies about.  So I brought the book for the discussion I want it to spur.  I just hope the ladies will give it a chance.

Cheaper by the Dozen

One of my new years' resolutions is to read more print (and less pixels).  Last year I may have made it all the way through around 30% of our book club books.  I would just put off reading the selection, then I would start reading it a few days before book club --and really start to enjoy it-- but then it would be time to meet and discuss and get the next month's book.

I was very dissatisfied with the experience, so I've committed to starting this year off right.  Our first selection was Cheaper by the Dozen.  It was nothing at all like the movie with that Smallville guy other than the idea of a family with twelve children and an extra helping of humor on the side. 

The book was written in the 40's and talks about life in the 20's.  This book is classified as biography (non-fiction) and gives a fascinating look into the way life looked during that time period.  Frank and Lillian were engineers and pioneering experts in the field of motion study where they would watch a job being done, break it down into it's various parts and figure out how to make it happen faster.  They comically --though in all seriousness-- used these principles of efficiency in their home as well, like the time when the over 200 pound Frank called all his sons into the bathroom where he was bathing to demonstrate to them the proper sequence for soaping up their bodies in order to master a 3 minute bath allowance.  

On vacation in their summer home the children had declared that they would not be forced to do any kind of learning or studying.  But it was simply against the nature of Frank to be idle, so he painted the Morse code alphabet on the bathroom wall.  Then he painted messages and jokes all over the walls of the house for the kids to figure out.  So the children choose to study the code and began laughing at the jokes on the walls and racing for treats from Dad mentioned in other hidden notes. 

I am not as fast at typing as I would like, and have thought before of painting the keys on the keyboard different colors so I know which one of my fingers is supposed to be striking which key.  Well, Frank Gilbreth marketed that color-coded training course 100 years ago (after using his children as the first experimental test group). 

I read a lot of this book out loud to Jeremy.  We got a good laugh from so many of the stories, and a real itch to do something more productive during our free time like memorizing mathematical formulas or learning a foreign language or something.  And really, reading this book made think I could write my own version of Cheaper by the Dozen of stories from my childhood.  Anyone who's ever met my dad knows--he's quite the character as well.

Bookshelf

I had to chuckle a little bit. . .

"Gee, I wonder what Jeremy is researching for his dissertation?"


The contents of my book pile look a little bit different. . .

You can never have too many books around the house.

Radical Homemakers

"If you have learned to live on less in order to take the time to nourish your family and the planet through home cooking, engaged citizenship, responsible consumption and creative living, whether you are male, female, or two people sharing the role, with or without children, full or part-time, please drop me a line and tell me your story." (15-16)

This online invitation was the basis for the book Radical Homemakers: Reclaiming domesticity from a consumer culture, by Shannon Hayes. 

Initially I resisted this book because of the main title and cover. To me it gives off that crazed-feminist vibe which I really don't appreciate. In reality--it wasn't too much of that. Other than the the time she alluded to God as a woman, and the point where she used a quote from one person's research to blame the national issues of overworking and over-consumption as a whole on Christianity, I would say that the book fell into the moderate liberal range--which I can work with.

The author divided the book in to two parts.  The why of radical homemaking and the how.  I would have thought I would be more interested in the second, but it wasn't "how" as in "how-to."  It was actually more of a "what people do"  not "how to do it yourself."  So ultimately, I enjoyed the first section better.

In the first section the author presents a very thorough history of domesticity throughout time.  In support of one of her main theses of the book--that men play an important equal role as radical homemakers--she sites the term husband as meaning "bonded to the house," or hus in old spelling.  These thirteenth-century post-feudal homemakers were neither peasants nor aristocracy.  Their security relied on their combined efforts in their homes and the land around it.  While there was a clear line between man's and woman's responsibilities, there were not clearly separated "spheres."

"Men made cider and mead; women made beer, ale and wine.  While women made and mended clothing made from cloth, the men produced anything made of leather. . . women sewed and spun, men chopped wood and fashioned tools and utensils.  Both performed jobs that required strength and stamina--men hauled wood; women washed clothes.  Both men and women would milk animals, draw water, weave, and peel apples and potatoes.  Much of their work was a team effort.  Men would grow flax; women would break it and spin it into linen. Women nursed and cared for the children;men made the cradles, and mowed the hay and sheered the fleece to fill the mattress ticking." (62)

That was such an interesting perspective of history. Then came the cult of domesticity--the height of domesticity as colonial housewives were making great political statements through the things they purchased -or chose not to- for their homes. Then we all know how men began to leave the home with the advent of the industrial revolution, and the sphere of "housework" was left for women. But not for long as "soon the industrial values of maximum efficiency were called upon to rescue the housewife from her burdens (70)." Slowly the skills, credibility, good judgment of the homemaker were usurped by "experts" advertising the products to take over all the woman's responsibilities leaving her lonely in the suburbs, nothing more than a driver of the family car, operator of household appliances, shopper for household goods, and warmer of purchased food.  Thus, as explored in Betty Frieden's Feminine Mystique, women developed "housewife syndrome," a depression and dissatisfaction regarding their situation in life.

So women left the home as well, to garner a second income and become slaves to the self-serving extractive economy.  (Sometimes the author was a bit dramatic.)  Though I did appreciate her discussion about the economy and how we've been  brainwashed into believing that we have to support (and bail out) the big companies, even though they treat us like an abusive boyfriend, always telling us we aren't good enough, and threatening to dump us when someone better comes along.  Telling us to work harder, and sneering when we threaten to leave, because. . . really, who would want us? (An interesting analogy.)

But with the home converted fully from a unit of production to merely a unit of consumption there are major changes that have come about.  Negative changes have come to families, society, the environment, our own health, as we outsource all production to companies with shady business practices that abuse their employees and the environment, take advantage of their customers,  and ultimately provide us with products, food, clothing that is inferior to what we could produce on our own.

In the second section we see the results of the interviews the author conducted with radical homemakers around the country.  In a chapter titled Housekeeping, the author lays out the ways that radical homemakers live.  The book as a whole maintains that radical homemaking can take a number of forms, but this chapter didn't allow for such leniency.  This was definitely the chapter that seemed "radical."  A lot of the points are valid--I wholeheartedly agree that there are ways to make it work in America on just a single income--but I also took issue with some.  Like, you don't need a car because you can just borrow someone else's (wait how's that gonna. . . ) Only suckers buy health insurance.  And no one really needs college. Really this section that I thought I would be the most interested in, was actually completely irritating--when not outright infuriating-- to read.

The author followed this up with a chapter on reclaiming "domestic skills," such as nurturing relationships, self-teaching, setting realistic expectations, rediscovering the taste of real food, and becoming fearless.  I was interested (because it's my pet topic) to see how the "real food" issue was present in this book. 

The one idea that I don't think received enough attention was the author's hypothesis that in order for these new wave homemakers to avoid falling prey to housewives syndrome--radical homemakers must be and are involved in reaching out to the greater community in someway, not just simply being self-reliant, but helping others as well, mentoring, teaching skills and changing society. That idea is one that really speaks to me. 

I've put off reviewing this book for quite a while because I'm still not sure what I thought about it overall. There were things I enjoyed in it and things I was totally put off by.  So I'll just end with a quote that I feel sums up some good ideas about the radical homemaking movement, and shows that even radicals can show a little (a really little) bit of moderation. 

"This is not to say that every homemaker must start weaving cloth and hand-washing their family's clothing; with few exceptions, most of us will always rely on the broader industrial system for something.   But for each daily need that we re-learn to provide within our homes and communities, we strengthen our independence from an extractive and parasitic economy.  As we realize the impact of each choice we make, we discover ways to simplify our demands and rebuild our domestic culture.

"When we regain connection with all that sustains us, we regain creative spirit.  We rediscover the joy that comes with using our hands and our minds in union to nourish, nurture and delight in our families; we tap the source of true creative satisfaction, the ecstasy that accompanies a home that lives in harmony with the earth's systems, and the certitude of a life guided by principles of social justice and nonexploitation." (83)

American Bento

You know you are a strange Mom when the reason you are excited for your child to start kindergarten is because then you get to start packing him a lunch. 

This summer Jeremy bought me this book Yum-Yum Bento Box.  I've had tons of fun looking through it.  Although a lot of the food is traditional Japanese I still got lots of great ideas from the book.  It promotes the idea that lunches from home can be fun and appetizing, asside from what the term "brown bagging it" would suggest.  Also, that packing your children's lunches can be a creative outlet for parents instead of a drudgery.  It definitely fits our household food philosophy.

Jeremy tried the recipe in the book for basic rice balls and they were surprisingly tasty.  So maybe we'll make Owen rice balls once in a while.  But mostly I liked looking at the different presentations of fresh fruit and vegetables, and scoping out supplies I might want for doing Owen's lunch.  Here are my most bento-ie supplies:

Colored plastic toothpicks-- used for spearing things like grapes, cherry tomatoes, olives, or for holding sandwich layers or wraps together.

Cupcake liners--used for segmenting a smaller area off inside a larger container, and holding small pieces of food-- or I was even thinking of making pudding or jello to set up right in the cups and then put them in a box.

Sandwich cutter--Owen has had this dino sandwich cutter for a while and he loves it.  They sell other shapes at the grocery store.  You can use regular cookie cutters as well.  They also can be used for cutting cheese and lunch meats. 

Egg Molds--These are so cool.  Santa got these from e-bay for the boys' stockings last year.  You hard boil an egg then peel it while it is still hot and press it into these molds.  Here's a really bad picture of what they come out looking like:

I didn't get Owen an actual bento box.  Though I really like the Americanized "Laptop Lunchbox," and I only yesterday saw an add for these cool segmented containers.   But I think I prefer the versatility of a bunch of different containers that can fit into the lunch bag. 

Here's my stash, some are new, some are old. Those little containers with the maroon lids are from the thrift store.  I thought that smallest one might be good for dip for carrot sticks or something.  A drink bottle.  Some little hologram snack cups--these were in Owen's Schultute this year.  An insulated lunch bag.  My reusable zip-top bags. A stainless steel Thermos Funtainer (also from Owen's Schultute) for soups in the fall and winter.  And two sandwich boxes.  One was from the Target dollar spot last year--though I think they have them again--and the black one was a prize from a Tupperware party--Sweet!

Delicious and -mostly- healthy foods are placed in an assortment of containers.

And they all fit inside.  --Insert happy competent-as-a-parent feelings here--

On Food and Eating

The other night Jeremy told me he was in the mood to make cupcakes. We were at Target and the trip lasted later in the evening than we wanted, so at the end we stopped in the "grocery" section and were considering the easy way out--purchasing some Hostess cupcakes.

"But do I really need a whole box?" Jeremy asked.

"Well, it is only eight of them." I said. I was trying to be a supportive wife.

While we sat there debating whether or not we would actually buy them, Owen noticed the aisle that we were on and pointed excitedly to the Hostess Zingers.

"Look! It's traveling snacks, for when we are traveling in our car!"

"You're very right Owen." We said, and moved along from the snack-y cake aisle.

************

That moment made me happy for a number of reasons. First, Owen recognized packaged convenience foods as something that we don't buy regularly, and he wasn't going to even ask for them. But second, that he recognized them as something that we do allow them to get once in a while for special occasions, like a family road trip.

This is really what Jeremy and I want: moderation in all things. We really try to eat healthy and naturally and eat "real food." But yet we don't want to be crazies.

************

Recently we have watched this:


And this:


And read this:
They all share some similar themes. They talk about how much processed food Americans eat and how much of that processed food is corn and soy-product based. How the corn growers vs. government situation is totally out of control. How this impacts the meat products sold in this country, and how unhealthy that whole system is. . .

It's alarming, thought-provoking and frustrating all at the same time. Really, leaving the question of what's a person supposed to do about food?

That's why I liked this one:

This one had the answers of what a person was supposed to do. "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants," explained in a few hundred additional and interesting pages. But the reason I liked it so much was because so much of this book was so intuitive to me. It just made sense.

Michael Pollan himself wonders in the book why we feel like we need anyone else to tell us what to eat.

There are so many lifestyle-diets out there that lay out a wacky food philosophy and then go into all these complicated explanations and obscure examples to explain their reasoning and why their idea has to be right. Things that leave me scratching my head thinking, "Did all that 'science' actually add up, and can that really be right?"

************

I personally believe in God and that he created our bodies and expects us to respect and care for them. Therefore I don't believe that God intended that the principles of feeding our bodies would be such a complex thing that we would require "experts" to lay each calorie out for us.

And as God created the earth, that's the place I believe I will find good nutrition. Plants that grow on the earth and animals that live on the earth. And from an evolutionary standpoint it would also make sense that our bodies would be able to be sustained by the things of our environment--not that we should require eliminations of whole groups of intuitive food sources, or necessitate scientifically calculated dietary supplements in order to actually maintain health.

See?! I already sound like a crazy, and that's just from me saying I want to eat food from nature, and not listen to people who tell me not to eat meat, or dairy, or whole grains or the ones who insist that I can only be really healthy from eating things made by scientist who engineered the food and supplements to provide perfectly for the needs of the human body (at least--as far as we understand the body this year. . .).

************

So although I want to eat healthy, Michael Pollan talks about the serious problem we have in our country about stressing too much over food and nutrition. So I really don't want to do that. I just want to eat healthy most of the time.

So here's my youngest, happy as can be after eating handfuls of yummy delicious red raspberries:


And here's my oldest, happily and tenderly caressing the most recent addition to our shelf-stable "food" supply:

And I don't feel guilty at all. . .

moderation baby.

It's Finally Here!

I've been waiting an entire week for this book to become available at the library.

Someone had it on hold. Someone who obviously was not in as dire need of the information contained inside as I have been this last grueling week waiting for it! Granted I'm happy they never showed up to pick up the book they placed on hold, because then I'd have to wait three more weeks to get it, but still. Don't put books full of potentially life-changing information on hold for yourself unless you are actually serious about reading it!

I'll calm down now, because the book is now in my possession, and I'm sure that maintaining a calm atmosphere in the home is going to be one of the suggestions in "The No Cry Sleep Solution: for toddlers and preschoolers."

So here's my problem: Both Owen and Jonas are put in bed at 8pm after a bedtime routine while they are still awake and they put themselves to sleep. Sounds good so far right?

Problem #1 Jonas has started throwing fits when I begin singing to him as he knows that is the last step in his bedtime routine.

Problem #2 Jonas wakes up in the night crying and won't put himself back to sleep.

Problem #3 As of the last week we've started bringing Jonas to bed with us in the middle of the night which we haven't done since he was 6 months old.

Problem #4 Owen puts himself to sleep approximately one to two hours after 8pm spending the time in between playing Geotracks or building himself Lego towers that are going to "sing to him while he sleeps." (I'm serious.)

Problem #5. Owen sneaks into bed with us in the middle of the night.

We have a new baby coming in approximately 9 weeks and we all know how wonderfully new babies sleep. So the point is I'd like to get some of these sleep issues with the other boys resolved before the baby comes.

The biggest problem is everyone in our bed. We don't have a problem with co-sleeping except that we only have a double and not everyone is going to fit! Since Jonas has been out of our bed since six months I see no reason to bring him back now. Owen has been in bed with us off and on his entire life, but I think he's getting old enough to be able to sleep consistently on his own, and I really don't want him sneaking into our bed if the baby is in bed with us.

Solutions? We've already talked about going back to the 7:00 bedtime routine we were in before Christmas. Jonas did well with that, and if Owen is going to stay up playing toys, at least it will only be 'till 8 or 9, not 9 or 10. Also in our favor, we've had a pretty consistent wake-up schedule since January when Owen started preschool and we switched to "early" church. Hopefully the rest of the solutions we need will be contained within this book.

Now if you'll excuse me--I have some reading to do.

Conscientious Objector

I picked up this book knowing that I was going to disagree with it. I saw it reviewed positively on the blog of a "natural mama" but I could tell I wouldn't view it so favorably. But I read it anyways because I want to be educated. There are a lot of people out there (particularly ones with radical ideas) that think if you don't agree with their ideas, it's just because you are simply "uninformed." That bugs me, so I read it in order to defend my position against it intelligently.

This doctor advocates a vegetarian--leaning towards vegan--diet, stating that it will make your child healthy and protect them from ADHD, diabetes, cancer, and many other diseases.

Here are my major critiques on his positions:

He talks about how ridiculous it is that we fortify grain products with folic acid and other nutrients that can easily be obtained from simply eating green vegetables. However, then he talks about how a vegan diet is lacking in B12 and often calcium, and vegetarian diets are often very low in these as well. He explains why this poses no real problem because orange juice and soy milk are fortified with calcium and vitamin B12. So where did his whole argument about getting nutrients where they are found naturally (in this case through animal products) go?

He then talks about how bad for you dairy products are, in particular cheese. He states that cheese should not be kept in the home. He bases his argument mainly on the saturated fat content, citing a chart of saturated fat content in common foods which lists cheddar cheese at the top with 24 grams of saturated fat per 4 ounces, down further is a 6oz steak with 18 grams of fat, later you see 1 cup of whole milk with 5 grams of saturated fat.

Sure that looks convincing at face value, except that I'm not blind and I could quickly recognize that this chart is comparing arbitrary amounts of the foods as opposed to serving sizes. One cup of milk is an accurate serving size, so if you did drink whole milk (which in this country is only recommended for children between the ages of one and two) you would receive 5 grams of saturated fat. (We drink 1% milk at our house which has 1.5 grams per serving.) An appropriate serving size of meat would be 3-4 ounces which would mean you are getting 9-12 grams of saturated fat per serving. Then there is the appropriate serving size for cheese, one ounce, which would mean that 1 serving of cheddar cheese has 6 grams (not 24) of saturated fat. (Our Kroger brand medium cheddar is labeled as 5 grams per 1oz serving.)

So is cheese high in saturated fat? Yes, but do I serve a brick of cheese for dinner? No, cheese is a condiment which I use a small amount of to add a lot of flavor. Saying that cheese has no place in the home is way too extreme.

Another reason he gives for cutting out dairy is based on the evidence that giving cows milk to infants under the age of one can give them digestive problems and they often end up forming other food allergies. So in this case not only is he using an example that goes against standard contemporary medical advice, which is to not give children cows milk until they are over the age of one, but then he generalizes the problems these infants have to the whole population citing that it proves milk is not healthy for any age humans to drink.

Then he sets out to present a "balanced discussion" on the different diets you may choose and their benefits and drawbacks. As it turns out, if you eat a low-fat vegan diet, you will be super healthy. . . except for the little tiny fact that your brain might explode when you get older because the plaque-building processes of fat just may be protecting the fragile blood vessels in the brain from the stress of high blood pressure (p. 152). So if you just make sure not to eat too much salt you should be OK.

When talking about vegetarianism he sites that fruits and vegetables are the two foods associated with the highest rate of longevity in humans, not whole grains, bran, not even vegetarianism (p. 147). Which makes me wonder why we're having this discussion at all. But, he insists, the reason to be vegetarian is in order to consume high levels of fruits, green vegetables, and beans. Well my question is: what about eating small servings of meat prevents us from being able to eat large amounts of fruits vegetables and beans?

So, in answer he explains his reasons against an omnivorous diet. All his reasons being that the typical western diet is not a healthy balance between animal and plant products. What?! The typical unhealthy American diet is not what we are talking about--we're discussing diet ideals and what healthy options you can create for your family.

So my overall impression of the book was: it's totally overly biased. Which I expected. Not to mention full of references to his website and his own personal brand of DHA suppliments (oh, more suppliments?) that you can purchase from his website.

There was one bit of advice he gave that I thought was good. He stated that if your children choose to eat junkfood outside the home you shouldn't try to guilt trip them about it. He stressed that our job is to control what our family eats in the home and try and make sure that most of your family's eating happens in the home, but don't try to control their behavior outside the home.

New Moon Revisited

Come back next time for "intelligent conversation" on the topic of a book about children's health I read recently. Today--it's all about Twilight.

Last week Jeremy took me out on a date to see New Moon on it's last night showing in our local theater. It was his first time and my second. We actually "doubled" with some friends, and it was good because our two husbands could appreciate each others handful of wise-cracks throughout the movie. And both of us wives had seen it before so that didn't bother us.
I enjoyed the movie my first time, and I really enjoyed it my second time. I really think it was well done. Obviously with a higher budget the special effects were a lot better than Twilight. But it was more than that.

The movie has a lot more of a mature feeling to it. Twilight is kind of about infatuation, it is so fresh and there's so much mystery still. But in New Moon it really seemed like Bella and Edwards relationship had matured, which made it more real.

I really appreciated the number of sequences where they did some serious combining of different plot elements from the book. This really helped the plot to move along smoothly without taking different scenes for everything which would make it feel choppy. I think the scene where Charley and Harry Clearwater (and whoever else) are out looking for the wolves is great. They overlap the hunting parties, with the werewolf hunting party, with Harry's heart attack, with some screen time for Victoria, with Bella jumping off the cliff. There's a lot going on, but the whole sequence goes so smoothly and quickly. Perfect for a film adaptation.

Bella and Jacob's growing relationship was shown perfectly. It was another example of how I felt this movie had more maturity to it. Their relationship is real. It grows and develops. It's good for Bella, it helps her. Jacob tries so hard, but he does make mistakes, but then he admits them and is not too proud to hide his feelings from Bella.

Alice arrives and Bella starts acting irrational, so he leaves angry but then comes back to make it right. Their relationship is so raw and real--it's right out there. Then comes the scene in the kitchen. . .

. . . which makes my heart want to stop beating. But then she runs out yelling at him again. And then he comes to the car and begs her to say--for him.

Whether or not you want Bella to be with Jacob, there are some powerful, real emotions there. I just loved it .

And then Alice and Bella rush off to Italy to rescue Edward from himself. Bella runs across the people-filled courtyard, through the fountain, pushes Eward out of the sunlight, they embrace and then. . . hold hands as they walk off to visit the Voulturi? This is my biggest complaint of the movie. Where is all the holding onto each other so tightly trying to be as close to each other and be touching as much as possible while still walking uprightly stuff from the book?

He almost just gave up his whole existence because his life was destroyed thinking she was dead, and she just turned her back on a beautiful life with Jacob Black to rescue the person she hadn't seen in over half a year, whose loss she had been mourning the entire time, whom she'd taken up reckless behaviors just to feel closer to. And they finally see each other again and they hold hands? It just didn't do it for me. That scene of the reunion and heading off to the Vouluri is possibly my favorite scene from the entire four-book saga, and I think they gave the scene no justice at all in the movie. And compared to the super-heightened emotions all being conveyed just five minutes earlier with Jake, it's really a significant let-down.

It's obvious that this movie only increased my allegiance to Jake. And really when it ended the fist time I watched it, I was super frustrated. I wanted more time with Jake. I want to spend more time hanging out at Emily's cottage listening to the brothers jibe each other. It felt like it was all over so soon.

But, after all the saga is a fairy tale about the "true love" (Stephenie Meyer's term) between Edward and Bella, and sometimes true love doesn't make sense. Jeremy's favorite part, from the book and movie is when Bella and Edward are talking about why Edward left. And how when he left he lied and told her he didn't love or need her, but the hard thing for him to see was how easily she believed him. Because love doesn't "make sense" to us in a logical way. And that's such a real emotion for us to love our partner so deeply and yet wonder why they ever stick around for us.

By the way Jeremy, thanks for being "man enough" to go see this movie with me, and for not being jealous of my celebrity-crush on Taylor Lautner. I love you the most.

Souvenirs

Jeremy brought me back a little something special from his overnight business trip last week.

Yes--they were free from the hotel room, but that's not the point. If you've ever read The Host you might get a kick out of how the labels on these toiletries resemble the labeling practices of the Souls.

Anyone. . . ?

Well, Jeremy noticed it and it cracked me up and that's why he brought them home for me to see. And that's why I love him.

The Early Bird

I feel like a really big nerd today!

Of course I already outed myself with yesterday's post, but still, that was mostly about Jeremy being a nerd.

Sometimes when I used to work at Target, I'd work the opening shift. You were supposed to get there at 8:30 or 8 :45 to get things ready for the store to open at 9:00am. The thing was though, any time I showed up for this early shift there were always people already in the parking lot waiting for the store to open, like 15-30 minutes before the store was going to open. And I used to think, "How lame! What's so important that you have to be at Target right when the doors open?"

So this morning, we got up and had breakfast with Jeremy before he left for school. (He made us craisin-lemon scones--I'm not sure what I did to deserve that, but they were delicious.) Then I got the boys dressed and was trying to decide what sort of interesting thing to do with them today. I went out and filled up the chickens' waterer. We decided it might be fun to go to the library, so I got online and searched the catalog for anything I might want to pick up for myself while we were there. While my mind was on the topics of books I remembered that today was September first and so this book was going to be released today:


It's the sequal to a great book Jeremy and I read together earlier this year. I checked on Borders.com to make sure it really was coming out today, then I printed out a coupon for 30% off. (Because--who doesn't love a good deal?) Then I got the boys in the car and tried to decide if we should go to the library first or the mall and bookstore. I decided mall-bookstore first because Jonas might be ready for a nap at the end of our outing, and it's never easy to do the "quick" in and out and right back in the carseat errands with an overtired baby. So we showed up at the mall. . .

It was closed!

I was sitting in the mall outside the bookstore gate for fifteen minutes waiting for it to open! After that whole long boring explanation of everything I did this morning the store was not open yet!

I felt like such a nerd waiting for the gates to open then going in and picking up my just-released that morning book and standing in line to check-out before the lady working there even had all three gates open.

I much prefer the anonymity of the crowd at the midnight-release parties like for the Harry Potter and Twilight books. Then I can look around and pretend like I'm only there for the food and everyone else there is way more of a nerd than I am. But in the end, maybe it was good there was no identity-hiding crowded midnight-release party. . . I'm really getting too old for those things anyway. (I need my sleep.)

I suppose I'll just have to come to terms with the fact that I am just as big a nerd as my husband.

Potato Peel Pie

Our selection for book club was a very non-traditional read. The whole book is made up of letters from one character to another. Therefore the storyline is not direct, you have to piece it together and fill in all the little blanks.

As the story develops the main character Juliette enters into correspondence with a group of people she's never met before--The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. Through her letters she forms relationships with these people, and eventually feels driven to further develop their relationships by meeting in person. Yet we still only hear the stories of their meetings and developing relationships through Juliette's letters to others.

It was a very unique read. It made me want to sit down and write a good old-fashioned letter to someone. Their anticipation they had in waiting at the mailbox every day for the chance a new letter may be there, is almost completely lost in our current society.

I think this is a tragedy, because I was able to experience a bit of this kind of letter-writing in my own life. While I was studying in Austria, Jeremy and I corresponded by e-mail, not the quick "I'm sending you a short e-mail just in case I don't see you first, or maybe I'll call you if I don't hear back from you before lunch" kind of e-mails, but the long thoughtful, carefully chosen words and stories e-mail more akin to traditional letters.

Our relationship deepened and matured through those letters in a way that I don't know would have happened if we had been living that summer in the same town sending (not-yet-available) text messages to each other all day. Because of this history, I could relate with the characters ability to develop friendships--and even love--simply through letters.

In Defense of Jacob Black

In glorious anticipation for the release of New Moon-the movie this fall, I feel a desire to publish my feelings in relation to the book and "my favorite gift" of New Moon: Jacob Black.

In the beginning I read Twilight. My dad had cut out an article for me from BYU Magazine on Stephenie Meyer (she's an alumnus), and interested in her story I waited a number of months until the book club kit became available at our library, and we read it for book club.

I loved it. (Lot's of people do--that doesn't make me weird or mean my literary tastes are unrefined)

Immediately I wanted to read New Moon, and Jeremy had a friend at school who said she'd let me borrow her copy. While I waited I got online and started looking around. I started seeing jewelry, t-shirts, message boards all proclaiming "Team Jacob!"

What?! I demanded. Jacob Black--the little kid?! How could she, why on earth would Bella go after someone other than Edward?

So, I did what any rational person afraid that their whole make-believe perfect world is about to crumble to the ground would do. . . I read Twilight again.

That way, I could ingrain in my mind all my feelings, all my experiences reading it, so if I hated everything that happened in the next book I could just go back to the first and pretend nothing ever happened past it.

But then, I began reading New Moon. And things began to make sense. Awful, horrible sense.

Edward was gone.

And then there was Jacob. Young, enthusiastic, perceptive, willing, Jacob. Completely different, from Edward, but completely right for Bella--in his own way. A different way. Not replacing Edward or Bella's love for him, but providing a different way to live, love and be happy.

My friend has said that Edward reminds her of her husband and that's one reason why she likes Edward over Jacob. She suggested that my husband is maybe more like Jacob, and that's why I like him. But that is not the case at all (I still love you Jen).

If there is any aspect of my personal life that is affecting why I like Jacob Black, it can only be the fact that I have loved more than once. The comparison between my friend's life and my own can still hold true because she married her high school sweetheart whom she met when she was 15 or 16, so it makes sense that for her there can only be one true love for Bella.

For myself, there was someone else, who was right for me in so many ways, whom I loved. And then I met Jeremy. And Jeremy is right for me in so many ways. And my life with Jeremy is totally different than my life would have been otherwise. But sometimes I still ache for him--the other love. Not ache to have him in my life, but ache for him, and for the pain I may have caused him, and mostly aching to know that he is happy that his life is as full as mine, and that my leaving didn't break him.

And that's how I feel about Jake.

Do I think Edward and Bella belong together? Of course! I wouldn't like the saga if I didn't think so. (And I wouldn't love New Moon, particularly what I consider to be the best part of the entire saga: when Bella And Edward reunite in Italy.)

But, do I love Jacob, and want life to compensate for what he looses with Bella? Yes.

That is why I proudly declare: I am Team Jacob.

Early Bird

Tired of reading the same books every night--I picked out something new for Owen and me to start reading.


A classic book written by E. B. White, called Charlotte's Web.



The story of a little girl, Fern, and a pig she calls "Wilbur."



It's perfect for an almost four-year-old boy. There's plenty of farm animals, a quick-moving storyline, and not too many pages between illustrations.

There just may be a life lesson or two tucked within the pages as well.



Here's Avery, Fern's brother, coming down for breakfast and realizing that Fern got a pig.

"Can I have a pig too, Pop?" asked Avery.

"No, I only distribute pigs to early risers," said Mr. Arable. "Fern was up at Daylight, trying to rid the world of injustice. As a result, she now has a pig. A small one, to be sure, but nevertheless a pig. It just shows what can happen if a person gets out of bed promptly."



Well, I'm now even more committed to my new summer goal of getting out of bed earlier in the morning.

I wonder what wonderful things will happen in my early summer mornings?!

Hungry for a Good Book?

Jeremy and I spent his last week of freedom, I mean vacation, reading a book together. What big nerds are we? No, we both grew up enjoying reading, and to tell the truth, we have enjoyed the last five nights together reading this book for the same price as one night at the movies, and we didn't have to get a babysitter (I know I'm not the only one out there with babysitter anxiety). Anyway on to the good stuff.

The story takes place in North America in the future. Society is organized under the Capitol which is located somewhere in the Rocky Mountains. The rest of the people are divided into districts 1-12. 75 years ago there was a rebellion where the districts revolted against the capitol. They were subdued and a 13th district that existed up until that time was utterly destroyed.

To remind the people of the Capitol's complete control over them, and to remind them of the consequences of their trying to revolt, the Capitol instituted the Hunger Games, a yearly televised event in which each district is required to send two youth, a boy and girl to represent their district in a survivor/gladiator-style fight to the death in which one victor remains.

The main character Katniss volunteers to go in the place of her younger sister whose name is drawn. The male tribute who ends up being selected is connected to Katniss in an interesting way. As their story develops you learn more about their past and wonder more about the future of their story.

This book is totally my style of fiction. I love dystopian novels. I definitely recommend it to anyone else with similar tastes. Here are a number of books that I also love that it reminded me of. If you liked any of these books I think you would enjoy The Hunger Games as well.

The Hunger Games shows some similar themes as Lord of the Flies. There is the survival aspect, and the youth warring with each other. Another similar theme was the idea of whether or not you can stay true to your self and dignity in a situation like this or if you allow yourself to be changed into something different entirely. In both novels you see characters that go both ways. This always relates to our own lives and how we choose to react to situations that we are placed in.

The similarity with Fahrenheit 451 is more of an undertone in The Hunger Games but seems like it will come out more in the next book. The idea of quiet rebellion and everyday people fighting in small ways to overcome oppression. I could feel this vibe through the whole book. You can tell that something is going to happen.

We didn't realise until the end that this book is one of a trilogy. (I know Mom, you hate all the trilogies.) But getting towards the end I was getting afraid that nothing was going to change--about the society, or the system, because what is the point of going through all of this story if nothing is going to change? I told Jeremy "That would make this only a horror story." But the rest of the story is yet to come.

Finally, It reminded me of my favorite book from 2008: The Host. The idea of what price is too great to pay for peace? Is it all that bad if people are being oppressed if the trade-off means they are living in a peaceful safe environment? Will people who feel oppressed ever stop desiring true freedom and finding little ways to fight back?

The Host also includes the "survival" aspect and love interests that are complicated within the crazy storyline. Call me a sap but I like a good love-interest in a story. I definitely know MY life would be more boring without my hubby in it. I may be sentimental but I like to see my fictional characters end up in a happy, stable, mutually appreciated, loving relationship.