I've been really enjoying this discussion and I'm sorry I missed the chat, but I deeply appreciate the recap! Here are some scattershot thoughts for how we manage tech in our family.
1. The shortest version of the strategy we use right now, which we say to our children frequently is, "Phones are tools for grownups, not toys for kids." Our children do not touch our phones unless given explicit permission. We don't have games or social media apps on them and we try to minimize our use of them in the sight of our children, except when we are using them as tools (to play audiobooks or music, to take photos, to navigate in a new city, etc)
2. We don't have iPads, Kindles, any video game systems, or a smart TV. Our older kids use iPads at school and we ask them to tell us about how they use them as part of our dinner conversation. We also talk to their teachers about tech in the classroom so we know what they're being exposed to.
3. Video games at friends' houses are not allowed. I tell the parents of their friends this when I drop them off, and our kids know it too.
4. We let our kids have access to media (which we differentiate from "tech") via other methods beyond phones and computers. Our kids have a small collection of music and books on tape/CD and a cheap boombox to play them on, so they can listen to music or stories without having to go through us/our phones. We listen to our local sports teams on the radio while we work in the yard together or drive. We watch movies together as a family, sometimes via streaming but also via DVDs from the library. Basically, we don't want to promote the idea that all access to the outside world comes via a phone or a computer.
5. One thing I would like us to improve on is using our tech as a tool to mitigate loneliness/build community. I wish we had more people over for dinner, I wish we knew more people whose approach to tech and community was closer to ours. Unfortunately, given our complete shunning of social media, it's hard to make those connections without it! But unmachining takes time, I suppose!
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Ruth Gaskovski
Amy, we have CD players on each floor of our house and also one in each of the kids' bedrooms. The kids use them all the time and it has been just wonderful -- they listen to music, books on CD (Narnia! Little House! History books!), stories (Jim Weiss! Adventures in Odyssey!) every day. Bonus: we bought all the CD players used, because the older ones are better-made than the new ones. Imagine my delight when my son carried a big one two miles home from the flea market because he so very much wanted one in his room!
I am handicapped, paralyzed on my right side, and can't very well handle books anymore, so I have to rely on my Kindle instead of paper. I don't feel compromised. It's quite handy to look up words, highlight passages, refer to notes, etc. Tech is not detrimental, per se.
Oh, agreed, Jesse. It can be a useful tool. The sense is rather: how can we make choices about tech so that it does not dehumanize us? Its power is great.
This is a great idea. I would love to have the audiobooks not rely on me… we do a lot of Bluetooth speaker so the device playing the book stays in the kitchen and I don’t have to worry about them accessing anything else, but then I’m constantly responsible for monitoring… do you have a favorite source for finding CD audiobooks?
We found most of ours in library sales (because they are getting rid of all CDs), thrift stores, homeschool sales, and ordered the Narnia series and Jim Weiss online. We had several portable CD players (that used to be so incredibly cool -like a walkman) from the thrift store and they worked perfectly for years.
Annelise, you should try the CD's! Even my 3.5-year-old can work a CD player. We borrow CD's from the library and we buy CD's for birthday and holiday gifts (I often put one in an Easter basket or a stocking, for example). Sometimes we will suggest them to relatives when they want to know what the kids might like for a gift, too. But we have also found great ones at library sales and yard sales -- for example, an entire, beautifully-narrated Narnia set.
P.S. The reality is that the CD's are more expensive than something like Audible. We just...do CD's anyway. If you keep an eye out at sales (and during online sales), you can build a CD library over time, the same way you build a home library of books, for not very much money at all.
“Our older kids use iPads at school and we ask them to tell us about how they use them as part of our dinner conversation.”
This is a great practice, and I’ve heard other parents do it as well (not just for tech but other things). It seems to not only help educate the kids, but strengthens their sense of connection with the parents and family.
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Peco, Ruth Gaskovski
Something I keep coming back to is Tsh Oxenreider's saying of "machine or tool"... is the tech serving as a machine - to replace a human function- or is it a tool - making something human easier. I think it's a tricky thing to discern. Interactions on Substack can make me more of a human when they give a chance to connect and encourage with like minded people I may not meet in my real life. They can be a tool. They can also be a machine when I use the adulation or information overload to numb out of my real life. But so much of this comes down to how we are using technology, and requires us to be brutally honest with ourselves. Like others above me have pointed out, this can look a variety of ways in different seasons. We aim for limited screen time but are not at all militant about it. I will gladly put on a Youtube video of off road trucks being towed out of sand if the alternative is me being so frustrated that i'm yelling because it's a long day, my husband has worked 14 hour days all week and I haven't slept in a month. I think sometimes the militant attitude about tech can feel superior or defeating (and I do not think that's what the FPR folks are getting at!) but I really think we need to look at this as an issue of addiction, and addiction always has a cause. What are the factors in a family, or an individual or a culture that make us so desperate for connection and dopamine that we're likely to fall easily into a tech addicted hole? The digital detox without curiosity about the function and purpose it's serving in our life and why we're so attached to it in the first place is bound to perpetuate a shame inducing spiral.
I observe in my children that they are not obsessed with screens though we're not super strict about limiting them. I hope that the approach of doing other things first leaves movies and screens as a last resort instead of being the go-to solution. There have been seasons when I have used a lot of screen time while very sick or with newborns barely staying afloat. I think what I would hate is for people to assume that it must be an all or nothing proposition. We have some rules - no access to tech in their hands (they don't have access to our phones or ipad) all the tech use is supervised, we carefully screen WHAT they watch, but not always how much. It seems that it may be similar to creating a healthy relationship with food - if a child is well nourished, given more good food than junk and has a healthy gut they tend to be pretty good at self limiting... I don't know. My kids are young. We haven't crossed the phone bridge yet, but we talk regularly about tech use and things like pornography, how you can't trust everything you see or read. I hope we're giving them a foundation of truth. And I'm trying to lead by example in taking consistent small steps to wean myself away from my own addictions.
All this to say: It's complicated. I'm trying. Shame is a terrible motivator and yet we have to take action in some small way and not give up.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Anneliese! Nodding my head all along your points. I hope that my strong words at times have not caused people to feel shame, I should be mindful to use language that acknowledges that it's complicated, we try our best, we fail along the way, but keep nevertheless keep the goal firmly in mind and heart. I think the need for parents to fall back on screens is a function of having less support around us. I was very fortunate to have my mother-in-law living with us, who could step in when needed. Also wanted to add that I really appreciate all your honest, thoughtful, and encouraging writing on your substack!
Thanks Ruth! I really like the saying, "stubborn about goals and flexible about methods" and absolutely agree that the lack of support is a primary reason for tech crutches, but it doesn't negate the need to keep being aware of habits. This article (shared via Leila Lawler at Like Mother Like Daughter) hits on some super insightful points about how few women are prepared for the self governance and autonomy of being a homemaker and mother. There's not a great rubric for understanding if you're succeeding or slacking or even heading in the right direction as so much of the fruit is not immediate. I don't think most women are prepared for the idea that staying at home with children is... really hard work. And I think this expectation that it should be influencer beautiful and magical leads to a ton of shame, which is why I'm pretty passionate about being truthful about difficulties AND working towards greater virtue : https://americanmind.org/salvo/the-mothers-gauntlet/?utm_source=pocket_saves
Yes, that is a very helpful saying to keep in mind. I think your point about fruit not being evidenced immediately is important. Motherhood takes immense amount of patience and perseverance, and that is why the goals are so important to keep in mind (even when the daily trials seem to be derailing us). Our oldest will be 18 within a couple of months and I can see how much of her upbringing did grow into her bones and is bearing fruit; but it indeed takes much hard work, trust, and prayer, along with trials and joys. Will take a look at the link as well :)
“…is the tech serving as a machine - to replace a human function- or is it a tool - making something human easier. I think it's a tricky thing to discern.”
Yes, I like this distinction too. One of my discerning questions is: Is technology a facilitator for my mind or my social life—by strengthening my thinking processes and relationships—or is it more of a mental prosthetic that takes over the natural functioning of my mind and my normal embodied social life—in which case it can be weakening?
Oh, I like that question. If the things I’m discussing online make me live my real life differently and effect change then I think they’re good… if they’re making me sound intelligent online while I ignore my children, then it would probably be better if I didn’t try to sound smart on the internet 🙃
My take on 5: “What are we to do if we live in a city and are not interested in agrarian life?” -- this is me; I deeply admire the ideal of rural living for those who are called to it, but I simply couldn’t do it. But if what we are drawn to is the “natural” human environment: it’s worth considering that cities in themselves are natural! We’re meant to live near those we work with and work near those we live with. To collaborate, to share resources, to rejoice and grieve together, to know our neighbors (because it’s hard to love those you don’t know).
When--because of historically almost unimaginable prosperity, which is in itself a good thing!--our environments grow beyond our control, it’s still worth forging these hyper-local and interpersonal connections and relationships. I think it can be done even online (at least, we’ve been doing it for going on 18 years at Dappled Things magazine). While the city is growing like crazy, you look around and ask: How can this thing we want to do be done on a *human* scale? That may mean, among other things, not scaling up as fast as the cultural pressures around you. But what if what grows slowly grows strong?
I also would not be able to fully enjoy rural living (I grew up with neighbours upstairs and downstairs and would simply feel lonely not surrounded by people) and I agree that "it’s still worth forging these hyper-local and interpersonal connections and relationships." This is harder to do in a very large city, but as living in suburbia for 15 years has taught us, it is possible to connect with others even when you are surrounded by concrete. We now live close to the country and I do find it much more enjoyable and it allows for a slower pace of life. It is also easier to resist cultural pressures, but with dedication and patience this is also possible to some degree within cities. Thanks for your reflections Katy :)
This really interests me. I grew up in NYC with a large extended Puerto Rican family. There's a vein of truth here (recovery of handiwork, conviviality and community-building, - and I don't think I know anyone who disagrees the amount of screentime children get is toxic; Haidt, Twenge, etc.)
But a lot of the examples given for culture recovery are highly culture-bound, regionally specific. I think that's what your discussion questions are getting at. New Yorkers don't do farm work or have campfires and porches; my friends are more interested in a night at a museum than a night reading plays; most ideas shared above would make me feel like I was LARPing. In my experience, it's mostly academics and ex-homeschoolers who find this kind of thing appealing. I share both dispositions (work adjacent to academy, was homeschooled) but honestly, most of my cousins, and the friends I've made in adulthood, absolutely would not take interest in an evening of singing round a campfire.
My greatest childhood memories include eating Fruit Loops and watching Mulan with my grandmother in her Brooklyn apartment after a sleepover. Junk food and screentime - both verboten, right? But she was animated by love. Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith. Perhaps what I am looking for is acknowledgement that we are trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition. I continue to watch the FPR project with interest, but at a remove, because of this.
Thanks for adding your reflections Liz! I think you are spot on here:
" Perhaps what I am looking for is acknowledgement that we are trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition."
I think that a "return" must address exactly what you bring up here. I grew up in a city (albeit a very pedestrian, medieval, and traditional one), and I enjoy museums, cafes, strolling along city streets, sitting on park benches etc. none of which might fall in the typical vein of community building. Yet I feel that these practices connect me to my hometown (when I get a chance to visit) and the people around me.
In future writings, my husband and I will make an effort to explore this direction more fully, because I agree with you that solutions will look different depending on our upbringing, cultural background, and current living circumstance. Thanks again for your thoughts:)
There's a vein of misogyny here that also troubles me - I was listening to some of the lectures on tech resistance and my goodness, felt I had to say something.
One of the people I admire most in the world is a scientist with a terminally ill husband. You can imagine how urgent her work seems to her, partly because she is main breadwinner (and needs to be so he has healthcare) and partly because she understands that research is his best hope and for those like him. They have no local family support. In COVID lockdown, her son watched a lot of Youtube videos - she admitted this to me and told me she did not know what alternatives she had. Well, we know the alternative was no healthcare for her husband, losing their home, and being unable to care for her son - they have no nearby family support as they are also immigrants. She worked herself to the bone because of her great great love for her husband and her son. I have met the child myself. He is a bright, intelligent, interesting, funny child. He is not a tech zombie and honestly you would not ever guess he spent formative years watching Cocomelon.
I admire the love in her and the love that animates her. I was really surprised by the histrionic framing of "tech resistance" as something that can be accessed by everyone. The references to Wendell Berry as if he was an authoritative source on the good, true, and beautiful... I hope that FPR speakers and those like them understand that if they want to win over a skeptical, modern, city-dwelling crowd, they are going to need to come up with solutions that include this woman and her family.
I think getting back to focus on what you mentioned in your earlier comment would be most helpful in this regard: "trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition. "
Liz, thank you for sharing your friend's story. I think no one would argue that your friend is a wonderful mother and wife, and I believe I can say with confidence that absolutely no one at FPR would say differently.
Your comment is a good reminder that this is why we need to be very clear that, when we talk about resistance, it's not "technology" or all tools/digital devices in general that we mean—of course not—but the kind of machine thinking that excludes and would like to transcend and replace the human. And each of us is called on to seek wisdom and courage within our own context, and to be generous (and generous-minded) with each other.
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Ruth Gaskovski
Liz, I'm so sorry that you felt excluded or off-put; there's actually a lot of writing out there (including at the FPR site) about applying good principles to our ordinary lives and how that looks so different in different situations. A person can only say so much in one talk and is of course speaking on a specific subject to a specific audience, but there's a lot of talk out there, too, about how we can take little steps towards humanizing our lives more. I think most parents understand that these times arrive when using something like TV can be a boon. You might find some things that explore this over at Hearth & Field (I try to address this perfectionism some in my recent piece here: https://hearthandfield.com/seven-suggestions-for-making-the-most-of-apple-season-even-if-you-arent-feeling-very-crunchy/) but I think, honestly, that most FPR types understand this, too. We're just often talking about ideals so we can think about how we can seek to approach them, if not achieve them, you know? But the practical things are so important, as is the understanding and generosity towards our various situations, challenges, troubles, talents, and needs.
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Peco, Ruth Gaskovski
Liz, have you encountered the work of Susannah (Black) Roberts? She's a wonderful writer who's also a New Yorker and has been a friend of the Front Porch Republic folks as well (https://www.frontporchrepublic.com/author/susannah-black/). She's a joyful cosmopolitan who often writes eloquently on the beauty of cities.
Truly, every single writer that I am vaguely familiar with at and around FPR (including Wendell Berry!) would agree that finding our way out from a cold modernity is going to look different—indeed, *should* look different!—depending on our region and gifts and responsibilities, etc. I think one thing folks are trying to give when telling one's own story is exactly that—to demonstrate the various ways of community, love, and belonging that are possible, that the cold isolation that so many of us are handed is not the only possibility. (And the sort of legalistic mind that would actually see Fruit Loops and a film watched with a loved one as a problem is exactly the sort of thing we should guard against and indeed, make us go back to first principles!) And we always need more folks' stories and ideas!
I think you're exactly right, that everything has to be rooted in love, but also that we need to begin where we are, and that we each have been given a variety of gifts, and that's going to look differently depending on where we are. Indeed, I think one thing that we can be clear on is that being grateful for one's own region ought not take away from someone else's—instead, they ought to strengthen each other!
For my part, the love my city friends have for their city is beautiful and good, and the love my farmer friends have for their farm is also beautiful and good; neither takes away from the other. There's something certainly amiss if we ever feel threatened by the love and care someone else is trying to live out in one's own context and home.
As a city-bred person from a large extended family, I sympathize with these thoughts.
There are many beautiful cities, and often what detracts from them are the very things you mentioned—the isolation and alienation (and I would add noisy disrespectful behavior).
I am with Wendell and Paul Kingsnorth. In Paul's analogy of the 3 legged stool -- People, Place, and Prayer -- the stool won't stand without all 3 legs. I'm hearing many people saying they'd like to leave off Place because agrarianism isn't realistic or isn't important or something like that. The problem that I see with de-emphasizing Place is that it is ultimately impossible to care for people without connection to the more than human; the soil, the water, the people who manufacture our junk, the insects and so on. People cannot exist and cannot experience health or flourishing for very long if these other areas fail. The fact that some people have grown up in cities and like them and have done well in them doesn't negate the fact that cities by definition exploit other places and other people in order to exist and concentrate resources. We now have an unprecedented percentage of the globe living in cities and we are likely to suffer horribly as this becomes impossible to sustain (economy, energy, agricultural systems all precarious). I grew up in a suburban area and in a church environment that was heavy on People and Prayer but not Place at all. It seems to me that this tends to breed a complacent hubris, a lack of healthy limits. There were many kind and genuine folks in our church genuinely trying to "fight worldliness" with varying success. And of course we all know someone who is so obsessed with Place in an arrogant way that neglects People and maybe Prayer, too... imagine the self-righteous organic goat farmer who despises his country neighbors. Nevertheless, deep authentic connection to place helps us to see and feel that we must limit ourselves in order to love our neighbor and to love God. In the city or suburbs one is removed from all the destruction and pollution that our "normal" lifestyles cause. We may be very convivial with our immediate neighbor but we are disconnected to where most everything we use, eat, wear, etc comes from so we are unable to consider some of those who we impact the most. One can begin to believe it is OK to buy unnecessary gadgets as long as we don't feel they are dehumanizing us, without thinking about how they are harming enslaved people, polluting African rivers, etc. Life on the farm, on the ocean, or in the woods helps to humble us.
Imagine the owners of large slave plantations discussing whether or not it was important to have people over for dinner more, to dance and converse, or whether it was addictive to smoke tobacco. These might be good considerations but the fact that they are wealthy and comfortably living off the labor of others is a much larger moral consideration! Sorry to sound ornery but I have been thinking this ever since the coffeehouse.
“It seems to me that this tends to breed a complacent hubris, a lack of healthy limits.”
This reminds me of a statistic that if everyone in the world lived like residents of the US, then we would need 4.9 Earths in order to satisfy the global need for resources in a year (or, for comparison, we would need 3 earths to live like Germany and 1.1 earths to live like Indonesia). See here:
Yes, this is one way to become aware of our limits. But it is such a machine mediated way of seeing.... global statistics that are tabulated by someone (who? and with what assumptions?) which can be used to promote different ideological positions. I can hear Maelin using this data to support her belief in the ethics and importance of population control! Or to argue for veganism, or electric cars.
I really enjoyed your and Ruth's most recent piece. I believe the part about the given and the chosen applies to Place, too. As you made clear, we are all operating in less than optimal circumstances; this is not about blaming people for their cultural inheritance any more than it is about laying guilt on those for whom divorce or distance from family is a necessity. But living in a way that connects us to the "given" landscape, rather than the man-made "chosen" has its machine-defying benefits. We may more naturally and intuitively sense our limits, our potential for harm, and the gift of God's provision. This is analogous to the way you described relational dynamics having all-around benefits inherent in the limits they impose on our individualism, rubbing off the rough edges and taking our concern beyond self interest.
I bring this up not to make people feel bad about where they are but because some of us have a sense that in spite of all the suggestions that have already been discussed we are still tottering on a 2 legged stool, or seeing our children do so. This may be all we have to work with, and God takes that into account no doubt.
An excellent resource that I'd like to share is Chris Smaje's work: https://chrissmaje.com/blog/ and his two books, A Small Farm Future, and Saying No to a Farm Free Future. He is tackling the ecomodern fantasies about urban life being more efficient, about hyper-industrial foods like vat fermented vegan protein. His recent work in refuting George Monbiot's book Regenesis is very interesting to read alongside your Exogenesis. Basically, Lantua city is an idea that will never happen but our belief in it and attempt to create it may cause a great deal of harm.
Another is Paul Kingsnorth's friend Dougald Hine: https://dougald.substack.com/. He is a great example of how the concerns that your readers share are not limited to the politically right leaning. I think there has been a very significant movement from the left since at least the 1970s and many of them are now feeling like the current left no longer fits. (In fact, they have such a thorough critique of the Machine that it makes some of the FPR people seem a little late to the conversation, like they are starting from scratch to craft a conservative version rather than just joining the existing movement.) Dougald is promoting a class from his 'School Called Home' on 'The Work of Regrowing a Living Culture'. He is also very focused on the relational aspects of this and as a former environmental activist type has decided to stop talking about climate change because it is divisive and because it misses the bigger issues, as explained in his book At Work in The Ruins. I started reading him this summer and have found everything very worthwhile.
Thanks for these links and thoughts, Clara. I really like your application of the “given” to Place. In practice, of course, I think people often just flee to the places that look prosperous, even if their own place isn’t altogether terrible. This happened in my own family, where their village—a place where people had lived for at least 500 years, and possibly a thousand—emptied out in a couple of decades during the 1960s and 70s when they all immigrated to the West. It’s hard to see prosperity elsewhere, to see people with luxuries, and to not feel left behind.
The 4.9 earths might or might not be an accurate statistic, but stats aside, just looking at our relative wealth, compared to less developed countries, or to life in the past, is astonishing. I periodically reflect on the fact that, while my own home and possessions are somewhat more modest than my immediate neighbors, we all nevertheless live with a level of luxury and convenience that even the Roman emperors would have envied. The amount-of-stuff-per-person is undoubtedly higher now than in the past; and I’ve even seen various stats (sorry for all the stats!) that, even with the population set to decline through the latter half of this century, the overall amount of stuff being used will continue to increase, as people strive for a “higher standard” of living.
As for Maelin, she learned better in the end. Perhaps I will too. :)
When I first stumbled across social media back in 2010, I was a new mother and was just feeling alone in the sleepless blue that is newborn life. It was nice to make connections with others albeit online, and it helped me feel less alone during that particular time. Also, I think being an introvert, it helped me feel connected.
Fast forward to the past few years and I had hit a point where social media made me feel awful. It did make me feel lonely and it seemed that everyone was in cliques and I felt like I was seeing the underbelly of social media. I didn’t like it.
I’ve made a point to cut the time I spend on both Instagram and Substack. I try and put my phone down as much as possible and I am trying to be more in my real life. I joined a Bible study this autumn and it has been life giving and I am enjoying real life conversations.
I think the difference of online /offline becomes evident when we experience the real, like you are in your Bible study. Substack is the first platform where I have engaged, but I find that I have to draw a line as well (which is why I rarely venture onto Notes). My youngest commented recently that the strange thing about online conversations is that you can simply close the laptop and they are all gone, and you could just leave it closed. He reminded me that time spent with him, the rest of my family, and friends should always take precedence. Glad that he already gets this.
I’m just going to riff here and see what comes of it.
I think many of the problems of the internet come from the way that it puts us to sleep and makes us (intellectually, spiritually, morally) lazy and pessimistic. The internet today implicitly offers a set of assumptions and presuppositions, if not a worldview, which too many seemingly accept. ‘It’s just the way things are’. Says who?
You have to be an influencer to create, you have to monetise, you can’t act differently, everyone is becoming more divided. And on an on. Blanket statements that are affirmed by the echo chamber nature of the very system itself. But like money it is on some level only true and only real because we have bought into this.
On some level the kids these days are stupid(or whatever) because we *believe* they are. The old people are facebook-addled ideologues because we *believe* they are. Dopamine reward systems being hijacked is the problem because we believe it is. These are articles of faith. Assumptions. There are counter examples.
In a post truth, fake news world their are ‘facts’ to prove any thesis. So why do we default to the most doom and gloom one? Could it be because there is a secret payoff in despair and pessimism? Is it because this makes less demands than hope and optimism which always carries the implication of pulling up your sleeves and actually doing something, actually attempting something?
My answer to everything is to essentially reject the form of the question asked (are you a this or are you a that?) and to bring about what I want to see in the world (whether online or offline) in the spirit of hope.
I don’t see an interesting collective for writers- I’ll start one. There aren’t any good communities for writers online any more- I’ll make one. And on and on. Whether any of this amounts to anything is in God’s hands but when you try and build something an awful lot of angst magically vanishes. The form of social media makes you see everything top down, of a structure collapsing inwards. Whereas true creativity and community is something that emanates outwards. A light.
So the answer for me, as simplistic as it may sounds is to simply be a light, to be the person that *you need* but to be that person *for others*
Thanks for adding your reflections Thomas! I concur with you on this "bring about what I want to see in the world (whether online or offline) in the spirit of hope." This mindset has also prompted me to bring to life a variety of programs and groups over the years, simply because they did not exist and I wanted to be part of one. It is powerful for children to witness that one can recognize a need, come up with an idea, act on it, and literally witness words changed into actions. While it is helpful to identify problems, lingering on them too long has a dampening effect and colours our perception, and can make us feel helpless. Thus, "being the light" is the most concrete way to move forward. Thanks again for your thoughts :)
I love your last lines, Thomas—they may sound simplistic, and yet they are true! Certain people have been such a gift in my own life partly because they wanted to serve others in the way they wished they could have been served, and I've acted similarly. E.g.—being super lonely during my first year especially as a young mother makes me try to be a friend to others in the way that I yearned for but didn't have.
One problem with the internet is the metrics. It focuses us on results and numbers.
But the flip side is that the internet also lets us do amazing shit. I could start a TV channel tomorrow with my phone.
I’ve published a blog for 15 years. I’ve pumped out a wide variety of essays, poetry and drawings. Is any of it great? Most likely not - only 6 non family members have subscribed (pre substack).
But the doing is in itself enriching, even uplifting.
I’m with you. There are structural issues out there, but there are also powerful catalysts out there. We should bury our heads to ignore the problems, but we can’t let our awareness of such issues paralyze us from doing the work.
The Gita says it best when it reminds us that the privilege is to strive, success is not our problem.
Last sentence is exactly it. Do what you know you can and what you know needs to be done and can be done by you, and simply don’t worry about the rest.
10) When I think of anti-machine behavior that can truly prompt others to reexamine their own technological use, my mind goes to the personal stuff. Being the only friend one has who mails them hand written, thoughtful letters is anti-machine. Those around you may notice this, realize how nice it is and follow your lead. Putting my phone away and building a bench for our prayer garden from left-over lumber is anti-machine behavior. My wife and children and maybe grandchildren will actually be able to point to something I made by hand because wasn't distracted by digital technology. Maybe they too will want to build something. Maybe they will put away the tech and do it. Growing a garden is anti-machine and can have a big impact on your neighbor when you share your home grown food with them and they realize it tastes way better than what they buy at Walmart.
We had three kids in three years, my husband was/is traveling half the month for work, and we didn’t have a lot of family or community support (at the time). So I can safely say we’ve never desired to be completely tech free. However, really strong boundaries helped us navigate the early years and tech. The kids were only allowed to watch tv on the physical tv that sits in the family room where I can always see it (no computer/iPad/phone etc.). The tv was only allowed on at certain times of day (when I was making dinner or nursing a baby down while my husband was gone) and we rotated through the same 10-15 approved toddler shows. Any whining or fighting about the tv resulted in swift loss of tv time. I found these boundaries worked really well for our kids while also giving me much needed breaks!! Now that our kids are “older” (7,5,4,1) and life is generally more manageable for me, we have no tv time during the school week & we get DVDs from the library for family movie nights on the weekends. My kids made the transition from tv shows during the week as toddlers to no tv except weekend movies really easily so that is my encouragement to anyone who is worried some toddler tv time is going to turn their kids into maniacs! 😅
This is great to hear, thank you for sharing! I currently have a 4, 2, and 6 month old and use the tv exactly as you mentioned you did in the early years. Life is absolutely hectic most of the time right now! I hope to one day transition to just during the weekends so I'm thankful to hear this worked for you.
Thanks for opening this thread! With the caveat that I have only read a portion of the above so far (will read in full throughout the weekend), I look forward to the conversation in the comments and I hope it stays lively for quite some time!
I was disappointed to miss the FPR Conference and last week's online gathering, but I missed them due to a) coaching local youth soccer and b) our downtown Fall Festival, respectively. It was a good reminder to embrace doing the things of local community that we talk about and about which we are all so passionate!
One of these days, there will be a localism gathering right here in Stamford, Texas, for all of you and more!
James, you were doing what we are talking about and hope that you can still add some of your reflections here:) I noted to Peco yesterday that for every time I type the word "embodied" I should go and rake leaves, or bake bread, or pet the chickens. On this note I guess I earned myself another hands-on task...so I am off to make dinner:)
Regarding the loneliness caused by social media and solutions to it, I've found (beyond the obvious like cutting it—along with news and most television—from my life) that it has been helpful to pursue relationships with younger people. I'm only in my 20s, but developing friendships with teenagers in my congregation is helpful for both them and myself. My wife and I try to make our house a hangout spot for friends, coworkers, church members, etc. in an effort to be a place where community can happen. We're lucky to have a vibrant culture of this kind of behavior in our church and many others are doing the same.
Regarding the first question, I've found Ellul's analysis to be helpful. Humans have always sought progress and technology ever since the plow and the axe, but I do think something fundamental has changed since the industrial revolution: broadly, as a society, we see technology and progress as both inevitable and inherently good. I think it is helpful to slow down and think critically about what technology or media or any other tools I bring into my life, and ask questions about it. Often I find myself deciding I'd rather not have it.
Thanks for adding your thoughts Wayne! Making "an effort to be a place where community can happen" is certainly one of the most effective ways of connecting. It is a practice I have followed for more than a decade with regard to building a homeschooling community. Set the table and they will come....
“My wife and I try to make our house a hangout spot for friends, coworkers, church members, etc. in an effort to be a place where community can happen.”
I agree with Ruth—this is a great way for connecting. I know people in a couple of households who have done this, and one thing I’ve noticed is that it seems to work better when the hosts are naturally more sociable and extroverted. Introverts can seem to struggle more and find it draining. I recall one couple where the husband was more extroverted, and the wife was more introverted, so he always ended up energized by these events, whereas she ended up a bit exhausted.
That's interesting. I'm fairly introverted (and un-sociable, lol), but have a high capacity for draining activities; my wife is extroverted, but I tend to overexert the two of us. It's a learning curve for sure—I struggle with empathy and understanding what our neighbors and friends need whereas my wife excels, and we keep struggling to find ways of serving that fit.
I am continually inspired by others who fight for similar values in other contexts. I would count you and Ruth in that category.
Thanks Wayne:) We have been working to find this balance over the last twenty years and we have certainly learned how to accommodate each other's limits. One rule we do have is the "one event per day" maximum, even during busy holiday seasons when one is tempted to fill the days.
One challenge of the modern world is that it's so often more difficult to see our neighbor—and we can get distracted by what someone says on a website (and it's easier to take offense or misunderstand what's not communicated in person), which then takes away from our duties to those entrusted to our care. And it's not merely digital devices but also the built environment that isolates us: so many apartments, suburban strips, etc., are built to isolate—not to be homes, not to be gathering spaces, not to be places of beauty, not to be neighborly.
To demonstrate another way of living, to un-Machine, means to see anew our neighbor. We've been dealing with division—between ourselves and God, and between ourselves and each other, and between ourselves and all of creation—ever since the Fall, and it's when we recover seeing all of creation and each other as gift, as given, that we can start to recover that lost communion.
I have these words by St. Ephrem of Syria on my mind today:
“One person falls sick—and so another can visit and help him;
one person starves—and so another can provide him with food and give him life; ...
6) I think solutions seem to focus on traditional style or Amish-style living because on some level we all have to admit the Amish are doing something right. I do think there are solutions for others, but it will take effort. I think finding time to spend with others, and even alone, with no technology can be done anywhere. People in cities can still get together for dinner together and decide to put their phones in another room. Or leave them in one persons apartment while you go out and explore the city together. City for can join book clubs, or go to trivia nights or sporting events or concerts or anything or take a walk in the park without their phones. They can pick up a tangible cook book and work through a recipe without their phones. It may look like living in a city back in the 1970's, but it's possible.
4) For how to not sound like a pessimist, find ways to harp on and encourage the good things that come from refraining from digital tech. We cannot just be all negative. We can talk about how much better are relationships are. How much more fun we have with our families when not distracted by technology and point our the hope that these good things are available for everyone. These are benefits everyone can get. We have to find ways to express the hope we have found when we resist.
"However, I think complete shielding can backfire, because screens can then turn into the forbidden fruit."
Yep, we've seen that with our kids and relaxed our limits some, but have just tried to direct them toward slightly better shows and computer games (we don't let them have computer time until they're 5 and just in small doses.) Computer games are a very powerful motivator for our oldest and definitely better use of her brain than just passively watching a show. Tech is a tool and like any other can be used for good or for ill. We choose to try to use it for good while engaging our kids in plenty more "human" time than screen time.
And Dixie, thanks for asking the question for the rest of us introverts. Tech has been a very beneficial way for me to still engage with people when my energy is so low (my little kids wear me out) that I can't make it out somewhere in person. Is it as good as in person? No. But is it better than no interaction with friends? YES.
I think the emphasis on spending "human" time helps to direct attention to reality. Video games are a tricky business, especially for teens who engage in games that are potent dopamine kicks that are highly addictive especially for boys (however, there are games that use more story-based algorithms that are less problematic). Thanks for adding your thoughts Abigail:)
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Ruth Gaskovski
That is true. I have struggled with that in the past (looking at you, Civ 6!) and found that engaging with real people and having good community does lessen the draw of video games. It makes it easier for me to enjoy them in their proper place then.
Nov 3, 2023·edited Nov 3, 2023Liked by Peco, Ruth Gaskovski
I really liked Tessa's reply about how old-fashioned types of gatherings provide space for the introverted and the extroverted. Plus, those quiet one-on-one meetings on the porch...we do need those, and they can be hard to get.
I also think that exploring the restorative powers of silence and solitude can do a lot for introverts who wish to "unmachine," and perhaps do some good for extroverts, too. Participating in social contexts is important, but just as powerful is opening up tech-free silence in ways that are nourishing for the individual. Hikes alone on a windy day; reading late at night by the fire; doing watercolors or journaling or cooking while sipping a glass of wine while occasionally glancing contentedly through the window at the kids playing outside.
I've been really enjoying this discussion and I'm sorry I missed the chat, but I deeply appreciate the recap! Here are some scattershot thoughts for how we manage tech in our family.
1. The shortest version of the strategy we use right now, which we say to our children frequently is, "Phones are tools for grownups, not toys for kids." Our children do not touch our phones unless given explicit permission. We don't have games or social media apps on them and we try to minimize our use of them in the sight of our children, except when we are using them as tools (to play audiobooks or music, to take photos, to navigate in a new city, etc)
2. We don't have iPads, Kindles, any video game systems, or a smart TV. Our older kids use iPads at school and we ask them to tell us about how they use them as part of our dinner conversation. We also talk to their teachers about tech in the classroom so we know what they're being exposed to.
3. Video games at friends' houses are not allowed. I tell the parents of their friends this when I drop them off, and our kids know it too.
4. We let our kids have access to media (which we differentiate from "tech") via other methods beyond phones and computers. Our kids have a small collection of music and books on tape/CD and a cheap boombox to play them on, so they can listen to music or stories without having to go through us/our phones. We listen to our local sports teams on the radio while we work in the yard together or drive. We watch movies together as a family, sometimes via streaming but also via DVDs from the library. Basically, we don't want to promote the idea that all access to the outside world comes via a phone or a computer.
5. One thing I would like us to improve on is using our tech as a tool to mitigate loneliness/build community. I wish we had more people over for dinner, I wish we knew more people whose approach to tech and community was closer to ours. Unfortunately, given our complete shunning of social media, it's hard to make those connections without it! But unmachining takes time, I suppose!
Amy, we have CD players on each floor of our house and also one in each of the kids' bedrooms. The kids use them all the time and it has been just wonderful -- they listen to music, books on CD (Narnia! Little House! History books!), stories (Jim Weiss! Adventures in Odyssey!) every day. Bonus: we bought all the CD players used, because the older ones are better-made than the new ones. Imagine my delight when my son carried a big one two miles home from the flea market because he so very much wanted one in his room!
I am handicapped, paralyzed on my right side, and can't very well handle books anymore, so I have to rely on my Kindle instead of paper. I don't feel compromised. It's quite handy to look up words, highlight passages, refer to notes, etc. Tech is not detrimental, per se.
Oh, agreed, Jesse. It can be a useful tool. The sense is rather: how can we make choices about tech so that it does not dehumanize us? Its power is great.
This is a great idea. I would love to have the audiobooks not rely on me… we do a lot of Bluetooth speaker so the device playing the book stays in the kitchen and I don’t have to worry about them accessing anything else, but then I’m constantly responsible for monitoring… do you have a favorite source for finding CD audiobooks?
We found most of ours in library sales (because they are getting rid of all CDs), thrift stores, homeschool sales, and ordered the Narnia series and Jim Weiss online. We had several portable CD players (that used to be so incredibly cool -like a walkman) from the thrift store and they worked perfectly for years.
Annelise, you should try the CD's! Even my 3.5-year-old can work a CD player. We borrow CD's from the library and we buy CD's for birthday and holiday gifts (I often put one in an Easter basket or a stocking, for example). Sometimes we will suggest them to relatives when they want to know what the kids might like for a gift, too. But we have also found great ones at library sales and yard sales -- for example, an entire, beautifully-narrated Narnia set.
P.S. The reality is that the CD's are more expensive than something like Audible. We just...do CD's anyway. If you keep an eye out at sales (and during online sales), you can build a CD library over time, the same way you build a home library of books, for not very much money at all.
“Our older kids use iPads at school and we ask them to tell us about how they use them as part of our dinner conversation.”
This is a great practice, and I’ve heard other parents do it as well (not just for tech but other things). It seems to not only help educate the kids, but strengthens their sense of connection with the parents and family.
Something I keep coming back to is Tsh Oxenreider's saying of "machine or tool"... is the tech serving as a machine - to replace a human function- or is it a tool - making something human easier. I think it's a tricky thing to discern. Interactions on Substack can make me more of a human when they give a chance to connect and encourage with like minded people I may not meet in my real life. They can be a tool. They can also be a machine when I use the adulation or information overload to numb out of my real life. But so much of this comes down to how we are using technology, and requires us to be brutally honest with ourselves. Like others above me have pointed out, this can look a variety of ways in different seasons. We aim for limited screen time but are not at all militant about it. I will gladly put on a Youtube video of off road trucks being towed out of sand if the alternative is me being so frustrated that i'm yelling because it's a long day, my husband has worked 14 hour days all week and I haven't slept in a month. I think sometimes the militant attitude about tech can feel superior or defeating (and I do not think that's what the FPR folks are getting at!) but I really think we need to look at this as an issue of addiction, and addiction always has a cause. What are the factors in a family, or an individual or a culture that make us so desperate for connection and dopamine that we're likely to fall easily into a tech addicted hole? The digital detox without curiosity about the function and purpose it's serving in our life and why we're so attached to it in the first place is bound to perpetuate a shame inducing spiral.
I observe in my children that they are not obsessed with screens though we're not super strict about limiting them. I hope that the approach of doing other things first leaves movies and screens as a last resort instead of being the go-to solution. There have been seasons when I have used a lot of screen time while very sick or with newborns barely staying afloat. I think what I would hate is for people to assume that it must be an all or nothing proposition. We have some rules - no access to tech in their hands (they don't have access to our phones or ipad) all the tech use is supervised, we carefully screen WHAT they watch, but not always how much. It seems that it may be similar to creating a healthy relationship with food - if a child is well nourished, given more good food than junk and has a healthy gut they tend to be pretty good at self limiting... I don't know. My kids are young. We haven't crossed the phone bridge yet, but we talk regularly about tech use and things like pornography, how you can't trust everything you see or read. I hope we're giving them a foundation of truth. And I'm trying to lead by example in taking consistent small steps to wean myself away from my own addictions.
All this to say: It's complicated. I'm trying. Shame is a terrible motivator and yet we have to take action in some small way and not give up.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Anneliese! Nodding my head all along your points. I hope that my strong words at times have not caused people to feel shame, I should be mindful to use language that acknowledges that it's complicated, we try our best, we fail along the way, but keep nevertheless keep the goal firmly in mind and heart. I think the need for parents to fall back on screens is a function of having less support around us. I was very fortunate to have my mother-in-law living with us, who could step in when needed. Also wanted to add that I really appreciate all your honest, thoughtful, and encouraging writing on your substack!
Thanks Ruth! I really like the saying, "stubborn about goals and flexible about methods" and absolutely agree that the lack of support is a primary reason for tech crutches, but it doesn't negate the need to keep being aware of habits. This article (shared via Leila Lawler at Like Mother Like Daughter) hits on some super insightful points about how few women are prepared for the self governance and autonomy of being a homemaker and mother. There's not a great rubric for understanding if you're succeeding or slacking or even heading in the right direction as so much of the fruit is not immediate. I don't think most women are prepared for the idea that staying at home with children is... really hard work. And I think this expectation that it should be influencer beautiful and magical leads to a ton of shame, which is why I'm pretty passionate about being truthful about difficulties AND working towards greater virtue : https://americanmind.org/salvo/the-mothers-gauntlet/?utm_source=pocket_saves
Yes, that is a very helpful saying to keep in mind. I think your point about fruit not being evidenced immediately is important. Motherhood takes immense amount of patience and perseverance, and that is why the goals are so important to keep in mind (even when the daily trials seem to be derailing us). Our oldest will be 18 within a couple of months and I can see how much of her upbringing did grow into her bones and is bearing fruit; but it indeed takes much hard work, trust, and prayer, along with trials and joys. Will take a look at the link as well :)
“…is the tech serving as a machine - to replace a human function- or is it a tool - making something human easier. I think it's a tricky thing to discern.”
Yes, I like this distinction too. One of my discerning questions is: Is technology a facilitator for my mind or my social life—by strengthening my thinking processes and relationships—or is it more of a mental prosthetic that takes over the natural functioning of my mind and my normal embodied social life—in which case it can be weakening?
Oh, I like that question. If the things I’m discussing online make me live my real life differently and effect change then I think they’re good… if they’re making me sound intelligent online while I ignore my children, then it would probably be better if I didn’t try to sound smart on the internet 🙃
My take on 5: “What are we to do if we live in a city and are not interested in agrarian life?” -- this is me; I deeply admire the ideal of rural living for those who are called to it, but I simply couldn’t do it. But if what we are drawn to is the “natural” human environment: it’s worth considering that cities in themselves are natural! We’re meant to live near those we work with and work near those we live with. To collaborate, to share resources, to rejoice and grieve together, to know our neighbors (because it’s hard to love those you don’t know).
When--because of historically almost unimaginable prosperity, which is in itself a good thing!--our environments grow beyond our control, it’s still worth forging these hyper-local and interpersonal connections and relationships. I think it can be done even online (at least, we’ve been doing it for going on 18 years at Dappled Things magazine). While the city is growing like crazy, you look around and ask: How can this thing we want to do be done on a *human* scale? That may mean, among other things, not scaling up as fast as the cultural pressures around you. But what if what grows slowly grows strong?
I also would not be able to fully enjoy rural living (I grew up with neighbours upstairs and downstairs and would simply feel lonely not surrounded by people) and I agree that "it’s still worth forging these hyper-local and interpersonal connections and relationships." This is harder to do in a very large city, but as living in suburbia for 15 years has taught us, it is possible to connect with others even when you are surrounded by concrete. We now live close to the country and I do find it much more enjoyable and it allows for a slower pace of life. It is also easier to resist cultural pressures, but with dedication and patience this is also possible to some degree within cities. Thanks for your reflections Katy :)
This really interests me. I grew up in NYC with a large extended Puerto Rican family. There's a vein of truth here (recovery of handiwork, conviviality and community-building, - and I don't think I know anyone who disagrees the amount of screentime children get is toxic; Haidt, Twenge, etc.)
But a lot of the examples given for culture recovery are highly culture-bound, regionally specific. I think that's what your discussion questions are getting at. New Yorkers don't do farm work or have campfires and porches; my friends are more interested in a night at a museum than a night reading plays; most ideas shared above would make me feel like I was LARPing. In my experience, it's mostly academics and ex-homeschoolers who find this kind of thing appealing. I share both dispositions (work adjacent to academy, was homeschooled) but honestly, most of my cousins, and the friends I've made in adulthood, absolutely would not take interest in an evening of singing round a campfire.
My greatest childhood memories include eating Fruit Loops and watching Mulan with my grandmother in her Brooklyn apartment after a sleepover. Junk food and screentime - both verboten, right? But she was animated by love. Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith. Perhaps what I am looking for is acknowledgement that we are trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition. I continue to watch the FPR project with interest, but at a remove, because of this.
Thanks for adding your reflections Liz! I think you are spot on here:
" Perhaps what I am looking for is acknowledgement that we are trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition."
I think that a "return" must address exactly what you bring up here. I grew up in a city (albeit a very pedestrian, medieval, and traditional one), and I enjoy museums, cafes, strolling along city streets, sitting on park benches etc. none of which might fall in the typical vein of community building. Yet I feel that these practices connect me to my hometown (when I get a chance to visit) and the people around me.
In future writings, my husband and I will make an effort to explore this direction more fully, because I agree with you that solutions will look different depending on our upbringing, cultural background, and current living circumstance. Thanks again for your thoughts:)
There's a vein of misogyny here that also troubles me - I was listening to some of the lectures on tech resistance and my goodness, felt I had to say something.
One of the people I admire most in the world is a scientist with a terminally ill husband. You can imagine how urgent her work seems to her, partly because she is main breadwinner (and needs to be so he has healthcare) and partly because she understands that research is his best hope and for those like him. They have no local family support. In COVID lockdown, her son watched a lot of Youtube videos - she admitted this to me and told me she did not know what alternatives she had. Well, we know the alternative was no healthcare for her husband, losing their home, and being unable to care for her son - they have no nearby family support as they are also immigrants. She worked herself to the bone because of her great great love for her husband and her son. I have met the child myself. He is a bright, intelligent, interesting, funny child. He is not a tech zombie and honestly you would not ever guess he spent formative years watching Cocomelon.
I admire the love in her and the love that animates her. I was really surprised by the histrionic framing of "tech resistance" as something that can be accessed by everyone. The references to Wendell Berry as if he was an authoritative source on the good, true, and beautiful... I hope that FPR speakers and those like them understand that if they want to win over a skeptical, modern, city-dwelling crowd, they are going to need to come up with solutions that include this woman and her family.
I think getting back to focus on what you mentioned in your earlier comment would be most helpful in this regard: "trying to find our way out of an isolated, alienated, and cold modernity; we are looking for a way to live that is animated by love and care; but that is going to look *different* depending on your upbringing, culture, context, environment, and disposition. "
Liz, thank you for sharing your friend's story. I think no one would argue that your friend is a wonderful mother and wife, and I believe I can say with confidence that absolutely no one at FPR would say differently.
Your comment is a good reminder that this is why we need to be very clear that, when we talk about resistance, it's not "technology" or all tools/digital devices in general that we mean—of course not—but the kind of machine thinking that excludes and would like to transcend and replace the human. And each of us is called on to seek wisdom and courage within our own context, and to be generous (and generous-minded) with each other.
Liz, I'm so sorry that you felt excluded or off-put; there's actually a lot of writing out there (including at the FPR site) about applying good principles to our ordinary lives and how that looks so different in different situations. A person can only say so much in one talk and is of course speaking on a specific subject to a specific audience, but there's a lot of talk out there, too, about how we can take little steps towards humanizing our lives more. I think most parents understand that these times arrive when using something like TV can be a boon. You might find some things that explore this over at Hearth & Field (I try to address this perfectionism some in my recent piece here: https://hearthandfield.com/seven-suggestions-for-making-the-most-of-apple-season-even-if-you-arent-feeling-very-crunchy/) but I think, honestly, that most FPR types understand this, too. We're just often talking about ideals so we can think about how we can seek to approach them, if not achieve them, you know? But the practical things are so important, as is the understanding and generosity towards our various situations, challenges, troubles, talents, and needs.
Liz, have you encountered the work of Susannah (Black) Roberts? She's a wonderful writer who's also a New Yorker and has been a friend of the Front Porch Republic folks as well (https://www.frontporchrepublic.com/author/susannah-black/). She's a joyful cosmopolitan who often writes eloquently on the beauty of cities.
Truly, every single writer that I am vaguely familiar with at and around FPR (including Wendell Berry!) would agree that finding our way out from a cold modernity is going to look different—indeed, *should* look different!—depending on our region and gifts and responsibilities, etc. I think one thing folks are trying to give when telling one's own story is exactly that—to demonstrate the various ways of community, love, and belonging that are possible, that the cold isolation that so many of us are handed is not the only possibility. (And the sort of legalistic mind that would actually see Fruit Loops and a film watched with a loved one as a problem is exactly the sort of thing we should guard against and indeed, make us go back to first principles!) And we always need more folks' stories and ideas!
I think you're exactly right, that everything has to be rooted in love, but also that we need to begin where we are, and that we each have been given a variety of gifts, and that's going to look differently depending on where we are. Indeed, I think one thing that we can be clear on is that being grateful for one's own region ought not take away from someone else's—instead, they ought to strengthen each other!
For my part, the love my city friends have for their city is beautiful and good, and the love my farmer friends have for their farm is also beautiful and good; neither takes away from the other. There's something certainly amiss if we ever feel threatened by the love and care someone else is trying to live out in one's own context and home.
As a city-bred person from a large extended family, I sympathize with these thoughts.
There are many beautiful cities, and often what detracts from them are the very things you mentioned—the isolation and alienation (and I would add noisy disrespectful behavior).
I am with Wendell and Paul Kingsnorth. In Paul's analogy of the 3 legged stool -- People, Place, and Prayer -- the stool won't stand without all 3 legs. I'm hearing many people saying they'd like to leave off Place because agrarianism isn't realistic or isn't important or something like that. The problem that I see with de-emphasizing Place is that it is ultimately impossible to care for people without connection to the more than human; the soil, the water, the people who manufacture our junk, the insects and so on. People cannot exist and cannot experience health or flourishing for very long if these other areas fail. The fact that some people have grown up in cities and like them and have done well in them doesn't negate the fact that cities by definition exploit other places and other people in order to exist and concentrate resources. We now have an unprecedented percentage of the globe living in cities and we are likely to suffer horribly as this becomes impossible to sustain (economy, energy, agricultural systems all precarious). I grew up in a suburban area and in a church environment that was heavy on People and Prayer but not Place at all. It seems to me that this tends to breed a complacent hubris, a lack of healthy limits. There were many kind and genuine folks in our church genuinely trying to "fight worldliness" with varying success. And of course we all know someone who is so obsessed with Place in an arrogant way that neglects People and maybe Prayer, too... imagine the self-righteous organic goat farmer who despises his country neighbors. Nevertheless, deep authentic connection to place helps us to see and feel that we must limit ourselves in order to love our neighbor and to love God. In the city or suburbs one is removed from all the destruction and pollution that our "normal" lifestyles cause. We may be very convivial with our immediate neighbor but we are disconnected to where most everything we use, eat, wear, etc comes from so we are unable to consider some of those who we impact the most. One can begin to believe it is OK to buy unnecessary gadgets as long as we don't feel they are dehumanizing us, without thinking about how they are harming enslaved people, polluting African rivers, etc. Life on the farm, on the ocean, or in the woods helps to humble us.
Imagine the owners of large slave plantations discussing whether or not it was important to have people over for dinner more, to dance and converse, or whether it was addictive to smoke tobacco. These might be good considerations but the fact that they are wealthy and comfortably living off the labor of others is a much larger moral consideration! Sorry to sound ornery but I have been thinking this ever since the coffeehouse.
--Clara
“It seems to me that this tends to breed a complacent hubris, a lack of healthy limits.”
This reminds me of a statistic that if everyone in the world lived like residents of the US, then we would need 4.9 Earths in order to satisfy the global need for resources in a year (or, for comparison, we would need 3 earths to live like Germany and 1.1 earths to live like Indonesia). See here:
https://www.statista.com/chart/10569/number-of-earths-needed-if-the-worlds-population-lived-like-following-countries/#:~:text=If%20everyone%20in%20the%20world,for%20resources%20in%20a%20year.
This does not speak directly to cities, but it does speak to issue of “healthy limits” that you mentioned.
Yes, this is one way to become aware of our limits. But it is such a machine mediated way of seeing.... global statistics that are tabulated by someone (who? and with what assumptions?) which can be used to promote different ideological positions. I can hear Maelin using this data to support her belief in the ethics and importance of population control! Or to argue for veganism, or electric cars.
I really enjoyed your and Ruth's most recent piece. I believe the part about the given and the chosen applies to Place, too. As you made clear, we are all operating in less than optimal circumstances; this is not about blaming people for their cultural inheritance any more than it is about laying guilt on those for whom divorce or distance from family is a necessity. But living in a way that connects us to the "given" landscape, rather than the man-made "chosen" has its machine-defying benefits. We may more naturally and intuitively sense our limits, our potential for harm, and the gift of God's provision. This is analogous to the way you described relational dynamics having all-around benefits inherent in the limits they impose on our individualism, rubbing off the rough edges and taking our concern beyond self interest.
I bring this up not to make people feel bad about where they are but because some of us have a sense that in spite of all the suggestions that have already been discussed we are still tottering on a 2 legged stool, or seeing our children do so. This may be all we have to work with, and God takes that into account no doubt.
An excellent resource that I'd like to share is Chris Smaje's work: https://chrissmaje.com/blog/ and his two books, A Small Farm Future, and Saying No to a Farm Free Future. He is tackling the ecomodern fantasies about urban life being more efficient, about hyper-industrial foods like vat fermented vegan protein. His recent work in refuting George Monbiot's book Regenesis is very interesting to read alongside your Exogenesis. Basically, Lantua city is an idea that will never happen but our belief in it and attempt to create it may cause a great deal of harm.
Another is Paul Kingsnorth's friend Dougald Hine: https://dougald.substack.com/. He is a great example of how the concerns that your readers share are not limited to the politically right leaning. I think there has been a very significant movement from the left since at least the 1970s and many of them are now feeling like the current left no longer fits. (In fact, they have such a thorough critique of the Machine that it makes some of the FPR people seem a little late to the conversation, like they are starting from scratch to craft a conservative version rather than just joining the existing movement.) Dougald is promoting a class from his 'School Called Home' on 'The Work of Regrowing a Living Culture'. He is also very focused on the relational aspects of this and as a former environmental activist type has decided to stop talking about climate change because it is divisive and because it misses the bigger issues, as explained in his book At Work in The Ruins. I started reading him this summer and have found everything very worthwhile.
--Clara
Thanks for these links and thoughts, Clara. I really like your application of the “given” to Place. In practice, of course, I think people often just flee to the places that look prosperous, even if their own place isn’t altogether terrible. This happened in my own family, where their village—a place where people had lived for at least 500 years, and possibly a thousand—emptied out in a couple of decades during the 1960s and 70s when they all immigrated to the West. It’s hard to see prosperity elsewhere, to see people with luxuries, and to not feel left behind.
The 4.9 earths might or might not be an accurate statistic, but stats aside, just looking at our relative wealth, compared to less developed countries, or to life in the past, is astonishing. I periodically reflect on the fact that, while my own home and possessions are somewhat more modest than my immediate neighbors, we all nevertheless live with a level of luxury and convenience that even the Roman emperors would have envied. The amount-of-stuff-per-person is undoubtedly higher now than in the past; and I’ve even seen various stats (sorry for all the stats!) that, even with the population set to decline through the latter half of this century, the overall amount of stuff being used will continue to increase, as people strive for a “higher standard” of living.
As for Maelin, she learned better in the end. Perhaps I will too. :)
When I first stumbled across social media back in 2010, I was a new mother and was just feeling alone in the sleepless blue that is newborn life. It was nice to make connections with others albeit online, and it helped me feel less alone during that particular time. Also, I think being an introvert, it helped me feel connected.
Fast forward to the past few years and I had hit a point where social media made me feel awful. It did make me feel lonely and it seemed that everyone was in cliques and I felt like I was seeing the underbelly of social media. I didn’t like it.
I’ve made a point to cut the time I spend on both Instagram and Substack. I try and put my phone down as much as possible and I am trying to be more in my real life. I joined a Bible study this autumn and it has been life giving and I am enjoying real life conversations.
I think the difference of online /offline becomes evident when we experience the real, like you are in your Bible study. Substack is the first platform where I have engaged, but I find that I have to draw a line as well (which is why I rarely venture onto Notes). My youngest commented recently that the strange thing about online conversations is that you can simply close the laptop and they are all gone, and you could just leave it closed. He reminded me that time spent with him, the rest of my family, and friends should always take precedence. Glad that he already gets this.
I’m just going to riff here and see what comes of it.
I think many of the problems of the internet come from the way that it puts us to sleep and makes us (intellectually, spiritually, morally) lazy and pessimistic. The internet today implicitly offers a set of assumptions and presuppositions, if not a worldview, which too many seemingly accept. ‘It’s just the way things are’. Says who?
You have to be an influencer to create, you have to monetise, you can’t act differently, everyone is becoming more divided. And on an on. Blanket statements that are affirmed by the echo chamber nature of the very system itself. But like money it is on some level only true and only real because we have bought into this.
On some level the kids these days are stupid(or whatever) because we *believe* they are. The old people are facebook-addled ideologues because we *believe* they are. Dopamine reward systems being hijacked is the problem because we believe it is. These are articles of faith. Assumptions. There are counter examples.
In a post truth, fake news world their are ‘facts’ to prove any thesis. So why do we default to the most doom and gloom one? Could it be because there is a secret payoff in despair and pessimism? Is it because this makes less demands than hope and optimism which always carries the implication of pulling up your sleeves and actually doing something, actually attempting something?
My answer to everything is to essentially reject the form of the question asked (are you a this or are you a that?) and to bring about what I want to see in the world (whether online or offline) in the spirit of hope.
I don’t see an interesting collective for writers- I’ll start one. There aren’t any good communities for writers online any more- I’ll make one. And on and on. Whether any of this amounts to anything is in God’s hands but when you try and build something an awful lot of angst magically vanishes. The form of social media makes you see everything top down, of a structure collapsing inwards. Whereas true creativity and community is something that emanates outwards. A light.
So the answer for me, as simplistic as it may sounds is to simply be a light, to be the person that *you need* but to be that person *for others*
And then the rest will all work itself out.
Thanks for adding your reflections Thomas! I concur with you on this "bring about what I want to see in the world (whether online or offline) in the spirit of hope." This mindset has also prompted me to bring to life a variety of programs and groups over the years, simply because they did not exist and I wanted to be part of one. It is powerful for children to witness that one can recognize a need, come up with an idea, act on it, and literally witness words changed into actions. While it is helpful to identify problems, lingering on them too long has a dampening effect and colours our perception, and can make us feel helpless. Thus, "being the light" is the most concrete way to move forward. Thanks again for your thoughts :)
Nicely said, Thomas. Your last lines especially.
I love your last lines, Thomas—they may sound simplistic, and yet they are true! Certain people have been such a gift in my own life partly because they wanted to serve others in the way they wished they could have been served, and I've acted similarly. E.g.—being super lonely during my first year especially as a young mother makes me try to be a friend to others in the way that I yearned for but didn't have.
One problem with the internet is the metrics. It focuses us on results and numbers.
But the flip side is that the internet also lets us do amazing shit. I could start a TV channel tomorrow with my phone.
I’ve published a blog for 15 years. I’ve pumped out a wide variety of essays, poetry and drawings. Is any of it great? Most likely not - only 6 non family members have subscribed (pre substack).
But the doing is in itself enriching, even uplifting.
I’m with you. There are structural issues out there, but there are also powerful catalysts out there. We should bury our heads to ignore the problems, but we can’t let our awareness of such issues paralyze us from doing the work.
The Gita says it best when it reminds us that the privilege is to strive, success is not our problem.
Last sentence is exactly it. Do what you know you can and what you know needs to be done and can be done by you, and simply don’t worry about the rest.
Ruth and Peco, you're on to something here. Keep going, please.
Thanks for your encouragement!
10) When I think of anti-machine behavior that can truly prompt others to reexamine their own technological use, my mind goes to the personal stuff. Being the only friend one has who mails them hand written, thoughtful letters is anti-machine. Those around you may notice this, realize how nice it is and follow your lead. Putting my phone away and building a bench for our prayer garden from left-over lumber is anti-machine behavior. My wife and children and maybe grandchildren will actually be able to point to something I made by hand because wasn't distracted by digital technology. Maybe they too will want to build something. Maybe they will put away the tech and do it. Growing a garden is anti-machine and can have a big impact on your neighbor when you share your home grown food with them and they realize it tastes way better than what they buy at Walmart.
Agreed Daniel. All of these things can also simply be done without comment. The actions speak for themselves:)
We had three kids in three years, my husband was/is traveling half the month for work, and we didn’t have a lot of family or community support (at the time). So I can safely say we’ve never desired to be completely tech free. However, really strong boundaries helped us navigate the early years and tech. The kids were only allowed to watch tv on the physical tv that sits in the family room where I can always see it (no computer/iPad/phone etc.). The tv was only allowed on at certain times of day (when I was making dinner or nursing a baby down while my husband was gone) and we rotated through the same 10-15 approved toddler shows. Any whining or fighting about the tv resulted in swift loss of tv time. I found these boundaries worked really well for our kids while also giving me much needed breaks!! Now that our kids are “older” (7,5,4,1) and life is generally more manageable for me, we have no tv time during the school week & we get DVDs from the library for family movie nights on the weekends. My kids made the transition from tv shows during the week as toddlers to no tv except weekend movies really easily so that is my encouragement to anyone who is worried some toddler tv time is going to turn their kids into maniacs! 😅
I think starting these disciplines early, as you have, enormously helps when the kids hit the teenage years. You have a foundation to work from.
This is great to hear, thank you for sharing! I currently have a 4, 2, and 6 month old and use the tv exactly as you mentioned you did in the early years. Life is absolutely hectic most of the time right now! I hope to one day transition to just during the weekends so I'm thankful to hear this worked for you.
Thanks for opening this thread! With the caveat that I have only read a portion of the above so far (will read in full throughout the weekend), I look forward to the conversation in the comments and I hope it stays lively for quite some time!
I was disappointed to miss the FPR Conference and last week's online gathering, but I missed them due to a) coaching local youth soccer and b) our downtown Fall Festival, respectively. It was a good reminder to embrace doing the things of local community that we talk about and about which we are all so passionate!
One of these days, there will be a localism gathering right here in Stamford, Texas, for all of you and more!
James, you were doing what we are talking about and hope that you can still add some of your reflections here:) I noted to Peco yesterday that for every time I type the word "embodied" I should go and rake leaves, or bake bread, or pet the chickens. On this note I guess I earned myself another hands-on task...so I am off to make dinner:)
Regarding the loneliness caused by social media and solutions to it, I've found (beyond the obvious like cutting it—along with news and most television—from my life) that it has been helpful to pursue relationships with younger people. I'm only in my 20s, but developing friendships with teenagers in my congregation is helpful for both them and myself. My wife and I try to make our house a hangout spot for friends, coworkers, church members, etc. in an effort to be a place where community can happen. We're lucky to have a vibrant culture of this kind of behavior in our church and many others are doing the same.
Regarding the first question, I've found Ellul's analysis to be helpful. Humans have always sought progress and technology ever since the plow and the axe, but I do think something fundamental has changed since the industrial revolution: broadly, as a society, we see technology and progress as both inevitable and inherently good. I think it is helpful to slow down and think critically about what technology or media or any other tools I bring into my life, and ask questions about it. Often I find myself deciding I'd rather not have it.
Thanks for adding your thoughts Wayne! Making "an effort to be a place where community can happen" is certainly one of the most effective ways of connecting. It is a practice I have followed for more than a decade with regard to building a homeschooling community. Set the table and they will come....
Also agree with you on your second point!
“My wife and I try to make our house a hangout spot for friends, coworkers, church members, etc. in an effort to be a place where community can happen.”
I agree with Ruth—this is a great way for connecting. I know people in a couple of households who have done this, and one thing I’ve noticed is that it seems to work better when the hosts are naturally more sociable and extroverted. Introverts can seem to struggle more and find it draining. I recall one couple where the husband was more extroverted, and the wife was more introverted, so he always ended up energized by these events, whereas she ended up a bit exhausted.
That's interesting. I'm fairly introverted (and un-sociable, lol), but have a high capacity for draining activities; my wife is extroverted, but I tend to overexert the two of us. It's a learning curve for sure—I struggle with empathy and understanding what our neighbors and friends need whereas my wife excels, and we keep struggling to find ways of serving that fit.
I am continually inspired by others who fight for similar values in other contexts. I would count you and Ruth in that category.
Thanks Wayne:) We have been working to find this balance over the last twenty years and we have certainly learned how to accommodate each other's limits. One rule we do have is the "one event per day" maximum, even during busy holiday seasons when one is tempted to fill the days.
I like that—we definitely need to figure out some boundaries that work for our household!
One challenge of the modern world is that it's so often more difficult to see our neighbor—and we can get distracted by what someone says on a website (and it's easier to take offense or misunderstand what's not communicated in person), which then takes away from our duties to those entrusted to our care. And it's not merely digital devices but also the built environment that isolates us: so many apartments, suburban strips, etc., are built to isolate—not to be homes, not to be gathering spaces, not to be places of beauty, not to be neighborly.
To demonstrate another way of living, to un-Machine, means to see anew our neighbor. We've been dealing with division—between ourselves and God, and between ourselves and each other, and between ourselves and all of creation—ever since the Fall, and it's when we recover seeing all of creation and each other as gift, as given, that we can start to recover that lost communion.
I have these words by St. Ephrem of Syria on my mind today:
“One person falls sick—and so another can visit and help him;
one person starves—and so another can provide him with food and give him life; ...
In this way the world can recover;
tens of thousands of hidden ways are to be found,
ready to assist us.”
6) I think solutions seem to focus on traditional style or Amish-style living because on some level we all have to admit the Amish are doing something right. I do think there are solutions for others, but it will take effort. I think finding time to spend with others, and even alone, with no technology can be done anywhere. People in cities can still get together for dinner together and decide to put their phones in another room. Or leave them in one persons apartment while you go out and explore the city together. City for can join book clubs, or go to trivia nights or sporting events or concerts or anything or take a walk in the park without their phones. They can pick up a tangible cook book and work through a recipe without their phones. It may look like living in a city back in the 1970's, but it's possible.
4) For how to not sound like a pessimist, find ways to harp on and encourage the good things that come from refraining from digital tech. We cannot just be all negative. We can talk about how much better are relationships are. How much more fun we have with our families when not distracted by technology and point our the hope that these good things are available for everyone. These are benefits everyone can get. We have to find ways to express the hope we have found when we resist.
Daniel, it seems like you are on a roll! Just waiting to see whether you will indeed hit all 10 :)
Oh I’m going for all ten! I’ve been itching to get on here!
You are a trooper indeed.
"However, I think complete shielding can backfire, because screens can then turn into the forbidden fruit."
Yep, we've seen that with our kids and relaxed our limits some, but have just tried to direct them toward slightly better shows and computer games (we don't let them have computer time until they're 5 and just in small doses.) Computer games are a very powerful motivator for our oldest and definitely better use of her brain than just passively watching a show. Tech is a tool and like any other can be used for good or for ill. We choose to try to use it for good while engaging our kids in plenty more "human" time than screen time.
And Dixie, thanks for asking the question for the rest of us introverts. Tech has been a very beneficial way for me to still engage with people when my energy is so low (my little kids wear me out) that I can't make it out somewhere in person. Is it as good as in person? No. But is it better than no interaction with friends? YES.
I think the emphasis on spending "human" time helps to direct attention to reality. Video games are a tricky business, especially for teens who engage in games that are potent dopamine kicks that are highly addictive especially for boys (however, there are games that use more story-based algorithms that are less problematic). Thanks for adding your thoughts Abigail:)
That is true. I have struggled with that in the past (looking at you, Civ 6!) and found that engaging with real people and having good community does lessen the draw of video games. It makes it easier for me to enjoy them in their proper place then.
More and more introverts are coming out of the woodwork!
I really liked Tessa's reply about how old-fashioned types of gatherings provide space for the introverted and the extroverted. Plus, those quiet one-on-one meetings on the porch...we do need those, and they can be hard to get.
I also think that exploring the restorative powers of silence and solitude can do a lot for introverts who wish to "unmachine," and perhaps do some good for extroverts, too. Participating in social contexts is important, but just as powerful is opening up tech-free silence in ways that are nourishing for the individual. Hikes alone on a windy day; reading late at night by the fire; doing watercolors or journaling or cooking while sipping a glass of wine while occasionally glancing contentedly through the window at the kids playing outside.