Basking in Discomfort

The kind people of Valparaiso waved and cheered from their garages as athletes sped past, my mom and I being two of those athletes . . . only we weren’t running. We weren’t even jogging. My mom conveniently “forgot” her running shoes, and since she was wearing her galoshes and wanted to stop frequently to photograph lawn decorations, we were at the end of the race. Yes, it was a little embarrassing. The van for shaming stragglers was right behind us. It was cold and windy and sporadically hailing, which was annoying, considering the title of the race was “Ringing in Spring.”

My mom waved back at the spectators, as if we were in a parade and the van lurching behind us was our parade float. She graciously accepted every compliment of “Great job!” or “You guys look great!” She even yelled back, “Thanks for noticing!”

Judging by the wide range of numbers on people’s race bibs and the relatively low turnout, a lot of people looked out their window that morning, observed the crummy weather, and decided to go back to sleep. I don’t blame them. The conditions were uncomfortable. My mom stopped at one point to shake a rock out of one of her galoshes, but it honestly could have been a hail stone.

The thought of pancakes kept me going. When we finally reached the end and received our lovely participation medals, we went out for our “breakfast of would-be champions (had my mom remembered her running shoes)”. For some primordial reason, I love restaurant booths. It just makes dining so much more enjoyable. It’s the modern equivalent of a cave, exuding a false sense of privacy and security. But I suppose the same way the first homo sapiens may have thought about their language echoing through the caves, I have to be more mindful of my voice carrying across a crowded restaurant. I have a TEACHER VOICE, and I’m used to projecting, so much so that even if I’m insulated in what I believe is some kind of soundproof restaurant booth, the other diners can still hear me.

With my mom sitting across from me, I launched into a critique of people who don’t seem to understand the difference between “controversial” and “uncomfortable,” about how Americans are too concerned with their own peace of mind. The best writing is achieved when the writer is uncomfortable, accessing unique and authentic material and deeply rooted emotions from some dark recess of the mind. The best learning is achieved when the learner is challenged and pushed out of their comfort zone. And the best art should challenge our perceptions, force us to think and view the world differently, even make us squirm a little.

I was trying to make sense of something that happened in class recently. Students expressed discomfort at a comparison I drew. My objective was to have students reflect on the power of imagery. I said that Marc Antony unveiling Caesar’s butchered body and pointing to all the stab wounds in order to rile up the crowd reminded me of Emmet Till’s open casket funeral and how it sparked the Civil Rights Movement. I wasn’t comparing the life of Caesar to the life of Emmet Till, nor was I comparing Marc Antony’s civil war to the Civil Rights Movement or minimizing black pain. I was simply saying that images are powerful and can spur us into action, whether that action be positive or negative. I showed students a brief PBS video to familiarize them with Emmet Till, careful to choose one that did not contain the horrific photo. I try to be mindful of the sensitivity levels in America, even if I think those sensitivity levels are over-the-top.

A couple students said they were afraid that these kinds of topics would embolden students with racist ideas to voice them, and therefore we should not discuss these dangerous topics in school. My response was that school is a place for learning and making mistakes and shaping the way we think. Just because we’re afraid someone will say something we don’t like doesn’t mean we should shut down uncomfortable topics all together. One student said certain topics did not belong in the classroom, topics such as Hitler and Tom Metzger. Maybe that student is right. Rather than talking about Hitler or Tom Metzger, the real focus should be on why these topics produce such an uncomfortable reaction in the first place.

I was told by one student that a previous teacher had them read “Night,” by Elie Wiesel, “a very controversial book.” That's when I realized students were conflating discomfort with controversy. I know I read “Night” when I was in high school. What year I can’t remember. I do know that I wasn't too concerned with my own discomfort.

Looking up from my pancakes, I noticed an older woman, exuding positive energy, standing at our booth. “I just want to say I agree with you whole-heartedly and to keep up the good work. I know it’s a hard time to be a teacher.”

I thanked her, and I was happy she stopped by our booth, even though I felt terribly self-conscious about the volume of my voice. After all, restaurant booths are supposed to be safe havens. If the waitress came by and gave everyone a side order of disturbing American history with every entrée, I’m pretty sure that restaurant would get bad reviews. I, however, am not a waitress. I don’t serve information. I don't walk around, asking students if they’d like a free refill of knowledge. Books, if they’re properly analyzed, should be grappled with, reckoned with, poked and prodded. Good writing is uncomfortable because good writing tells the truth.

If we can’t face our discomfort and analyze our reactions, how can we hope to get along with people who hold different views? How can we ever solve any problems? Right now the country is so segregated; we can live our whole lives in a bubble and never receive any pushback. Districts are so gerrymandered; politicians can do as they please and only answer to their own supporters. If we shut down conversations because they’re uncomfortable, are we on a dangerous trajectory of being no better than the Tennessee House GOP who expelled two black lawmakers for exercising their First Amendment Rights? And is it any coincidence that the expulsion came as a result of hard truths spoken about America’s myriad of mass shootings?

Discomfort should NOT be avoided, although I think if I sign up for another run and there happens to be a hailstorm on race day, I will go back to bed.

Conversations should also be age-appropriate. Recently, while having breakfast in a booth with my friend and her two children, her little boy showed skepticism for Pixar’s “Up.” He said it would be scientifically impossible for balloons to lift up a house and carry it to South America. I suggested that maybe if the house were light enough, balloons could lift it. Then I launched into a history lesson about Charles Lindbergh and how he made the Spirit of St. Louis as light as possible so he could complete the first transatlantic flight without crashing. He even cut the edges off his maps. So maybe Mr. Fredrickson was a bit like Charles Lindbergh.

Pretty soon, a nice Hoosier lady appeared at our booth. “Thank you for the history lesson. I didn’t know all that stuff about Charles Lindbergh!”

“You’re welcome, “ I said, even though I was once again self-conscious about my booming voice. I could have continued the history lesson to include bits about Lindbergh being a Nazi sympathizer or his many extramarital affairs, but that would have made our morning uncomfortable. And restaurant booths, unlike challenging learning environments, should always be comfortable.