"I meet more people in an afternoon in a town of 3000 than I do back in
Boston, a city of 3.5 million, in a month. I wore myself a rut after 14 years in
Boston, going from home to MIT to friends' houses with blinders on. I eat in the
same restaurants and go to the same Boston Symphony every Saturday night. When I
get back home, I'll try to be more of a tourist in my own city, talking to
strangers and going to new places."
Thus had I explained my new philosophy all through August. I applied it
successfully on my first evening back in Boston, chatting up a grandmother from
Wheeling, West Virginia, in the produce section of Stop & Shop. I was back to
my old ways by the next morning.
New people and places were interesting in theory, but they couldn't compete
with the reality of two hundred pounds of mail, 30 undergraduates trying to learn
mathematics from me, old friends, my insurance company, a Ph.D. thesis, and this
book. Exacerbating the situation was my conviction that, during my first two
weeks back, I should be able to do everything I'd put off for months before
traveling plus everything that had accumulated during 14 weeks on the
road plus my standard MIT workload.
 |
545 Technology Square: the cradle of computer science
|
If one is going to be work-obsessed, MIT is about the most supportive
environment imaginable. For example, one evening just after midnight I sat in my
office writing problem set solutions. Raj, a fellow graduate student, was walking
by just as my frustration with one problem was simmering. He came up with the
right approach after five minutes. Ten minutes later, I presented the complete
solution on the blackboard in our lounge. The rest of the late-night crowd, 10
nerds, blessed my solution.
As everyone turned his attention to helping Andy finish his Ph.D. project, a
super-strong-for-its-weight model railroad bridge built out of thin strips of
metal--Andy had figured out how to use sensors and tiny computer-controlled
motors to keep beams from buckling--I reflected that, in all my years at the MIT
Artificial Intelligence Lab, I'd never had to walk more than 100 feet from my
office to get the answer to any technical question. If I didn't have the tenacity
or knowledge to solve a problem, someone else always did and was happy to help
me. It didn't matter whether I was stuck designing a digital signal processor,
solving differential equations, building an integrated circuit, representing
complex surfaces in a computer, dividing welfare recipients into all possible
family combinations, or building dozens of circuits--from phase-locked loops to
high-quality audio filters.
It didn't take me too long to become blasé about the swirl of MIT life.
I skipped U.N. Secretary General Boutros-Boutros Ghali's address to "leaders"
from 53 nations. It didn't bother me that The Tech, MIT's student
newspaper, glossed over Professor Philip Sharp's Nobel Prize in biology in favor
of continuing coverage of sexual harassment and racial preference
debates--Sharp's split-gene discovery was old news and 24 other faculty members
already had Nobels. I wasn't sorry to have missed Salman Rushdie's first U.S.
appearance since he was sentenced to death. I was too busy struggling with the
return of my high expectations.
Was I alone in a small town for an evening? That's only natural, I only got
there three hours before and couldn't expect to have made friends. Was I alone in
Boston for an evening? That made me a loser, for how else could someone live in a
city of 3.5 million and find himself friendless.
On the road, I was satisfied with just getting from one place to another,
taking the occasional photograph or writing a few words. If I learned something
or made a friend, that was a bonus that put me on top of the world. Back in
Boston, the following goals seemed like a minimum: (1) know as much as MIT
professors, (2) have a collection of friends who would drop everything at a
moment's notice to be with me, (3) keep a girlfriend happy, (4) be as good a
probability teacher as Al Drake, who's had 30 years of practice, (5) figure out
how the computing landscape had been changed by the spread of World Wide Web
browsers, and (6) find a Ph.D. thesis topic that would get me a faculty position
ahead of 1000 other wanna-be's.
"The term started three weeks ago and I'm already five weeks behind" is a
typical MIT student's lament. That's how I felt about my life. I turned 30 on
September 28th and realized that the list of things I at one time thought I could
do by age 30 would now take me at least another four decades. It made me
jumpy.
When I noticed how jumpy I was, I resolved to stop dating in Boston. After a
month or two alone in my minivan, I had been ready to listen to a stranger, man
or woman. I could devote 100% of my attention to his or her situation, and I got
to know people remarkably quickly. Back in Boston, with my head filled with
thoughts such as "I forgot to call Bruce back," "I'm not prepared for the lecture
I have to give on Monday," and "Why doesn't Neil ever call me?" I was in no shape
to give more than 5% of myself to a stranger.
I was lonely, to be sure, and not sold on the idea of sleeping alone for the
rest of my life. However, I thought I would feel even lonelier spending hours
skimming the surface of a stranger while thinking that I really ought to be
working.
It was an article of faith in Washington, D.C., where I grew up,
that small towners were narrow-minded people good for nothing except paying taxes
to support our $8 billion subway and free museums. Further, one can't live 14
years in Boston without absorbing some of the prevailing contempt for those who
live beyond reach of Harvard and MIT. I'd accumulated 30 years of prejudice, but
it melted away during my weeks on the road. People in small towns would listen
with respect to any story I told, even if it underlined fundamental differences
in philosophy, religion, or politics between us. After 10 minutes of patient
listening, a person might frankly note that he saw things differently, but I was
never scorned by anyone for holding a different point of view.
After returning home, I had high expectations for social gatherings. I figured
my great stories from the road would make me the life of the party. In reality,
I'd lost the social skills necessary to survive in Cambridge, as underscored one
evening when 40 people came over to my house to see some slides.
Matthew asked me what I learned on my trip.
"One thing I learned was how narrow my experience of people had been. For
example, I had my first real conversation with someone with AIDS on this trip. In
Utah..."
Susan interrupted: "A lot of the people you know, even some of the people here
tonight, probably have AIDS; you just don't realize it."
I was never able to tell anyone what I'd learned from Arthur because my
introduction challenged one of Susan's cherished beliefs, i.e., that a large
percentage of upper middle-class men who are neither gay nor IV drug users
carried the HIV virus. She could not wait until the end of the story to put in
her two cents' worth, but had to make sure that I aligned my beliefs with hers
before she would let me continue.
Initially, I thought that Susan just had a bee in her bonnet. However, at two
other gatherings I tried telling the same story. In both cases, a thirtysomething
Jewish woman interrupted me at the same point for the same reason.
The inability of Bostonians to cope with differences of philosophy
was driven home one night at the Harvest bar in Harvard Square. Bruce, Henry, and
I were going over old times when Jackie, an acquaintance of Bruce's, and Roberto,
her Chilean boyfriend, sat down next to us.
Bruce congratulated Jackie, a trim brunette in a stylish suit, for having just
been on the cover of a travel agent's trade magazine. Jackie works for a
consulting company. She gets paid big bucks to dress nicely, fly around, and tell
companies how to make their benefits packages more "family friendly."
What was the subject of the article?
"It is about the difficulties that minorities have traveling."
Er... How is her situation relevant?
"I'm half-Japanese."
Wouldn't they have been better off choosing someone from a minority group with
a lower-than-average income, perhaps someone black or Puerto Rican?
"Why do you say, that?" Jackie asked with a hostile edge in her voice.
"Most businesses' primary objective is getting money out of customers, so I
would think that someone who looked poor would get worse treatment. By contrast,
Michael Jackson would probably get treated better than any of us for the same
reason," I theorized.
Roberto was furious.
"Are you saying that only blacks are minorities?"
To deny someone the victimhood status of "minority" was apparently an
unforgivable sin. Jackie went on to relate how she'd been a victim of prejudice
her entire life. She'd been teased in elementary school, treated badly by service
businesses, and denied jobs. Against this bleak background, she admitted that
Jews and Asians were comparatively lucky.
"We're allowed to pass by white society. If we have enough money, they let us
buy houses in their neighborhoods. But they never fully accept us."
Henry, born and raised in Hong Kong, piped up, "that proves that it is
classism and wealthism, not simply racism."
"That doesn't prove anything. If you get bad service, you might not chalk it
up to racism." Jackie's philosophy was that any bad treatment should be put down
to racism unless otherwise accounted for. Thus, nearly every day provided for her
more evidence that Americans are full of bad will.
"This nation is full of anti-Semitism [a German word I don't like to use; it
was coined in the late 19th century to replace the simpler "Jew-hatred" to make
the feeling seem more scientific and hence acceptable to educated Germans].
Doesn't your own experience confirm this?" Jackie asked.
"I just drove 15,000 miles around North America and encountered a few people
who said things that most Cantabrigians would consider shockingly anti-Semitic.
However, these people had never had any experience with Jews. Despite knowing
that I was Jewish, they were happy to take me into their homes and feed me. Their
prejudices didn't affect their actions or their openness to learn about people.
So I would have to say that it didn't matter much. I just hoped that someday
they'd learn more about Jews and change their opinions."
"What about the Nazis?" Jackie asked. "Would you say that they would have been
nice people if only they'd actually met a few Jews? I used to live in Frankfurt
and there was one school with a few Jewish students. They had to have guards with
machine guns outside because there was so much hatred from the Germans."
Jackie had a good point there. I probably sounded a bit too much like Candide.
I reviewed the situation: Jackie was hurt that I'd presumed to deny her minority
victim status and angry that I was too obtuse to see Americans as full of hatred.
If tolerance was good in her feminist-liberal worldview, why was she upset with
me for not hating my fellow Americans?
Before I could finish this thought, Henry observed that he'd "traveled quite a
bit through the Far East and North America and noticed that the U.S. has very
little discrimination and a lot of talk about discrimination, while the Far East
is the opposite."
"A lot of clubs in Tokyo hang `Japanese Only' signs out front," Bruce
added.
Henry continued, "Prejudice isn't bad. If you've met nine Jews and have found
them untrustworthy and say that there is a 90% chance the next Jew you meet won't
be trustworthy, that's good. But if you say that there is no chance the next Jew
I meet can be trusted, that's bad. If you are willing to give people a chance, it
doesn't matter what your prejudices are."
Jackie ignored Henry's radical position and focused on me as the prime
heretic. I tried to soothe her by saying that I considered Anti-Jewish prejudice
a problem, just not a significant one.
"In Civilization and its Discontents, Freud divided the sources of pain
in life into three categories..."
Before I could explain Freud's thesis that the pain that one gets from
problems with loved ones is in another category from the pain inflicted by
strangers and society, Jackie stopped me.
"I won't listen to anything having to do with Freud--he thought women had
penis envy."
The range of expressed opinion in Cambridge is broader than in a
small town, but the range of opinion that any given person is prepared to
hear is much narrower. All across America, I had seen people sit down and listen
to each other even when they were on opposite sides of an issue. In Cambridge,
people with slight political differences can barely get through a cocktail party
together.
Despite seeing some folks as narrow-minded, it felt good to be back at MIT. I
remembered a 1938 comment by Karl Taylor Compton, one-time president of MIT:
"In recent times, modern science has developed to give mankind, for
the first time, in the history of the human race, a way of securing a more
abundant life which does not simply consist in taking away from someone
else."
Add a comment