Who Cares for the Body?

The random farmers near the roadside make me wonder.  They make my mouth water because I came from a family where you went outside to pick your supper, washed it and then put it on the table.  But these berry, egg and vegetable offerings next to commercial centres also make me uneasy - they shouldn't have to sit in deserted parking lots all day to get their produce to people. When farmers aren't in the grocery store, and aren't at the Farm Market, something is wrong.

I don't say this to upset any of the fine people on the Farm Market Board of Directors - they've worked hard to get a building and keep things going during times when food wasn't the blockbuster issue it seems to have become lately.  But we desperately need to have fresh local food at our Farm Market - not just for farmers, but for our bodies (not to mention the body politic).

But all this talk of food and the issues that surround it - corporate control of meat and grain production, obesity and diabetes, the death of cooking and the family meal, the separation that most people have from their food producers - really makes me think about the body and how uncared for it is nowadays.

For example: we're continually blasted with images and exhortations to buy food that is terrible for our bodies and for the planet.  And we're told it's a "treat."  No, it's not.  My mother's rasberry pie or string beans from the garden or real strawberries or a homemade cookie is a treat. 

We don't send kids outside to exercise and run around anymore, we don't go out dancing with our friends and spouses, we don't walk anywhere and we wonder why our ten year olds look sickly, our twenty year olds have back pain and everyone is depressed.  It's because we don't give proper consideration to our bodies anymore.  Using the phrase "my body" in most social situations will immediately make people suspect you are a wacko of some kind.  Too bad.

When I think back to my childhood, most of my good memories have something to do with my body: the smell of working men in my family coming in for supper (sawdust, hay and motor oil), the taste of food picked off the plant and eaten (carrots rinsed with the garden hose and devoured), long uphill bike rides and flying downhill on the other side, swims in the brook and lake, the homecooking of numerous aunts, mothers and grandmothers, mud pies, sandboxes, swing sets, sunsets, horses, long stories after supper. 

These are treats and not of the high-minded philosophical variety.  They are the things that form culture, keep us civilized and make us truly human.  I feel sad that we've lost the body.  I think the mind can be a terrible tyrant if it runs the show all the time.  A mind can be convinced of anything if you put the right message on 'repeat.'  The body is an ecosystem with its own internal balance.  When the environment of the body is off-kilter, it colours everything we see, hear, taste, touch, feel and think. 

Until we make peace with our bodies, we will never solve our overconsumption problems.  As goes the body, so goes the nation, perhaps....

Passivity

I'm nearly finished reading Richard Sennett's brilliant book "The Fall of Public Man."  I am on quest right now to understand why things are they way they are, both in general "society" and also in our little town.  It's pretty interesting, and beats watching the same commerical ten times in one evening.

I like Sennett because he doesn't just repeat the standard answers: ie. capitalism is bad, people are obsessed with material things, the political elite don't want an electoral system that actually reflects the priorities of working people. Spare me, please - it's not that simple.

Instead he looks at ideas of public and private and how our perception of what those mean has changed since the industrial revolution.  In the 17th and early 18th centuries people in public saw themselves as actors.  Showing your feelings was a well-practiced art, with specific ways of demonstrating each.  Talking to complete strangers in public was totally normal. Being social in a crowd was completely normal. Costumed public appearances were normal too.

Today people are absorped in the psychological dimensions of their families, living in neighbourhoods where people are just like them, and seeing crowds and strangers as something to be feared.  The most valued bonds are formed by sharing deep intimate thoughts. "Community" is made up of people forming these bonds. Narcissism is everywhere.

Our fundamental ideas about public and private have changed a lot, and where people used to be demonstrative in public, now they are passive, keeping their feelings on the inside and keeping their bodies still and silenced. We teach our children this all the time.

It was very common for people in the 18th century theatres to heckle, spit, boo, hiss, cry, laugh, and even sit on the stage.  They did this unabashedly.  Picture the House of Commons during Question Period - that's what it was like.

Now it's difficult to get people to respond or participate in ordinary situations.  I've seen it - audiences that won't laugh or can't decide if it's "okay" to clap, people who won't dance to music designed for dancing, people who won't introduce themselves to someone despite being in close proximity to a stranger, church congregations who won't sing above a whisper for fear of hearing their collective voice.  It's everywhere, pass the remote control. It has poltical implications - most people won't get organized enough to protest or to challenge systems which are actually doing harm to them or their compatriots.

Situations where people shun this passivity are seen as audacious and maybe slightly dangerous. Heaven forbid you might be seen enjoying yourself in public, or that you might experience something out of the ordinary in a crowd of strangers. You might actually change the system.

I think school has a large part in engraining passivity, as do television and advertising.  I think this passivity makes us insecure about ourselves and robs us of opportunities to express joy, sorrow and anger in a meaningful way in public.  We have a need to participate in something other than consumerism, whether it's collective joy, the political process, storytelling, or the social life of a town or city.

So get off the couch/internet/txt and go somewhere new today.  What you will see will change you.  And you'll be fine - slightly different, but more fully human.

How will I know what to "like" ?

I don't have time to fully explore this right now but it looks promising.  All you techno-punks (or people who value their private information) will likely find this interesting.

http://www.joindiaspora.com/project.html

More to come after I have a chance to digest...

That pesky Charter of Rights

A lot has been said and written about the G8/G20 events in Toronto.  Here's what I have to say about it.

A lot of the commentators seem to have really bizarre perceptions of people who protest.  There is generally no discussion about why normal people decide to skip the family BBQ, the trip to the movies, etc. to go and get their heads whacked by a bunch of agressive and.or frightened police officers. (I'm not convinced all police officers are inherently evil).

The assumptions tend to go one of two ways:
1. These "privileged kids" should stop whining and realize how good their lives are. 
2.  The protesters are trouble-makers who don't even know what they're protesting.

I have been to a couple of large protests (tear-gas included) and here's who goes to protests: old ladies who are concerned about cuts to public health care and pensions, students who feel that corporations have too much economic power/political influence/not enough responsibilty, union members who are concerned about their job security, indigenous people who have been kicked off their land, people concerned about climate change and environmental degradation.

There seems to be a real disconnect between Canadians' assumptions that we have "free speech" and supporting fellow Canadians in the exercise of those rights.  In case you forgot, here's what ye olde Charter of Rights and Freedoms has to say on the issue:

                     SECTION 2: Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
Citizens have the right to challenge the legitimacy of corporate institutions like the G8 and the G20. Disagreeing with the government does not equal losing your democratic rights. 
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
Standing with a sign and a message does not make you a terrorist.
(d) freedom of association.


If this G20 mess had happened in China, lots of self-righteous commentators would have disapprovingly mentioned that the government spent over a billion dollars on militarzed police, and that shortly after the singing of the national anthem, those police charged into a peaceful crowd, swinging clubs at the heads of mothers, grandmothers, uncles and brothers. 

But it wasn't China, it was Canada.  And lots of people on the sidelines seem to have forgotten that the majority of people who protested are people just like them.  And what I find the most disturbing is that the same people who want to pretend that protesters are "trouble-makers" also complain that corporations have too much power and that governments won't stand up to them. Well, you can't have it both ways, folks. 

One last thing: if people hadn't protested in the past, women would not be legal "persons" in Canada, there would be no regulations against child labour, there would be no health care, minimum wage, collective bargaining or environmental laws.  So maybe it's time to abandon the simplistic assumptions and take a closer look at why regular people would put themselves in harm's way.

Meet the "Meeting House"

I've heard good things about this little beauty in Bath!

Parking first, women and children second

Check out these incredibly depressing photos of downtown Atlanta.  Lots of parking! No people anywhere....just what you needed on a grey day like this, right?

Daily Dead Birds

You can find the numbers dead, oiled and released here. The BP spill is still gushing.

Woodstock: The City That Wasn't?

I finally finished "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" this spring, on my way to the placemaking workshop in NYC.  Since then I have been thinking continually about places in general, Woodstock in particular, and how our culture becomes visible in the buildings we construct, the town we live in, and our attitude towards public gatherings.

I've also been reading a lot by Richard Sennett, an academic who has a very interesting perspective on history, the private vs. public realms, buildings, theatre and culture. Right now I'm working through "The Fall of Public Man," which deals with the ways people present themselves in public now vs. they way they did in the 1700, 1800 and 1900's.  Apparently back then it was completely normal to address strangers in public, to see oneself as a 'performer' in public, much like an actor, and to assemble in public places for celebrations.

I look at a town like Woodstock, with its small but preserved public square and I start thinking about who really built this town, how it has evolved from two small settlements (one at Upper Woodstock, one at the Meduxnekeag and St. John rivers).

If you look at the Census information for Woodstock, the population really hasn't changed much since its founding.  Add to that the fact that Woodstock is at an ideal geographic location - the meeting point of two rivers, at the junction of TCH #2 and Interstate 95, the fact that it is equi-distant between Portland, Maine, Halifax, and Montreal, and it would appear that Woodstock has all the geographic characteristics of a city.

But it hasn't grown.  Why?

I think there are several reasons.  First, because the people who settled here were Loyalists, people who were averse to taking risks, preferring instead to follow rules and leave the American Colonies to preserve their social status and avoid conflict. 

Also, I think this conservativeness (and I mean that in a general sense, leave the blue guys out of this) has implications for public gatherings, the encouragement of creativity and the status of young people.  Creative young people want to socialize, try new things, experiment and take risks.  All of which are seen primarily as negatives around here.  Challenge me on that if you can think of examples of risk-takers being lionized in the public realsm, but I can't think of any ready examples.

A culture that sees young people as a threat or a liability or a culture that is uncomfortable with sexuality outside of monogamy/heterosexuality is not going to meet the needs of many young people. And many profitable enterprises are started by risk-taking, creative people in their teens and twenties.  Look at Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, etc.  This reticence has a big impact on the future of small towns.

An overemphasis on marriage and families causes people to withdraw from public life.  I think it would be fair to say that many people around here conside cities and families incompatible.  As in "you can't raise a good family in the city,"  or "I would never raise kids in the city." I guess cities are associated with crime, but there are break-ins (and even the occasional shooting) around here frequently and nobody labels Woodstock as a "dangerous" place to live.  So why do we feel that way about cities?

The other day my friend and I were listing all of the organizations that attempted to locate in Woodstock and were denied: King's Landing, McCain Foods, the Nackawic Pulp Mill.  Those are some pretty heavy hitters and if you took those and added them to Woodstock as it stands today, you would be well on your way to "city" status. 

I will likely write more on this topic, as it's something I think about a lot.  Add your two cents: why do you think Woodstock is not a city?

If people in Woodstock wanted to grow the town into a city, how could we go about doing that? 

Hmmm.

Can you say "escrow" ?

Looks like BP had better start saving for the billions they will have to pay out in damages and compensation.  Not that the ecosystem can put it in its RRSP, of course, but you know what I mean, right....??

More on NYC

Trying to balance my oily despair with something positive.  Here's more on what I learned in NYC.  This might appear soon in the Bugle-Observer.

What makes a good public place?
This is one of the questions I tried to answer during a short trip to New York City at the end of April. On April 29th and 30th, I was part of a group of businesspeople, city employees, sustainability advocates and students from around the world who came to learn "How to Turn a Place Around."

I went because I am concerned about Woodstock's downtown. When I look around downtown, I see two beautiful rivers, some remaining historical buildings, friendly people and high-quality small businesses.

But the downtown is also occupied by a large number of vacant lots, such as the one at the corner of Queen and Main streets. Many parking lots used during the day are vacant during evenings and weekends.

Thinking that workshops on "How to Turn a Place Around" could provide fresh ideas, strategies and insight, off I went to Manhattan, the only person from a small town in a room full of "city folk."

We looked at lots of photos of great public places, spaces where people go to relax, walk dogs, buy sandwiches, play with their kids or go on dates. These places were more than "parks" - they are intended to be the "backyards of people who live in the area." What a great notion!

Although Connell Park is the "backyard" of people living in the Creighton and Deacon neighbourhoods, downtown Woodstock doesn't really have a place where you can sit in the shade, take your shoes off and spend an afternoon or evening.

We also learned about "Placemaking" - that every successful public place needs four things: to be accessible and well-connected to other important places in the area, to be comfortable and project a good image, to host activities people can participate in, and to be a sociable place that people will gather over and
over again.

We learned about some very simple processes to engage local residents in improving public places. We also learned how to observe how people actually use a place - where they will and won't cross the street, how long they will stay, which age groups are or aren't present, etc. This information helps lead the improvement process.

One simple piece of advice we were given was "start with the petunias." If a place looks cared for, poeople are more likely to visit and also to respect the space.

During the sessions, we heard the fascinating story of Bryant Park, which is located just south of Times Square. Apparently it was a notorious haven for drug dealers and criminals in the late 1960's and early 1970's.

Using the "placemaking" process, some of our workshop presenters helped revitalize Bryant Park. They eliminated the concealing hedges, made the entryway open, added furniture and a sandwich stand to encourage people to frequent the park.

I visited Bryant Park the evening before I left and it was truly the most beautiful, serene, and magical place I have ever seen in a city.

Sometime in the future I would like to share some more information about what I learned and see what the residents of Woodstock can do to create a shared "backyard" in our downtown. Let's start with the petunias!

BP Oil Could Reach Atlantic Coast This Summer

It's a global village, alright.

The madness continues

Follow up to yesterday's post: Greece announces plans to sell its railways and public water systems as per its agreement with the IMF.  Bye, bye public assets.

On the oil front, the latest attempt is looking like a failure.  Had a dream last night I was clinging to a fake leather couch covered in oil, trying to avoid falling into the oily water.  Wonder what those pelicans must feel like...

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico continues. I feel like this is exactly what's wrong with the western society - never mind just the United States, although it's easy to point the finger at them and safeguard our own superiority. 

Oil companies have manipulated legislatures, pressured and bought politicians in order to relax regulations intended to safeguard the common good.  That's what's really at stake here, some sense that the Gulf is important enough to belong to everyone - the people who depend on it for fishing, tourism or making a living, the marine life it contains, the birds that stop there along their many thousands of migratory miles. 

All of a sudden, we have a legal/political system that says that drilling for oil (and making profits for oil companies) is more important than safeguarding a body of water that controls a large part of the climate in the North Atlantic.  We're drowning in our own arrogance, to think that these kinds of policies are in our "best interest." Everything is connected and we've blown a large hole right into one very important link.  And judging from the latest reports, it's unlikely that the gusher will be silenced before August - after several hurricanes have likely had the chance to stir the oily ocean and wash it half-way to kingdom come. You're right, I'm mad. 

I'm mad because we live in a society that refuses to restructure itself away from oil dependency because it will be "too slow" or "too hard" or "too painful."  I doubt our grandparents who lived through the Depression or the World Wars were this wimpy and selfish. And I'm also upset that each person who drives everywhere, buys food shipped from the other side of the world, and can never have enough "stuff" doesn't want to admit that their personal choices are part of what created the demand that put the Deepwater Oil Rig in the Gulf to begin with. We can continue this kind of denial but the people, birds, animals and marine life off the coast of Louisiana are now paying the price for our actions.

One final thing - and I'm sorry if you find this depressing but it's the reality we have created for ourselves - if this crisis had been a crisis of public finance, or healthcare, or transportation, corporations would be banging down the doors of government demanding we privatize those resources.  If you don't think that's true, look at the recent IMF bailout of Greece, or read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine."

If people and environmentalists are smart, they will use the current ecological tragedy to implement stiff environmental laws.  If you have a rig like this blow up, you should lose your drilling license in the U.S. for at least five years.  That would be the kind of deterrent big oil understands - a threat to the bottom line.  But of course, society is too addicted to oil to restrict our own access.  Will we continue to act like junkies who let their dealer burn down their house and ruin their neighbourhood, or will we see what's really coming down the pipeline if we don't change our ways?

Turning a Place Around: let's go!

It's hard to know where to begin writing about my recent trip to NYC.  I haven't travelled alone in a while and life is so busy here at the moment that it's hard to focus my reeling mind on anything other than what I have to get done tomorrow.  Nevertheless, it was a fabulous trip, and the workshop I attended, called "How to Turn a Place Around" was excellent.  I went because I think Woodstock could use a little turning around. Our downtown looks like it's been hit by a bomb, and it's been that way for over a year.  Here's my first in a series of posts.

DAY 1 - Thursday, April 29th. 

We gathered in a room full of anticipation, strangers with no common frame of reference except some vague affinity for "great public places," whatever that means.  We came because we were interested in change, because we could envision a world beyond the one we knew right now.  We were sick of being told it "couldn't be done" and that "nothing would ever change around here." Wherever "here" was, we had all been told the same thing.

Then the presentations began, with no manifestoes about "the man" or "the machine" or invectives against cars or capitalism, no conspiracy theories, no MBA's, nothing except discussions of benches, moveable furniture, garbage cans, crosswalks, sightlines, trees and bicycles.  Really elemental stuff, objects with which everyone has had direct contact, spaces we can experience in the flesh and report back on, whether we are homeless people or corporate executives.  It felt very liberating not to have to "apply the formula" or "read the manual" in order to give valid feedback on something we'd experienced.

It was really nice to study how to create a place that would acknowledge human needs and meet them, instead of rigidly demanding that humans set their deep needs aside and bow to "rational management." It felt good to acknowledge that people want to be in the presence of other humans in a way that isn't rabidly commercial or psychotically self-interested. That fullfillment isn't in staying home and surfing the thousand channel universe.

The workshop threw ideologies out the window and let us be ourselves.  We were glad.

Another reason to like Saint John

Great story here about a 1979 action by longshoremen in Saint John that prevented "heavy water" from reaching the military dictatorship in Argentina.  An excerpt:

As a result of the protest, 11 of the 17 political prisoners were released within days and three were sent into exile. Another of the prisoners identified by the NO CANDU campaign, union leader Alberto Piccinini, was released a year later. During a visit to Canada, he expressed his gratitude to a group of Canadian workers: “Unity is the unity of all of us; and it must go beyond national boundaries. I am very clear that I am free today because of the struggle first of the people in my country and second because of workers elsewhere – especially in this beautiful country.”

Chile under Pinochet was one of the most brutal regimes of the 20th century, and was supported by most governments, including Canada.  Luckily, the courage and common decency of people in Saint John was able to help a few Chileans. 

At long last, the facebook status blog

I knew it would come to this eventually.  Today I'm not writing about an article or podcast, but about a friend's facebook status.  She wrote:

JW is thinking about words: burqa, niqab, sharia, Europe, dhimmi, submission, identity, public security, social inclusion, choice, public/private dichotomy... and wondering whether it is possible to come to agreement on what these words mean.

It got me to thinkin'. 

I have read a bunch of books about the Muslim world and the veil and face-covering issues just never go away.  For women in the west, we've grown up hearing (if not always experiencing) that women and men deserve to participate equally in public life.  Canadian society is increasingly one in which women earn as much money or more than their partners, fathers take paternity leave or even stay at home with children, and the view that women belong in the kitchen, or are the property of their husbands and fathers is long since passed.  Thank goodness.

Of all the words in her status list, I think choice is the most important. Whether burqas are banned or not, either way you still have men (either Islamic fundamentalists or western lawmakers) telling women what is okay to wear.  They don't have a choice in the matter - their dress is dictated by someone else. 


I find this debate very difficult - Canada is supposed to be a nation of religious freedom. But when religious freedom means one gender oppresses the other it's a hard pill to swallow. The sad part is, most Muslim women don't even have any way to voice their opinions on the matter. They are mostly shut out from public participation.  That's what bugs me the most.

So then you have to ask yourself whether passing a law banning female face coverings will actually enhance quality of life for these women or further contribute to their seclusion. Looking at the examples of Muslim men murdering their wives or daughters for becoming "too westernized" you have to wonder if banning face coverings could mean putting a vulnerable group even more at risk. It could mean they will never be able to leave their houses.  Then you will have an entire sector of the population effectively under house arrest.
 
The other part of the debate that bothers me is that the law is aimed at Muslims.  I don't see anyone taking on the oppression of women within extreme Christian sects - and they do exist, in places where 14-year old girls are married off to old men who already have multiple wives.  And let's not forget that some religions don't allow women to wear pants or cut their hair. So it seems a bit hypocritical to me for western parliaments to point their fingers at Muslims only when religious "oppression" (if that's what you want to call it) exists in many forms. So to me the "human rights" argument feels a bit sanctimonious.
 
I don't believe a ban is the way to go. I believe it will do more harm than good. If we really wanted to do well for Muslim women, I think there are other things we could be doing, like education and job training.  Women will take off their veils when they have adequate social resources to do so.  When they can stand on their own feet economically and make their own choices financially and in terms of marriage then they will have a choice on how to clothe themselves, either at home or in public.

Not in my orchestra's back yard

Let me tell you a little bit about the New Brunswick Youth Orchestra.  It began back in the 1960's and up until a few years ago had a pretty low profile.  The budget was limited but the dedication of volunteers, players and the conductor, Dr. James Mark, kept it going.  Dr. Mark was my conducting teacher at Mount A. and never once have I heard a single person say anything negative about him.  Never once have I heard him raise his voice at a student or ensemble.  A true gentleman, to say the least.

Lately the NBYO has succeeded in taking some high profile trips such as China, Carnegie Hall and Italy.  Much of this was made possible by the hard work of the chair of NBYO's Board, Ken McLeod.  This Board also recently launched the 'Sistema' program, which is an excellent initiative that provides orchestral instruments and training to children in the Moncton area, regardless of their financial status.

But here's the conflict: it appears that the NBYO is considering replacing Dr. Mark with a Venezuelan conductor connected to Sistema.  After more than 15 years of dedication the Board is trying to push Dr. Mark aside over the objections of many in the orchestra, who feel that Dr. Mark is an excellent conductor.  Dr. Mark himself has said he does not want to leave the NBYO.  It really bugs me that such a dedicated man would be bulldozed in an attempt to build more prestige for Sistema. 

In NB we often think our people are not as good as outsiders but we need leaders who understand New Brunswick and its situation.  Dr. Mark rountinely travels all over our rural province in an attempt to give young musicians a chance to audition.  He knows who the active teachers are, and has given years of his life to build this orchestra. 

I support the Sistema program but I think NBYO is "cutting of its nose to spite its face," as we say around here.  Dr. Mark deserves our loyalty and he should leave at a time of his choosing, not because of someone else's ambition.

Attention mentors and teachers: you matter

Hopefully everyone can idenfity a person who helped them to build skills and character and become more successful.  These mentors are oftentimes more important than friends or family because they encourage us to overcome obstacles in our thinking that prevent us from putting our talents into the world. Here's a great list of famous people and their mentors from the Harvard Mentors Project, take a look. 

I've been reading a little bit by the Dalai Lama and the Buddhists believe we are reborn many times until we learn to transcend suffering.  One thing I have been thinking about is how our actions affect other people - the 'vibe' we give off translates to other people feeling worthy or worthless, scared or safe, joyful or depressed.  Sometimes we fool ourselves into thinking that our actions don't matter, that nobody sees or cares what we do.  But the truth is we have enormous power to inspire, motivate and support one another, if we choose.  As Yeats once wrote:

Had I the heavens’ embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

Busy Bee

The RiVA machine is working overtime right now, planning for summer and trying to get ye olde Victorian beauty at 702 Main prepared for its Dooryard debut. In the meantime, we've applied for our charity status (meaning we will *fingers crossed* be able to issue tax receipts for donations), completed our first AGM and welcomed new board members.

It's unbelievable how different the preparations feel this year - this time last year we didn't even know where to rent a large outdoor tent, knew nothing about permits, codes, by-laws or zoning (and believe me, there's a LOT to know), and weren't even incorporated.  So, with 70% of this year's festival confirmed, we're an excited bunch.  I can feel the community support starting to appear; maybe some people are curious to see what they missed last summer.

A brief list of things I've learned:
1. Most people are nice and want to help.
2. You will have to do it yourself at first.
3. Be patient.  Then wait longer and be more patient.
4. Look for the right helpers and find the right job for them to do.  This makes life wonderful and you have company in addition to help.
5. Change is possible but it moves at such a slow rate as to be nearly inconceivable in the short-term.
6. All successes are worth celebrating.
7. Passion can move mountains, if you're patient (see #3).

This pretty much sums it up

But what about your pension?  Your benefits? 

When I left teaching, a lot of people asked me these questions.  Here's a look at other people who have left the 9-5 life, because they realize that
            
            your well-being is not tied to finances. It’s tied to relationships, it’s tied to skills it’s tied to creativity, resourcefulness and a sense of peace, intellectual challenge –  these are the things that enable our well-being,” she says.

It doesn't seem that radical to me, but in an era where GDP rules it's an awkward thing to explain sometimes.