Progress and Me
I have a love-hate relationship with the idea of "progress."
On one side, I'm all for it. It's a fabulous way to improve the
human condition: to progress means to grow and learn. On
the other hand, progress has often been a step on the wrong
direction. Under the guise of "progress," urban mass
transportation methods have been reduced to relics,
interstates have come to dominate the landscape, and
nature has been relegated to afterthoughts amid suburban
sprawl.

I think my problem with the word is that it has become so
abused. Politicians love the word, but convey no real
meaning when they use it. Rick Perry, for example, believes
that building eleven (now reduced to three large) coal plants
represents progress in maintaining energy production. The
Iraq war is said to "progress" slowly, indicating that the
situation is steadily improving. Say what?!

Real progress requires change. To progress, one must first
break the chains of the status quo and by doing so question
authority. A new paradigm emerges with innovative ideas
that improve the quality of life - that's what progress should
be. It's not about opening strip malls where once stood
prairie, or replacing old iron bridges with utilitarian,
low-slung concrete structures. Ultimately, progress should
be measured by what legacy we can be proud of to leave
behind.

I am always trying to find ways to progress (improve). I read
controversial books, listen and give merit to different
opinions (except Ann Coulter!), and get involved in
worthwhile causes. The best education for me is traveling; I
feel that on the road, I grow.

At the same time,  I can be incredibly backwards. I
sometimes find myself fighting change at all costs. I am livid
about the proposed Trans-Texas corridor and have made
my opinions known. I see most new technology as subtle
forms of enslavement (even though I have a website - never
said I was logical!) I refuse to eat new cuisines and am
reluctant to read new fiction because I don't want to get
"burned" by a bad book.

What got me thinking about my relationship to "progress"
was Salman Rushdie, who wrote (and I paraphrase), that
those who oppose progress are those who cannot think. I
ponder what he meant by that. If I oppose the destruction of
a venerated building, does that mean I'm a non-thinking
moron? Or did Rushdie mean what I meant when I wrote that
progress improves the human condition? Destroying beauty
doesn't better anyone, does it?

I think historians in general will find it hard to define true
progress. It's one of those elusive concepts that can mean
so many things - and may not say anything at all.
Downtown Dallas, where shiny glass and steel
overshadow the old buildings - is it progress or not?
Signs of downward progress can often be hidden in nostalgia.  
For example, I enjoy discovering old advertising on downtown
buildings (above is a Coca Cola advertisement in Chickasha,
Oklahoma). Advocating national brands as opposed to local
products, however quaint, ultimately made many  communities
lose their identities. So I contradict myself:  I wouldn't say that
Wal-Mart is progress, but I don't seem to have had any qualms in
reveling in old advertisements of homogenized soda pop.
Once again I have a
dilemma of conscience: I
love old neon, and lament
the demise of these
beautiful signs along the
highways. Yet when neon
first debuted, many people
thought it garish, and
towns even relegated its
displays to designated
areas. Of course, these
old neon signs became
the forerunners of the
cheaper and utilitarian
plastic signs. And didn't  
Holiday Inn, the
homogenized chain that
supposedly progressed
the motel industry to
respectability, start out as
a roadside motel, too?
Now I find myself resentful
of the chains that
introduced neon in the first
place...