Praveen Fernandes

Praveen Fernandes (PF) is my brother-in-law and someone I have been trying to convince to write a WITI since we got started last year. His bio is far longer than I could list here, but briefly, he’s a lawyer, advocate, former Obama administration appointee, art lover, and a great uncle! Hugely happy to have him writing here. - Noah (NRB)Praveen here. I enjoy old-school correspondence. Yes, handwritten letters, placed in envelopes, stamped, and then placed in mailboxes. I savor the idea that a letter I have touched will travel thousands of miles, across seas and time zones, and finally arrive at the home of loved ones, where it will be touched by their hands; atoms that I have rearranged on the page will be further rearranged by them in an act of communion, meaningful even before they get to the letter’s substance. I appreciate that loved ones know it is a letter from me even before opening it, as they recognize my handwriting; in turn, for a handful of family members and friends, I can instantly identify their handwriting. I realize that I’m a statistical outlier in an era of email and text messages, both of which are admittedly more efficient channels of communication and ones I use all the time. My relationship with mail is driven more by emotion than by logic. Stamps are a part of that.I was reminded of this emotional connection this past December, when I was about to mail my holiday cards and agonized about which stamps to buy. In the end, I selected stamps featuring artwork from “The Snowy Day,” a beloved children’s book by Ezra Jack Keats, which won the Caldecott Medal in 1963, making it the first book with an African-American protagonist to win a significant children’s award. But the truth is, I was temporarily frozen by my winter stamp choices. There were Winter Berries, Holiday Wreaths, and Poinsettias, and that is before one even gets to the stamps that mark winter holidays, such as Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, or Lunar New Year. Happily, there was a diversity in the offerings that would have been unimaginable in my youth.Why Is This Interesting?I spend a lot of time at my day job thinking about the arc of constitutional progress, meaning the way in which the United States Constitution, through its many amendments, has been strengthened and become more inclusive, reflecting our nation’s conversations about equality and liberty, and about the metes and bounds of the American family. However, the Constitution is only one locus for this national discussion; our cultural institutions and products, and yes, even our stamp subjects, reflect this conversation and can trace an arc of progress. (To cite just two examples, in 2006, children had their first chance to send letters with an Eid stamp, and in 2016, children had their first chance to send letters with a Diwali stamp, expanding people’s ideas about what could qualify as an American holiday and what traditions our friends and neighbors observed.) I became curious about how the United States Postal Service (USPS) chooses stamp subjects.  As is often the case with important matters, there’s a committee associated with it. In this instance, it is the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee (CSAC), which advises the United States Postmaster General (PMG), who heads the United States Postal Service (USPS). The USPS describes the committee’s function as follows:Using their collective expertise in history, science, technology, art, education, sports, and other areas of public interest, CSAC members consider and then recommend stamp subjects to the PMG, who makes the final selections.There is a process, involving CSAC consideration of the proposals at quarterly meetings. And the process is not hasty—stamp programs and subjects are planned two to three years in advance. The USPS has established some clear criteria, including, but not limited to: (1) that the subject be American (although “other subjects may be considered if the subject had significant impact on American history, culture, or environment”); (2) that if the subject is a person, the person is deceased and died at least 3 years before the proposal; (3) that if the subject is the anniversary of a historical event, it should be in multiples of 50 (50th anniversary, 100th anniversary, etc); and (4) that the subject be positive, as “negative occurrences and disasters will not be commemorated on U.S. postage stamps.” Additionally, presumably to avoid any issues relating to entanglement with religion, the USPS will not issue stamps “to honor religious institutions or individuals whose principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings or beliefs.”Any member of the public can submit a proposal for a stamp subject. And since “no in-person appeals, phone calls, or e-mails are accepted,” one is reminded that a proposal must be written and mailed using the USPS. (But, of course!) Roughly 40,000 ideas are submitted each year, and of these, roughly 25 proposals are selected by the CSAC and passed on to the Postmaster General for approval. Individuals whose proposals are not selected by the CSAC need not lose heart, as they can resubmit a proposal after a three-year interval. Stamp campaigns have lasted many years and involved numerous advocacy organizations. For instance, when the Marvin Gaye stamp was issued on April 2, 2019 (on what would have been Gaye’s 80th birthday), it represented the culmination of a campaign begun in 2003 to honor the music icon (often referred to as the “Prince of Soul”) and which involved both the Motown Alumni Association and the Marvin Gaye USPS Stamp Initiative, an organization founded by superfan Carla Johnson. As Johnson said in an article in The Charlotte Post, “…when we were finally able to see something that had been denied twice, we felt like we had definitely made history and I was excited to be a part of that.”  While the professional artists with which the USPS contracts to produce stamp artwork are compensated, individuals who have submitted successful stamp subject proposals receive no credit or financial compensation. But I’m not sure anyone can put a price on having played a role in what we celebrate as part of our American heritage and who we honor as part of the American family. (PF)Book of the Day:There are many great collections of correspondence between famous writers, such as the compelling “Words in Air,” which is the complete collection of the decades of letters shared between the poets Elizabeth Bishop and Robert Lowell.  But have you wondered about letters from people known more for images?  “More Than Words: Illustrated Letters from the Smithsonian’s Archives of American Art” collects illustrated letters from artists and architects.  For instance, a 1978 letter from the architect and furniture designer Gio Ponti to American architectural historian Esther McCoy, a 1981 thank-you note from painter Edith Schloss, a 1971 letter from artist and social activist Miné Okubo, or a 1913 three-dimensional letter from illustrator Alfred J. Frueh to his future spouse Giuliette Fanciulli.Quick Links:Few intellectual property dispute stories have happy endings. This New York Times piece recounts one of those rare tales, about a brief naming kerfuffle between an indie-rock band (the Postal Service) and an independent federal government agency (the United States Postal Service). (PF)A less happy tale about the Statue of Liberty, a sculptural replica in Las Vegas, a stamp, and a choice that cost $3.5 million. (PF) A touching 2014 Washington Post article about the issuance and dedication of the Harvey Milk stamp. (PF)History.com author’s opinion about the 11 most controversial stamps in United States history (PF)International Correspondence Writing Month (affectionately known as “InCoWriMo”) involves a pledge to write a letter a day in February, the shortest of months (PF)Thanks for reading,Noah (NRB) & Colin (CJN) & Praveen (PF)Why is this interesting? is a daily email from Noah Brier & Colin Nagy (and friends!) about interesting things. If you’ve enjoyed this edition, please consider forwarding it to a friend. If you’re reading it for the first time, consider subscribing (it’s free!).

Why is this interesting? - The Stamps Edition

Praveen Fernandes (PF) is my brother-in-law and a previous WITI contributor (the very excellent Stamps Edition). His bio is far longer than I could list here, but briefly, he’s a lawyer, advocate, former Obama administration appointee, and art lover. - Noah (NRB)Praveen here. In the winter of 2014, snowy owls, which normally inhabit the arctic tundra, were spotted in a number of major East Coast cities. The theory is that these owls were driven south because climate change had disrupted their usual food sources. One displaced owl in particular captivated our nation’s capital city, perching upon a ledge near The Washington Post headquarters. It was massive, majestic, and frequently Instagrammed. When it wasn’t being a social media darling, it presumably found plentiful urban rodents to keep itself fed.Until it was hit by a city bus.Why is this interesting?It was surprising to many that an owl could be hit by a large and slow-moving vehicle, as owls are known for their sharp vision. But it’s a specific type of visual acuity. As Ellen Paul, Executive Director of the Washington Ornithological Council explained to The Washington Post, owls are raptors (as are falcons, hawks, eagles, etc), and raptors have excellent forward vision, but poor peripheral vision:It’s got to be very accurate . . . It’s going to swoop down and pick up an animal that may be moving. It has to be able to see and focus and lock on to the animal. And it’s not going to notice . . . what’s coming at it from the side.And this, as I remembered from a college evolutionary biology course, makes sense. Eye placement and vision explains a lot about where an animal exists within a food chain.  According to the Museum of Osteology:Eyes that face forward on a skull suggest a predator. Forward facing eyes allow for binocular or stereoscopic vision, which allows an animal to see and judge depth. Predators need this depth perception to track and pursue prey . . . . [E]yes that are located on the side of its head would suggest a prey animal. Side eye placement allows for greater peripheral or side vision. This allows the animal to see predators approaching from the side as well as from behind. This vision is very important for protecting an animal when it is grazing or feeding. Think of an owl versus a rabbit. The latter has eyes on the sides of its head, with a broad range of peripheral vision, as well as ears that can move and rotate to capture the sounds of approaching predators; but it doesn’t have the long-distance, sharp, focused vision of an owl. And it’s not just eye placement within a skull, but also the density of eye cells, and retinal rod placement within owl eyes that seem to provide extremely detailed forward vision. The trade-off is poor peripheral vision.  In short, this owl was not built to worry about risks from the side, even slow-moving risks, as there is a very limited bus schedule in the arctic tundra. Raptor eyesight was designed for seizing small and fast prey, not for avoiding harm.The discussion above describes evolutionary, structural differences in animals, which occur over many generations of genetic selection and shaping. But my mind strayed from science---in part because I was quickly out of my depth---and I began to think about behavioral adaptations and humans. Not the evolutionary changes that happen over generations, but rather the behavior of individual organisms in reaction to their individual environments.I find unexceptional the claim that our sense of vulnerability shapes the way we move in the world, and affects the amount of time and energy we spend monitoring threats. Extending this logic, focus can be considered a form of luxury, a luxury afforded to those whose survival doesn’t depend upon monitoring the periphery. Regardless of where one falls within a metaphoric food chain, each one’s field of vision comes with its limitations. And when one’s setting changes dramatically, those limitations can become apparent. (PF)Book of the DayOcean Vuong’s On Earth We’re Briefly Gorgeous. As difficult as this book is to describe, it’s even more difficult to forget. It’s a first novel by a writer who works primarily as a poet, and the prose has the compression of image and intensity of feeling that I associate with poetry. Vuong structures the book as a letter from a Vietnamese-American son who is a writer to a mother who cannot read. The words serve as a meditation on the limitations of words. The book explores the distances immigrants travel physically and symbolically, but it’s also about so many other things. It is painful and unsparing, and full of so much beauty. As Justin Torres said in his New York Times review:Nowadays the word “sentimental” is impossible to detach from its pejorative sense, but the original, philosophical sense of the word refers to thought that is either colored by, or proceeds from, feeling . . .  [T]he book is brilliant in the way it pays attention not to what our thoughts make us feel, but to what our feelings make us think. To what kind of truths does feeling lead?(PF)Quick LinksA piece in The New York Times about the literature that might be inspired by the COVID-19 pandemic (PF)A collaborative art piece called “Phone Call,” conceived by Ginevra Shay and supported by the Transformer Gallery, in which participants sign up to be read to, and to interact with, poets and artists. Think John Giorno’s “Dial-a-Poem” or Yoko Ono’s “Telephone Piece,” but newly relevant and for our moment (PF)Jason Farago in The New York Times on visual art and artists in the midst of a plague, and on what may emerge after (PF) Think a novel about twins and grammar couldn’t possibly be fascinating? Cathleen Schine’s The Grammarians proves you wrong. But don’t take my word for it, as Lauren Leibowitz explains it far better in her New Yorker review (PF)As this Washington Post piece describes, the “coronavirus pandemic has highlighted yet another Faultline in America’s racial and economic divisions---those who can do their jobs from home and those who can’t” (PF)Thanks for reading,Noah (NRB) & Colin (CJN) & Praveen (PF)Why is this interesting? is a daily email from Noah Brier & Colin Nagy (and friends!) about interesting things. If you’ve enjoyed this edition, please consider forwarding it to a friend. If you’re reading it for the first time, consider subscribing (it’s free!).

Why is this interesting? - The Owl Edition

Praveen Fernandes (PF) is my brother-in-law and a previous WITI contributor (the very excellent Owl and Stamps Editions). His bio is far longer than I could list here, but briefly, he’s a lawyer, advocate, former Obama administration appointee, and art lover. - Noah (NRB)Praveen here. In early February, amidst events like the Superbowl and the Iowa Caucuses, something else happened that captured less attention—various publications, such as Architectural Record and The New York Times, appear to have gained access to the draft of an executive order that, if finalized and issued, would establish that “classical architectural style shall be the preferred and default style” for all new and renovated federal buildings. For those who don’t follow architecture closely, the classical architectural style referenced in the order is a style that harkens back to ancient buildings built by Greeks and Romans from the 5th century BCE to the 3rd century CE. Think the Acropolis and the Pantheon. Envision columns and pediments, in materials like marble and stone. The draft executive order criticizes the General Service Administration, an independent federal agency that manages federal properties and oversees much of the contracting for the federal government, and in particular, its Design Excellence Program. The Supreme Court Building by Cass GilbertWhy is this interesting? While many executive orders end up getting politicized on substantive and procedural grounds—and this draft executive order likely will prove no exception—there is a compelling history behind the existing Guiding Principles that inform the Design Excellence Program’s approach to shaping federal architecture.The current system establishes parameters and principles for federal buildings, but in terms that are purposely open-textured. Issued in 1962 and derived from a report authored by a young (pre-Senate) Daniel Patrick Moynihan to President John Kennedy, the Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture require: (1) the design of federal buildings to provide “efficient and economical facilities” for government use; and (2) “provide visual testimony to the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability” of American government. The principles aimed to ensure that good design wasn’t considered an afterthought, and the document continues by saying:The belief that good design is optional, or in some way separate from the question of the provision of office space itself, does not bear scrutiny, and in fact invites the least efficient use of public money.The principles specifically state that “the development of an official style must be avoided” and go on to quote Pericles’ instruction to the Athenians, “We do not imitate—for we are a model to others.” As a drafting matter, Moynihan and his team wisely avoided being overly granular. By establishing goals like buildings that provide visual testimony to “dignity” and “vigor,” but not being overly specific about what dignity and vigor translate into, the principles have remained relevant and powerful without being overly prescriptive or needing to be updated. We see the wisdom of this approach to drafting elsewhere. For instance, examining one of the U.S. Constitution’s strongest and most vital provisions, the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection language (preventing the denial of “any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”), it establishes a clear commitment to equality without being overly granular. This has permitted fidelity to the text’s equality mandate, while protecting the rights of a number of groups of people (such as the LGBTQ community of which I’m a member) whose struggles might not have been specifically contemplated by the Framers. We can benefit from broadly stated principles, which can be applied in successive generations based on the reality and demands of the moment. There is also a humility to this approach. It’s hubris to think we know what will evoke dignity in the years ahead. When I was 11, I was fairly sure that my sleeveless vest and parachute pants constituted enduring elegance. (I was wrong, Gentle Reader. So wrong.) To cite an architectural example, consider Brutalism. This style (with its simplicity, rough edges, and abundant use of concrete) might have fallen out of favor for some time, but it is experiencing a comeback. And buildings like the Barbican in London and City Hall in Boston are finding legions of new fans, like the architectural equivalent of high-waisted pants.J. Edgar Hoover F.B.I. Building by Charles F. Murphy and AssociatesThe Guiding Principles avoid isolating any strands of America’s architectural DNA and amplifying them over others. This allows for the sort of regional variations in the built environment that one sees when taking a road trip across the country. To name just a few examples, one can observe Spanish influences in Florida, Mexican influences in Texas, and Japanese influences in California. And of course, the architecture of a region doesn’t just reflect its people and cultural history, but also the practical realities of building in that region. A flat modernist roof might work well in Palm Springs, CA, but might be a disaster in a state with heavy snowfall, like Vermont.  U.S. Courthouse for the Utah District by Thomas Phifer and PartnersFinally, the flexibility of the Guiding Principles has permitted federal architecture to adapt to new challenges. Knowledge about the climate change crisis and the environmental impact of building has changed how architects approach their work. Why shouldn’t buildings in the Pacific Northwest be able to use locally sourced and reclaimed timber? Why shouldn’t buildings have flat, green roofs?  Foreclosing these simply because they don’t mesh with a particular style would be foolish. Also, what about other challenges? Security screening measures implemented after September 11, 2001, have meant that the grand central entrances of such classical buildings like the Supreme Court have been closed to the public, in favor of side entrances that facilitate screening. What adjustments will the COVID19 crisis bring us? A recent WITI discussed the importance of considering HVAC in buildings, but might we also discover that the large central halls and formal entrances of classical buildings make less sense than buildings with multiple entrances (to avoid large groups of congregating people) and ones that make use of indoor and outdoor spaces? As the nation navigates this current deadly pandemic—and constructs buildings to lessen the impact of future pandemics—the Guiding Principles don’t limit architectural problem-solvers to the constraints of a particular style. The Guiding Principles aim for beauty in our federal buildings, but avoid the trap of narrowly defining what is and could be beautiful. (PF)House of the Day: Utsav House is in Alibagh, India, just on the outskirts of Mumbai. This New York Times article is a thoughtful exploration (with striking pictures) both of architectural influences in India and the experiences (including family tragedy) that shaped the approach of the architect, Bijoy Jain. (PF)Quick Links:What’s in a name? The proposal for rebranding Brutalism as “Heroic” architecture. (PF) “The World’s Most Extraordinary Homes” is a Netflix series that I feared would devolve into a sizzle reel for mansions, but it ended up being something much more interesting. Season 1 focused on homes that adapted to landscapes, with each episode (Mountain, Forest, Coast, Underground) spotlighting architecture that blended and complemented its natural surroundings. (PF)Julius Shulman was a photographer most known for his pictures of Mid-Century Modern architecture in California. His photo of Case Study House #22 is iconic. Modernism Rediscovered examines 400 of his pictures. (PF)Ruth Asawa, an artist whose sculptural (and quasi-architectural) works were underappreciated during her lifetime, is gaining a USPS stamp and new fans. (PF)Thanks for reading,Noah (NRB) & Colin (CJN) & Praveen (PF)—Why is this interesting? is a daily email from Noah Brier & Colin Nagy (and friends!) about interesting things. If you’ve enjoyed this edition, please consider forwarding it to a friend. If you’re reading it for the first time, consider subscribing (it’s free!).

Why is this interesting? - The Federal Architecture Edition

Praveen Fernandes (PF) is my brother-in-law and a previous WITI contributor (the very excellent Owl, Stamps, and Federal Architecture Editions). His bio is far longer than I could list here, but briefly, he’s a lawyer, advocate, former Obama administration appointee, and art lover. - Noah (NRB)Praveen here. Hulu’s “Only Murders in the Building” is marked by intergenerational humor. In a scene from the first season, after deciding that young people prefer texts to calls, the two older protagonists (played by Martin Short and Steve Martin) are deciding how to sign off texts to the younger protagonist (played by Selena Gomez). The humor lies in the fact that text messages aren’t generally signed. As an audience member, I laughed. But truth be told, I remember when texting was a new technology, and I remember signing my early texts. Perhaps I even remember being mocked by my more tech-savvy friends. (Let us not speak of this again.)New technologies beget new conventions. But not immediately. There exists a lag period between the emergence of a correspondence technology and the development of correspondence conventions that better suit the new form. I remember joining a law firm in the late 1990s, newly graduated from law school, when email was a somewhat new way of communicating with clients. The old method involved printed legal memoranda on heavy firm stationery, with handwritten signatures or initials accompanying the authors’ names at the top; these memoranda were mailed to clients or couriered to clients who were within the city. During the transition to electronic communication, I remember style manuals containing suggestions of how to begin and end email messages to clients, with “Sincerely,” “Best regards,” or “Warm regards” being common ending options.Why is this interesting?Email messages increasingly drop such niceties (or default to incorporating them into an electronic signature). That’s unsurprising. New technology now allows us to know the sender and the recipient immediately, arguably eliminating the need for such things. But it’s not simply a matter of technology. The opening line (“Dear ___,”) of a traditional letter is referred to as a salutation, and the closing (“Sincerely, ____”) is referred to as a valediction. These lines did more than merely announce to whom the letter was intended and from whom it was being sent. After all, akin to email messages, there was an address and a return address on the envelope of an old-fashioned letter, so the “to” and “from” were hardly mysteries. Salutations and valedictions also provided an emotional context and information about how people knew each other. For archivists, a letter beginning with “My darling Reshma,” and ending with “Your doting brother, Rajesh,” conveys a lot. And social norms came into play. For instance, in the early 1900s, it would have been inappropriate for a man to use the valediction “Love,” to a woman to whom he was not related or to whom he was not engaged to be married.Some valedictions seem unusable now. For instance, Thomas Jefferson’s “Your most obedient and most humble servant,” is unlikely to be adopted by today’s government officials. And modern valedictions might have derivations that surprise those who casually use them today. For instance, some argue that “Yours truly” and “Sincerely yours” actually began as abbreviations for “Your servant truly” and “Sincerely your servant,” with the lowercase “s” in each instance appearing as a superscript.There is likely no shortage of advice for salutations and valedictions on the internet, such as those for business correspondence, those for email messages, and those for email messages in particular industries. And there are seasonal valedictions, like the “Happy holidays!” valediction that pops up in work email as a customary closing around December each year. However, I’m intrigued by the ones that seem to emerge organically, instigated by new circumstances. For example, in the spring of 2020, when the coronavirus pandemic placed large parts of the world in lockdown, I noticed that many email messages I received were capped by “Stay safe,” or “Hoping you are and remain safe,” endings that would have been odd and meaningless in the spring of 2019. A valediction was forged by a collective threat that was very specific to 2020. And it told the recipient something non-generic; it certainly wasn’t part of anyone’s electronic signature. For future readers of such correspondence, it conveys something about how we interacted with each other, what concerned us, and what was going on at the time. And that’s before one gets to the actual substance of the correspondence.Of course, writers like Matthew J.X. Malady, have made a strong (and droll) case for eliminating sign-offs entirely in email. He argues that any awkwardness at first will be offset by the time saved, and ultimately, will become less awkward. But I can’t help but feel that part of his quarrel with email valedictions stems from their being generic and poorly chosen. As he explained:But everyone has a breaking point. For me, it was the ridiculous variations on “Regards” that I received over the past holiday season. My transition from signoff submissive to signoff subversive began when a former colleague ended an email to me with “Warmest regards.” Were these scalding hot regards superior to the ordinary “Regards” I had been receiving on a near-daily basis? Obviously they were better than the merely “Warm Regards” I got from a co-worker the following week. Then I received “Best Regards” in a solicitation email from the New Republic. Apparently when urging me to attend a panel discussion, the good people at the New Republic were regarding me in a way that simply could not be topped.Malady’s piece was published in 2013. Roughly a decade later, it’s not even that awkward to eliminate valedictions in email messages. So, it’s understandable if people want to jettison them. But I know where I stand on the topic. Your faithful correspondent I remain, P.F.Exhibition of the DayUntil February 26, 2023, you’ll be able to see the finalists of the triennial Outwin Boochever Portrait Competition at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, DC. The 42 winning pieces, which can also be viewed online here, were selected by expert jurors from a pool of over 2,700 entries. The finalists challenge restrictive notions of portraiture and span genres—paintings, sculptures, and photographs, but also videos and soundscapes. What does it mean to make a portrait of your mother in India comprised of surveillance camera footage capturing years of your conversations and anxious monitoring from thousands of miles away in New York, as the artist Cheryl Mukerji did? Or to capture in a video portrait and day-long performance the societally unacknowledged and underappreciated labor of Black women, as the artist Holly Bass did? You can see these works and more in this stirring exhibition. And you never know whose career will earn a well-deserved lift from the competition. The painter Amy Sherald won the 2016 competition with her gorgeous painting “Miss Everything (Unsupressed Deliverance),” and then, helped in part by the greater attention paid to her work, went on to be chosen to paint this iconic portrait of former First Lady Michelle Obama. (PF)Quick Links:The United States Postal Service has a bevy of new 2022 postage stamps on offer, including one that celebrates the painter George Morrison (one of the leading Native American modernist artists) and the James Webb telescope (the most sensitive telescope ever deployed in space).  Still available is last year’s tribute to Japanese American servicemembers of WWII and coming soon (next month!) will be a stamp honoring the women cryptologists of WWII. (PF)—WITI x McKinsey:An ongoing partnership where we highlight interesting McKinsey research, writing, and data.How to remove unconscious bias from the workplace. When it comes to job performance, unconscious bias can be more harmful than explicit discrimination—and everyone at work suffers for it.Read and see why tackling this problem benefits everyone.  —Thanks for reading,Noah (NRB) & Colin (CJN) & Praveen (PF)—Why is this interesting? is a daily email from Noah Brier & Colin Nagy (and friends!) about interesting things. If you’ve enjoyed this edition, please consider forwarding it to a friend. If you’re reading it for the first time, consider subscribing (it’s free!).