Sofi LaLonde | Vox

What does it mean to learn from failure? Eve L. Ewing has an idea.

2024-08-05T12:32:47-04:00

Eve L. Ewing is a writer, professor, researcher, and Chicago native. But even that list of titles doesn’t feel adequate to describe the breadth of her creative output and the depth of her intellectual and academic work. She writes fiction for young people and adults, poetry, serious academic books about education policy, and seriously mainstream comic books in the Black Panther/Wakanda series. She’s also a professor, a community organizer, head of the Beyond Schools research lab, and an artist.

In this month’s Highlight Podcast, Jonquilyn Hill and Eve talk about how she gets so much done, why she pushes herself to try new things, what she’s learned from a lifetime in education, and what, through her research lab, she still hopes to figure out.

What follows is a partial transcript of the conversation edited for length and clarity. Listen to the full version here or in the player below:

You can also add a private RSS feed in Apple Podcasts by taking the following actions:

Open the Podcasts app
Tap Library
Tap Edit (three dots) in the upper right corner, and then tap “Follow a Show by URL”
Enter your RSS feed: https://feeds.megaphone.fm/VMP8601503564
Tap Follow
The podcast will populate under the Listen Now and Library tabs

Jonquilyn Hill

I’m not going to lie, it was kind of hard to pin down what exactly to talk about because you write so much. Is there a through line through all that work? How do you think of all of your work in conversation with one another?

Eve L. Ewing

I think that part of why it feels overwhelming or confusing to people is that I work across a lot of different genres. And I think that a lot of people define their work by the genre in which they write. And for me, I’m more interested in a connected set of questions.

Some of my work is about the world as it is and how it got to be this way. And some of it is about the world as it could be and how we speculate to create something different.

I’m a scholar of education, specifically race and inequality in education. And so a lot of my work in that arena is thinking about the histories of racial inequality in the US, and how schools are a reflection of a broader, unequal society. But also how schools play a role in perpetuating and normalizing that inequality.

In the speculative world and thinking about how the world could be otherwise, I spend a lot of time writing poetry and comics and thinking about Afrofuturism and other ways of doing imaginative work.

But the real thing is that I just like telling stories. And as I think about the kind of work that I want to do, I’m really just setting about to tell the best stories that I can in the ways that they want to be told.

And I am too foolish, too silly to be bound by the idea that, “Well, I’ve never written this type of thing in this way before.’ So usually if it occurs to me, I’m just willing to give it a shot.

Jonquilyn Hill

In preparation for this conversation, I watched a conversation between you and the poet and essayist Hanif Abdurraqib. And you had this really funny story about your redemption arc as a spades player.

Eve L. Ewing

So two summers ago, I co-founded and co-taught a two-week writing workshop with a group of Howard students, and I found none of them could play spades. So I taught them how to play spades and now there are some Bison out there that can count me as their spades grandma.

Jonquilyn Hill

You said you were able to look at spades in a new way through that teaching. What does teaching teach you?

Eve L. Ewing

So I think that part of my commitment to spades is that in my little literary circle, I am known as a wild spades player in the sense of being sometimes unreliable. Like I have done my partners dirty.

Jonquilyn Hill

Have you reneged?

Eve L. Ewing

I’m gonna take the fifth on that. The point is, I’ve gotten so much better over time because I’m willing to take feedback and I’m willing to fail in public.

I think that it’s really hard to be effective as an artist if you’re not comfortable with failure. It’s really, really hard to be effective at creating anything if you’re not comfortable with the idea that you have to work through your own sometimes poor showing. Because it’s only when you get comfortable with that that you can ever get better, right? And I feel like writers and artists across all disciplines say this, but it’s really hard to actually do.

I try to maintain in my life a practice of always being willing to try some things that I’m not great at and muddle through them. Part of why that’s my practice is that it helps me maintain discipline as a writer.

I do things that I’m mediocre at because it gives me the fortitude to show up and grind through a really bad first draft and come back to it.

Whereas people that maybe are more talented but less tenacious than me would just quit. And again, this is not a unique insight. Baldwin said this, Alexander Chee says this, lots of writers will say it’s not really about talent. It’s about a willingness to finish, to complete things. And that requires being bad.

Jonquilyn Hill

How did you get comfortable with failure?

Eve L. Ewing

Yeah, it’s scary right? Part of your question about teaching is that: how can I be in a position as an educator where I’m asking people to be vulnerable, be not great at things, try new things, do things that are maybe new to them, receive feedback, receive advice, revise. How can I ask that of anybody else if I’m not willing to do that of myself?

I’m half joking about the spades thing, but Im also quite serious. There’s a lot of people in my life that are really amazing at spades, and then there’s a lot of people that never learned how to play. And I’m like, if this is an art that’s important to us, specifically as Black people, if we’re saying this is part of our culture, then we have to be willing to put ourselves out there. Or else it dies, you know?

Jonquilyn Hill

I think that’s interesting, especially when you talk about your relationship with your students, with young people, because I read in an interview from a few years ago that you think one of the most impactful things you’ve written is Maya and the Robot.

Eve L. Ewing

Maya and the Robot is a novel I wrote for young readers. And it’s about a girl whose best friend is a robot. And it’s about a lot of other things too. I knew that people who were familiar with [my nonfiction] work were not necessarily going to go out and pick up this work of children’s fiction. And I feel like, obviously that’s everybody’s prerogative.

But I feel like people, outside of folks who write for kids and educators, often don’t take children’s literature seriously. And I think that whether or not you choose to make reading literature for young people part of your everyday practice, the fact of the matter is that for most people in our culture, their most vibrant reading life happens before they turn 18, happens in school.

And so given that, many people, if you ask them, what’s your favorite book or what’s your best memory as a reader? They’re going to tell you about something that they read when they were children, right?

When I approached writing that book, I did so with that sense of responsibility that if you’re going to write for young people, you are playing a really serious role in shaping how people think about literature in our culture for the rest of their lives.

Jonquilyn Hill

So we’ve been talking about your writing a lot, but I also want to ask you about your research, particularly the Beyond Schools Lab. Tell us what it is you research there.

Eve L. Ewing

So I have a small research group, at the University of Chicago that I call the Beyond Schools Lab. Basically it’s just giving a name to me and the graduate students, undergraduate students, and colleagues that I am lucky enough to collaborate with.

The idea that undergirds all of that research and the reason why I use that term beyond schools is that I think within education, we have a way of assigning all of the culpability and responsibility, for transforming schools to people in those schools.

And what we often don’t do is think about the ways that schools themselves are a reflection of the broader social structure in which they are enacted.

Part of what I mean when I say beyond schools is how do we think about what happens in education space as being a collective responsibility that transcends what we traditionally call education?

And how do we push people in power, but also from the grassroots level? How do we think about not just test scores and grades and graduation rates and things like that, but how we create opportunities for all young people to have the lives that they want to have and the lives that they deserve, in ways that reflect a sense of collective responsibility?

I don’t necessarily identify as a Christian, but there’s a lot of stuff in Christianity, in the Bible that appeals to me or that I call upon a lot. And one of them is the idea of the least of these, where Jesus says “that what you do to the least of these, you do unto me.”

I think about children as being people who are in many ways made the most vulnerable to the shifting social currents of our world and who also are systematically denied political and civic power to change and affect those currents. If we have people that are unhoused, if we have people that don’t have good jobs, if we have air that is not clean, young people bear the brunt of that from the time they are born and often don’t have a lot of control in being asked to contribute to shaping responses to those issues. How do we all show up and take on collective responsibility, to change those circumstances?

How the train industry could change after the Ohio disaster

2023-03-10T10:07:43-05:00

A Norfolk Southern train passes underneath a bridge in East Palestine, Ohio. | Michael Swensen/Getty Images

Railroads are a fixture of the American landscape: There are about 140,000 miles of track in the United States. But most people don’t think of the trains running through our towns and cities all that often.

“It was just a means of transportation for moving goods from one point to the other,” Wayne Bable told Vox’s Benji Jones last week in East Palestine, Ohio. “I mean, the trains are every 15 minutes on a regular basis. So it’s just part of life. … After a while, you don’t hear them. We sure hear them now.”

It was the dramatic derailment of a train last month in his small town that changed Bable’s awareness of that regularity. On February 3, a Norfolk Southern train carrying hazardous materials derailed near East Palestine. In its wake, concerns have been raised on the environmental impacts of the spill, and over the trains and how they run.

Action in Washington has been relatively swift. There’s now a bipartisan effort to address railroad safety, and Norfolk Southern’s CEO testified Thursday before Congress.

The derailment and its fallout raise a lot of questions about the rail industry, its profits, and deregulation. But in order to understand the regulatory landscape, we first need to know how the modern rail industry functions. To talk about that for an episode of The Weeds, we called Joanna Marsh, a senior staff reporter at FreightWaves, which covers freight transportation. And for a better understanding of the policy solutions, we talked to Washington Post transportation reporter Ian Duncan.

Below are some of their answers to our big questions about the state of railways and the railroad industry. Host Jonquilyn Hill’s questions and the reporters’ answers have been edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to The Weeds wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and Stitcher.

Who are the big players in the modern railroad industry, and how much stuff are they moving?

Joanna Marsh: There are a lot of railroad companies operating in the United States. According to the Federal Railroad Administration, there are over 800 freight and passenger railroads. That includes subways and commuter rails and Amtrak. But you still have hundreds of railroad companies.

There are three economic classes of railroads. You have your smallest companies, like mom-and-pop operations. They serve the small towns, like companies or shippers that might be there if you want to transport crushed stone somewhere or farmers who want to sell their soybeans.

And then you have a slightly larger size, which means they make more money and they generate more revenue. Those include small railroads that might cover a wider territory, or they might include companies who have several of these smaller rail assets throughout the country or in a certain region. These two kinds of railroads are called short line railroads.

The last category consists of the biggest railroads, and they’re the ones who have thousands of miles of track, who make millions of dollars, and who spend millions of dollars. And they’re called the Class 1 railroads. There are seven of them right now in the United States and Canada … all of them except BNSF are publicly traded.

The bulk of freight goods are transported by truck, but rail handles a sizable portion of it as well. A lot of what rail handles are bulk commodities and things that you might not necessarily need right away. So things like coal or grain, or energy products such as ethanol or crude oil. Other commodities that the railroads carry include automotive parts and vehicles. Those components kind of go back and forth between the US and Canada and Mexico. So your car might have parts that are produced in Canada and the US and is actually put together in Mexico, and then [it] goes back into the US via train.

And there is also a type of rail car called intermodal cars or intermodal containers. Those are ones that carry your import goods, things that might come from the ports, inland.

How often do freight trains derail? Is East Palestine an outlier?

Joanna Marsh: Train derailments among the Class 1 railroads actually happen quite a bit.

Between January and November 2022, there were 818 train derailments reported to the Federal Railroad Administration out of 1,049 total. That number is actually slightly lower than 2020 and 2021 numbers, which are hovering around 870.

It’s interesting what happened in East Palestine as well, because it’s not an unusual cause to have overheated bearings.

Part of the reason you don’t hear about derailments as much is because they might be occurring in places where there just aren’t very many people around.

Part of it, too, might be that the derailment isn’t as flashy, like it might not have resulted in multiple cars derailing or what derailed didn’t cause tank cars to heat up their chemicals and cause an explosion.

There are various reasons why derailments occur. One could be how the track has been maintained. Another reason could be mechanical issues with the rail cars.

Looking at this [East Palestine] train derailment, even though this happened on Norfolk Southern’s track and it was a Norfolk Southern train and the wayside detectors of the hot box detectors are owned and operated by Norfolk Southern, the rail cars themselves are actually not owned by Norfolk Southern.

Norfolk Southern inspects the train to make sure everything looks okay. But who is actually liable for the rail car is kind of to be determined.

Most rail cars are owned by either rail car leasing companies such as Trinity Industries or GATX. The other kind of rail car owners are companies — or shippers, as people call them: your chemical manufacturers or your plastics producers or your grain producers or your coal companies.

How are railroads regulated?

Ian Duncan: So the regulation of railroads goes back to the 19th century, because it’s obviously one of the oldest big industries in the country.

The modern era, starting in the 1980s, has been about deregulation. That’s where we get to today, where there is federal oversight, but it’s reasonably limited and a lot of it has to do with safety measures.

There is a part of the US Department of Transportation called the Federal Railroad Administration, and they have the power to set safety rules for the railroads. It’s a little bit like the Federal Aviation Administration for planes, but they’re not running the air traffic control system in the same way. They do some hands-on stuff, they do some inspections, but it’s mostly about setting safety rules.

There’s a body called the Surface Transportation Board, which has some commercial oversight of the relationships between railroads and their customers. And there was some kind of attention on that last year because there was a lot of tension about the service railroads were providing to their customers. But it’s fairly light touch regulation there.

Why does the federal government have such little oversight of railroads? What rules are in place?

Ian Duncan: Transportation in this country … used to be much more tightly controlled.

In aviation and in railroads, you’ve seen deregulation, the idea being that with the railroads, they were struggling financially. And so you had attempts to kind of free them up and help them turn into more viable businesses. And if you talk to the railroads, they would say this has been a period of real growth and financial success and that that’s good for the country because they’re providing this vital service to get goods where they need to go.

There are rules around inspection of tracks and standards for maintaining tracks and equipment on railroads.

I think the big thing that’s come into focus in the last decade or so and certainly in the last few weeks has been around how a special kind of train that’s called a high-hazard flammable train is regulated. They’ve come to be seen as particularly dangerous, full of chemicals that potentially can burn or explode. And so there you have a system of laws like speed limits, braking standards, much more detailed regulation about what the railroads are required to do.

What is the role of lobbying when it comes to railroads?

Ian Duncan: It’s a pretty consolidated industry, so that gives them a reasonable amount of power in Washington. They have an association that also represents them. What we’ve seen in this period where there’s been interest in trying to set new safety standards is that the railroads will often lobby against that.

Their argument is that it’s a period of technological change in the industry, and so if you write rules right now, they might be outdated by the time that they’re put in place.

The Obama administration made some efforts to tighten the rules. But the Trump administration was interested in deregulation especially when it came to transportation. They looked for opportunities to walk things back. The guy who ran the Federal Railroad Administration during the Trump administration had worked as a railroad executive. They were able to get some rules rolled back.

How quickly is railroad technology moving?

Ian Duncan: An example: There’s technology that can automatically check basically the health of tracks. It’s pretty new. The industry thinks this is much better at finding potential problems on tracks that can lead to derailments or other kinds of accidents than human inspectors. And so they’ve been trying to get permission to walk back the number of visual inspections that they do and rely on this technology. The Biden administration allowed some testing to go on. But what they’ve been saying since the derailment in East Palestine is you can do both. You don’t need to get rid of the human inspections in order to use this technology; let’s do both. But the industry obviously also has a kind of commercial incentive to try and use technology that might be cheaper than having people do the work.

Another one of the big disputes currently is how many people need to be on these trains. The standard at the moment is an engineer who essentially drives the train and a conductor who’s responsible for keeping tabs of what’s on the train.

That was reasonably astonishing to me, when you think of just the size of these vehicles. … There used to be five [people]. But the unions that represent these workers on the railroads are worried that the railroads are looking to go down to just one person, just an engineer, and then maybe having someone following in a truck or on the ground.

The union’s view is that you can’t cut this back, that these machines do only work as well as the people. But the industry has seen it’s been able to cut the crews before and I think is interested in seeing if you can go even further.

What are pneumatic brakes, and were they a factor here?

Ian Duncan: This was a huge dispute. It’s really more of a political dispute than an actual dispute. It gets back to this issue of deregulation during the Trump administration.

The current emergency brakes have an air hose that sort of connects between all the cars on a train. So when it’s tripped, that signal kind of pulses down the train, so that all the cars aren’t having their brakes applied at the same time. The electronic brakes would be designed to have this kind of immediate braking on all the cars.

The history is pretty tangled here, but basically the Obama administration wrote a rule and said they should be required on these high-hazard flammable trains. And Congress stepped in and said you need to have another look at that. We’re not convinced. Under the Trump administration, they tried to figure out what would be the cost to the railroads of installing these brakes and what would be the benefits in terms of preventing accidents. In their view, it didn’t pencil out, so they repealed that requirement.

The train that derailed in East Palestine was not one of these high-hazard trains. It didn’t meet the definition. And so even had the rule been in place, it wouldn’t have had these brakes on and then there would have been a question about would they have helped stop it? Maybe they would have. But we just won’t know.

What policy proposals are emerging now that could make railways safer?

Ian Duncan: So there’s a few things, and we’ve seen movement on some of these already.

The sick leave thing. [Transportation Secretary Pete] Buttigieg has cast that as a safety measure. Essentially, if you have workers who are exhausted, who are ill and can’t take time off to get medical care, they’re not going to be working safely. Some of the railroads have sort of made some steps toward offering leave.

And then the other thing that happened is that there’s a close call reporting system that’s run by the government, and that is something that the government sees as a way for workers to kind of come forward and confidentially report safety risks without feeling like there’s going to be reprisals. The big freight railroads had resisted that. The administration came down pretty hard and said that we really want you to join this. And so they’ve all agreed that they will do that.

I think, looking forward, the big dispute that was already playing out before this derailment was this question of crew sizes. The unions really want to get a floor set at two.

There was a bill that was introduced after the derailment that includes that idea. There are some questions about, “Could we set standards for a type of technology that is along the tracks and is designed to detect problems on the train?” — in this case, bearings that are too hot on the trains — and they did that too late. And so could we space them out differently? Could the thresholds at which they send a warning to the crew be changed? There’s interest in putting that into law.

The other big thing that Secretary Buttigieg just called for in this legislation as well is to increase the fines for when railroads break these violations. They cap out at around $200,000. These are companies that make billions and billions of dollars. Buttigieg has said that’s just no kind of deterrent to them. And so, again, that legislation would also ramp up the maximum fines pretty dramatically potentially.

What are the politics of getting anything done here?

Ian Duncan: [The train derailment] took on this political life. A lot of that has been focused on Buttigieg, and I think a big reason for that is that he’s kind of an unusual person to be transportation secretary. This is an office that — they’ve faced crashes and big disasters and things in the past, but it hasn’t been led by someone who was so political and is presumed to have continuing political ambitions. And so Republicans in Congress had already been looking for opportunities to criticize him. Especially with air travel, winter was pretty messy. And so they tried to lay some of that his door — some of it, I think reasonably so. The question was where is he? Why hasn’t he showed up?

It is interesting to see this kind of two-track political response, because [Republican Sens.] J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio, for example, have been some of the loudest critics of Buttigieg over all of this, and yet they’re sponsors of this legislation that does a lot of the things that he’s also been calling for. So when you get down to specifics, there seems to be maybe some room for agreement.

For more on the policy solutions being explored and the political obstacles to getting anything done, listen to the full episode on your favorite podcast app.