Are you in a constant state of stress, possibly without even realizing it? Could be due to that endless chatter in your head. Time to tame the monkey mind.

Hey, you are not alone. Most of us have some repetitive thoughts going on in our minds most of the time. It’s a state often called “monkey mind.”

Some say this metaphor came from Buddha, others claim it is of Chinese or Hindu origin. Wherever it began, the term monkey mind does a good job of summing up incessant and racing thoughts.

This mental chatter could be causing worry, anxiety, distraction, lack of creativity, and other negative emotions. There are ways to tame these beasts and gain control over your mind.

6 Monkey Mind Taming Tips

1 Strike a Pose: You probably aren’t surprised to see yoga on this list. Why does practicing yoga have a calming effect on the mind? The intentional breathing done while practicing activates the parasympathetic nervous system, which lowers blood pressure and  heart rate, and slows breathing. Calmer body, calmer mind. Try these yoga poses for instant calm.

2 Get Om: Another usual suspect on getting centered. Sick of the meditation revolution yet? As we’ve said here before, there are many ways to meditate beyond the crossed-legged om-chanting posture. Try guided meditation or get yourself to a meditation studio. And I love this list of fun ways to meditate, especially number two.

3 Do What You are Doing: Sounds easy enough, right? But how ‘in the moment’ are we when folding clothes, doing dishes, making dinner, and other daily tasks? Chances are, not very. These mundane duties give us a chance to plan, contemplate, and make decisions–and fret, worry, and obsess. Eckhart Tolle, master of living in the present moment, maintains that being in the here and now is the route to peace and happiness. It may take some getting used to, but give mindful tasking a try. Need some inspo? Eckhart shares with Oprah two ways to get present.

4 Talk With the Monkeys: Okay. I admit this one sounds a little crazy. But this is an important exercise in confronting your fears. Trying to avoid problem thoughts often makes the issue seem much worse than it is. Ask yourself what it is that’s truly bothering you or that you can’t quit thinking about. What’s the worst that will happen if this thought happens in real life? Can you handle that? Most likely, you can. It’s amazing how addressing fear can abate worrisome thoughts.

5 Step Away From the Device: Yes, the cell phone, tablet, or laptop. What’s the big deal? Manoush Zomorodi, host of WNYC’s New Tech City podcast, found that less screen time can free up mind space. Through her seven day Bored and Brilliant campaign, Zomorodi put participants through daily tasks aimed at awakening awareness. The biggest take away from the campaign: people felt less distracted and more inspired when they stopped multitasking and allowed their minds less distraction.

6 Gaze in the Right Direction: You may be surprised to learn that what we look at and for how long affects how focused or distracted we are. Duke University researchers studied monkeys’ eyes (I know, again with the monkeys) for links to the brain’s focus. The study distracted monkeys from a task by showing them pictures of other monkeys. By monitoring brain activity, scientist found that a set of neurons were only active when the monkeys were trying to do two things at once, complete a task while being distracted by pictures. The neuron sets were inactive when the monkeys were doing just one task at a time. The theory goes that when humans are trying to pay attention to two different things, it triggers a “conflict” circuit in a region of the brain called the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC). The dACC is part of a larger brain structure that controls rational thought and emotions. Moral of the story, try concentrating your focus on one thing at a time for better productivity and peace of mind.

Quieting the noisy mind is something we all deal with. Do you have other tips to taming your inner monkeys?

Related on EcoSalon

The Many Benefits of Meditation for Your Mind and Body

Refuse to Worry (And How to be More Useful for Your Friends)

Positive Thinking: Health Benefits of PMA

Image of monkeys via Shutterstock

The post 6 Monkey Mind Taming Tips appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnWhy we really care whether or not Lindsay Lohan is sober.

It’s easy to say we care about Lindsay Lohan and her sobriety because we hate to see the cutie from “The Parent Trap” movie remake struggling. We say we care because she was so loveable in “Mean Girls.” A few of us may even admit to being drawn to the train wreck that appears to be her life.

Watching the Oprah reality show “Lindsay“(sorry, but it’s a reality show; respect to Lady O and its award-winning director for trying to class it up), many of us are rooting for her. I am.

Not because she’s famous, but because she’s a person who appears to be struggling. Also, I did love her in “Mean Girls.”

Others are rooting for her to fail. As a famous person, she can afford an addiction treatment center that reportedly costs upward of $80,000 a month, a life coach (who dumped her), a personal assistant, and a sober coach (who also seems to have dumped her) and still can’t make it.

That’s why we really care. If Lindsay Lohan fails it will give us an out.

If she can’t do it, how can we, mere mortals, be expected to get our shit together? To quit drinking? Make time for the gym? If she loses her battles, how can we be held accountable for losing our own?

This week alone I have read that she admitted to having a glass of wine and was seen drinking at Coachella.

As a culture, we’re great at putting women on pedestals and then celebrating when they can’t balance up there.

Kim K. Looks Fat at the Grocery Store! Miley Is a Skanky Mess! Tori is Painfully Thin! Gwyneth Does a Thing and We Hate Her!

Stars, they’re just like us—and we all suck.

It’s been a year since I quit drinking. I never careened out of control ala Lindsay Lohan;  I never entered a rehab program; but I did need to stop drinking.

And you know what, as great as I feel overall, there are moments—whole entire days sometimes—when it really doesn’t feel worth the effort.

While I work hard to not make a big deal out of it, and sometimes succeed in those attempts, it is effort. Every day, I remake my choice in a million little ways.

There are a lot of factors in why I have done well so far (and I say so far because who knows). Maybe my problem wasn’t as bad as the other LL’s. My family is definitely awesome (and not trying to cash in on my fame by writing a book about me like Lindsay’s mom Dina Lohan is). And, no one made this choice for me.

Perhaps most importantly, I never had to leave the bubble of rehab and experience the shock of re-entry into life under a microscope and flashbulbs.

I’m not criticizing people for watching “Lindsay.” I wouldn’t be writing this if I wasn’t watching myself—and feeling a little guilty about it. But, I know that my watching doesn’t impact her success getting sober. And that her success, in turn, doesn’t impact my own—or anyone’s.

Overall, watching “Lindsay” makes me sad. You can see her, in moments, really wanting more for herself. More that has nothing to do with vintage Yves St. Laurent. More than the chance to chain smoke in private. It seems like she wants to make it and be happy—whatever that means to her, and I hope she gets there.

Stars might be able to retreat to rehab centers that cost more for a month than many make in a year, but people like me have a much better chance at winning the war because there’s not a crowd of people watching me teeter on a pedestal, ready to pummel me with chants of, “I knew she couldn’t do it,” and then hand me a drink if I fall.

That Happened is Libby Lowe’s weekly column for EcoSalon analyzing media, news and pop culture through a feminist lens. Keep in touch with Libby @LibbyLowe.

Related on EcoSalon

Dear Oprah: Please Tell Us Who We Are

Miley’s Twerk: That Happened

My Final Rose: Saying Goodbye to Reality TV?

Image: Zennie Abraham

The post Lindsay Lohan: That Happened appeared first on EcoSalon.

Okay, so he is on Oprah. And it’s basically her job to make people cry, but Pharrell Williams has another reason for gushing. His song “Happy” has changed the world in an unbelievably beautiful way. Just watch the clip already!

Can’t get enough “Happy”? Check out this infectious mashup featuring some of Fela Kuti’s Afro-beat horns. So, so good.

Find Jill on Twitter @jillettinger

Related on EcoSalon

Link Love: Best Valentine’s Caramels + Pharrell is Killing it (Amirite, Ladies?) + Ouch: A Rapper Drops the “R” Word

Dear Oprah, Please Tell Us Who We Are — Atheists, Feminists and Other ‘Others’ Need to Know:  HyperKulture

These Happy Cows Jumping Almost Over the Moon Will Make You Tear Up [Video]

Image:

The post Because It’s the Best Song Ever: Why ‘Happy’ Makes Pharrell (and Probably You) Cry [Video] appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnOprah seems to think she knows best when it comes to social and religious identities. Here’s why that should piss you off.

During an awkward television interview last month, the extraordinarily famous Oprah Winfrey informed endurance-swimmer hero Diana Nyad that Nyad was not, despite her claims, an atheist.

Almost immediately, the godless Internet lit up with a range of reactions from heretics of all shapes and sizes proclaiming their indignation, anger and even “hurt.” This was Oprah—Queen of the popular media big leagues—and she was getting it wrong. But there’s more to this story than “nonbelievers annoyed.” Believers should be too.

The exchange took place on Winfrey’s Super Soul Sunday, which featured the talk-show host trying to muscle Nyad’s ability to experience awe and wonder into what is increasingly becoming mainstream God vocabulary—that is to say, one that expands the definition of the term well beyond its traditional angry-dude-in-clouds confines. Nyad, eloquent and powerful (figuratively, as well as literally), allowed Winfrey some wiggle room with language, but overall wasn’t having it:

Nyad: I’m not a God person…

Winfrey: Do you consider yourself atheist?

Nyad: I am an atheist…

Winfrey: But you’re in the awe.

Nyad: I don’t understand why anyone would find a contradiction in that. I can stand at the beach’s edge with the most devout Christian, Jew, Buddhist, go on down the line, and weep with the beauty of this universe and be moved by all of humanity—all the billions of people who have lived before us, who have loved and hurt and suffered. To me, my definition of God is humanity, and is the love of humanity…

Winfrey: Well I don’t call you an atheist then. I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and in the mystery, then that is what God is… God is not a bearded guy in the sky.

Nyad: It’s not bearded, but there is an inference with ‘God’ that there is a presence, that there is either a creator or an overseer.

A moment later, after Nyad stated the fact that “we will never know,” Oprah said “’til that last breath—and [somewhat defiantly] maybe it will be an ‘oh, wow’ one for you…”

For us nonbelievers, this kind of exchange is nothing new. It’s one we’ve all had with often well-meaning folks (I should say that Oprah shows no malice here and seems genuine, albeit insensitive) who have trouble arranging us on their spiritual (and often religious) gameboards. It’s certainly well-trodden ground in the media. Here’s another recent example that caught a news cycle or three—CNN anchorman Wolf Biltzer, after May’s deadly tornado in Moore, Oklahoma, interviewing a survivor standing amidst horrible debris with her young child in arms:

Blitzer: I guess you gotta thank the Lord, right?

Tornado survivor: Yeah. [Clearly trying to quickly dismiss the question.]

Blitzer: Do you thank the Lord? …

Tornado Survivor: I – I – I’m – I’m actually an Atheist.

Unlike Oprah, Blizter seemed to quickly catch the woman’s drift, as it were, and moved on to playing with the kid. (Very cute.) Nevertheless, in watching the interview, one gets the sense that in that moment he was pushing the issue. When he didn’t get the “oh, yes, praise be” response he expected, he slipped into ‘But you have to, right? Do you?’ Like Nyad to Oprah, this woman did not fit his paradigm and he was taken aback.

These high-profile exchanges bring up two important questions. The first, which has been well covered, is whether atheists can have awe (and/or spirituality) in their lives without god(s) or a “higher” power. As a nonbeliever, I certainly don’t want to diminish the issue, but the question’s frequency really isn’t all that surprising, despite its insulting nature. The concept of being unable to make room for supernatural dualism in one’s spiritual framework is confounding to many. Burden of proof issues and a lack of scientific method aside, believers are operating within a framework that simply does not accommodate the kind of utter oneness that edges out anything higher or lower or elsewhere; it’s just something they can’t not see.

But question two is broader and more baffling, and one that has caught the attention of a number of my faithful friends (yes, believe it or not, I have many): Why is it that Oprah would feel comfortable responding to someone explaining his or her (very) personal sense of self (such as, “I’m a spiritual atheist”) with a “No. You can’t be that. I’ll tell you what you are.” Odd, right? Well, not really.

Pegs and Holes—Atheists are Not Alone

Sadly, it’s not difficult in our culture to find a wide range of precedent for the “you don’t believe what you say you believe” admonition. In fact, most of us can start quite young. Remember mom and dad’s head-patting “I know you think you believe that”? (Oh, man. Instant tantrum.)

How many women have been nominally exiled outside the cap-F, feminist camp because they might harbor the idea that a fulfilling life for them features being a stay-at-home mom, or perhaps, god forbid, they enjoy porn now and again? How about the virgin homosexual teen being told he or she’s not really gay—yet—or the bisexual who’s informed by certain members of the homosexual and lesbian communities that he or she is merely “confused”?

Want more? Might you be an animal rights advocate who’s “not” because you eat meat? An environmentalist cast away for not being sold on the evils of GMOs? And here’s one that’s near and dear to my heart: evidently, to some, my atheism somehow interferes with the Jewish identity with which I was born. (There’s a great line from Ricky Gervais that I like to trot out when asked by my tribespeople why I’m an atheist: “God made me this way.”)

The list goes on.

We all know how our culture is sadly characterized by a scarcity of empathy. But what about these instances where empathy is simply not available, when there’s just no way one can put themselves in the shoes of others who are so, well, other? What’s missing from the equation that leads people to feel okay contorting another’s sense of self and transmuting that sense into their own ideas and language? The answer seems to lie in the inability to simply listen and accept—baffled or not. Comfortable bemusement is just not in most people’s skill set. Control, however, is.

But that’s their side of the street, right? What about ours? Us others? What is our role in the cultural codependence that has the likes of not only average Joes telling us who and what we are, but our institutions, as well? Where do pundits and anointed culture purveyors like Oprah and Wolf come off telling us what we think? How dare they!?

How dare they, indeed. Have we handed them the keys to our personal kingdoms? Perhaps. Oprah’s untold millions are “earned” from a nation of viewers who turn to her to interpret their thoughts for them (not to mention telling them what books to read—including, um, “The Secret”). Why would we be surprised when she offers such interpretations and contortions designed to bring outsiders into the mainstream from what must surely be the cold? She’s just doing her (read: our) job.

What was great about Nyad (who, at 64 recently achieved her goal of swimming from Florida to Cuba) is not only how she didn’t evade the issue (she chose to appear on a show called Super Soul Sunday, for god’s sake) but how well thought out her feelings were, and how she held firm throughout the discussion.

Not all of us are prepared to come out of our closets when our belief systems are queried, challenged and dismissed, nor should we feel forced to do so. But given the opportunity—and the platform—to stand one’s ground, doing so deserves a ton of credit. That pesky acceptance thing, both self- and societal, ultimately emerges from freedom from fear and the courage to speak one’s mind.

Now, no one is suggesting that the shaken Moore survivor should have blitzed Blitzer with what might have been a (some might argue wiser) alternate question: “Why do you think God chose to punish and kill all those people? What do you think they did to earn such horrifying and violent deaths?” That would be insensitive, right?

The bottom line is that no one gets to tell you who you are or what you think. That’s up to you—no matter what anyone believes. Or doesn’t.

Scott Adelson is EcoSalon’s Senior Editor of HyperKulture, a monthly column that explores opening cultural doors to initiate personal change. He is also the author of InPRINT, which reviews and discusses books, new and old. You can reach him at scott@adelson.org and follow him @scottadelson on Twitter.

Related Reading:

HyperCulture: From The Sanbox to Syria – Tribe, Ego and Decision Making

HyperKulture: In Swoon’s Way – Time traveling and Staring Down Florence Syndrome

InPRINT: A Novel Challenge – Take Action and Read Outside Your Box

InPRINT: You Want Erotic? The Countless Shades of Anaïs Nin

InPRINT: Albert Camus and the Biggest Question of All

Images: Surian Soosay (top) and Bob Wells

The post Dear Oprah, Please Tell Us Who We Are — Atheists, Feminists and Other ‘Others’ Need to Know: HyperKulture appeared first on EcoSalon.

What came first, the depressing women’s book clubs or the morbid books?

Remember the trances and travels afforded by pleasure reading? You couldn’t wait to lose yourself in the next chapter of that murder mystery, royal court espionage or love tryst – you were a voracious reader who deeply mourned the loss of your new character friends once the final page was devoured and downloaded into your fiber.

But somehow, that pleasure has become elusive to the women’s book group, the reading less an armchair cruise than an academic grind. The inevitable prerequisite is the agreed-upon selections must be meaty enough to spark evocative feedback for eloquent sharing round the coffee table. As a result, our picks are highly wrought works of historic, political or cultural significance perpetually mired in sadness. Or, as a fellow member recently commiserated, “Can’t we move on from the holocaust and women in pain?”

“People going through misery, the good women and bad men dynamic – that was an Oprah thing,” observes Bill Dito, an employee of the popular Books Inc. shop in San Francisco, where staff specialists write their own book reviews for customers. He has a bird’s eye view of the victim trend in fiction the last decade, one that has forced us to endure an excruciating trip through a time machine or suffer female bondage of one brand or another – which only further marginalizes us as women.

Then there is the entire cottage industry one might call “victim books” from rape to exploitation to the toast of the Oprah Book Club, author Wally Lamb with big guns like Couldn’t Keep it to Myself: Wally Lamb and the Women of York Correctional Institution. In the collection described as both utterly depressing and a real page turner, inmates describe in their own words, tales of abuse, rejection, self-destructive impulses long before they entered the criminal justice system. This followed other works like She’s Come Undone and Drowning Ruth – bereft titles that speak for themselves.

When The Color Purple and Joy Luck Club came out, they were rare rather than part of a steady diet of underdog angst and could be easily digested. Now, the question remains: Are there any other stories being told?

“As someone who has written about ‘women in pain,’ women dealing with the death of a child, for example, I think that the premise of your question is problematic,” novelist Ayelet Waldman tells me. “All interesting stories are about someone in crisis – in ‘pain’ if you will. Who wants to read about happy people doing happy things? Story is conflict, conflict is story. The Corrections was about people in crisis. Does that fall into your category of ‘victim-literature?’ If it doesn’t, then I think you should take a good look at the question you’re asking, and consider whether it isn’t inherently sexist.”

When she puts it that way, I do feel I’m turning my back on the movement. Men deal in pain, too, as she aptly points out.  The Kite Runner was all about the pain.

The fact is I cherish my women’s book group and our time reviewing, catching up, sipping wine and grazing on grapes and cheese. But it is time to lighten up, or at least look around. Even read about happy things. So sue me. Can’t drama tinged with humor a la Capote, Sedaris and McInerney be book group material? We have even drifted from titillating historic fiction such as Phillipa Gregory’s The Other Boleyn Girl series.

I’d like to shirk my duty to remember and never forget (Sarah’s Key, The Invisible Bridge, The Book Thief, Jacob’s Courage, The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society). I’ve hit my saturation point for the empathy we must extend to our unfortunate, ill-fated sisters still under tutelage of warlords, meddling Indian parents or Southern patriarchs (Little Bee,  Sister of My Heart, Shanghai Girls, Secret Life of Bees, Reading Lolita in Tehran, Eat, Pray Love, Life of Venus, Cutting for Stone). 

How might it be different if men were members? I have no idea, since I have only belonged to all women book groups.

In my group, which focuses on contemporary fiction, it would appear the lists are stocked with Sophie’s choices – just as films have waves like the one witnessed in 2008 with an abundance of Third Reich themes: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, The Reader, Valkyrie, Adam Resurrected. The onslaught had New York Times contributor A.O. Scott questioning the trend, as I have questioned my book group’s thematic selections:

“The near-simultaneous appearance of all these movies is to some degree a coincidence, but it throws into relief the curious fact that early 21st-century culture, in Europe and America, on screen and in books, is intensely, perhaps morbidly preoccupied with the great political trauma of the mid-20th century,” he wrote. “The number of Holocaust-related memoirs, novels, documentaries and feature films in the past decade or so seems to defy qualification, and their proliferation raises some uncomfortable questions: Why are there so many? Why now?”

I can’t say I don’t glean knowledge, picking up more details than what I acquired or remember as a history major in college or as an impressionable kid at Communist Jewish summer camp exposed to the soul-flogging images in films like, Let My People Go, the 1965 story of Israel containing graphic footage of the remains of my ancestors being scooped up from piles at the camps after liberation. It was important to watch. Nonetheless, I wanted to run back to the arts and crafts table and make another God’s Eye. 

Sarah’s Key informed me of the French betrayal and the Vichy collaboration and the wrenching view from the eyes of a child; The Invisible Bridge eloquently told the Hungarian artisan’s story of survival. And the highly literary, exquisite novel, The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, allowed me to visit the British Isles during occupation where defiant members of a book group take great risks to meet and eat and break German curfews.

I benefited from all of these reads, but aren’t we ready for an expanded library, a richer experience?

“My in laws came from Poland and Hungary and they ask me about the books we read, but they can never read them and have no interest in going near them,” says another member of my group. I get it. While I didn’t live it, my grandmother was the only one of seven children in her family to escape and survive the Polish slaughter.

While I identified strongly with Jonathan Saffran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated – which recounted one man’s yearnings for his ancestors’ experience of being hidden from the Nazis in a uniquely entertaining voice – I struggle with each depiction of the hiding like animals in the woods, the mashing like cattle into jam-packed train cars, the starvation, the fear, the digging of their own graves before dropping into them. No wonder we found relief in the uber-violent Inglorious Bastards.

The same frustration is suffered in the downtrodden female tales, which produced two centuries after Jane Austen, rarely offer a happy mid-18th century way out via a beneficial marriage around the maypole or sudden death of a piggish heir. Instead, we find ourselves steeped in the relentless bellicosity of the neanderthals entrapping them, classic male withholders of the basic needs we women require to thrive: love, money, property, liberty, suffrage and great sex after 50.

Why now are we spending our free time moaning vicariously in wartime hellishness or flinching through a deranged arranged marriage when we could cuddle up in bed on a Sunday with a steamy romance epic, bone-chilling murder mystery or a young professional’s playful romp working at a style magazine or publishing house or paying dues in some hick town? Now that is chick-lit I can wrap my overloaded, burned-out brain around – reads that I won’t equate with the daily drudgery of paying bills and managing schedules.

If we must endure yet fresh pain, perhaps it might be framed not in 20th century Europe but, say, 21st century New Orleans, as in Dave Eggers’s Zeitoun. At least, as in The Help and Eat Pray Love, it is fresh stuff chronicling our own times. The Depression-era Water for Elephants, too, provided a historic perspective while still offering something totally new in the journey of a would-be vet who joins the circus. It certainly wasn’t free of struggling female characters, but the suffering didn’t dominate the theme and the redemption was a gift.

The same dearth of freshness clearly exists in in play writing, as well. How else can you explain the barrage of revivals in the last decade? If I see an ad for Annie Get Your Gun one more time, I’ll shoot myself and take Wild Bill with me. It’s the old Disney strategy of when in doubt, produce a remake or sequel. And novelists suffer from the same syndrome by focusing on what sells.

Perhaps one remedy would be to not rely solely on the New York Times lists and peruse book stores for the employee recommendations. Oftentimes, you will find sparkling little stories that didn’t cut the mustard with the corporate giant, but are worthwhile nonetheless.

“We pick and choose ones we want to read and then write it up if we like it and also accept customer reviews,” explains Dito. “You would be amazed how many people come in here to look at our reviews. That’s why there is a need for book stores. You can’t talk to someone from Amazon.”

Among the Books Inc. favorites: Destiny of the Republic by Candice Millard (author of  The River of Doubt ) which examines the the madness, medicine and murder of James A. Garfield; The Elegance of the Hedgehog a quirky French story by Muriel Barbery; The Thousand Autumns of Jacob De Zoet by David Mitchell, focusing on a war-ravaged Dutch East Indies company; and Norwegian Wood by Haruki Murakami,  a romantic Japanese woman’s coming of age.

Another staff reviewer, Chris Lutes, adds that there are certainly a plethora of Third Reich era reads such as Laura Hiderbrand’s World War II survivor dramas including the recently acclaimed Unbroken.  But there are plenty of alternatives worth book club consideration.

“It was a pretty trying time in history so it’s easy to revisit because even though we are removed from that drama there is such humanity to those stories and it’s easy for people to get into that mindset. Still it’s staggering how many books are published each month – so there’s a lot of other stuff out there,” he says.

Images: imdb; Skinny Chronicles, shutterhacks; Squidoo

The post From Chick Lit to Victim Books: Problems with the Woman’s Book Club appeared first on EcoSalon.

Mainstream fashion media and corporate-sponsored design houses continue to shun environmental progress.

Fashion week has always been an exciting time of year for the fashion industry. It’s an amped up version of “Project Runway,” where designers scramble to present the most eye drawing collections, fighting every other designer showing for the attention of the press. It’s a lot of work, a lot of hype and the best man or woman wins orders from Neiman Marcus, Bloomingdales, or maybe even a capsule line at Target or H&M if they’re really lucky. Innovation is heralded and beauty is showcased as fashion struts its stuff to show the ordinary people how to dress exceptionally.

So if this is the case, why does Ralph Lauren’s Runway Collection, season after season, get the New York Fashion week cover of WWD and raving reviews from all the fashion press? He literally designs the same retro looks year after year: 1920-30’s, Great Gatsby-esque, horse riding get ups for the rich. Feather boas? Have you ever seen anyone in public pull that off without looking slightly ridiculous? This is what the fashion industry heralds as innovative, new and headlining.

The fashion press applauds loudest for the very same fashion houses that do the most advertising. Coincidence? Imagine if an oil company donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to a politician’s campaign and they just happened to be in the same business that the politician fought to give special tax breaks to. This is the exact same way the mainstream fashion industry runs: donations and lobbying, also known as paying for advertising.

The Business of Fashion pulled from a Guardian article, quoting Alexandra Shulman the Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue saying “Vogue makes most of its money out of advertising — and it does make an awful lot of money — so we’ve got to have a good relationship with our advertisers. They’re not going to place £100,000 a year and then say ‘Feel free not to use any of our goods’  — life’s not like that. So although there is this feeling sometimes that creatively it’s not pure, well magazines are a business, you’re not sitting there writing poetry.”

Marrying Sustainable Fashion With Mainstream

While the mainstream fashion press is busy paying lip service to old school fashion house’s fat wallets, they barely acknowledge that sustainability for the future of fashion means a lot more than traditional press and sales. Outside of the advertising winner’s circle, there are plenty of designers, press, and bloggers who acknowledge, report upon, work for and really do see the change of the sustainable design community’s efforts.

Even Oprah has something to say about it. Yet the fashion industry doesn’t want to outwardly acknowledge the shifts going on towards sustainable consumerism perhaps from a fear because they’re afraid that following, or even promoting ethical and sustainable business practices would mean a few things:

1.  The admittance that things have been and continue to be done unethically in almost every step of the process.

2. The end of days for business processes that are comfortable, which might equate to a loss of sales and/or jobs for people who don’t know how to evolve.

3. Quite possibly the end of all the excess that is fashion week because it would require focusing on doing things based on a whole new model.

Eko-Lab, A/W 2011

Melissa Kirgan co-designer for sustainable label Eko-Lab asks why sustainable fashion and mainstream fashion need to be two separate entities when they both ultimately share the same goal: to sell a product.

“No matter how ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ a design is, if it is not bought there is no business. For us at Eko-Lab the number one important focus is to make an amazing product, our beliefs and ethics are to be valued as building blocks in the heritage of our brand.”
Yet Kirgan relays her own story of a trip to Bendel’s Open Call to present her line which was an eye opening moment for her and partner Xing-Zhen Chung.

“When we presented our product it was well received and we were given many complements, when we began to share the origin of our fibers and their organic qualities there was an instant change in tone and we were told that was not their customer,” says Kirgan, adding that while fashion is glamorous, it’s function is to create an illusion of how the wearer wishes to project themselves to the world.
“While sustainable design appears to still suffer crunchy connotations. If you must make these into two groups (mainstream vs. sustainable) then sustainable design is going to need way better branding.“

Better Branding and Changing Existing Fashion Industry Models

Every sustainable designer has had to look in the mirror and face the need to reinvent the wheel. When it comes to the fashion business, no matter what, designers (sustainable or not) are still adding to a massive waste stream. If we actually believe fashion can be a platform to stop planetary, environmental, and health degradation, it’s going to consistently be a painful reinvention for designers to go through, (especially if they like the idea of a steady paycheck and health insurance). Very few eco-designers make it after two years. 

This might also be why you don’t see most eco-designers, showing up at the Lincoln Center Tents, (which cost $20,000 a runway), where every season the “notable” designers present with a new and cheerful line of must have items.

Are there designers who support and propel a healthy future that the population would rather hear about? Of course, but the only way most people might see them is if they go searching for it outside of the daily barrage of advertising. Even with Oprah’s blessing, the eco-design world is considered “the fringe,” not something that appears regularly on mainstream fashion’s radar. But even with their “fringe” status some of these designers are somehow staying in business, making a huge impact, and offering consumers an option to opt out of the game of Fashion Monopoly that no one but the big corporations win.

Stewart + Brown

Howard Brown of Stewart+Brown is one of those designers and says the ethical fashion movement needs to remain true to its core mission; to lead by example and shift the paradigm toward sustainable business and production practices.

“Opportunistic grandstanding and hollow gestures from the fashion establishment do nothing meaningful to change the status quo yet compromise the mission and integrity of the ethical fashion movement. The path towards sustainability does not pass through fast fashion retailing. Remember what Bucky Fuller said, ‘You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.'”

Image: MokeSDoke

The post Corporate Fashion Still Monopolizing Progress For Indie Designers appeared first on EcoSalon.

Artist Charlotta Janssen’s Freedom Riders’ portraits come from mug shots on public databases that are rendered anew on canvas.

A great many considerations go into choosing the right piece of art for your home, pretty and functional being chief among them. The work of Brooklyn artist and restauranteur Charlotta Janssen serves an even higher level of functionality, particularly for those that strive to create an atmosphere of consciousness within their homes.

A collection that has garnered the artist a great deal of attention during the past year including a spot on Oprah (Winfrey, by the way, is the owner of a Charlotta creation), is her Freedom Riders Project, a collection of portraits painted from the mug shots of the 400 people arrested during the freedom rides and bus boycotts of 1961. Many of those Freedom Riders were also bloodied and beaten, the buses on which they rode set alight, for challenging the government to uphold the United States Supreme Court decision Boynton v. Virginia, which called for an end to racial segregation in the restaurants and waiting rooms of bus terminals.

They succeeded.

A powerful new documentary on PBS celebrating the 50th anniversary of these courageous civil rights pioneers who hailed from all corners of the United States and represented all age ranges, colors, and creeds premiered just this week.

“These portraits are about facing an oppressive system with non violence and a deep mix of emotions, each in their own way: fear, joy, anger and innocence,” says the artist, pointing out that details, such as disheveled collars, skinny ties, and bows on ruffled collars, are reminiscent of the bygone fifties while, at the same time, contrasting with the loud patterns that were evocative of a new era, the 1960s.

“These are extraordinary humans who didn’t stand by idle,” she says. “The Freedom Riders are a miracle to me and we all need to know about and build on what they started: the beloved community.”

History is dependent on people, she says. “Without one of them this wouldn’t have happened.”

Janssen started the project soon after Obama was elected, reveling in that collective exuberance of a nation for whom “hope” was not a four-letter word and more palpable than a t-shirt or an equally evocative print, which hangs in homes across the country.

Shepard Fairey’s original print, which The Guardian’s Laura Barton wrote has the “same kind of instant recognition of Jim Fitzpatrick’s Che Guevara poster,” now resides in the National Portrait Gallery at the Smithsonian Institution. Janssen hopes to gain a similarly permanent space for her touring collection of iconic images of ordinary citizens as well.

“The art is for sale,” she says, “but because it’s so intertwined with Nashville history, I’m hoping it will find a home there.” Part of the collection will soon be on view at the Downtown Public Library through mid-October.

Three collectors bought her entire first show, a total of 36 canvases; the majority went to a single collector, an apparent aficionado of consciousness raising décor who has requested to remain anonymous. “Learning about the lessons of non-violent direct action and how you can let it into your life have been my biggest rewards in this.”

In addition to her paintings, Janssen also produces high-end giclee prints of her work with an edition of 25 prints per image with customizable sizes. For prices and shipping, contact the artist. And you can always sit for your own portrait: make a film of you and your loved ones looking into the camera for twenty seconds and send it to the artist via her What’s Fresh button.

Image: Charlotta Janssen’s studio, New York Daily News and Charlotta

The post The Freedom Riders Traverse Time appeared first on EcoSalon.

We may have mentioned that we’re a fan of the men. Give us a guy who can quote Gloria Steinem or Michael Pollan (or Gloria Steinem quoting Michael Pollan) and we will show you a guy we’re dancing around like vegan Bacchante. For December, we brought you the greatness that is Ryan Gosling. Now for the new year? We’re agreeing with Time and Oprah on this one: author Jonathan Franzen is our January Man We love.

Why is he of the well-written word so cool? As our editor-in-chief Sara notes, “I love how he notices textures, his sense of humor, and that great big brain. It’ll be fun to see if he lets out his mean streak in future books. And, he’s adorable, tall, and watches birds. What’s not to like?”

Further, his list of accomplishments as a writer is the stuff of dreams for this one. There’s his National Book Award in 2001 for The Corrections, a New York Times best seller. He’s a Pulitzer Prize nominee. He’s been called “The Great American Novelist” by Time Magazine and he’s tangoed with Oprah Winfrey, only to come out on top as her final book club selection ever with his latest tome, Freedom.

So yes, there’s a wee bit of fawning of the Franzen. But a recent interview got us thinking about what this man is doing for the environmental movement with Freedom. Freedom tells the story of Walter Berglund, a “greener than Greenpeace” environmentalist who takes on the task of negotiating strip mining for a bird sanctuary.

Walter wants to save a warbler species that Grist, in an interview with Franzen, points out leads his to make “a Faustian deal with a mountaintop-mining coal company.” Franzen works with the American Bird Conservancy, which is dedicated to helping wild birds of North America. But when asked if Freedom is an activist book, Franzen makes the point that modern day environmentalism includes many shades of gray. As he mentions,

There is a place for radical stances – Greenpeace with the whales, some of the anti-mountaintop-removal stuff going on in Appalachia. And you can actually sometimes succeed by taking the really hard-line position. But much more often, if you talk to the people doing the work and getting things done, it’s a gut-wrenching compromise every day. You have to cultivate extremely wealthy people. You have to cut very imperfect deals with industry. People have said to me, about Freedom, “Oh, you must be satirizing this poor Walter Berglund who gets corrupted when he sets out to do good.” In fact, what I was after was a purely realistic portrayal of contemporary conservation work in Appalachia.

Franzen further points out that his way of turning people’s attention to certain interests is to hook them on the human story first. He concludes that “engaging people on the environment is really, really hard” and cautions that people should not lose sight of that.

Franzen’s subtle exposure of the modern-day environmentalist in his latest work is fantastic. But he also knows how to motivate his acolytes. He recently told The Guardian, “It’s doubtful that anyone with an internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.” Point taken, Mr. Franzen. (She writes, as she sits on her hands to avoid clicking on the latest headlines.)

Photo courtesy of Chris Buck for The Guardian

The post January’s EcoSalon Man We Love: Jonathan Franzen appeared first on EcoSalon.

It took me years to realize that not only were sunglasses necessary to do the basic job of keeping the sun out of my eyes, they were also meant to protect the fine skin around my eyes.

Now, with sun damage lines grooved deep into the corners of my eyes, I wish I’d always worn sunglasses while out in the sun and thrown all care away for sunglass lines. According to All About Vision, an eye care journalism site, the UV Index developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Weather Service (NWS) has made many Americans more aware of the risks of sunburn and skin cancer from the ultraviolet radiation, but when it comes to eye protection are we just not listening?

FYI, extended exposure to the sun’s UV rays has been linked to eye damage, including cataracts, macular degeneration, pingueculae, pterygia and photokeratitis that can cause temporary vision loss.

Thanks to a slough of really hip sunglasses out there, you can protect your eyes while still looking hip and yes, even sustainably so.

Here are four lines I love and seven more from Eco-Chick Starre Vartan on MNN:

iwood

Made in the U.S. from FSC certified, reclaimed exotic woods, these glasses are feather light and offer 100 percent UVA/UVB protection.

icu

Made from recycled plastic and metal (and bamboo), this sunglass line (and this particular style) is a favorite with Oprah.

Moonwoods

Made conscientiously without harsh chemicals out of mill ends that would otherwise be discarded from a small (but growing) company based in Portland, Oregon.

eco

Utilizing recycled plastic and metal, eco plants a tree for each frame sold. A sunglass line doing double duty makes us smile.

Image: orangeacid

The post Screw the Tan Lines, Time for Sunglasses appeared first on EcoSalon.