Culture:

Headed into the Wind: A Memoir

by Rhonda Brittan | April 28, 2021
7 min read

Headed into the Wind book cover“Headed into the Wind: A Memoir” by Jack Loeffler, University of New Mexico Press 2019, 288 pages, Hardcover $27.95, E-book $9.99

Editor’s Note: In honor of Earth Month, let us call your attention to the life and accomplishments of an influential New Mexico environmentalist, vividly recounted in a memoir recognized by the Pima County (Tucson) Public Library’s prestigious award as a Southwest Book of the Year 2019.

Jack Loeffler welcomes us into this endearing, intentionally meandering memoir with a cover photo of himself, sporting a big, genuine, toothy smile. Photographed in Chaco Canyon in 1980, he is posed in front of a huge rock formation with binoculars, recording equipment and a bandana, all around his neck. Loeffler, a longtime Santa Fe resident, is obviously in his element, making us wish we were there with him. And, from the comfort of our armchairs, we do go with him on the exciting adventures experienced by this “former jazz musician, fire lookout, museum curator, bioregionalist and self-taught aural historian,” as his publisher describes Loeffler’s eventful life.

“Headed into the Wind” is divided into two sections. Part One is mostly personal narrative. Part Two is also personal narrative, but includes transcriptions of fascinating interviews Loeffler recorded with colorful literary and activist figures of the 1960s and ‘70s, including his best friend, Edward Abbey. Abbey graduated from the University of New Mexico with a master’s degree in philosophy in the 1950s, and his activism and writings have inspired two generations of environmentalists, making him the godfather of radical environmentalism. The Loeffler interviews give us entrée to the thinking of Abbey and other important countercultural pioneers who helped to stimulate the rising social consciousness of the final decades of the 20th century.

Because the book was written in a non-linear fashion, reading it feels as though we are spending many sociable hours with a good friend, who slowly, over the course of time, shares his exploits, interests and passions. Even the unnumbered chapter titles—presented in what looks like a hand-written font—reflect the author’s approachability and informality.

One of the most pivotal experiences in Loeffler’s life took place in July of 1957. A trumpet player in the 433rd Army Band, he and his band mates were rousted at 4 a.m. one morning, loaded onto a bus and driven to a military base at the Nevada Proving Grounds. Dressed in shorts and pith helmets, the band played Sousa marches in the dark from memory. In the middle of “The Stars and Stripes Forever,” Loeffler saw the “sky burst into light brighter than the sun, and an enormous mushroom cloud rocketed skyward.” The band was seven miles from ground zero of an atmospheric test of an atomic bomb.

It was a defining moment. “I realized,” the author writes, “that I was totally sane, born into a culture that was not totally sane, and that thenceforth I would pursue my own trail through this lifetime and that my trail would involve great resistance to any form of governing body that condoned the detonation of atomic bombs that blatantly destroyed spans of earthly habitat and all life therein, ostensibly in defense of the American Dream.” In embracing the epiphany that to “terrorize natural habitat for economic gain is fundamentally evil,” Loeffler was at the forefront of environmental awareness.

After being discharged from the Army in 1958, Loeffler immersed himself in the Beat scene that was in full swing in coastal California. He first made his way to Santa Barbara, then on to North Beach in San Francisco and ultimately to Monterey. There he learned that Doc, the hero of John Steinbeck’s novel, “Cannery Row,” was based on Ed Ricketts, a marine biologist whose lab assistant and bottle washer was Joseph Campbell, the future comparative mythologist.

Although he never met Steinbeck, Loeffler was one of the habitues of Ricketts’s lab gatherings, where he did meet and once shared a bottle of wine with novelist Henry Miller, another regular. Loeffler refers to Ricketts as “a high school dropout, an endlessly curious vagabond,” who was “probably as great a role model as I’ve ever had.” They shared many interests, including listening to classical music, enjoying the vagabond lifestyle and having deep conversations with some of the finest minds of Loeffler’s generation.

It is in California, in 1960, that Loeffler met people who became “peyoteros,” occasionally holding a peyote “meeting,” or healing ceremony, in a cave in western Nevada. These meetings became the basis for the non-native branch of the Native American Church that remains active to this day. Discovering “peyote mind” was another defining moment for Loeffler, who came to believe that use of this psychedelic puts one in touch with the spirit of the Earth.

Loeffler was first introduced to New Mexico in 1958 on a hitchhiking trip from LA to Cleveland, Ohio, that he made while on furlough from the Army Band. Descending into the Rio Grande Valley and Albuquerque, he immediately recognized that he wanted to spend the rest of his life in the Land of Enchantment, but it took him four years to move back here permanently.

In the early 1960s, Loeffler settled in Santa Fe, where the octogenarian still lives with his second wife Katherine in a adobe home that he built by hand. He became the curator of an adult travelling exhibition for the Museum of New Mexico in 1967. He wrote, performed and recorded the soundtracks for audio/visual presentations about indigenous people and their relationship to the land. This effort to raise environmental awareness took him to 37 towns and cities around the state. Becoming fascinated with sound as an art form, this time spent as an aural historian provided him experience and income enough to fund his further adventures.

In 1968, Loeffler was invited by the director of the Laboratory of Anthropology, part of the University of New Mexico, to a meeting where he was introduced to Lee Udall, whose Center for the Arts of Indian America in Washington, D.C.,had received a grant from the Ford Foundation to create a travelling exhibition about Navajo history to take to Bureau of Indian Affairs schools throughout the Navajo Nation. With his experience with traveling exhibitions and familiarity with the Navajos, Loeffler was able to provide helpful advice to Lee about the CAIA project. He was later invited to the Udall home, where he met Lee’s husband, Stewart Udall, then U.S. Secretary of the Interior. The Udalls and the Loefflers became close friends and remained so throughout their lives.

Flying deep into Mexico on an assignment for the CAIA in 1969, he, photographer Karl Kernberger and a small crew happened upon and documented a colorful Huichol peyote ceremony. It was another moment of self-definition “I didn’t want a job,” Loeffler writes. “I loved to make quality sound recordings in stereo. I was deeply committed to the preservation of habitat and indigenous culture. Something clicked in my consciousness, and I recognized that, although I would not get a job, I would pursue my work as I saw fit—and my life’s work had already begun.”

The CAIA team’s plane was days late in picking them up, they were out of food and supplies, camped by the runway, and at a loss. A friendly Huichol boy stopped by their encampment, fashioned an airplane from some corn husks and twigs and set it beside the runway. “Shortly thereafter, we spotted our plane heading in for a landing,” Loeffler remembers. “I looked at the kid, he looked at me, and we both laughed and shook hands.”

Loeffler was receptive to the simple magic of life and allowed it to lead him anywhere, unafraid.

It takes Loeffler four or five short chapters to wind down to a conclusion because he still has much to say, and he doesn’t want to let the memoir go, enjoying the excuse to reminisce. So he provides snippets of his favorite memories of dozens of friends, two pages of personal suggestions and a reiteration of the critical importance of consciousness, of living every day in the moment and of recognizing and protecting the interconnectedness of all forms of life. We are lucky to have portions of the Aldo Leopold Wilderness and Gila National Forest right here in Sierra County. Loeffler asks us to steep ourselves in the natural world, for therein we are truly alive.

author
Share this:
HAVE YOU SEEN?

Understanding New Mexico's proposed new social studies standards for K-12 students

“The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.”
—National Council for the Social Studies 

Reader Michael L. Hayes of Las Cruces commented: What impresses me is that both the proposed standards and some of the criticisms of them are equally grotesque. I make this bold statement on the basis of my experience as a peripatetic high school and college English teacher for 45 years in many states with many students differing in race, religion, gender and socioeconomic background, and as a civic activist (PTA) in public education (My career, however, was as an independent consultant mainly in defense, energy and the environment.)

The proposed social studies standards are conceptually and instructionally flawed. For starters, a “performance standard” is not a standard at all; it is a task. Asking someone to explain something is not unlike asking someone to water the lawn. Nothing measures the performance, but without a measure, there is no standard. The teacher’s subjective judgment will be all that matters, and almost anything will count as satisfying a “performance standard,” even just trying. Students will be left to wonder “what is on the teacher’s mind?” or “have I sucked up enough.”

Four other quick criticisms of the performance standards. One, they are nearly unintelligible because they are written in jargon. PED’s use of jargon in a document intended for the public is worrisome. Bureaucrats often use jargon to confuse or conceal something uninformed, wrong or unworthy. As a result, most parents, some school board members and more than a few teachers do not understand them.

Two, the performance standards are so vague that they fail to define the education which teachers are supposed to teach, students are supposed to learn, and parents are supposed to understand. PED does not define words like “explain” or “describe” so that teachers can apply “standards” consistently and fairly. The standards do not indicate what teachers are supposed to know in order to teach or specify what students are supposed to learn. Supervisors cannot know whether teachers are teaching social studies well or poorly. The standards are so vague that the public, especially parents or guardians, cannot know the content of public education.

Three, many performance standards are simply unrealistic, especially at grade level. Under “Ethnic, Cultural and Identity Performance Standards”; then under “Diversity and Identity”; then under “Kindergarten,” one such standard is: “Identify how their family does things both the same as and different from how other people do things.” Do six-year-olds know how other people do things? Do they know whether these things are relevant to diversity and identity? Or another standard: “Describe their family history, culture, and past to current contributions of people in their main identity groups.” (A proficient writer would have hyphenated the compound adjective to avoid confusing the reader.) Do six-year-olds know so much about these things in relation to their “identity group”? Since teachers obviously do not teach them about these other people and have not taught them about these groups, why are these and similar items in the curriculum; or do teachers assign them to go home and collect this information?

Point four follows from “three”; some information relevant to some performance measures requires a disclosure of personal or family matters. The younger the students, the easier it is for teachers to invade their privacy and not only their privacy, but also the privacy of their parents or guardians, or neighbors, who may never be aware of these disclosures or not become aware of them until afterward. PED has no right to design a curriculum which requires teachers to ask students for information about themselves, parents or guardians, or neighbors, or puts teachers on the spot if the disclosures reveal criminal conduct. (Bill says Jeff’s father plays games in bed with his daughter. Lila says Angelo’s mother gives herself shots in the arm.) Since teacher-student communications have no legal protection to ensure privacy, those disclosures may become public accidentally or deliberately. The effect of these proposal standards is to turn New Mexico schools and teachers into investigative agents of the state and students into little informants or spies.

This PED proposal for social studies standards is a travesty of education despite its appeals to purportedly enlightened principles. It constitutes a clear and present danger to individual liberty and civil liberties. It should be repudiated; its development, investigated; its PED perpetrators, dismissed. No state curriculum should encourage or require the disclosure of private personal information.

I am equally outraged by the comments of some of T or C’s school board members: Christine LaFont and Julianne Stroup, two white Christian women, who belong to one of the larger minorities in America and assume white and Christian privileges. In different terms but for essentially the same reason, both oppose an education which includes lessons about historical events and trends, and social movements and developments, of other minorities. They object to the proposal for the new social studies standards because of its emphasis on individual and group identities not white or Christian. I am not going to reply with specific objections; they are too numerous and too pointed.

Ms. LaFont urges: “It’s better to address what’s similar with all Americans. It’s not good to differentiate.” Ms. Stroup adds: “Our country is not a racist country. We have to teach to respect each other. We have civil rights laws that protect everyone from discrimination. We need to teach civics, love and respect. We need to teach how to be color blind.”

Their desires for unity and homogeneity, and for mutual respect, are a contradiction and an impossibility. Aside from a shared citizenship, which implies acceptance of the Constitution, the rule of law and equality under the law, little else defines Americans. We are additionally defined by our race, religion, national origin, etc. So mutual respect requires individuals to respect others different from themselves. Disrespect desires blacks, Jews or Palestinians to assimilate or to suppress or conceal racial, religious or national origin aspects of their identity. The only people who want erasure of nonwhite, non-Christian, non-American origin aspects of identity are bigots. Ms. LaFont and Ms. Stroud want standards which, by stressing similarities and eliding differences, desire the erasure of such aspects. What they want will result in a social studies curriculum that enables white, Christian, native-born children to grow up to be bigots and all others to be their victims. This would be the academic equivalent of ethnic cleansing.

H.E.L.P.

This postmortem of a case involving a 75-year-old women who went missing from her home in Hillsboro last September sheds light on the bounds of law enforcement’s capacity to respond, especially in large rural jurisdictions such as Sierra County, and underscores the critical role the public, as well as concerned family and friends, can play in assisting a missing person’s search.

Reader Jane Debrott of Hillsboro commented: Thank you for your article on the tragic loss of Betsey. I am a resident of Hillsboro, a friend of Rick and Betsey, and a member of H.E.L.P. The thing that most distresses me now, is the emphasis on Rick’s mis-naming of the color of their car. I fear that this fact will cause Rick to feel that if he had only gotten the facts right, Betsey may have been rescued before it was too late. The incident was a series of unavoidable events, out of everyone’s control, and we will never know what place the correct color of her car may have had in the outcome. It breaks my heart to think that Rick has had one more thing added to his “what ifs” concerning this incident.

Diana Tittle responded: Dear Jane, the Sun undertook this investigation at the request of a Hillsboro resident concerned about the town’s inability to mount a prompt, coordinated response to the disappearance of a neighbor. From the beginning, I shared your concern about how our findings might affect Betsy’s family and friends. After I completed my research and began writing, I weighed each detail I eventually chose to include against my desire to cause no pain and the public’s right to know about the strengths and limitations of law enforcement’s response and the public’s need to know about how to be of meaningful assistance.

There was information I withheld about the state police investigation and the recovery. But I decided to include the issue of the car’s color because the individuals who spotted Betsy’s car emphasized how its color had been key to their identification of it as the vehicle described in Betsy’s Silver Alert. Because the misinformation was corrected within a couple of hours, I also included in this story the following editorial comment meant to put the error in perspective: “The fact that law enforcement throughout the state was on the lookout in the crucial early hours after Betsy’s disappearance for an elderly woman driving a “light blue” instead of a “silver” Accord would, in retrospect, likely not have changed the outcome of the search” [emphasis added].

I would also point to the story’s overarching conclusion about the inadvisability of assigning blame for what happened: “In this case, a perfect storm of unfortunate circumstances, many of them beyond human control, hindered the search that it would fall to Hamilton’s department to lead.”

It is my hope that any pain caused by my reporting will eventually be outweighed by its contribution to a better community understanding of what it will take in the future to mount a successful missing person’s search in rural Sierra County.

Scroll to Top