It's that time of year again when people begin to compile lists from the past year into the best of/worst of comparisons, and also the celebrity death lists. I've never been a fan of the best/worst lists, but I understand why people have a need to list their likes and dislikes. I'm always at a loss for words when someone asks me what my favorite movie or book is, because I have so many I like, and some for very different reasons. It's agonizing for me to list things in order of favorites, and mostly I never do. I read other people's lists and usually shrug my shoulders because they hardly ever agree with what my likes and dislikes are.
AFI came out with a 100 best movie lines this year, and I keep thinking about who makes these decisions, what about films of the future, why were most of the lines from recent (within 20 years) movies, and how do you make an objective decision about which lines get included and which don't? If I didn't care for a particular movie, chances are I'm not going to pick a line from it that I consider one of the "best ever" lines of cinema history. The same goes for AFI picking the best movies. Shouldn't the title be: AFI's Best Movies (So Far...).
The other thing that bugs me, is the celebrity death lists that come out. I find it incredibly depressing, and although I understand there is a fascination with it, I personally find it distasteful and tacky. When the "memorial" is presented at the Academy Awards, or the Oscars, I know why the presentation is done, but unless the audience is prepared to attend a funeral, it seems schlocky and half-hearted. Kind of like "hey, we know you're having a good time celebrating, but let's bring this down a notch and watch pictures of all your friends who are now dead." When the camera pans to the theater, most people are talking, not paying attention, on cell phones, or just plain gone from their seats. I'm also guessing that the majority of the viewing audience at home is in the kitchen for a snack, gone to the bathroom, channel-surfing, or talking on the phone.
The published death lists seem just as bad to me. A member of my family handed me a newspaper that had a death list in it, and I tried to explain why I didn't really want to read it. She took it back, but I felt like for some reason I offended her. Almost like I was disrespecting the dead, which I don't feel I was. She's never spoken of it again, and this year didn't try to give me the paper, so I'm guessing I probably did offend her and she's covering it. I guess I feel that when I first read of a person's death, and then the obituary, that is enough for me. I now know they have passed on, and I don't need to be reminded of it in some year-end list where the public just kind of reads through it and blazes through to the next section of the paper. It seems rude somehow, an "aw, that's a shame" and move on moment.
Don't misunderstand me and think that once a celebrity is dead and buried I forget about them. Quite the contrary. Every time I see an actor who has passed away, it registers in my head they are no longer with us. I think of Jim Henson every time I see a Muppet. Movies that were directed by master filmmakers and I wonder if we'll ever see talent like that again. Writers who will never write a favorite book for me and musicians who will never sing again; it all registers with me at the time of their death. I don't need some popularity list at the end of the year reminding me in some trite way the level of their popularity based on how big of a page spread they get. Or corner blurb.
So, as 2009 draws to a close, I will not watch all the shows that every network puts out addressing "the year that was" and other condensed bits of trivia that get fed to the public in these last few days. It is still a free country (for the time being anyway...) so those of you who love the death lists and best ever lists, have at it. Just don't complain to me when your favorite movie doesn't make it on someone else's idea of the best...movie...everrrrrr!
Happy New Year!
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Right or Privilege?
I've been hearing ads on the radio and seeing ads on TV for something called Safelink phone service. It is a government sponsored plan that gives FREE OF CHARGE a cell phone, along with what goes with a cell phone (voice mail, minutes, caller ID, etc.) to eligible people. I went to the website to learn more, and the program is run in conjunction with Tracfone Wireless. There's no other phone service company to choose from, the only choice is TracFone. But that's not my big problem with this program.
At what point did it become the government's responsibility to make sure everyone has a cell phone? Or any telephone for that matter? I don't remember free phone service being offered before, even before cell phones. If you didn't have the money, you didn't have a phone. TracFone believes that having a cell phone is a RIGHT and that no matter what your income level, you have a guaranteed right to have a cell phone.
"TracFone Wireless believes that cell phone ownership is a right and an important tool for individual success in today's world. Everyone should have a cell phone without the need for a contract or a high credit rating." https://www.safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/about_us.aspx
Why? Why are my tax dollars being wasted on this program? Why are my dollars being used for something I don't see as a constitutional right? Having a cell phone is not a RIGHT. It is a privilege and a luxury, not a RIGHT. You have the RIGHT to free speech, but you don't have the RIGHT to get a cell phone in order to have free speech. The government had it's fingers in phone service for years until deregulation came along, but they never gave away free phones. Having a phone, whether a "land line" or a cell phone is nothing more than pure privilege, not right.
And why should I have to pay for someone to have a cell phone? No one pays for my cell phone. There are a lot of things we need in life, but almost all of them are not RIGHTS. They are privileges. Luxuries. Things we WORK for. I might be on board with this cell phone giveaway if, and only if, the phone only called 9-1-1 for emergencies. And, if the person didn't have an emergency, they would be charged for the call and given a ticket for making false 9-1-1 calls. But this program doesn't restrict the use of the phone. So if Chatty Kathy wants to annoy every driver on the road telling her BFF about the latest gossip, she can. At tax payer expense. Oh, the website does mention that if a person runs out of minutes, they can purchase more TracFone cards to buy more minutes. What? If they can afford the extra minutes, why can't they afford the phone in the first place? TracFones are $10 bucks at Big Lots the last time I checked, and are around the same price at Walmart too.
In a government system run amok with spending, this is the straw for me. Having phone service is not a RIGHT and anyone who thinks so is wrong. Just flat-out plain wrong. It is not the governments business to make sure people can chat with their BFF's. And what good will that phone do when they have used up all the minutes doing so and then complain they don't have any phone service for the rest of the month? What then? At some point, some sue-happy People's Flower Power group is going to sue for unlimited minutes because, after all, you can't restrict free speech if you are going to give it out to begin with. At what point, do we just turn every single aspect of our lives over to the government and like the zombies we are destine to become, let them choose every aspect of our lives from cell phones to clothing?
Will we work just for "living credits" instead of a paycheck? Hey, you worked 5 hours this week! Yeah! Good for you! You can have a gallon of milk or a cell phone. But, don't forget, for every hour you work, you also have to support the ones who won't work, so you'll get a half gallon of milk instead. Sorry about the cell phone, maybe next week.
The sense of entitlement in the country is growing at an alarming rate. I do believe we need to take care of a slice of society that truly can not work or support themselves for various reasons. Disabilities, retirement, veterans, and to help people get back on their feet; a temporary help, not permanent. Food, shelter, clothing, and medical care. But not a cell phone. Or a computer, or TV, or car, or vacations, or anything else that seems so silly, and just as silly as free cell phones.
Where is this money coming from anyway? Don't we hear about all the short falls the government is experiencing, and yet something as frivolous as a cell phone gets money from said broke government? What truly needed program was cut off so that BFF's can waste the money chatting about the game? Or the soaps? Or the neighborhood gossip? How many of the people who get the free phones will actually use them for emergencies or something productive? I do not consider gossip productive.
This is a stupid program. Plain and simple. And yes, I know there is a lot of government waste and stupid uses of money, but do we really need to condone this behavior? And, at what point can I start saying I have a right to (fill in the blank) and therefore the government should supply it to me. It's my right after all.
At what point did it become the government's responsibility to make sure everyone has a cell phone? Or any telephone for that matter? I don't remember free phone service being offered before, even before cell phones. If you didn't have the money, you didn't have a phone. TracFone believes that having a cell phone is a RIGHT and that no matter what your income level, you have a guaranteed right to have a cell phone.
"TracFone Wireless believes that cell phone ownership is a right and an important tool for individual success in today's world. Everyone should have a cell phone without the need for a contract or a high credit rating." https://www.safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/about_us.aspx
Why? Why are my tax dollars being wasted on this program? Why are my dollars being used for something I don't see as a constitutional right? Having a cell phone is not a RIGHT. It is a privilege and a luxury, not a RIGHT. You have the RIGHT to free speech, but you don't have the RIGHT to get a cell phone in order to have free speech. The government had it's fingers in phone service for years until deregulation came along, but they never gave away free phones. Having a phone, whether a "land line" or a cell phone is nothing more than pure privilege, not right.
And why should I have to pay for someone to have a cell phone? No one pays for my cell phone. There are a lot of things we need in life, but almost all of them are not RIGHTS. They are privileges. Luxuries. Things we WORK for. I might be on board with this cell phone giveaway if, and only if, the phone only called 9-1-1 for emergencies. And, if the person didn't have an emergency, they would be charged for the call and given a ticket for making false 9-1-1 calls. But this program doesn't restrict the use of the phone. So if Chatty Kathy wants to annoy every driver on the road telling her BFF about the latest gossip, she can. At tax payer expense. Oh, the website does mention that if a person runs out of minutes, they can purchase more TracFone cards to buy more minutes. What? If they can afford the extra minutes, why can't they afford the phone in the first place? TracFones are $10 bucks at Big Lots the last time I checked, and are around the same price at Walmart too.
In a government system run amok with spending, this is the straw for me. Having phone service is not a RIGHT and anyone who thinks so is wrong. Just flat-out plain wrong. It is not the governments business to make sure people can chat with their BFF's. And what good will that phone do when they have used up all the minutes doing so and then complain they don't have any phone service for the rest of the month? What then? At some point, some sue-happy People's Flower Power group is going to sue for unlimited minutes because, after all, you can't restrict free speech if you are going to give it out to begin with. At what point, do we just turn every single aspect of our lives over to the government and like the zombies we are destine to become, let them choose every aspect of our lives from cell phones to clothing?
Will we work just for "living credits" instead of a paycheck? Hey, you worked 5 hours this week! Yeah! Good for you! You can have a gallon of milk or a cell phone. But, don't forget, for every hour you work, you also have to support the ones who won't work, so you'll get a half gallon of milk instead. Sorry about the cell phone, maybe next week.
The sense of entitlement in the country is growing at an alarming rate. I do believe we need to take care of a slice of society that truly can not work or support themselves for various reasons. Disabilities, retirement, veterans, and to help people get back on their feet; a temporary help, not permanent. Food, shelter, clothing, and medical care. But not a cell phone. Or a computer, or TV, or car, or vacations, or anything else that seems so silly, and just as silly as free cell phones.
Where is this money coming from anyway? Don't we hear about all the short falls the government is experiencing, and yet something as frivolous as a cell phone gets money from said broke government? What truly needed program was cut off so that BFF's can waste the money chatting about the game? Or the soaps? Or the neighborhood gossip? How many of the people who get the free phones will actually use them for emergencies or something productive? I do not consider gossip productive.
This is a stupid program. Plain and simple. And yes, I know there is a lot of government waste and stupid uses of money, but do we really need to condone this behavior? And, at what point can I start saying I have a right to (fill in the blank) and therefore the government should supply it to me. It's my right after all.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Yet another comment on number 4
I was never a fan of Brett Favre, or the Packers, or the whole hoopla when Favre was in Green Bay. I don't care one way or the other what is going on with the Packers, but I do notice that there are a lot of people who do, that anyone who says anything negative about Favre or the Packers, at least in the 90's would be ridiculed and aggressively shouted down and usually called some form of an idiot. I think the pinnacle of my irritation with the Packers and the majority of the state of Wisconsin's adoration of anything green and gold was Superbowl Sunday in 1996 when my friend Kathie and I went to a Joann's Fabric store at Bayshore and was promptly told that they were closing because of the football game. Huh? A fabric and sewing store was even closing for the game. Now, I understand that they were fans and I respect that. I certainly have unusual hobbies that I've been made fun of or ridiculed for and I would never berate someone for being a football fan. But, I would have expected a sewing and fabric store to be one of the few stores that would have stayed open. Oh, well.
I can't help but notice however, the recent venom and hatred toward Favre after he left the Packers. I'm stunned by the level of animosity between some fans and their attitude towards Favre. As I stated, I'm not a fan, and I don't really like Favre, but it seems to me that even though he is playing for a different team, why is there so much hatred? I think the worst example of fan hypocrisy I've seen is the tee shirt stating "Judas Favre". Really? Is the maker of this tee shirt so arrogant to believe that Favre is on the same level as the person who sold out Jesus Christ? The two situations aren't even comparable, and it's offensive to me to see that level of trivialness related to Christ's Crucifixion.
And Favre did nothing to deserve that branding. He did nothing different that any other NFL player does. They all move around to different teams, and I'm not an expert here, but didn't he play for the Atlanta Falcons before coming to Green Bay? Shouldn't those rabid fans be trashing Favre for having the audacity to play for Atlanta before Green Bay. Shouldn't he have just known that it was expected he play here? Why was it expected that he would end his career here? If he wants to play, so what? If you are a Favre fan, you'll follow him no matter where he goes. If you are a Green Bay fan, so what? Are Green Bay fans so stupid to think that new players aren't always coming and going on this team? And, if you are both a Green Bay and a Favre fan, we'll you're in luck because the local news media will cover both. Forever.
So what? Why do some fans think that Favre should retire and never play for another team again? How would they like it if they were told that the first place they worked for, no matter how crappy or unlikeable, had to stay there until they retired. Think about that. You could NEVER leave your workplace. Year after year, you'd be doing the exact same thing for the exact same employer. Or, if you are like Favre, your second job. For decades you'd never be able to leave. Or get a promotion or move to a different department. Year after agonizing year. At what point do we owe "allegiance" to our workplace?
Let Favre alone. He has every right to move on to a different employer just as much as the rest of us do. Just because it's sports doesn't mean that the people who play on these teams owe ANYTHING to anybody. The only difference between a professional sports player and the average schmo (well, besides money and fame) is that they usually really enjoy their job.
And to the fans who feel betrayed and angry: Stop making Favre a god of some sort and his leaving will be easier to take. He's gone, face it and move on. I'm tired of hearing about it already.....
I can't help but notice however, the recent venom and hatred toward Favre after he left the Packers. I'm stunned by the level of animosity between some fans and their attitude towards Favre. As I stated, I'm not a fan, and I don't really like Favre, but it seems to me that even though he is playing for a different team, why is there so much hatred? I think the worst example of fan hypocrisy I've seen is the tee shirt stating "Judas Favre". Really? Is the maker of this tee shirt so arrogant to believe that Favre is on the same level as the person who sold out Jesus Christ? The two situations aren't even comparable, and it's offensive to me to see that level of trivialness related to Christ's Crucifixion.
And Favre did nothing to deserve that branding. He did nothing different that any other NFL player does. They all move around to different teams, and I'm not an expert here, but didn't he play for the Atlanta Falcons before coming to Green Bay? Shouldn't those rabid fans be trashing Favre for having the audacity to play for Atlanta before Green Bay. Shouldn't he have just known that it was expected he play here? Why was it expected that he would end his career here? If he wants to play, so what? If you are a Favre fan, you'll follow him no matter where he goes. If you are a Green Bay fan, so what? Are Green Bay fans so stupid to think that new players aren't always coming and going on this team? And, if you are both a Green Bay and a Favre fan, we'll you're in luck because the local news media will cover both. Forever.
So what? Why do some fans think that Favre should retire and never play for another team again? How would they like it if they were told that the first place they worked for, no matter how crappy or unlikeable, had to stay there until they retired. Think about that. You could NEVER leave your workplace. Year after year, you'd be doing the exact same thing for the exact same employer. Or, if you are like Favre, your second job. For decades you'd never be able to leave. Or get a promotion or move to a different department. Year after agonizing year. At what point do we owe "allegiance" to our workplace?
Let Favre alone. He has every right to move on to a different employer just as much as the rest of us do. Just because it's sports doesn't mean that the people who play on these teams owe ANYTHING to anybody. The only difference between a professional sports player and the average schmo (well, besides money and fame) is that they usually really enjoy their job.
And to the fans who feel betrayed and angry: Stop making Favre a god of some sort and his leaving will be easier to take. He's gone, face it and move on. I'm tired of hearing about it already.....
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The letter
I got the letter on Friday Oct. 16th. The one I've been dreading and knew would come since the day Columbia Hospital and St. Mary's Hospital in Milwaukee signed the "partnership" agreement in 1995. It's time for everyone on the east side campuses (they don't call them hospitals anymore) to re-apply for their jobs. Now, the letter doesn't come right out and state that, it's put in a more employee friendly way. We actually have to state what are our job is, when we would like to work, and then our managers will place us in new positions. Now, I realize that I have completed my math requirements for college, but any 5th grader could pretty much tell you that CSM will not have enough job openings for all the employees currently working for both CSM Milw campuses. Columbia Hospital, which just celebrated its 100th anniversary this past summer will be closing in the fall of 2010. We are the ones who have lost in this merger and I really don't care what management tries to state otherwise. We bailed St. Mary's out of a financially ruinious situation, suffered the wage freeze when it happened and made CSM what it is today. Not St. Mary's. But we are the building closing.
And the trend to adopt St. Mary's way of life has been ingrained since that "partnership" agreement 14 years ago. Columbia lost it's identity, many of the employees have left, and there are few who remember Columbia Health System which competed with St. Mary's. Anyone who knows me, knows that I am making a life decison in changing my career. I've never thought of work as a career. I've never had ambition to get to management, have a high paying position, or otherwise make my work my career. Work has always been a way to pay bills and allow me to do the things I really cherish in my life. My hobbies, live without debt, be comfortable, play, and help others when they need it. Work is not the end all be all for me, and it never will be. My parents were hard working salt of the Earth people and that's pretty much where I get my work ethic from. Work is not my life. But it does take up a huge portion of it, and if that is going to be the case, I feel I should be happy where I work.
I've already told my boss that I will not go to the new hospital. Even if it does have a lake veiw. I want nothing to do with it. My office will be at a different CSM owned building, and luckily I have the type of job where I don't have to be onsite in order to complete my duties. But of late, I've been really trying to figure out if I want to stay. I've spent 20 years there, and come this January, it will be 21 years. I had hoped to make 25 years, but I'm not so sure I want to. Something about this whole new hospital deal makes me bitter that Columbia was used as nothing more than a financial springboard for St. Mary's to get a new building. And now, because the building is sold, Columbia is slowly turning into the (now closed) St. Michael Hospital and the standards are no where near what they used to be. Why fix, repair, clean, paint, upgrade, or care about a building that is being abandoned? Let the new owners take care of it. Even if they want that building. I'm guessing it will be torn down and new construction will be put up. I have solid tiger eye maple doors going to my office, a marble window ledge, 15 foot ceiling, wood trim, and plaster walls. I seriously doubt the new building will have any of those features or workers who even care enough to notice the difference.
It's going to be a blood-bath when the openings are announced. Not only will there be bitter unhappy people who didn't retain jobs, but the ones who do will be left to work short when all the non-job people quit. There will be no new hirings because who would be crazy enough to take a job just for a few months? So the ones left behind will be worked ragged until they too quit. The job lettings have happened twice now in the past year, and I expect more will come in this year. I worry about the quality of care and the reputation damage we will suffer, and I'm not sure I want to be part of that. I already get every horror story people can relate when they find out I work for a hospital. As if I alone either had some influence over their care, or can fix whatever problem they encountered. Especially when they find out that I mainly do billing. From my experience I've pretty much surmised that no one likes billing people.
In 1999, my husband and I won at auction, along with several other people, dinner with Anthony Daniels(C-3PO from Star Wars) when he was in town for Gen Con. The dinner was at the (now closed) Polaris Restaurant atop the Hyatt. He is a wonderful person in public, and I mean no disrepect to him, but at the very beginning of dinner, he went around the table trying to guess what everyone did for a living. He got to me, and had a very hard time guessing. In fact, he came back to me. After several wrong guesses he caved and asked me what I did. I stated that I did billing for the retail pharmacies for CSM. His smiled faded and he launched into a lecture about how you could die in a waiting room if you didn't have your insurance information in this country. I couldn't get a word in edgewise to defend myself because he continued to tell a story of an injury he suffered while filming something, had to go to the ER, and was insulted because the intake worker didn't recognize him and asked him for his insurance card. The person with him made a big production about who he was and apparently he got the treatment he needed. But then he also launched into how he would NEVER have been treated that way in England.
I knew, even back then and having had my current job for only a year, that was the way people were going to react to me when I told them what I do for a living. So, why then did it take me this long to make moves to leave? And why do I care so much? It paid the bills and because Columbia was one of the best hospitals in Milwaukee at the time. I also started out as a Pharmacy Technician, not in billing and enjoyed that job much more than what I do now. It's too bad they don't pay techs what I make as a billing coordinator.
So, those are my somewhat uncheery thoughts for a Sunday night. I miss Columbia and I am not looking forward to the coming year work-wise.
And the trend to adopt St. Mary's way of life has been ingrained since that "partnership" agreement 14 years ago. Columbia lost it's identity, many of the employees have left, and there are few who remember Columbia Health System which competed with St. Mary's. Anyone who knows me, knows that I am making a life decison in changing my career. I've never thought of work as a career. I've never had ambition to get to management, have a high paying position, or otherwise make my work my career. Work has always been a way to pay bills and allow me to do the things I really cherish in my life. My hobbies, live without debt, be comfortable, play, and help others when they need it. Work is not the end all be all for me, and it never will be. My parents were hard working salt of the Earth people and that's pretty much where I get my work ethic from. Work is not my life. But it does take up a huge portion of it, and if that is going to be the case, I feel I should be happy where I work.
I've already told my boss that I will not go to the new hospital. Even if it does have a lake veiw. I want nothing to do with it. My office will be at a different CSM owned building, and luckily I have the type of job where I don't have to be onsite in order to complete my duties. But of late, I've been really trying to figure out if I want to stay. I've spent 20 years there, and come this January, it will be 21 years. I had hoped to make 25 years, but I'm not so sure I want to. Something about this whole new hospital deal makes me bitter that Columbia was used as nothing more than a financial springboard for St. Mary's to get a new building. And now, because the building is sold, Columbia is slowly turning into the (now closed) St. Michael Hospital and the standards are no where near what they used to be. Why fix, repair, clean, paint, upgrade, or care about a building that is being abandoned? Let the new owners take care of it. Even if they want that building. I'm guessing it will be torn down and new construction will be put up. I have solid tiger eye maple doors going to my office, a marble window ledge, 15 foot ceiling, wood trim, and plaster walls. I seriously doubt the new building will have any of those features or workers who even care enough to notice the difference.
It's going to be a blood-bath when the openings are announced. Not only will there be bitter unhappy people who didn't retain jobs, but the ones who do will be left to work short when all the non-job people quit. There will be no new hirings because who would be crazy enough to take a job just for a few months? So the ones left behind will be worked ragged until they too quit. The job lettings have happened twice now in the past year, and I expect more will come in this year. I worry about the quality of care and the reputation damage we will suffer, and I'm not sure I want to be part of that. I already get every horror story people can relate when they find out I work for a hospital. As if I alone either had some influence over their care, or can fix whatever problem they encountered. Especially when they find out that I mainly do billing. From my experience I've pretty much surmised that no one likes billing people.
In 1999, my husband and I won at auction, along with several other people, dinner with Anthony Daniels(C-3PO from Star Wars) when he was in town for Gen Con. The dinner was at the (now closed) Polaris Restaurant atop the Hyatt. He is a wonderful person in public, and I mean no disrepect to him, but at the very beginning of dinner, he went around the table trying to guess what everyone did for a living. He got to me, and had a very hard time guessing. In fact, he came back to me. After several wrong guesses he caved and asked me what I did. I stated that I did billing for the retail pharmacies for CSM. His smiled faded and he launched into a lecture about how you could die in a waiting room if you didn't have your insurance information in this country. I couldn't get a word in edgewise to defend myself because he continued to tell a story of an injury he suffered while filming something, had to go to the ER, and was insulted because the intake worker didn't recognize him and asked him for his insurance card. The person with him made a big production about who he was and apparently he got the treatment he needed. But then he also launched into how he would NEVER have been treated that way in England.
I knew, even back then and having had my current job for only a year, that was the way people were going to react to me when I told them what I do for a living. So, why then did it take me this long to make moves to leave? And why do I care so much? It paid the bills and because Columbia was one of the best hospitals in Milwaukee at the time. I also started out as a Pharmacy Technician, not in billing and enjoyed that job much more than what I do now. It's too bad they don't pay techs what I make as a billing coordinator.
So, those are my somewhat uncheery thoughts for a Sunday night. I miss Columbia and I am not looking forward to the coming year work-wise.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
New beginings
School has started once again, and this semester I am taking a chemistry class and a creative writing class. Odd combination, huh? Chemistry is at campus and the writing class in online, which seems fitting. I've also had to shift my working hours to a split second shift time, except for a 10 hour day on Tuesdays that will start at 7am and go till 5:30pm. But that's not the point of this posting. Actually, I'm not really sure what the point of this posting is, I just felt like writing something.
We are starting out with poetry in creative writing, something I'm not good at, and have never been comfortable with reading or writing. I know a few things about myself, and one of them is that I like to deal with absolutes. Yes, I know nothing is absolute in life, and I suppose that is where poetry gets its foot in the door and takes hold. And, as with anything else, the variety of poems and poetry out there is a varied as life itself. But, they all have one thing in common. Using words in a way they, the words, may never have been intended to be used. And that's where my discomfiture comes with reading and trying to understand what's in front of me. I love writing essays. Same with actual experiences. I really enjoyed writing my papers in my ENG 102 class mainly because they drew on an actual experience that was the subject of the paper. Am I saying I have no creativity and can't come up with a story or poem? No, but it won't be anywhere near what I want to write.
Several years ago, my work needed to go through a "getting in touch" moment so that we could understand our fellow coworkers better. A nice way of saying that we were fighting so badly with one another that management had to do something about it before someone filed a complaint with HR. There were MANY reasons why we didn't get along, some valid, some not...but the main part of the kumbyeya moment was that we were divided up into the following groups based on our own understanding of ourselves. Machine gun thinkers, dreamers, list makers, and story tellers. My work had roughly 45 people in it at the time and I was the only story teller. Not "lie-like-a-rug" story teller, but someone who "collects" stories, life experiences, anecdotes, trivia, etc from other people and myself and then uses that information when it is needed.
The majority of the group were machine gun thinkers, the ones who made a decision based on clear, concise facts presented in a machine gun manner and didn't want to hear or consider the detrius of non-facts. No background stories for them. They also find the three other groups sometimes intolerable to listen to. Which, right there, explains why the dept was having the problems it had. There were a few dreamers who were the poets of the group, and the rest were list makers, which is a fairly obvious personality trait. Even though the day long event failed to make us a better department, it was something that made such an impact on me that it really did adjust the way I deal with my coworkers, and eventually any person I meet. My husband is a machine gun thinker and I can tell when I've moved past the "I'm telling him what he needs to hear" moment and into the "He'll listen and look like he's paying attention but is thinking about something else" moment. He also has the remarkable ability to repeat back to me what I've just said so in some ways he is listening, but not like I would like him to listen sometimes. But he will tell anyone that it's dead-on I'm a story teller. That I'm most comfortable with dealing with an actual event than trying to come up with something that's abstract or non-existent.
So, I guess what I need to do, is write poetry that deals with absolute experiences. It could be argued that all poetry is based on real life experiences, and I would agree with that, but the way it's written is what is difficult for me. Part of being a story teller is to have the best understanding of what I'm reading and not filling in the blanks myself or creating my own story of someone else's experience. You would think someone who wants a degree in information resources would love any written or spoken word, but for some reason I get irritated at the vagueness of poetry. Maybe that's it. The vagueness of poetry. But, really, couldn't anything be vague enough to make the reader or listener irritated?
When I was a freshman in high school, we had to read Romeo and Juliet and the screen play of West Side Story. The book actually had both printings in it, and chapter by chapter and verse by verse we got through both stories. By far West Side Story was the most popular, the easiest to discuss, and the part of English class that got the class to pay attention. I struggled through Romeo and Juliet, but flew through West Side Story. Shakespeare, arguably regarded as THE greatest writer of humankind, was no match for interest from a 9th grade English class. However, throw in some snappy songs, easily readable text, gangs, guns, and choreography and the class gets it. And, not only gets it, but was eager for more. Why?
Maybe I will be able to answer that question after this semester. Maybe after being forced to write and read poetry, I will gain a better understanding of it and will be able to add that to my collection of stories. Or maybe being forced to once again read and write it will continue the distaste I developed in 9th grade and never got over. Maybe because I know in my heart I'm not a writer, I will always be a collector of stories and not a creator of them.
We are starting out with poetry in creative writing, something I'm not good at, and have never been comfortable with reading or writing. I know a few things about myself, and one of them is that I like to deal with absolutes. Yes, I know nothing is absolute in life, and I suppose that is where poetry gets its foot in the door and takes hold. And, as with anything else, the variety of poems and poetry out there is a varied as life itself. But, they all have one thing in common. Using words in a way they, the words, may never have been intended to be used. And that's where my discomfiture comes with reading and trying to understand what's in front of me. I love writing essays. Same with actual experiences. I really enjoyed writing my papers in my ENG 102 class mainly because they drew on an actual experience that was the subject of the paper. Am I saying I have no creativity and can't come up with a story or poem? No, but it won't be anywhere near what I want to write.
Several years ago, my work needed to go through a "getting in touch" moment so that we could understand our fellow coworkers better. A nice way of saying that we were fighting so badly with one another that management had to do something about it before someone filed a complaint with HR. There were MANY reasons why we didn't get along, some valid, some not...but the main part of the kumbyeya moment was that we were divided up into the following groups based on our own understanding of ourselves. Machine gun thinkers, dreamers, list makers, and story tellers. My work had roughly 45 people in it at the time and I was the only story teller. Not "lie-like-a-rug" story teller, but someone who "collects" stories, life experiences, anecdotes, trivia, etc from other people and myself and then uses that information when it is needed.
The majority of the group were machine gun thinkers, the ones who made a decision based on clear, concise facts presented in a machine gun manner and didn't want to hear or consider the detrius of non-facts. No background stories for them. They also find the three other groups sometimes intolerable to listen to. Which, right there, explains why the dept was having the problems it had. There were a few dreamers who were the poets of the group, and the rest were list makers, which is a fairly obvious personality trait. Even though the day long event failed to make us a better department, it was something that made such an impact on me that it really did adjust the way I deal with my coworkers, and eventually any person I meet. My husband is a machine gun thinker and I can tell when I've moved past the "I'm telling him what he needs to hear" moment and into the "He'll listen and look like he's paying attention but is thinking about something else" moment. He also has the remarkable ability to repeat back to me what I've just said so in some ways he is listening, but not like I would like him to listen sometimes. But he will tell anyone that it's dead-on I'm a story teller. That I'm most comfortable with dealing with an actual event than trying to come up with something that's abstract or non-existent.
So, I guess what I need to do, is write poetry that deals with absolute experiences. It could be argued that all poetry is based on real life experiences, and I would agree with that, but the way it's written is what is difficult for me. Part of being a story teller is to have the best understanding of what I'm reading and not filling in the blanks myself or creating my own story of someone else's experience. You would think someone who wants a degree in information resources would love any written or spoken word, but for some reason I get irritated at the vagueness of poetry. Maybe that's it. The vagueness of poetry. But, really, couldn't anything be vague enough to make the reader or listener irritated?
When I was a freshman in high school, we had to read Romeo and Juliet and the screen play of West Side Story. The book actually had both printings in it, and chapter by chapter and verse by verse we got through both stories. By far West Side Story was the most popular, the easiest to discuss, and the part of English class that got the class to pay attention. I struggled through Romeo and Juliet, but flew through West Side Story. Shakespeare, arguably regarded as THE greatest writer of humankind, was no match for interest from a 9th grade English class. However, throw in some snappy songs, easily readable text, gangs, guns, and choreography and the class gets it. And, not only gets it, but was eager for more. Why?
Maybe I will be able to answer that question after this semester. Maybe after being forced to write and read poetry, I will gain a better understanding of it and will be able to add that to my collection of stories. Or maybe being forced to once again read and write it will continue the distaste I developed in 9th grade and never got over. Maybe because I know in my heart I'm not a writer, I will always be a collector of stories and not a creator of them.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Good-Bye Summer....
It was nice while it lasted. My summer class ended July 31st and for five weeks I'm free of school, and for almost two of those weeks I was also free of work. Well, my paying job anyway. I was able to take some time to go visit friends in Ohio (Hi Kathie and Steve!), and then veg around the house a bit. Scott and I didn't go to GenCon this year, but maybe next. We'll see if they have fun guests of honor and if the road construction between Wisconsin and Indianapolis is better. Chicago is a lost cause as that freeway/tollway is ALWAYS under construction, but I-65 to Indy was also torn up this year. Even though we have air conditioning in the car, I don't fancy sitting in construction traffic with the AC off, in August, in Indiana. So, we passed on it this year.
As the summer draws to a close, my husband and I have decided to pave our driveway and put in a patio behind the garage. We've had a gravel driveway since the beginning of this house, and even though it doesn't bother me that much to have it, shoveling it in winter is hard, and even more difficult with the snowthrower. I won't miss the ice that forms on the gravel as I've fallen several times, including my first night back to college where I not only fell, but ripped the skin off my palms from the rocks that were still sticking up, and was a bloody mess going to my first night of English 102 class. That's a good way to start a semester. Not realizing that I had ripped that skin off, it wasn't until I was half-way to class and with my hands burning did I realize they were more than just scratched up. Once I got into the light I saw that my hands were bloody, I was a wet mess from the snow (it was snowing pretty hard), and the front of my pants were muddy and bloody because of my hands. I'm very glad that the rest of the semester didn't go as badly.
While in Ohio, I went to an estate sale with Kathie and Steve. It was paydirt for me, as I found a set of salt and pepper shakers in the depression glass pattern I collect. Granted they were pink instead of the monax (white) color I collect, but I got them for a song. I had really only needed the tops, but when I saw what the bases were, there's no question as to whether or not I'll keep them. Last summer I found a quilt that is exceptional in its stitching and quality, and this summer the shakers. I'm not sure how I'm going to top myself next year, but it will be fun trying. Kathie is the person who got me into auctions and antiques by exclaiming one day in my kitchen "WOW, that's a Shawnee cookie jar on your fridge!!!" I had no clue what it was other than grandma's cookie jar which was always magically full of cookies whenever the grandkids were there. It was never empty. When she passed away, I was very lucky to get that cookie jar and a box of "old, white dishes" I though would be useful when I went off to college in the fall. I was 18 at the time and didn't have a clue as to what either items were worth, or would be worth in the future. I just knew that I would always think of my grandma when I looked at that cookie jar. So, when Kathie had that reaction, my interest was peaked for all things Shawnee and soon had the salt & pepper shakers and the creamer that went with the cookie jar. Then, the collecting of depression glassware started. While at the first auction Kathie took me too, there were a few plates in the same pattern that I had sitting in my basement. The crowd was not paying attention and I got them for a song too. The auctioneer actually admonished the crowd for letting someone get those plates for cheap. I didn't care what the crowd did, I was thrilled and hooked.
Over the years, I've added quite a few things to my collections of glassware and Shawnee pottery. I'm sure my grandmother would have a fit if she knew how much these items were worth. And, that I treat them more like museum pieces instead of actually using them. I do use a few platters of my depressionware, but they are pretty common ones and are also not mint. You might find a chip or two in them. And, no, the shakers will not be in use either....
My final thought is that even though I love collecting this stuff, it has occurred to both my husband and I that moving all this stuff into a new house is going to be, well, let's just say, AWFUL! It never occurred to us that we might want to collect, oh, I don't know, feathers or something light. It's going to take a long time to move, plus packing all these things will be nothing short of, short. But, I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Until then, just one more piece of glass won't hurt, will it?
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Random Thoughts
I haven't blogged in several weeks, mostly because I really haven't had anything to say. I'm almost done with my summer class, and I'm still irritated that Caucasians are referred to as "whites" and "white man" yet skin color is never used for any other ethnic group.
I saw my first Christmas stuff in the store last weekend (July 11th) at Fleet Farm in Plymouth. A whole aisle of lights, lawn ornaments, decorations, artificial trees, and other assorted Christmas items. They were having a Christmas in July sale, which is lame. I'm wondering at what point the stores will have year round Christmas sales and just be done with the pretense of suffering through the non-Christmas shopping season.
My workplace, Columbia Hospital, celebrated its 100th anniversary today. I have worked there 20 years, and as of October 2010, will close. Columbia and St. Mary's hospital form CSM (Columbia St. Mary's) and will have a new hospital at the St. Mary's Milwaukee site. The employees are continually told that this is a wonderful thing, but I'm sad that a once great hospital, Columbia, will close and forever be forgotten. And, at what point will the "C" in CSM be erased from the name because it doesn't exist anymore. The merging of employees will prove to be stressful and interesting. All the Columbia employees will be like the step-children in a new blended marriage. The ones relegated to trying to fit in and make a place for themselves. At least the ones that still have a job.
Why is our government spending money it will never have? Why are all these programs and far reaching plans being passed RIGHT NOW instead of being discussed and debated for a reasonable amount of time so we know what we are getting ourselves in to? What is the hurry?
Why do people think a national health care plan will be run any better than what Medicare is run now? Just ask any person on Medicare about the plan and you will hear nothing positive. As a person who deals with Medicare from a providers point of view, if we get the same reimbursement from the new Medicare, we will be bankrupt within the first year. You think you wait a long time for treatment or a doctor's appointment now? Just wait until there are only a handful of doctors and hospitals and you are triaged based on age, life-style habits, and whether or not you really qualify for treatment.
Why are there so many Michael Jackson fans all of a sudden? Where were they when he was on trial? Personally, I was never a fan and didn't really care for his music. I think he was a strange person and don't feel any differently about him now that he is dead. Why does death change some people's perception of the deceased?
And finally, why isn't The Amazing Race show in HD?
I saw my first Christmas stuff in the store last weekend (July 11th) at Fleet Farm in Plymouth. A whole aisle of lights, lawn ornaments, decorations, artificial trees, and other assorted Christmas items. They were having a Christmas in July sale, which is lame. I'm wondering at what point the stores will have year round Christmas sales and just be done with the pretense of suffering through the non-Christmas shopping season.
My workplace, Columbia Hospital, celebrated its 100th anniversary today. I have worked there 20 years, and as of October 2010, will close. Columbia and St. Mary's hospital form CSM (Columbia St. Mary's) and will have a new hospital at the St. Mary's Milwaukee site. The employees are continually told that this is a wonderful thing, but I'm sad that a once great hospital, Columbia, will close and forever be forgotten. And, at what point will the "C" in CSM be erased from the name because it doesn't exist anymore. The merging of employees will prove to be stressful and interesting. All the Columbia employees will be like the step-children in a new blended marriage. The ones relegated to trying to fit in and make a place for themselves. At least the ones that still have a job.
Why is our government spending money it will never have? Why are all these programs and far reaching plans being passed RIGHT NOW instead of being discussed and debated for a reasonable amount of time so we know what we are getting ourselves in to? What is the hurry?
Why do people think a national health care plan will be run any better than what Medicare is run now? Just ask any person on Medicare about the plan and you will hear nothing positive. As a person who deals with Medicare from a providers point of view, if we get the same reimbursement from the new Medicare, we will be bankrupt within the first year. You think you wait a long time for treatment or a doctor's appointment now? Just wait until there are only a handful of doctors and hospitals and you are triaged based on age, life-style habits, and whether or not you really qualify for treatment.
Why are there so many Michael Jackson fans all of a sudden? Where were they when he was on trial? Personally, I was never a fan and didn't really care for his music. I think he was a strange person and don't feel any differently about him now that he is dead. Why does death change some people's perception of the deceased?
And finally, why isn't The Amazing Race show in HD?
Friday, June 26, 2009
Diversity and Education
I'm taking my Interdisciplinary Studies class online this summer. The best I can figure out is that this and Ethnic Studies classes are pretty much diversity training. At my work I have to go through diversity training twice a year. Apparently, someone thinks that I don't know I should treat other people with respect and understand that not everyone is going to agree with me. And, that there are other people in the world who have different skin color. I had no clue that there were other people of different skin colors out there until I had diversity training at work and school. I was too wrapped up in my Euro American Caucasian world to even realize that there are other opinions and cultures in the world. And, guess what? You shouldn't make fun of them, or think that you are smarter or better, or not hire or work with them. Oh, and they also have a right to their religions beliefs too.
Do you think I'm kidding and being sarcastic? The work lessons are worse than the school classes, but both are of the same spirit. The thing about school, however, is that I'm paying good money to be told these things. Lessons my parents taught me for free. I'm sure there are people out there who really need to be taught these lessons, but I'm guessing they are not going to be the type to stick through a semester of lessons, or continue employment for any length of time. My other observation about diversity training is that there is never the expectation that anyone other than "white" people need to go through these lessons. Oh, sure, the AAS degree requires all students to have three credits for each area, but everything is taught so that the "white" person can gain an understanding of a different culture.
My summer IS class is entitled "American Indian Studies" and I really wanted this class to be about what the culture entails and not a rant about the "evil white man". Yesterday, she (my teacher) posted a racial joke in the discussion area and justified it by putting "warning, some may be offended" in the subject line. Considering we HAVE to read EVERYTHING the teacher posts, it's not like we could ignore this. I've actually heard this joke before, it's as old as the hills, and wasn't that funny the first time I heard it. I'm not going to justify it by posting it again, but let's just say that the punch line is about the "white man". The thing is, if I, as a "white (wo)man" had posted that in my discussion group, I'm guessing I would have been expelled from the class. Maybe even subject to disciplinary action from the University for posting racially offensive material. Why then, is it ok for the teacher, the person we are supposed to believe unconditionally, to post this joke? Is it because she's American Indian and it's a slam against the "white man"? And why does she get to refer to Caucasians as "white man" in all of her lecture notes and commentaries, but never once uses the term "red man"?
If the point of this class is supposed to be cultural understanding, using racially offensive terms doesn't really accomplish that, does it? Yet, if I bring this up to her, I'm sure I'll flunk, and she'll have some lame excuse about using the term "whites" and "white man". If "red man" is racially offensive, so is "white man" and NEITHER term should be used. I knew that going into this class, so I'm not sure why I'm being told it's ok to use "white man" but not "red man". Both describe a color of skin, both are dehumanizing, and double standards should never be tolerated. It's unfortunate that we do tolerate them. I'm really thinking of telling her that, but after my grade has been posted. Because a person who supposedly "educates" with racially offensive jokes and terms won't think twice about flunking a "white woman" for expressing something that is a double standard being used in her class.
I also seem to feel that the two required books and the lecture notes are being written specifically to be insulting to Euro Americans and Caucasians. I'm guessing it's a case of petty revenge for all the history books that were written by "whites" about Indians. In fact, the beginning lesson had a spiel about that very fact. That the books used were going to be from an Indian perspective, because apparently, in all this time no "white man" has gotten history correct.
I won't let this be a stopping point for my college degree. I will do what I have to in order to not only pass this class, but get a good grade. I've learned two things from diversity classes. 1) They are not really about treating people as equals, and 2) How to regurgitate back to the teacher what s/he wants to hear and not what I really feel.
I guess they really train you for how to deal with a boss.....
Do you think I'm kidding and being sarcastic? The work lessons are worse than the school classes, but both are of the same spirit. The thing about school, however, is that I'm paying good money to be told these things. Lessons my parents taught me for free. I'm sure there are people out there who really need to be taught these lessons, but I'm guessing they are not going to be the type to stick through a semester of lessons, or continue employment for any length of time. My other observation about diversity training is that there is never the expectation that anyone other than "white" people need to go through these lessons. Oh, sure, the AAS degree requires all students to have three credits for each area, but everything is taught so that the "white" person can gain an understanding of a different culture.
My summer IS class is entitled "American Indian Studies" and I really wanted this class to be about what the culture entails and not a rant about the "evil white man". Yesterday, she (my teacher) posted a racial joke in the discussion area and justified it by putting "warning, some may be offended" in the subject line. Considering we HAVE to read EVERYTHING the teacher posts, it's not like we could ignore this. I've actually heard this joke before, it's as old as the hills, and wasn't that funny the first time I heard it. I'm not going to justify it by posting it again, but let's just say that the punch line is about the "white man". The thing is, if I, as a "white (wo)man" had posted that in my discussion group, I'm guessing I would have been expelled from the class. Maybe even subject to disciplinary action from the University for posting racially offensive material. Why then, is it ok for the teacher, the person we are supposed to believe unconditionally, to post this joke? Is it because she's American Indian and it's a slam against the "white man"? And why does she get to refer to Caucasians as "white man" in all of her lecture notes and commentaries, but never once uses the term "red man"?
If the point of this class is supposed to be cultural understanding, using racially offensive terms doesn't really accomplish that, does it? Yet, if I bring this up to her, I'm sure I'll flunk, and she'll have some lame excuse about using the term "whites" and "white man". If "red man" is racially offensive, so is "white man" and NEITHER term should be used. I knew that going into this class, so I'm not sure why I'm being told it's ok to use "white man" but not "red man". Both describe a color of skin, both are dehumanizing, and double standards should never be tolerated. It's unfortunate that we do tolerate them. I'm really thinking of telling her that, but after my grade has been posted. Because a person who supposedly "educates" with racially offensive jokes and terms won't think twice about flunking a "white woman" for expressing something that is a double standard being used in her class.
I also seem to feel that the two required books and the lecture notes are being written specifically to be insulting to Euro Americans and Caucasians. I'm guessing it's a case of petty revenge for all the history books that were written by "whites" about Indians. In fact, the beginning lesson had a spiel about that very fact. That the books used were going to be from an Indian perspective, because apparently, in all this time no "white man" has gotten history correct.
I won't let this be a stopping point for my college degree. I will do what I have to in order to not only pass this class, but get a good grade. I've learned two things from diversity classes. 1) They are not really about treating people as equals, and 2) How to regurgitate back to the teacher what s/he wants to hear and not what I really feel.
I guess they really train you for how to deal with a boss.....
Friday, May 22, 2009
The Generifaction of the Holiday
This morning (May 22nd) I was wished a “happy holiday weekend.” I have noticed the past few years several things about holidays.
First, in society's attempt to be diverse and to not offend any group or person, holidays that once had cultural or religious meaning have been obliterated by the generic term “holiday”. It's the perfect non-committal, non-significant, non-meaning, non-threatening, non-descriptive way to wish someone good feelings for something that we may or may not know if the person celebrates or not. But if the person doesn't observe or celebrate the “holiday” why would we wish them a happy “holiday”? It's almost as if we need to leave no person behind when it comes to happiness during holidays.
Second, I do not want to be wished a happy holiday when it is Memorial Day or a happy holiday weekend for the whole weekend. It is NOT a happy holiday, it is a time to remember our dead, and specifically, our military dead. It seems that in our rush to enjoy every single second of the summer, society has now deemed that Memorial Day is not for remembrance and reflection, but a whole weekend event to WOO HOO! ring in the whole season of summer. This, of course, ends with Labor Day weekend, which being a day the Unions have constructed isn't really a holiday I observe, but I still get wished a happy holiday weekend for that one too. I don't mind, but maybe it would have more meaning to me if I were in a union. But as it stands now, I really don't care about that one. Mostly, it's annoying because it usually falls right around or on my birthday, so trying to plan anything is difficult because of crowds of people trying to get the last days of summer crammed into their lives before school starts or the perceived notion of winter starting the next day.
Third, when I wish some a happy Easter, or a Merry Christmas, or a happy Hanukkah, or whatever happy holiday is current, I get a surprised look and then a smile. I have yet to have someone correct me, scowl, or be angry that I wished them a happy (specific) holiday. However, I don't wish anyone a happy Memorial Day. That's just insulting. Of the six major recognized holidays (New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Christmas Day, Thanksgiving Day, and July 4th) that the majority of America observes, Memorial Day is the only one that isn't a reason to celebrate, yet we've turned it into a reason to celebrate because, after all, who DOESN'T love summer? Oh, wait, Memorial Day isn't about summer? What? Are you sure?
And fourth, I really want the retailers to stop treating this day as a great opportunity for sales. That doesn't mean I want all the stores closed, but what I do want is for them to stop treating the day as another Christmas shopping season. Anyone who wants to shop is going to whether or not (insert store here) is having a special Memorial Day sale. Just have a sale, don't name it a Memorial Day sale. There's no need for that.
We've lost our meaning for this day. I would also equate it to having lost our meaning and direction for what is important not only on this day, but every day. No one likes to dwell on the dead, or sad times, or what we've lost in life, or be reminded of how harsh, cruel, and mean reality can be. Of course it's more fun to think about the summer ahead and how great it is to have a mandated day off of work. If we're lucky, we can get the Friday before off and get a jump start on that traffic. But that is not what this day, and not a weekend, is about. Society has turned it into a reason to celebrate, because who wants to be bothered with all those depression thoughts of war, fallen heroes, and lost friends and relatives when the perfect grill-out is just minutes away.
To my father, Lester L. Olson, I would like to say thank you for your years of service in the Army Air Corp during WWII and Army Reserves after the war. And to my mom, Ruth E. Olson, thank you for your years of service to Military Families through the American Red Cross. I miss you both.
First, in society's attempt to be diverse and to not offend any group or person, holidays that once had cultural or religious meaning have been obliterated by the generic term “holiday”. It's the perfect non-committal, non-significant, non-meaning, non-threatening, non-descriptive way to wish someone good feelings for something that we may or may not know if the person celebrates or not. But if the person doesn't observe or celebrate the “holiday” why would we wish them a happy “holiday”? It's almost as if we need to leave no person behind when it comes to happiness during holidays.
Second, I do not want to be wished a happy holiday when it is Memorial Day or a happy holiday weekend for the whole weekend. It is NOT a happy holiday, it is a time to remember our dead, and specifically, our military dead. It seems that in our rush to enjoy every single second of the summer, society has now deemed that Memorial Day is not for remembrance and reflection, but a whole weekend event to WOO HOO! ring in the whole season of summer. This, of course, ends with Labor Day weekend, which being a day the Unions have constructed isn't really a holiday I observe, but I still get wished a happy holiday weekend for that one too. I don't mind, but maybe it would have more meaning to me if I were in a union. But as it stands now, I really don't care about that one. Mostly, it's annoying because it usually falls right around or on my birthday, so trying to plan anything is difficult because of crowds of people trying to get the last days of summer crammed into their lives before school starts or the perceived notion of winter starting the next day.
Third, when I wish some a happy Easter, or a Merry Christmas, or a happy Hanukkah, or whatever happy holiday is current, I get a surprised look and then a smile. I have yet to have someone correct me, scowl, or be angry that I wished them a happy (specific) holiday. However, I don't wish anyone a happy Memorial Day. That's just insulting. Of the six major recognized holidays (New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Christmas Day, Thanksgiving Day, and July 4th) that the majority of America observes, Memorial Day is the only one that isn't a reason to celebrate, yet we've turned it into a reason to celebrate because, after all, who DOESN'T love summer? Oh, wait, Memorial Day isn't about summer? What? Are you sure?
And fourth, I really want the retailers to stop treating this day as a great opportunity for sales. That doesn't mean I want all the stores closed, but what I do want is for them to stop treating the day as another Christmas shopping season. Anyone who wants to shop is going to whether or not (insert store here) is having a special Memorial Day sale. Just have a sale, don't name it a Memorial Day sale. There's no need for that.
We've lost our meaning for this day. I would also equate it to having lost our meaning and direction for what is important not only on this day, but every day. No one likes to dwell on the dead, or sad times, or what we've lost in life, or be reminded of how harsh, cruel, and mean reality can be. Of course it's more fun to think about the summer ahead and how great it is to have a mandated day off of work. If we're lucky, we can get the Friday before off and get a jump start on that traffic. But that is not what this day, and not a weekend, is about. Society has turned it into a reason to celebrate, because who wants to be bothered with all those depression thoughts of war, fallen heroes, and lost friends and relatives when the perfect grill-out is just minutes away.
To my father, Lester L. Olson, I would like to say thank you for your years of service in the Army Air Corp during WWII and Army Reserves after the war. And to my mom, Ruth E. Olson, thank you for your years of service to Military Families through the American Red Cross. I miss you both.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Cell phones
I may be dating myself here, but I remember when there were no cell phones. It really wasn't all that long ago, and they may have existed in the military, but within a few short years, something that I never knew existed has now taken over lives. Let me explain. I'm guessing that Alexander Bell had no clue the Genie he let out of the bottle as I think the telephone has been at least as influential to modern society as electricity, automobiles, and indoor plumbing. I say modern because I think the wheel has been THE most influential device, but that was invented a long time ago and doesn't qualify as modern in my book. For years, the phone was tethered to a stationary spot and wasn't mobile. When the cords were cut, a whole new dynamic emerged concerning phones, and along with that, a whole new level of bad manners and bad etiquette.
When I was in the 4th grade, and yes, I'll tell you what year it was (1975-1976 school year) we had weekly lessons in manners and etiquette. One particular lesson was on the usage of telephones. Back then, phones were big, boxy, and were rotary dial phones. Push button phones were just coming out, but you had to pay extra each month for the rental of the phone and for the special phone line to use them. Oh, yes, you rented phones from the phone company. There was no such thing as buying your own phone. There was a cord from the receiver to the base of the phone and then from the base of the phone to the wall. Also, for many years, you couldn't unplug the phone from the wall and move it from room to room. It required a technician to come out and rewire the phone lines. Many homes only had one phone and in many instances the phones were hooked into "party" lines. My grandmother's phone line was set up this way for many years, and it wasn't until I was a junior in high school that she got a private line.
Anyway, back to manners class. We were taught several rules. First, when you get/receive a phone call that is all you pay attention to. It was considered very rude to eat, watch TV, talk with other people, do homework, or do any activity that took any attention away from the person on the other end of the line. Second, you NEVER listened to other people's phone calls. Tantamount to spying, eavesdropping, snooping, sneaking, betrayal, rudeness, and being a bad person. You left the room when someone got a phone call, or if you couldn't leave, you would at least get as far away from the person getting the call as possible. If you were making a call, you would wait until the room was clear before you made the call. That's just how it was. The point I'm making here is that your attention was given wholly and unconditionally to the phone conversation. It was bad manners to do anything else.
So, now I'm an adult back in college and one of the first things I notice is that the cell phone is as prevalent as notebooks and pens. They sit on the desk right next to books, and usually the traditional aged kids are the ones who can't seem to get through a class without using them. There is a distinct line that divides the people who were brought up with cell phones and those who got them later in life. And here's the rub. Why can't people make it through a class without communicating with someone via texting? What is SO important in their life that it just simply can not wait until they are out of class to talk to someone? I constantly hear the clicking of keys throughout all my classes and I find it disturbing. And, I've never had a teacher or professor once tell the class that it's unacceptable to text during class. My algebra teacher will give students the hairy eyeball if their phones beep or ring during class, but even he will wait until they silence the phone. Not turn it off, but only silence it. Then, when he gets back to the lecture, all you hear is tap, tap, tap, from that person and their phone.
I had lunch with a friend several weeks ago whom I haven't seen in a long time. As we were catching up, I could hear her phone beeping, vibrating, and beeping. At first she would briefly glance at it and put it back in her pocket. As lunch went on, she would look at it, hit a few buttons, and then put it back in her pocket. Eventually, as I was relating a very personal story to her, she took it out, and proceeded to start typing a manifesto on it. I let it go for about two minutes and then I stopped talking. It took her a few seconds to realize I had stopped and without looking up or stopping typing said, "I'm still paying attention." But that wasn't the point. This was something very personal and it would have been nice to know that I had her full attention and eye contact and not some portion of her non-texting brain. Apparently, I'm not important enough to compete with a cell phone for two hours. That's all lunch was. My phone? Turned off, as it usually is.
I'm still in the 4th grade mode of phone manners. I get very uncomfortable when someone is on the phone around me. This is a problem with cell phones because the majority of the people using them WANT you to know they are using them and WANT you to hear all about their lives and WANT you to ask them questions when or if they ever get off the phone. Do I really care what the cell user is having for supper when they are yelling about it in the middle of the dairy case at the grocery store? Or in restaurants? Or movie theaters? Or libraries? Or doctor's offices? Or any other public place? No, I don't really care about the mundane details of someone's life. I barely care about my own, let alone expecting anyone else to care about them. And don't even get me started on cell phone use while driving. That is a whole new level of irritation that is not only rude, but careless, reckless, stupid, and selfish. Hang up and pay attention to what you are hurtling down the road!
I'm saddened by the loss of phone manners because there used to be a time when personal contact was more important than technology. And we as society have accepted this change without a whimper of protest that we have now lost something that was essential to human understanding. Face to face conversation, and when we couldn't do that, a phone call. A very special something in your life that said, hey, look I'm calling you. I'm paying attention to you. But now, all of that has been taken away. Texting has replaced actual conversation, phone calls are public events to be shared, and quite frankly, what is going on in your life right now is nowhere near as important as telling someone that you are bored in class and want to leave. Blah, blah, blah.
I do believe that cell phones are important, and have used one on several occasions when I really needed help, or really needed a bit of information, or needed directions. But, for the most part, my phone is off during class, work, movies, going out to dinner, when I'm with friends, gatherings, at home, and, well, most of the time. I don't give out my cell number unless I really have too, and my friends know not to call me on it because I usually don't answer because it is turned off. I'm in control of my life, not my phone. I really don't need to be accessible 24/7, nor am I that important to think that I am. It's too late to teach people about manners and cell phone usage, that Genie is long gone. But what I would hope that would happen is that more people will stand up to rude cell phone behavior and maybe, just maybe, we can get back to the priority at the moment.
Think about this, would you turn to another person and start a conversation when someone you are already talking with is still telling you something? That would be rude, wouldn't it?
When I was in the 4th grade, and yes, I'll tell you what year it was (1975-1976 school year) we had weekly lessons in manners and etiquette. One particular lesson was on the usage of telephones. Back then, phones were big, boxy, and were rotary dial phones. Push button phones were just coming out, but you had to pay extra each month for the rental of the phone and for the special phone line to use them. Oh, yes, you rented phones from the phone company. There was no such thing as buying your own phone. There was a cord from the receiver to the base of the phone and then from the base of the phone to the wall. Also, for many years, you couldn't unplug the phone from the wall and move it from room to room. It required a technician to come out and rewire the phone lines. Many homes only had one phone and in many instances the phones were hooked into "party" lines. My grandmother's phone line was set up this way for many years, and it wasn't until I was a junior in high school that she got a private line.
Anyway, back to manners class. We were taught several rules. First, when you get/receive a phone call that is all you pay attention to. It was considered very rude to eat, watch TV, talk with other people, do homework, or do any activity that took any attention away from the person on the other end of the line. Second, you NEVER listened to other people's phone calls. Tantamount to spying, eavesdropping, snooping, sneaking, betrayal, rudeness, and being a bad person. You left the room when someone got a phone call, or if you couldn't leave, you would at least get as far away from the person getting the call as possible. If you were making a call, you would wait until the room was clear before you made the call. That's just how it was. The point I'm making here is that your attention was given wholly and unconditionally to the phone conversation. It was bad manners to do anything else.
So, now I'm an adult back in college and one of the first things I notice is that the cell phone is as prevalent as notebooks and pens. They sit on the desk right next to books, and usually the traditional aged kids are the ones who can't seem to get through a class without using them. There is a distinct line that divides the people who were brought up with cell phones and those who got them later in life. And here's the rub. Why can't people make it through a class without communicating with someone via texting? What is SO important in their life that it just simply can not wait until they are out of class to talk to someone? I constantly hear the clicking of keys throughout all my classes and I find it disturbing. And, I've never had a teacher or professor once tell the class that it's unacceptable to text during class. My algebra teacher will give students the hairy eyeball if their phones beep or ring during class, but even he will wait until they silence the phone. Not turn it off, but only silence it. Then, when he gets back to the lecture, all you hear is tap, tap, tap, from that person and their phone.
I had lunch with a friend several weeks ago whom I haven't seen in a long time. As we were catching up, I could hear her phone beeping, vibrating, and beeping. At first she would briefly glance at it and put it back in her pocket. As lunch went on, she would look at it, hit a few buttons, and then put it back in her pocket. Eventually, as I was relating a very personal story to her, she took it out, and proceeded to start typing a manifesto on it. I let it go for about two minutes and then I stopped talking. It took her a few seconds to realize I had stopped and without looking up or stopping typing said, "I'm still paying attention." But that wasn't the point. This was something very personal and it would have been nice to know that I had her full attention and eye contact and not some portion of her non-texting brain. Apparently, I'm not important enough to compete with a cell phone for two hours. That's all lunch was. My phone? Turned off, as it usually is.
I'm still in the 4th grade mode of phone manners. I get very uncomfortable when someone is on the phone around me. This is a problem with cell phones because the majority of the people using them WANT you to know they are using them and WANT you to hear all about their lives and WANT you to ask them questions when or if they ever get off the phone. Do I really care what the cell user is having for supper when they are yelling about it in the middle of the dairy case at the grocery store? Or in restaurants? Or movie theaters? Or libraries? Or doctor's offices? Or any other public place? No, I don't really care about the mundane details of someone's life. I barely care about my own, let alone expecting anyone else to care about them. And don't even get me started on cell phone use while driving. That is a whole new level of irritation that is not only rude, but careless, reckless, stupid, and selfish. Hang up and pay attention to what you are hurtling down the road!
I'm saddened by the loss of phone manners because there used to be a time when personal contact was more important than technology. And we as society have accepted this change without a whimper of protest that we have now lost something that was essential to human understanding. Face to face conversation, and when we couldn't do that, a phone call. A very special something in your life that said, hey, look I'm calling you. I'm paying attention to you. But now, all of that has been taken away. Texting has replaced actual conversation, phone calls are public events to be shared, and quite frankly, what is going on in your life right now is nowhere near as important as telling someone that you are bored in class and want to leave. Blah, blah, blah.
I do believe that cell phones are important, and have used one on several occasions when I really needed help, or really needed a bit of information, or needed directions. But, for the most part, my phone is off during class, work, movies, going out to dinner, when I'm with friends, gatherings, at home, and, well, most of the time. I don't give out my cell number unless I really have too, and my friends know not to call me on it because I usually don't answer because it is turned off. I'm in control of my life, not my phone. I really don't need to be accessible 24/7, nor am I that important to think that I am. It's too late to teach people about manners and cell phone usage, that Genie is long gone. But what I would hope that would happen is that more people will stand up to rude cell phone behavior and maybe, just maybe, we can get back to the priority at the moment.
Think about this, would you turn to another person and start a conversation when someone you are already talking with is still telling you something? That would be rude, wouldn't it?
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Driving pet peeves, part two...
As I've posted before, I do a fair amount of driving in my daily life. Mostly freeway driving, but still, a fair amount. Because of all that driving, I have the opportunity to see all types of drivers, vehicles, pedestrians, and road conditions. And, as I stated in my first posting about driving pet peeves, this is my blog and if someone reading this has a problem with what I'm writing, get your own blog.
I want to start with potholes. They are a fact of life in Wisconsin, and I give credit to the crews that work hard to keep them filled in. However, the City of Milwaukee seems to excel at not filling them in. And, they waste money on senseless projects that could easily be forgotten and use that money instead to build the roads back up to level. Two weeks ago as I was driving west on Capitol drive, lanes were closed off for what I at first thought was road repair, but was for island clean-out. A crew of five people were doing flower bed maintenance. Raking, cutting dead plants down, mulching, etc. Meanwhile, I bounced out of a pot hole so big that my car bottom scraped the edge of the hole. Why is that crew not FILLING IN THE POT HOLES? I don't give a rodent's buttocks about the island flower beds. As far as I'm concerned, pave the stupid islands over and FIX THE POT HOLES! How much money is wasted on employees, equipments, supplies, water, and electricity for something that no one really cares about? When was the last time you even THOUGHT about the flowers in the island dividers? And, there were three teams fixing these islands along the way of my drive back to interstate 43. What a colossal waste of taxpayer money.
My next gripe is with motorcyclists and bicyclists. This time of year brings warnings from every media outlet that (usually "cage" or four wheelers) drivers should be on the look-out for these individuals. I come back to the same thought every single time. Shouldn't EVERY driver, no matter the vehicle, be on the look-out for things they could hit? As with everything that relates to humans in life, there is a broad range of good to bad. But, for some reason, we are expected to accept that ANYONE who rides a two-wheeler as the PERFECT embodiment of road safety and perfection. That somehow the cyclist is NEVER at fault, and that they can do no wrong. That this romanticized notion of the cyclist is somehow above the law. Two years ago as I was driving to work in the summer, there was a traffic jam on south 43 that had both lanes of traffic stopped. As I waited for the traffic to start moving again, I heard a motorcycle moving. And sure enough, I looked in my driver's side mirror and lo and behold here is Mr. I-can-do-no-wrong motorcyclist driving BETWEEN the two lanes of cars. Right on the dotted line. I have seen this several times since then, and it absolutely infuriates me because all that needs to happen is for someone to decide they are going to switch lanes and butt their car out and Mr. Motorcyclist is history and the car driver is at fault.
I have also observed on several occasions young kids on sport bikes going incredible speeds on the freeways. They weave in and out of traffic and have absolutely no regard for traffic laws, safety, or anyone's lives, including their own. And what makes it really exciting is when a car driver makes a lane switch and because these cycle-jerks are going so fast ends up accidentally cutting one of them off. And yet, it's the "cage" drivers who are expected to be the only ones responsible for road safety.
I work across the street from UW-Milwaukee, and this last Tuesday when I was making a right turn onto Oakland ave, a bicyclist came rolling along on my LEFT side, cut in-between me and the driver in front of me, scooted along the curb and then crossed the street in the crosswalk while riding his bike. Traffic was stopped for the red light, but when the bike person cut in front of my car, I had just tapped the accelerator to start moving forward before making my right turn as the light had just turned green. I blared the horn at him, but all he did was turn and smile and wave at me. I really want to know when in our society the rules stopped being applied to everyone? As a side note, I'm really tired of pedestrians taking advantage of the crosswalk rules. While I was trying to avoid bike boy, there was a group of kids who were jumping back and forth between the cross walk and the curb. What this effectively did was make the drivers who were going straight slam on their brakes and the ones who were trying to turn right, not. And these are the kids who will be running the country in a few years. The best they can do is play "red-light, green-light" with traffic? They would jump back to the curb, laugh, and when the cars started moving again, jump into the crosswalk and make the cars stop. Infuriated doesn't even begin to describe my level of road rage at that point. It took me two light cycles to get through that intersection. I was already late for my class as I was leaving work late to drive to school, yet these yahoos had the law on their side and knew that the car drivers couldn't do anything about them being in the crosswalk. Once they did start to cross the street, they STOPPED half-way through the intersection to tear-around and have a chat. Just stood there laughing. Future leaders of America....
My last peeve of this blog is parking lots. Why do the traffic rules not apply in parking lots? Drivers that cut across the lanes, parking areas, and cut other drivers off so they can get ahead by one second are never in short supply. A parking lot is not a free for all! Rules still apply there. And, put your carts in the cart returns or I'll send my husband after you....
I want to start with potholes. They are a fact of life in Wisconsin, and I give credit to the crews that work hard to keep them filled in. However, the City of Milwaukee seems to excel at not filling them in. And, they waste money on senseless projects that could easily be forgotten and use that money instead to build the roads back up to level. Two weeks ago as I was driving west on Capitol drive, lanes were closed off for what I at first thought was road repair, but was for island clean-out. A crew of five people were doing flower bed maintenance. Raking, cutting dead plants down, mulching, etc. Meanwhile, I bounced out of a pot hole so big that my car bottom scraped the edge of the hole. Why is that crew not FILLING IN THE POT HOLES? I don't give a rodent's buttocks about the island flower beds. As far as I'm concerned, pave the stupid islands over and FIX THE POT HOLES! How much money is wasted on employees, equipments, supplies, water, and electricity for something that no one really cares about? When was the last time you even THOUGHT about the flowers in the island dividers? And, there were three teams fixing these islands along the way of my drive back to interstate 43. What a colossal waste of taxpayer money.
My next gripe is with motorcyclists and bicyclists. This time of year brings warnings from every media outlet that (usually "cage" or four wheelers) drivers should be on the look-out for these individuals. I come back to the same thought every single time. Shouldn't EVERY driver, no matter the vehicle, be on the look-out for things they could hit? As with everything that relates to humans in life, there is a broad range of good to bad. But, for some reason, we are expected to accept that ANYONE who rides a two-wheeler as the PERFECT embodiment of road safety and perfection. That somehow the cyclist is NEVER at fault, and that they can do no wrong. That this romanticized notion of the cyclist is somehow above the law. Two years ago as I was driving to work in the summer, there was a traffic jam on south 43 that had both lanes of traffic stopped. As I waited for the traffic to start moving again, I heard a motorcycle moving. And sure enough, I looked in my driver's side mirror and lo and behold here is Mr. I-can-do-no-wrong motorcyclist driving BETWEEN the two lanes of cars. Right on the dotted line. I have seen this several times since then, and it absolutely infuriates me because all that needs to happen is for someone to decide they are going to switch lanes and butt their car out and Mr. Motorcyclist is history and the car driver is at fault.
I have also observed on several occasions young kids on sport bikes going incredible speeds on the freeways. They weave in and out of traffic and have absolutely no regard for traffic laws, safety, or anyone's lives, including their own. And what makes it really exciting is when a car driver makes a lane switch and because these cycle-jerks are going so fast ends up accidentally cutting one of them off. And yet, it's the "cage" drivers who are expected to be the only ones responsible for road safety.
I work across the street from UW-Milwaukee, and this last Tuesday when I was making a right turn onto Oakland ave, a bicyclist came rolling along on my LEFT side, cut in-between me and the driver in front of me, scooted along the curb and then crossed the street in the crosswalk while riding his bike. Traffic was stopped for the red light, but when the bike person cut in front of my car, I had just tapped the accelerator to start moving forward before making my right turn as the light had just turned green. I blared the horn at him, but all he did was turn and smile and wave at me. I really want to know when in our society the rules stopped being applied to everyone? As a side note, I'm really tired of pedestrians taking advantage of the crosswalk rules. While I was trying to avoid bike boy, there was a group of kids who were jumping back and forth between the cross walk and the curb. What this effectively did was make the drivers who were going straight slam on their brakes and the ones who were trying to turn right, not. And these are the kids who will be running the country in a few years. The best they can do is play "red-light, green-light" with traffic? They would jump back to the curb, laugh, and when the cars started moving again, jump into the crosswalk and make the cars stop. Infuriated doesn't even begin to describe my level of road rage at that point. It took me two light cycles to get through that intersection. I was already late for my class as I was leaving work late to drive to school, yet these yahoos had the law on their side and knew that the car drivers couldn't do anything about them being in the crosswalk. Once they did start to cross the street, they STOPPED half-way through the intersection to tear-around and have a chat. Just stood there laughing. Future leaders of America....
My last peeve of this blog is parking lots. Why do the traffic rules not apply in parking lots? Drivers that cut across the lanes, parking areas, and cut other drivers off so they can get ahead by one second are never in short supply. A parking lot is not a free for all! Rules still apply there. And, put your carts in the cart returns or I'll send my husband after you....
Saturday, April 11, 2009
I joined Facebook several weeks ago, and I have 12 friends now. I'm not sure how I feel about Facebook and the whole exposing every detail of my life, but it is kind of fun. I keep finding people who are on there that I know, and how the typical reaction goes:
Friend or Me: "Wow! You're on Facebook? Will you be my friend?" (Shades of Mr. Rogers there..) As if you are not friends before, you some how have to prove you have friends.
And then the general ensuing of hand expressions and disbelief that either one of us is on Facebook. I was sucked into it from Natalie, who had sent out invites to me a couple of times. I finally gave in to curiosity and joined. I wanted to see what all the hoopla was about. It is fun, and I find myself wasting more than a few minutes on it sometimes. It's also fun to see the different sides of people you think you know. This got me thinking to how we choose to present our public selves to the world around us and how the shield of Facebook sometimes makes it a little too easy to reveal ourselves. And, to be fair, Facebook is not any different from any other blog or personal webpage on the internet. It's the safety of being able to post something on the web, and not having to "face" the other person or persons reading or, in the case of my blog, not reading what you've just laid out for the world to examine. Forever. I find it ironic that people will cry foul and bemoan the loss of privacy one minute and then post something on the web the next. Of course, you choose the information you want out there, but sometimes people can't, won't, or don't know that they should filter ideas before posting.
Several weeks ago, there were stories on the local newscasts about teenagers using their mobile devices and computers to do something called "sexting". Sending explicit messages or pictures of themselves to other people they may or may not know. The story had warnings about not doing this, and telling parents they need to have a talk with their teens about why this isn't a good idea. Now, I realize that when I was a teen, cells were probably only being used by the military, were 100lbs, and cost a small fortune, but it never occured to me or my friends to exchange explicit messages or pictures of ourselves with each other or people we didn't know. Seems like a no-brainer when you take the electronic aspect out of it. The personal interaction required to do so stops you in your tracks. I guess the absence of digital photography and mobile devices probably helped with that , but my point is, just because we have the technology now doesn't mean that some things in life should change. It is (or should be) understood that you just don't do certain things. My parents never had to say to me that you shouldn't send these messages and images to other people.
I'm not a parent, but I have a hard time imagining myself saying to my teens, "you know you aren't supposed to send naked pictures of yourself to friends and strangers, right? You probably shouldn't post them on your webpage and Facebook pages either, right?" Isn't this a foregone conclusion? Why do the digital devices used for such purposes allow someone to drop all sense of inhibition? Or, in a not so extreme example, let people post things they would never say to another face to face? Just because someone may never meet the person they are commenting on in the real world, doesn't mean they should call them vile names or be hurtful. I stay away from chat groups and forums, but my husband has several for HD and home theater that he participates in. The moderators don't always remove posts quickly, and I'm often surprised at the venom exchanged between posters. What are the chances they would act like that if they had the person right in front of them?
While I still have fun with Facebook, and love to find new friends, I can't help but feel it is a bit "stalkerish" when they want me to divulge my address book under the pretense of finding more friends for me. Or that I should just start putting in names of people I know and see if they turn up. If they wanted to be friends with me, or have contact with me, wouldn't they just contact me? I won't be allowing access to my address book, as I just don't think it is any of Facebook's business knowing who all of my contacts are. But, I'm guessing there are a lot of people who don't think twice about that.
So, if you want to be my friend, look me up. Or just talk to me. Either way, you'll get the same person whether in real life or cyberlife.
P.S. On a completely unrelated note, what happened to the term cyber-space?
Friend or Me: "Wow! You're on Facebook? Will you be my friend?" (Shades of Mr. Rogers there..) As if you are not friends before, you some how have to prove you have friends.
And then the general ensuing of hand expressions and disbelief that either one of us is on Facebook. I was sucked into it from Natalie, who had sent out invites to me a couple of times. I finally gave in to curiosity and joined. I wanted to see what all the hoopla was about. It is fun, and I find myself wasting more than a few minutes on it sometimes. It's also fun to see the different sides of people you think you know. This got me thinking to how we choose to present our public selves to the world around us and how the shield of Facebook sometimes makes it a little too easy to reveal ourselves. And, to be fair, Facebook is not any different from any other blog or personal webpage on the internet. It's the safety of being able to post something on the web, and not having to "face" the other person or persons reading or, in the case of my blog, not reading what you've just laid out for the world to examine. Forever. I find it ironic that people will cry foul and bemoan the loss of privacy one minute and then post something on the web the next. Of course, you choose the information you want out there, but sometimes people can't, won't, or don't know that they should filter ideas before posting.
Several weeks ago, there were stories on the local newscasts about teenagers using their mobile devices and computers to do something called "sexting". Sending explicit messages or pictures of themselves to other people they may or may not know. The story had warnings about not doing this, and telling parents they need to have a talk with their teens about why this isn't a good idea. Now, I realize that when I was a teen, cells were probably only being used by the military, were 100lbs, and cost a small fortune, but it never occured to me or my friends to exchange explicit messages or pictures of ourselves with each other or people we didn't know. Seems like a no-brainer when you take the electronic aspect out of it. The personal interaction required to do so stops you in your tracks. I guess the absence of digital photography and mobile devices probably helped with that , but my point is, just because we have the technology now doesn't mean that some things in life should change. It is (or should be) understood that you just don't do certain things. My parents never had to say to me that you shouldn't send these messages and images to other people.
I'm not a parent, but I have a hard time imagining myself saying to my teens, "you know you aren't supposed to send naked pictures of yourself to friends and strangers, right? You probably shouldn't post them on your webpage and Facebook pages either, right?" Isn't this a foregone conclusion? Why do the digital devices used for such purposes allow someone to drop all sense of inhibition? Or, in a not so extreme example, let people post things they would never say to another face to face? Just because someone may never meet the person they are commenting on in the real world, doesn't mean they should call them vile names or be hurtful. I stay away from chat groups and forums, but my husband has several for HD and home theater that he participates in. The moderators don't always remove posts quickly, and I'm often surprised at the venom exchanged between posters. What are the chances they would act like that if they had the person right in front of them?
While I still have fun with Facebook, and love to find new friends, I can't help but feel it is a bit "stalkerish" when they want me to divulge my address book under the pretense of finding more friends for me. Or that I should just start putting in names of people I know and see if they turn up. If they wanted to be friends with me, or have contact with me, wouldn't they just contact me? I won't be allowing access to my address book, as I just don't think it is any of Facebook's business knowing who all of my contacts are. But, I'm guessing there are a lot of people who don't think twice about that.
So, if you want to be my friend, look me up. Or just talk to me. Either way, you'll get the same person whether in real life or cyberlife.
P.S. On a completely unrelated note, what happened to the term cyber-space?
Friday, March 13, 2009
Along with the rest of the country, my husband and I have watched our stocks (in a local bank), our 403b and 401k tank. I keep trying to be positive and think that they will recover and as all things cyclical, they will. But, our country has never been through this bad of an economic downturn before, and I keep wondering if my financial assets really will come back to their previous levels and if they will go beyond that. Both my husband and myself had parents that grew up during the depression. When I was a child, my maternal grandmother had a basement full of home canned goods, and was almost fanatical about growing a very large garden every year and making sure she had food for the upcoming year. A child of the 1970's and a teenager of the 1980's, I really did not understand my grandmother at all. Even though my parents didn't have much money, I never went without food (hamburger gravy...YUCK!), shelter, or clothing (even if it was second-hand). For my grandmother, however, it was a different story and being poor at the begining of the depression, and then surviving the depression with two small children and a husband to take care of is unfathomable for me. My mother would often mention stories of living in a chicken coop while they tried to build the farmhouse that I was familiar with, but like all kids just assumed their parents were exaggerating a little. Now, I'm not so sure.
My grandmother passed away April 1, 1986 at the age of 78, and up until her death, she continued to raise that garden every year. She started seeds in the basement even before all the snow was gone in the yard. She had a huge fenced in area that was once the part of the horse pasture, and had a permit from the DNR to shoot the woodchucks that tried to consume the efforts of her hard work. As one of her four grandchildren, I was put to work weeding and tending that garden when I would stay with her for a few weeks in the summer. I hated it. To this day, I can remember whining about it, doing a half-hearted job, and consuming all the ripe strawberries when she wasn't looking. I'm sure she knew, but never said anything. She grew everything from fruits to nuts. And then, the canning would begin. If I thought the weeding was bad, canning was worse. Hours and hours of prepping the food, the jars, the lids, the mashers, sieves, and spices. Hot, sweaty, weary, and sick of smelling vinegar and cooked food. Still, it never once sunk in to my self-centered kid brain that for grandma, this wasn't a hobby. This was her survival. This was how she survived the roughest economic time in America's history.
Now, close to 23 years after her death, our country is facing far worse economically than what my grandmother went through, but I still don't feel the need to start growing a garden. But, that isn't because the lesson of my grandmother's struggle was completely lost to me. At some point, her tendencies to, oh, let's say, stock-up and grow her own food, was replaced with I'll buy extra when on sale and stock up that way. She understood that the only person she should really rely on was herself. There was no need in her eyes for the government or the taxpayers to solve her financial woes. I am always amazed at folks who do not take advantage of sales or are not willing to buy an off brand to save money. Or even worse, just walk into a store and buy items higgly-piggly with no regard to price, name-brand, sale, or quantity. I'm continually floored when I see other people's shopping carts in stores filled with very expensive items that are really nothing but packaging and no substance. Or have non-essential items like alcohol or cigarettes. Yet, these are the same people who cry that they cannot feed a family on $100 a week, and that's true when you buy nothing but non-sale brand-name items that are more convenience than substance.
I also can't help but compare my grandmother's take-care-of-herself-spirit with all the folks clamoring for hand-outs, buy-outs, help-outs, bail-outs, and the flat-out gimmes. Many of whom got themselves into these predicaments of needing taxpayer money because they were selfish, greedy, and self-centered. Not all are, and to help the folks who TRULY need it I'm glad to do it. But, they are such a small minority that it wouldn't even register on the evening news in any other time but the gimme, gimme, gimme time we are in now.
I'm angry because my husband and I did everything right. We kept full-time jobs and steadily built our lives up the way we were taught you should do it. Rent until you can afford the house, buy a house within your means, eventually you'll sell that house and buy a bigger one, pay off that mortgage, and save for your retirement with a 401k and a 403b. We did EVERYTHING we were supposed to, paid our mortgage off four years early because we put extra money to the principal every month and still put money away for retirement. We don't carry credit card debt and bought our last two cars with cash. Oh, and those two cars? Normal cars that get good gas mileage and not the giant honking SUV's that cost more than both of them together. So why, then, are we now watching all of our hard work evaporate AND not only have our savings gone but have to bail-out dead-beats who just spent, and spent, and spent and never ONCE thought that this would come back to bite them in the ass?
Yeah, I'm angry. And, if I have to start growing a garden so I can have food in the coming year, I will be cursing every dead-beat to eating hamburger gravy forever for every seed I have to put in the ground. But, it will be my ground, paid for with my money, not taxpayer money, and unlike most of the dead-beats I'll be bailing out who won't even think twice about where that money is coming from, I will still be thankful that I did things the right way and know that my grandmother and parents would be very proud of me.
My grandmother passed away April 1, 1986 at the age of 78, and up until her death, she continued to raise that garden every year. She started seeds in the basement even before all the snow was gone in the yard. She had a huge fenced in area that was once the part of the horse pasture, and had a permit from the DNR to shoot the woodchucks that tried to consume the efforts of her hard work. As one of her four grandchildren, I was put to work weeding and tending that garden when I would stay with her for a few weeks in the summer. I hated it. To this day, I can remember whining about it, doing a half-hearted job, and consuming all the ripe strawberries when she wasn't looking. I'm sure she knew, but never said anything. She grew everything from fruits to nuts. And then, the canning would begin. If I thought the weeding was bad, canning was worse. Hours and hours of prepping the food, the jars, the lids, the mashers, sieves, and spices. Hot, sweaty, weary, and sick of smelling vinegar and cooked food. Still, it never once sunk in to my self-centered kid brain that for grandma, this wasn't a hobby. This was her survival. This was how she survived the roughest economic time in America's history.
Now, close to 23 years after her death, our country is facing far worse economically than what my grandmother went through, but I still don't feel the need to start growing a garden. But, that isn't because the lesson of my grandmother's struggle was completely lost to me. At some point, her tendencies to, oh, let's say, stock-up and grow her own food, was replaced with I'll buy extra when on sale and stock up that way. She understood that the only person she should really rely on was herself. There was no need in her eyes for the government or the taxpayers to solve her financial woes. I am always amazed at folks who do not take advantage of sales or are not willing to buy an off brand to save money. Or even worse, just walk into a store and buy items higgly-piggly with no regard to price, name-brand, sale, or quantity. I'm continually floored when I see other people's shopping carts in stores filled with very expensive items that are really nothing but packaging and no substance. Or have non-essential items like alcohol or cigarettes. Yet, these are the same people who cry that they cannot feed a family on $100 a week, and that's true when you buy nothing but non-sale brand-name items that are more convenience than substance.
I also can't help but compare my grandmother's take-care-of-herself-spirit with all the folks clamoring for hand-outs, buy-outs, help-outs, bail-outs, and the flat-out gimmes. Many of whom got themselves into these predicaments of needing taxpayer money because they were selfish, greedy, and self-centered. Not all are, and to help the folks who TRULY need it I'm glad to do it. But, they are such a small minority that it wouldn't even register on the evening news in any other time but the gimme, gimme, gimme time we are in now.
I'm angry because my husband and I did everything right. We kept full-time jobs and steadily built our lives up the way we were taught you should do it. Rent until you can afford the house, buy a house within your means, eventually you'll sell that house and buy a bigger one, pay off that mortgage, and save for your retirement with a 401k and a 403b. We did EVERYTHING we were supposed to, paid our mortgage off four years early because we put extra money to the principal every month and still put money away for retirement. We don't carry credit card debt and bought our last two cars with cash. Oh, and those two cars? Normal cars that get good gas mileage and not the giant honking SUV's that cost more than both of them together. So why, then, are we now watching all of our hard work evaporate AND not only have our savings gone but have to bail-out dead-beats who just spent, and spent, and spent and never ONCE thought that this would come back to bite them in the ass?
Yeah, I'm angry. And, if I have to start growing a garden so I can have food in the coming year, I will be cursing every dead-beat to eating hamburger gravy forever for every seed I have to put in the ground. But, it will be my ground, paid for with my money, not taxpayer money, and unlike most of the dead-beats I'll be bailing out who won't even think twice about where that money is coming from, I will still be thankful that I did things the right way and know that my grandmother and parents would be very proud of me.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Migraines
I suffer from migraine headaches. I've had them since I was a young girl, my sister suffers from them and my mother also had them. This past weekend, (Feb. 28th) I woke up at 3am with a pain so intense on the right side of my head it felt like someone was shoving a flaming hot saber through my eye and up and out the back of my head. I would have confessed to anything to stop that pain. I even denied it when I first woke, telling my husband, "My head is killing me, but I don't think it is a migraine." I hate migraines and usually try to deny they are happening when they do strike. They are a whole body experience for me, the pain, nausea, sound and light aversion, tactile over-stimulation, and the pain. Yes, I know I mentioned that twice. I always laugh at the migraine commericals that show a person up and at whatever activity they were doing an hour before they took the medicine that eliminates their symptoms.
It doesn't really work that way.
I have both over-the-counter and prescription medicines to try to prevent them and to treat them when they do strike. For some reason my daily Rx meds are not doing too well as I'm two for two in 2009. I had one January 1st (that's a good way to start off a new year) and then this one yesterday. The Rx med I took to actively treat one did work for me, but not until I slept for several hours and took an OTC med with it that has aspirin, caffeine, and acetaminophen in it. I had to take several more doses of that yesterday too. So, no, after an hour I wasn't "up and at 'em" like the TV commercials.
My point in divulging all my migraine history is that in the past, I have heard mention (from non-migraine sufferers) that these headaches are just exaggerated from the people claiming to suffer from them. That we are somehow trying to get attention, or that we want a day off of work, or that they really aren't that bad, and if you watch the TV commercials, they aren't. The active mom just pops her OTC or Rx meds and the next thing you know she's running around in the yard with the kids! Nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe I don't have the right meds, but just trying not to throw the pills up is a major milestone in the course of a migraine for me. Running? Cognitive thinking? No, that's not going to happen for many hours yet.
Sometimes I get a visual aura before the major symptoms hit. It's like looking through a kaleidoscope of broken crystal that shimmers like sunlight on water. I know that most people who suffer from aura have different types of it, but mine starts on one side of my visual field and progresses toward the other side, blocking my vision for as long as an hour. Whether I close my eyes or not, it's the same sight. I've come to think that it's my brain trying to figure out why it's being assaulted by its own blood vessels and trying to fight back. Yeah, yeah, corny, I know. What it is anyway, is an early warning for me to take something RIGHT NOW, because what's coming is going to be hell if I don't. However, if the aura occurs in the middle of the night when I'm sleeping, I can't do anything about it until I wake up feeling like I'm being stabbed in the head.
So, if you are reading this and happen to be one of the people who thinks that migraine sufferers are just exaggerating their headaches, you are wrong. Just plain wrong and despite what the TV would have you believe, we won't be up and running a few minutes after taking whatever product is being hawked on the screen. Unless we are running for the bathroom and hoping the pain of throwing up won't send us into a seizure.
It doesn't really work that way.
I have both over-the-counter and prescription medicines to try to prevent them and to treat them when they do strike. For some reason my daily Rx meds are not doing too well as I'm two for two in 2009. I had one January 1st (that's a good way to start off a new year) and then this one yesterday. The Rx med I took to actively treat one did work for me, but not until I slept for several hours and took an OTC med with it that has aspirin, caffeine, and acetaminophen in it. I had to take several more doses of that yesterday too. So, no, after an hour I wasn't "up and at 'em" like the TV commercials.
My point in divulging all my migraine history is that in the past, I have heard mention (from non-migraine sufferers) that these headaches are just exaggerated from the people claiming to suffer from them. That we are somehow trying to get attention, or that we want a day off of work, or that they really aren't that bad, and if you watch the TV commercials, they aren't. The active mom just pops her OTC or Rx meds and the next thing you know she's running around in the yard with the kids! Nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe I don't have the right meds, but just trying not to throw the pills up is a major milestone in the course of a migraine for me. Running? Cognitive thinking? No, that's not going to happen for many hours yet.
Sometimes I get a visual aura before the major symptoms hit. It's like looking through a kaleidoscope of broken crystal that shimmers like sunlight on water. I know that most people who suffer from aura have different types of it, but mine starts on one side of my visual field and progresses toward the other side, blocking my vision for as long as an hour. Whether I close my eyes or not, it's the same sight. I've come to think that it's my brain trying to figure out why it's being assaulted by its own blood vessels and trying to fight back. Yeah, yeah, corny, I know. What it is anyway, is an early warning for me to take something RIGHT NOW, because what's coming is going to be hell if I don't. However, if the aura occurs in the middle of the night when I'm sleeping, I can't do anything about it until I wake up feeling like I'm being stabbed in the head.
So, if you are reading this and happen to be one of the people who thinks that migraine sufferers are just exaggerating their headaches, you are wrong. Just plain wrong and despite what the TV would have you believe, we won't be up and running a few minutes after taking whatever product is being hawked on the screen. Unless we are running for the bathroom and hoping the pain of throwing up won't send us into a seizure.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Saving the environment
Can anybody tell me why our new President feels the need to fly everywhere to give speeches he doesn't really need to give? Or why in all of Washington D.C. and the top chefs in our country (who are working at the White House) cannot provide a romantic meal for the first couple for Valentine's day that they have to fly to Chicago for a meal? What happened to his promise of saving the environment? Or was that just for us peons? A "do as I say, not as I do" kind of thing. So far I have seen nothing of his gallivanting around the country at the drop of hat that shows me he is serious about saving money, saving fuel, not wasting resources, or taking advantage of his office. Just because you can fly to the Windy City for meal doesn't mean you should. A little more restraint and common sense would go a long way to convince skeptics that maybe he is putting his money where his mouth is. So far, the only money I've seen him save is... oh wait, he isn't. And, with this joke of a stimulus package going into effect, no one will be saving money. What a complete sham.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Viva Las Vegas!
During winter break from school, my husband, Scott and I went to Las Vegas for a week. We planned this kind of at the last minute and chose the perfect week to go. It was bitterly cold at home and perfect 50 to 60 degree days in Vegas. We had talked about going there a few times in the past, but never really made an effort to go. With air and hotel prices at bargain basement levels, we jumped at the chance to go. We are not gamblers, nor did we go there just to gamble. Sight-seeing and buffets were our primary goals, and we excelled at both.
We didn't anticipate, however, the amount of walking that entails a visit to Vegas. The "strip" isn't that long, only about 7 miles or so, but the hotels and casinos are so BIG that walking from one end to the other can take as long as a half hour. We also chose not to rent a car, so we took the bus, a double-decker known as The Deuce. When getting on The Deuce, a recorded message was broadcast at an ear splitting level that informed you to HAVE FUN! RIDE THE DEUCE! By the end of the week, we were mimicking it perfectly. It was more frugal that the taxis, which are really expensive.
We saw two shows, Louie Anderson and Mac King. Both were very good and we recommend going to them if you find yourself out that way. We wanted to see Penn & Teller, and had planned to go on Thursday night, but the guide book we had was incorrect in its listing and they are off on Thursdays and Fridays. So much for making a plan. We also used the half-price ticket booths, and that turned out well for us.
I got to go horseback riding in the Red Rock Canyon, which was something that I had wanted to do for years. Not necessarily the Red Rock Mountains, but originally the Grand Canyon. Red Rock was closer, less expensive, and a much smaller group. There were only five of us and it was a really "personal" tour. We didn't ride in the canyon, but followed the mountain up and down and rode along the canyon rim. I've never been nervous riding a horse before, but had a brief glimmer of it when I realized that if she wanted to, my horse, September, could have flipped me into the abyss without a second thought we were so close to the edge. One slip on a stone and that would have been the end of happy trails for me.
We went to five buffets while there. The Belliagio, Harrah's, Tropicana, and two others that were not so good and I can't remember their names. The buffet at the Belliagio was by far the best, and although pricey at $35 each, was well worth it. Go hungry and be prepared to eat. It is a huge buffet and has delicacies from around the world on it. Heavily influenced with seafood, my favorite was the lobster ravioli and Scott's was the African Blue Nose fish. Outstanding.
While we didn't do a lot of gambling, it was surprising how fast the week went. We had a beautiful hotel room at The Signature at MGM. It was on the penthouse floor, 30 stories up. A balcony and a great view to boot. There is a considerable amount of construction going on, and it seems like each casino keeps trying to out-do the one before it.
All in all, a fun trip and a great break from the dreary Wisconsin winter.
Friday, January 9, 2009
And the secret is.....
Spoiler warning: I'm discussing the book "The Secret" and giving away the secret. If you want to find out for yourself, read no further. You have been warned.
I just finished, or well almost finished, the book "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne. I had heard a few people here and there talking about it, and finally decided to read this book and discover how I could make everything I want happen, happen. The secret is the law of attraction. And in her book, Ms. Byrne has interviewed several experts on the secret. They all state the same thing. If you truly believe what you want to happen, you will transmit that to the Universe and the Universe will give you what you want. The book states that we are all transmission towers and that the Universe "hears" us and then gives us what we want. So, if you are in a bad mood, bad things will happen. If you are in a good mood, good things will happen. As I was reading, I began to wonder if at the end of the book, there was a gotcha! line coming along. So, I did something I NEVER do. I skipped ahead to the end of the book. Nope, the interviewees believe that if you feel good, are a positive thinker, and can really convince yourself that what you really want IS what you really want, you will get it.
I'm a skeptical person, and I freely admit that. Life experience and years of practical jokes and not so practical jokes have taught me that you can't take everything you experience with your senses for real. Especially when the husband tells you stories about earwigs. To have someone then tell you that you just need to think positive and feel happy and you will be positive and happy leaves me with the feeling that someone has been heavily medicated. Same with wanting money or wealth. If you imagine yourself living in wealth, you will get your wish. If you want to be fabulously beautiful, you just have to think and believe that you are. I guess somehow, faeries or gremlins will somehow transform you while you sleep and you will wake up with whatever vision you want yourself to be. While this is all good and wonderful, I began to wonder what would happen if someone REALLY wanted an enemy dead, or disgraced, or ruined in some way. Would it happen? The book only addresses how negative feelings impact you, not if you can transmit negative thoughts to that annoying neighbor's dog barking at 2am.
I read all the summaries and skipped the last 1/3 of the book because I could no longer stand the exclamation points, the Stuart Smiley like text and the trite way of how we should deal with life. If this utopia described in the book is possible just by the power of positive thinking, does that mean that there is also a doppelganger version that accounts for all the bad things that happen in the world? Good and Evil are as old as time itself and are found everywhere. But wouldn't the majority of the human race want good? Shouldn't we have a very small percentage of people that can't help themselves and want bad? The question then becomes do we really have so many people in the world that want bad? Crime, disease, corruption, war, poverty, slavery, apathy, deceit, disgrace, hate, rage, could all be eliminated just by thinking happy thoughts. The book states that love is the most powerful feeling you can experience or transmit. If you could live in a perpetual state of feeling love, you would never know unhappiness. It was at this point I stopped reading the book, because while I don't disagree that love is a very powerful emotion, it is impossible to live in a perpetual state of that blissful, flower-child sentiment from the 60's. Just watching the evening news will put a dent in anyone's love-o-meter.
The idea of the book is wonderful. If you could really pull this off, there would be no mental illness. I would say it is a safe bet that if you ask most people who suffer from say, depression, that they could cure their depression just by feeling happy, they would. In fact, there are probably many of them that have tried to help themselves just by doing that very same thing. "Maybe if I just put on a happy face....." Maybe they should be thinking that they should fix the chemical imbalance in their brains? Do you have to be that specific for the secret to work? "Oh, I know my serotonin levels are normal today!" And *POOF* depression cured? Could we really put the medical business out of business? Do we bring on our cancers ourselves by our negative thinking that we are going to get cancer?
So, I guess the only real thing I believe from this book is the money part. I got the book from the library, but I know there are many people who bought this book and went to see the movie that was based on it. I guess the author must really have wanted wealth because she found a way to make that happy thought come true.
I just finished, or well almost finished, the book "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne. I had heard a few people here and there talking about it, and finally decided to read this book and discover how I could make everything I want happen, happen. The secret is the law of attraction. And in her book, Ms. Byrne has interviewed several experts on the secret. They all state the same thing. If you truly believe what you want to happen, you will transmit that to the Universe and the Universe will give you what you want. The book states that we are all transmission towers and that the Universe "hears" us and then gives us what we want. So, if you are in a bad mood, bad things will happen. If you are in a good mood, good things will happen. As I was reading, I began to wonder if at the end of the book, there was a gotcha! line coming along. So, I did something I NEVER do. I skipped ahead to the end of the book. Nope, the interviewees believe that if you feel good, are a positive thinker, and can really convince yourself that what you really want IS what you really want, you will get it.
I'm a skeptical person, and I freely admit that. Life experience and years of practical jokes and not so practical jokes have taught me that you can't take everything you experience with your senses for real. Especially when the husband tells you stories about earwigs. To have someone then tell you that you just need to think positive and feel happy and you will be positive and happy leaves me with the feeling that someone has been heavily medicated. Same with wanting money or wealth. If you imagine yourself living in wealth, you will get your wish. If you want to be fabulously beautiful, you just have to think and believe that you are. I guess somehow, faeries or gremlins will somehow transform you while you sleep and you will wake up with whatever vision you want yourself to be. While this is all good and wonderful, I began to wonder what would happen if someone REALLY wanted an enemy dead, or disgraced, or ruined in some way. Would it happen? The book only addresses how negative feelings impact you, not if you can transmit negative thoughts to that annoying neighbor's dog barking at 2am.
I read all the summaries and skipped the last 1/3 of the book because I could no longer stand the exclamation points, the Stuart Smiley like text and the trite way of how we should deal with life. If this utopia described in the book is possible just by the power of positive thinking, does that mean that there is also a doppelganger version that accounts for all the bad things that happen in the world? Good and Evil are as old as time itself and are found everywhere. But wouldn't the majority of the human race want good? Shouldn't we have a very small percentage of people that can't help themselves and want bad? The question then becomes do we really have so many people in the world that want bad? Crime, disease, corruption, war, poverty, slavery, apathy, deceit, disgrace, hate, rage, could all be eliminated just by thinking happy thoughts. The book states that love is the most powerful feeling you can experience or transmit. If you could live in a perpetual state of feeling love, you would never know unhappiness. It was at this point I stopped reading the book, because while I don't disagree that love is a very powerful emotion, it is impossible to live in a perpetual state of that blissful, flower-child sentiment from the 60's. Just watching the evening news will put a dent in anyone's love-o-meter.
The idea of the book is wonderful. If you could really pull this off, there would be no mental illness. I would say it is a safe bet that if you ask most people who suffer from say, depression, that they could cure their depression just by feeling happy, they would. In fact, there are probably many of them that have tried to help themselves just by doing that very same thing. "Maybe if I just put on a happy face....." Maybe they should be thinking that they should fix the chemical imbalance in their brains? Do you have to be that specific for the secret to work? "Oh, I know my serotonin levels are normal today!" And *POOF* depression cured? Could we really put the medical business out of business? Do we bring on our cancers ourselves by our negative thinking that we are going to get cancer?
So, I guess the only real thing I believe from this book is the money part. I got the book from the library, but I know there are many people who bought this book and went to see the movie that was based on it. I guess the author must really have wanted wealth because she found a way to make that happy thought come true.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)