I’ve never been convinced that “organization skills” can be taught; those who are organized can become better organized, and for those whose natural inclination is chaos — disorganization — you can offer guidelines, suggestions, and recommendations and, if you’re lucky, some may penetrate and get used, but in the end, I think, disorganization tends to win out because of the habitual penchant toward disarray. I have no evidence of this, just an observation based on teaching organization skills for 30 years.
I wonder whether those whose lives — at least behind the scenes — tend to be messy and haphazard might be encouraged to make changes if they knew the benefits of getting organized. The key to remember is, “Organized minds make successful people.” At Life Organizers.com, Maria Gracia, in an essay entitled, “10 Little-Known Benefits of Getting Organized,” lists ones that I have discovered in my life as well. The first one is that becoming organized will give you more time to relax. When things are in their proper places, you can find them quickly, but you must remember to put them back for the next time. Remembering to put them back is difficult, especially for procrastinators who will always claim, “I’ll do that later.” Just that little act — remembering to put them back — is likely to be a key to lowering blood pressure and stress.
Another benefit is that getting organized will give you more time to do other things. I am often asked, “How do you get so much accomplished?” The simple answer is organization. I always wish I could be more organized, but if you are a workaholic, the pay off is clearly in the bottom line — quantity. Quality occurs in how you go about getting the results. More time to do other things includes more time for yourself, loved ones, family, and friends.
For me, Gracia’s fourth benefit is especially important: feeling good about your environment. Often, just before beginning a new writing project, I will clean up my entire study and try to get rid of all the excessive and unnecessary pages or manuscripts. My problem is clutter, it is true, but what is most important is that I know where things are when I need them.
Professional improvement and being a role model do not concern me as much as Gracia’s final, tenth, benefit: “You'll achieve more. When you're disorganized, there are always barriers that keep you from reaching your goals. But organized people find ways to eliminate tasks that aren't necessary and to streamline those that are taking too much time. This leaves plenty of time to work on achieving all of those goals on your list.”
It may be that none of these are sufficiently enticing, or it may be that even though they are, you may still wonder how you — personally — can get organized. My suggestions are incredibly easy and, for me, successful. Often, the primary problem boils down to one thing: you! You are likely to be your own worst enemy. There are four overall characteristics that will guide you in following each of the suggestions: 1) commitment, 2) self-discipline, 3) eliminate procrastination, and 4) ignore distractions. If just a little push is necessary to start the process, then here is that push.
My first suggestion is to begin using a planner. This is more important for those who have a lot of appointments or for those whose days are so varied that it is difficult to keep track of the schedule. You can do this the old-fashioned way with a pocket-sized notepad, or use a PDA, Blackberry or palm Pilot. With a PDA, if you back it up at least once a week, and back up your computer at least once a month, you will always have a copy of your address book, calendar, and task list.
Closely related to using a planner is the “to-do-list.” I like daily lists, then those items not completed are simply carried over to the next list. When very busy, it helps to free your mind so you can concentrate on what you’re doing right now: you just don’t have to think or worry that you might forget to do something. PDAs hold lists, prioritize items, and assign each a due date.
Making a “to-do-list” is also useful for combining similar activities. For example, I have a list for everything I want to do when I get in the car to run errands. Order on this list is important for saving time. Completeness is important for finishing everything in a single trip. You can get organized in much the same way by doing things at the same time: making your phone calls, paying your bills, and getting your e-mails answered.
Another simple suggestion is to organize your work space. The space I work in is extremely important. Give everything you use and need a separate, convenient, and clearly designated space. Everything I need is at my fingertips — paper, dictionary, thesaurus, pens, pencils, markers, scissors, rulers, tape, stapler, a clock, telephone, and supporting books and documents. What is unnecessary is thrown out. Examine how you use your space and design it to be efficient and convenient.
Related to space concerns is the aphorism, “A place for everything and everything in its place” to which I just referred. Find a specific place for your keys, cell phone and charging station, checks (if you use them) and bills. I also have a place for my wallet, daily journal, dark glasses, pen, single blade knife, lip balm, and change. When leaving the house no time is spent looking for essentials.
Another simple suggestion for getting organized is multi-tasking. Technology has assisted. Organize your study, a drawer or cabinet, or do dishes while talking on the phone. Fold clothes or towels while watching television. Listen to books-on-tape while driving
Realize that making these changes overnight — as small as some of them are — is almost impossible. Change cannot take place that quickly. Disorganization is as much a habit as getting organized, once it is accomplished. Make little changes, starting for example, with one small area of your life or living area — papers, computer files, clothes, linen closet, kitchen, mail, children’s room. When successful there, move on to another area. Now, reward yourself for the completion of each goal you set — a night at a favorite restaurant, a movie, or a relaxing walk in the park. Getting organized may be tough, but the rewards make it worthwhile; it is an important area for self-improvement.
-----
At WebMD, there are at least 16 tips on how to get organized in the essay there, “How to get organized—Finally!”—an essay by Hara Estroff Marano reprinted from Psychology Today. Just enter “Get organized” into the Google search window, and you will get nearly 20 million hits.
At WikiHow, there is so much information in the essay, “How to be organized,” that just reading it or clicking on the additional resources icons will keep you busy for a day or two. This is an excellent website.
There are 13 suggestions in the essay, “How to get organized,” at the eHow.com website. I have discovered—as I’m sure you know already—that organizing skills at home or at work, carry over nicely into all other areas of your life; thus, putting these ideas into practice will assist you in a wide variety of areas.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Is there an erosion of standards?
In the editorial section of the March 1, 2007, edition of The (Toledo) Blade, there was an “Another Opinion” column reprinted from the Washington Post entitled “Dismal performance of high school seniors,” and the article states that, “high school seniors, though taking more advanced classes and getting better grades, are performing dismally on national tests.” The article goes on to answer the question, “Why?” with the following explanation: “Advanced classes may have high-falutin’ course descriptions, but the curriculum has been dumbed down. Pressure to pass students has caused grade inflation.” The article ends saying academic standards and accountability must be raised, “so students graduating from high school are able to meet the demands of college work.”
In reading this column I was struck by the fact that the erosion of standards in America’s public high schools isn’t the only area where erosion is taking place. It can be seen in higher education, language, manners, honesty, television, sex, and ethics as well as in many other areas.
The United States is recognized as having the world’s best system of higher education, but that doesn’t mean the system is graduating students who are prepared to understand the world or, more importantly, have benefitted from the wisdom of the great thinkers, writers, scientists, and historians. Students today have little interest in what past generations of college students accepted as an essential education. For a growing number of college students, higher education is all about focusing on a career path and studying narrowly about the skills required of that career path. This short-cut route to postgraduate adulthood leaves behind the building blocks of an educated person. Today the ideas of Oprah and Tom Cruise’s blog musings are held in higher regard than Plato’s Republic or Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice.
In addition to higher education, the ability to use the English language has eroded. The chances are that a graduating college student will be unable to write ordinary, expository English with any real degree of structure or lucidity. A high school student planning to attend college is unlikely to be able to write English at the minimum college level when they get there. If students are not planning to attend college, their skills in writing English may not even qualify them for secretarial or clerical work. Students in elementary school are not being given the kind of required reading material, much less writing instruction, that would make it possible for them eventually to write comprehensible English.
Manners is another area where standards have eroded. One poll found that we’re ruder than ever, and it can be witnessed in the daily assault of selfish, inconsiderate behavior on the highways, in the office, on television, and in stores. In this same poll, nearly 8 in 10 respondents said lack of respect and courtesy is a serious national problem, and 61% agreed that there is more rude behavior today than in the past. We’re rude, and we’re mean: there’s road rage, air rage, cellphone rage, checkout rage, bike rage, sports rage, parking rage, rail rage, bank rage, roller rage, boat rage, desk rage, car alarm rage, and drivers who even honk at people on crutches. According to one expert, there’s also “funeral rage”—people actually flip the bird and cut off funeral processions.
The erosion of honesty in our society is shameful. Dishonest practices, bold-faced lies, and scams are so pervasive in the auto repair business that dealers and repair-shop owners no longer consider themselves dishonest. If everyone else is doing it, that makes it “normal behavior.” That dishonesty, however, pales in comparison to deliberately misleading advertisements, corruption, miscarriages of justice, tax evasion, unnecessary medical procedures, harassment of whistle-blowers, and all other forms of dishonesty. The threat to democracy and a free economy is not from attacks on our country by religious zealots but terrorism carried out daily by a den of thieves.
Television, too, contributes to an erosion of standards. Much of the news media has focused on violence, but that is a small part of the problem. There are explicit sex scenes and crude language during prime time and pornographic content on talk shows and soap operas. Television assaults the values that many Americans hold dear. Our culture has been hijacked and replaced by something that openly rejects, rather than reflects, the values people try to instill in their families. In the world of television, sex is a recreational pastime, indecency is a cause for laughter, and humans are killed as casually and senselessly as bugs. It is a coarse caricature of the America people love.
There has been an erosion of standards in the area of sex as standards of sexual morality have been dropped. Television, movies, popular songs, and the printed media present an enormous temptation towards sexual misconduct. The lack of personal discipline and self control regarding sexual matters has caused difficulty and is likely to be reflected in the increases in teen pregnancies, abortions, adultery, sexual abuse of children, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. One poll indicated that one in five Americans have a sexually transmitted disease.
When there is an erosion of standards in manners, honesty, and sex, you would expect it to be reflected in the area of ethics as well. Americans have witnessed a significant number of individual ethical lapses that have resulted in organizational and systemic failures. Corporate malfeasance, sexual abuse by priests coupled with woefully inadequate responses by church hierarchy, unethical and corrupt acts by government officials, an increase in cheating by students, and the fabrication of scientific evidence by researchers, violations of journalistic integrity, and violations of the standards of fair play in athletics, are just a few examples where ethical lapses have occurred.
This essay has barely touched the surface of an enormous erosion of standards, but one fact is clear, such erosion undermines individual responsibility and civic values, harms individuals, generates a loss of public trust in the institutions of our society, and leaves everyone searching for guideposts—instructions on how to proceed when faced with complex emerging issues.
-----
At the website Helium.com, the title of the entry is: “Does the erosion of moral values also erode the strength of our society?” The discussion of this question is provided by Clint Daniel with the opposing side offered by Michelle R. Bishop. Both sides of the discussion are interesting and worth reading.
At the Flaming Liberal! website, the essay there, “Society at the crosswords,” covers far more ethical lapses than the essay above. The essay includes the following parts: 1. The Erosion of Ethics, 2. The Source of Values, and 3. Capitalism as a system of ethics, and 4. Is there another way? I like the solution that Gordon Glasgow, the author of this essay, offers readers. Read the essay and decide for yourself.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
In reading this column I was struck by the fact that the erosion of standards in America’s public high schools isn’t the only area where erosion is taking place. It can be seen in higher education, language, manners, honesty, television, sex, and ethics as well as in many other areas.
The United States is recognized as having the world’s best system of higher education, but that doesn’t mean the system is graduating students who are prepared to understand the world or, more importantly, have benefitted from the wisdom of the great thinkers, writers, scientists, and historians. Students today have little interest in what past generations of college students accepted as an essential education. For a growing number of college students, higher education is all about focusing on a career path and studying narrowly about the skills required of that career path. This short-cut route to postgraduate adulthood leaves behind the building blocks of an educated person. Today the ideas of Oprah and Tom Cruise’s blog musings are held in higher regard than Plato’s Republic or Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice.
In addition to higher education, the ability to use the English language has eroded. The chances are that a graduating college student will be unable to write ordinary, expository English with any real degree of structure or lucidity. A high school student planning to attend college is unlikely to be able to write English at the minimum college level when they get there. If students are not planning to attend college, their skills in writing English may not even qualify them for secretarial or clerical work. Students in elementary school are not being given the kind of required reading material, much less writing instruction, that would make it possible for them eventually to write comprehensible English.
Manners is another area where standards have eroded. One poll found that we’re ruder than ever, and it can be witnessed in the daily assault of selfish, inconsiderate behavior on the highways, in the office, on television, and in stores. In this same poll, nearly 8 in 10 respondents said lack of respect and courtesy is a serious national problem, and 61% agreed that there is more rude behavior today than in the past. We’re rude, and we’re mean: there’s road rage, air rage, cellphone rage, checkout rage, bike rage, sports rage, parking rage, rail rage, bank rage, roller rage, boat rage, desk rage, car alarm rage, and drivers who even honk at people on crutches. According to one expert, there’s also “funeral rage”—people actually flip the bird and cut off funeral processions.
The erosion of honesty in our society is shameful. Dishonest practices, bold-faced lies, and scams are so pervasive in the auto repair business that dealers and repair-shop owners no longer consider themselves dishonest. If everyone else is doing it, that makes it “normal behavior.” That dishonesty, however, pales in comparison to deliberately misleading advertisements, corruption, miscarriages of justice, tax evasion, unnecessary medical procedures, harassment of whistle-blowers, and all other forms of dishonesty. The threat to democracy and a free economy is not from attacks on our country by religious zealots but terrorism carried out daily by a den of thieves.
Television, too, contributes to an erosion of standards. Much of the news media has focused on violence, but that is a small part of the problem. There are explicit sex scenes and crude language during prime time and pornographic content on talk shows and soap operas. Television assaults the values that many Americans hold dear. Our culture has been hijacked and replaced by something that openly rejects, rather than reflects, the values people try to instill in their families. In the world of television, sex is a recreational pastime, indecency is a cause for laughter, and humans are killed as casually and senselessly as bugs. It is a coarse caricature of the America people love.
There has been an erosion of standards in the area of sex as standards of sexual morality have been dropped. Television, movies, popular songs, and the printed media present an enormous temptation towards sexual misconduct. The lack of personal discipline and self control regarding sexual matters has caused difficulty and is likely to be reflected in the increases in teen pregnancies, abortions, adultery, sexual abuse of children, AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. One poll indicated that one in five Americans have a sexually transmitted disease.
When there is an erosion of standards in manners, honesty, and sex, you would expect it to be reflected in the area of ethics as well. Americans have witnessed a significant number of individual ethical lapses that have resulted in organizational and systemic failures. Corporate malfeasance, sexual abuse by priests coupled with woefully inadequate responses by church hierarchy, unethical and corrupt acts by government officials, an increase in cheating by students, and the fabrication of scientific evidence by researchers, violations of journalistic integrity, and violations of the standards of fair play in athletics, are just a few examples where ethical lapses have occurred.
This essay has barely touched the surface of an enormous erosion of standards, but one fact is clear, such erosion undermines individual responsibility and civic values, harms individuals, generates a loss of public trust in the institutions of our society, and leaves everyone searching for guideposts—instructions on how to proceed when faced with complex emerging issues.
-----
At the website Helium.com, the title of the entry is: “Does the erosion of moral values also erode the strength of our society?” The discussion of this question is provided by Clint Daniel with the opposing side offered by Michelle R. Bishop. Both sides of the discussion are interesting and worth reading.
At the Flaming Liberal! website, the essay there, “Society at the crosswords,” covers far more ethical lapses than the essay above. The essay includes the following parts: 1. The Erosion of Ethics, 2. The Source of Values, and 3. Capitalism as a system of ethics, and 4. Is there another way? I like the solution that Gordon Glasgow, the author of this essay, offers readers. Read the essay and decide for yourself.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Family members as role models—the first school for young children
When my oldest son was eight years old, I was mowing the lawn, and he was walking in my tracks with his plastic lawnmower, following every line, making every turn, and doing exactly what I was doing. I would wash our car, and exactly the same behavior would take place; he would follow every movement precisely as I preceded him. This, of course, is the obvious imitation that we all see and sometimes capture with a camera or video recorder. Imitation, however, often runs much deeper, is less noticeable, and has more profound consequences in the lives of our children. It goes without saying that parents, caregivers, and family members are vital to the healthy development and growth of children. Little kids are like sponges—soaking up what they see and hear.
I have been a writer all of my married life, but one thing my wife made clear very early was that regardless of the time I needed at the typewriter/ computer, it was not just important but necessary for me to be available to our children whenever they asked for attention. I would take the time to listen to them and talk with them and, often, this took place on my lap in my study. Those were precious moments (and over so quickly!) Now, I treat my grandchildren in precisely the same way.
I thought about this the other day when Mckenzie (9 years old) came into my study to say hello. She asked what I was doing, although she knows that I write and is familiar with the signs because she has seen them so many times before. I stopped and explained the essay I was writing, and I showed her the notes I was using. The notes were part of the daily diary I keep. She said that she keeps a diary, too, and I let her know what a good idea that is because although our minds are good at remembering things, often it is the specific details that slip away as time passes.
I showed her some of the entries I had written; I even went back ten or twenty years and showed her some of my earlier diaries. Mckenzie is a writer, so I showed her the notes I take when my wife and I travel. She was able to see the process I use as I convert information into essays. Mckenzie and I, just like our other seven grandchildren, have a warm, comfortable, friendly, talk-oriented relationship. The Bible says “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it (Proverbs, 22:6).” Caring adults make huge differences.
Just as parents are vital to the healthy development and growth of children, grandparents serve a vital role as well. For example, we can show our love and concern by telling them we love them, showing affection by hugging and kissing them or holding their hands when we go for a walk. We also make time for special family fun activities.
Another way grandparents serve a vital role is through communication. Our grandchildren not only have excellent communication skills, but the channels of communication with us have always been open; we listen to them when they talk. We find out what is going on in their lives, what they liked best when we visit a museum or zoo, and what their likes and dislikes are. We find out about their friends, favorite toys, and the things they like doing the most. Around the table when we eat, they know they can talk and share their ideas with us and other adults.
By listening to our grandchildren, we show them respect. When there is an argument or fight between them, we discuss ways to solve problems without arguing or fighting. Also, we seek their ideas for helping to resolve issues. We explain that their anger, humiliation, or embarrassment is normal, but they must deal with it in peaceful, meaningful, and constructive ways. Physical force and intimidation don’t solve problems. Problem solving occurs when there is both respect and supportive, positive communication.
There are many ways to obtain peaceful solutions to problems. The first is to talk clearly and calmly. When they can state the problem and their desire to solve it without fighting, they have moved toward resolving it. If they can inject humor into the situation by making fun of the problem, it can change the situation from one of hostility and confrontation to friendliness and amelioration. The art of compromise suggests that conflict situations can have win-win outcomes when both parties are willing to give up something. Also, kids can be told that it takes more guts and self-respect to walk away from a fight than to fight.
There is no doubt that parents are a child’s first teachers and role models. Usually, too, children are more affected by what their parents do than by what their parents say. They learn how to behave by seeing how their mothers and fathers behave, and they follow their example. It is like a computer’s default pattern. That is, when given no specific instructions on how the computer is supposed to deal with a situation, it falls back on the programming it has stored in its memory, and it uses the instructions in that programming.
Mothers and fathers need to be aware of the “lessons” they are unintentionally teaching their children. Children learn without parents realizing it. For example, a great discussion was taking place at the dinner table one day between the adults, and it was thought that all the kids had gone downstairs to play. Suddenly, one adult turned to see that the oldest of our grandchildren was seated at the table where she had finishing eating, and she was totally absorbed by and involved with the discussion taking place. She just smiled, knowing that the adults thought none of the kids were listening—and, yet, there she was: absorbing, thinking, learning.
Have you ever listened to your children playing house? Often the language they use as they discipline or punish a younger sister or brother takes place in the same sharp tones you use when scolding. The way your children are treated will directly determine how they treat others. The kinds of things that occupy their interests are precisely those that take place daily around them. If they use “please” and “thank you” it is only because these good manners are insisted upon by considerate, respectful, and concerned parents. A Chinese proverb says, “A young branch takes on all the bends that one gives it.”
Valuing children as human beings, revealing consistency between what you do and what you expect children to do, creating a positive and supportive home atmosphere, accentuating the positive, and modeling and explaining effective, expected behaviors, are just some of the ways adults can influence children. “Family,” says Alice Sterling Honig, a child development specialist, is the first school for young children....”
-----
At Family Guide, the essay, “Be a good role model: Somebody is watching you,” is an excellent one and underscores what I have said in the essay above. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)—which sponsors this website—ends the essay saying: “Your values, opinions, and example carry more weight with your child than you may have thought. By providing a positive model for your child to follow, you set a good example on how to successfully navigate life's conflicts and negative messages-and to choose healthy behaviors that will follow into adulthood.”
At Dragos Roua — Brilliantly Better, the essay, “Stop Looking at Role Models to Do the Dirty Work for You,” by Hulbert Lee is a real treat. Lee writes: “When you look up to someone all your life, someone that’s always there who gives you hope, courage, motivation, inspiration, excitement, desire, or what have you, what happens one day when they don’t have that same impact on you anymore? Who do you really become? Who are you? Are you nobody? Do you feel empty? I know I did… I wondered who the heck I was. I wasn’t a star. I wasn’t a celebrity. I wasn’t someone famous. I was just another person, among the billions of others out there.” And he gives readers four specific guidelines that are truly spot on. A great essay.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
I have been a writer all of my married life, but one thing my wife made clear very early was that regardless of the time I needed at the typewriter/ computer, it was not just important but necessary for me to be available to our children whenever they asked for attention. I would take the time to listen to them and talk with them and, often, this took place on my lap in my study. Those were precious moments (and over so quickly!) Now, I treat my grandchildren in precisely the same way.
I thought about this the other day when Mckenzie (9 years old) came into my study to say hello. She asked what I was doing, although she knows that I write and is familiar with the signs because she has seen them so many times before. I stopped and explained the essay I was writing, and I showed her the notes I was using. The notes were part of the daily diary I keep. She said that she keeps a diary, too, and I let her know what a good idea that is because although our minds are good at remembering things, often it is the specific details that slip away as time passes.
I showed her some of the entries I had written; I even went back ten or twenty years and showed her some of my earlier diaries. Mckenzie is a writer, so I showed her the notes I take when my wife and I travel. She was able to see the process I use as I convert information into essays. Mckenzie and I, just like our other seven grandchildren, have a warm, comfortable, friendly, talk-oriented relationship. The Bible says “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it (Proverbs, 22:6).” Caring adults make huge differences.
Just as parents are vital to the healthy development and growth of children, grandparents serve a vital role as well. For example, we can show our love and concern by telling them we love them, showing affection by hugging and kissing them or holding their hands when we go for a walk. We also make time for special family fun activities.
Another way grandparents serve a vital role is through communication. Our grandchildren not only have excellent communication skills, but the channels of communication with us have always been open; we listen to them when they talk. We find out what is going on in their lives, what they liked best when we visit a museum or zoo, and what their likes and dislikes are. We find out about their friends, favorite toys, and the things they like doing the most. Around the table when we eat, they know they can talk and share their ideas with us and other adults.
By listening to our grandchildren, we show them respect. When there is an argument or fight between them, we discuss ways to solve problems without arguing or fighting. Also, we seek their ideas for helping to resolve issues. We explain that their anger, humiliation, or embarrassment is normal, but they must deal with it in peaceful, meaningful, and constructive ways. Physical force and intimidation don’t solve problems. Problem solving occurs when there is both respect and supportive, positive communication.
There are many ways to obtain peaceful solutions to problems. The first is to talk clearly and calmly. When they can state the problem and their desire to solve it without fighting, they have moved toward resolving it. If they can inject humor into the situation by making fun of the problem, it can change the situation from one of hostility and confrontation to friendliness and amelioration. The art of compromise suggests that conflict situations can have win-win outcomes when both parties are willing to give up something. Also, kids can be told that it takes more guts and self-respect to walk away from a fight than to fight.
There is no doubt that parents are a child’s first teachers and role models. Usually, too, children are more affected by what their parents do than by what their parents say. They learn how to behave by seeing how their mothers and fathers behave, and they follow their example. It is like a computer’s default pattern. That is, when given no specific instructions on how the computer is supposed to deal with a situation, it falls back on the programming it has stored in its memory, and it uses the instructions in that programming.
Mothers and fathers need to be aware of the “lessons” they are unintentionally teaching their children. Children learn without parents realizing it. For example, a great discussion was taking place at the dinner table one day between the adults, and it was thought that all the kids had gone downstairs to play. Suddenly, one adult turned to see that the oldest of our grandchildren was seated at the table where she had finishing eating, and she was totally absorbed by and involved with the discussion taking place. She just smiled, knowing that the adults thought none of the kids were listening—and, yet, there she was: absorbing, thinking, learning.
Have you ever listened to your children playing house? Often the language they use as they discipline or punish a younger sister or brother takes place in the same sharp tones you use when scolding. The way your children are treated will directly determine how they treat others. The kinds of things that occupy their interests are precisely those that take place daily around them. If they use “please” and “thank you” it is only because these good manners are insisted upon by considerate, respectful, and concerned parents. A Chinese proverb says, “A young branch takes on all the bends that one gives it.”
Valuing children as human beings, revealing consistency between what you do and what you expect children to do, creating a positive and supportive home atmosphere, accentuating the positive, and modeling and explaining effective, expected behaviors, are just some of the ways adults can influence children. “Family,” says Alice Sterling Honig, a child development specialist, is the first school for young children....”
-----
At Family Guide, the essay, “Be a good role model: Somebody is watching you,” is an excellent one and underscores what I have said in the essay above. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)—which sponsors this website—ends the essay saying: “Your values, opinions, and example carry more weight with your child than you may have thought. By providing a positive model for your child to follow, you set a good example on how to successfully navigate life's conflicts and negative messages-and to choose healthy behaviors that will follow into adulthood.”
At Dragos Roua — Brilliantly Better, the essay, “Stop Looking at Role Models to Do the Dirty Work for You,” by Hulbert Lee is a real treat. Lee writes: “When you look up to someone all your life, someone that’s always there who gives you hope, courage, motivation, inspiration, excitement, desire, or what have you, what happens one day when they don’t have that same impact on you anymore? Who do you really become? Who are you? Are you nobody? Do you feel empty? I know I did… I wondered who the heck I was. I wasn’t a star. I wasn’t a celebrity. I wasn’t someone famous. I was just another person, among the billions of others out there.” And he gives readers four specific guidelines that are truly spot on. A great essay.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
People don’t want to know how to live a responsible, accountable, mature life—and they don’t care
In my more than thirty years of college teaching, one underlying philosophy has guided both my teaching and writing. That philosophy is that people want to improve their lives—communicate better, of course, but do better, act with higher quality, strive harder, and live a more valuable, desirable, and suitable life. It was this philosophy that made me want to enter the classroom, accept the opportunity to write a textbook, choose to lecture, advise and counsel students, and go above and beyond what was expected of me as a professional.
There were times that I became skeptical that the philosophy was wrong. For example, I met people who were only willing to give half-an-effort to a project, I would serve on a committee only to find that I was the only one willing to work, or I encountered students taking courses for a “pass” instead of a grade so they only had to exert a minimal amount of time and effort. When I was a student I (tongue-in-cheek) celebrated those around me who chose not to give their “all” with a flippant remark: “Well, that’s one more person with whom I don’t have to compete.” Because their philosophy wasn’t my own (and there were always more of them than people like myself), I always assumed that I was the exception, not them.
As a teacher I made a vow with myself that I would not let those students who did not want to commit themselves to my courses drag me or my standards down. I chose, instead, to direct my attention and focus to those who wanted to excel. If you want to be outstanding, then I am here to help you; if you want to be mediocre or “just average,” then you will need to find a way to help yourself.
This approach to education—attend to and focus on those who want to excel—faced a great deal of student complaint and criticism when I directed a basic, required, speech-communication class. Why? Because many students believed that a basic, required, speech-communication course should—by both its definition and nature—be a “blow off,” “Mickey Mouse,” easy grade. In the course, they found a director (me!) who had high standards supported by a number of exercises, activities, and assignments that not just required work, but were evaluated by well-designed, stringent, detailed, and explicitly explained criteria. Students, in all cases, knew exactly the criteria they would be evaluated on before undertaking any activity.
Now, underlying or buttressing my approach to the basic speech-communication course was a belief that effective communication would help students improve their lives. If they took the course seriously, there was a good chance that they would find benefits in all their thoughts and actions—as well as in their other classes, in their daily interactions with others, in their relationships, in any job they pursued, and, obviously, in their communication-related activities (i.e., small-group discussions and public speaking).
Despite the way I conducted my courses, and despite the basic philosophies I believed in that guided my behavior, I may have over estimated my audience. How did I arrive at this conclusion? I discovered it when reading a book, The Healthy Guide to Unhealthy Living: How to Survive Your Bad Habits (Simon & Schuster, 2006), by Dr. David J. Clayton. Clayton is a medical doctor who is a graduate of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. He has an undergraduate degree in chemical biology with honors from Stevens Institute of Technology. He trained in internal medicine at Boston University and the Scripps Clinic and Research Institute in La Jolla, California.
Clayton begins the introduction to his book with this comment: “Despite all the self-help books out there on living a healthy life, many of my patients don’t want to know how to live a healthy life—they want to know how to live their unhealthy lives better.” In the very next paragraph he writes, “They don’t want to stop drinking, smoking, doing drugs, or having casual sex with the other sleep-deprived professionals they meet at parties. They want to know how to do these things without killing themselves or permanently damaging their health. They want to know how to lose weight fast for a wedding, or whether a drug test will show last week’s joint. They want to know how to stay awake at the office when they haven’t slept well the night before (p. 1).”
Using an analogy to Clayton’s conclusion, it may be that students don’t want to be more effective communicators. Maybe they don’t even want to be better educated. Maybe they simply want a college degree, and they are willing to do what is necessary to acquire the degree. “Put up the requirement—the hurdle—and we’ll find a way to deal with it,” some students may be saying. It is similar to those who take courses “pass” so they can complete them with minimum time and effort. Perhaps college itself has become like those courses taken for a “pass”—what is the fastest, easiest, and most task efficient way I can get a degree and get on with my life?
I think Clayton has defined a problem that explains a number of different problems. For example, cheating and dishonesty may occur because all those who cheat and reveal dishonesty see is the final outcome, and the end justifies the means. It may explain obesity and other hedonistic pleasures: “You do what feels good, and you deal with extraordinary circumstances as they occur.” It may explain, too, ignorance. Being informed takes time and effort—pursuing ideas in any kind of organized, systematic, rigorous fashion is an excessive and inordinate demand. “I’d rather be ignorant,” people say, “because knowing means responsibility.”
Clayton could just as easily have started his book saying, “People don’t want to know how to live a responsible, accountable, mature life.” Most people believe as they do because their parents believed that way, and it requires no thinking on their own to change or deviate. Most people don’t think beyond the obvious because it requires energy, and they have never been trained to really think. Most people watch the no-brainer, lackluster, uninspired, dull, and unimaginative entertainment provided on television or the big screen because of their own slovenly inertia. They become immersed in video games, text messaging, chat rooms, e-mail messaging, Internet surfing and other mindless pursuits to fill their boring, nothing lives. People don’t want to know how to live a responsible, accountable, mature life—and they don’t care.
-----
“Breaking Bad Habits: Do You Really Want Change?” is an essay by Christopher George at the website ByRegion.net His opening paragraph reads like this: “As a hypnotherapist, I work with many people trying to break a habit that they've had for years and some, even decades. As I tell my clients during the first session - in order to change a habit, you first must understand it.” George discusses two specific steps that must be completed to acquire permanent change
Oh, I know this website, choicesforteens, is especially designed for teenagers, but the essay, “Why some people can’t break bad habits,” is not only short, but it gets right to the point. A fast, quick (but solid) read.
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
There were times that I became skeptical that the philosophy was wrong. For example, I met people who were only willing to give half-an-effort to a project, I would serve on a committee only to find that I was the only one willing to work, or I encountered students taking courses for a “pass” instead of a grade so they only had to exert a minimal amount of time and effort. When I was a student I (tongue-in-cheek) celebrated those around me who chose not to give their “all” with a flippant remark: “Well, that’s one more person with whom I don’t have to compete.” Because their philosophy wasn’t my own (and there were always more of them than people like myself), I always assumed that I was the exception, not them.
As a teacher I made a vow with myself that I would not let those students who did not want to commit themselves to my courses drag me or my standards down. I chose, instead, to direct my attention and focus to those who wanted to excel. If you want to be outstanding, then I am here to help you; if you want to be mediocre or “just average,” then you will need to find a way to help yourself.
This approach to education—attend to and focus on those who want to excel—faced a great deal of student complaint and criticism when I directed a basic, required, speech-communication class. Why? Because many students believed that a basic, required, speech-communication course should—by both its definition and nature—be a “blow off,” “Mickey Mouse,” easy grade. In the course, they found a director (me!) who had high standards supported by a number of exercises, activities, and assignments that not just required work, but were evaluated by well-designed, stringent, detailed, and explicitly explained criteria. Students, in all cases, knew exactly the criteria they would be evaluated on before undertaking any activity.
Now, underlying or buttressing my approach to the basic speech-communication course was a belief that effective communication would help students improve their lives. If they took the course seriously, there was a good chance that they would find benefits in all their thoughts and actions—as well as in their other classes, in their daily interactions with others, in their relationships, in any job they pursued, and, obviously, in their communication-related activities (i.e., small-group discussions and public speaking).
Despite the way I conducted my courses, and despite the basic philosophies I believed in that guided my behavior, I may have over estimated my audience. How did I arrive at this conclusion? I discovered it when reading a book, The Healthy Guide to Unhealthy Living: How to Survive Your Bad Habits (Simon & Schuster, 2006), by Dr. David J. Clayton. Clayton is a medical doctor who is a graduate of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. He has an undergraduate degree in chemical biology with honors from Stevens Institute of Technology. He trained in internal medicine at Boston University and the Scripps Clinic and Research Institute in La Jolla, California.
Clayton begins the introduction to his book with this comment: “Despite all the self-help books out there on living a healthy life, many of my patients don’t want to know how to live a healthy life—they want to know how to live their unhealthy lives better.” In the very next paragraph he writes, “They don’t want to stop drinking, smoking, doing drugs, or having casual sex with the other sleep-deprived professionals they meet at parties. They want to know how to do these things without killing themselves or permanently damaging their health. They want to know how to lose weight fast for a wedding, or whether a drug test will show last week’s joint. They want to know how to stay awake at the office when they haven’t slept well the night before (p. 1).”
Using an analogy to Clayton’s conclusion, it may be that students don’t want to be more effective communicators. Maybe they don’t even want to be better educated. Maybe they simply want a college degree, and they are willing to do what is necessary to acquire the degree. “Put up the requirement—the hurdle—and we’ll find a way to deal with it,” some students may be saying. It is similar to those who take courses “pass” so they can complete them with minimum time and effort. Perhaps college itself has become like those courses taken for a “pass”—what is the fastest, easiest, and most task efficient way I can get a degree and get on with my life?
I think Clayton has defined a problem that explains a number of different problems. For example, cheating and dishonesty may occur because all those who cheat and reveal dishonesty see is the final outcome, and the end justifies the means. It may explain obesity and other hedonistic pleasures: “You do what feels good, and you deal with extraordinary circumstances as they occur.” It may explain, too, ignorance. Being informed takes time and effort—pursuing ideas in any kind of organized, systematic, rigorous fashion is an excessive and inordinate demand. “I’d rather be ignorant,” people say, “because knowing means responsibility.”
Clayton could just as easily have started his book saying, “People don’t want to know how to live a responsible, accountable, mature life.” Most people believe as they do because their parents believed that way, and it requires no thinking on their own to change or deviate. Most people don’t think beyond the obvious because it requires energy, and they have never been trained to really think. Most people watch the no-brainer, lackluster, uninspired, dull, and unimaginative entertainment provided on television or the big screen because of their own slovenly inertia. They become immersed in video games, text messaging, chat rooms, e-mail messaging, Internet surfing and other mindless pursuits to fill their boring, nothing lives. People don’t want to know how to live a responsible, accountable, mature life—and they don’t care.
-----
“Breaking Bad Habits: Do You Really Want Change?” is an essay by Christopher George at the website ByRegion.net
Oh, I know this website, choicesforteens
-----
Copyright August, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The tyranny of masculinity—stop trying to be a man; start trying to be yourself
Men who display in an obvious way the typical characteristics associated with masculinity are silly, if not immature and childish. This is about being overly competitive, aggressive, dangerous, violent, insensitive, abusive, selfish, unemotional, hyperrational, or ambitious. It is true that many of these traits are culturally determined— especially reinforced in the media—but our culture places far too much emphasis on the roles people are supposed to play based on their race, religion, and gender. If everyone just followed their hearts, kept it real, and didn’t do or be what others told them to do or be, the world would be a better place.
Men, in general—not all men—can be criticized for being too addicted to cultural definitions of masculinity and for lacking a critical perspective about those definitions.
A lot of men like sports, cars, motorcycles, beautiful women, sex, guns, gambling, tinkering and fixing, and electronic gadgets. These interests do not concern me in this essay. I think some of them are hardwired. My wife and I have had children of both sexes, and if you watch their natural inclinations—whether nurtured in one direction or the other—males and females are naturally, comfortably, and, I dare say, automatically drawn to different things.
The problem with the hard-wiring, higher levels of testosterone, and Y chromosome arguments often used to support the trite aphorism that “boys will be boys” (or “men will be men”) is that they offer a handy excuse for not doing the psychological and spiritual hard work that genuine growth and change require, especially when that change and growth contradicts socialization and cultural values.
From where did the current stereotypical view of the male gender come? The wide variety of masculine ideals of numerous past cultures have all but vanished. Whether hunter-gatherer, farmer, or craftsman, premodern men were steeped in family, land, community, and religion. The traditional masculine traits were generativity, stewardship generosity, teaching, husbandry, honor, and even adventure. All of these have been virtually ignored and replaced by ideals that have been supplied by the media. Author and media expert Jerry Mander reminds us that, “we evolve into the images we carry in our minds. We become what we see.”
An obvious question, however, is why should men addicted to the cultural definitions of masculinity even consider changing? It is because many of the traits associated with men or socialized into men are just plain stupid—as are, I might add, many of the traits of the conventional female gender role. For example, it is stupid not to ask for directions when lost, to show reluctance to go to a doctor, to thrive on violence, to work such long hours that one does not know his children, or to refuse to become relationally competent.
What we need to confront are the outdated beliefs that men are impregnable, that risking life and limb is okay, that avoiding medical check-ups, diets, and keep-fit regimes is praiseworthy, that a man’s job is done if he “brings home the bacon,” and that families don’t need them (fathers) as much as mothers. Men need to be reassured that the traditional women’s traits that include being nurturing, selfless, overtly sensitive, passive, emotional, and intuitive are important characteristics—just as important as the traditionally more “macho” characteristics—and that to nurture, encourage, and reveal these “feminine” traits is likely to yield a stronger, more well-rounded, acceptable, and complete human being.
Women should expect men to be a mixture of many qualities, even though some of those qualities may be polar opposites of each other. Sure they can retain the old qualities of masculinity such as being strong, aggressive, hard, tough, big, and powerful, but they should also possess the feminine qualities such as being compassionate, soft, sweet, gentle, and caring. What’s wrong with this combination of traits being the standard?
Men should be free to express a full range of emotions and creative urges. In this way they become both more humane and more sane.
Here is the point: it is very likely that men, on average, have more innate aggressiveness than do most women. But both men and women will be more tolerant of aggression and competitiveness in a culture that values these traits over gentleness and friendliness.
The problem is figuring out what techniques or practices would likely encourage such a change? Men, unfortunately, are the only ones who can do much of the work. For women to coach men in this undertaking would be both arrogant and inappropriate. If women can simply supply some of the challenge, a little encouragement, and a great deal of emotional support, of course, that will help. As with every significant cultural revolution, this tectonic cultural plate shift would happen only because of deep internal, psychological, moral, and spiritual changes, individual by individual.
One suggestion might be additionally helpful. Just as women studies and women’s groups worked so well for women, men studies and men’s groups should work for men. What is needed on college campuses across the nation are three closely interrelated, but distinctive, disciplines: men studies, women studies, and gender studies. It is only through such a development that we are likely to find something close to freedom from the prison of gender roles.
It is true that most men feel pressured to act masculine. Why can’t men, instead, emulate people like the Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King, Jr., or Gandhi—men who were both gentle and competent? These are male culture heroes and icons of highly accomplished masculinity. Why is it that most men hold as heroes athletes, lawyers, businessmen, and generals? The answer is: because we live in a speedy, competitive, hyper-masculine culture—a culture that focuses upon and idealizes the most problematic aspects of the male gender role. If I could give men just one message, it would be: Stop trying to be a man; start trying to be yourself. If that includes elements that are considered feminine, so be it.
-----
At the JacksonKatz.com website, the essay is entitled “Manhood on the Mat: The Problem is Not that Pro Wrestling Makes Boys Violent. The Real Lesson of the Wildly Popular Pseudo-Sport is More Insidious,” and written by Jackson Katz and Sut Jhally, suggests that the hyper-masculine pro-wrestling subculture promotes bullying, taunting, and other negative male features. “It is a lesson that resonates all too clearly in our schools: A recent survey of 6,000 children in grades 4 to 6 found that about 1 in 10 said they were bullied one or more times a week, and 1 in 5 admitted to being bullies themselves. And we know from the 1990s' series of school shootings that, all too often, guns become the great equalizer for boys who have been bullied, ridiculed, and verbally taunted.” This essay was first published in The Boston Globe on February 13, 2000, in the Sunday, Third Edition Focus Section; Pg. E1.
At the Gender Blender Blog, there is an excellent essay entitled, “Violent Masculinity as a Cultural Ideal: Both Men and Women are Victims,” in which students (problably Women’s Studies students at Tufts University) talk about the various effects of violent masculinity. It is an interesting and provocative essay.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Men, in general—not all men—can be criticized for being too addicted to cultural definitions of masculinity and for lacking a critical perspective about those definitions.
A lot of men like sports, cars, motorcycles, beautiful women, sex, guns, gambling, tinkering and fixing, and electronic gadgets. These interests do not concern me in this essay. I think some of them are hardwired. My wife and I have had children of both sexes, and if you watch their natural inclinations—whether nurtured in one direction or the other—males and females are naturally, comfortably, and, I dare say, automatically drawn to different things.
The problem with the hard-wiring, higher levels of testosterone, and Y chromosome arguments often used to support the trite aphorism that “boys will be boys” (or “men will be men”) is that they offer a handy excuse for not doing the psychological and spiritual hard work that genuine growth and change require, especially when that change and growth contradicts socialization and cultural values.
From where did the current stereotypical view of the male gender come? The wide variety of masculine ideals of numerous past cultures have all but vanished. Whether hunter-gatherer, farmer, or craftsman, premodern men were steeped in family, land, community, and religion. The traditional masculine traits were generativity, stewardship generosity, teaching, husbandry, honor, and even adventure. All of these have been virtually ignored and replaced by ideals that have been supplied by the media. Author and media expert Jerry Mander reminds us that, “we evolve into the images we carry in our minds. We become what we see.”
An obvious question, however, is why should men addicted to the cultural definitions of masculinity even consider changing? It is because many of the traits associated with men or socialized into men are just plain stupid—as are, I might add, many of the traits of the conventional female gender role. For example, it is stupid not to ask for directions when lost, to show reluctance to go to a doctor, to thrive on violence, to work such long hours that one does not know his children, or to refuse to become relationally competent.
What we need to confront are the outdated beliefs that men are impregnable, that risking life and limb is okay, that avoiding medical check-ups, diets, and keep-fit regimes is praiseworthy, that a man’s job is done if he “brings home the bacon,” and that families don’t need them (fathers) as much as mothers. Men need to be reassured that the traditional women’s traits that include being nurturing, selfless, overtly sensitive, passive, emotional, and intuitive are important characteristics—just as important as the traditionally more “macho” characteristics—and that to nurture, encourage, and reveal these “feminine” traits is likely to yield a stronger, more well-rounded, acceptable, and complete human being.
Women should expect men to be a mixture of many qualities, even though some of those qualities may be polar opposites of each other. Sure they can retain the old qualities of masculinity such as being strong, aggressive, hard, tough, big, and powerful, but they should also possess the feminine qualities such as being compassionate, soft, sweet, gentle, and caring. What’s wrong with this combination of traits being the standard?
Men should be free to express a full range of emotions and creative urges. In this way they become both more humane and more sane.
Here is the point: it is very likely that men, on average, have more innate aggressiveness than do most women. But both men and women will be more tolerant of aggression and competitiveness in a culture that values these traits over gentleness and friendliness.
The problem is figuring out what techniques or practices would likely encourage such a change? Men, unfortunately, are the only ones who can do much of the work. For women to coach men in this undertaking would be both arrogant and inappropriate. If women can simply supply some of the challenge, a little encouragement, and a great deal of emotional support, of course, that will help. As with every significant cultural revolution, this tectonic cultural plate shift would happen only because of deep internal, psychological, moral, and spiritual changes, individual by individual.
One suggestion might be additionally helpful. Just as women studies and women’s groups worked so well for women, men studies and men’s groups should work for men. What is needed on college campuses across the nation are three closely interrelated, but distinctive, disciplines: men studies, women studies, and gender studies. It is only through such a development that we are likely to find something close to freedom from the prison of gender roles.
It is true that most men feel pressured to act masculine. Why can’t men, instead, emulate people like the Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King, Jr., or Gandhi—men who were both gentle and competent? These are male culture heroes and icons of highly accomplished masculinity. Why is it that most men hold as heroes athletes, lawyers, businessmen, and generals? The answer is: because we live in a speedy, competitive, hyper-masculine culture—a culture that focuses upon and idealizes the most problematic aspects of the male gender role. If I could give men just one message, it would be: Stop trying to be a man; start trying to be yourself. If that includes elements that are considered feminine, so be it.
-----
At the JacksonKatz.com website, the essay is entitled “Manhood on the Mat: The Problem is Not that Pro Wrestling Makes Boys Violent. The Real Lesson of the Wildly Popular Pseudo-Sport is More Insidious,” and written by Jackson Katz and Sut Jhally, suggests that the hyper-masculine pro-wrestling subculture promotes bullying, taunting, and other negative male features. “It is a lesson that resonates all too clearly in our schools: A recent survey of 6,000 children in grades 4 to 6 found that about 1 in 10 said they were bullied one or more times a week, and 1 in 5 admitted to being bullies themselves. And we know from the 1990s' series of school shootings that, all too often, guns become the great equalizer for boys who have been bullied, ridiculed, and verbally taunted.” This essay was first published in The Boston Globe on February 13, 2000, in the Sunday, Third Edition Focus Section; Pg. E1.
At the Gender Blender Blog, there is an excellent essay entitled, “Violent Masculinity as a Cultural Ideal: Both Men and Women are Victims,” in which students (problably Women’s Studies students at Tufts University) talk about the various effects of violent masculinity. It is an interesting and provocative essay.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Assholes at work
I’ve always assumed the best when encountering other people, and it takes me a long time to form an opinion so severe and critical that I could actually label someone “asshole.” Although I’ll admit the word is in my vocabulary, there are few instances when I use it, nor would want to use it. More often than not, my use of the word is in retrospect, a little like Monday-morning quarterbacking, when you look back on a situation, analyze it, and then realize that the negative consequences occurred simply because someone was acting like a total jerk.
I had a brother-in-law like that who always seemed to take a contrary position in discussions just to antagonize and provoke. He loved the verbal battle. I had a colleague like that as well who all faculty members tried to avoid. It seemed the faculty members of our small department would almost always see eye-to-eye, even agree to disagree at times, but got along with each other famously except when this one person would become involved. It was as if a discordant ingredient was put into a recipe that seemed to spoil the overall flavor, texture, or appearance. Without it, no problem; with it, yuck!
It seems as if this world is more full of assholes today than in the past. I’m talking here about people who quickly, and often thoughtlessly, throw out personal insults, invade our personal space, make uninvited physical contact, use verbal and nonverbal means to threaten and intimidate, use unwanted sarcastic jokes, offer-up withering e-mail flames, inject rude interruptions into conversations, appear two-faced—one face cordial and accommodating, the other face condemning, vilifying, and attacking—ready to give dirty looks (in Hawaii they call it “stink-eye”) at a moment’s displeasure, and treating others as if they are invisible.
For this list, and for stimulating this essay, I am indebted to Robert I. Sutton and his book, The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t (Warner Business Books, 2007). My list of characteristics, above, comes from his list of “Common Everyday Actions That Assholes Use” (p. 10). I have avoided using quotation marks throughout most of this essay for ease of reading, but I acknowledge my dependence on this terrific book that is well worth reading.
The best way I have found to successfully deal with assholes is to avoid them, or, in a business, get rid of them. Sometimes it is a matter of proceeding with the first approach— avoidance—until the second takes place—departure. Looking back, in all cases that I can recall, this was exactly the procedure that took place.
In talking with my father-in-law, a former department chairperson, one faculty member was not only an asshole, continued to provoke and display his negative personality on a daily basis, affected everyone’s demeanor and morale, became known throughout the profession and university for just what he was, and — to everyone’s delight and amusement — ended up taking a faculty position at a university in Australia. Out of sight, out of mind! (The trail of negative memories and stories, however, paved a muddy and treacherous course of recollections well beyond his presence in this country.)
My problem with Sutton’s top ten steps, “Enforcing the No Asshole Rule,” is simple. It is difficult to detect assholes, because they are so good at disguising themselves before people who do not know them. So often, when you meet for the first time a person who has been labeled an asshole, recognized as an asshole, and roundly supported as an asshole by people you respect and admire, you are astounded at what you discover. Here, you think, is one of the most cordial, friendly, warm, genial, affable, amiable, pleasant, polite, warmhearted, and good-natured people on the face of the earth! The critics must be wrong!
The key, I’m afraid, is to base your judgment on that of those who are credible and whom you trust and respect. What other recourse do you have? In an organization, Sutton claims, assholes hire other assholes, so get rid of them fast. Treat them as incompetent employees. Remember power breeds nastiness. “Beware that giving people — even seemingly nice and sensitive people — even a little power can turn them into big jerks” (p. 90), says Sutton. In dealing with them, you must develop a culture in which people know how to argue and when to stop fighting. Often, it means gathering more evidence, listening to other people, and implementing decisions even when the asshole disagrees with them.
Although it is important to emphasize — in business, education, or even in small meetings — that treating people with respect rather than contempt makes good sense, it doesn’t always register with those for whom the words should resonate the loudest. The resonation falls on deaf ears — or rebounds with no purpose or direction within an empty head, if it makes it that far — especially when things are going badly!
When you have to hunker down and take it, here are some of the suggestions Sutton makes for surviving nasty people. First, reframe the situation to escape the source of stress and reduce the damage being done to you. Above all, avoid self-blame, hope for the best while expecting the worst, and develop indifference and emotional detachment. Second, look for and celebrate small wins. “The advantage of taking small actions is that they bring about noticeable and typically successful changes” (p. 140), says Sutton. “Using a small-wins strategy can enhance your feelings of control, make things around you a little better, and maybe — just maybe — chip away at the vile and vicious culture in which you are trapped and start making it a bit better” (p. 147). Third, limit your exposure to dampen the damage that assholes do. Fourth, build pockets of safety, support, and sanity. When you can hide, hangout with decent people, or engage supportive family and friends in constructive, positive, and helpful conversations, often these social networks can buffer you against the stress of working with an asshole.
One problem with assholes is the residual effect they can have on your mind, mentality, and memory. Just writing this essay, for example, brings back memories I would rather not entertain. Forgiving and forgetting is a great thought, but sometimes doesn’t serve to purge such experiences. Although Sutton discusses both revenge and calling their bluff, I have seldom seen these tactics work well. There are some tactics that work and that are discussed above, and they may be all you have. Fortunately, assholes make up a small percentage of the population!
----
At the HuffingtonPost.com, Robert Sutton writes, “The No Asshole Rule: Part 1,” where, in his own words, “I thought it would be fun to introduce the book to Huffington Post readers by sharing 13 of the most fascinating and funny things that have happened so far [since his book was published]. The first six are in this post the other seven in my next post.”
At Bob Sutton’s own website, he offers an essay, “Updated Tips for Victims of Workplace Assholes,” which he introduces with the paragraph, “I’ve talked a lot here about methods for enduring abusive bosses and co-workers. Some of these tips come from your comments and e-mails, some from the No Asshole Rule, and some from academic research. I thought it would be useful to list some of the most effective methods in one place. I update this list every few months, so please keep your suggestions coming!” He gives six or seven tips then includes numerous comments from messages he receives at the website.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
I had a brother-in-law like that who always seemed to take a contrary position in discussions just to antagonize and provoke. He loved the verbal battle. I had a colleague like that as well who all faculty members tried to avoid. It seemed the faculty members of our small department would almost always see eye-to-eye, even agree to disagree at times, but got along with each other famously except when this one person would become involved. It was as if a discordant ingredient was put into a recipe that seemed to spoil the overall flavor, texture, or appearance. Without it, no problem; with it, yuck!
It seems as if this world is more full of assholes today than in the past. I’m talking here about people who quickly, and often thoughtlessly, throw out personal insults, invade our personal space, make uninvited physical contact, use verbal and nonverbal means to threaten and intimidate, use unwanted sarcastic jokes, offer-up withering e-mail flames, inject rude interruptions into conversations, appear two-faced—one face cordial and accommodating, the other face condemning, vilifying, and attacking—ready to give dirty looks (in Hawaii they call it “stink-eye”) at a moment’s displeasure, and treating others as if they are invisible.
For this list, and for stimulating this essay, I am indebted to Robert I. Sutton and his book, The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t (Warner Business Books, 2007). My list of characteristics, above, comes from his list of “Common Everyday Actions That Assholes Use” (p. 10). I have avoided using quotation marks throughout most of this essay for ease of reading, but I acknowledge my dependence on this terrific book that is well worth reading.
The best way I have found to successfully deal with assholes is to avoid them, or, in a business, get rid of them. Sometimes it is a matter of proceeding with the first approach— avoidance—until the second takes place—departure. Looking back, in all cases that I can recall, this was exactly the procedure that took place.
In talking with my father-in-law, a former department chairperson, one faculty member was not only an asshole, continued to provoke and display his negative personality on a daily basis, affected everyone’s demeanor and morale, became known throughout the profession and university for just what he was, and — to everyone’s delight and amusement — ended up taking a faculty position at a university in Australia. Out of sight, out of mind! (The trail of negative memories and stories, however, paved a muddy and treacherous course of recollections well beyond his presence in this country.)
My problem with Sutton’s top ten steps, “Enforcing the No Asshole Rule,” is simple. It is difficult to detect assholes, because they are so good at disguising themselves before people who do not know them. So often, when you meet for the first time a person who has been labeled an asshole, recognized as an asshole, and roundly supported as an asshole by people you respect and admire, you are astounded at what you discover. Here, you think, is one of the most cordial, friendly, warm, genial, affable, amiable, pleasant, polite, warmhearted, and good-natured people on the face of the earth! The critics must be wrong!
The key, I’m afraid, is to base your judgment on that of those who are credible and whom you trust and respect. What other recourse do you have? In an organization, Sutton claims, assholes hire other assholes, so get rid of them fast. Treat them as incompetent employees. Remember power breeds nastiness. “Beware that giving people — even seemingly nice and sensitive people — even a little power can turn them into big jerks” (p. 90), says Sutton. In dealing with them, you must develop a culture in which people know how to argue and when to stop fighting. Often, it means gathering more evidence, listening to other people, and implementing decisions even when the asshole disagrees with them.
Although it is important to emphasize — in business, education, or even in small meetings — that treating people with respect rather than contempt makes good sense, it doesn’t always register with those for whom the words should resonate the loudest. The resonation falls on deaf ears — or rebounds with no purpose or direction within an empty head, if it makes it that far — especially when things are going badly!
When you have to hunker down and take it, here are some of the suggestions Sutton makes for surviving nasty people. First, reframe the situation to escape the source of stress and reduce the damage being done to you. Above all, avoid self-blame, hope for the best while expecting the worst, and develop indifference and emotional detachment. Second, look for and celebrate small wins. “The advantage of taking small actions is that they bring about noticeable and typically successful changes” (p. 140), says Sutton. “Using a small-wins strategy can enhance your feelings of control, make things around you a little better, and maybe — just maybe — chip away at the vile and vicious culture in which you are trapped and start making it a bit better” (p. 147). Third, limit your exposure to dampen the damage that assholes do. Fourth, build pockets of safety, support, and sanity. When you can hide, hangout with decent people, or engage supportive family and friends in constructive, positive, and helpful conversations, often these social networks can buffer you against the stress of working with an asshole.
One problem with assholes is the residual effect they can have on your mind, mentality, and memory. Just writing this essay, for example, brings back memories I would rather not entertain. Forgiving and forgetting is a great thought, but sometimes doesn’t serve to purge such experiences. Although Sutton discusses both revenge and calling their bluff, I have seldom seen these tactics work well. There are some tactics that work and that are discussed above, and they may be all you have. Fortunately, assholes make up a small percentage of the population!
----
At the HuffingtonPost.com, Robert Sutton writes, “The No Asshole Rule: Part 1,” where, in his own words, “I thought it would be fun to introduce the book to Huffington Post readers by sharing 13 of the most fascinating and funny things that have happened so far [since his book was published]. The first six are in this post the other seven in my next post.”
At Bob Sutton’s own website, he offers an essay, “Updated Tips for Victims of Workplace Assholes,” which he introduces with the paragraph, “I’ve talked a lot here about methods for enduring abusive bosses and co-workers. Some of these tips come from your comments and e-mails, some from the No Asshole Rule, and some from academic research. I thought it would be useful to list some of the most effective methods in one place. I update this list every few months, so please keep your suggestions coming!” He gives six or seven tips then includes numerous comments from messages he receives at the website.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Romantic notions help us maintain balance—a stable, steady footing—in our lives
All my life I have held a romantic notion about living in a remote location with my computer along with a subsistence level of survival—just enjoying the wilderness, a “green” existence, and the essentials of survival and nothing more. After all, I am a writer. It is a lonely profession in which I need solitude, great chunks of solitary confinement, and license to exist by myself out of reach of civilization.
A recent cruise to the Inside Passage of Alaska began to shake some of my romantic notions. I talked, for example, to some of the residents of Skagway, Alaska, just to see why they choose to live there year round. Skagway was once Alaska’s most populous town. Now only four blocks wide and just over twenty long, it is nestled into a cozy and picturesque setting between the 7,000-foot Coast Mountains (Canadian boundary). Many summer residents, of course, only live there during the tourist season when as many as eight cruise ships at a time, may add from 15-20,000 people to a permanent village population of only about 841 people.
One employee of a small tourist shop said he had chosen to live in Skagway year round because it is a great place to bring up your children. He said he had three kids. The schools were great, with lots of individual attention for students, the atmosphere is clean and healthy, and, he said, you can leave your kids outside all day to play without supervision. He said the crime rate in Skagway is negligible. (He suspected that whatever crime rate there is, is a direct result of the tourist industry, but it disappears as quickly as the ships slipping away from their dockside ports after only several hours of being in town.)
Interestingly, the shop employee said that the only time he and his wife had to be outside with the kids was at dusk and after dark. That is the time the black bears come into town from the surrounding forests. He said it wasn’t unusual to see one right in the middle of the road outside his shop. They scavage for food in the town’s outside garbage containers, but they are as scared of humans as humans are scared of them; they are just more imposing.
Our female guide on our Skagway shore excursion, an extroverted, humorous, single writer for the local Skagway newspaper published with local news only every-other-week, and who looked and sounded like Barbra Streisand, had stayed in Skagway for three years and had an interesting view of life there. She was waiting for her boyfriend to come home from Iraq and, originally, had decided to give Skagway but six months as a live-in trial.
She said that life there was definitely unique. Everything in town (including cars) had to be shipped in by barge. When the barge arrived (usually once a month), the townspeople would flood the local supermarkets for the freshest fruits and vegetables they could find. What the food barge brought in was what was available for the next month or so.
There was no doctor, dentist, health-care professional, or hospital in town. Those with serious health problems had to be flown to another town.
During the six months of winter, it was dark most of the time. At the height of the winter months, there was a mere twenty minutes of sun, and that was like dusk. Also, being part of a massive temperate rain forest system, during the summer it rained almost every day, and if it was not raining, it was overcast much of the time. Talk about gloomy weather! Alaska, and Skagway contributes its fair share, has the highest suicide rate of any state in the nation, and one can easily see why that is true.
There is a third feature of the weather in Skagway that makes that location unusual. During three weeks in January there is an intense, non-stop wind. Skagway is located just on the other side of a long mountain range that separates the town from Canada and the inland. During the winter, air pressure accumulates on the Canadian side of the mountains, and as it builds it pushes the clouds up vertically toward the top of the mountain range. Our guide said that when the clouds begin drifting over the mountains in January, that is the sign that everyone in Skagway must go out and purchase provisions to supply themselves for three weeks and then go home and batten down the hatches.
Located in a large U-shaped groove between the 7,000-foot mountains, fashioned thousands of years ago by a massive glacier, Skagway provides a conduit for the air from the buildup on the Canadian side of the mountains to reach the water—the glacier-carved Lynn Canal fjord. Our guide reported that winds maintain a constant speed of 60-70 miles per hour, nonstop, for three solid weeks when you can’t even open an exterior door to your house.
It isn’t any single factor—the dependency on the barges, the lack of medical-service personnel, or the weather—that made me second-guess my romantic desire for isolation. It is the total picture. When you’re accustomed to having many choices—fresh fruits and vegetables, meats and poultry, and all brands and kinds of products—it is difficult to make a decision to give all of that up.
When we were in Australia for 6 months, our choices were limited, but we discovered that it doesn’t take long to become accustomed to it. When we returned home, we even discussed the possibility of limiting what we needed to live comfortably, but it isn’t long until the supply catches up with what you want—not what you need, but what you want. Soon, once again, you begin to appreciate all that you have and all the choices you have in order to have more!
I still retain some of my romantic notions regarding living in a remote location; however, I now know for certain it won’t be in Alaska—specifically, Skagway. It is like many places we have visited throughout our travels. It is a great place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there.
So often, I think, the romantic notions we have about how we would like to live are just that—romantic notions. There is no need to prove them, live them out, or fulfill them in any direct manner. They are pleasant, comforting, and adequately soothe our idyllic, picturesque, fairy-tale side. They offer, too, more than just a reason for living; they are, indeed, a placid, warm, snug, and cozy place where our thoughts can reside in a calm and peaceful manner without agitation, distress, or upset. We need romantic notions to maintain a balance—a stable, steady footing—in our lives.
-----
At Askville.com (sponsored by Amazon.com) , the question posed is: “Have you ever thought about becoming a hermit/recluse?” The readers responses are varied, interesting, and worth a read.
At Success From the Nest , there is a post called, “Are you becoming a home-based hermit?” by Jon Morrow, that offers a number of useful tips. The 24 reader comments on Morrow’s post are also fun to read.
-----
Copyright September, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
A recent cruise to the Inside Passage of Alaska began to shake some of my romantic notions. I talked, for example, to some of the residents of Skagway, Alaska, just to see why they choose to live there year round. Skagway was once Alaska’s most populous town. Now only four blocks wide and just over twenty long, it is nestled into a cozy and picturesque setting between the 7,000-foot Coast Mountains (Canadian boundary). Many summer residents, of course, only live there during the tourist season when as many as eight cruise ships at a time, may add from 15-20,000 people to a permanent village population of only about 841 people.
One employee of a small tourist shop said he had chosen to live in Skagway year round because it is a great place to bring up your children. He said he had three kids. The schools were great, with lots of individual attention for students, the atmosphere is clean and healthy, and, he said, you can leave your kids outside all day to play without supervision. He said the crime rate in Skagway is negligible. (He suspected that whatever crime rate there is, is a direct result of the tourist industry, but it disappears as quickly as the ships slipping away from their dockside ports after only several hours of being in town.)
Interestingly, the shop employee said that the only time he and his wife had to be outside with the kids was at dusk and after dark. That is the time the black bears come into town from the surrounding forests. He said it wasn’t unusual to see one right in the middle of the road outside his shop. They scavage for food in the town’s outside garbage containers, but they are as scared of humans as humans are scared of them; they are just more imposing.
Our female guide on our Skagway shore excursion, an extroverted, humorous, single writer for the local Skagway newspaper published with local news only every-other-week, and who looked and sounded like Barbra Streisand, had stayed in Skagway for three years and had an interesting view of life there. She was waiting for her boyfriend to come home from Iraq and, originally, had decided to give Skagway but six months as a live-in trial.
She said that life there was definitely unique. Everything in town (including cars) had to be shipped in by barge. When the barge arrived (usually once a month), the townspeople would flood the local supermarkets for the freshest fruits and vegetables they could find. What the food barge brought in was what was available for the next month or so.
There was no doctor, dentist, health-care professional, or hospital in town. Those with serious health problems had to be flown to another town.
During the six months of winter, it was dark most of the time. At the height of the winter months, there was a mere twenty minutes of sun, and that was like dusk. Also, being part of a massive temperate rain forest system, during the summer it rained almost every day, and if it was not raining, it was overcast much of the time. Talk about gloomy weather! Alaska, and Skagway contributes its fair share, has the highest suicide rate of any state in the nation, and one can easily see why that is true.
There is a third feature of the weather in Skagway that makes that location unusual. During three weeks in January there is an intense, non-stop wind. Skagway is located just on the other side of a long mountain range that separates the town from Canada and the inland. During the winter, air pressure accumulates on the Canadian side of the mountains, and as it builds it pushes the clouds up vertically toward the top of the mountain range. Our guide said that when the clouds begin drifting over the mountains in January, that is the sign that everyone in Skagway must go out and purchase provisions to supply themselves for three weeks and then go home and batten down the hatches.
Located in a large U-shaped groove between the 7,000-foot mountains, fashioned thousands of years ago by a massive glacier, Skagway provides a conduit for the air from the buildup on the Canadian side of the mountains to reach the water—the glacier-carved Lynn Canal fjord. Our guide reported that winds maintain a constant speed of 60-70 miles per hour, nonstop, for three solid weeks when you can’t even open an exterior door to your house.
It isn’t any single factor—the dependency on the barges, the lack of medical-service personnel, or the weather—that made me second-guess my romantic desire for isolation. It is the total picture. When you’re accustomed to having many choices—fresh fruits and vegetables, meats and poultry, and all brands and kinds of products—it is difficult to make a decision to give all of that up.
When we were in Australia for 6 months, our choices were limited, but we discovered that it doesn’t take long to become accustomed to it. When we returned home, we even discussed the possibility of limiting what we needed to live comfortably, but it isn’t long until the supply catches up with what you want—not what you need, but what you want. Soon, once again, you begin to appreciate all that you have and all the choices you have in order to have more!
I still retain some of my romantic notions regarding living in a remote location; however, I now know for certain it won’t be in Alaska—specifically, Skagway. It is like many places we have visited throughout our travels. It is a great place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there.
So often, I think, the romantic notions we have about how we would like to live are just that—romantic notions. There is no need to prove them, live them out, or fulfill them in any direct manner. They are pleasant, comforting, and adequately soothe our idyllic, picturesque, fairy-tale side. They offer, too, more than just a reason for living; they are, indeed, a placid, warm, snug, and cozy place where our thoughts can reside in a calm and peaceful manner without agitation, distress, or upset. We need romantic notions to maintain a balance—a stable, steady footing—in our lives.
-----
At Askville.com (sponsored by Amazon.com) , the question posed is: “Have you ever thought about becoming a hermit/recluse?” The readers responses are varied, interesting, and worth a read.
At Success From the Nest , there is a post called, “Are you becoming a home-based hermit?” by Jon Morrow, that offers a number of useful tips. The 24 reader comments on Morrow’s post are also fun to read.
-----
Copyright September, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
It is our sanctuary, our special place, an area of safety, solitude, and serenity
When a friend of one of our children, led by our older son, followed the sidewalk from the front of our house around and through the gate into our backyard, his first reaction coming upon our pond, gazebo, and round brick patio in front of both was to exclaim, “Wow, this is a real sanctuary!” It was clear to him—having seen our backyard for the first time—that this was, indeed, a special place.
We have lived in our house for over thirty years, and for every one of those years, we have done something—mostly add plants, bushes, or trees—to our yard.
Our three-fourths of an acre was but a field when we moved in, and we were the second or third house constructed when the rear plat to our subdivision was built. Because we were among the first, we selected the largest piece of property on a cull-de-sac so that our children would have a large, safe area in which to play. Being on a cull-de-sac, the front of our property is only about 50-feet wide, but the rear lot line covers a full two properties plus it touches a drainage ditch in one far corner—a lot line somewhere between 250 and 300 feet in length.
There were no trees, so our first goal was to plant them. Our intention was to frame our property in trees rather than use fences, and in the beginning that worked well. A couple of problems, however, developed. First, the right of way behind our house which contained all the electric, telephone, and cables for television was a drainage area for all the houses built behind us and at least a half dozen others. The excess rain from all of those properties came through our right of way—part of our property—to reach that drainage ditch. When it rains, it fills.
That has never been a major problem, however, when we tried growing blue spruce trees on the inside of the right-of-way, they were dying quickly from too much water, and we immediately moved them to both of the edges of our yard that lead to the right-of-way. Then we tried lilacs, and the same thing happened, and we had to move them to another portion of the side of the yard leading to the ditch. When we tried forsythia, the same thing happened a third time, and we had to pull them all out before they died. Our final effort was to put in 50 or 60 Russian Olive saplings, and that worked. The saplings have grown into large trees along the inside of the right-of-way, and nearly every year of the 30 here, we have had to trim or remove them.
All of our early efforts were designed to provide shade as well as some privacy from the four homes that border ours. In the back, our property is now enclosed by blue spruce, 20-foot high lilac bushes, and Russian olives. Inside the Russian olives we have planted arbor vitae to add to the privacy along the back right-of-way.
In addition to the quest for privacy, we have always had a large garden. The garden was enclosed by landscaping ties, and we used chicken wire to keep out the rabbits and woodchucks.
We have always used annuals to add color and variety to our other plantings. What has happened—and it is particularly evident this year—is that because of our early interest in shade trees, we now have an enormous amount of shade provided by oak, maple, and pine trees as well as an enormous bradford pear tree.
For many years, my goal has always been to reduce the amount of grass I have had to mow. So, using cypress mulch, I have continued to mulch in areas and build hosta gardens or areas for our birdbaths or other bushes and plants. Along the back right-of-way, I used mulch around all the Russian olives and arbor vitae so I would never have to weed-whack. Then we added lamb’s ear as well as Japanese spurge (pachysandra) as ground cover.
All of the people occupying the homes surrounding our property have added fences around their yards. To fence in our yard meant that we would simply have to add to their fences, include a small one along the rear ditch, and then, from their fences we could add one that came up to the sides of our house. We made the final one a white picket fence, and I added a small cover over the gate, so that when you enter our yard on either side, you have to come under this small portico. Thus, our backyard is now fully enclosed by fences with gates on either side.
Because of the shade from the trees we planted early on, it has been difficult to keep grass growing in many areas. On one side, under a silver maple tree, we made a large hosta garden with over 30 different kinds of hosta as well as ferns and other ground covers.
One of our sons found a brick pile, and we brought home two large loads of bricks in our truck. From those, we fashioned brick walkways from the front of our house to the backyard (under the porticos), and around the two front blue spruce trees (one on each side of our lot), we built a small brick wall to enclose circular hosta gardens around those spruce trees.
We have added a rear barn that measures 10' w x 20' l x 14' h, and we bought an 8-foot in diameter gazebo from the Amish who came in and installed it.
When I put in the patio in front of our pond, which my son and I built and which includes three small waterfalls, I buried the dirt from the patio foundation in the garden, so I changed the landscaping ties to 6" x 6" treated timbers to box in our two 10' x 15' plots. Then around the patio, I used our annual accumulation of leaf mulch to landscape the area and added hydranga, sweet William, and viburnum to fill out those areas.
This year (it was yesterday as I am writing this), the friend of one of our family members who called our backyard a sanctuary, gave us four flats of Impatiens and begonias in reds, oranges, and pinks. Today, I planted all of those plants which has added a great deal of additional color to our yard. We had three double hanging metal plant holders that already had full baskets of pink Impatiens plants, and then with the other blooming plants—yellow snap dragons, white hydrangas, and pink blossoms on several other bushes—our place has truly taken on the feel of a sanctuary.
Our yard is and always has been a “work-in-progress.” It was never planned; we are never finished with it; and we never stop purchasing more plants—some that we have no place for—every year. But when you enter the backyard now, with the songs of the many birds, the sounds of the water from our pond, and the incredible smell of fresh air, it is truly a joy to behold. It is our sanctuary, our special place, an area of safety, solitude, and serenity.
-----
At LearningMeditation, there is a fun, short essay, “Sanctuary-Safe,” on how to build a sanctuary within your home. It is similar to what we have done in our backyard, however, it is inside. Just a short, pleasant read.
At About.com, under the subheading, “Interior Decorating,” there is another brief essay, “Create Your Own Private Retreat in Your Home---Escape to a Comforting Space You Really Love.” Here, Coral Nafie writes about all the essentials needed to create that special place. It is a longer essay, but it certainly discusses the importance, the needs, and the requirements for an interior space.
At @zinearticles.com, the essay is entitled, “Creating a Personal Sanctuary - To Moat, Or NOT to Moat,” in which DeAnna Radaj discusses a number of requirements (and possible elements) for an outside sanctuary. This is, by far, the best essay I have discovered on creating an outdoor sanctuary.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
We have lived in our house for over thirty years, and for every one of those years, we have done something—mostly add plants, bushes, or trees—to our yard.
Our three-fourths of an acre was but a field when we moved in, and we were the second or third house constructed when the rear plat to our subdivision was built. Because we were among the first, we selected the largest piece of property on a cull-de-sac so that our children would have a large, safe area in which to play. Being on a cull-de-sac, the front of our property is only about 50-feet wide, but the rear lot line covers a full two properties plus it touches a drainage ditch in one far corner—a lot line somewhere between 250 and 300 feet in length.
There were no trees, so our first goal was to plant them. Our intention was to frame our property in trees rather than use fences, and in the beginning that worked well. A couple of problems, however, developed. First, the right of way behind our house which contained all the electric, telephone, and cables for television was a drainage area for all the houses built behind us and at least a half dozen others. The excess rain from all of those properties came through our right of way—part of our property—to reach that drainage ditch. When it rains, it fills.
That has never been a major problem, however, when we tried growing blue spruce trees on the inside of the right-of-way, they were dying quickly from too much water, and we immediately moved them to both of the edges of our yard that lead to the right-of-way. Then we tried lilacs, and the same thing happened, and we had to move them to another portion of the side of the yard leading to the ditch. When we tried forsythia, the same thing happened a third time, and we had to pull them all out before they died. Our final effort was to put in 50 or 60 Russian Olive saplings, and that worked. The saplings have grown into large trees along the inside of the right-of-way, and nearly every year of the 30 here, we have had to trim or remove them.
All of our early efforts were designed to provide shade as well as some privacy from the four homes that border ours. In the back, our property is now enclosed by blue spruce, 20-foot high lilac bushes, and Russian olives. Inside the Russian olives we have planted arbor vitae to add to the privacy along the back right-of-way.
In addition to the quest for privacy, we have always had a large garden. The garden was enclosed by landscaping ties, and we used chicken wire to keep out the rabbits and woodchucks.
We have always used annuals to add color and variety to our other plantings. What has happened—and it is particularly evident this year—is that because of our early interest in shade trees, we now have an enormous amount of shade provided by oak, maple, and pine trees as well as an enormous bradford pear tree.
For many years, my goal has always been to reduce the amount of grass I have had to mow. So, using cypress mulch, I have continued to mulch in areas and build hosta gardens or areas for our birdbaths or other bushes and plants. Along the back right-of-way, I used mulch around all the Russian olives and arbor vitae so I would never have to weed-whack. Then we added lamb’s ear as well as Japanese spurge (pachysandra) as ground cover.
All of the people occupying the homes surrounding our property have added fences around their yards. To fence in our yard meant that we would simply have to add to their fences, include a small one along the rear ditch, and then, from their fences we could add one that came up to the sides of our house. We made the final one a white picket fence, and I added a small cover over the gate, so that when you enter our yard on either side, you have to come under this small portico. Thus, our backyard is now fully enclosed by fences with gates on either side.
Because of the shade from the trees we planted early on, it has been difficult to keep grass growing in many areas. On one side, under a silver maple tree, we made a large hosta garden with over 30 different kinds of hosta as well as ferns and other ground covers.
One of our sons found a brick pile, and we brought home two large loads of bricks in our truck. From those, we fashioned brick walkways from the front of our house to the backyard (under the porticos), and around the two front blue spruce trees (one on each side of our lot), we built a small brick wall to enclose circular hosta gardens around those spruce trees.
We have added a rear barn that measures 10' w x 20' l x 14' h, and we bought an 8-foot in diameter gazebo from the Amish who came in and installed it.
When I put in the patio in front of our pond, which my son and I built and which includes three small waterfalls, I buried the dirt from the patio foundation in the garden, so I changed the landscaping ties to 6" x 6" treated timbers to box in our two 10' x 15' plots. Then around the patio, I used our annual accumulation of leaf mulch to landscape the area and added hydranga, sweet William, and viburnum to fill out those areas.
This year (it was yesterday as I am writing this), the friend of one of our family members who called our backyard a sanctuary, gave us four flats of Impatiens and begonias in reds, oranges, and pinks. Today, I planted all of those plants which has added a great deal of additional color to our yard. We had three double hanging metal plant holders that already had full baskets of pink Impatiens plants, and then with the other blooming plants—yellow snap dragons, white hydrangas, and pink blossoms on several other bushes—our place has truly taken on the feel of a sanctuary.
Our yard is and always has been a “work-in-progress.” It was never planned; we are never finished with it; and we never stop purchasing more plants—some that we have no place for—every year. But when you enter the backyard now, with the songs of the many birds, the sounds of the water from our pond, and the incredible smell of fresh air, it is truly a joy to behold. It is our sanctuary, our special place, an area of safety, solitude, and serenity.
-----
At LearningMeditation, there is a fun, short essay, “Sanctuary-Safe,” on how to build a sanctuary within your home. It is similar to what we have done in our backyard, however, it is inside. Just a short, pleasant read.
At About.com, under the subheading, “Interior Decorating,” there is another brief essay, “Create Your Own Private Retreat in Your Home---Escape to a Comforting Space You Really Love.” Here, Coral Nafie writes about all the essentials needed to create that special place. It is a longer essay, but it certainly discusses the importance, the needs, and the requirements for an interior space.
At @zinearticles.com, the essay is entitled, “Creating a Personal Sanctuary - To Moat, Or NOT to Moat,” in which DeAnna Radaj discusses a number of requirements (and possible elements) for an outside sanctuary. This is, by far, the best essay I have discovered on creating an outdoor sanctuary.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Following the rules
Those of you familiar with my essays and especially my books know that I am a rules-based person. After my first collection of essays, And Then Some: Essays to Entertain, Motivate, and Inspire, I immediately wrote the book, Public Speaking Rules: All You Need for a Great Speech. I followed that rules-based book with a book entitled, SMOERs: Self-Motivation, Optimism, Encouragement Rules. As if that wasn’t enough, I wrote an additional rules-based book entitled, Relationship Rules: For Long-term Happiness, Security, and Commitment. With all of this as a preface, it is little wonder that I would be attracted to a New York Times article by Jane E. Brody entitled, “Rules Worth Following, for Everyone’s Sake” (“Personal Health,” 02-02-10, p. D7).
Now, I am familiar with Brody’s essays in the science section of the Times every Tuesday, and I have cited her numerous times in my textbooks, because she often writes about aspects of interpersonal relationships, verbal and nonverbal communication, and other facets of human behavior—all topics I discuss in my textbooks.
In this essay I want to cover the same topics she covers in her essay. I am deeply indebted to her for the ideas in this essay, and I give her full credit for them.
Brody’s column is based on “a slender, easy-to-digest new book called Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual (137 pages, $11 retail, $5.50 at Amazon) by Michael Pollan.” Pollan is a professor of science journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. Kristine Hale, in her four-star review of Pollan’s book at Amazon.com, writes, “Pollan takes the essential and fascinating information that he wrote about in his previous book [In Defense of Food: An Eaters Manifesto (256 pages, $7.50 at Amazon)] and simmers it down into a succinct (the book is basically 70 half pages long) ‘manual’ of rules for eating. While this book retains some of the bones of its predecessor, it is by no means a Cliff's Notes version. This manual is essential reading all on its own.”
In her review of the book, Norma Lehmeierhartie tells how the Pollan book is organized: “The book is divided into three parts and has 64 chapters or rules. The following will give you a good idea of what the book is about: Part I, What should I eat? Includes such chapters as ‘Don't eat anything your great-grandmother wouldn't recognize as food,’ ‘avoid food products that contain more than five ingredients,’ and ‘avoid foods that contain high-fructose corn syrup.’
Part II, What kind of food should I eat? includes, ‘Eat mostly plants, especially leaves,’ ‘eat your colors,’ and ‘the whiter the bread, the sooner you will be dead.’ Part III, How should I eat? includes: ‘pay more, eat less,’ ‘eat less,’ and ‘limit your snacks to unprocessed plant food.’”
Jesse Kornbluth, in his review of Pollan’s book, offers samples of some of his rules: “What does Pollan tell you in these pages? Here's a sample:
--- ‘Don't eat anything your great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food.’
--- ‘Don't eat anything with more than five ingredients, or ingredients you can't pronounce.’
---- ‘Don't eat anything that won't eventually rot...There are exceptions --- honey --- but as a rule, things like Twinkies that never go bad aren't food.’
--- ‘Always leave the table a little hungry.'
--- ‘Eat meals together, at regular meal times.’
--- ‘Don't eat breakfast cereals that change the color of the milk.’
There are three types of people who will not appreciate Pollan’s book. First, those who have read his previous books will find this one redundant. More than that, it is simply a distillation of and recycled verbatim from his previous book, In Defense of Food, referred to above. Second, if you are already into food and nutrition, you will find much of what Pollan says, common sense—maybe even, elementary. The third type of person who can skip this book and his previous one are those who simply adopt Pollan’s approach, which he summarized in just seven words: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” Obesity solved! Diet-related ailments eliminated!
There is only one reason I have provided these quotations from reviews of Pollan’s book. I have not read it myself, and I am dependent on the Amazon reviews and Brody for their interpretations and insights.
Quoting from Brody’s column, “The new book provides the practical steps [for following his approach], starting with advice to avoid ‘processed concoctions,’ no matter what the label may claim (‘no trans fats,’ ‘low cholesterol,’ ‘less sugar,’ ‘reduced sodium,’ ‘high in antioxidants,’ and so forth).” If you read his book, you will become accustomed to his cute way of phrasing his ideas. For example, “If it came from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t.”
“Avoid foods advertised on television.. . . Those who sell the most healthful foods—vegetables, fruits and whole grains—rarely have a budget to support national advertising.” If you shop in a supermarket, “shop only the periphery of the store and avoid the center aisles laden with processed foods”. . . and “Never get your fuel from the same place your car does,” Pollan writes.
Other valuable rules include, “If you’re not paying attention to what you’re eating, you’re likely to eat more than you realize,” or“Stop eating before you’re full,” “There is nothing wrong with special occasion foods, as long as every day is not a special occasion,” and the rule I love the best is Pollan’s “S policy”: “No snacks, no seconds, no sweets—except on days that begin with the letter S.” There is clearly a reason why I’m rules-oriented—don’t you wish everyone was?
-----
If you think following rules is a new concept, or if you think rules are a modern idea, or if you think old rules do not apply, check out this web site: PlugInID.com, and the essay there entitled “21 Rules to Live Your Life - Dokkodo.” “Dokkodo” is a small book written by Miyamoto Musashi a week before he died in 1645. 1645!!!!! Read these 21 rules. They are terrific guidelines by which to form a very good life. Just the first two examples: 1. Accept everything just the way it is, and 2. Do not seek pleasure for its own sake. Also, this is not a simple listing; all rules are explained and discussed as well.
If you want an entertaining, delightful, and challenging adventure, look at: “Life’s Rules of Thumb (and other quotes)” and you will discover an array of over 85 great quotations. Some of the quotations (to offer but a mere sampling) that I liked include, “If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees. If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children.” Confucius. Or, “People are basically honest. And they're even more honest when you watch them.” Alan C. "Ace" Greenberg. Or, “Life at work is like a tree full of monkeys, all on different limbs at different levels. Some monkeys are climbing up, some down. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but arseholes.” Anonymous.
You get just a fraction of the pleasure here that you will get by going to this web site.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Now, I am familiar with Brody’s essays in the science section of the Times every Tuesday, and I have cited her numerous times in my textbooks, because she often writes about aspects of interpersonal relationships, verbal and nonverbal communication, and other facets of human behavior—all topics I discuss in my textbooks.
In this essay I want to cover the same topics she covers in her essay. I am deeply indebted to her for the ideas in this essay, and I give her full credit for them.
Brody’s column is based on “a slender, easy-to-digest new book called Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual (137 pages, $11 retail, $5.50 at Amazon) by Michael Pollan.” Pollan is a professor of science journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. Kristine Hale, in her four-star review of Pollan’s book at Amazon.com, writes, “Pollan takes the essential and fascinating information that he wrote about in his previous book [In Defense of Food: An Eaters Manifesto (256 pages, $7.50 at Amazon)] and simmers it down into a succinct (the book is basically 70 half pages long) ‘manual’ of rules for eating. While this book retains some of the bones of its predecessor, it is by no means a Cliff's Notes version. This manual is essential reading all on its own.”
In her review of the book, Norma Lehmeierhartie tells how the Pollan book is organized: “The book is divided into three parts and has 64 chapters or rules. The following will give you a good idea of what the book is about: Part I, What should I eat? Includes such chapters as ‘Don't eat anything your great-grandmother wouldn't recognize as food,’ ‘avoid food products that contain more than five ingredients,’ and ‘avoid foods that contain high-fructose corn syrup.’
Part II, What kind of food should I eat? includes, ‘Eat mostly plants, especially leaves,’ ‘eat your colors,’ and ‘the whiter the bread, the sooner you will be dead.’ Part III, How should I eat? includes: ‘pay more, eat less,’ ‘eat less,’ and ‘limit your snacks to unprocessed plant food.’”
Jesse Kornbluth, in his review of Pollan’s book, offers samples of some of his rules: “What does Pollan tell you in these pages? Here's a sample:
--- ‘Don't eat anything your great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food.’
--- ‘Don't eat anything with more than five ingredients, or ingredients you can't pronounce.’
---- ‘Don't eat anything that won't eventually rot...There are exceptions --- honey --- but as a rule, things like Twinkies that never go bad aren't food.’
--- ‘Always leave the table a little hungry.'
--- ‘Eat meals together, at regular meal times.’
--- ‘Don't eat breakfast cereals that change the color of the milk.’
There are three types of people who will not appreciate Pollan’s book. First, those who have read his previous books will find this one redundant. More than that, it is simply a distillation of and recycled verbatim from his previous book, In Defense of Food, referred to above. Second, if you are already into food and nutrition, you will find much of what Pollan says, common sense—maybe even, elementary. The third type of person who can skip this book and his previous one are those who simply adopt Pollan’s approach, which he summarized in just seven words: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” Obesity solved! Diet-related ailments eliminated!
There is only one reason I have provided these quotations from reviews of Pollan’s book. I have not read it myself, and I am dependent on the Amazon reviews and Brody for their interpretations and insights.
Quoting from Brody’s column, “The new book provides the practical steps [for following his approach], starting with advice to avoid ‘processed concoctions,’ no matter what the label may claim (‘no trans fats,’ ‘low cholesterol,’ ‘less sugar,’ ‘reduced sodium,’ ‘high in antioxidants,’ and so forth).” If you read his book, you will become accustomed to his cute way of phrasing his ideas. For example, “If it came from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t.”
“Avoid foods advertised on television.. . . Those who sell the most healthful foods—vegetables, fruits and whole grains—rarely have a budget to support national advertising.” If you shop in a supermarket, “shop only the periphery of the store and avoid the center aisles laden with processed foods”. . . and “Never get your fuel from the same place your car does,” Pollan writes.
Other valuable rules include, “If you’re not paying attention to what you’re eating, you’re likely to eat more than you realize,” or“Stop eating before you’re full,” “There is nothing wrong with special occasion foods, as long as every day is not a special occasion,” and the rule I love the best is Pollan’s “S policy”: “No snacks, no seconds, no sweets—except on days that begin with the letter S.” There is clearly a reason why I’m rules-oriented—don’t you wish everyone was?
-----
If you think following rules is a new concept, or if you think rules are a modern idea, or if you think old rules do not apply, check out this web site: PlugInID.com, and the essay there entitled “21 Rules to Live Your Life - Dokkodo.” “Dokkodo” is a small book written by Miyamoto Musashi a week before he died in 1645. 1645!!!!! Read these 21 rules. They are terrific guidelines by which to form a very good life. Just the first two examples: 1. Accept everything just the way it is, and 2. Do not seek pleasure for its own sake. Also, this is not a simple listing; all rules are explained and discussed as well.
If you want an entertaining, delightful, and challenging adventure, look at: “Life’s Rules of Thumb (and other quotes)” and you will discover an array of over 85 great quotations. Some of the quotations (to offer but a mere sampling) that I liked include, “If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees. If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children.” Confucius. Or, “People are basically honest. And they're even more honest when you watch them.” Alan C. "Ace" Greenberg. Or, “Life at work is like a tree full of monkeys, all on different limbs at different levels. Some monkeys are climbing up, some down. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but arseholes.” Anonymous.
You get just a fraction of the pleasure here that you will get by going to this web site.
-----
Copyright July, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Self-identity is a base for everything else you do in life
Early in the basic-communication course we used two activities in the small performance sections specifically designed to awaken students to themselves—a confirmation of their life and existence. The first had them sit in the middle of a circle with the rest of their small group of 15 to 20 students sitting around them. They were to remain silent as they turned their chair to face each of the surrounding students while each one, separately, “reflected” their impression of the student in the center. Although occasionally a student would say something that could be interpreted negatively by the student in the center, most comments were not only positive but encouraging even flattering as well. Student reports of this exercise were always positive, and as a result, use of the activity was continued for more than twenty years.
The second activity was labeled the “Interview-Introduction-Name Exercise.” Students were first labeled A or B moving clockwise in a large circle around the room. To begin the interviews, A’s were to interview B’s who were seated to their left to find out as much information as they could so that they could introduce this student to the class. Then, all students were to turn fully around in their seats to form new dyads (groups of two). Now, B’s were to interview a new A with the same goal in mind—so they could introduce A to the class. In this way, once the process was complete, all students would be able to introduce the student on their left, and we could proceed around the circle learning the names of all students----repeated by everyone as introductions continued. These interviews gave students an identity, made them stand out as unique, and put some distance between them and the others in the class. It is an outstanding and effective means for learning the names of all students. (I had teaching assistants—especially those who taught two or three sections of the course—take notes as the sequence proceeded, so they could review the names before coming to class the next time.)
Now, you must understand that these two activities occurred within the context of a basic, required, speech-communication course. I say that because in such circumstances, some students could be inclined not to take the course seriously; thus, whatever activities engaged in might not be perceived as significant, worthwhile, valuable, or relevant. The overall design and purpose of these two activities—along with what followed in the course---served as a metaphor for life.
The point of the activities—beyond simply beginning the course with a couple of startling exercises—has to do with identity. Both exercises are designed to be confirming: offering students proof or verification that they are valuable, appreciated, respected, and important. Experiencing this confirmation of life—whether in class or other places—is a prelude to everything else they will learn and do. Once they have found this feeling, they will then not only be ready to discover but express their uniqueness as individuals.
The comments that follow on identity come from a book called The Identity Code (Random House, 2005). In that book, Laurence Ackerman explains the various ways in which identity is the foundation of our lives and how, with it as the foundation, it can be a better and more productive world. The basic purpose of the book is to convince readers they have value in the world simply as a result of being who they are.
When students have a sense of who they are, they begin to discover why they are here. It is as if they have found a natural gyroscope that guides them to a place or position from which to take charge of their lives. It is on the strength of that gyroscope that their decisions will be wise, and the outcomes—no matter what challenges and hardships they face—will be the right ones.
All the activities that follow from these first two give students real opportunities to make important decisions and derive solutions. The lectures are designed not just to underscore, reinforce, and buttress what goes on in the performance sections but empower students by revealing their potential, It is, indeed, these decisions and solutions which provide clear separation between themselves and other students in the class. Because they can observe the decisions and solutions of other classmates, all students are able to step back and see, really see, themselves in relationship to others. How are they different? How are they the same? It is the answers to these questions that allow them to set the boundaries that mark out turf belonging to them.
What the basic course is designed to give students—and as a corollary, what they truly need in life—is independence. Independence is the ability to think and act on their own and in their own best interests, despite what others may expect of them. By defining themselves as separate from others, they find their own integrity as individuals. It gives them a place to begin forming ideas, framing beliefs, and discerning attitudes that are uniquely their own. In moments of great intensity like when they are under the pressure of deadlines, experiencing conflicting demands from various courses, trying to deal with the competing demands of family, friends, relationship partners, and their classes, it allows them to make the necessary decisions based on who they are and who they are not.
Standing alone strengthens students. There will always be unfamiliar emotions, misgivings, and resistance, but when students make their decisions and follow through with solutions, there will also be exhilaration and hope. Facing up to initial discomfort, even aloneness, is a definite and specific sign of progress. When students stay with it, it is their passage to discovery. It is part of the development of their powers as individuals in their own right.
Life offers many opportunities for making decisions and deriving solutions, but it doesn’t often offer the similar opportunities to others of our same age and status. When we can compare our decisions and solutions with relevant, immediate others and even embrace, adapt, and adopt strategies and use them as our own in a helpful, positive, encouraging, and hopeful environment, the rewards are often instantaneous and valuable.
There is no easy path when it comes to unleashing the remarkable energy that one’s identity contains. Finding it, however, is just a start. As people understand their unique capacities and live according to them, they become happy being who they are. As Ackerman writes in the final chapter of his book, “A Framework for Living,” “Consider your identity your source of life. It makes you vibrant, wise, agile, powerful, even playful. It is the sun within you, whose energy need never die.”
-----
Yes, it’s an advertisement for a course. That said, the essay by Karl Perera, “Personal Identity,” at the website, More-Self-esteem.com is a very good one because he not only outlines the seven components of self-esteem, but he carefully shows “How . . . your personal identity [can] help you improve your self esteem.” Great specifics here.
“Self Identity and Memory” is the title of this very long, highly technical, heavily documented, well-written (but academic) paper that explains exactly why self identity is so important. You can access this paper by John F. Kihlstrom, Jennifer S. Beer of the University of California at Berkeley, and Stanley B. Klein of the University of California at Santa Barbara at their website---accessed by clicking on their names (above). Their research was supported by a number of research grants, and an edited version of this chapter appeared in M.R. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 68-90). New York: Guilford Press, 2002.
-----
Copyright June, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
The second activity was labeled the “Interview-Introduction-Name Exercise.” Students were first labeled A or B moving clockwise in a large circle around the room. To begin the interviews, A’s were to interview B’s who were seated to their left to find out as much information as they could so that they could introduce this student to the class. Then, all students were to turn fully around in their seats to form new dyads (groups of two). Now, B’s were to interview a new A with the same goal in mind—so they could introduce A to the class. In this way, once the process was complete, all students would be able to introduce the student on their left, and we could proceed around the circle learning the names of all students----repeated by everyone as introductions continued. These interviews gave students an identity, made them stand out as unique, and put some distance between them and the others in the class. It is an outstanding and effective means for learning the names of all students. (I had teaching assistants—especially those who taught two or three sections of the course—take notes as the sequence proceeded, so they could review the names before coming to class the next time.)
Now, you must understand that these two activities occurred within the context of a basic, required, speech-communication course. I say that because in such circumstances, some students could be inclined not to take the course seriously; thus, whatever activities engaged in might not be perceived as significant, worthwhile, valuable, or relevant. The overall design and purpose of these two activities—along with what followed in the course---served as a metaphor for life.
The point of the activities—beyond simply beginning the course with a couple of startling exercises—has to do with identity. Both exercises are designed to be confirming: offering students proof or verification that they are valuable, appreciated, respected, and important. Experiencing this confirmation of life—whether in class or other places—is a prelude to everything else they will learn and do. Once they have found this feeling, they will then not only be ready to discover but express their uniqueness as individuals.
The comments that follow on identity come from a book called The Identity Code (Random House, 2005). In that book, Laurence Ackerman explains the various ways in which identity is the foundation of our lives and how, with it as the foundation, it can be a better and more productive world. The basic purpose of the book is to convince readers they have value in the world simply as a result of being who they are.
When students have a sense of who they are, they begin to discover why they are here. It is as if they have found a natural gyroscope that guides them to a place or position from which to take charge of their lives. It is on the strength of that gyroscope that their decisions will be wise, and the outcomes—no matter what challenges and hardships they face—will be the right ones.
All the activities that follow from these first two give students real opportunities to make important decisions and derive solutions. The lectures are designed not just to underscore, reinforce, and buttress what goes on in the performance sections but empower students by revealing their potential, It is, indeed, these decisions and solutions which provide clear separation between themselves and other students in the class. Because they can observe the decisions and solutions of other classmates, all students are able to step back and see, really see, themselves in relationship to others. How are they different? How are they the same? It is the answers to these questions that allow them to set the boundaries that mark out turf belonging to them.
What the basic course is designed to give students—and as a corollary, what they truly need in life—is independence. Independence is the ability to think and act on their own and in their own best interests, despite what others may expect of them. By defining themselves as separate from others, they find their own integrity as individuals. It gives them a place to begin forming ideas, framing beliefs, and discerning attitudes that are uniquely their own. In moments of great intensity like when they are under the pressure of deadlines, experiencing conflicting demands from various courses, trying to deal with the competing demands of family, friends, relationship partners, and their classes, it allows them to make the necessary decisions based on who they are and who they are not.
Standing alone strengthens students. There will always be unfamiliar emotions, misgivings, and resistance, but when students make their decisions and follow through with solutions, there will also be exhilaration and hope. Facing up to initial discomfort, even aloneness, is a definite and specific sign of progress. When students stay with it, it is their passage to discovery. It is part of the development of their powers as individuals in their own right.
Life offers many opportunities for making decisions and deriving solutions, but it doesn’t often offer the similar opportunities to others of our same age and status. When we can compare our decisions and solutions with relevant, immediate others and even embrace, adapt, and adopt strategies and use them as our own in a helpful, positive, encouraging, and hopeful environment, the rewards are often instantaneous and valuable.
There is no easy path when it comes to unleashing the remarkable energy that one’s identity contains. Finding it, however, is just a start. As people understand their unique capacities and live according to them, they become happy being who they are. As Ackerman writes in the final chapter of his book, “A Framework for Living,” “Consider your identity your source of life. It makes you vibrant, wise, agile, powerful, even playful. It is the sun within you, whose energy need never die.”
-----
Yes, it’s an advertisement for a course. That said, the essay by Karl Perera, “Personal Identity,” at the website, More-Self-esteem.com is a very good one because he not only outlines the seven components of self-esteem, but he carefully shows “How . . . your personal identity [can] help you improve your self esteem.” Great specifics here.
“Self Identity and Memory” is the title of this very long, highly technical, heavily documented, well-written (but academic) paper that explains exactly why self identity is so important. You can access this paper by John F. Kihlstrom, Jennifer S. Beer of the University of California at Berkeley, and Stanley B. Klein of the University of California at Santa Barbara at their website---accessed by clicking on their names (above). Their research was supported by a number of research grants, and an edited version of this chapter appeared in M.R. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 68-90). New York: Guilford Press, 2002.
-----
Copyright June, 2010, by And Then Some Publishing, LLC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
