Where the day takes you

A movie came out 20 years ago called where the day takes you.  It was a stream of consciousness movie about teenagers who had nothing really to live for.  They were merely drifting through life.  It showed them staying home from school most days of the week.  They would meet at one or the other's house to  smoke marijuana or to shoot heroine into their veins.  Several of them died.  The point of the movie was to show the absolute dejection that modern (ca. 1994) youth felt.

Today I was in my favorite Starbucks getting my usual hot chai tea latte.  I noticed a sign that was advertising some of their specialty coffees.  It read: Refreshing. Everywhere your day takes you.  My immediate thought was the association of the expression to the title of the movie that showed the utter listlessness of our youth.  But, then, I realized the sign was about me or whoever would be drinking this specialty coffee.  Whew, what a relief.  I knew I wasn't listless or dejected nor was anyone I knew.  The point of the sign was to convey that you could drink it now and later and any other time you needed a lift.  Help for your day was a sip away.  But, then, that's the same message as the movie, right?

Well, I could be depressed by drinking that specialty coffee.  Fortunately, I don't drink coffee, and my day takes me to work every day where I have a very definite purpose for being there.  I'm not drifting and dejected.  Life could be better, but it could be a whole lot worse for sure.  My nights rejuvenate me for the morning.  I wake refreshed, no matter where my day goes.  And it goes to a place I really like to work.  And it goes to my phone's MP3 app at night that plays Up on the Ridge, Come a Little Closer, Feel that Fire, Pretty Amazing Grace, Everything I Do, With or Without You, Run, Run, Run, I Hear the Sound of Your Voice, and many others selections that refresh me.  And, my day goes by the place of my dreams, too.  It goes there often.  And, it's refreshing every time I am taken there.

I'm going there now, as a matter of fact.  Refreshing. Every time I'm taken there.

Take me back.  Refreshing!!!

The discipline of success

The New England Patriots played this afternoon.  The score went back and forth throughout the game, so it was unclear near the end who was going to win.  Brady was his usual self - always poised, always positive, always disciplined, always working to effect a win.  The Patriots  happened to have the ball in the waning seconds of the game.  They needed a touchdown to win; a field goal wouldn't win the game.  They basically had to travel 80% of the length of the field to win.

So Brady - always poised, always positive, always disciplined, never quitting, had time to throw about 5 or six passes if they could make a couple of first downs .  He navigated downfield on 3 passes and then had only enough time for about four last passes.  The first one was exactly on target but dropped.  The second one was perfectly thrown to the receiver's hands, but he dropped the ball too.  A lot of quarterbacks would enter desperation mode at that point, but not Brady.  The third pass was completed for a first down and a few yards extra.  So, with only enough time for one pass and about 20% of the field in front of him, Brady dropped back to pass - poised, positive, disciplined, and working for the win.  The ball was exactly on target for the fourth time, right in the hands of the receiver in the corner of the end zone.  All the receiver had to do was to hold on to the ball and take two small steps in bounds before running out of the end zone for a Patriot win.

Oh yes, he did. Game over.  Patriots won.  Lovely, I couldn't help but let out a whoop.  

Brady epitomizes for me what it takes to be successful.  He has a fantastic work ethic, but there's more to it than that.  He knows that with proper execution the ball goes exactly where you throw it, and receivers catch it time after time.  Every practice is about execution.  Every play leads to the next well executed play, one after another, in order to have a lead,  and every touchdown leads to the next because they are executed the same way.  I hope that is the way I will be viewed after my record is complete - poised, positive, disciplined, and always working to effect success.

Even Brady loses now and then.  But no one really remembers those games since there are so many of the other kind.  I count on people looking at the big picture for me as well, seeing four qualities that saw me through lean times and characterized the many good times.

Just looking around

When it comes to capturing language in its natural form, you really have to be a fly on the wall in order to capture it.  I am reminded of the early work of William Labov when it comes to trying to find out what the language of the people really is.  He would go to department stores like Macy's and ask questions.  After the people he was asking left, he would record their answers.  By so doing, he captured some interesting results and made a name for himself.   Some recognize him as the father of sociolinguistics.

This last week I was eating at a restaurant I had eaten in only one other time.  I was eating alone, so I decided to notice who was at the 9 tables immediately around me.  One table had a group of 5 men having lunch.  They were all in their 70s, I would say.  Their conversation flowed rather well among the 5.  There were never any long pauses or awkward silences.  They talked of trips they had taken for the most part.  Next to their table was a couple of women.  One looked to be in her early 30s, the other in her 50s.  They also were engaged with each other for the whole time I was there.  They talked of their children and the schools they were going to.

Then, there was the young man in the corner.  He was in his mid to upper 20s,  He sat at his table alone, but he was using his phone to read material (news perhaps) and to communicate by texting.  Next to him was a table of 3 women, one of whom was deaf.  The entire time the language was in silent signing, but it went on without a break.  At the table next to mine were 3 men, one in his 40s probably, the other two were younger around 30 maybe.  They spoke of their work and the people they worked with the whole time.  There were some pauses for topic changes or extensions, but nothing awkward or lengthy.

Only one table had a mixed gender couple.  The two looked like they were husband and wife in that they seemed extremely comfortable with each other.  Silences were the order of the day for them.  It didn't seem to bother them too much.  Some of the literature on mixed gender conversations concludes that women do the conversational work in such situations.   But, at this table the woman  was equally as silent as the man.  Probably they conversed about 60 or 70% of the time.  But, they had some notable amounts of time without talking.

I wish I could sit around and observe 100 such restaurants.  Then I would write up the results.  I would bet there would be some surprises.  If I were to write my hypothesis after only one visit to the research den, however, I would say that men and women talk equally as much in same sex conversations.  The big trouble is with mixed sex talking.

I would love to see the transcript of the table conversations between men and women.  I would almost bet that the conversations derive from the personalities of the conversants and are not often guided by topics and interruptions like the literature on such conversations would have people believe.  I wish that would be true because then it would spur the psychology community to look more closely at personality and at its influence on mixed gender conversation.  I also wish that would be true because then compatibility could be more easily gauged between people and two people would have much more to say to each other.

Looking to be twice struck

I was eating supper at Wendy's.  At the table diagonal to me, a young man was speaking to a woman twice his age.  I couldn't tell if the woman was his mother, but the young man was at great ease with her.  The proximity of our tables was close, so I overheard every word the young man said.  He spoke about several subjects, and in typical male conversational style, he spoke of things that were not personal in nature, but of things that were interesting to him in his external world, such as the plot of a novel and the interesting parts of an episode of a TV show he was following.  The woman was kind enough to show interest.  Whether or not she truly was interested is a different story.  But, she at least was kind enough to indulge the young man.

I dwelt on a couple of thoughts while the young man was talking (and talking).  The first was that when the young man was talking about the novel he found interesting, I was listening to what he thought was of interest to him.  I am in the middle of writing a novel myself, so I am keenly aware that people have a variety of points of attraction.  I wanted to know if what I had written would be of interest to this young man.

I say I am "writing" a novel.  Well, my linguist friend often chides me because he says it is so ironic that I have been saying that writing and reading are disappearing, yet I continue using that mode of communication to entertain and inform.  Point taken - but this novel is different.  I am using 3 different modes in its construction.  We'll see how it goes when it is finished.

The second thought was that the older woman really listened well to the young man.  She didn't judge his comments, which she easily could have done because his comments were value driven.  She participated in the conversation with him, extending what he said with interesting comments of her own.

Wow, do I miss that.  Intermittently I have a conversation in which people participate with me or I with them.  It happens rarely, and I miss it.  I tire of the judgmental, many times accusatory, conversations that make up the conversations outside of work.

There was a time not that long ago when I anticipated with great enjoyment the conversations I would have outside of work, conversations with laughter, excitement, and energy.  I am always looking to the horizon for the storm that will bring the lightning that strikes twice in that same exact spot.  I've heard that lightning does that.

Enjoying a half hour

Oh yes, the rain arrived today.  And, it arrived at the time of day the forecaster said it would arrive.  I sat on my covered patio to soak in the sensory experience.  The occasional rumble enhanced the experience of hearing the rain come down hard on the grass, the fence, the roof, and the sides of the house.  The fringe of the patio on three sides became wet a little at a time, and I felt the mist when the rain gusted.  The refreshing aroma energized me and calmed me.  I enjoyed the half hour or so I was able to sit and take in the tranquility of these beautiful moments.  I had to leave my patio for work even though the rain continued falling without me.

And this literal half hour reminded so much of the figurative half hour of a time not so long ago that refreshed my life.  And while I know that I can't revisit that time, I know repetition can and often does happen.  In my literal world, next weekend is predicted to bring the same rainy experience.  Oh, for such a prediction in my figurative world... trusting it will.

The current forecast

Rain is coming.  At least so says the weather forecaster for the news.  He began saying three days ago that a front over the northeast part of the U.S. was headed our way, and that should it stay together, it could bring a little rain to the area.  At the time, the front was bringing an early snow to the states of Colorado and Wyoming.   The next day, the forecaster said Yellowstone had received almost a foot of snow, and the front would hold together for our area.  Yesterday, the forecaster then said that there was a 100% chance of rain for our area, maybe up to two inches.

Today, everyone is preparing for the rain event.  It is supposed to last about 12 hours and dump an inch to an inch and a half of rain.  This much advance notice allows for preparation so that nothing gets damaged..  But, it's interesting how a forecaster can now track rain 4 days away.

I know that no one can see around a corner, but sometimes the events in life are predictable. The origins for the events  come from the same place and head our way.  At least, I guess, we can prepare for them.  The issues that bring the rains of life our way, seem never to change.  We can predict the same behaviors, the same speeches, the same tirades, the same duration of time.  But, at least there is preparation time so that nothing gets damaged.

Incidentally, the forecaster today said that he saw some interesting weather developing in the Sea of Japan.  Resulting weather from that area is a week away.  And coincidentally, Thanksgiving is the next holiday.  Resulting weather from that holiday is something I am already preparing for in order to minimize the damage.  Rain is coming, for sure.

Keystone

The Romans were innovators in many areas of life.  But, one of the main areas was their architecture.  The arch in particular allowed them to save  materials and maintain strength for building above the arch.  The way the Romans would build the arch would be to build the arch from wood first, then surround the wood frame with brick.  The last stone to be put in place would be the stone in the middle of the top of the arch.  That stone was called the keystone.  When the keystone was put in place, the weight that would be built above it would be distributed evenly down the two sides of the arch.

Events happen to us all the time.  Somehow we distribute the weight of the event evenly throughout our way of thinking.  Accomplishments are great and we react with pride, but our experience tells us that there is a downside to every accomplishment.  So, the weight of the accomplishment is evenly distributed and we can appreciate the moment without thinking too highly of ourselves.  The opposite is true, too.  When devastation comes, we know that soon events will turn around.  We just have to ride out the storm.  So, the weight of the devastation is evenly distributed and we are not thrown into a spiral of depression.

And, what is the keystone in our lives that helps in distributing those events evenly?  The arch containing the keystone is usually a person who is in the center of our activity.  As we build life above us, this person bears the weight with us and puts it in proper perspective for us, letting us know how to respond, or what the downside is, or reminding us of the good times or benefits we will receive at a future time.  I am so proud to have had a person like this who made me a much better person.  When I have no keystone in my arch of events, I am not nearly as good or nearly as happy.  No one is there to even things out. I am keeping faith that I will return to being the best person I can be soon, that the keystone of my future arches won't be cracked or missing.

Moments of paradise

I was watching a Kenny Chesney special on GAC.  The man has an inspiring story.  He really never had anything given to him.  He earned it all.  Of course, people now remember him for being the entertainer of the decade in counrty music.

But, for 20 years he worked his heart out to be on top of his game.  He really never had the support of the established Nashville music community despite sell-out football stadium crowds and a string of number one radio hits.  He was too short, too bald, and had a terrible voice.  They never thought he would be good for the industry.  His bank account shows that established opinion was not well founded.

At the end of the special, as he talked about the last part of his career, he mentioned a particular music project he made for ESPN.  He made the program using his music as a background for showing how determination drives a person to the top.  He recruited coaches like Sean Payton and John Gruden and various football greats like Joe Namath and Brett Favre to make the appropriate sports applications.  Then he said that the project was his favorite moment in all of his career.

All of us have accomplishments and moments where determination won the day.  I certainly do.  But, after all is said and done, over a period of many years, I can look back on a particular year of my life and say, "It was my favorite year of all the years of my life."  I had a managerial job, but that was ancillary to the reason it was the best year of my life.  I actually had 4 jobs that year.  None of them really mattered.  I was able to break some of the fetters I had going on in my life, but that wasn't it either.  It was the following year, 2010, that I made more money than I had ever made in my life.  But the best year was the year before the money.

The favorite year of my whole life broadened my horizons, added spring to a tired step, gave meaning to a not-so-special existence, and trapped views, echoes, and marks on the walls of my heart's four-chambered caves... once-trapped attractions of beauty... oh, such beauty!... my favorite moments in all of life!

Moments I remember now as moments of paradise.

Yes I do

Oh my goodness.  The crowd knew all the words to his songs and sang them wildly.  All of them.  I was impressed, of course, but inspired as well.  It's so refreshing to see an entertainer woo and wow thousands of people through words that represent what they believe in.

I'm talking about the Dierks Bentley concert a week ago.  I carry his songs in my telephone and listen to them most nights before falling asleep - songs like Feel That Fire, Come a Little Closer, and Up on the Ridge.  Those particular songs recall a fantastic laugh, a cheerful voice, lots of smiles, and hope-filled eyes.  And tonight Dierks played a new song, I Hold On, from his recently released album. 

He set up the song by talking of people who suggested that he buy a new truck.  But, he had a truck from before his days of fame.  It had memories with his dad, who drove with him in it to Tennessee.  He would never forget that trip, and he in turn would not let go of the truck that represented that trip.  He next held up his guitar and explained that that particular guitar was the one that got him started on his road to prosperity.  It kept him centered and grounded.  It represented his roots, which he hoped he would never forget.

I understand totally the idea of that song... "I hold on to the things that keep me going strong."

I intend to keep forever three sacred belongings... a blue envelope with a card inside... a poster of three pictures with names of songs and books... and a collage of mountain pictures called A Place Within.  They keep me going strong.

I totally understand the idea of that song... "like the stripes to the flag, like a boy to his dad. I hold on"... "I hold on to the things I believe in."  And the exact memory I have of this song is one where the crowd sang wildly "I hold on" more times than the studio version of the song (because all of them knew the words, including me).  I'm thankful that night a week ago was recorded because it now plays and represents the night that brought to mind my feelings from stored symbols, my almost nightly thoughts just before drifting off...



... things I believe in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Personality Palette

Imagine an old artist's color palette.

The artist would rarely use a single color on the palette.  Instead, (s)he would dab the primary colors in the color well in an empty well on the palate and mix the colors for some other unique color from the primary colors mixed.

In the electronic age it's the same principle, but the colors are not manually mixed.  The digital number of one color is added to the digital number of a second color.  The result is the same - many unique colors - but the possibilities are more numerous.

The digital color palette is a great snapshot for what takes place in the DNA of each person.

A personality palette exists in genes and operates on a larger scale, but with a similar process as that of the selection of color of skin, type of skin, color of eyes, size of eyes, color of hair, texture of hair, and so forth.  Families could have certain dominances that surface, but wouldn't have to surface given the right conditions.  A personality palate would also explain the nuances of likenesses and differences in the same way a brother or sister might have similar eyes or brows, but different shaped lips and teeth.

Personalities show early in a person's life and continue to develop through life.  And, it seems that they are not so much changeable as they are malleable.  Charting the personality palette would be a marvelous study because it would show the nuances that mixtures of personalities bring and mixtures that differ.  An even more fascinating study would be the interaction of the personalities when they are in the same environment together.  Which influence is the stronger or weaker influence in the presence of particular personality opposites.  To use a color palette analogy, what happens when lime green and silver are in the same picture?  How do people viewing the two colors react?

At that point, perhaps we could begin formulating some laws of attraction and repulsion.  But, we all know how much better as a person we are when we are in the environment of harmony and what a drain it is to be in the environment of conflict.  Most of the time we are in an environment containing varying amounts of conflict and harmony.  Our physical actions and mental reactions undergo constant adjustment.  But, how enjoyable life is when the influences from a significant person around us contain the perfect matches for us of tension and ease.  Compatibility happens.  Yes, days of Camelot!

Blue Marble

Every time I see a new picture from the Mars rover Curiosity, I sit in awe of a planet that used to look like Earth.  It would have been fun to have been on Mars and to have watched the Earth during one of its pre-human stages, maybe the solid ice stage.  Our blue marble would have looked entirely white.  Or maybe the greenhouse stage when there was absolutely no ice covering the poles.  Or maybe it could have been after the eruption of Mount Toba 75,000 years ago.  A black cloud encircled the entire Earth and wiped out 75% of all life.  Human life was down to around 10,000 living souls.  Or maybe it could have been the original cooling of the planet before it had water and a spin.

But, I can't, of course.  My time is for the blue marble stage.  It's beautiful enough, but I think I have missed out on something magnificent.  I find myself in that position sometimes.

Manifested sentience

Sentience doesn't surface as sentience.  It manifests itself in various forms.  Much of science is about proving what one can find evidence for.  Manifestations in various forms don't really qualify as solid, replicable evidence.  Psychology is called a soft science since it mainly deals with sentience.  I usually don't give psychology a break, but in this context I do.  How does a person describe, define, and measure something that manifests itself differently?   It's not the same as discovering something about physics that evidences itself following laws.

One of the great opportunities still available in the field of psychology is the study of personality.  People seem to be alike in so many ways, yet different in at least as many ways.  Like the genetics of a family, similar traits surface, but the nuances of difference are at least as many as the nuances of likeness are.  Yet these traits drive us to feel certain ways in reaction to our environments and the behaviors of others in that environment.  We react minute-by-minute to the events and people surrounding us.

I think of the word compatibility in connection with personality since, to me, it is the greatest manifestation of sentience.  Some people have personalities that are toxic to certain other personalities.  And, the opposite is true.  Some people have personalities that are in harmony with certain other personalities.  Of course, there are all shades of personality matches between the ends of this spectrum.  And I freely admit that the strongest manifestation of my sentience is when I have been with and around the person whose personality was the most complementary, supplementary, supportive, and propulsive to my own.  I have no science to back it up.  Maybe in a 100 more years, but not now. For the moment, I just know.  And, I relish the moments of sentience when two perfectly complementary and supplementary personalities share the same intersection of time!!!

Supremacy of numbers

Widespread use of computers has existed for 20-25 years now.  At first, they were a miracle  for lessening the workload of people.  A number of stages have ensued.  They removed the need for paper, but using paper was a habit hard for people to make since paper had been used abundantly in every facet of life for 200 years.  Finally, after 25 years, people learned to store information and files electronically in large volumes.  Computers also made communication instantaneous.  That too has taken 25 years for people to adjust to.  The fax machine should have disappeared at least a decade ago, but they were a habit hard to break.  Now, people finally have adjusted to receiving files through various means such as email, common forums like Google Docs, and attachments for in-person meetings such as with GoToMeeting.  Even legal documents can now have electronic signatures, so the world has been able to change some of its major habits.  But, change didn't come easy.

Computers have also opened the way to another foundation for communication. After years of working with programs like EXCEL, people are now ready for a new change that will likely take another 20 years or so because people are so entrenched in habits involving printed materials and words.  Algorithms are headed our way - not in just an area of life here and there.  That has already been happening.  Stock predictions are made based on algorithms.  Predicting events has been reduced to numbers in an algorithm.  Networks of people for marketing purposes is used regularly in an algorithm by Google to show you what you want to see.  Even words in reading and writing have been reduced to numbers in an algorithm for identifying the complexity level of conversations and writing.  And, words in testimony can be packaged in an algorithm for areas of deception in the "story" a person tells. Because of this groundwork, now people are ready to make much, much more available to algorithmic communication - numbers communication.

Apps are designed through numbers, software is a conglomeration of numbers organized to achieve particular goals, like EXCEL, even digital photography is composed and transmitted through the combination of pixel, location, and shades assigned a number.  Numbers are used in controlling the currency of a nation through statistics organized into algorithms.  Companies plan based on projections and inventory and sales - combined in an algorithm in order to accumulate wealth.  Yeah, changing to the importance of learning numbers and their organization over the importance of learning words and their organization will take a little while longer.  The footwork has taken place already.  The dinosaurs have identified themselves.  They will certainly fall and fall hard.  Algorithms will have a long life of their own because they will usher in the next age that will begin with holography and take us into space and other planetary contact.  Let me say adios... and good riddance... to those who want to strap us into the past and retard the development of the agile environment of organized  number communication that will take us to a world beyond our own.

De facto English

There is a particular piece of writing advice that I hear fairly often.  I don't know exactly when the idea was started.  I don't remember hearing it as a youth in school, but I have heard it often since the 1990s.  The movement started in Texas, called the New Jersey Writing Project in Texas, perpetuated it over a 20 year period, so it affected a great many teachers and their students.  The advice?  Limit or eliminate the use of the verb "to be" by writing more active verbs.  And the corollary is to write active verbs not passive ones.

When I first heard the advice, I thought it might have some wisdom behind it, so I tried following it.  But, fortunately, I was able to learn more and more about language in its various aspects, and began noticing that there was no wisdom to the advice.  Speech, which requires generating words using split second reasoning, uses stock phrases and redundancy of phrasing.  Thus, identifying and describing nouns after they are introduced (predicate nominatives and predicate adjectives) is a common strategy in conversation.  In writing, the immediacy of needing to develop thought disappears.  However, the need to identify and describe (or modify) doesn't disappear.  So, why would someone think limiting the use of "to be" would be a good idea?

After more contemplation and experience with those who teach writing, I think the notion began by teachers not fully understanding the use of the passive voice in English.  It is a very useful technique in a language's arsenal of expressions.  English is only one of many languages, modern and ancient, that have used the passive.  So, ignoring the use of the passive defies the logic of many peoples across the time continuum.  But, English teachers without training in grammar theory explain passive only as an alternative to the active.  The passive wording is a little lengthier than the active wording, so to a teacher who emphasizes economy of words in writing, it would seem more logical to use the shorter version of the idea.  Also, teachers like emphasizing the underlying structure of English to be SVO (subject-verb-object), which favors the use of an active verb.

So, it is the case of Pope's aphorism beginning with "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing..." that has characterized the reason for rampant misinformation.  There are three underlying structures to English logic, not one - SVO, SV, SVA,  (Subject-Verb-Agent, the sentence structure for passive voice).  And while SVO might dominate, albeit under 50% of most people's writing, and well under 50% of most people's speech, plenty of important ideas are expressed with the other two alternatives.

And, it is the Pope aphorism that explains why people need to rely on some extremely arbitrary notion.  Because passive voice is not understood as a bigger part of the language, it is targeted for elimination or restriction.  And, because the passive voice is very often confused for a nonpassive predicate adjective sentence construction, eliminating and restricting the use of forms of "to be" (because it is the common denominator of the two types) save teachers' faces, keeping their lack of understanding from showing.

It reminds me of the poem, For Want of a Nail.  Fortunately, language is larger than English class and very few people pay attention to elaborations of grammar.  While people may remember a teacher saying something about not writing forms of the verb "to be," they won't remember the rationale, so they continue to use the predicate nominative, predicate adjective, and passive voice constructions.

Power to the people who have ignored advice that merely saves face for a group of people who don't want to fully understand what they are teaching.  The people's way is the de facto English.  I love it when that happens.

It's such a lovely game

The movie Jobs is well worth seeing.  I love watching movies that show people's genius.  Among the characters in the movie is a man who joined with and sponsored Jobs when he first started.  He remained with Jobs as Apple grew into a multi-million dollar company.  He was one of Jobs' trusted friends.

But life has a few twists in it.  The scene in which the board of directors decides to rid Apple of Jobs' leadership is a very good one.  The friend that had so long been Jobs' most supportive partner was required to vote on whether to keep Jobs as Apple's leader or not.  The night before the vote, Jobs had asked his friend point blank, "Do I have your support?"  His friend said that he unequivocally had his support.  But, when asked the question in the board room amongst all the other members, Jobs' trusted friend raised his hand to vote in opposition to allowing Jobs to stay as president.  It was a moment of total betrayal.

Betrayal is the one issue that drives me over the edge.  It is the ultimate wound.  My favorite book, Aspen, has the exact same theme and a circumstance eerily similar to the one in Jobs.   But, Jobs has the twist I love, and it is this twist that separates it from Aspen.  Several years later Jobs is invited by a different board for Apple to return as president and CEO of the company.  This time, however, Jobs won't take the position unless the board supports him carte blanche.   So, Jobs goes to three of 5 board members and offers them a deal they can't refuse - a golden parachute so that they will not stand in his way ever again.  In the scene in which the third golden parachute is issued, Jobs does a beautiful thing... he hands the offer to his "friend" who several years back voted no for him to remain as president.  The circle becomes fully completed.  I wanted to cheer at that moment.  The rest of Jobs' story is one of revolutionizing America's way to get information and hear music... made possible by no one standing in his way.

I have a personal application of this issue in my own life.  And I love doing it in the legal arena.  Yes, the lovely game of showing deceptive language in testimony that has been sworn as truth.  Yes... full circle when people's lies come to light... and they nearly always act so surprised. Ha!

P-L-ease!!

In a radio interview, the director of an institute on national educational policy in Dallas commented on the difference between boys and girls learning math.  I am sure she wanted to make comments that make her appear as if she was on top of her field, but she should have followed the adage, "Better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

"Boys are better with spatial learning," she mused, "as girls are better with language."  Both parts of that statement are false at worst and socially conditioned at best.  The first part of that statement shows a complete void of knowledge with how the brain works.  The information the director spouted is from the observations about learning math from the 1970s and 80s.  Atrocious.

So many studies on learning and the brain have taken place, that to place the director's words in the parallel context of astronomy is to say that the earth is flat.  Want to know why American math scores are behind other nations?  Seriously!

Underlying both math and language is a syntax or grammar, a system of rules governing the use of symbols for that particular logic (math logic and language logic).  The number system is not any more difficult than the alphabetic system.  Social attitudes about learning math along with the socialization process of adolescents and the conditioning influences of business and home have more to do with the differences in boys and girls learning math easily than ability.  Anyone can learn syntax whether with numbers or with letters and words.  Please, madam director, get a clue.  Don't spew archaic information and think for a second that you can guide the policies for national education!

Duping again

A man wanted to see what effect each leg of a grasshopper had on the length of its jump.  He measured the jump with all four legs and wrote down: grasshopper with 4 legs jumps 1 foot.  Then, he cut off a front leg and measured the jump.  He wrote: grasshopper with 3 legs jumps 10 inches.  He removed the other front leg and measured.  He wrote: grasshopper with no front legs jumps 8 inches.  He cut off a hind leg.  He commanded the grasshopper to jump.  Then he recorded: grasshopper with only 1 leg jumps 4 inches.  Finally, he cut off the last of the grasshopper's legs.  He told the grasshopper to jump.  The grasshopper didn't move.  The man shouted, "Jump!"  But the grasshopper still didn't move.  He thought he would yell one last time, "Jump!"  "Jump!" he yelled.  The grasshopper didn't move.  So, the man recorded,: grasshopper with no legs is deaf.

Last night I heard a portion of an interview with the director of an institute for national policy on education  in Dallas.  It reminded me of the grasshopper joke I had heard in a statistics class many years ago when the professor was cautioning against jumping to conclusions without measuring something properly and against using the wrong choice of statistical method for the situation.  I heard a woman in an important position spouting information that reflected both old research and age-old notions, not modern research.  In her position, one would expect different, and better.

One of the things she said was that boys in elementary school develop in language more slowly than girls do.  I heard that in the 1980s also.  But there has been a great deal of research in both developmental language and language of the sexes.  One of the first pieces of information from the 80s spawning the notion was that the corpus collasum of women's brains contained more nerve endings than men's.  One of the theories was that the thickness accounted for the verbal prowess of women over men because of the popular idea that men spoke more often and with greater eloquence than men.  That theory has disappeared with the great amount of research that has ensued.

The idea that boys have fewer language skills in childhood than girls is a pedogogical observation that also has been scrutinized and has disappeared. Boys' language and girls' language are merely different in style and topic, not development.  Boys who have men teachers don't lag behind girls in language use or development because male teachers realize that topics are different as is choice of words.  But developmentally behind boys are not!  Boys with women teachers seem to run into problems if female teachers don't care for the boys' topics or restrict the topics boys can write or speak about or the types of verbs they can use.  (Oh, the grasshopper must be deaf! Seriously!)

And one last piece of research from the field of sociolinguistics addresses the idea of covert solidarity.  It happens between men and women, and between generations.  Boys and girls would not be exempt from the influence of covert solidarity.  But teachers are not made aware of this phenomenon, so they don't address language development against that context - to the detriment of the children's development in language use.

The good director in the position of having anything  to do with educational policy, much less on a national scale, should be guided by more current research, at least within the last 20 years, and less by outdated observations before she makes decisions, and absolutely before she grants an interview to be aired to the public.  Ditzes like her don't add beauty to the educational landscape.

One single factor

I remember running an experiment with a close colleague using an ANOVA in order to determine what factor stood out among 4 factors on student scores on a standardized exam for 4th grade children.  So, we selected the 5 highest and 5 lowest class scores in math and writng.  We wanted to know if the same factor that was outstanding for high scores also produced low scores if it was lacking.  Sure enough one of the four factors mattered.  It wasn't class size (4th grade classes were limited to 22 children) or number of years a teacher had taught or whether it was a team of teachers or a single subject teacher.  It was the amount of time the teacher spent on the subject.  The other factors didn't matter.

That's simple enough.   It doesn't require any training.  It doesn't require hours all day trying to integrate anything.  It doesn't require one to be a brain surgeon.  When people wonder what it is that makes students perform, well, the "it" is simple.

I am also never left wondering in my personal life who and what the "it" factor is either.  It's simple... and I think about it a lot... and perform well in life when I do!

At the end of your words

I have had a chance to observe a person who has been socialized in the Ukraine and who didn't arrive in the U.S. until after adolescence, the time period during which socialization happens.  I have also been able to observe a number of people from a number of countries south of the U.S. and from Canada for very short periods of time whose childhood happened outside the U.S., some whose childhood and adolescence happened outside, and some whose childhood, adolescence and early adulthood occurred entirely outside the United States.  This has allowed me to anecdotally compare the kind of socialization that occurs in the U.S. with that of people outside the country.

So, did the same features of marking conversation of the two sexes appear?  In the group of people socialized in the Americas, it was a mixed bag. The feature outside in/inside out appeared right away.  Alignment of women to other women in conversation appeared also.  Men taking the floor away never appeared, but adding important detail so as to look important did appear.  Interruption patterns of men with women didn't appear as reported in the gender language literature.  This is merely by observation, not by empirical data.  As far as the person from the Ukraine is concerned, I have observations only from mixed company (men and women together), so I don't have enough observation data to go on.

Socialization is powerful, and its traces are embedded in language.  It would appear that knowing who is on the other end of your words, no matter the country of origin, affects interpretation of and attitude toward the speaker.

Logical extensions of misinterpretation

Writing is a part of language and has a rather curious history when it comes to including it as a part of the educational curriculum in the public schools.  In the 1800s, grammar was taught, to be sure, but not for the purpose of writing.  It was taught for proper speaking.  In the early 1900s, higher education wanted to ensure that the idea of grammar could be reflected in writing especially on tests.  From that point on, composition began being taught with the idea of propriety in writing.  Then it filtered into the public schools from higher education so that students could perform better on college entrance exams.  Of course, now, writing has become a staple of the curriculum.  The idea of the 3 Rs (Readin', 'Ritin', and 'Rithmetic,) illustrates how entrenched writing has become in the public school system.

That means that the socialization process that gives us different language features seen in speaking can now be seen in writing.  That causes a real problem since in elementary school the bulk of the teaching corps is female.  Roughly half of the students are male.  So, both stylistics and topics are affected.  Girls write about the same topics they would speak on, as do boys.  That's expected.  But, who does the grading?  Ay, there comes the rub.  Students using an inside out perspective and personal topics tend to have higher value than the students using outside in perspectives and topics about external events and the environment.  Grades are affected.  A quick review of grades given for writing in elementary schools shows higher grades for girls on the whole than for boys.  Male high school students fare a little better since more teachers  who teach writing are male, but not that many more.  So, writing is greatly discriminatory in the school system.

Fortunately, that will be changing over the next 5 years as more emphasis will need to be put on visual organizing, video organizing, storyboard organizing, and eventually, holographic organizing.  Presentations through YouTube and PowerPoint have absolutely changed the playing field from writing to a medium more visual.  Therefore, writing skills as a way of presenting information will be taking more and more of a backseat.

While it is possible that language behavior of women and men will continue to bleed into visual presentations, it might be less likely since the visual world includes an environment for words to happen in and a personal extension of what the world means.  Something for men, something for women.  So, while writing has reigned for 100 years tormenting its male users, visual organization and presentation will replace it and hold out the promise of more equally guided language expression.

Orientation

Inside out.  Outside in.  These are the two terms that have been coined about the language that represents the two sexes.  Women, supposedly, speak of matters on the personal level.  The talk of what happens in terms of feelings, the inside of a person.  Once that area has been satisfied, then the conversation can take a turn to the larger environment, or what is happening around the person.  Men, supposedly, speak of matters in the environment.  The talk is of what happens around the person, such as politics, news events, sports, religion, or the weather.  Once that area has been explored, then the conversation can take a turn to the more personal.  Women, therefore, have language habits reflecting inside out, men outside in.

Of course, none of the features has to be that way.  They are the result of the socialization process.  They help men and women to make themselves distinct from the other sex.  They definitely are not genetic.  Some women who are not socialized as other women seem to have characteristics attributed to men.  The same is true of men.  Androgynous people, for example, speak of the pressure they feel from other men or other women to be like them.  Homosexuals also speak of the same pressure.  Socialization creates an atmosphere of ostracism, sometimes, if a particular unwritten behavior isn't heeded by a person.  Thus, women are pressured to speak like other women, men like other men.

That's the formula for misinterpretation.  Women began speaking on the personal level to men.  Men begin by speaking on the exterior level to women.  Women then say men don't seem to care about them.  Men say women don't show interest in their conversations or that their interests are so very different from their own.  So the war between the sexes rages on.  We should blame ourselves, however.  The sexes are not born to miscommunicate; they are trained to miscommunicate.

Our loss.

What surrounds a statement

Interpreting what people are saying is really a full time job.  The brain cannot follow people's utterances word for word and analyze them for meaning, at least not while thinking about all the other things it does like run bodily functions, notice things about the environment, such as safety and caution (especially if driving), take into account tone of voice, try to have the right face for the emotion required by the the one talking, and a hundred other things.  So, the default is to accept people's words for face value.  But, if something seems like it doesn't fit or like something is missing from the full intelligibility, then the brain has to shut down one or more of its functions so that it can analyze what is being  said for all the utterance's possible meanings.

Cross-gender conversation is particularly susceptible to having the brain not run its many functions while conversing because the conversation will be different from what is familiar.  And, what is familiar is what someone has been socialized to accept as normal.  So, when men and women speak to each other, they are on high alert, spending available brain power to analyze statements for secondary meaning.

One answer is that the two speakers are not knowledgeable enough of the other's background.  For example, if one person says that her uncle is coming into town so she it will have to put a lock on the liquor cabinet, then the other person is left to wonder.  Is her uncle a religious fanatic who is a tea totaller, so the other speaker can't drink while the religious uncle is in town?  Or, is the uncle a sot, so the speaker has to keep liquor from the uncle's lips so as not to be embarrassed?  Or is it that the speaker's mother doesn't know that the speaker drinks.  If he or she drinks in front of the uncle, the speaker's mother will surely find out?  Or is it that the uncle feels free to take the liquor with him when he leaves since he has to scrape by for money?  The visit will cost the speaker a fortune in replacement costs.  Or, is it that the uncle is rich and always has an opinion about the cheap liquor that the speaker buys?  So, in order to avoid how cheap she or she is, they go out to buy their liquor while the uncle is in town.

Great, now one's background for what is meant contributes meaning to an already difficult conversation.  Socialization is different, so misinterpretation arises, AND the person's background has to be known or misinterpretaion arises.  Cross-gender conversations are just doomed.

There is one exception, but that is the subject for another time.

Volcanic language

One study about gender and language I would like to see done is the language of innuendo.  I am not sure what it would exactly show, but I have a working hypothesis for it.  When two people are building to a point of high emotion, the signal that an eruption is about to happen is the use of innuendo.  I don't know if it would show that women or men use it more, but I think the study would conclude that women use it to get matters to change, men use it to warn that matters have gone too far.

If the analogy to eruption holds true also for innuendo, there would be particular placement for these eruptions equivalent to the Pacific Rim - right around the tectonic plate boundaries.  The "seams" that cause people's relationship to "rumble" from time to time are the cracks in the lower strata where magma  leaks through to form a chamber right below the surface.  When the pressure is great enough, the magma forces its way through the mountain top in a violent spewing show.  Eruptions don't happen that often, but they change the landscape around them when they do happen.

It would also be interesting to see what topics trigger an innuendo and subsequent eruption.  Simple linear regression would be the statistical tool of choice since it is both predictive and descriptive.  I'll add this study to my bucket list for the next decade.

Chasing our tails

The notion is that women talk a whole lot more than men.  Well, that depends.  On what?  Socialization of course.  Some researchers have studied mixed groups and their conversational habits and observed that women speak more words and with more frequency than men.  But, there are other groupings, such as men with men and women with women.  How many words are used then?

And then there is the idea of topic.  Because men like banter, they tend to speak about the two subjects, religion and politics, which women tend to avoid because they prefer more personalized subjects.  Because women like alignment with each other, they tend to speak on topics they personally identify with.  So, the topic helps to dictate whether women or men are using more words to express themselves.

Also, what constitutes a conversation is the subject of some debate.  One researcher, for example, mentions that women were much more silent in a mixed group faculty meeting of high school teachers.  One has to ask if a faculty meeting is the same as a conversation  among friends, even among acquaintances, or if formal meeting groups are not to be considered conversations.

Back to the main point: men are socialized to speak with other men, not other women, as women are to speak with other women, not other men.  So, it would be natural to think that women are more verbose with other women and men with other men.  A researcher would need to take those two groupings, then weight the findings against the third grouping if (s)he thinks that (s)he has figured out the role of the third grouping and the guiding principles on when women will speak in such a grouping or when men will speak.

Another problem with researching the above idea is the so-called Observer's Paradox.  When people know they are being observed, they alter their language behavior.  Some methods have been used to beat the Observer's Paradox, but not the studies dealing with conversation groupings.  Socialization doesn't happen under the microscope.  It happens over time as a result of seeing how language operates in all the possible combinations where language is used.  That's a real problem, for who can study language situations over a lengthy period of time or define what scenarios for language use represent other scenarios if trying to shorten the length of time or the number of different situations in which language is used?

So, no one really knows whether women speak more or not.  It doesn't really matter except that the popular belief is that women speak more, so are perceived as more nurturing, or better with words, or better communicators, or more impressive in sales jobs, or better at persuasion when closing a deal, or easier to listen to in presentations, or... (the list goes on).  And how does that popular belief arise?  Now we're back to socialization.

Product of socialization

The situation seemed more than a bit awkward.  The teenage couple ate together in almost complete silence.  Occasionally, the girl would try to introduce a topic to talk about, but the boy would merely answer with 4 or 5 words, and the topic hit its dead-end.

In the same restaurant, an older couple, in their late 30s possibly, were also eating.  There were 2 boys at the table also, presumably the couple's children.  They were eating in silence for the most part, but from time to time the mother would say something to try to get the boys to talk.  The father merely talked to them to redirect their behavior.  The boys talked to each other mainly.  The husband and wife exchanged words only to ask about the schedule for the rest of the day.

Scenes like this beg the question of why cross-sex talking is so difficult.  The answer is not simple.  Part of the answer is found in the combination of personalities.  The particular events leading to a conversation contribute to what is said too, of course.  But part of the anatomy of a conversation is the different conversational styles developed as young people are socialized as a (fe)male in this society.  Styles, of course, have features, and features are identified because they surface several times in a conversation.

Politeness is one of those features that manifests itself differently in men's and women's conversations.  Men show politeness by listening.  Since another feature of male conversation is to participate by adding more important details to a story or to take the floor, it is noticeable when the absence of taking the floor or adding details is happening.  Being silent after a comment before extending the conversation or changing topics signals appreciation for what was said.  Women, on the other hand, show politeness by immediately responding with a remark of personal affirmation to what has been said.

So, in a cross-sex conversation, the man shows politeness to the woman by being silent.  She thinks he is being non-responsive to her remark or ignoring her.  He is trying to make it clear that he is not trying to take the floor or add more important details.  The woman shows politeness by immediately responding to the man with a remark of personal affirmation rather than with banter.  This makes him feel like what he is trying to say is something that is over her head or that she has no interest in at all.  She is making a placating remark.

So goes the misinterpretation of styles.  So, on goes the ill will in the conversation as a whole.

But, I will say that I have had a female conversational partner that was socialized to understand the opposite sex's style, not merely her own style.  Maybe that was a part of compatibility of personality also because there were very few moments when we were not on the same page.  That enhanced understanding, for sure.

That was a utopian environment, making everyday pure joy... to be so clearly understood... and to so clearly understand... two who were in concert with each other.

What a difference when the world slips back into the world of men's and women's socialized understandings.

Inevitable miscommunication

Every society builds socialization into its culture.  The language the society speaks bears the marks of that socialization process.  English is no different and its American speakers use it in a way that marks them as having been socialized in the U.S.  The two genders within the American experience seem to also have semantic markers that show that they use language to different ends sometimes.  So, while there is a general American socialization process, with language expressions illustrating American attitudes (as there is for individualism and materialism, for example) there is a gender socialization process with language expressions illustrating men's or women's attitudes about how to share personal information and how to relate directly or indirectly to the environment around them.

And that difference in socialization, as shown in language expression, causes great difficulties.  The attitudes expressed in words bear out the values behind them, and that is where the rub comes.  A great example is that  practice of women to acknowledge other women's ideas as they express their own while men practice an almost opposite habit of adding detail to another speaker's story to enhance it or taking the floor from a speaker with more important information.  Great conflict arises since women see men's speech as supercompetitive or as always having to add something to women's already complete thoughts while men see women's speech as too dependent on what others think.  And, that is only one cause underlying miscommunication.  There are certainly other kinds of conflicts.

So, the two sexes are socialized to misinterpret each others' remarks.  That's a shame in many cases.  It leads to vicious fighting, hurt feelings, and ideas that same sex conversation is to be preferred over cross-sex conversation.  (Of course, misunderstandings arise within the arena of same-sex conversations, too.  It's just clearer as to what the cause of the misunderstandings are.)

Even knowing the features of the two sexes' conversation patterns that underlie attitudes and values doesn't really stave off miscommunication.  But, it does make for a quicker rebound and a more tolerant view of why one sex says something that seems contrary to the first nature of the other sex.

At least dignity

According to some 15-year-old research, there is supposed to be a lot of interrupting going on in conversations between men and women.  I have certainly seen interruption before.  The research said that men interrupt women much more than women do men, and that the purpose of men's interrupting women was to show who was in control of the overall situation.  I don't doubt that a lot of interruption is going on,  but I am not in situations to see much of it.  Generally speaking, professionals at work don't interrupt, and if they do, they are polite enough to renege and allow the first party to continue talking.  In my particular case, my workplace is filled with turn-taking not interruption.  At home, the norm is turn-taking as well.

The particular study quoted quite often in cross-gender conversational literature contains recordings from men and women in the home environment.  The couples are young and childless, and they are all from a working class or middle class background.  I think the study needs to be redone.  Things sometimes change about language use, even from one generation to the next.  That's what the "S curve" graph is constructed around - language behavior that changed in a generation.  Or perhaps, my corner of the world isn't like others' corners.  My corner is the exception to the rule, but I have no other frame of reference.

I do think cross-gender conversation is difficult to navigate.  Actual contexts and expected or anticipated contexts are very different.  It's almost surprising that meaningful communication takes place at all.  But, control of a conversation, such as the purpose of interruption as a strategy in language behavior, is not and won't be part of my corner of the world.  Too many other variables can go wrong between men's ideas and women's ideas of conversation for interruption to be a problem.  Equality should be a given when two people talk.  And if not equality, at least dignity.

Splendid, beautiful, ironic

A great number of poets take great care to hone their poems to their most succinct form.  They try to put passion in a small space.  Many succeed.

That's ironic because passion and emotion drive us to expand ourselves, to elaborate our actions, especially for a recipient by whom we want to be seen clearly and transparently.

Which is also ironic because when something is clear and transparent, it is nothing... there is nothing to see.  But, it is the most important thing we have to offer... it is everything.

Which is ironic since clear and elaborate actions happen in a pocket of time, which ironically are captured well enough, but only in a pocket of time... intact, but not lasting.

Oh the irony of the most splendid and beautiful moments of one's existence.

Nothing...
is what I have

Everything...
is what I would give


to keep the moments
Intact...

never to come
Apart...

Cloudburst

I looked above my front door through the arched window at a flash I thought I saw.  It had been a while since I had seen the familiar bright light.  Then I saw it again clearly through the arched panes.  Wow, what a welcome sight.  The high today had reached 101, but it was cooling slowly since the sun was about to set.  Rain had not been predicted for my area.  I went outside to enjoy the show.

What a show it was.  The sky lit up for over an hour with all the ensuing thunderbooms clapping overhead.  Loved the show.  It was the 3rd time today that I was reminded of one who had brought me my life just a short time ago.

First, I was watching a TV movie in which a young woman and a young man had fallen in love.  She told him about halfway through the movie that she had leukemia.  The woman had touched the young man's life deeply before she finally passed on to the next world.  At the end of the movie, in a stirring set of lines, he compared the young woman's affect on him to the wind.  She had swept into his horizons giving him life, changing him, and leaving him with her spirit before she passed on.  It was a touching ending.

The young man's speech about the wind reminded of a passage from the New Testament that I remember so well from studying Greek in college.  The Greeks had the idea that the wind and the spirit of someone shared the same characteristics.  They reflected that in their language.  Pneuma was their word for wind and spirit.  The ideas are different in English as shown in our having two words for the ideas.  But, not for the Greeks.  The passage I remembered was a saying of Jesus, "The wind (spirit) blows where it desires to blow.  Nobody sees its origin or destination.  All those who are born from the spirit (wind) are just like that."  People interpret this passage as a pun on the words wind and spirit, translating them as such in that order.  But, both words could be translated as spirit and both words could be translated as wind .  Now there's a thought.  We are children of the wind - making our presence known, leaving our impressions even after we're gone.

Then, about 8:30 tonight, at the end of a very typical hot August day, the wind began blowing ferociously.  The neighbor's fence split and fell to the ground in two sections from its force.  It was the advance guard of the tremendous downpour that followed.  Now the storm is gone although I can still hear the rumbling of thunder in the distance.  The wind announced the coming refreshment to the parched ground with the wind that swept through with the storm.  It brought lifegiving elements to everything alive, including me.  Then it left.

So this evening, in three reminders, I have been alive with the spirit (wind) of one who breezed through my life, refreshed it with lifegiving elements, and covered me forcefully so that I should never forget the absolute joy, zest for living, and love for this one that I felt .

Let the wind (spirit) blow!!!

These days, dog days

This is the period of time referred to as the dog days of summer.  The last 7 days and the next 7 days,  on average, are the hottest days of the year.  This year is not an exception.  Each day has been between 101 and 109 with heat indexes higher than the temperature.  What makes these days bearable is the refreshment one gets from drinking all manner of drinks - water, of course, but soft drinks, icees, smoothies, flavored teas, milk shakes, and floats too.  Ahhhh, there's nothing like refreshment in 105 degree heat.  It's that season... and season of life as well.  I'll take a cherry snow cone - large, please.  Thank you, it's hot these days.

The hand that's dealt

There are competing theories about dreams.  One is that people dream all the time.  They just don't remember them.  Brainwave activity determines whether or not a person is dreaming.  The other is that a dream is only a dream if it is remembered, even if only briefly, when a person comes to full consciousness.  I don't know which is correct.  I prefer to think the latter is correct since no one can yet explain if the brain activity is meaningful or not.

Lately, I have been dreaming a lot, meaning that I have had remembered dreams.  I don't normally characterize my sleep as producing dreaming.  I have had a few along, sure, but it is not the rule.  Over the last week, I have had recurring dreams, and today, I had one that showed my great frustration.  It was a groundhog style dream.  The same activity kept happening over and over.  I could change the details if I didn't like the outcome of the time before.  Crazy dreaming.  I kept having to sit in the backseat of a car and come to a stop at a stop sign.  Now, that is tricky to hit the brake from the back seat, but I remember four distinct times having to do just that.  Cars were pressuring from behind, nearly hitting me, and ready to smash into me if I didn't successfully stop.

I don't know if every little thing in the dream has symbolic value, but given that the mind rumbles around ideas to create different scenarios as possible outcomes, I think that the week's dreams have dealt with my inability to direct reality, particularly the one today, or to accept reality.  I have a different idea of what I want my reality to be than the way it has worked out actually being.

My dreams will probably subside when I become more accepting.  I can more openly accept my reality or I can more doggedly pursue changing my reality.  I can't unilaterally control what my reality is, so trying to do so would never change my dreams.  Becoming more accepting is not really appealing.  I'll figure it out.  My next dream should have a few more symbolic details in it that will help me.

Peering into the dark

Inside the house tonight, it is quiet and dark.  There is light in only one room.  As I look down the entryway, I see shadows of the few items that are there, but only dark forms.  I know the door is white, but I really can't see its outline because it is too far away.

I hate being in the position of not being able to see much out of the present moment.  I know what certain things should happen next, but for some reason the future is completely blocked from view.  I have had two pretty troubling dreams of late because my mind runs dark scenarios of subconsciously drifting thoughts. I can only see shadowy forms.  One dream was comprised of symbolic action that would make me sad for a very long time were it to really happen.  Surely it won't.

Against the mundane

I have walked on the nature path that is adjacent to my house many times.  I love walking on it for the exercise, of course, but also for the peculiar view of bullrushes lining the little creek that runs through it.  Willow trees and a few Cottonwoods are mixed in with the bullrushes in certain spots along the winding course of the creek.

A little while ago, I happened to be looking at the line of bullrushes and the trees as I had a hundred other times, but thought that something might be a little different.  The eyes play tricks on the brain all the time, so there's nothing new there.  But, I began trying to isolate what was different.  Everything looked basically the same except that little yellow patch against the backdrop of solid green.  Yes, what was that yellow patch?

A golden-leaved tree?  How did that sneak in?  I don't remember seeing that before.  But, it was too large to have been newly planted.  Wow, how could I have missed a tree that stood out so clearly against the otherwise monochromatic green of the park?  Its golden leaves made it outstanding and beautiful in its setting.  I stared at it.

I stared at it then and have so ever since then because it represents to me what happened on my journey down a recent path in my life.  Life was pretty routine, mundane actually, when boom!, a thing of beauty suddenly entered it.  I have stared at it ever since that recent time because of its beauty in its setting.  Oh, how I enjoy to look at it (figuratively and literally).  What I wouldn't give for it to be in my setting now.  I would enjoy it every day of my life soaking in its golden leaves in the otherwise monochromatic color around me.

!