Upon moving to my current home in 2010, I made two decisions related to my book collection:
1.) After a lifetime denying myself the pleasure, this home would include a library, i.e. an entire room dedicated to my collection, complete with floor to ceiling built-in bookcases. My lifelong friends would now get the space they'd always deserved instead of lying in random piles in every room.
2.) To ensure I did not become the subject of a future reality TV show about book hoarders, every new book purchased would be coupled with an old one donated to a library, coffee shop, etc. And that brings me to my current dilemma.
Up until now, it's been relatively easy to decide which of my friends would give up their space as a purchased book was added to the shelves. The earliest donations were books my wife had read that I was reasonably sure I would not. Before anyone calls book foul, let me clarify: She is not as attached as I to books she's finished. The second phase of donations included stuff I'd enjoyed at the time but probably not much worthy of a re-read.
I'm now in phase three - decisions about what goes next are becoming more difficult. Either ... a.) I've read it (or in several cases, re-read it) and my notes and annotations are part of my story or ... b.) I haven't read it but I'm pretty sure I will or ... c.) something unexplainable won't allow me to let go ... yet. Any book hoarders care to offer some coaching? Good thing the public library and my thriftiness helps me keep a lid on purchases, huh?
Thursday, March 30, 2017
Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Thanks, Boss
Think of the best supervisor you ever had. What trait did that person possess or which behavior did he or she frequently exhibit that made them so good? Now think of the worst supervisor you ever had and answer the same question. Which of the two is more solidly etched in your memory?
Reviewing my full time work life, I can't honestly recall ever having someone I'd call a bad supervisor. But I can distinguish a few things separating the good ones from the best.
* The best supervisor I ever had put a lot of effort into my performance reviews. I walked away from each of those conversations with something tangible I could improve.
* This same person didn't wait for performance reviews to give me positive or corrective feedback.
* Over the five years I reported to this person, I don't recall ever hearing a bad word spoken about someone else.
That last trait is something I value in anyone, supervisor or not. But in my experience - especially in a work environment - it is rare. Thanks for teaching me some stuff boss.
Reviewing my full time work life, I can't honestly recall ever having someone I'd call a bad supervisor. But I can distinguish a few things separating the good ones from the best.
* The best supervisor I ever had put a lot of effort into my performance reviews. I walked away from each of those conversations with something tangible I could improve.
* This same person didn't wait for performance reviews to give me positive or corrective feedback.
* Over the five years I reported to this person, I don't recall ever hearing a bad word spoken about someone else.
That last trait is something I value in anyone, supervisor or not. But in my experience - especially in a work environment - it is rare. Thanks for teaching me some stuff boss.
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
Rewind And Grow
For the first time since beginning the practice of reviewing my posts from three or more years ago on the same date, my reflections from both March 28 of 2011 and 2012 felt worth a re-visit. If you keep a journal, why not join me and see if what was on your mind on any past March 28 has remained with you? I'll feel better knowing at least one person was with me on this solipsistic rewind.
On the two presenting issues from five and four years ago today - limiting my use of labels and paying less attention to needing approval in the creative domain - my progress has been fitful. For the former, occasional opportunities to do anti-oppression work, consistent reading, and developing courses on music - forcing me to look at how I label even something I love desperately - have each contributed to some halting growth. How do you guard against letting labels limit your perceptions?
It's harder to measure my progress with the second issue, though I did take some of my own advice from the March 28 2012 post and traded some of that need for creative approval with more attention to my grooming; there's still room for more growth there. Now, when I label less, my spoken and written language changes in ways noticeable even to me. But my ongoing conversation about creative approval is more internal. So, I'm more likely to notice only the outward manifestations of exactly what I'm trying to avoid, i.e. when speaking to others and seeking their approval! See what I mean about fitful progress? What strategies do you use to lessen your need for approval, creative or otherwise?
http://reflectionsfromthebellcurve.blogspot.com/2011/03/labels-limits.html
http://reflectionsfromthebellcurve.blogspot.com/2012/03/time-for-trade.html
On the two presenting issues from five and four years ago today - limiting my use of labels and paying less attention to needing approval in the creative domain - my progress has been fitful. For the former, occasional opportunities to do anti-oppression work, consistent reading, and developing courses on music - forcing me to look at how I label even something I love desperately - have each contributed to some halting growth. How do you guard against letting labels limit your perceptions?
It's harder to measure my progress with the second issue, though I did take some of my own advice from the March 28 2012 post and traded some of that need for creative approval with more attention to my grooming; there's still room for more growth there. Now, when I label less, my spoken and written language changes in ways noticeable even to me. But my ongoing conversation about creative approval is more internal. So, I'm more likely to notice only the outward manifestations of exactly what I'm trying to avoid, i.e. when speaking to others and seeking their approval! See what I mean about fitful progress? What strategies do you use to lessen your need for approval, creative or otherwise?
http://reflectionsfromthebellcurve.blogspot.com/2011/03/labels-limits.html
http://reflectionsfromthebellcurve.blogspot.com/2012/03/time-for-trade.html
Monday, March 27, 2017
Who You Calling A Sissy?
"Getting old is not for sissies" - Bette Davis
To be clear: I definitely prefer getting old to the alternative. And I refuse to become an old fart who perpetually complains about age-related physical ailments. But claiming those words of Bette Davis never cross my mind would be a lie. Recently, I've felt old when ...
* Noting the number of dead people in my address book.
* Realizing the birthday parties I attend usually end long before midnight.
* Visiting a public rest room just to be safe.
On the other hand, I continue to enjoy skiing with my daughter, loud rock n' roll, and rolling around on the floor with children. Which things remind you of the inexorable march of time? What things do you do to defy the stereotypes others have of people "your age"?
Sunday, March 26, 2017
Adjusting The Scope
"Do one thing each day that scares you" - Eleanor Roosevelt
Since stumbling across them some months ago, I've been turning over Eleanor Roosevelt's words in my head. And I've reluctantly decided not to tackle her advice right now, at least not literally.
My decision is based on the scope Eleanor proposes, not the wisdom of her words. When someone as goal oriented as I reads "each day" in an admonition like this, deciding to act on it is not a halfway affair. The planning begins, closely followed by the documentation of the action taken "each day".
Still, the energy derived from inspiring words like these cannot be ignored. Consequently, I'm using "each week" instead and have already begun to settle on which "one thing" I'll do this week. If my first "one thing" ends up being not too cringeworthy, perhaps I'll share it here. In the meanwhile, I'd enjoy having company so let me know - here or offline - if you'd like to join me. If you're more prone than I to over-doing the goals, broaden your scope to "each month". Either way, we'll both be a little less afraid.
Since stumbling across them some months ago, I've been turning over Eleanor Roosevelt's words in my head. And I've reluctantly decided not to tackle her advice right now, at least not literally.
My decision is based on the scope Eleanor proposes, not the wisdom of her words. When someone as goal oriented as I reads "each day" in an admonition like this, deciding to act on it is not a halfway affair. The planning begins, closely followed by the documentation of the action taken "each day".
Still, the energy derived from inspiring words like these cannot be ignored. Consequently, I'm using "each week" instead and have already begun to settle on which "one thing" I'll do this week. If my first "one thing" ends up being not too cringeworthy, perhaps I'll share it here. In the meanwhile, I'd enjoy having company so let me know - here or offline - if you'd like to join me. If you're more prone than I to over-doing the goals, broaden your scope to "each month". Either way, we'll both be a little less afraid.
Friday, March 24, 2017
Words That Can Haunt Me, Part 14: Supercilious
supercilious: haughtily disdainful as a person, or in expression or bearing. Synonyms: arrogant, scornful.
When describing my reading preferences - and some who love me may say at other times as well - supercilious is probably an accurate description of my demeanor. I'm more measured here because it's easy to edit my impulses while typing and I long ago made a commitment to not bash authors on my blog.
Now, were I more careful when speaking aloud about authors, supercilious might haunt me less. But aside from many years of the mouth moving before the brain has fully engaged - and I make no excuses for that bad behavior - the volume of my reading in the post full time work years has also tripled, at least. And, over these past seven years, I've met some very discerning fellow readers who often share my disdain for cheap sentiment, clunky metaphors, and speeches given by characters to ensure an author's MESSAGE is unmistakable. I realize what is melodrama to you may be moving to me and vice versa. But being spoon fed by an author to "feel" something reminds me of the intrusive violins used in some films. Under those circumstances, I want to tell that author or filmmaker, "Let me figure out what I think or feel, will you please?"
p.s. I started with snob as the 14th haunting word for this series. But, the dictionary definitions for that simpler word didn't fit me as well as supercilious. The fancy-schmancy word will make the word snobs happier anyway.
When describing my reading preferences - and some who love me may say at other times as well - supercilious is probably an accurate description of my demeanor. I'm more measured here because it's easy to edit my impulses while typing and I long ago made a commitment to not bash authors on my blog.
Now, were I more careful when speaking aloud about authors, supercilious might haunt me less. But aside from many years of the mouth moving before the brain has fully engaged - and I make no excuses for that bad behavior - the volume of my reading in the post full time work years has also tripled, at least. And, over these past seven years, I've met some very discerning fellow readers who often share my disdain for cheap sentiment, clunky metaphors, and speeches given by characters to ensure an author's MESSAGE is unmistakable. I realize what is melodrama to you may be moving to me and vice versa. But being spoon fed by an author to "feel" something reminds me of the intrusive violins used in some films. Under those circumstances, I want to tell that author or filmmaker, "Let me figure out what I think or feel, will you please?"
p.s. I started with snob as the 14th haunting word for this series. But, the dictionary definitions for that simpler word didn't fit me as well as supercilious. The fancy-schmancy word will make the word snobs happier anyway.
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Almost Halfway Round The Globe
Over the six year duration of our "Eat The World" project, we've now sampled the cuisine of eighty seven independent nations. What recent eating experience took you to a foreign land? What did you eat? Would you return for more of whatever you had?
At our current rate - we're almost halfway round the globe now - the project could be completed by 2026, especially with the help we've been getting lately from the friends who have become frequent fellow food travelers. Regular readers will not be surprised to learn how quickly I was able to provide a list of countries not yet tasted to a few of those friends who want to host a dinner for us to keep the project humming. You want a list? That's like to asking me to recommend a good recording or book or film. Be careful what you ask for.
The last country we "visited" was Georgia - Western Asia, not US South version - via a restaurant called Old Tbilisi in NYC. At this point, unless Google searches have let me down, we've largely exhausted the local eating out possibilities. But, El Salvador is in our near future on a visit to DC in April and I'm hoping an eating adventure or two awaits us on vacations later this year. Until then, I've got my sous chef apron and knives ready to go and my ears open waiting for your suggestions.
At our current rate - we're almost halfway round the globe now - the project could be completed by 2026, especially with the help we've been getting lately from the friends who have become frequent fellow food travelers. Regular readers will not be surprised to learn how quickly I was able to provide a list of countries not yet tasted to a few of those friends who want to host a dinner for us to keep the project humming. You want a list? That's like to asking me to recommend a good recording or book or film. Be careful what you ask for.
The last country we "visited" was Georgia - Western Asia, not US South version - via a restaurant called Old Tbilisi in NYC. At this point, unless Google searches have let me down, we've largely exhausted the local eating out possibilities. But, El Salvador is in our near future on a visit to DC in April and I'm hoping an eating adventure or two awaits us on vacations later this year. Until then, I've got my sous chef apron and knives ready to go and my ears open waiting for your suggestions.
Monday, March 20, 2017
They're Dead Anyway
In which of the tiers below would you place each US President who has served in your lifetime? Try to recall the overall condition the country was in when the person first took office vs. the day that same person left the White House before placing them. And to help minimize online sniping, leave out the five living ex-Presidents - i.e. Carter, Bush I & II, Clinton & Obama, OK? Sorry to my daughter and her cohort; I know leaving out the last four Chief Executives leaves you with no one to place.
Tier 1 is reserved for the historically venerated, like the four on Mt. Rushmore and anyone you'd add to that monument. Among the now dead Presidents who served during my lifetime, I place no one in that tier.
Tier 2 would be the middling group, i.e. the bell curve Presidents. Historically, I think here of John Quincy Adams, James Polk, Calvin Coolidge. For my money, all of the dead Presidents who have served during my lifetime reside in that middle muddle, except Gerald Ford. For the record, that group includes Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, & Reagan.
Tier 3 is for the real losers. In this dismal historical company, dullards like Millard Fillmore, James Buchanan, and Warren G. Harding come to mind. I know at least one of my sisters will be unhappy I don't place Nixon in this pack (she might also be surprised I didn't elevate JFK to Tier 1) but all things considered, I'll stand by my placement of both of them in Tier 2.
Tier 4 is the limbo group, i.e. Presidents who either had no chance for history to assess them because they died too soon - William Henry Harrison & James Garfield - or ... they were never elected but ended up a President anyway. Gerald Ford lies alone among the dead Presidents of my lifetime in this weird group.
Even though this Presidential scholar did not provide a rationale for the placement of his seven dead guys, if you comment here and put at least a few of your dead guys in tiers (who does this hurt?), I'll share my perverse logic with you. Deal?
Tier 1 is reserved for the historically venerated, like the four on Mt. Rushmore and anyone you'd add to that monument. Among the now dead Presidents who served during my lifetime, I place no one in that tier.
Tier 2 would be the middling group, i.e. the bell curve Presidents. Historically, I think here of John Quincy Adams, James Polk, Calvin Coolidge. For my money, all of the dead Presidents who have served during my lifetime reside in that middle muddle, except Gerald Ford. For the record, that group includes Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, & Reagan.
Tier 3 is for the real losers. In this dismal historical company, dullards like Millard Fillmore, James Buchanan, and Warren G. Harding come to mind. I know at least one of my sisters will be unhappy I don't place Nixon in this pack (she might also be surprised I didn't elevate JFK to Tier 1) but all things considered, I'll stand by my placement of both of them in Tier 2.
Tier 4 is the limbo group, i.e. Presidents who either had no chance for history to assess them because they died too soon - William Henry Harrison & James Garfield - or ... they were never elected but ended up a President anyway. Gerald Ford lies alone among the dead Presidents of my lifetime in this weird group.
Even though this Presidential scholar did not provide a rationale for the placement of his seven dead guys, if you comment here and put at least a few of your dead guys in tiers (who does this hurt?), I'll share my perverse logic with you. Deal?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)