The radio rustles with their return every year and somehow
No other team will suffice and no other worldly honor will be lauded.
They play the games those large men, they fly into each other as if each had a purpose.
The puck will sing, the ball will be kicked, but still part of us waits for the boys.
It is perhaps the inner life of those players -- we watch them wait for the pitch and imagine
inside ourselves what they might be thinking. I have always watched them. Their inner life, like the inner life of a nun, has always spoken to me.
When you stand still and wonder. When you stand still at the barre and wait for instructions. When you stand still and wonder what life will give you at that particular moment.
The moment when a ball will be hurled at you at 90 mph and then you must decide what to do.
And you have no time.
And you have nothing to rely upon but your instincts and your experience.
Ballet dancers, baseball players and nuns, how could you know how much they have in common. And yet, they do.
This I know because I have been all of them, either in reality or in my mind.
I have been all of them.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
My problems with the holidays
Dearest cherubs:
It's not PC what I have to say. But I have a lot of problems with the holidays.
It is extremely difficult for me to just forgive and forget. I find, after much introspection, that I can do neither.
So, this year, I will not participate.
I resign.
I'm packing it in.
So this year, for the holidays I seek solitude. Complete and utter solitude.
What does this mean, you might ask.
This means the bell ringers go unanswered, the carols go unsung, the meals go unattended, the presents go unbought. The life goes on as if the holidays did not even exist.
I am finding some solace in this decision. But I also find that people feel sorry for me. I am wondering what kind of projection allows them to do so. For whom are they feeling sorry? For me? For themselves? For the myths? I am not sure.
But I also have to tell you, that is not a sad thing for me. My aloneness is not the same as lonliness. They are separate. Sometimes I am lonely. Sometimes, people teeming with family, are lonely. Sometimes people wish for the time to be alone, and they can never be. But I can.
I think the time to be alone with myself is something I have fought for all my life. And at no time other than the holidays is that more profound.
We are supposed to be making merry. But making merry means different things to different people. To me, making merry means being alone, quiet, or with one or two people. To me making merry means making merry with myself. I like me. I am a good person. I find, often, that I am the best person to tell myself that.
Best wishes for your own, self actualized, holiday celebrations.
Warmly and with love dear cherubs:
Margaret
It's not PC what I have to say. But I have a lot of problems with the holidays.
It is extremely difficult for me to just forgive and forget. I find, after much introspection, that I can do neither.
So, this year, I will not participate.
I resign.
I'm packing it in.
So this year, for the holidays I seek solitude. Complete and utter solitude.
What does this mean, you might ask.
This means the bell ringers go unanswered, the carols go unsung, the meals go unattended, the presents go unbought. The life goes on as if the holidays did not even exist.
I am finding some solace in this decision. But I also find that people feel sorry for me. I am wondering what kind of projection allows them to do so. For whom are they feeling sorry? For me? For themselves? For the myths? I am not sure.
But I also have to tell you, that is not a sad thing for me. My aloneness is not the same as lonliness. They are separate. Sometimes I am lonely. Sometimes, people teeming with family, are lonely. Sometimes people wish for the time to be alone, and they can never be. But I can.
I think the time to be alone with myself is something I have fought for all my life. And at no time other than the holidays is that more profound.
We are supposed to be making merry. But making merry means different things to different people. To me, making merry means being alone, quiet, or with one or two people. To me making merry means making merry with myself. I like me. I am a good person. I find, often, that I am the best person to tell myself that.
Best wishes for your own, self actualized, holiday celebrations.
Warmly and with love dear cherubs:
Margaret
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Ok now that the hype has lessened, here are my thoughts about Ted Kennedy
Dearest Cherubs:
Of course, I had to let the hype die down. How could I even add to anything? But now, I have bought the book "True Compass" and I have devoured it my dears. I mean, I have completely devoured it. And it has brought me back to my childhood and to my adolescent years and to my adulthood.
So now, here's what I have to say.
I am part of the generation who watched JFK die, RFK die, Martin Luther King die, Malcom X die, George Wallace become paralized from a gun shot, race riots, Kent State and many other appalling indignities and horrid events transpire.
But I did not lose three brothers and two sisters. I did not endure that. I did not endure being responsible for the death of another person. I endured other things, but not those things.
On the other side of that, I was not responsible for championing legislation that made other people's life better. I did not nor was not in the position to make things better for the people of Massachusetts and the people of the USA. I was not in that position. He was.
I have only one small Kennedy story to tell. When I was in highschool, I knew a student who went to school at Concord Academy, the school which Caroline Kennedy attended. There was a small gathering at Concord Academy that year to which I was invited. Caroline was there. Her father had been dead about eight years. She wore her hair very long, I remember. It covered half her face. I was also wearing my hair in the same fashion.
The party was lively and fun but yet, Caroline held herself apart, quietly sitting in a corner. Who could blame her?
I gently approached her. I have no idea what gave me the courage to do that. I touched her hand and said, hey, there's cake, have you had some? She smiled at me and said that she didn't care for cake.
I don't remember much after that. But I tried to speak because it seemed to me that she was an unwilling victim of that senseless act of violence. And no matter how unsettled my adolescent life was (and it was) it could never compare to what she had to go through.
I am sure if I related that incident to her now, she would not remember it. But I remembered it. Because she was a Kennedy.
They were and still are a family that represents things to us, as Americans. And Teddy chose to give up aspirations to power, because I believe that despite what happened on the Cape that night, he could have been president. He could have been President of the United States of America. But he gave it up. Perhaps he felt himself unworthy. But I think not. I think he thought of the children and grand children left to his care. I really think he thought of them and thought that he was the only one left. So he took it on. He took it on without complaint. And he stayed in the United States Senate and voted every year, day after day, month after month, year after year, exactly as I would have asked him to vote.
It is for that I am grateful. It is for that, that his book goes into my library in a place of honor. It is for that public service that I thank him from the bottom of my heart.
A perfect person he was not, and who is? But a great public servant, he was. And dearest cherubs, there are few. So very few.
With love and respect, I submit this post.
Of course, I had to let the hype die down. How could I even add to anything? But now, I have bought the book "True Compass" and I have devoured it my dears. I mean, I have completely devoured it. And it has brought me back to my childhood and to my adolescent years and to my adulthood.
So now, here's what I have to say.
I am part of the generation who watched JFK die, RFK die, Martin Luther King die, Malcom X die, George Wallace become paralized from a gun shot, race riots, Kent State and many other appalling indignities and horrid events transpire.
But I did not lose three brothers and two sisters. I did not endure that. I did not endure being responsible for the death of another person. I endured other things, but not those things.
On the other side of that, I was not responsible for championing legislation that made other people's life better. I did not nor was not in the position to make things better for the people of Massachusetts and the people of the USA. I was not in that position. He was.
I have only one small Kennedy story to tell. When I was in highschool, I knew a student who went to school at Concord Academy, the school which Caroline Kennedy attended. There was a small gathering at Concord Academy that year to which I was invited. Caroline was there. Her father had been dead about eight years. She wore her hair very long, I remember. It covered half her face. I was also wearing my hair in the same fashion.
The party was lively and fun but yet, Caroline held herself apart, quietly sitting in a corner. Who could blame her?
I gently approached her. I have no idea what gave me the courage to do that. I touched her hand and said, hey, there's cake, have you had some? She smiled at me and said that she didn't care for cake.
I don't remember much after that. But I tried to speak because it seemed to me that she was an unwilling victim of that senseless act of violence. And no matter how unsettled my adolescent life was (and it was) it could never compare to what she had to go through.
I am sure if I related that incident to her now, she would not remember it. But I remembered it. Because she was a Kennedy.
They were and still are a family that represents things to us, as Americans. And Teddy chose to give up aspirations to power, because I believe that despite what happened on the Cape that night, he could have been president. He could have been President of the United States of America. But he gave it up. Perhaps he felt himself unworthy. But I think not. I think he thought of the children and grand children left to his care. I really think he thought of them and thought that he was the only one left. So he took it on. He took it on without complaint. And he stayed in the United States Senate and voted every year, day after day, month after month, year after year, exactly as I would have asked him to vote.
It is for that I am grateful. It is for that, that his book goes into my library in a place of honor. It is for that public service that I thank him from the bottom of my heart.
A perfect person he was not, and who is? But a great public servant, he was. And dearest cherubs, there are few. So very few.
With love and respect, I submit this post.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Progressive libralism and sound Investing, they're not mutually exclusive
Hello dear cherubs:
I am an investment professional, I guess you would say to me that fact should make me a conservative, at least fiscally. Ummmm it does and it kind of doesn't.
I am a progressive liberal who believes in investing. How bizarre is that? But it's true. I am a progressive liberal who believes in investing. Investing and being careful and smart and informed does not collide with being a progressive liberal. Unbeknownst to most people, liberals don't just know how to spend other people's money. We also know where to spend the right amount of money at the right time. This may mean that the money we spend doesn't have an immediate effect. Good investing takes patience. To those who tell me now that the stimulus is not working, I will say to them the facts: the stimulus bill is 90% unspent, hung up in bureaucracy. And it's not the federal bureaucracy, it's the individual state's bureaucracy. So we have no idea whether it's working or not. My thought is, it is working but not quickly enough to suit most Americans. Americans have very little patience for anything.
If I could make enough money doing it, I would teach poor folks how to invest. I would think about investing for them. If brokers were really doing their job, they'd be thinking about poor folks too. I think that's what the government should be doing, paying brokers to help poor people learn about investing.
For a while, I was able to beat the S&P 500 by a goodly percent in my 401(k). (Many thanks go to my former colleagues who taught me about investing.) But the fact that I was confined to investing in a single fund company worried my investments into losses beyond my control.
But now I am back in control. And what do you all think I am doing in my 401(k) account dearest cherubs? I'm buying! I'm buying! I'm buying! There are values out there that are unbelieveable and if you're not buying you're crazy.
However, in my non-contributary accounts dearest cherubs, my roll over IRA, what do you think I'm doing? I'm protecting myself. I'm in bonds and precious metals and other safe investments. I'm being careful. Because I can't contribute to those accounts and so therefore, there's only one way to mitigate risk and that is to be in less lucrative but "safer" investments.
Now you're all smart folks, and so you know why I'm making these choices. I'm 53 years old and I have to save what I can save, and grow what I can grow. Also, I have a wonderful financial advisor who cares what happens to me. I'm unusual in this respect.
I really do not have a problem with the losses I suffered recently. That's the way the market works. But it's all a loss on paper. I have sold nothing and bought nothing that can be valued now. If I were to sell, then, I would suffer. But the fact is I will recoup my losses over the next 20 years or so. This is how one must think. For the people just retiring now, I am sorry, but I hope they had a wise broker who saw it coming and got those investments into safety. Because if that broker truly acted in his client's best interest, then folks just now retiring who were fortunate enough to be that broker's clients, they would be just fine. But we all know there are people out there who know what they're doing and others, well, let's hope this environment squeezes many of the bad ones out of business.
Here is what my progressive liberal self hopes. I am hopeful that we have learned something about what unchecked greed and unmitigated risk can do during this crisis. I hope that we have learned that when you don't restrain the market, the market will not restrain itself. My investor self hopes that the regulatory community will be wise in its imposition of new regulations (and we all know these are coming) and not prevent the market from achieving reasonable growth based on real value and solid deal making and not silly and stupid ideas like "the housing market will always go up".
See, we liberals know about money, yours and my money, other people's money. We know alright. We know that if you're investing for retirement, it's all about "hurry up and wait". If you're getting close to retirement age, consult a professional with a good ethical reputation and that professional should put you in the right place at the right time. That's her job. If she's not doing her job, fire her and get somebody else.
Who's in charge here? You, that's who.
Ok enough about that. Thank you, as always, for listening.
Warmly and with all my love, Margaret
I am an investment professional, I guess you would say to me that fact should make me a conservative, at least fiscally. Ummmm it does and it kind of doesn't.
I am a progressive liberal who believes in investing. How bizarre is that? But it's true. I am a progressive liberal who believes in investing. Investing and being careful and smart and informed does not collide with being a progressive liberal. Unbeknownst to most people, liberals don't just know how to spend other people's money. We also know where to spend the right amount of money at the right time. This may mean that the money we spend doesn't have an immediate effect. Good investing takes patience. To those who tell me now that the stimulus is not working, I will say to them the facts: the stimulus bill is 90% unspent, hung up in bureaucracy. And it's not the federal bureaucracy, it's the individual state's bureaucracy. So we have no idea whether it's working or not. My thought is, it is working but not quickly enough to suit most Americans. Americans have very little patience for anything.
If I could make enough money doing it, I would teach poor folks how to invest. I would think about investing for them. If brokers were really doing their job, they'd be thinking about poor folks too. I think that's what the government should be doing, paying brokers to help poor people learn about investing.
For a while, I was able to beat the S&P 500 by a goodly percent in my 401(k). (Many thanks go to my former colleagues who taught me about investing.) But the fact that I was confined to investing in a single fund company worried my investments into losses beyond my control.
But now I am back in control. And what do you all think I am doing in my 401(k) account dearest cherubs? I'm buying! I'm buying! I'm buying! There are values out there that are unbelieveable and if you're not buying you're crazy.
However, in my non-contributary accounts dearest cherubs, my roll over IRA, what do you think I'm doing? I'm protecting myself. I'm in bonds and precious metals and other safe investments. I'm being careful. Because I can't contribute to those accounts and so therefore, there's only one way to mitigate risk and that is to be in less lucrative but "safer" investments.
Now you're all smart folks, and so you know why I'm making these choices. I'm 53 years old and I have to save what I can save, and grow what I can grow. Also, I have a wonderful financial advisor who cares what happens to me. I'm unusual in this respect.
I really do not have a problem with the losses I suffered recently. That's the way the market works. But it's all a loss on paper. I have sold nothing and bought nothing that can be valued now. If I were to sell, then, I would suffer. But the fact is I will recoup my losses over the next 20 years or so. This is how one must think. For the people just retiring now, I am sorry, but I hope they had a wise broker who saw it coming and got those investments into safety. Because if that broker truly acted in his client's best interest, then folks just now retiring who were fortunate enough to be that broker's clients, they would be just fine. But we all know there are people out there who know what they're doing and others, well, let's hope this environment squeezes many of the bad ones out of business.
Here is what my progressive liberal self hopes. I am hopeful that we have learned something about what unchecked greed and unmitigated risk can do during this crisis. I hope that we have learned that when you don't restrain the market, the market will not restrain itself. My investor self hopes that the regulatory community will be wise in its imposition of new regulations (and we all know these are coming) and not prevent the market from achieving reasonable growth based on real value and solid deal making and not silly and stupid ideas like "the housing market will always go up".
See, we liberals know about money, yours and my money, other people's money. We know alright. We know that if you're investing for retirement, it's all about "hurry up and wait". If you're getting close to retirement age, consult a professional with a good ethical reputation and that professional should put you in the right place at the right time. That's her job. If she's not doing her job, fire her and get somebody else.
Who's in charge here? You, that's who.
Ok enough about that. Thank you, as always, for listening.
Warmly and with all my love, Margaret
Monday, May 4, 2009
Business Speak I never want to hear again!
Cherubs:
There's something happening to our language concerning the way we communicate in the world of work, here in America. The words are moving away from the humanity, there's a distancing and an objectification that's happening. It bothers me immensely. I'll attempt to use a little humor here, but consider the following phrases:
"Think outside the box" -- People who still say this are decidedly inside the box. It's become a tired phrase that attempts to conjure creativity, but instead succeeds only in conjuring eye rolling on the part of the listener, if indeed, the listener is still listening. How about "think creatively about" or "think beyond the obvious" what's wrong with that?
"It is what it is". -- I do not know who coined this phrase but if ever a more empty, defeatist, negative phrase existed I don't know what it is. If the good side of this is to invoke pragmatism, there must be a better way to do it. How about "let us accept those things which can't be changed and work together to improve those which can"? Oops, maybe that's too many words?
"Take this offline" -- This is an attempt to pretend that you don't want to bother people in the larger meeting which the details of a particular matter. But what it really means is that you actually want private time with the person disagreeing with you in order to brow beat them into submission with impunity and without witnesses. And by the way, when we're sitting in a meeting are we "on line"? I know some of us are pounding away on our blackberries and not paying any attention to the meeting in the first place, and I know that some of us are so unfortunate as to have had to call into the meeting which allows those present in the meeting room to snicker at us without being detected, but I was not aware that we were "on line". So why are we taking things "off line"? Things in English are really weird in corporate America.
"Circle back with" -- OK this is a weird one. What this means is that you can't answer a question, so you need to speak with the person who has the answer. Why you can't just "speak" with them as opposed to "circling back" with them is beyond me. It kind of reminds me of the old cowboys and Indian games, where the cowboys "circle the wagons" (which by the way, never really happened but it made for a nice movie shot).
"Reach out and touch" -- Okay I think the political types use this one more than the corporate types, but I've heard it both places. What it means is to contact somebody, talk to somebody, speak with somebody, telephone somebody, or otherwise attempt to communicate. There was an old television ad I believe that had a jingle "reach out, reach out and touch someone". Perhaps that old ad is what spawned this phrase, but I actually would posit a different theory. My theory is that "reach out and touch" gives the feeling of distance and "speak with" gives the feeling of closeness. When faced with the choice of distance or nearness, most corporate speakers will choose distance. Distance is safer. Also, I think "reach out and touch" implies that you're doing something more than you're doing. Corporate speakers always want you to think that they're working harder than they really are.
"We" -- "We" almost always equals "I" or even more often "you". People choose to say "we" because they think it sounds more egalitarian than "I/you", and protects them from being exposed as a bully, which is what they're really usually doing, bullying you into doing it their way. Consider the following sentence: "I'm not sure we should be taking that approach". What this means is "you stupid idiot, just do it my way and get it right next time, ya hear?" Enough said.
"Resources" -- "Resources" = "money". There are no exceptions to that equation. It's just that we don't say the bad, bad money word. The money word is bad, very, very bad. Even if "resources" = "people", "people" cost money. And the money word is bad, very, very bad. Don't say that word, okay?
"Throw him/her/them under the bus" -- This frighteningly violent phrase has to do with pointing out that somebody on one's team, or elsewhere in the company, might be responsible for doing something less than helpful. "I don't want to throw anybody under the bus but didn't that gaff in the newsletter originate with the editing team?" It can also mean that you intend to assign somebody a painful, difficult and thoroughly awful project and then you name the name of the person to whom this dreadful and thoroughly awful project will be assigned. Then you end with some iteration of the bus phrase. "Not to throw Julie under the bus, but she'd be very good at sorting out all the widgets into the special widget drawers and then reporting the contents of each drawer in 20 different memos to senior management, twice weekly." In other words, when you state you don't want to throw somebody under the bus, that's exactly what you end up doing. Look both ways before crossing anywhere in corporate America folks.
"The bottom line is" -- See above under "Resources".
"Bandwidth" -- This is an adoption of a computer measurement of memory or disk space which is being applied to people's "time". "Time" is almost as bad "money" in the corporate world. Don't say these words okay? Again, I'm seeing a depersonalization of people -- they don't have "time" they have bandwidth, they are not people, they are computers. They are not people who have time and who cost money. They are people who have/don't have bandwidth and are worth/not worth resources. Yikes!
"Do the math" -- You do the math! Okay, I'll do the math! Doing the math refers to figuring something out. I actually don't mind this phrase quite so much if it is not used to brow beat somebody. "Everybody knows that the editing team (not to throw them under the bus) has made at least 25 errors this year. I mean, you do the math!" There is one most dreadful iteration of this and that is, dare I say it, the conversion of the word "math" from a noun to a verb. Yes, it's the now commonplace assumption that we don't have enough verbs in English and so therefore, we have to use perfectly good nouns and convert them to verbs. People "gift" each other now, so I guess, the verb "to give" is just not okay anymore. But when people "math" things out, I have to put my foot down all. I really can't stomach that.
And I guess that brings me to the end of this blog entry with a plea for a return to humanity in the workplace. Let's close up the distance and communicate with one another in such a way that acknowledges our human worth and makes us less like commodities and more like people. I dare say we'll get more done, make more "money" and have more "time" to ourselves. You do the math!
All my love, Margaret
There's something happening to our language concerning the way we communicate in the world of work, here in America. The words are moving away from the humanity, there's a distancing and an objectification that's happening. It bothers me immensely. I'll attempt to use a little humor here, but consider the following phrases:
"Think outside the box" -- People who still say this are decidedly inside the box. It's become a tired phrase that attempts to conjure creativity, but instead succeeds only in conjuring eye rolling on the part of the listener, if indeed, the listener is still listening. How about "think creatively about" or "think beyond the obvious" what's wrong with that?
"It is what it is". -- I do not know who coined this phrase but if ever a more empty, defeatist, negative phrase existed I don't know what it is. If the good side of this is to invoke pragmatism, there must be a better way to do it. How about "let us accept those things which can't be changed and work together to improve those which can"? Oops, maybe that's too many words?
"Take this offline" -- This is an attempt to pretend that you don't want to bother people in the larger meeting which the details of a particular matter. But what it really means is that you actually want private time with the person disagreeing with you in order to brow beat them into submission with impunity and without witnesses. And by the way, when we're sitting in a meeting are we "on line"? I know some of us are pounding away on our blackberries and not paying any attention to the meeting in the first place, and I know that some of us are so unfortunate as to have had to call into the meeting which allows those present in the meeting room to snicker at us without being detected, but I was not aware that we were "on line". So why are we taking things "off line"? Things in English are really weird in corporate America.
"Circle back with" -- OK this is a weird one. What this means is that you can't answer a question, so you need to speak with the person who has the answer. Why you can't just "speak" with them as opposed to "circling back" with them is beyond me. It kind of reminds me of the old cowboys and Indian games, where the cowboys "circle the wagons" (which by the way, never really happened but it made for a nice movie shot).
"Reach out and touch" -- Okay I think the political types use this one more than the corporate types, but I've heard it both places. What it means is to contact somebody, talk to somebody, speak with somebody, telephone somebody, or otherwise attempt to communicate. There was an old television ad I believe that had a jingle "reach out, reach out and touch someone". Perhaps that old ad is what spawned this phrase, but I actually would posit a different theory. My theory is that "reach out and touch" gives the feeling of distance and "speak with" gives the feeling of closeness. When faced with the choice of distance or nearness, most corporate speakers will choose distance. Distance is safer. Also, I think "reach out and touch" implies that you're doing something more than you're doing. Corporate speakers always want you to think that they're working harder than they really are.
"We" -- "We" almost always equals "I" or even more often "you". People choose to say "we" because they think it sounds more egalitarian than "I/you", and protects them from being exposed as a bully, which is what they're really usually doing, bullying you into doing it their way. Consider the following sentence: "I'm not sure we should be taking that approach". What this means is "you stupid idiot, just do it my way and get it right next time, ya hear?" Enough said.
"Resources" -- "Resources" = "money". There are no exceptions to that equation. It's just that we don't say the bad, bad money word. The money word is bad, very, very bad. Even if "resources" = "people", "people" cost money. And the money word is bad, very, very bad. Don't say that word, okay?
"Throw him/her/them under the bus" -- This frighteningly violent phrase has to do with pointing out that somebody on one's team, or elsewhere in the company, might be responsible for doing something less than helpful. "I don't want to throw anybody under the bus but didn't that gaff in the newsletter originate with the editing team?" It can also mean that you intend to assign somebody a painful, difficult and thoroughly awful project and then you name the name of the person to whom this dreadful and thoroughly awful project will be assigned. Then you end with some iteration of the bus phrase. "Not to throw Julie under the bus, but she'd be very good at sorting out all the widgets into the special widget drawers and then reporting the contents of each drawer in 20 different memos to senior management, twice weekly." In other words, when you state you don't want to throw somebody under the bus, that's exactly what you end up doing. Look both ways before crossing anywhere in corporate America folks.
"The bottom line is" -- See above under "Resources".
"Bandwidth" -- This is an adoption of a computer measurement of memory or disk space which is being applied to people's "time". "Time" is almost as bad "money" in the corporate world. Don't say these words okay? Again, I'm seeing a depersonalization of people -- they don't have "time" they have bandwidth, they are not people, they are computers. They are not people who have time and who cost money. They are people who have/don't have bandwidth and are worth/not worth resources. Yikes!
"Do the math" -- You do the math! Okay, I'll do the math! Doing the math refers to figuring something out. I actually don't mind this phrase quite so much if it is not used to brow beat somebody. "Everybody knows that the editing team (not to throw them under the bus) has made at least 25 errors this year. I mean, you do the math!" There is one most dreadful iteration of this and that is, dare I say it, the conversion of the word "math" from a noun to a verb. Yes, it's the now commonplace assumption that we don't have enough verbs in English and so therefore, we have to use perfectly good nouns and convert them to verbs. People "gift" each other now, so I guess, the verb "to give" is just not okay anymore. But when people "math" things out, I have to put my foot down all. I really can't stomach that.
And I guess that brings me to the end of this blog entry with a plea for a return to humanity in the workplace. Let's close up the distance and communicate with one another in such a way that acknowledges our human worth and makes us less like commodities and more like people. I dare say we'll get more done, make more "money" and have more "time" to ourselves. You do the math!
All my love, Margaret
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
I understand completely that I am too introspective
Cherubs:
I have been cautioned about my introspectiveness. I have been counseled (and I think carefully, and with forethought and love) that I must join the world, that I am alone too much in my thoughts.
I think perhaps that all those who council me are quite correct. One cannot sit and contemplate one's navel. Yes, indeedy, I agree.
But dearest cherubs, I ask you this..... who is thinking? Who is thinking? And I ask one more time, who is thinking?
Writers serve a purpose in the world. We sit around during train rides to Boston and we think of stuff. Sometimes, we look around us and make an observance that might, one hopes, be useful to somebody else. Notice that I don't say "everybody" I simply say "somebody". I really don't care two bits if I ever publish a book but I sure do care two bits if I don't influence or communicate with other human beings.
I have several good friends who have encouraged me to write a book. What in the sweet name of heaven would I write about I wonder? My family is indeed, colorful. If I wrote about them, I might risk hurting somebody whom I never would have intended to hurt.
I could write about the things that bother me, confuse me, piss me off, make me happy.... make me happy.... I have to think about the "make me happy thing".
I have declared often to those whom I love and to those perhaps who simply endure me that "happiness is an unproductive state". Do you know when I am completely happy? It's when I am doing absolutely nothing. I am completely happy, in a bubble bath, in a tub that I don't have to clean, sipping a glass of wine that I didn't have to buy, looking at towels on towel warmers that somebody else is paying the electricity bill for, knowing that I will soon wrap myself in those towels.
Happiness is not productive. Agnst is productive. Worry and gnashing of teeth is productive (sometimes). Carefulness, and planning and consideration all are productive...but happiness? Well, to me it really is not conducive to getting anything done.
I believe that our founding fathers guranteed us only the "pursuit of happiness". The pursuit, is all that is guaranteed. The happiness is all a matter of perception.
I pursue my bubble bath. But I know that what I contribute is of value. But nobody is going to say to me "hooray for you Margaret". So who will say that to me, other than myself -- nobody I think.
So back to introspectiviness. I am indeed, introspective, and perhaps I wonder why that is. It is, I think, because I give myself the credit and rely on nobody else to do so. Even if somebody says, nope, you didn't get there or you didn't do what I wanted you to do, I still know that I am a person of worth. I guess I credit a person who sat across from me. in a leather chair-- a woman, my therapist, who saved my life.
I no longer see her on a regular basis, but she saved my life nonetheless, and my gratitude to her knows no bounds.
Today, I went to a gym to begin the process of putting back together my body to match my psyche. And my trainer was another kind of therapist. I could tell that he had compassion and I could tell that he had a sense of humor. I did only 9 pushups in one minute. But I knew that if I made a commitement, those 9 pushups would grow. I remember the feeling of muscles working from another life. Thank you to all my dance teachers for that.
Cherubs, the pursuit of happiness, is a very great pursuit. It is my humble opinion that one should attempt it as best one can, even if it results in lack of production. And please all of you, forgive my introspection because what can one do? I am thinking. I am thinking. I am thinking.
Warmly, and with love, Margaret
I have been cautioned about my introspectiveness. I have been counseled (and I think carefully, and with forethought and love) that I must join the world, that I am alone too much in my thoughts.
I think perhaps that all those who council me are quite correct. One cannot sit and contemplate one's navel. Yes, indeedy, I agree.
But dearest cherubs, I ask you this..... who is thinking? Who is thinking? And I ask one more time, who is thinking?
Writers serve a purpose in the world. We sit around during train rides to Boston and we think of stuff. Sometimes, we look around us and make an observance that might, one hopes, be useful to somebody else. Notice that I don't say "everybody" I simply say "somebody". I really don't care two bits if I ever publish a book but I sure do care two bits if I don't influence or communicate with other human beings.
I have several good friends who have encouraged me to write a book. What in the sweet name of heaven would I write about I wonder? My family is indeed, colorful. If I wrote about them, I might risk hurting somebody whom I never would have intended to hurt.
I could write about the things that bother me, confuse me, piss me off, make me happy.... make me happy.... I have to think about the "make me happy thing".
I have declared often to those whom I love and to those perhaps who simply endure me that "happiness is an unproductive state". Do you know when I am completely happy? It's when I am doing absolutely nothing. I am completely happy, in a bubble bath, in a tub that I don't have to clean, sipping a glass of wine that I didn't have to buy, looking at towels on towel warmers that somebody else is paying the electricity bill for, knowing that I will soon wrap myself in those towels.
Happiness is not productive. Agnst is productive. Worry and gnashing of teeth is productive (sometimes). Carefulness, and planning and consideration all are productive...but happiness? Well, to me it really is not conducive to getting anything done.
I believe that our founding fathers guranteed us only the "pursuit of happiness". The pursuit, is all that is guaranteed. The happiness is all a matter of perception.
I pursue my bubble bath. But I know that what I contribute is of value. But nobody is going to say to me "hooray for you Margaret". So who will say that to me, other than myself -- nobody I think.
So back to introspectiviness. I am indeed, introspective, and perhaps I wonder why that is. It is, I think, because I give myself the credit and rely on nobody else to do so. Even if somebody says, nope, you didn't get there or you didn't do what I wanted you to do, I still know that I am a person of worth. I guess I credit a person who sat across from me. in a leather chair-- a woman, my therapist, who saved my life.
I no longer see her on a regular basis, but she saved my life nonetheless, and my gratitude to her knows no bounds.
Today, I went to a gym to begin the process of putting back together my body to match my psyche. And my trainer was another kind of therapist. I could tell that he had compassion and I could tell that he had a sense of humor. I did only 9 pushups in one minute. But I knew that if I made a commitement, those 9 pushups would grow. I remember the feeling of muscles working from another life. Thank you to all my dance teachers for that.
Cherubs, the pursuit of happiness, is a very great pursuit. It is my humble opinion that one should attempt it as best one can, even if it results in lack of production. And please all of you, forgive my introspection because what can one do? I am thinking. I am thinking. I am thinking.
Warmly, and with love, Margaret
Sunday, April 12, 2009
The obligatory Easter Blog!
Sweet cherubs:
Because of my group membership in the popular social network LinkedIn, I have been in a dialogue with a minister. Yes, this is me, Margaret, the agnostic, in a dialogue with a minister.
He posed a question to the Learning, Education and Training Professionals group on LinkedIn. The question is as follows: Do you know of an objection to Christianity?
Well, as you might imagine, there were several posts indignantly questioning the relevancy of such a question posted in this particular group. But I decided to reply to him privately. I should tell you that he was actually seeking a way to communicate across many other religions and answer questions and talk about Christianity. Well, I thought that was a noble effort, so I replied. I suggested to him that one cannot debate faith, for the very reason that faith is based on an acceptance that cannot be proved or beaten into another person. Faith just is, you either have it, or you don't. What I did suggest to him is that what I call "churchianity" has caused much ill in the world. (More about that later.) Across a few e-mails, I suggested to him that if one were to have a discussion, one must discuss the similarities across all three Abrahamic religions. It's basically the same story, with different names, in slightly different locations, over approximately 3,000 years.
I also suggested to him that if one were to step back one step further to include the eastern religions, there are still points of similarity. "Everybody be loving and helpful to others; everybody help those less fortunate than yourselves." Goodness gracious, what's wrong with that? It's quite difficult to argue with that, don't you agree?
Back to the evil and disparaging "churchianity". Herein lies the problem. Churches were founded by men (and sometimes women, but mostly men). Once you have a "church" you have a problem. You have a problem because then, somebody starts pointing to a book and saying "it says here in this book that this and such and stuff is true and if you don't believe that, then you are wrong, and not just wrong, you can't be a part of our community".
Well, that is where organized religion and I part company. I explained to the good minister that God and I have a good relationship. I explained that she smiles at me every morning when I look in the mirror (I expect that statement may have given him some pause). But I also explained that once you say "it says here in this book" that I believe one is automatially wrong. The discussion of right and wrong must be avoided. There is no right and there is no wrong. There just is dogma and stories and the stuff of humans. It's humans that made religion. God had nothing to do with it.
Finally, I suggested to our friend the minister, that in order to break out of the evils of "churchianity" he consider respect. Okay the Christians believe this, the Jews believe this, the Muslims believe this and the Buddhists, believe this. So what? Everybody's beliefs are okay, and everybody's non-beliefs are okay. You can't convince anybody, but you can share ideas. You can share ideas as long as you do not feel the need to "convince" anybody. Faith and convincing are an anathma to one another. My ex-mother in law is a devout Christian. I learned to get along with her when I stopped beating her with my intellectual approach. As I have said before, faith cannot be proved nor can it be repudiated. When we would talk, I simply smile and say, "your faith must be a great comfort to you". I was not patronizing her, but I was trying to say in a sense, "I"m okay and you're okay". I won't get on the band wagon, but neither will I imply that you're on the wrong band wagon. I just, simply, have no idea.
To me, it's okay not to know. Sometimes, I think, we were not meant to actually "know". Jeepers creepers, there's a lot of quotation marks in this post!
Thanks as always for listening dearest cherubs.
Blessed Be and Happy Easter, Passover, ummm not sure what the Muslims and Buddhists do this time of year.
Margaret
Because of my group membership in the popular social network LinkedIn, I have been in a dialogue with a minister. Yes, this is me, Margaret, the agnostic, in a dialogue with a minister.
He posed a question to the Learning, Education and Training Professionals group on LinkedIn. The question is as follows: Do you know of an objection to Christianity?
Well, as you might imagine, there were several posts indignantly questioning the relevancy of such a question posted in this particular group. But I decided to reply to him privately. I should tell you that he was actually seeking a way to communicate across many other religions and answer questions and talk about Christianity. Well, I thought that was a noble effort, so I replied. I suggested to him that one cannot debate faith, for the very reason that faith is based on an acceptance that cannot be proved or beaten into another person. Faith just is, you either have it, or you don't. What I did suggest to him is that what I call "churchianity" has caused much ill in the world. (More about that later.) Across a few e-mails, I suggested to him that if one were to have a discussion, one must discuss the similarities across all three Abrahamic religions. It's basically the same story, with different names, in slightly different locations, over approximately 3,000 years.
I also suggested to him that if one were to step back one step further to include the eastern religions, there are still points of similarity. "Everybody be loving and helpful to others; everybody help those less fortunate than yourselves." Goodness gracious, what's wrong with that? It's quite difficult to argue with that, don't you agree?
Back to the evil and disparaging "churchianity". Herein lies the problem. Churches were founded by men (and sometimes women, but mostly men). Once you have a "church" you have a problem. You have a problem because then, somebody starts pointing to a book and saying "it says here in this book that this and such and stuff is true and if you don't believe that, then you are wrong, and not just wrong, you can't be a part of our community".
Well, that is where organized religion and I part company. I explained to the good minister that God and I have a good relationship. I explained that she smiles at me every morning when I look in the mirror (I expect that statement may have given him some pause). But I also explained that once you say "it says here in this book" that I believe one is automatially wrong. The discussion of right and wrong must be avoided. There is no right and there is no wrong. There just is dogma and stories and the stuff of humans. It's humans that made religion. God had nothing to do with it.
Finally, I suggested to our friend the minister, that in order to break out of the evils of "churchianity" he consider respect. Okay the Christians believe this, the Jews believe this, the Muslims believe this and the Buddhists, believe this. So what? Everybody's beliefs are okay, and everybody's non-beliefs are okay. You can't convince anybody, but you can share ideas. You can share ideas as long as you do not feel the need to "convince" anybody. Faith and convincing are an anathma to one another. My ex-mother in law is a devout Christian. I learned to get along with her when I stopped beating her with my intellectual approach. As I have said before, faith cannot be proved nor can it be repudiated. When we would talk, I simply smile and say, "your faith must be a great comfort to you". I was not patronizing her, but I was trying to say in a sense, "I"m okay and you're okay". I won't get on the band wagon, but neither will I imply that you're on the wrong band wagon. I just, simply, have no idea.
To me, it's okay not to know. Sometimes, I think, we were not meant to actually "know". Jeepers creepers, there's a lot of quotation marks in this post!
Thanks as always for listening dearest cherubs.
Blessed Be and Happy Easter, Passover, ummm not sure what the Muslims and Buddhists do this time of year.
Margaret
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
