Uncategorized

  • Does Time Drag or Fly?

     

    [Quiltnmomi agreed to let me tag along on her topic today.  My own caveat:  don’t read mine without assimilating hers!]

     

    Some time ago, idling around the springtime yard picking up lawnmower-threatening sticks and watching the kids cavort on the tire swing and the tree limb, I thought about how time flies.  Can my kids really be seven and four already?  When did that happen?  Just yesterday, seemingly, they were little nursing-and-pooping machines with slightly cloudy eyes and a fixation on Everything Mother, to my eternal exhaustion.  Then, I thought each minute oozed, and I gritted teeth when folks insisted “Watch out; it all goes so fast!”  Now, my eldest is immersed in books she’s reading to herself all day, and my youngest, the personable chatterbox, engages herself in hours-long discussions with her toys and dolls if no actual warm body is available for play.  They’ve become individuals with their own timescales that coincide only intermittently with my own.  Yesterday, for example, just back from a business trip with a thousand personal and professional things to accomplish, time pressed heavily for my every waking minute.  For my eldest, however, sick with Strep and desirous of heavy mothering, time plodded.

     

    Beyond the perceptions of the individuals sharing a timeframe comes a longer view of our brief ownership thereof.  Shakespeare, as usual, says it best:

     

    To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
    Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
    To the last syllable of recorded time;
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
    The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
    Life's but a walking shadow; a poor player,
    That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
    And then is heard no more: it is a tale
    Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
    Signifying nothing.

     

    Macbeth, of course, was a character for whom time both dragged and flew, and both with weighty and frightening import.  Maybe his perception isn’t, after all, the best to encompass a more modern timesense. 

     

    One of the videos I rented to sooth my feverish eldest was Disney’s rendition of Madeleine L’Engle’s “A Wrinkle in Time,” one of my own all-time favorite works of teen literature.  The book isn’t so much about time as it is about the power of love and all thoughts individual, creative and positive – but it does introduce some weighty concepts of its own about the physics of time, and how our standard concept of beginnings, middles and endings (our brief time-candle, alight, and then out) may be misconceptions, or at least misperceptions. 

     

    The other day I happened across a tidbit of science news regarding astronomers’ latest glimpse of the swirling, scattering stars born in the formation of the universe.  Across unimaginable expanses of time, this long-gone image reached their lenses only last month:  a bit of living time-archeology marching side-by-side with the modern minute.  It boggles the mind to think of us, in the hear-and-now, putting an eye to the sky and seeing the formation of the universe so long ago.  An estimated 15 billion years ago … the universe began with a cataclysm that created space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the universe will ever holdThis timeline attempts to show the best scientific estimates of the timings of past events and predictions of the approximate timing of hypothetical future events with cosmological significance. Some locally significant events of interest to members of Homo sapiens are also included. "

     

    If there were ever a reason to postulate God, the phrase ‘created space and time’ (BANG!) seems an apt enough genesis.

     

    Here on the American continental east side, Sunday was the “time change;” a presumptuous phrase indeed in light of the magnitude of “time creation.”  Homo sapiens can, we assume, change a clock – but time itself?  Or is time only a figment of our little minds, after all; the “Drag-n-fly” that is both an amalgam of human perception and, a metamorphosis into something entirely otherwise, entirely unknown – and entirely awe-inspiring?

  • News From the Road


    It was a long drive, my colleague sneezed germily in my direction throughout, the city was big, dark and confusing, and we went to the wrong hotel by mistake.


    When we finally got to the correct hotel, I trudged out of the elevator on my floor, checking my keycard.  Room number 717.  I looked up.  There were two signs above the little glass stand with the torpid plastic houseplant:


    Rooms 704-716 ----->


    <----- Rooms 718-722


    It's been that kind of day.  And yours?

  • Personality Challenges


    The other night my 4-year-old, who's going through a bit of a personality development challenge right now, crossed her little arms, pouted out her cute little bottom lip, stamped her foot and declared, rapid-fire:


    "Mommy, I hate you, you're stupid, and I'm never going to play with you again."


    Interestingly, it was the second time that day I'd heard the same line, more-or-less in the same words.  The first time, the delivery came at work, from an individual who has a half-century on Ms. 4.  In his case, I fawned, flattered, retreated and reconsidered my position.  In hers, I informed her flatly that she knew better and gave her a time out.


    Others to whom I turned for solace in dealing with my disgruntled colleague have suggested that when you have a laser-sharp focus on your own point of genius (whether that be masterly acting, intuitive grasp of the mysteries of the universe, the creative ability to engineer new and highly complex machinery, or what-have-you) the world will kowtow, ease your every burden, bear your disgruntlement with a smile, and in general aid and abet you in avoiding the necessity to deal with your own personality development challenges.


    I'm left in something of a maternal quandary there, realizing that my severe treatment of Ms. 4's pecadillos is thereby steering her toward being a good, forgiving, kindly person with excellent sandbox skills rather than a focused genius without any of those attributes.  On the other hand, much though one might find significant pride in being the parent of the latter, the entire family might end up being co-opted into the Adulation League, which would be irritating.


    Anyone know any pleasant, well-adjusted geniuses?  Just wondering ('cause, dang, I'd like to work with that one for a change).

  • Grabbing the Bull by the ….

     

    Last week my CEO and I hosted several visitors from the local business community for a briefing on our firm.  All together we were a group of five: two women, three men.  Most of us were dressed in some form of unobtrusive business casual.  The other woman wore a dazzlingly patterned miniskirt over stalwart thighs, and as she spoke energetically about collaborative relationships, her long black curls swirled, filling the air with the scent of green apple.  In contrast to the rest of us in our drab trousers and short locks, she was very much the bird of paradise.

     

    Working his way through our standard corporate introduction, my boss started describing potential clients for our line of cryocoolers (machines that cool to liquid-gas temperature).  Did we deal with any other Ohio firms? Asked one of the men.  “Yes,” explained my boss, “we’ve had inquiries from Select Sires, a firm that markets…uh..." and, uncharacteristically, he paused as he sorted through the most appropriate choice of descriptors.

     

    “Semen!” cried the other woman enthusiastically.  Grinning broadly and without the slightest sign of hesitation or embarrassment, she went on, “I grew up on a dairy farm, and we knew those folks really well.  They used to put out calendars with one of their bulls for each month.  Now those bulls were really ….. well!”  she laughed merrily.

     

    The guys all looked studiously at the walls.  After a moment the senior man, a Vice President used to addressing large halls of rapt audience members, cleared his throat.  “Would this machine,” he asked tentatively “be useful for vaccine cooling?”

     

    “Yes!” cried my boss, and the other men leapt happily after him into safer conversational waters.

     

    I related this tale to my thoughtful friend-and-colleague, who pointed out:  You women hold all of the cards in these situations.  Men have to wait to see what's going to be acceptable, even the guys who imagine themselves always in control.

     

    Which is an excellent point, and renders the tale less like a joke and more like reverse gender discrimination (I can only imagine the 'male' version of the scenario in which a well-turned-out guy ends up extolling the virtues of his brand of silicon for breast enhancement, or some such).

     

    Still.  I did laugh. 

     

  • Following the Rules

    "Every society has its own arbitrary food taboos, as one of the many ways to distinguish itself from other societies:  we virtuous clean people don't eat those disgusting things that those other gross weirdos seem to savor....French eat snails and frogs and horses, New Guineans eat rats and spiders and beetle larvae, Mexicans eat goat, and Polynesians eat marine annelid worms, all of which are nutritious and...delicious, but most Americans would recoil at the thought of eating any of those things."  p. 230, Collapse by Jared Diamond.

    Some rules are so ingrained they're more like incontrovertible fact rather than a matter of cultural choice; so ingrained it takes a highly readable Pulitzer Prize winner to give you the double take (spiders?  edible?  what?).

    A colleague recently complained to me that the local rec center's over-enthusiastic enforcement of their "no shirt no service" rule was harmful to his health on a day when, feeling overheated, he "didn't take off the shirt; I just, you know, pulled my arms out of the arm-holes."  "So you were -- what?  Wearing the shirt sort of like a necklace?" I asked.  He acknowledged he had been, then paused and said, "Well, maybe if I'd covered my nipples with my hands, it would have been all right."

    More often than I would have imagined likely, prior to parenthood, I find myself telling the kids:  "Well, in [this society][this house][this time of day] we follow such-and-such rule, but it's different [elsewhere][other times]."  How confusing is that?  Consistency is what good parenting is supposed to be all about, but it's amazing how inconsistent rules are.  At home, the girls can wear all the clothes, or none of them, they like; elsewhere they can't.  At my parents' house anything containing sugar is a highly regulated substance; in ours it's less regulated, and in some friend's houses it's right out there on the table in large bowls. 

    Nevermind the silly stuff, perhaps one can say.  There are some hard-and-fast rules.  "Thou shalt not kill," for example.  But even this requires consideration.  I shouldn't kill someone for a passing rude remark.  But should I kill them (and lots and lots of their citizens, not to mention a large number of my own people), as extolled by both Time and Newsweek in the current edition, because they're a despot and I'm bringing them democracy? 

    But to move away from the macro and the political:  what of the personal?  My colleagues and relatives belonging to the Society of Friends (Quakers) hold it as an absolute that all killing is unacceptable, even in self-defense.  As a mother of young girls, I can righteously respond:  "But if anyone ever hurt my children...."  And of course I'm thinking of big, strong, evil strange men.  Well, once I worked in a prison and taught such men, some of whom had harmed small children.  They were all individuals with individual stories, some understandable and some less so, but as my perception of them turned from 'strangers' to 'students,' I rethought some of my previously held black-and-white concepts of punishment that fits the crime. 

    And there are a lot fewer big strong evil strange men in the world than there are confused, ordinary people making poor choices.  Take a local tragedy, for example:  a true story of which all parental nightmares are made.  Three female teenagers went drinking and driving.  The one who lived (fragile, suicidal and marked for life) was the driver.  The mother of one of the victims called the driver's house every day to say a kind and encouraging word.  The other victim's mother took the survivor to court.  I suppose I need not say which mother, in the event of such an unthinkable thing ever happening to me, I would hope and pray to have the strength to emulate.

    Personally, I think the world would be a much better place if there were no rules about shirts or annelid worms whatsoever, but only about matters of life and death.  And even those, I'm beginning to believe in my waning years, are useful merely as guidelines for a series of individual choices, always subject to revision upon reconsideration.

  • Snow in Spring


    I think it was the heaviest snowfall of the winter, and definitely the quickest gone.  What gave the sheep a seasonal backdrop at dawn



    made even the outside as warm as the kidding pen by dusk



     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    and left our droop-headed snow-dragon adrift in sea-green, ridden by her bare-armed mistress.



    Meanwhile, news came through that the new charter school effort I've poured so much into in recent months unexpectedly foundered on a technicality we thought we'd surmounted months ago.  So my children go public in the fall. 


    There are physical snows that leave the earth damp and fertile, and snows of the heart that freeze the marrow solid.  Eventually, though, I'm too old not to know that spring does break through, in either case.

  • "If you were born between 1920 and 1965...."


    Panting away on the exercise machine in front of the blinking tv bank at the local rec center, I stared at the closed-captioned tv monitor with interest.  Okay, so they were aiming at my demographic -- but painted rather broadly, I thought.  What product that would interest me and my 85-year-old compatriot, I wondered.  Next up on the screen was the name of the seller, which meant nothing to me (Heritage something), then came


     ".....today's funeral averages $6,000."


    Ouch. 


    Yeah, that old cost-of-the-corpse concern is definitely a kicker, all right.  And I suppose even if you optimistically believe, at 43, that your own heirs may hope to have a bit longer before that worry rises to the top, you do find yourself in the burgeoning group of those actually arranging the funerals.


    But in lieu of calling up Heritage quite yet, I think I'll opt for stating my preferences publicly:




    • I don't want the life-support.  If my brain is dead, then the "I" of me is dead.  Don't keep the rest of me alive in memoriam.


    • Definitely donate the organs.


    • Cremate the rest, and you choose the options thereafter.  Urned on the mantelpiece seems a trifle macabre to me, but I won't be around to object.  Thrown to the winds anywhere you like would be fine.  Frankly, I've always fancied the "Travels With My Aunt" approach,* but you needn't go that far.

    Care to share yours?


    * in Graham Greene's brilliant and hilarious novel (also a movie) of that title the cremated remains of a woman are unceremoniously tossed by her surviving relative so the urn can be used to smuggle pot.  And that's just the beginning....

  • That Deep Professional Blush


    One of my waking nightmares is that inevitable but inexcusable mental cross-wiring of the personal and the professional.  A good example is calling your boss by your spouse's name (or, worse, vice-versa), because after all in some ways they occupy the same place in your hierarchy (on a taking-dictation, cleaning-toilets, knowing-schedules level).  I have deep sympathy for Dr. Condolezza, whose similar gaff caused such riotous press.  I may not forgive her some of her professional choices, but oh, I felt for her on that little slip.


    As far as I know I've never actually audibly confused the spouse for the boss, except on one notable occasion when I began a sentence with my husband's name in a meeting and then very quickly revised the sentence to actually be about my husband.  Narrow escape.


    But today.  Well.  Just like the spouse/boss confusion, there are some folks at work with whom I have a relationship similar to the one I have with my children.  They're naive, eager to please and rather confused about basic organizational skills, but generally pleasant to work with.


    One such subordinate, a shambling, 55-year-old, would-rather-be-fishing type fellow, was hanging around outside an office while I was finishing a conversation with the boss.  Our discussion completed, I looked up and said in a kindly tone:


    "Did you want to see us, honey?"


    o_O


    (Fortunately, the employee in question is hard of hearing.  Unfortunately, the boss isn't.)


    ...........so for the second day in a row:  please, please.  Tell me about some similar situation so we can all laugh companionably and with great relief at each other?

  • When You Say....


    "....I'm too angry to speak," let this be your lesson:


    Don't go on from there.


    Yeah.  Because anything you say after that, unless you really aren't so angry you can't speak (but rather working your crowd in good Machiavellian style) is going to descend rapidly downhill from a statement of principle to sputtering idiocy that's better not spilled in the boardroom.


    You would think I would have learned this by the ripe old age of 43, but apparently not. 


    I do find it interesting, however, that the day my CFO adamantly refused to acknowledge fault for not having gotten payroll out on time is the day I come back to Xanga to find my prior entry began "No lack of excuse."


    If I wasn't so angry I couldn't speak, I might laugh.


    Any workaday speaking problems out there on your end?

  • No Lack of Excuse


    (this is the unapologetically naval-centric follow-on to the below.  Feel free to pass on by )


    As all of you who know me, and many of you who don't, surmised, Ms. 7's remark ("Mommy, no matter what I do, you find no excuse for it") made me laugh, but it also made me agonize.


    Because the point is (and I suspect she may be fully aware what I believe the point is) that not only do I try to avoid that expression, I don't believe in it.  Being one of those irritating and perhaps delusional people who'd like to believe there to be good in everyone, I'm fully ready to acknowledge an excuse for everything.  There's an excuse for not doing your homework. There's an excuse for being late.   There's an excuse for shoving someone.  On a larger scale, there's excuses for torture and murder (as any nation at war has good reason to understand first-hand).


    My admonition to Ms. 7 which occasioned her too-clever remark wasn't "There's no excuse for that," it was "That's unacceptable."  Because I do believe in the unacceptability of certain things.  Groups of people who live together have to agree on certain rules, and follow them.  It's (generally) unacceptable to break the social rules.  So usually you have to do your homework, be on time, refrain from shoving ..... and put some seriously deep thought into whether that torture/murder choice was really the right one.


    So to turn her phrase:  "Honey, I trust you have excuse for whatever you do, but ultimately it's not your mother who will judge its merits."