“Only connect! That was the whole of her sermon.” – E. M. Forster

I like to believe we can all make that important connection – to nature, to each other, to the value and beauty of all life – the connection that lifts us beyond competition and savagery. Making the connection is the path to peace, individually and collectively. Sooner or later we’ll see it, by any variety of means – hopefully, before our mortal end.

The connection is there for all of us – in any language, on our own or with help, no matter what color our holy book or science journal. Some find the connection through meditation or prayer; some while contemplating a spectacular starlit sky or holding a child; some only after experiencing a dramatic injury or other traumatic event.  The connection exists whether you intentionally seek it or not.  Sometimes the connection serendipitously finds you. The connection exists no matter how you define God, and even if you consider God a fiction.  If we spend our lives squabbling over the semantics and details, we can miss the value of the connection altogether.

In this beautiful TED talk, neuroscientist Jill Bolte Taylor talks about her discoveries as the result of her 1996 stroke:

YouTube Preview Image

More information about Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor and her book, Stroke of Insight, is available at DrJillTaylor.com

Special thanks to Larry Glover at Wild Resiliency who reminded me of this TED talk in a beautiful, candid memorial post he wrote after the death of his father: A Father’s Lessons on Living and Dying.

The Judgmental Pontificator: The Elder You Don’t Want To Become

pontificate 2: to speak or express opinions in a pompous or dogmatic way -  merriam-webster.com

I had one of those interesting wonder-if moments after my post on quieting down. I wondered if conversational fatigue is a natural part of this path through and beyond middle age. After all, middle age is as much about attitudinal change and gaining perspective as it is about chronology. Doesn’t some part of the getting of wisdom involve developing a certain laissez-faire equanimity about a lot of things that seemed overwhelmingly important when we were younger? Perhaps, I thought, everyone quiets down as they age.

Ha!

Just circumstantial evidence supports the opposite. The very afternoon of my musing, I ran into Liz, the 80-year-old antithesis of my theory. I share a 90-minute, parking-lot conversation with Liz about once a month. Liz was a next-door neighbor when I was growing up in Seattle. She moved to this area after her daughter bought a property not far from us (one of those small-world serendipities.)

A contemporary of my parents, Liz is one of those people who NEVER stops talking (as is her daughter I’ve discovered). At this point in her life, Liz’s monologue is rife with a long thread of what’s-wrong-withs – what’s wrong with the world, the country, our small town, the internet and all associated technologies; and on down to her favorite subjects – what’s wrong with her children and grandchildren.

I do have to give Liz this much – she is a colorful and somewhat gifted orator with a well-developed (if consistently judgmental) sense of humor. She was a cocktail waitress in her formative years – back in the day when all cocktail waitresses wore – well, not much. Her bawdy, occasionally-profane tales boost my tolerance of her stream of complaints. With time and a change in my own perspective, she’s evolved from just a gossiping busy-body into something of a tolerable character. I like characters. (I’ve been told I am one.) When I run into her, unless there is something truly pressing, I give her my time and my ear. We always end our conversation with her invitation for me to come by for tea. I haven’t so far. I guess I’m not quite that tolerant.

I have to admit that for us quiet types, effusive blabberers can be a conversational boon – all we have to do is listen and nod occasionally and “conversation” takes care of itself. And although Liz is an extreme, she is certainly an excellent reminder that not everyone values quiet serenity as a life goal. (In fact, a little googling leads me to suspect quieting down as a function of aging is rare – just another behavior on the list of hermit idiosyncrasies.)

But back to Liz. As entertaining as Liz can be, I always feel a little sad when we part after a conversation. I always think I should take the time for tea; after all, it won’t be too long before we won’t be meeting in parking lots anymore. I’m saddened that she’s entered what’s probably the last chapter of her life so dissatisfied with the way things have turned out. I’m saddened that, given the very peripheral nature of our friendship, she confides in me as much as she does. Perhaps I’m the only safe forum she has for her complaints.

Perhaps she’s lonely. Her judgmentalism may have set her up for that. I certainly would not want to be one of her children – or grandchildren. It sounds like Liz tries to micro-manage her whole family, down to the smallest circumstantial details, often using financial rewards or threats as the pivot point. Many of the behaviors Liz disapproves of in her children are, in fact, part of my own routine. Liz doesn’t know that, of course. She doesn’t actually know me very well and when we talk, I don’t need to talk.

Unfortunately for Liz (and in spite of her occasional entertainment value), Liz tops my list as the kind of elder I don’t want to become: the judgmental pontificator. The source of much inter-generational divisiveness, the loudest pontificators seem quite certain that, having lived a certain number of years, what they’ve learned must surely be gospel.

I’ve got news. What you’ve learned through experience is not gospel – it’s just a chronicle of your experience within the circumstances of your life. Yes, we do learn from experience, but much of what we learn that way cannot be taught. By the time our children enter high school, most of what they learn is coming from their own experiences, not from our pontifications. Yes, they’ll still need a few more years of guidance, and parenting is really a lifetime commitment, but the rapid change of today’s world almost guarantees that many of our children’s life experiences will be very different from ours. Most of our pontifications later in life (certainly by the time our children reach 30), especially those in the realm of specific circumstantial formulas that worked for us, already don’t (or soon won’t) apply at all. Let it go. The world is not going back to the way it used to be. The happiest among us find ways to celebrate that, even participate – not continually denigrate.

There’s a word for the belief (or desperate insistence) that everyone else (including your adult children) should do things the way you always have, make the same kinds of choices you always do, and live their lives as a reflection of the way you live your life. You may think the word is caring, but it isn’t. Most often, the word that best describes those manipulative, mini-me expectations is CONCEIT.

The good news is it’s never too late to stop trying to change others, especially other adults.  It’s also never too late to consider changing yourself – the one part of the equation over which you have some real control.

Share wisdom if you’re asked, but skip all the petty circumstantial stuff – what car to drive, what clothes to wear, your preference for certain neighborhoods or professional choices.  The kind of wisdom to share is the stuff that holds up beyond culture, fashion and clique; the stuff they’ll need to survive the greatest changes and the direst circumstances – the health crises, natural disasters, wars and economic downturns -  the inspirational stuff like courage, tolerance, love and compassion. But even that kind of wisdom is best taught by demonstration not with a diatribe of empty shoulds.

Demonstrate serenity and acceptance. Demonstrate inclusivity, not exclusivity. Overcome judgment. Demonstrate peace. Demonstrate love without circumstantial conditions and expectations. If you can train yourself to consistently prioritize and demonstrate any of those (or even a couple of them), not only will you be happier and healthier, you’ll probably mysteriously discover you’ve also overcome most of your complaints about the way things turned out.  Don’t be surprised if your need to pontificate declines accordingly.

I’m not pontificating, mind you. All I really know is what works for me.

When the Quiet Quiet Down

Here’s one for the hermit researchers – or the shrinks. The wordiness of life has been bugging me more than usual lately. It’s been almost six weeks since I’ve written anything for this blog and I have to confess there were moments when I seriously considered abandoning the endeavor.  I’ve talked about these phases before. [...]

The Robert B. Parker/Spenser Memorial Read: A Life Well-Written

I was saddened by the news of Robert B. Parker’s death this last January even though I only started reading Parker’s mystery novels a couple of years ago. (I actually only started reading any mystery fiction about five years ago.) I so enjoy Parker’s style and wit – interesting, lively plots and the prominent use of dialog to advance story and develop characters. Just plain fun, escapist fiction -  though Parker was no literary slouch, having earned a Ph.D. in literature from Boston University.

Although, I hadn’t read all of Parker’s books, once I discovered Parker through his more recent works, I started picking up his earlier books when I saw them at used bookstores or garage sales, or to round out an Amazon order. Since I had most of them on hand already, news of Parker’s death prompted me to go back and start at the beginning of the Spenser series – The Godwulf Manuscript, (c) 1973. So for the past couple of months, I’ve just kept on through the entire Spenser series, in chronological order. It’s been extremely enjoyable – even rereading those I’d read quite recently.

Though each novel is written to stand alone as a crime novel, like most series in the mystery genre, a repertory of prime characters continues throughout. Apparently, the Spenser series is the most autobiographical of Parker’s works, and there’s an intimacy and authenticity in the evolution of these particular characters which shines through.

The main character, Spenser, is an intelligent, literate, ex-prizefighter, ex-cop turned private investigator – a tough, good-guy, wise-cracking thug with a big heart and who loves to cook. His long-time girlfriend, Susan Silverman, is a psychologist. The other most-constant character is Spenser’s best friend, Hawk – another ex-fighter toughie with noble intent – though Hawk’s activities and motivations often wander deeper into the realm of  illegal than his buddy Spenser’s.

As a psychology buff, I am naturally fond of Parker’s use of the dialog between Spenser and his psychologist- true-love, Susan, to effectively interject psychological elements into the resolution of each mystery. Parker often uses the same vehicle to comment on timely or newsworthy issues.

Within the gestalt of reading all of these books in rapid succession, I particularly enjoyed the dialog and evolution of the relationship between Spenser and Silverman as a reflective chronicle of the evolution of masculine and feminine stereotypes through some of the the most turbulent times of the feminist movement. As in life, there are no permanent or pat resolutions to the difficulties that surface, but, in my opinion, Parker did an excellent job showing us that the differences between men and women are as vital and important as our equalities. The Spenser-Silverman relationship flourishes because each honors the other’s individuality with compassion and a willingness to listen (plus a healthy thread of sexual intimacy).

It may have been coincidence, but repeatedly when purchasing Parker’s books, or reading them in public, I had women comment to me at how much their husbands or boyfriends liked Parker’s books. I hope this is not an accurate indicator of the ratio of Parker’s female fans. If so, it’s a shame, really. Though Robert B. Parker’s male protagonists are often violent and always extremely masculine, I perceive Parker’s message as, in many ways, strongly feminist.

Looking for Rachel Wallace, written in 1980, was a particularly pleasant surprise. I’m sure it was considered quite provocative when originally published.  The book juxtaposes Spenser’s competent, extreme masculinity against the radical feminist rhetoric of open lesbian, Rachel Wallace, who Spenser is tasked with protecting, and ultimately rescuing (using lethal violence) when she is kidnapped after firing Spenser. When thanking Spenser for the rescue, Wallace states: “You still embody much that I must continue to disparage. I still disapprove of you.”

Spenser’s reply: “Rachel, how could I respect anyone who didn’t disapprove of me?”  Rachel Wallace shows up briefly in later books as an valuable ally and friend to Spenser.

The character, Spenser, though masculine to the max, is likable, lovable and heroic – a life well-written.

Robert B. Parker’s other mysteries include the Jesse Stone series and the Sunny Randall series. I now plan to go back and read both of those series in chronological order as well. Character evolution through the progression of these series is part of the pleasure.

Robert B. Parker died of a heart-attack at the age 77, while writing at his desk – surely the most heroic kind of exit any writer would hope for.

If you are a Robert B. Parker fan (or even if you’re not), I highly recommend reading the touching, eloquent eulogy by his son, David, which was reprinted in its entirety in The Washington Post.

“…the illusion hurts us, takes our peace away…”

“By nature, we do not perceive ourselves or others accurately. We magnify the importance of ourselves and diminish that of others. In the beauty of a clear night, however, we look at the stars and feel ourselves small, unimportant, and at peace. On an objective scale, we sense our insignificance. Somehow the realization comforts us. The return of the illusion hurts us, takes our peace away, allows us to magnify slights, rejections, and humiliations as others challenge the illusion of our self-importance with theirs. It is in our human nature that this be so; it is our task to transcend it.”

- Barry Grosskopf, Hidden In Plain Sight

via psychobabble

“Political” Science

Much of the hoopla over the global warming controversy seems to be the “shocking revelation” that science is being used by (and thus ostensibly soiled and manipulated) by politicians. So? Science has always had a strong thread in and of politics, just like all other human endeavors, including religion. The only non-political human endeavor is probably solitude – and it’s only apolitical to the solitaire. As soon as one other wonders about or tries to find the  hermit, his solitude becomes part of a political debate. All human interaction includes politics. The more people, the more complicated the politics.

Science as the ultimate objectivity has always been an ideal not a fact. Scientists are human, too – with mortgages and egos and tuition debt, too.  Most research is at some level politically funded – whether the funder is the Catholic Church, the Exxon Corporation, or government. (We all know how apolitical government is. Right?) Who gets the money for what research – in our culture often a variable of potential profit in the research product – is part of the process. Unfortunately, money as the engine of research comes with a built-in corruptibility factor – sometimes very subtle, sometimes openly controversial, but rarely completely out of the picture.  Which is worse:  good science with bad intentions or bad science with good intentions?  Add to that debate “whose science” and “whose morality” then define “good” and “bad.” Yeah, I know.

Still there’s good scientists (and some not-so-good) working hard in their labs zealously pursuing “truth.”  There probably is even such a thing as “pure” science happening somewhere in some labs. But even the most ardent and disciplined objectivists among us are still subjective human beings. The process leading up to who gets a lab, how they design the experiment and who does what with any discoveries will always be a function of politics.  The “science” that reaches the masses will always have spin. Most of the “masses” wouldn’t understand the science if you spoon fed it to them straight from the scientist’s mouth. I have great respect for Al Gore’s intentions. I voted for him when he ran for President partially because of his environmental stance. I  have warmist leanings. I am not, however, blind to the inconvenient truth that Al Gore is not a scientist – he “just plays one in a movie.” But science without politics wouldn’t get very far.

And with well-established criteria for peer review and reproducible results, science tends to self-regulate. The global warming controversy really emphasizes the stability of the scientific ideal not its erosion. It’s the old torpedo effect of all human progress – we launch out of the tube in the general direction of our target, we stray off course, we make corrections.

Challenge and controversy have always been a part of scientific progress, whether the battle is between scientists and institutions, or scientists and other scientists. Today’s unavoidable transparency just makes the noise a lot louder and faster – out where we all get to watch and comment. And after all, it is science that brought us the internet – the vehicle of its own exposure.

Global Warming Humming

Global warming (anthropogenic or otherwise) is a hard sell to anyone who’s freezing his butt off fighting the hardest winter he can remember. And though repackaging global warming as climate change is probably a wise move, it’s just human nature to let broader perspectives and scientific conjectures rest completely while coping with the immediacy of “what’s happening to me right now.” (If you haven’t seen Stephen Colbert’s recent comedy sketch about this, I highly recommend it. I particularly liked Colbert’s professor of peekaboo-ology.)

Climate change is almost a non-term here in Western Washington where the weather is so variable year to year, climate change seems almost normal.  Unlike the rest of the Northern Hemisphere, we’ve just had our warmest winter on record. Last winter we had our taste of the ice age.

But in spite of recent controversies which expose some extremely-careless or just-plain-bad science, there’s some good science behind global warming, too.  Weather extremes are integral to the theory, so discounting the whole idea because your butt’s cold today is definitely throwing the baby out with the bath water.

On the other hand, there’s some very smart people countering the theory and some very good science behind their counter claims. Ironically, the very reason we find global warming so hard to believe when our butts are cold mirrors the reason why global warming has rational skeptics. It really is difficult for us humans (including scientists) to stand far enough back from our tiny little lives to get accurate, objective perceptions. From a geological perspective, the global warming theory itself is just a report on what’s happening right now. Several decades of climate statistics do not necessarily make an arguable trend. Well, obviously it is arguable, but that’s not the same as provable.

But it’s the furor of this discourse that deserves applause. It means awareness of environmental degradation (whatever the cause) has whole-heartedly entered our public consciousness. A recent New York Times article pointed out that therapists are even seeing a trend in environmental issues as a significant cause for family discord. And as much I hate to see families in stress, the environmental dialog matters; and the things that matter most to us should be discussed (and sometimes argued about) in our homes.  An integral environmental consciousness – public and private – represents true progress.

I have warmist leanings.  There’s much more to the theory than whether you should be driving a Prius or a Hummer. But selling global warming as yet another variety of armageddonism is counterproductive and unnecessary. Extremes always create backlash. Most of the noise between warmists and their skeptics is not about whether humans are negatively impacting the environment,  it’s about how, what’s the timeline and what’s the fix.

Anyone completely devoid of environmental awareness at this point is either under-educated, living in impoverished desperation, or choosing to remain intentionally blind. Lack of education and impoverished desperation are both forgivable, and illiteracy and poverty must be addressed as part a holistic environmental dialog.  But intentional blindness, whether motivated by greed or just laziness, is no excuse at all.

But that’s another human foible, isn’t it – it often takes the noise of controversy to force our eyes open. It’s called awakening.

“When people generally are aware of a problem, it can be said to have entered the public consciousness. When people get on their hind legs and holler, the problem has not only entered the public consciousness — it has also become a part of the public conscience. At that point, things in our democracy begin to hum.”

- Hubert Humphrey

Blogopause with Aside of Cat Blogging

Where’d she go? I realize it’s been almost three weeks since I posted.  That probably shouldn’t  bother me or anyone else at this point; though I do wish I hadn’t read all those best-blogging-practices articles before I started this blog. “Three posts per week plus three comments per week on other blogs” always sticks in [...]

A Ramble on Life’s Soundtracks, Old Music & New

Donna Woodka recently posted this video and the associated lyrics (following) on her Changing Places blog with one of her wonderful theme posts entitled Searching.

YouTube Preview Image

As my life goes on I believe
Somehow something’s changed
Something deep inside
Ooh a part of me

There’s a strange new light in my eyes
Things I’ve never known
Changin’ my life
Changin’ me

I’ve been searchin’
So long
To find an answer
Now I know my life has meaning

Now I see myself as I am
Feeling very free
Life is everything
Ooh it’s meant to be
When my tears have come to an end
I will understand
What I left behind
Part of me…

As usual, Donna’s post was good thought-food, though for some reason I wound up thinking more about the music than about searching.  (Well, I did spend some time reflecting on what I might have been searching for in 1974 [the year Chicago released Searching So Long] and whether I found it or ultimately abandoned the quest.)  But the music from her post lingered. Part of the fun of looking back at the music is noticing how perspective gives the lyrics refreshing new meaning.

I wound up wondering at what point the music of our childhood (often our parents’ music) transitions to our own music and not theirs. For some of us, it’s that intentionally cultivated point where our preferred music alienates our parents, but that’s not always true. The methods for teenagers to alienate their parents are many and sundry – and always have been. Music may or may not be involved.

But if you’re a music person (even just an appreciator, like me), important memories always wind up tied to whatever music surrounds you at the time of any life passage, phase or event. Ever after, that music stimulates the memories of the associated events and vice versa. I suppose that’s not so great for those who hang on to the lousy memories – and there is some music which stimulates sad memories for me. But I don’t dwell on the sadness when I hear the music. I just reflect on the lessons learned or losses endured and charge onward to a different soundtrack (or playlist) to snap myself out of the maudlin if I get stuck there.

Of course, like other memories of youth, the music of youth often seems more vivid and lasting than some of the later additions. Psychologically, this has more to do with the youthful memories (and music) falling on a fresh canvas than it does (as some youngsters think) with the terminally declining mental acuity of us oldsters. Yes, there is such a thing as age-related memory loss – but not everyone over 40 is trapped in a downward spiral into dementia. In youth, many things, including music, are hooked into memory as extremely relevant because of their newness. Ultimately, experience diminishes the novelty factor and memories in later life are stored in a very crowded filing system. As we mature, we also get significantly more efficient at forgetting (intentionally or subconsciously) the irrelevant. And our definition of relevant changes dramatically – or should.

But I think it’s important not to get stuck only with the music of our younger years. I continue to allow new music to seep into my life. Since I don’t really have any other handy sources and I don’t spend very much online time listening to music, I frequently listen to fm radio while driving as a method of familiarizing myself with new music and younger artists. This gets me 5+ hours per week of serendipitous music discovery. Though listening to radio may itself be an archaic and outdated (hopefully, not dying) method, when I find something I like, I do have an iPod for downloading it.

Of course, whether a song is on the top 40 (if that still exists per se), which artists are dating each other, and what any of them are wearing is totally irrelevant to me.  But I never was into that aspect of the music scene. And I admit, I’ve never developed a true appreciation of rap. But as a writer, I’ve long appreciated lyrics, and rap has significantly improved the lyrics of all genres. There’s as much talent out there as ever.

The old music is important and meaningful, but I think it’s also important not to get stuck with only your old tunes. Like other retreats we inadvertently wander into as we age – closing the door on the new limits our perspective, our opportunities, and our readiness to keep up the searchand therein may be the passage from mature to just plain old.

The Energetic Gestalt of Group Sing

In my opinion, Straight No Chaser’s 1998 version of the 12 days of Christmas is still one of the best. (Don’t stop the video early, especially if you’ve somehow missed this version in the past -  surprises await you.)

I was in choir and smaller chorales from one end to the other of my K-12 school years. I have fond memories of the energetic gestalt of group sing – palpable here, I think:

YouTube Preview Image

As a naturally introverted youngster, I was lucky to find a group activity that worked for me.  I was also fortunate to attend large urban schools (Seattle) with excellent, well-funded music programs. Choral singing allowed me to develop social skills and a comfort with teamwork I might have missed if left to my loner tendencies. There’s something about the mutual creation of music that allows an introvert to participate, yet still remain partially insulated from the barrage of interaction present in most large group situations.