i read the elements of style so you don't have to...

Last week's reading review of The Element of Style mostly avoided word-level usage nuggets. I recognize that some might get more out of this than me. So, here are a few of my favorite word-specific notes from the book.

Thanks for reading.

Tim

******************

Word choice matters...

*'Aggravate' adds to, 'irritate' starts up.

*'Anticipate' is often used when 'expect' would do better.

*'Contact' is a verb that holds back. Say 'looked up' or 'called' or 'wrote', etc.

*A 'student body' usually is better as 'students'.

*'Utilize' use instead.

*A zoo 'comprises' animals but animals do not 'comprise' a zoo.

'Just don't bother with these ones...'

*It is often the case (!) that 'case' introduces unnecessary words.

*'In terms of' is often rubbish.

*'Personally' loses its function alongside the first-person.

*'So' is not an acceptable intensifier in writing.

*Avoid using qualifiers. Little describes size.

'Omit needless words...'

*'He is a man who' = 'he is'
*'Vermont is a state that' = 'Vermont is'
*'Hostile nature' = 'hostile'
*'The truth is...' = (just state the truth)
*'The fact is...' = (just state the fact)

i get it- but where is the coal?

I've noticed a built-in problem with advice from successful people- it's never really clear if I'm getting helpful direction or an autobiography. When it comes to writing advice, always in the back of my mind is the same tiny objection: sure, it worked for you, because you are good- but what if I'm no good (1)?

In On Writing, Stephen King shares his formula for revision: second drafts = first draft minus ten percent. His formula is a perfect example of the idea to prune bullshit that I discussed last Friday (and I'm sure is itself an example of the idea). But it does not address an important fact- King is a great writer (2). When he prunes bullshit, he's left with a bestseller. When I prune bullshit, I'm left with a blank page.

Another piece of writing advice I really like comes from Cheryl Strayed. In addressing the difficulty of writing, Strayed comments:

"Coal mining is harder. Do you think miners stand around all day talking about how hard it is to mine for coal? They do not. They simply dig."

Again, I think it's great advice. But coal miners usually know where to dig. In the context of writing, what is the equivalent of 'knowing where to dig'? The obvious answer is to learn 'where the coal is', an approach that strikes me as simplistic (or perhaps merely true, by definition). If I knew where to dig, I would be there, digging.

A lot of writers seem to think "just write, baby" or "keep panning until you find the gold" is sufficient writing advice. I don't think its ill-intended advice. I sometimes forget that life is dark before sunrise. Sometimes, a reminder helps get me to dawn.

Writing requires a solid dose of good old-fashioned grit and comparisons to digging or recommendations to write first and edit later are great analogies. No one describes a writer as 'gritty' because there is no such thing as a writer without grit.

But sometimes, advice reminds me of certain proverbs- 'he who hesitates is lost' or 'the early bird catches the worm'. The tricky bit with proverbs is that there is usually a counter-proverb- 'good things come to those who wait' or "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink".

Lately, I've noticed writing advice that is the equivalent of these counter-proverbs; the recommendations are the opposite of the 'pick up the pen and CHARGE' theme I've highlighted above. The best examples come from recent author events I've attended. Writers including Colson Whitehead, Min Jin Lee, and George Saunders all referenced 'incubation periods' of varying lengths for their recently published successes. All three of these writers hinted that writing at top speed as soon as they had their idea would have produced a lesser final work. These writers all looked- for a long time- before they leaped.

It seems like there is a case for slowing down, at least a bit, just to ensure that the writing is moving in the desired general direction. No one described the approach more directly than Dani Shapiro- regarding Hourglass, her recently released memoir, she remarked that she could not have written it 'a second sooner than I did'.

In tying all the advice together, what seems like the main goal is striking the right balance between caution and carelessness in the rough draft. A restrained approach might fail to unearth the entire message while a reckless first try might produce too much excess for the pruning exercise to function effectively.

One way I work on this balance is to examine my own bullshit. In the exercise I shared last Friday, I expanded on a simple phrase in a way that came naturally to me. The result was layer upon layer of nonsense. The bloated version introduced unneeded complexity to a simple message. In taking a simple idea- basically, don't sweat the little stuff- and expanding it into a rambling treatise, I highlighted my biggest problem of explaining too much (3).

I slowly became more aware of my bias to over-explain during the past year. I noticed that readers reacted well to posts featuring spare ideas. When I wrote posts over on The Business Bro at the end of last summer, I suspected the six hundred word limit produced sharper writing. Recent changes to the blog format reducing its complexity- limiting reading reviews to one book, writing deliberately shorter posts for Fridays, or grouping related ideas into recurring posts- left me with less to explain and thus less to potentially over-explain.

I recognizing over-explaining as a major problem when I started studying my revision process. I noticed that most of what I threw away explained the parts I kept. Tightening explanations, rearranging tangents into footnotes, or cutting away digressions constituted almost all of my revision time. Tailoring explanations took up so much time, in fact, that it was cutting into the time left for writing new posts. If I wanted to spend more time writing, I needed an approach that reduced the time I spent proofreading.

Over time, I responded by stopping myself whenever I was tempted to launch off into a first-draft explanation. In the same way that cars cut down side streets to avoid slow intersections ahead, I understood that my tendency to explain resulted in congested first drafts to sit through later.

I soon figured out that revision was the best time to add explanation. All I needed to do was read the first draft and assess the clarity. If I did not understand it, I added an explanation.

Most of the books I read tend to offer some kind of wisdom into how to improve at a given craft- how to write, how to manage, how to eat, how to run. These books generally take a forward-looking approach and direct the reader on what to immediately start doing for better results- what writing prompts to use next, for example, or what to prepare for tonight's meal.

But it is unusual to come across advice that urges me to look back and study my own process. In the case of writing, I've yet to read the suggestion that I keep copies of first and final drafts to study my own tendencies- what do I tend to get right the first time and what do I often mess up? Perhaps my background in sports lends itself to this thinking- most coaches study 'game film' to correct mistakes and identify an opponent's characteristics. Then, they adjust their coaching style for the next game. So, perhaps this kind of self-improvement comes more naturally to me than to non-athletes.

I acknowledge that such an approach might not make much sense for most writers. But I've yet to hear anyone suggest that increasing self-awareness is a bad thing. So until then, I'll continue to keep an eye on things regarding my process. And maybe one day, by ruling out all the ways I've failed to find the coal in the past, I'll know exactly how to look the next time.

Footnotes / imagined complaints

1. Those who can do...

Readers who follows sports closely will recognize a similar idea- the best coaches were rarely the best players. Steve Kerr, one of the NBA's best coaches, was a half-decent NBA player- but his teammate was Michael Jordan, the best player ever yet not an NBA coach. Perhaps the most accurate statement regarding players becoming coaches is: playing ability has no relationship to coaching ability. It helps except when it doesn't.

It's a surprising result for some. Surely, those who performed well at the craft are most likely to coach well? The long list of former great players who failed to become even good coaches is proof otherwise.

It is possible one explanation for some of these failures is the playing experience itself. Rather than working with young players and identifying the appropriate technique for each player's development, the former player-turned-coach cannot help but simply apply his or her own history as the appropriate path forward for everybody. The issue with that coaching approach is the small sample size: one.

A coach who did not have a successful playing career has no choice but to study a wider variety of practice techniques. The result is a broader knowledge of the sport and an improved chance to find the right coaching technique for the players in his or her charge.

2. But was King always a great writer?

What I do not recall is whether King shared if this was his formula throughout his entire writing career or if this is a more recent development. My gut says that this was his process at the time he wrote his memoir, a conclusion that leaves the question open.

A more helpful bit of writing advice for someone at my beginner stage would be his revision formula during his first couple of years as a writer, whatever that might have been.

3. Armchair psychology 101...


Why do I have a problem of explaining too much? A non-exhaustive list of theories:

1) Fear of not being understood
2) Interest in complex ideas that require longer explanations
3) Perception that verbosity = intelligence
4) Not enough faith in my audience to understand my thinking
5) I like explaining things

It's not a bad problem to have. In fact, this blog probably never gets started were I disinterested in explaining things. But like all positive qualities, too much of it and the benefits are lost.

Interestingly, I first noticed this tendency in the same economics class I cited at the top of last week's post. I would be asked a question by the professor and launch into a detailed explanation of All Things Economics. As I understood my own tendency to over-explain, I tailored my approach to questions.

Instead of immediately answering a question, I started stopping briefly to think. When I finally did start speaking, I slowed down my delivery. What my responses lost in small details was made up for by a stronger reliance on the fundamental principles. And if I needed to add the details in to flesh out the initial response, I could always do so later- just like I do today with my first drafts.

reading review: the elements of style

The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White (March 2017)

Strunk first published this classic in 1918 (!) while White contributed to future editions (the one I read was published in 1999). The authors follow their own advice- 'omit needless words'- in the most effective way: they show the reader how. By no coincidence does this book barely exceed one hundred pages. And each of those pages is filled with specific, concise advice for the aspiring writer.

These types of books pose a challenge to me- what passages should I note for later? Too many notes and I'm basically plagiarizing the book, too few and I risk losing valuable tips for my writing. My notes ended up in three general categories.

The first group included anything I knew already but suspected I might forget later. One example is 'who/whom'- when introducing a subordinate clause, the clause's function determines the appropriate word. I also certainly acknowledged the interesting temptation to write 'certainly' or 'interesting' to artificially glorify a sentence; the better approach is to highlight what is certain or interesting. As my memory tends to benefit from colorful analogies, I noted that a drawing does not contain unnecessary lines to better reinforce 'omit needless words'.

The other type of note highlighted my current areas for improvement (I took more of these notes). Some of these notes were direct, like omitting 'a' or 'the' from titles preceded by the possessive (Strunk's Elements of Style...Strunk wrote The Elements of Style...). The suggestions to use the present tense for summaries, break up convoluted sentences, and avoid problematic gendered pronouns by using the plural are recent changes in my writing that grew out of my notes for this book.

The third group falls in-between. These are my upcoming projects, so to speak, the tailoring work needed for my writing technique that I hope to put into practice as soon as possible. To describe this group as 'rules of thumb' would not be too far off the mark. Notes in this category include concepts like strong sentences use the positive form, prefer the specific, concrete, or definite, and emphasize new ideas by placing them at the end of a sentence.

I enjoyed the overall experience of reading this work. It helped a great deal that I have some writing to apply it to, of course, but the focus on brevity and clarity strikes me as useful for many kinds of skill development work. The best reason to read The Elements of Style is the book itself- again, by writing so clearly, Strunk and White set a persuasive example that readers are sure to follow.

One up: Not all the advice applies solely to writing. One section advises against injecting opinion; in responding to an invitation, accepting or declining suffices.

One down: I do not consider this a great read for beginning writers. The minimal dose of encouragement is diluted by all the rigid specifications. The points are often strengthened with example sentences typical of beginning writers. From my experience, beginners respond better to positive examples that they can aspire to rather than negative examples that look a lot like their own work. Most people don't need to be told they are no good- if they have any potential, they figure it out for themselves and try to do better next time.

Suggesting that this book is no good for beginners while also extolling its virtues raises an important question: what evidence do I have that I am no longer a beginner? when is a writer no longer a beginner?

Let's say it is someone who is able to ignore well-intended writing advice without feeling self-conscious, stubborn, or incompetent. Writers who get 'wrapped up' in proofreading- that is, those who wonder if they are spending too much time proofreading- are probably the target audience for this book.

I propose the following progression to best determine the time for this book:

1. Start writing
2. Keep writing...
3. See #2...
4. Become discouraged during proofreading
5. Pick up this book

I think reading this book too early might even harm a developing writer because those without a self-awareness of their own voice or (at least) a theory on taste are in danger of following the advice too blindly. Though it is important to know that adding '-wise' to create adjectives is 'not advised', it is much more important to retain the courage to try and describe things in an original or interesting way. A poor descriptor is preferred to no descriptor.

Writers attempting to follow the directives in The Elements of Style should not do so at the expense of learning how to express themselves. After all, even the most eloquent speakers blubbered their way through their first words.

Just saying: I thought 'do not try and explain too much' was the most applicable comment for my writing on this blog.

Maybe I should try rewriting the above 'one down' section again with this idea in mind...

doing the opposite

Given that life is short, relentlessly prune bullshit. That's a paraphrased version of Paul Graham's advice found in this essay, 'Life Is Short'.

I think I understand the advice. It applies to all kinds of activities. Writing (or proofreading) is an obvious one. Get all the ideas into a rough draft, toss the extra stuff aside, and the final draft is what's left.

Marie Kondo's tidying advice takes a similar approach. Look over all your things, at once, then throw out everything you don't need. What's left is tidiness.

Relentlessly prune bullshit- again, I think I got it. But, just to make sure, I decided to do one last comprehension check. My favorite economics professor used to tell us that he knew students understood a concept once they were able to 'explain the opposite' (1).

'Pruning bullshit' implies whittling out the unnecessary after getting every possible idea onto paper. So, the opposite must mean taking a final draft and expanding it with every possible unnecessary extension of the idea.

Here's the example I went through the other day.

First, I found a quote that I thought was pretty good:

"If you cannot waste hours, you will waste years."

Then, I applied the opposite:

"Planning is the key. Fail to plan and you plan to fail. But planning takes time. So if you cannot waste seconds to plan, you will waste minutes executing. If you cannot waste minutes, you will waste hours. If you cannot waste hours, you will waste days. If you cannot waste days, you will waste weeks. If you cannot waste weeks, you will waste months. If you cannot waste months, you will waste years. If you cannot waste years, you will waste your life."

Next Wednesday, I'll explain in more detail what I learned from the exercise and how I've applied it to my writing.

Thanks for reading. See you all again on Sunday.

Tim

Footnotes / imagine complaints

1. Explain the opposite? Explain!

Economics lends itself to this idea better than most subjects. If a student could explain what a tax increase would do to national output, the opposite meant explaining the implications of a tax decrease.

the pittsburgh climate agreement

President Trump pulling the USA out of the Paris Agreement was one of the biggest news stories of the month- and there has been a lot of news lately, no? Such was the newsworthiness of the event that I almost- almost- violated my own 'no news on TOA' principle to post an immediate thought about the decision.

I was surprised by the response to his announcement. By my limited understanding, this country was out as soon as the (electoral) votes were counted; the president's decision was mere formality.

And yet, the announcement on June 1 was presented on TV as 'breaking news'. Apparently, the thought was that, despite six months of evidence to the contrary, concepts like 'advisers' and 'senators' and 'logic' were still considered capable of swaying the president's decision.

When the announcement came, the coverage made it seem like a big deal. Commentators and pundits across the globe weighed in to condemn or criticize the decision. Many took to The Good Ol' Interwebs to share their opinions- tweeting outrage, expressing disbelief, maybe even uploading videos of themselves sadly shaking their heads.

I thought my immediate reaction was logical- I looked up what the Paris Agreement was. I suppose I should be embarrassed, ashamed, or resolve to read CNN.com more after admitting this but whatever- in my defense, no one ever bothered to bring up this 'landmark' deal during any conversation I was involved in. This, despite the many proclamations regarding global warming, climate change, carbon emissions, and so on that I've had to listen to over the years. On June 1, I had no other choice but to log on and figure life out for myself!

After a little browsing, I've condensed the basics below for you, dear reader:

The Paris Agreement (noun)- A bunch of politicians got together, years ago, probably all flying in on energy-guzzling airplanes to meet in one location, air-conditioners likely on full fossil-fueled blast, and decided to start 'tracking' global warming indicators. Not right then, mind, but in the future, specifically 2020, which was at least five years away given that the agreement was signed in 2015.

I learned almost all of this on Wikipedia, the internet's largest encyclopedia and general reference work. According to Wikipedia's Wikipedia entry, Wikipedia was founded in 2001 with the idea that anyone could create and edit entries for the sake of compiling all the world's knowledge into one place. Today, it has grown to contain over forty million articles in just under three hundred languages.

The most impressive thing I learned was about a peer-reviewed study conducted in 2005 by Nature, a scientific journal. Nature found that the accuracy of Wikipedia's science articles 'approached' the Encyclopedia Britannica's. This result was achieved despite the obvious concerns about accuracy, bias, and vandalism that plagued Wikipedia in its early years and led many to question its validity as a reliable source of truth.

I realized something as I read about the history of Wikipedia- this is how big changes happen. It happens when people interested in a common goal larger than themselves come together and relentlessly make small, daily, and incremental contributions toward it. That is the one and only way.

Politicians coming together to shake hands, pat backs, and sign agreements help, of course. And when these same deals fall apart, it can often seem like all progress is grinding to a halt. But remember that we grant our elected officials their power. They represent the common interests of their electorates, of us- whether those with certain rooting interests like to acknowledge it or not.

The best way for individuals to work around policy-level disappointments isn't to complain about who did what or to scheme about how to vote in the next election. It is to find a way to bring people together and work toward the larger goals that matter to us. It is to change the interests of the electorate through small, daily, and incremental contributions so that any politician who runs for office must represent those same interests to stand any chance of victory.

In the wake of the decision to leave the Paris Agreement, I think the best response is for people who are truly upset to come together and commit to making their own incremental contributions. We could call it the Pittsburgh Agreement- a city I chose entirely at random by sticking a pin into a map while blindfolded- except for the obstacle that such an agreement already exists (signed in 1918...according to...you got it...Wikipedia). Maybe we'll throw 'climate' into the title, just to differentiate it a little bit.

But whatever it ends up being called or not called, I think outlining and adhering to this agreement would help give the world a bottom-up push toward the top-down goals of the Paris Agreement. It certainly couldn't hurt. My first outline is below.

Thanks for reading.

Tim

******

1) The Pittsburgh Climate Agreement (hereafter referred to as 'PCA') is a non-binding agreement among free thinking individuals to make tiny, trivial contributions towards the larger goals of the Paris Agreement.

2) Signatories of the PCA agree to make any or no effort at completing all, some, or none of the following whenever it is possible to do so in a safe and/or convenient manner:

*Carpooling
*Reducing unnecessary use of water
*Cycling
*Recycling
*Driving with properly inflated tires
*Running around town properly inflating car tires
*Moving to a home or apartment that reduces commuting time
*Reusing towels after showers
*Drip-drying after showers
*Not showering
*Replacing old light bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs
*Getting by on natural light
*Learning to see in the dark
*Hang-drying clothing
*Deciding to stop wearing clothing

(...and probably, several thousand other more helpful things...)

3) Signatories of the PCA agree to add new items to the partial list in #2 above as they become aware of said item's ability to contribute to the goals outlined in #1.

4) Signatories of the PCA agree to remove any items from the partial list in #2 above as they become aware of said item's conflict with the goals outlined in #1.

5) Signatories agree to recognize the spirit of the PCA- 'many hands make light work'. When someone must drive, a fellow signatory will walk. When someone must walk, a fellow signatory will still walk, possibly together, to make pointless small talk about the (apparently quickly changing) weather.

'reading' review: lincoln in the bardo

Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders (February 2017)

George Saunders's first novel is set the night after the death of President Lincoln's eleven year old son, Willie. Most of the story takes place in the graveyard where the young boy is laid to rest. Saunders weaves together a chorus of voices- including ghosts in the graveyard, the President himself, and quotes from first-hand sources- to tell an unforgettable story about death, grief, and the challenge of going on despite unimaginable loss.

As I mentioned in a March post, I had the opportunity to see Saunders read from this book at an event in mid-February. In keeping with the structure of his novel, he used a variety of assistants to voice different characters (with the man on the marquee opting to voice Lincoln- as Saunders himself put it, 'of course'). I felt this was a thoughtful touch that emphasized an important aspect of the story- with no traditional narrator, readers are forced to pay closer attention as they try to make sense of the story and, in the process, make their best attempt to answer some of the big questions that Lincoln in the Bardo poses.

Once the reading ended, Saunders took questions from the audience. I tend to do the same thing regarding these author 'Q & A' sessions- I come up with lots of potential questions and end up asking none. I axe most of my questions when I realize that the questions are designed to make me look clever, not to learn something from the author that I am genuinely curious about (1).

The closest I came to an acceptable question referred to an obscure line from the early pages of the book (editor's note: see the point above about making myself look clever). In this scene, an irrelevant character makes a joke at a party about 'going to the front', referencing Lincoln's recent remarks about the ongoing Civil War. The quote is met with laughter from the man's companions who immediately recognize the line. An omniscient narrator then remarks about how the scene was an example of the 'collective wit' of a people.

I wanted to ask Saunders if he thought it was more helpful for a collection of people to improve their 'collective wit' or if he thought it was better for an individual in that group to improve his or her own wit (2). A related concept comes up elsewhere- two characters find that making jokes about the frozen expressions on the faces of the dead help them deal with the difficult task of handling corpses- so I suspected the idea was on the author's mind. Put another way, I could have asked- did he think it helpful that people come together to divide the burden of difficult situations? Or would individuals developing their own ability to cope in healthy ways be preferred?

I gave up on the idea when I recognized that I stood little chance of articulating all that into a coherent question (3).

As tends to be the case, though, with unasked questions, this one has lingered in my mind over the many weeks since the reading. I suspect 'collective wit' is easy enough to dismiss as one of those 'sometimes its good, sometimes its not' things- as long as it's in moderation, right? I think that point of view is perfectly reasonable. The cases I describe deal with big, frightening topics like war and death. To find common ground with others and laugh about such topics can be very helpful in dealing with difficult emotions.

But sometimes I worry about the collective wit dragging us too far downward. I noted a number of instances lately in these parts- you know, the liberal, 'elite' terminus of the Acela corridor- where people cleverly noted the irony that certain Trump supporters favoring the reversal of Obamacare might be the first to lose coverage. 'Too stupid to know the harm of their vote,' I often (over)heard among the self-righteous chuckles.

Now, there might be something there. But pointing out that someone is too stupid to understand anything, politics or otherwise, isn't witty or insightful. It's mockery. And assembling a group of others to laugh along and implicitly agree doesn't change that. A bully with a following is still a bully.

A group's collective wit strikes me as harmful when it starts to create divisions by the formation of 'in' and 'out' groups. In the case above, what is perhaps worst of all is how it disavows those who understand the political ramifications of a vote from any responsibility to help educate and inform others. Instead of lamenting the failure of the right information to make it into the hands of voters, the collective instead labels others as 'too stupid' to do the right thing with that information.

Another issue I see with collective wit is when a group's thought process influences an individual's attempt to think freely. People generally enjoy activities done with others more than those done alone- I suspect this fact is mistakenly extended to thinking. The most important ideas in human history have come from individuals, not collectives, and thus the adoption of collective thinking patterns worries me a great deal for the ways it might limit a group member's capacity to think individually.

Lincoln In The Bardo does not set out to make any comments on these themes. And yet, I could not help think about them in the aftermath of the author appearance and my reading of the novel.

Where the collective wit perhaps fails us without question is in matters of life and death. We often turn to shared patterns of thought and behavior when our thinking as individuals fails us, a fact reinforced by how many of the characters in this work approach life and death (4).

But as Saunders's strongest characters show us, ultimately we must return to confront unanswerable questions on our own. The collective may help bring us there but the threshold remains passable by only one person at a time. It highlights the role of the collective wit in today's social landscape; vital to help us carry on in difficult times, harmful when it prevents individuals from seeking answers or meaning in the mysteries that lurk in the spaces around us.

Footnotes / imagined complaints

1. Hats off to my fellow readers, though...

Fortunately, my fellow audience members always come up with several strong prompts for the author. I enjoyed Saunders's response to a question about how he wrote a novel after a career of short fiction and essays. His basic point was that his approach resembled linking several short stories together. A carpenter who builds a room can build a house by simply connecting a few of these rooms together, I suppose.

2. Live from Beacon Hill...

Actually, what I wanted to ask him is if he thought a show like Saturday Night Live or a clever commentator like John Oliver was helping or preventing progress toward vague but oft-referenced ideas like equality and acceptance. Being a bit of a satirist himself, I'm sure Saunders would have offered an interesting perspective or two.

3. Hats off to the author, as well...

I think if I were truly on the fence, I would have tried asking a question. I credit Saunders here- he gave a great performance at this reading and I'm sure at least one person found him inviting enough to give their question a go.

His well-regarded sense of humor- especially if you prefer dick jokes- contributed to this feeling. When introducing his reader for the part of Hans Vollman- a character an LA Times review describes as having 'an undeflatable erection'- Saunders joked about the process of finding a person with the right physical attributes for the role ('oh, the auditions!'). And at the start of the Q&A session, he remarked along the lines of 'usually, the first person to ask a question is also the audience member with the greatest sexual prowess'.

There was a moment during the Q&A that I found particularly interesting (or perhaps just read too much into). An audience member asked about 'The Twelfth of December', mistakenly referring to his short story collection Tenth of December. Saunders did not bother to correct the man and, as far as I could see, everyone in the audience followed his lead. This was a great show of a) empathy, notable for the contagious effect Saunders had on his audience, or b) pragmatism, in that answering the question quickly would keep things moving for better-informed readers (or maybe it was a show of c) apathy, from an author and audience not paying nearly as close attention as I was).

4. There are not so many versions of the afterlife...

It has always interested me that, when it comes to questions of the afterlife, despite all the differences worldwide in culture, religion, and lifestyle, it seems that people reach similar conclusions in terms of how they imagine life after death.

reading review: april 2017 clearout

South and West: From a Notebook by Joan Didion

This is a collection of notes, observations, and musings for two pieces that Didion never wrote. The title refers to the locations from where these commentaries are collected. The first came from a road trip through Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama; the second grew out of her notes while she was covering the Patty Hearst trial in San Francisco.

The brevity and unorganized nature of the work made it difficult to pull many ideas from my reading. The main goal for me was to decide if I wanted to invest additional time in Didion's work (1). Still, in the end a couple of comments did stand out to me.

The observation that outside disapproval reinforces a group's solidarity was interesting. A belittled or bullied group of people will reinforce the characteristics they share rather than bicker among themselves over their differences.

Didion also comments that those who live close to international airports seem to expect a future shaped by enlightenment values to arrive any day. One effect of living in such expectation is that the past quickly becomes meaningless. Perhaps this explains the strange form of community that develops in such areas- one built not on traditional values but instead formed by shared interests, activities, or ambitions.

Or...perhaps this observation explains why these decades-old notebooks, 'never to be published'...were finally published this year.

Free Food for Millionaires by Min Jin Lee

I picked up Lee's debut novel after thoroughly enjoying her recently published Pachinko. Though this novel did not capture me in the same way, I still found much to enjoy about this story describing a Korean-American community in New York City.

The big idea I took away from this novel was how much pressure a tight-knit community exerts on its members. The pressure often comes in the demands to conform to the standards demanded by the group. The need is understandable- for marginalized communities, survival required the strength borne out of unity. Knowing when to adjust that mentality and approach the future with new values is a difficult challenge.

Often, it takes a fiercely independent individual to indicate a coming change. This person will do everything in his or her power to break away from the community and establish an identity. The main protagonist, Casey, is such a presence and she opens the novel by exerting an equal and opposite reaction to this pressure in order to break free. Like any wrenching effort, though, the results are messy and the characters spend most of the novel picking up the debris, rearranging the pieces, and trying to find a new way to define their roles in a community transitioning away from its traditional values.

Of course, I enjoyed the smaller observations that appear a hallmark of Lee's work. In examining Casey's Ivy League education, the idea that school rarely teaches timing or the art of finessing difficult people was an eye-opening conclusion. The comment that those who have been hated find it much easier to hate was equal parts insightful and saddening.

In one scene, Lee describes a character's ability to give complete attention to another as a rare but powerful gift. This character is described as 'shining his floodlights' on another. I really enjoyed that image and have kept it in mind recently as a target for my own improvement in this area.

Footnotes / imagined complaints

1. And the jury finds the defendant...

I enjoyed South and West enough to green-light two more requests- The White Album and The Year of Magical Thinking.

I read Slouching Towards Bethlehem last spring so these two books will bring my total to four. I was on the fence- for though I enjoyed Slouching Towards Bethlehem last year, I do recall dragging a bit through the collection. It is never a good sign when I put down a book and start something new, as was the case last spring.

tales of two cities, vol 2: dec '15 - apr '16

Click here for part one of this infrequently updated series...

12/12/2015
Innovation Lab - 125 Western Ave. at Batten Way (5:22 pm)
Packard's Corner - Comm. Ave. at Brighton Ave. (5:35 pm)

Almost everything I know about urban planning I learned playing SimCity2000. Though an excellent game on some levels, it turns out that many of the challenges found in the computer gaming classic- responding to an alien invasion, building a cricket stadium, legalizing gambling without consulting a soul in the city government- translate very poorly to real life (and thus, probably, being a mayor).

Perhaps the most notable difference of SimCity2000 and real life is the speed of infrastructural change. In SimCity2000, when you a buy a police station, it gets built right away and crime immediately disappears.

In BostonCambridge2015, the Longfellow Bridge has been under construction ('under construction') for approximately thirty-seven years. Let's not talk about the Green Line extension. Such is (my) life.

A policy is approved or a building is planned with the intent of improving life for someone, somehow. And over time, the effects are observed carefully through measured hindsight. The benefits are rightly celebrated. But the process is slow and thus the exact moment when an individual notes a leap forward in quality of life is hard to identify.

The Western Ave protected bike lane is one such project. Cambridge, noting the ongoing safety issue presented by cars, cars, cars, cars, cars cars, bikes, and pedestrians criss-crossing through dangerous intersections, opened a raised bike lane on this road. The result is promising; cycling happens in its own space, pedestrians walk without stepping into the bike lane, and car doors open freely without endangering approaching cyclists.

I ride through this bike lane today and note that, although the new space does make the trip less nerve-racking, last week's passing scenery of fallen tree branches, overturned recycling bins, and texting pedestrians are today's obstacles. A bike lane is always just a part of something else in the city; this project has merely exchanged the street for the sidewalk.

Still, better to hit a bin than a Honda. Or hit by, for that matter.

Despite my little complaints, innovation is the appropriate word to include in the same breath as Western Ave on this day. Of course, those visiting the town from cycling-havens will likely wonder what took so long; any tourist here to research an 'English-to-my-first-language' dictionary will define innovation as 'finally getting around to it'.

The Packard's corner location implies one destination- Ittoku. This restaurant in Brighton is innovative in its own way. Its menu serves mainly Japanese appetizers on small plates. The concept is relatively new in a city littered with overpriced sushi, half-empty hibachi restaurants, and 'gourmet' ramen havens asking for your dreams at the end of each bowl. Again, those coming in from outside the city limits are likely to wonder what took so long for such a sure thing to open here.

I rarely entertain such wide-ranging thoughts at Ittoku, though. I'm too busy eating okonomiyaki to think. And Sapporo in a pitcher never hurts.

Having first eaten here in late June, we never came here with my mother. This is, sort of, a regret. But it is also a blessing. There is nothing specific to Ittoku that brings up reminders.

12/19/2015
Ink Block (7:52 am) 
??? (??? am/pm)

The removal of my next-door Hubway rack presents new challenges. Often, these are solved by walking five more minutes to one of the neighboring racks. I'm more annoyed by this than logic would dictate. Hubway, once a reducer of travel planning, is now forcing me to create itineraries.

Today is a new problem. There are no available bikes anywhere. I suppose it was inevitable. I end up walking twenty-five minutes to State Street to the rack that happens to be where I pick up the commuter bus on weekday mornings. Starting my weekend here brings about the somewhat unwelcome sensation that I am going to pedal to work on this frozen Saturday morning.

The new starting point takes me on an unexplored route into the South End. I briefly stop at the Ink Block and pedal on to Newmarket. But the end of the journey is never marked into my account, causing all kinds of problems with my next attempt to take out a bike. Not even Hubway is immune to the challenge of equipment maintenance in freezing weather.

The lack of communication in addressing the removal of the Charles Circle dock, the lack of any urgency by the city in addressing dangerous intersections, my inability on this day to find a bike, the failure of my trip to close correctly- it all seems connected. Things are slipping, slowly but clearly, and that's always a signal for needed change. I can't help feeling that the winter is going to be a long one.

12/21/2015
Mayor Martin J Walsh - 28 State St (6:55 pm)
Cambridge St. at Joy St. (7:02 pm)

I arrive early at the bar for trivia night and receive a surprise- an early Christmas gift! It's a set of reflector straps, or as I immediately refer to them, 'strap-ons'. The 'strap-ons' will make me, previously unsighted, now somewhat more visible at night to drivers, pedestrians, and other out-of-their-mind cyclists.

I still don't have a helmet. The reflectors, unlike a helmet, are in my recent spirit- they reveal me exactly as I am instead of forcing me to hide underneath a shell. It underlies a general ethos among city bikers- a preference for active safety to avoid 'crashes' rather than the passive safety advocated for by the car industry to protect during 'accidents'.

One problem with clever metaphors- they create excuses to not do things. I should probably get a helmet.

12/30/2015
Mass Ave at Newmarket Square (10:23 am)
Boston Public Library - 700 Boylston St. (10:42 am)

My last trip of 2015. It seems appropriate to start at Newmarket, perhaps less so to end at the library. The timing of this trip captures my reality at the end of the year. Though I intend to continue volunteering in 2016, the reality is that sometimes I am just not needed. And on those days, I leave early.

I could head into work, of course. Even though I took time off, I'm not really picky about my hours. I took a lot of personal time during the spring and summer that went unmarked in my paid time off account. Though I intend to contribute another strong year in 2016, the reality is that sometimes I am just not needed. And on those days, I come in late.

I take the Orange Line from Back Bay to Oak Grove and from there complete the journey via bus to Woburn. I'm still early so I stop into a used sporting goods store on the walk from the bus stop to the office. I start browsing around.

By the front register, I notice a bucket of cheap headbands. These are the thermal kind with a wide portion to cover the ears. My hair, uncut since August 2014, is too long for my winter hat. These will solve the problem of my cold ears.

As always, I seek out a simple, black accessory. But a pink headband catches my eye. Think pink? Who knows. It's not outwardly affiliated.

My mother was the only one who ever thought I should grow my hair out. I do not believe in signs, per say, but for five bucks it doesn't matter.

My mother was the only one who I ever talked seriously about running with. Maybe I should believe a little more in signs.

I buy two, a black one to wear during my daily activities and a pink one to wear for winter jogging.

01/09/2016
Harvard Law School at Mass Ave / Jarvis St (4:17 pm)
Harvard Law School at Mass Ave / Jarvis St (4:34 pm)

I ride Hubway eight times in January. This trip kind of sums it all up. The only stations open during winter are in Cambridge and all of my trips are circuitous, pointless, and cold.

02/02/2016
Porter Square Station (12:31 pm)
Cambridge Main Library at Broadway / Trowbridge St (12:47 pm)

I get laid off on January 29. The timing is not great- cousins from Japan are visiting, for the first time since our move here two decades ago. They spend the 31st, a Sunday, in town before returning to New York that same night.

It seems appropriate that my first bike ride after the visit involves Porter Square. Porter is the first place I remember going to in America. Back then, it was called something like 'Little Tokyo' or 'Japantown'. The specialty grocery store is no longer there but Sapporo Ramen, always the true destination, remains. My school vacation trips there with my mother and brother are among my fondest memories.

We took our cousins to my mother's favorite coffee shop in my hometown. On the bulletin board there, I noticed a flier seeking hospice volunteers. I'm starting to believe in signs.

02/29/2016
One Broadway / Kendall Sq at Main St / 3rd St (4:20 pm)
One Broadway / Kendall Sq at Main St / 3rd St (4:20 pm)

One Broadway / Kendall Sq at Main St / 3rd St (4:20 pm)
Cambridge Main Library at Broadway / Trowbridge St (4:43 pm)

Cambridge Main Library at Broadway / Trowbridge St (6:58 pm)
Lesley University (7:10 pm)

My first Hubway attempt of the day is an indecisive seventeen second journey from and back to the original bike rack. I suppose I must have found a problem with the initial selection.

I get it right the second time, as I eventually do with the name of the blog I start on the same day.

03/09/2016
Rindge Avenue - O'Neill Library (5:39 pm)
Danehy Park (5:44 pm)

Danehy Park (6:24 pm)
Inman Square at Vellucci Plaza / Hampshire St (6:39 pm)

My initial hospice volunteer attempt did not completely work out. A twenty minute phone call led me to realize that a car will be a requirement. I explore further options and find an organization serving patients in the Boston metro area.

My first training session is scheduled for the next week, March 16. I'm not entirely convinced of the wisdom of returning to a hospice residence and, quite frankly, this is a widely shared view. So this trip was a scouting mission, of sorts, where in addition to learning the length of the commute, I also gauge my response to the mere sight of a hospice residence.

On a street where the homes all look alike, the residence is subtly different- to my eye, it is obviously a hospice. The front door, the long driveways, the blinds covering the windows, every bit of the place oozes a feeling I did not even know about a year ago...

I learn later that many neighbors go years without realizing what the house is.

03/16/2016
Cambridge Main Library at Broadway / Trowbridge St (5:00 pm)
Danehy Park (5:21 pm)

Danehy Park (8:42 pm)
One Broadway / Kendall Sq at Main St / 3rd St (9:08 pm)

The trips to Danehy Park now mean one thing- a hospice shift. I do nothing else in this area. The appearance of these journeys on my Hubway account contrast with the disappearance of the once equally frequent Newmarket trips.

It has been over two weeks since my last appearance at the food bank. At this point, I do intend to return, perhaps planning to do so once my hospice duties stabilized, but in looking back over a year later, I admit that I have yet to do so.

Losing my job rattled me. In the days I went to volunteer after being laid off, I recognized that I no longer found the same sense of purpose I had when I volunteered in 2015. To show up at the food bank on a Wednesday because I had nothing to do bothered me in a way I did not fully understand. After about a month of unemployment, I stopped going.

The training at the hospice was promising. It remained unclear to me if I was ready for the role. Generally, hospice volunteers joining the team in the wake of their own loss are recommended to wait at least a full year since the death before returning to the same environment.

04/04/2016
Cambridge Main Library at Broadway / Trowbridge St (10:27 am)
Danehy Park (10:42 am)

Today was my 'training shift'- this involved shadowing a fellow volunteer as she made her rounds through the house. Not much to it.

After the shift ended, we talked a little longer.  She eventually asked if I was sure it was a good idea to go back into a hospice so soon after my mom died.  In particular, she wanted me to make sure that being reminded of my own experiences as a visitor would not make things difficult for me as I processed my own grief.

It was a thoughtful, compassionate question, the kind of question you are grateful someone makes the effort to ask. I took a few weeks away from the hospice to properly consider it.  Was I ready to serve in an environment where I would constantly encounter reminders of my most difficult times over the past year?

Eventually, I concluded yes, I was ready, but not necessarily because I thought I could handle the hospice.  Instead, what I realized was that the reminders were everywhere around me, hospice or not. Sometimes, they are fairly blunt reminders, like Mother's Day.

At other times, the reminders sneak up on me. I found out just yesterday that the Needham commuter rail line was discontinuing its Saturday service. I recalled that the last time I rode the Needham Line was to visit my mom, in hospice, on a Saturday.

04/05/2016
The Esplanade - Beacon St. at Arlington St. (6:47 pm)
Boston Convention & Exhibition Center (7:04 pm)

The city of Boston returns to near full Hubway operation as the calendar turns to April. This means the happy return of soothing bike rides into the waterfront area on the cool nights in early spring.

Trips like this one indicate an imminent basketball game. The team is, like everything, a mosaic of stories past. Teammates from high school, a former colleague, and my brother round out the optimistic but perennially failing squad. Notably missing is any link to my college basketball days save for my disintegrating sneakers, a holdover from my doomed senior season.

Never one to make plans or even unprompted phone calls, I recognize my almost total isolation over the past year. My ratio of incoming to outgoing texts is close to three to one. Without the tireless efforts of some very good friends and the consistent routine of standing plans, I wonder if I would have talked to anyone during this time. My total lack of contact with almost all of my college basketball teammates hints at the answer.

Like with bike riding, basketball got in my blood early. My parents both played and, in a roundabout, indirect sort of way, could even credit the sport with their first meeting. But my present feelings on the sport are mixed. I much prefer distance running to the shorter bursts of speed dictated by hoops. And the threat of injury in games with overeager, under-conditioned, and clumsy athletes grasping hopefully for lost glory days is significant. Getting to a volunteer shift or going to job interviews would be impossible on crutches.

But the biggest problem with basketball is that there is no running or biking on days with a game. This leaves me with maddeningly little to do on game days.

04/24/2016
University Park (3:19 am)
Charles Circle - Charles St. at Cambridge St. (3:32 am)

Hubway is a 24/7 kind of thing. For me, this means Hubway is the best way to get home after the 'T' closes. I suppose that is a trivial point, actually, since I consider it the best way to get home while the 'T' operates, as well.

My brother hosted a get together that ran predictably into the wee hours. I spoke to a mother of one of his friends at one point. She pointed out that, although my brother bore a physical resemblance to both parents, I was 'all mom'. The hair, I bet.

04/29/2016
Linear Park - Mass. Ave. at Cameron Ave. (12:12 am)
Inman Square at Vellucci Plaza / Hampshire St (12:26 am)

Inman Square at Vellucci Plaza / Hampshire St (12:27 am)
Charles Circle - Charles St. at Cambridge St. (12:45 am)

Charles Circle - Charles St. at Cambridge St. (12:47 am)
BIDMC - Brookline at Burlington St (1:00 am)

I make a trip to Linear Park, just shy of Arlington, to watch the Celtics lose in the playoffs with a couple of former colleagues. Afterward, I have a late drink near Fenway Park with a couple of other friends. Hubway accommodates my busy social calendar and I go flying down Beacon Streets in two different cities- Cambridge and Boston- to get to my life on time.

Linear Park is the northernmost point of my Hubway explorations, so far. As I recognized when I decided to move out of South Boston in 2014, most of my life was moving north. It seems that, though Beacon Hill occupies a prominent northern point in the geography of the city, my life still continues in the same direction. To go further north of Beacon Hill means Cambridge.

My new bike riding passion suggests a future move up the Red Line is in the cards. When the dealer is going to send those my way is an entirely different question. I suppose, barring new signals that life is turning south, all I can do for now is stay at the table.

reading review: the little prince

The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery (May 2017)

I originally picked up The Little Prince assuming it would be a picture book. It turned out to be a little different; it combined parts of a standard children's book with elements of a novel, an advice book, and a travel memoir.

Books as short as this one- reading it requires a commitment of around one hour, give or take fifteen minutes- are difficult to write about because I fear sharing too much will ruin the book for potential readers. So, I will skip even the faintest attempt at a plot summary and just get on with the ideas I liked.

There is a calling to responsibility that the author subtly delivers in this book. It builds slowly- the feeling is barely perceptible at first- but by the book's completion, I was left with a deeper understanding of how Antoine de Saint-Exupery sees an individual's obligations.

One part is to the community or world that surrounds and interacts with a person. The reader is shown many ridiculous ways to live a life; the only character demonstrating a counter-example is the lamplighter who acts because he thinks about others. The lesson that those who tame what is around them must take responsibility for it is explained simply- the tamed no longer have access to the protections given to it by nature.

The other part is the obligation to the individual, to the self. The Little Prince suggests an individual obligation to challenge assumptions in order to find the value of anything- a sentiment no better exemplified than by the idea that a desert's value is found in its hidden wells. This process might be uncomfortable, challenging, or just plain difficult. During these times, it helps to remember that those who put up with caterpillars are rewarded by butterflies.

One up (or is it one down?): I do not suspect this book will make it into the Business Bro Book Club- at one point, a comment is made about how businessmen often argue with the same logic of a drunkard. However, I did think the observations that authority is based in reason and that reasonable people only ask others to do what they are capable of doing were good food for thought for any manager to mull over.

One down (or is it one up?): One idea I'm sure to think more about in the coming month (I'm writing this on May 30) is about how sunsets are great for people who are feeling sad. Until reading that line, I never made a connection between my annual effort in June to watch as many sunsets as possible with my general dislike of our sixth month.

Just saying: It was not clear at first if I should count The Little Prince as a 'book' for my annual tally (spoiler alert: I did). Being nearly one hundred pages, the length was just about at the minimum for me. It was a book clearly written for children yet easily accessible for adults. I would describe the voice as that of a precocious spelling bee runner-up; fully capable of understanding the real world but not convinced enough of its appeal to justify learning all the little details.

I decided the best way to justify including it here would be to read it a second time, almost right away, and jot down any interesting sections for later reference. That's pretty much what I do for any book I include here, I suppose, so it struck me as the fairest way to move forward.

reading review: the very persistent gappers of frip

The Very Persistent Gappers of Frip by George Saunders (February 2017)

I regularly walk home from Boston’s main library in Copley Square. The route varies. Sometimes, I go through the Public Garden. On others nights I will go around it. I prefer to walk down Comm Ave but I’m perfectly fine strolling down Boylston Street. If time is of the essence, I’ll ride a bike.

The route always ends the same way, though. From the intersection of Beacon and Charles streets, I walk on the left side of Charles Street until I reach Peet’s Coffee. I cross the street there, diagonally, and complete the trip home on the right side of Charles Street. I even do this on the nights I bike because Charles Street runs one-way. Rather than bike along the sidewalk or pedal illegally against the flow of traffic, I rack the bike at the Beacon and Charles intersection and walk.

I was once treated to a rare event on that final leg of the walk home. As I crossed Charles (in front of Peet’s) I was almost run over by a car driving in the wrong direction. I’ve lived in this neighborhood for almost two and a half years but this was the first time I’ve seen a car going in the wrong direction on Charles Street.

Now, the car in question was not moving at top speed. Nowhere near it. It’s possible that, were I struck by the vehicle, I would not have even fallen over. Still, I prefer not being hit by cars if at all possible- let’s call it a pet peeve of mine, shall we?

Perhaps the lack of mortal danger allowed me to recover quickly from the shock. As the feeling of the (slow-moving) breeze from the car faded from my memory, I had approximately eight quick thoughts.

THOUGHTS #1 - #4: Just some quick hitters here, really, to get going.

What the heck is that guy doing? A joyride? Just dumb? First day on the job?

THOUGHT #5: I noticed that the license plate was from out of state. I can’t remember exactly but the colors involved were yellow and blue.

Boston is a long way from home. Maybe Massachusetts is the only state with one-way roads?

THOUGHT #6: Next, I laughed, ruefully. I’m a very careful pedestrian. I wait for the walk signal, if possible, and look both ways before crossing. A jaywalking stranger brushing past me makes no impact whatsoever on my conviction to stand at the curb and wait. If time is of the essence, I might take a careful look and go for the gold.

But time is never of the essence on Charles Street.

THOUGHT #7: I was laughing at myself because I used to joke that, were I ever to get hit by a car, it would be while crossing a one-way street. This was because I never look both ways.

Why would I? The threat only comes from one direction. Do I look up for falling pianos when I wander around town? 

Exactly.

THOUGHT #8: This thought was back to the basics, so to speak, of my first thought.

What an idiot! Doesn’t he know it's a one-way street?

But as I looked around, it occurred to me that perhaps he didn’t.

The stoplight pointed in the one correct direction and thus there was no mechanism for someone driving the wrong way to know to stop. Charles Street, like any one-way, has a number of ‘no turn’ and ‘do not enter’ signs. Still, it’s perfectly reasonable that someone might miss those, especially at night. And if a streetlight was broken, it might not even be possible to see some of these signs.

I resumed my walk home, now on the right side of the street, and mulled some more. Was it a self-driving car? Should I expect to see a news item about a massive GPS recall tomorrow? Would I have been hit if this were last June, when I was still wearing headphones in the streets? Had I ever driven the wrong way down a street? Would they have built a statue of me in front of Peet's had I perished just moments ago? Only to the last question did I have a definite answer.

My walk home down Charles always ends the same way. I reach the end of the street, turn right, and walk the final block to my front door. I always get a clear view of Mass General Hospital at this point. In fact, I basically live next door to MGH.

As I turned onto my block, it occurred to me that the fastest way to get to MGH for anyone living on or near Charles Street would involve a straight line down the one-way street. It would be the wrong way, mind, but that's the fastest way. I’m sure many have taken the legally-preferred circuitous route that incorporates Storrow Drive or braved the labyrinthine grid of one-way streets that make up Beacon Hill to get to MGH, a safe yet time consuming prospect. But what would these drivers have done if time was of the essence?

It comes naturally, I think (or perhaps we are so well trained), to automatically assume the worst intentions. It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, I’ve been told (a statement I accept despite never having seen a dog eat a dog, although one time at a Fourth of July cookout...never mind). People are always hustling, looking for anything that helps them get ahead. If they have to step on your back to boost themselves, be on alert because they’ll do it with both feet.

And so we wander on, up and down the Charles Streets of our own neighborhoods, passing judgment on the out-of-line and using isolated actions as proof of character traits. A driver who makes the wrong turn is an idiot. It’s a tough habit to break. Full understanding and rightful conviction is always more satisfying than ambiguity. Actions divided into ‘the right’ and ‘the wrong’ are simple to understand. Disagreement grows out of entrenched positions and the shared underlying interests are ignored or dismissed.

Reading this picture book, written by George Saunders and ably illustrated by Lane Smith, caused me to remember this little walking incident. Over the course of a few minutes, I considered new possibilities. I came to a couple of reasonable explanations for why anyone might drive the wrong way down Charles Street. And, perhaps most importantly, I understood that in certain cases I would do the same.

The book addresses that lesson at an audience that might have a little difficulty understanding it- kids. It uses the setting of a three-family village and examines how they react to the misfortunes that befall their families and their neighbors. What the final lesson lacks in originality is more than made up for in the kindness and compassion that shines from its final pages.

A society where people drive any which way would be chaotic. If the very rules that bind society are optional, the society itself is sure to crumble. But the rules were put in place to serve everyone living there. If breaking them accomplishes the same goal, then so be it.

I think of the ideal society as one that finds- and maintains- the balance. The rules are in place and the rule-breakers must face justice of some kind. But there should also be an understanding that if someone breaks a rule, they do so knowingly and do so because accepting the consequences leads to a better outcome for everyone. This society would seek to understand the rule-breaker and try to address the underlying motivation, whether it be a lack of resources, a medical emergency, or just simple confusion from a poorly lit road.

Do books like this help build such a society? I don't know. The target audience is a third my age. I'm pretty sure at that point in my life this book would have made no change to my lifestyle or worldview. But it probably would not have steered me toward becoming a cold-hearted jerk, either.

And having read it now, I again understand that although the immediate effect of reading is negligible, I am able to point back to examples I've witnessed of the various behaviors the characters exhibit in this story. The lesson is probably useful to reinforce from time to time just for this result. At the very least, the next time I see someone going the wrong way down Charles Street, I'll be a little more inclined to offer my help.

Assuming I don't get hit by the car first, of course.

reading review: march 2017 clearout

South of the Border, West of the Sun by Haruki Murakami

At this point, I'm ready to call this one a 'standard' Murakami work. A young male protagonist goes from spectator to participant in his own life through a series of events that stretch just to the edge of reality. The somewhat formless narrative arc is entertaining, sprinkled with profound insights, and always finds its way to a jazz club. I repeat my advice- if you like this author, read all his books.

One memorable passage describes the condition 'Hysteria Siberiana'. This occurs when a Siberian farmer- accustomed to waking when the sun rose in the east, breaking for lunch when the sun was directly overhead, and returning home when the sun set in the west- would suddenly leave his life behind and walk westward. Wherever it was that the sun went each day, it surely was better than staying put.

I came up with many potential analogies for this condition. For today, I settled on reading. Each time I open a new book is admitting that, surely, wherever the author went with the pen is a better place than staying put in my own head.

I've found these westbound journeys in pursuit of Murakami's light enriching. His novels remind me to look around and wonder what lies just beyond. At the same time, they also encourage me to stop, sometimes just to rest, but also to consider which fields I must till next.

An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments by Ali Almossawi

This short book describes common errors in reasoning. In order to best serve the visual learners out there among us debaters, helpful illustrations of each error are included.

I do not think there is much value in highlighting any specific error here- the book will take interested readers less than an hour to fully absorb- but I did spot three general themes into which I'll group a couple of these specific errors.

The first was a tendency to attack the person instead of the argument. Citing an opponent's background or associating them with repulsive characters who hold similar views is unrelated to the validity of the argument. Pointing out examples of past behavior that are inconsistent with the current position is also trivial.

A second theme was to get lost in meanings or definitions of words. An argument loses focus when a conclusion that applies for one meaning of a word is incorrectly applied to other meanings or if one party in a discussion changes the parameters of a word's use after the debate has started.

The final theme invokes basic statistical thinking. General claims tend to be hard to disprove but the temptation should be avoided- being general, the claims often fail to provide the robust support needed in stressing a key point. And the debater should always remember that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

After Dark by Haruki Murakami

My final Murakami novel was perhaps the one I enjoyed least. There is a pattern to his work into which this novel fit and After Dark was no exception in terms of its insights into the human psyche or its brave exploration of life's most profound spiritual questions. But for whatever reason, this one did not grab me in the same way that some of his other works did.

the final exam- half time

True On Average (TOA): Good morning, everyone! Welcome to the half-time show for 'The Education Of An American Football Fan' series, brought to you by-

The Business Bro (BB): The what? Half time? This isn't over? What was that thing you sent over last week, telling me it was 'urgent', begging me to 'please advise' or whatnot? I thought that was the end of it?

TOA: Well, that's the whole piece, you are correct, but the conclusion, I suppose, is for next week, or whenever I see fit, really, being the boss, but since I called Wednesday's post 'the first half', I thought it made sense to just call this the 'half time' show.

BB: Whatever. So the next post is 'the second half'?

TOA: Well, I'm not sure yet about how I'm going to break it all-

BB: This is why no one reads this blog. You set a bunch of rules and schedules and limitations that nobody asked for and then send out proper nonsense or whatnot-

TOA: Proper admin, I believe it is called-

BB: Right, proper rubbish is what it is, or a proper interruption, maybe, to all those poor email subscribers, inbox litter explaining why you are changing your own restrictions that no one knows or cares about or understands anyway, then you go off and compare the Champions League to the Swan Boats-

TOA: Hold on, that was last year, that was for a different football tournament, new readers, please click here, and by the way, welcome to-

BB: Will you stop interrupting me! And stop calling it football, if you wanna live in America, play by the rules, the game is soccer, goodness me, I can't believe I just said 'soccer', that was my New Year's Resolution not to say it, anyway, I was up all night editing your stupid post, changing 'football' to 'soccer' so your three readers would know what the heck-

TOA: Wait, you changed the post? Also, there are no 'New Year's Resolutions' allowed around here-

BB: Of course, that's what proofreading is! Didn't you write that, didn't you write about pruning BS or whatever-

TOA: Why did you do that? Your job is to edit and tweak, not write! Go write on your own blog.

BB: I have my own blog. I'm not going to shamelessly plug my own work, of course-

TOA: Right, I know that, your last post was literally during the Obama administration, I'm not sure the internet even existed-

BB: Better to remain silent than to write a fifteen thousand word post about soccer.

TOA: OK, whatever. And stop giving away content, if I may ask, that pruning BS post isn't up yet!

BB: Isn't up yet? You finished it a month ago!

TOA: Well, I actually get things done on time, which is a foreign concept to you, like soc- eh hem, football, I suspect, so I have the posts scheduled out a few weeks now.

BB: Preposterous.

TOA: Maybe I should start proofreading your proofreading. Still, that was dumb, to change the writing, now the title won't make sense.

BB: Oh, I changed the title, too.

TOA: You what?

BB: You're welcome, did you say? The title was dumb. 'The Education Of A Helmet Football Fan?' Who do you think you are, David Halberstam?

TOA: I'm gonna fire you!

BB: You can't fire me-

TOA: You quit? Then go. I can do this myself.

BB: No, you literally can't fire someone without a salary. If you pay me for this appearance, you can fire me next week. When is this thing going to make any money, by the way? And I was promised stock options, if I recall-

TOA: When are you going to find us a job?

BB: Hey listen you, I've been busy. Between editing your nonsense and working on my next batch of posts, it is a small miracle that I have time to fill out applications at all.

TOA: Pfffft...next batch? Does your domain still exist? I'd check, but I'm afraid your blog would ask me for a ransom.

BB: Oh, good one. I hope it does, maybe it will prune some of the BS on this one when you fail to pay up, cheapskate! Anyway, that technical ignorance is why I keep getting turned down by IT departments. It's called a paywall, which I don't have, and interested readers can go check out my first season at-

TOA: Hey! Cut it out! Stop advertising. No commercial breaks- this isn't an NBA playoff game.

BB: Oh right, the soccer guy wants to go ad-free. Figures. Maybe we can print 'TOA' jerseys with the Google logo on the front. Or do you prefer Bing?

TOA: Well, you can advertise if you want, but you have to pay. That's how advertising works.

BB: That's how it works, on TV. This isn't TV. This is closer to the TV being turned off. That would be more interesting than this, actually, a TV turned off.

TOA: Huh?

BB: I have a serious question. You wrote that a great part of soccer is that it ends in two hours. It would be even better if it ended after twenty minutes, now that I think about it, but whatever.

TOA: Can you get to the point? And stop giving away spoilers.

BB: Oh right, big revelation, the game ends after two hours. But why not cap your posts? Maybe your readers would enjoy it if you capped your posts at six hundred words, like I do mine, or just a few letters, like Twitter. Then they can plan a little bit for the rest of the day.

TOA: Maybe your readers would enjoy it if you posted.

BB: Wow, low blow! Green card! Ref, give him a green card!

TOA: Give me a what? Who? What ref?

BB: A green card! Like they do in soccer.

TOA: They do not give those in soccer. Are you talking about signing foreign players?

BB: What, no. Foreign players? Why would we need foreign players? I thought the countries played each other.

TOA: OK, well forget that, what you are talking about is yellow and red cards, right? For fouls?

BB: Right, because soccer players always act like little chickens, flopping around and clucking about...where is the ref?

TOA: What ref?

BB: The ref, for this debate.

TOA: This isn't a debate. We aren't doing another debate after that 'Make America Debate Again' debacle, or whatever it ended up being called, if you changed the name-

BB: Wait.

TOA: -readers actually thought I was going to vote for-

BB: Stop!

TOA: What?

BB: Why am I here if we aren't debating?

TOA: This is a half time show. We're going to review the last post and do some analysis.

BB: I can't believe it. Somehow, you've come up with your all-time worst idea.

TOA: Well, what should we do, then?

BB: Let's have a debate about soccer.

TOA: Debate soccer? Debate what about it?

BB: Typical, don't want to debate, you just wanna fire people and worry about your hair, right, no wonder everyone figured out you voted for-

TOA: How are you going to debate? Do you know anything about the sport?

BB: I know what I read from your posts which, now that I think about it, probably means I know a whole lot about very little.

TOA: I see. Well, yellow cards are like technical fouls and red cards are like ejections. Green cards? Where did you get green cards from?

BB: I thought they used all the colors.

TOA: Look, you can't win a debate if you haven't the slightest clue what you are talking about.

BB: Lose? I was the clear winner in our last debate! Although you probably think you won because you tied, or whatever you weirdo soccer fans think.

TOA: Well, tomorrow might suit you, Mr. Win-At-All-Costs, because it's a cup final. There are no ties in a cup final, unless you count some of the hairstyles.

BB: Hair. Goodness. Can't these guys find a charity to donate it to?

TOA: Hey listen you, if we ever go bald, it'll be because of you stressing over a pie chart in a PowerPoint that no one is going to pay attention to. So don't be rattling on about hair.

BB: You know what, I'll take that one seriously since you know all about content that no one reads. When is this big game, anyway?

TOA: Tomorrow. Didn't you read the post?

BB: No, I just told you, no one reads your posts, me included.

TOA: That's your problem, you think 'no one's gonna read this' then you don't write it. That's why your blog is indistinguishable from a blank page.

BB: That's your problem, you think 'well, it doesn't matter who reads this' then you stay up all night hitting 'refresh' on the page count to see who read it, then you beg me to code an email subscriber tool so you can count everyone you spam.  Who is gonna read ten thousand words about soccer?

TOA: Right, whatever, that's actually untrue, but you like fake facts, don't you?

BB: Fake facts?

TOA: Like when you change my posts-

BB: Those aren't fake facts. That's called tailoring to your audience. Calling it 'football' is going to make everyone think the Super Bowl is this weekend. Calling it 'soccer' lets everyone know to plan a picnic or a trip to the beach.

TOA: You know, it kind of is like the Super Bowl, this final tomorrow.

BB: Final, what a stupid word. Does everyone get a trophy? Do the players' Moms drive them home in minivans after the game? Or do they carpool?

TOA: Now hold-

BB: Hold what? You can't use your hands. Actually, they probably do each get trophies, since the game will end in a draw?

TOA: Well, that's not possible, since if the game ends in a draw, it goes to extra time, which is kind of like overtime.

BB: A shootout? Is this game in Europe or Texas?

TOA: If the game is tied after extra time, sure, a shootout.

BB: Good.

TOA: The shootout is probably the only thing you are capable of understanding.

BB: It's the only thing worth understanding. Who cares about grown men kicking each other and pretending to injure themselves? Talk about fake facts.

TOA: Hold on-

BB: Hey ref, he kicked me! Ow! Red card! Red card!

TOA: Right, because those tough guys wearing helmets and chain mail and butt pads look so tough when they beg referees to throw a little yellow tissue. Pass interference! He touched me! And tripping in basketball is basically an ejection, I might add.

BB: According to who?

TOA: Those are the rules.

BB: What rules?

TOA: The basketball rules.

BB: The rules don't matter. It's what the players do with the rules. If the speed limit is twenty-five, that doesn't matter. All that matters is whether a guy goes twenty-six or not.

TOA: Why does that matter?

BB: Guys in football who beg for flags or guys in basketball who trip others are probably reject soccer players, anyway. Most of the guys in those sports don't bother with the flopping around- they just play the game.

TOA: Well, maybe your macho sensitivities are violated, but apparently no one cares enough to keep the TV off, since the final is usually the most watched sporting event in the world.

BB: Like TV?

TOA: I don't.

BB: Whatever. I meant, most watched on TV? Or live?

TOA: Like in the stadium?

BB: Right, how many losers are in the stadium?

TOA: Losers, goodness. Well the game is in Cardiff. I don't know how big that is.

BB: What's it called?

TOA: The Millennium Stadium.

BB: Figures, millennials like soccer, they can just look at their phones and not miss a thing.

TOA: Millennium, fool. Millennium Stadium, like a sponsor.

BB: What? I've never heard of them. What does Millennium do?

TOA: I'm not sure, actually. It might not be sponsored. Some soccer stadiums aren't sponsored.

BB: Stop clowning around. Not sponsored? What the hell is that? Do these guys make any money?

TOA: The Champions League final brings in a ton of money, I'm sure.

BB: This is why all these foreign guys are investing, you know. They look at the European setup and see piles of cash. Look at what the Red Sox guys did for that team, what were they called? They always lose, I know that-

TOA: Liverpool? Liverpool do not always lose!

BB: That's what you said in your post- that it's a miracle or something that the cop they hired is getting them sorted out. That made sense- a cop. Those hooligans are out of control.

TOA: OK- I thought you said you didn't read?

BB: Well, I had to see some of it to proofread. It's like the sun, just a quick glance. Who is going to proofread this, by the way, if we are both here?

TOA: That makes no sense. Also, it's Klopp, not cop. And not all the investors get it right, which I covered in my post, as well, so maybe you should read it again.

BB: Maybe I'll read it during the final. I'll have nothing better to do. Where is Cardiff, anyway?

TOA: Wales.

BB: Where is Wales?

TOA: Left of England.

BB: Politically?

TOA: Well, maybe. They did vote 'stay'...but I meant more like in the cartography way, like if you looked at Googlemaps.

BB: Ha, like you understand politics. So west?

TOA: Right, west.

BB: Cardiff? Is that even a real city? Was Madrid busy? Or Milan?

TOA: The Millennium Stadium in Cardiff is actually a pretty good venue for a final, if you were to ask me. Liverpool won the FA Cup in a game there a decade or so ago.

BB: Liverpool? I thought they were no good? They going to win tomorrow?

TOA: No, they aren't playing.

BB: Well, who cares then? Why did you bring up Liverpool?

TOA: Sorry, bad habit.

BB: Whatever. So what are the real cities doing? Hosting a proper sport, like baseball?

TOA: I think Milan hosted last year, if I recall correctly. I don't think cities are allowed to host in back-to-back years.

BB: Wait. Multiple cities want to watch soccer?

TOA: And Madrid is bidding for the 2019 final, against a city from Azerbaijan.

BB: God bless you.

TOA: It's a country, near Georgia.

BB: Like Florida?

TOA: Like Russia.

BB: Is Russia playing? I bet you would like-

TOA: I bet you'd like that.

BB: Oh please, you copycat, like you didn't vote for-

TOA: Hold up. Stop talking for a minute. It's Real Madrid playing Juventus.

BB: Oh, clever, changing the subject.

TOA: This is the subject. I should fire you.

BB: We've been over that already. You probably should, if you really want to run for mayor, firing people in public seems like a good way to develop one's political non-credentials. So, why are those two teams playing?

TOA: It's the final, man.

BB: Yeah, I know that, but why those two teams?

TOA: Like why them and not Barcelona?

BB: Sure.

TOA: Well, that's how the Champions League works. They play all year and the winner tomorrow is declared 'the best team in Europe'. Though I suppose if Juventus wins, some might say they are 'the team that beat the best team in Europe'.

BB: So if Juventus wins it will be considered an upset?

TOA: Well, kind of. It's hard to really make predictions since these teams never play each other. But yes, Real Madrid is favored by the betting market.

BB: How do you bet in soccer? Can I bet on how many people take a nap during-

TOA: I don't care. Actually, I don't know, which I don't care about. Go play those slot machines you voted for, you degenerate.

BB: Oh, the name calling. I should flop to the ground, holding my ears. Maybe the referee will give you a yellow card.

TOA: Who is this referee you keep talking about?

BB: Are we done here?

TOA: I was done about ten minutes ago. Do you have any more questions?

BB: Umm, no, wait, yeah, hold on, how often is there an upset?

TOA: It's very unusual, actually. In researching the post, I figured out that I've watched eleven of these matches. Out of those, six had a clear favorite. Five held serve. Bayern Munich did lose a penalty shootout to Chelsea in 2012 but technically that's considered a draw.

BB: A draw? In the final? Unbelievable. I was only joking about it earlier. Never miss a chance to squeeze those draws in huh?

TOA: No, in a way, Chelsea definitely won, but the shootout is considered a tiebreaker. Technically, the game ended 1-1.

BB: So Chelsea won. Was Chelsea the one who scored that goal from midfield for us during the Women's World Cup?

TOA: No, fool, Chelsea's the name of a team. Or a rich part of London, I guess. That was against us, I might add.

BB: Against? When are you going to figure out where you live?

TOA: OK, I'm done.

BB: Why don't they just do penalties?

TOA: Why what?

BB: Like, soccer is boring except for penalties. They should just do that.

TOA: What are you talking about? It's the final.

BB: Yeah, and that too, why a final?

TOA: Well, that's just how tournaments work.

BB: But why a tournament? Don't we already know the champions?

TOA: What do you mean?

BB: I thought last week Chelsea became the champions?

TOA: Right, but only in England.

BB: Oh right, because England isn't in Europe! So the other teams play to win Europe?

TOA: What? No, well...ha, well it's because this tournament really happens over two years. Next year, Chelsea will enter the tournament as England's champions and play for a spot in the 2018 final.

BB: So English teams still play in the European thing? That makes no sense.

TOA: Soccer's weird like that. Australia is in Asia, for soccer.

BB: Insane.

TOA: Well, the New York Giants play in New Jersey.

BB: Yeah, but everyone in New Jersey thinks they are from New York.

TOA: OK, I'll give you that.

BB: So how come Chelsea isn't in the final?

TOA: Well, they didn't even play in the tournament, actually.

BB: I thought they were champions?

TOA: Yeah, this part is a little tricky, it is kind of like March Madness. The best teams from each of Europe's domestic leagues enter the UEFA Champions League in much the same way that college basketball conferences enter their best teams in the March Madness tournament bracket. But instead of doing the tournament after the season, they just do it the next season.

BB: But what if the players change teams between seasons?

TOA: Yeah, that does happen. The players that represent a team in the Champions League are sometimes different than the players who helped the club qualify for the tournament.

BB: That's dumb.

TOA: That's no dumber than a draft or a salary cap.

BB: The draft is a great thing.

TOA: You would support a draft, now that I think about it.

BB: You would be against a salary cap, based on how long some of these posts are.

TOA: Look, time's up, so unless you have any more questions, I'm going.

BB: I thought in soccer you could just add random amounts of time to the end? Where is that ref? Let's have him add some minutes to this debate.

TOA: What debate?

BB: You know what, I'm getting bored anyway.

TOA: OK, let's wrap up. You going to watch?

BB: Maybe halftime, as long as it isn't like this. You said it was like the Super Bowl, right?

TOA: Well, sort of, but there isn't going to be a strip show or even Katy Perry swinging around on a rope. The game's the thing tomorrow.

BB: That was Lady Gaga, you lazy-

TOA: And no commercials with dancing office workers or talking dogs, either.

BB: No commercials? What is the point? Are there prop bets, at least?

TOA: Interesting question, there might be. I'm sure Ronaldo taking off his kit is probably an even money-

BB: Kit? What is a Ronald? A scientist?

TOA: He's the best player, man. A kit is a word for uniform. He's taken it off in two straight finals.

BB: Alright, well I don't need to see that, but maybe we can bet on it. Let's go check out the odds.

TOA: Sounds good. Anything you want to plug before you go?

BB: Plug? Well, I said no, but if you insist, sure, when in Rome or Cardiff or whatever, folks, go check out The Business Bro, it's like this blog but good, I should have some new posts up soon but in the meantime have a look at the archive, the content never ages, unlike the rubbish we see here about Hubway or Maniac-

TOA: OK! Thanks for stopping by, folks. We'll be back a couple of times during June and July to wrap up 'The Education Of An American Football Fan'. Enjoy the game tomorrow and have an excellent weekend.

Footnotes / imagined complaints

0. Just in case this post was too confusing to figure out what's up for tomorrow...

What: 2017 UEFA Champions League Final
Who: Real Madrid (Spain) -v- Juventus (Italy)
When: Saturday, June 3, 2:45pm EST
Where: Network FOX or Cardiff, Wales (depending on how you plan to watch)
Why: Boredom alleviation / general desire to know 'who is best'
How: Ninety minutes plus extra time (if tied) plus penalty kicks (if still tied)

the toa newsletter- june 2017

Hi all,

As I threatened predicted warned in my most recent proper admin post, my lifelong love of newsletters has won out over my stated intent to stick to a posting schedule. Hope nobody minds seeing an extra post at the start of each month to cover some basic admin and set the stage for what's coming up on the blog.

The only thing on my mind at the moment is how I am going to approach related posts- let's call them series. In the past, I tried to publish these posts consecutively and/or give them obviously related titles to emphasize the similar or continuous content.

I am going to get away from that method for future cases. I think the best reason for this is to prevent myself from allowing boring topics to take over the space for an extended length of time to emphasize variety in the writing that I put up.

Of course, I am thinking about series because I have a number of them in the works. 'The Final Exam', which started up last week, gets into what it was like to become a soccer fan in the USA. I have some ideas about writing and proofreading that will get going at the end of June. And I hope to finish multi-post works in progress about hospice volunteering, chess, and Hillbilly Elegy before I trick someone into hiring me before we get too deep into the summer.

Thanks for reading in May.

Tim

Books I recently checked out that I'm excited to (someday) write about...

The Case Against Sugar by Gary Taubes

I've read a couple of Taubes's books in the past. I remember his books being interesting but a little exhausting. In these cases, I'm always happy to see an author release a new book so that I have an excuse to avoid re-reading the old ones.

I hope one day people say this about my posts- or at the very minimum, the last part.

The Mother of All Questions by Rebecca Solnit

I got about twenty pages into this one when I had an unusual thought- books like this make me grateful that I learned to read. In terms of my expectations for this blog, I'm a little skeptical- I've read a couple of Solnit's works in the past and found that I rarely have anything even half-insightful to add. She's good.

In the next month of...True On Average...

1) I write about how a walk I took was actually not so profound after all.

2) I fire my alter ego.

3) I pick up a part-time job digging for coal.

A couple of ideas that may or may not become posts...

*How to win at pachinko
*The Ivy League conspiracy to drive up tuition bills
*We must cross the threshold of life and death alone

And of course, my ten thousand word opus on the importance of Ricky Rubio continues. Don't know who he is? Don't care.

See you in June!

-June 2017