Over at The Milk Bar this morning, Amanda has a short post about the arrival of her mother for a visit. She wrote about how happy her son is to see his grandmother, and included a photo of the goodies her mother brought along that she can't get in Indonesia.
That got me to thinking about parental visits.
Because of my military career, which involved living in lots of places not always convenient to visit, we didn't have that many parental visits, and so my children grew up without much contact with their grandparents. I had two memorable visits from my parents when I was living in Germany, but - because of their varying work schedules and commitments - they had to come separately. Dad visited while I was living in Berlin (and there's a great three-beer story of how he and I faced down the Russians at Checkpoint Bravo). Mom visited while I was in Wiesbaden, with a list of things she wanted to do on the only trip she'd probably ever make to Europe: it included visiting a castle (which we did), driving along the Rhine (which we did), and drinking coffee and eating cake in a sidewalk cafe. Despite the fact that we had an unexpected cold snap while she was visiting (in May, no less), she still insisted on that coffee and cake in the sidewalk cafe...and so it was that at the Cafe Maldaner in Wiesbaden, we were served by a shivering young lady who probably thought we were totally nuts.
Agnes's parents have visited us from Germany many times, and their visits are always an experience: since they don't speak any English, it's hard for them to get around on their own, and since we live in a typical American suburb, they don't have all the stores and services within easy walking distance that they're used to. But nevertheless, we've always enjoyed their visits. Like Amanda's mother, they always showed up with lots of "stuff" for us...they usually had either an extra suitcase or an extra-large one filled with Swiss chocolate for Agnes, Mama's handmade socks for me (that's a story for another time), and all the other goodies we can't get (or can't afford) here.
But time passes. My mother passed away in 2001, my father and Agnes's mother are both 85, and her dad is 89. My dad still visits occasionally (most memorably last Thanksgiving, which you may have read about in this space), but Agnes's parents probably won't be able to make the long trip to the States again...they want to visit (certainly to see their first great-grandchild), but they're not as young and mobile as they used to be. I think a trip to Germany to visit them may be in our not-too-distant future.
We used to joke about reaching the "PSP" - the Parental Saturation Point, where you're glad your parents visited, but you're ready for them to leave. As time goes on and everyone gets older, we think less about the PSP and more about the simple pleasure of seeing and holding and loving the people who held and loved us for so many years.
In a time when we're all busy all the time, and our families are spread out across the US and the world, it's hard to maintain the traditional family ties we once enjoyed. The periodic reunions of Mom's side of the family were the high points of many summers, but it's been many years since we've been able to attend one. I hope to keep up a closer connection with my children and grandchildren.
So...
The Fifth Commandment enjoins us to honor our parents. I like to think I'm half the man my father is, and I miss the puns and jokes and trading of books with my mother. I've heard all Agnes's father's war stories a dozen times, but I still listen to them, if only with half an ear. Our parents raised us and made us what we are. Honoring them in ways large and small is the least we can do.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Monday, March 10, 2008
Sunday, March 09, 2008
The Cuss-Free Zone
I shot this picture several years ago in Virginia Beach, a town trying to remind its citizens that it's not polite to use foul language. A few days ago USA Today ran an article about the city of South Pasadena, California, which has declared itself a "cuss-free zone."
Yes, amazingly enough in this age of loud and frequent use of foul language by people of all ages, one town has finally had enough, and has officially declared itself to be a "cuss-free zone," if only for one week a year. South Pasadena mayor Michael Cacciotti designated the first week of March as "No Cussing Week," saying that it would "...provide(s) us a reminder to be more civil, to elevate the level of discourse."
This is, of course, not a bad thing. The sort of language my mother would have washed my mouth out with soap for using is now not only common, but shouted at high volume by loutish young people in public who aren't intelligent enough to think of anything better to say. Not that I haven't used intemperate language myself - I can curse with the best of 'em when the situation requires it - but I don't think it's necessary to lard your every sentence with four-letter words.
The thoughtlessly common use of bad language represents a benchmark of how low we've sunk in our level of education and in the level of personal decency and respect for others we're willing to show. I wrote the other day about the tendency of some people to demand respect for their religious beliefs without being willing to extend that same respect to the beliefs of others. In some places, failing to show the expected level of respect to someone ("dissing" them, in street slang), can get you killed. As I've written in this space before, words matter. While the old adage that "sticks and stones can break my bones, but names can never hurt me" is true to a point, it also misses the fact that the offhand use of insults, foul language, and other forms of disrespect can actually, hurt...if not physically, then certainly by poisoning the level of rational discourse.
There can never be an outright ban on the use of foul language in this country. If South Pasadena were, for instance, to enact a law imposing fines or jail time for public cursing, it wouldn't take more than about three nanoseconds for reinforced battalions of lawyers to show up with truckloads of lawsuits, drooling over billable hours and howling about the infringement of the people's right to freely express themselves. But as I always say, you can legislate freedom of speech, but not freedom of smart. It's just plain smart to speak clearly and show respect the sensitivities of others.
Unfortunately, smart is in short supply lately.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Sex!
Yes, I thought I'd get your attention with that title.
There's an entertaining article in the March 7th issue of Time Magazine titled "More Sex Please, We're French." It reports on the results of a new "Study of Sexuality in France" which rather proves the reputation of the French as great lovers: it shows that, statistically, "both the number of partners and diversity of sexual activity has significantly increased in France in the last decade."
Vive la France!
Having lived in Germany and seen the considerably more relaxed attitude toward matters sexual that Europeans in general have, I suppose that isn't surprising. German and French television certainly don't balk at the "nudity and sexual situations" about which we in the States feel compelled warn sensitive viewers, and magazine ads and billboards don't leave much to the imagination. If sex sells, as advertisers here say, business in Europe must be booming.
The French have a reputation, deserved or not, of being passionate lovers. An old joke says that French women are great lovers because they've had so much experience at greeting conquering armies, but we won't go there. We'll just note that the survey indicates that although French men have long enjoyed a larger number of sexual partners and affairs than their ladies, French women "...have closed the gap with men in terms of number of lovers, age of initiation, and variety of acts engaged in."
I wonder what multitude of sins is covered by the expression "variety of acts engaged in"...
But I really don't want to think too much about it. I'm approaching the age where I tend to agree with Lord Chesterfield's observation on sex that the pleasure is momentary, the position ridiculous, and the expense damnable. I'm not quite there just yet, but I can see it on the horizon, and it's probably just as well that I wasn't interviewed for the survey. Balding, pudgy, cantankerous curmudgeons don't make good poster boys for a vigorous and lusty sex life. Not a day goes by that I'm not thankful Agnes is nearsighted.
But of course, if sex were all that was important marriages wouldn't last as long as they do...not that that's all that long any more. My father used to joke that when Mom hit 40 he would trade her in on two twenties; he never did (Mom would have murdered him, anyhow), but a lot of men seem to take that joke seriously. The idea of the "trophy wife" is alive and well and silly, and women like the late Anna Nicole Smith manage to make a good living because of it.
So, men and women of France, go for it! Have fun! Enjoy the momentary pleasure, twist yourselves into the ridiculous positions, and ignore the damnable expense.
You'll keep the statistics skewed for the rest of us.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
P.S. - If you live in (most of) the United States, remember that Daylight Savings Time begins at 2:00 AM tomorrow. Turn your clocks ahead an hour before you go to bed tonight. It's one less hour to enjoy sex, but you'll end up with more daylight to enjoy it in.
B.
There's an entertaining article in the March 7th issue of Time Magazine titled "More Sex Please, We're French." It reports on the results of a new "Study of Sexuality in France" which rather proves the reputation of the French as great lovers: it shows that, statistically, "both the number of partners and diversity of sexual activity has significantly increased in France in the last decade."
Vive la France!
Having lived in Germany and seen the considerably more relaxed attitude toward matters sexual that Europeans in general have, I suppose that isn't surprising. German and French television certainly don't balk at the "nudity and sexual situations" about which we in the States feel compelled warn sensitive viewers, and magazine ads and billboards don't leave much to the imagination. If sex sells, as advertisers here say, business in Europe must be booming.
The French have a reputation, deserved or not, of being passionate lovers. An old joke says that French women are great lovers because they've had so much experience at greeting conquering armies, but we won't go there. We'll just note that the survey indicates that although French men have long enjoyed a larger number of sexual partners and affairs than their ladies, French women "...have closed the gap with men in terms of number of lovers, age of initiation, and variety of acts engaged in."
I wonder what multitude of sins is covered by the expression "variety of acts engaged in"...
But I really don't want to think too much about it. I'm approaching the age where I tend to agree with Lord Chesterfield's observation on sex that the pleasure is momentary, the position ridiculous, and the expense damnable. I'm not quite there just yet, but I can see it on the horizon, and it's probably just as well that I wasn't interviewed for the survey. Balding, pudgy, cantankerous curmudgeons don't make good poster boys for a vigorous and lusty sex life. Not a day goes by that I'm not thankful Agnes is nearsighted.
But of course, if sex were all that was important marriages wouldn't last as long as they do...not that that's all that long any more. My father used to joke that when Mom hit 40 he would trade her in on two twenties; he never did (Mom would have murdered him, anyhow), but a lot of men seem to take that joke seriously. The idea of the "trophy wife" is alive and well and silly, and women like the late Anna Nicole Smith manage to make a good living because of it.
So, men and women of France, go for it! Have fun! Enjoy the momentary pleasure, twist yourselves into the ridiculous positions, and ignore the damnable expense.
You'll keep the statistics skewed for the rest of us.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
P.S. - If you live in (most of) the United States, remember that Daylight Savings Time begins at 2:00 AM tomorrow. Turn your clocks ahead an hour before you go to bed tonight. It's one less hour to enjoy sex, but you'll end up with more daylight to enjoy it in.
B.
Friday, March 07, 2008
Thursday Thirteen...on Friday
Yesterday both Amanda and zero_zero_one took on an interesting Thursday Thirteen theme (how alliterative, eh?) - "13 Wants I Can't Classify as Needs (Yet)." Since I'd already written my post for the day, I decided to fire up the old time machine, pretend today is Thursday again, and take a stab at this topic. Here's what Bilbo wants, but really doesn't need...
1. A new laptop computer. There's nothing wrong with the one I have, except that it's fairly old (4 years or so), slow, and a little balky. But since I only use it when I travel on business, and I don't travel very much any more, this classifies as a want, rather than a need...at least, unless I start traveling again.
2. A new car...preferably something sleek, sporty, and comfortable, with great gas mileage and an enormous trunk. My car has the advantage of being paid off, but is showing its age. I don't need a new car, but it would be nice to have one.
3. A door on my study. I had to take the door off in order to fit in more bookshelves. I don't need the door, but it would be nice to have.
4. A cruise to a new destination every year. As vacations go, cruises are wonderful, and not all that expensive if you manage to control your spending once you're on board (since all your meals and services are included in the cruise price).
5. A really huge house. I grew up in a fairly small house with three brothers and sisters sharing two bathrooms. I don't need the burden of a huge mortgage payment, and I certainly don't need the agony of cleaning it, but I would love to have lots of rooms to roam.
6. A top-of-the-line, professional digital camera. I have a perfectly good Canon Digital Rebel XT that takes great pictures, so I don't need a new camera...but I'd sure like to have the latest and best.
7. A second, high-end desktop computer, running Windows XP (not Vista!). My Mac is great, but it would be nice to have a PC on which I can run all the software that won't work on the Mac.
8. An unlimited shopping spree in the local Borders Bookstore. The last thing in the world I need is more books...but then, you can never have too many books...
9. Visit Hungary. That's where my paternal grandparents came from, where I'm descended from a long and impressive line of ... well ... peasants.
10. Visit Florence. All that art and culture in one place waiting for me to come and see it...
11. A renewed membership at the local Gold's Gym, and someone to force me to go there and work out regularly.
12. A good wide-angle lens for my trusty camera. The four lenses I have cover pretty much all my needs, but we're talking about wants, here...
13. One more grandchild. Four is a nice, even number, but five would be nice, too. It would be nice to need that wide-angle lens (see number 12) to take the family picture...
And that's my Thursday Thirteen, on Friday. Actually, it was pretty hard to come up with 13 wants. On balance, I'm happy with what I have, and there really isn't much I want beyond that. Nevertheless, it's fun to dream.
Well, let's get on with Friday. Today, there's work to be done. Tonight, there are ladies to be danced with. And tomorrow, the Bonneville goes back to the dealer for more service. Ugh.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
1. A new laptop computer. There's nothing wrong with the one I have, except that it's fairly old (4 years or so), slow, and a little balky. But since I only use it when I travel on business, and I don't travel very much any more, this classifies as a want, rather than a need...at least, unless I start traveling again.
2. A new car...preferably something sleek, sporty, and comfortable, with great gas mileage and an enormous trunk. My car has the advantage of being paid off, but is showing its age. I don't need a new car, but it would be nice to have one.
3. A door on my study. I had to take the door off in order to fit in more bookshelves. I don't need the door, but it would be nice to have.
4. A cruise to a new destination every year. As vacations go, cruises are wonderful, and not all that expensive if you manage to control your spending once you're on board (since all your meals and services are included in the cruise price).
5. A really huge house. I grew up in a fairly small house with three brothers and sisters sharing two bathrooms. I don't need the burden of a huge mortgage payment, and I certainly don't need the agony of cleaning it, but I would love to have lots of rooms to roam.
6. A top-of-the-line, professional digital camera. I have a perfectly good Canon Digital Rebel XT that takes great pictures, so I don't need a new camera...but I'd sure like to have the latest and best.
7. A second, high-end desktop computer, running Windows XP (not Vista!). My Mac is great, but it would be nice to have a PC on which I can run all the software that won't work on the Mac.
8. An unlimited shopping spree in the local Borders Bookstore. The last thing in the world I need is more books...but then, you can never have too many books...
9. Visit Hungary. That's where my paternal grandparents came from, where I'm descended from a long and impressive line of ... well ... peasants.
10. Visit Florence. All that art and culture in one place waiting for me to come and see it...
11. A renewed membership at the local Gold's Gym, and someone to force me to go there and work out regularly.
12. A good wide-angle lens for my trusty camera. The four lenses I have cover pretty much all my needs, but we're talking about wants, here...
13. One more grandchild. Four is a nice, even number, but five would be nice, too. It would be nice to need that wide-angle lens (see number 12) to take the family picture...
And that's my Thursday Thirteen, on Friday. Actually, it was pretty hard to come up with 13 wants. On balance, I'm happy with what I have, and there really isn't much I want beyond that. Nevertheless, it's fun to dream.
Well, let's get on with Friday. Today, there's work to be done. Tonight, there are ladies to be danced with. And tomorrow, the Bonneville goes back to the dealer for more service. Ugh.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Thursday, March 06, 2008
The Coming Catholic-Islamic Talks
In the news recently has been the announcement that Pope Benedict XVI will hold a summit meeting of sorts with a large group of Muslim leaders and scholars later this year. Both sides had discussed the possibility of such a meeting since the downturn in Christian-Muslim relations in 2006 caused, it is said, by comments the Pope made in a speech in which he quoted a 15th-century Byzantine emperor's assertion that Islam was a violent and irrational religion. The worldwide Muslim reaction to this was, as in the famous Danish cartoon incident, well, violent and irrational.
At this point in history, Christian-Muslim relations are indeed strained and a meeting between the Pope and Muslim leaders to help calm things down and ease the rhetoric is certainly a welcome event. My concern, though, is that the meeting will end up being less a real dialog than yet another opportunity for Muslims to vent their anger at perceived slights and demand "respect" from the Christian world.
I don't think this is a particularly misplaced worry. While Muslims are concerned about their image in the West, and the perception of their religion as being "violent and irrational," it is undeniably true that:
- 3000 people were murdered in cold blood on September 11, 2001 by Muslims motivated in part by religious fervor.
- Hundreds of people are murdered each year by suicide bombers who are overwhelmingly Muslim and motivated in part by religious fervor.
- Churches were burned, Christians murdered, and economic boycotts were called for by Muslims in reaction to a collection of sophomoric cartoons against which they took offense.
- Similar reactions took place in late 2006 in reaction to the remarks made by the Pope cited above.
Unless the Muslim leaders and scholars who meet with the Pope are ready to face the reality that their religion, regardless of what they profess, is at times violent and irrational, and are ready to enter a dialog which will help to control the passions on both sides, this meeting will probably be a waste of time.
Muslims insist on respect for their beliefs and accommodation to their customs, but appear unwilling to accommodate the beliefs and customs of others. If you doubt this, try holding a Catholic mass in Saudi Arabia. Harvard University has recently caused a stir by agreeing to establish "women-only" hours at the university gym to accommodate the desire of six Muslim women to exercise in an environment free of men. While a certain level of accommodation to religious beliefs may be appropriate in some instances, I think it's a little silly that the entire university population is denied the use of facilities - for which they all pay handsomely - to accommodate the wishes of six people.
Respect, like academic, personal, and professional honors, cannot be demanded - it must be earned. It seems to me that each time Muslims insist on accommodation to their wishes without a concurrent willingness to accept the legitimate wishes and beliefs of others, it undercuts their demands for respect. To the extent that the Pope can make the Muslim leaders and scholars understand this very basic concept, the upcoming meeting will be a success and will lead to a better world for all. I'll try to be cautiously optimistic, but will probably tilt a bit to the pessimistic side until I see how all this will work out.
Actions speak louder than words, and Muslim actions have shaped the Western perceptions of them which they now decry. The sad part is that I don't believe they are able to understand this. If you have absolute faith in the righteousness of your position, it's pretty much impossible to see things from any other point of view, or bend to accommodate anyone else's concerns.
I wish the Pope well as he meets with the Muslim representatives. I hope some good comes of it. Unfortunately, I'm not holding my breath.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
At this point in history, Christian-Muslim relations are indeed strained and a meeting between the Pope and Muslim leaders to help calm things down and ease the rhetoric is certainly a welcome event. My concern, though, is that the meeting will end up being less a real dialog than yet another opportunity for Muslims to vent their anger at perceived slights and demand "respect" from the Christian world.
I don't think this is a particularly misplaced worry. While Muslims are concerned about their image in the West, and the perception of their religion as being "violent and irrational," it is undeniably true that:
- 3000 people were murdered in cold blood on September 11, 2001 by Muslims motivated in part by religious fervor.
- Hundreds of people are murdered each year by suicide bombers who are overwhelmingly Muslim and motivated in part by religious fervor.
- Churches were burned, Christians murdered, and economic boycotts were called for by Muslims in reaction to a collection of sophomoric cartoons against which they took offense.
- Similar reactions took place in late 2006 in reaction to the remarks made by the Pope cited above.
Unless the Muslim leaders and scholars who meet with the Pope are ready to face the reality that their religion, regardless of what they profess, is at times violent and irrational, and are ready to enter a dialog which will help to control the passions on both sides, this meeting will probably be a waste of time.
Muslims insist on respect for their beliefs and accommodation to their customs, but appear unwilling to accommodate the beliefs and customs of others. If you doubt this, try holding a Catholic mass in Saudi Arabia. Harvard University has recently caused a stir by agreeing to establish "women-only" hours at the university gym to accommodate the desire of six Muslim women to exercise in an environment free of men. While a certain level of accommodation to religious beliefs may be appropriate in some instances, I think it's a little silly that the entire university population is denied the use of facilities - for which they all pay handsomely - to accommodate the wishes of six people.
Respect, like academic, personal, and professional honors, cannot be demanded - it must be earned. It seems to me that each time Muslims insist on accommodation to their wishes without a concurrent willingness to accept the legitimate wishes and beliefs of others, it undercuts their demands for respect. To the extent that the Pope can make the Muslim leaders and scholars understand this very basic concept, the upcoming meeting will be a success and will lead to a better world for all. I'll try to be cautiously optimistic, but will probably tilt a bit to the pessimistic side until I see how all this will work out.
Actions speak louder than words, and Muslim actions have shaped the Western perceptions of them which they now decry. The sad part is that I don't believe they are able to understand this. If you have absolute faith in the righteousness of your position, it's pretty much impossible to see things from any other point of view, or bend to accommodate anyone else's concerns.
I wish the Pope well as he meets with the Muslim representatives. I hope some good comes of it. Unfortunately, I'm not holding my breath.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Cartoon Wednesday
I had started a different post this morning, but ran into a creative mental block halfway through. Thus, it's time for the tried and true dodge of sharing some of the cartoons from my collection with you until I can use some mental Drano to clean out the old system and get my thoughts together. Here we go...
This is one reason why Oliphant is my favorite political cartoonist:
The mortgage mess is ugly, but it has generated some good cartoons:
We all worry about hackers ruining our computers, and there are lots of ways to fight them, some better than others:
I found this one in a German magazine a few years ago ... it's one of those cartoons you've got to love if for no other reason than it's so stupid:
And finally, speaking of cartoons that are funny because they're so stupid:
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
This is one reason why Oliphant is my favorite political cartoonist:
The mortgage mess is ugly, but it has generated some good cartoons:
We all worry about hackers ruining our computers, and there are lots of ways to fight them, some better than others:
I found this one in a German magazine a few years ago ... it's one of those cartoons you've got to love if for no other reason than it's so stupid:
And finally, speaking of cartoons that are funny because they're so stupid:
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.Bilbo
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Auto Da Fe, 2008
According to history, the auto da fe was a religious ceremony of penance for condemned heretics and apostates that usually culminated in their punishment by torture, burning at the stake, or some other similarly enlightened form of public demise.
Today, the auto da fe still involves torture, but it uses real autos.
As a result of a long and tangled skein of circumstances, Agnes and I have three cars. Since shortly before last Christmas, at any one time two of them have been in expensive mechanical distress of one sort or another. I have been towed about five times, spent the equivalent of the GNP of a medium-sized African nation in repairs, and am reluctant to drive farther than I can walk back. The Mistress of the Dark writes eloquently of her dread of the Orange Light O'Doom on her car's dashboard...I dread the multicolored lights o'doom on our dashboards which always indicate the pending hemorrhage of cash from our battered checkbooks. We're funding the college educations of our local mechanic's children. And his yacht.
Last week, I took in Agnes's car with the worst of all possible problems: an intermittent electrical problem which prevents the car from starting until help has arrived, at which time it starts up fine and runs normally. The car always runs like a Swiss watch for the mechanic, but when we're at the wheel, the specially designed agony-inducing circuit kicks in and causes all sorts of problems. The dealer kept the car for four days, during which time it resolutely refused to cooperate with all attempts to reproduce the problem. I spent $1300 ($1200 after the senior citizen discount they gave me in sympathy), and within 24 hours the bright, happy "Check Engine" idiot light was back on. AARRGGHH!!
Today, I'm taking in my car, which has a distressing tendency for the engine to suddenly stop running at irregular intervals. This is fun when you're cruising down the interstate and suddenly have no engine, no power steering, and no brakes. My local mechanic tells me his computer registers 16 different fault codes when connected to the car...but he can't figure out what the problem is. After the last time he worked on the car, it seemed to run all right, except that now each time I hit a bump, the radio stops and none of the power windows operate. I've decided to bite the automotive bullet and take the car back to the dealership, which has called in extra staff to stock up on zeroes for the estimate.
So, we're down to one reasonably well-functioning car...but it has one headlight out, and is designed so that Real People cannot replace the headlights on their own...a mechanic has to remove the entire front end of the car up to the firewall to reach and replace the defective bulb.
Country singer Jerry Reed once sang a song called "Lord, Mr Ford":
"Lord, Mr Ford, I just wish that you could see
What your simple horseless carriage has become...
If I ain't out of gas in the pouring rain,
I'm fixin' a flat in a hurricane,
I once spent three days lost on a cloverleaf."
Mr Reed and I understand each other.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow, unless I'm stuck at the side of the highway waiting for a tow while I watch the Orange Lights O'Doom.
Bilbo
Today, the auto da fe still involves torture, but it uses real autos.
As a result of a long and tangled skein of circumstances, Agnes and I have three cars. Since shortly before last Christmas, at any one time two of them have been in expensive mechanical distress of one sort or another. I have been towed about five times, spent the equivalent of the GNP of a medium-sized African nation in repairs, and am reluctant to drive farther than I can walk back. The Mistress of the Dark writes eloquently of her dread of the Orange Light O'Doom on her car's dashboard...I dread the multicolored lights o'doom on our dashboards which always indicate the pending hemorrhage of cash from our battered checkbooks. We're funding the college educations of our local mechanic's children. And his yacht.
Last week, I took in Agnes's car with the worst of all possible problems: an intermittent electrical problem which prevents the car from starting until help has arrived, at which time it starts up fine and runs normally. The car always runs like a Swiss watch for the mechanic, but when we're at the wheel, the specially designed agony-inducing circuit kicks in and causes all sorts of problems. The dealer kept the car for four days, during which time it resolutely refused to cooperate with all attempts to reproduce the problem. I spent $1300 ($1200 after the senior citizen discount they gave me in sympathy), and within 24 hours the bright, happy "Check Engine" idiot light was back on. AARRGGHH!!
Today, I'm taking in my car, which has a distressing tendency for the engine to suddenly stop running at irregular intervals. This is fun when you're cruising down the interstate and suddenly have no engine, no power steering, and no brakes. My local mechanic tells me his computer registers 16 different fault codes when connected to the car...but he can't figure out what the problem is. After the last time he worked on the car, it seemed to run all right, except that now each time I hit a bump, the radio stops and none of the power windows operate. I've decided to bite the automotive bullet and take the car back to the dealership, which has called in extra staff to stock up on zeroes for the estimate.
So, we're down to one reasonably well-functioning car...but it has one headlight out, and is designed so that Real People cannot replace the headlights on their own...a mechanic has to remove the entire front end of the car up to the firewall to reach and replace the defective bulb.
Country singer Jerry Reed once sang a song called "Lord, Mr Ford":
"Lord, Mr Ford, I just wish that you could see
What your simple horseless carriage has become...
If I ain't out of gas in the pouring rain,
I'm fixin' a flat in a hurricane,
I once spent three days lost on a cloverleaf."
Mr Reed and I understand each other.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow, unless I'm stuck at the side of the highway waiting for a tow while I watch the Orange Lights O'Doom.
Bilbo
Monday, March 03, 2008
Catching Up on the Comments
Last Saturday's post, titled "The Greatest Moral Issue," elicited a good number of comments from my readers who partially agreed and partially disagreed with me. For those of you who didn't read the original post, I'll wait a minute for you to go back and read it before I continue.
My original post, briefly, disagreed with the statement in a Washington Post opinion piece which asserted that the economic inequality between the US/Europe and the developing world was "the greatest moral issue" facing the world today. On reading some of the comments I received, I realized that my point may not have been made as well as I had hoped.
My point was not that America and Europe bear no responsibility for the ills of the developing world. Sadly, we do. As my daughter pointed out in her comment, many of the problems of Africa, for instance, derive from the arbitrarily-drawn boundaries of the colonial era, and as Anonymous Katherine pointed out, we have often had a hand in placing corrupt leaders in power and keeping them there. So yes, clearly we are not blameless for the ills of the world, and we are not absolved from having to try to rectify them. Nevertheless, I stand by my original contention that it has become easier to dump all the blame for all the problems on the US and Europe than to take positive local action to address those problems. We bear much responsibility for the economic and political shape of the world...but why is it that discredited Communist doctrines and their patron, the former Soviet Union, that brought such misery to many developing countries seem seldom to be blamed as well?
I'd like to know.
Yesterday's post elicited some commentary, too, including this one from reader Mike, who eloquently asked: "What's, on Gods' green earth (my God not yours (if different or not)) (standard (American standard) green) (and this earth (our solar system) not another), your point?"
Mike, I hardly know how to respond, other than to ask you to send me a bottle of whatever you were drinking when you wrote that comment!
If I didn't specifically mention your comment, it doesn't mean I didn't read and appreciate it. I particularly enjoy it when people don't agree with me. As my profile says, I'm opinionated, but not (I hope) close-minded...so if you think I'm off-base, let me know. We may simply end up agreeing to disagree, but if we've gotten each other to think, I've done my job.
So I'll keep writing, you keep reading and commenting, and we'll all grow together. Sometimes it'll be fun, sometimes it'll be serious, but I hope that all the time it'll be entertaining and thought-provoking. Stick with me for the long ride!
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
My original post, briefly, disagreed with the statement in a Washington Post opinion piece which asserted that the economic inequality between the US/Europe and the developing world was "the greatest moral issue" facing the world today. On reading some of the comments I received, I realized that my point may not have been made as well as I had hoped.
My point was not that America and Europe bear no responsibility for the ills of the developing world. Sadly, we do. As my daughter pointed out in her comment, many of the problems of Africa, for instance, derive from the arbitrarily-drawn boundaries of the colonial era, and as Anonymous Katherine pointed out, we have often had a hand in placing corrupt leaders in power and keeping them there. So yes, clearly we are not blameless for the ills of the world, and we are not absolved from having to try to rectify them. Nevertheless, I stand by my original contention that it has become easier to dump all the blame for all the problems on the US and Europe than to take positive local action to address those problems. We bear much responsibility for the economic and political shape of the world...but why is it that discredited Communist doctrines and their patron, the former Soviet Union, that brought such misery to many developing countries seem seldom to be blamed as well?
I'd like to know.
Yesterday's post elicited some commentary, too, including this one from reader Mike, who eloquently asked: "What's, on Gods' green earth (my God not yours (if different or not)) (standard (American standard) green) (and this earth (our solar system) not another), your point?"
Mike, I hardly know how to respond, other than to ask you to send me a bottle of whatever you were drinking when you wrote that comment!
If I didn't specifically mention your comment, it doesn't mean I didn't read and appreciate it. I particularly enjoy it when people don't agree with me. As my profile says, I'm opinionated, but not (I hope) close-minded...so if you think I'm off-base, let me know. We may simply end up agreeing to disagree, but if we've gotten each other to think, I've done my job.
So I'll keep writing, you keep reading and commenting, and we'll all grow together. Sometimes it'll be fun, sometimes it'll be serious, but I hope that all the time it'll be entertaining and thought-provoking. Stick with me for the long ride!
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Death to Modifiers! Down with the Passive!
When, many years ago in college, I crashed on the stormy shores of calculus and realized that chemical engineering perhaps wasn't my optimum career choice, my selection of Linguistics as a major was an easy one. I loved words, enjoyed reading and writing, and was reasonably good at acquiring foreign languages...all skills (except for the foreign language part) that I got from my mother. Along with the love of words, though, came a lifelong nails-on-the-chalkboard reaction to the abuse and misuse of language.
Thus, I'm in a bad job.
A large part of my work involves reading and commenting on work done by others - mostly plans of one sort or another, or analytical works on particular topics. No matter how good the fundamental ideas of most of these documents may be, they are generally written in Early 21st Century Bureaucratese, a language similar to but more convoluted than Old Church Slavonic. There are a lot of arcane grammatical rules in Early 21st Century Bureaucratese, but the major ones are these:
1. Use lots of modifiers.
2. Use the passive voice to obscure responsibility.
I've been working my way through the review of a programming plan intended to guide the establishment of a new organization. It includes gems like these:
"... (individuals will) take appropriate action to ..." I suppose this is necessary, because otherwise people would certainly take inappropriate actions; for instance, in order to ensure that the new organization had sufficient personnel to operate, they might direct that all interior doors of the building be painted purple (This, of course, could happen if the building in question was located in the district of a powerful Member of Congress who received hefty campaign contributions from the Purple Paint Manufacturers League, but that's another issue).
"... Information will be provided in a variety of effective media ..." This admonition is clearly warranted, for otherwise people would spend lots of public relations money providing information in ineffective media; for instance, reaching out to radical militant Muslims through articles in the Jewish World Review. You never know.
And so I say, Death to Modifiers! Just say what you mean, without trying to pad the word count.
Likewise, Down with the Passive Voice! If you know who is supposed to do something, just come out and say it:
"... action will be taken to establish a functioning headquarters ..." Whose head will be on a pike outside the front door if this action, whatever it is, isn't taken? What action is to be taken? And, of course, by all means don't establish a non-functioning headquarters (that's already been done by the DC City Government and the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles).
As the late William F. Buckley was once famously quoted as saying: "Eschew obfuscation."
It's not easy being a linguistic purist. But somebody has to blow the BS horn every once in a while, and if it's not The Language Guy, it might as well be me.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Thus, I'm in a bad job.
A large part of my work involves reading and commenting on work done by others - mostly plans of one sort or another, or analytical works on particular topics. No matter how good the fundamental ideas of most of these documents may be, they are generally written in Early 21st Century Bureaucratese, a language similar to but more convoluted than Old Church Slavonic. There are a lot of arcane grammatical rules in Early 21st Century Bureaucratese, but the major ones are these:
1. Use lots of modifiers.
2. Use the passive voice to obscure responsibility.
I've been working my way through the review of a programming plan intended to guide the establishment of a new organization. It includes gems like these:
"... (individuals will) take appropriate action to ..." I suppose this is necessary, because otherwise people would certainly take inappropriate actions; for instance, in order to ensure that the new organization had sufficient personnel to operate, they might direct that all interior doors of the building be painted purple (This, of course, could happen if the building in question was located in the district of a powerful Member of Congress who received hefty campaign contributions from the Purple Paint Manufacturers League, but that's another issue).
"... Information will be provided in a variety of effective media ..." This admonition is clearly warranted, for otherwise people would spend lots of public relations money providing information in ineffective media; for instance, reaching out to radical militant Muslims through articles in the Jewish World Review. You never know.
And so I say, Death to Modifiers! Just say what you mean, without trying to pad the word count.
Likewise, Down with the Passive Voice! If you know who is supposed to do something, just come out and say it:
"... action will be taken to establish a functioning headquarters ..." Whose head will be on a pike outside the front door if this action, whatever it is, isn't taken? What action is to be taken? And, of course, by all means don't establish a non-functioning headquarters (that's already been done by the DC City Government and the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles).
As the late William F. Buckley was once famously quoted as saying: "Eschew obfuscation."
It's not easy being a linguistic purist. But somebody has to blow the BS horn every once in a while, and if it's not The Language Guy, it might as well be me.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Saturday, March 01, 2008
"The Greatest Moral Issue"
Last Sunday in the Washington Post David Kuo, former deputy director of the White House Office on Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, published an op-ed piece titled "It's Not Your Father's Religious Right." The article, which discussed the evolving shape and positions of the so-called "religious right" in the United States, contained this statement about social justice issues, attributed to conservative theologian N. T. Wright: "...the greatest moral issue today is not abortion, but the economic inequality between the United States and Europe and the developing world."
I have a problem with that statement.
Abortion is, of course, a serious moral issue, but I don't believe that "the economic inequality between the United States and Europe and the developing world" is a moral issue at all, regardless of how fervently many well-meaning people of all political persuasions might wish it so.
That such an economic disparity exists and is a problem is beyond dispute. But casting it as a moral issue, as if the wealth and success of the United States and Europe reflects some fundamental immorality of purpose and action is, in my mind, ridiculous.
As I have often pointed out in this space, it's easier to blame the United States and Europe for all the ills of the world than it is to tackle the home-grown problems that give rise to those ills. Many nations in Africa and Asia possess vast wealth in natural resources, yet are desperately poor. Is this the fault of rapacious Americans and Europeans, or of ethnic groups more interested in fighting to maintain their positions and benefits than in working together to solve problems and improve everyone's lot?
America's success grew out of its founding principle of equality of opportunity: your religion, former nationality, or race didn't matter as much as your willingness to work hard and reap the rewards of your efforts. Americans of all backgrounds worked together to build a powerful and vibrant nation that is the reluctant envy of the rest of the world. This, obviously, is an oversimplification: many nationalities (the Irish, Italians, and Chinese come to mind) and races (blacks and Orientals) suffered years of economic and social discrimination before being allowed to reach their full potential...but few other countries have made the efforts the United States has made in addressing those inequalities and ensuring all citizens not of wealth, but of equality of opportunity to obtain wealth. Europe has addressed (and is still addressing) similar problems, but owes its success in the world to similar philosophies.
So is it immoral for America to be rich and Zimbabwe, for instance, to be poor? Not at all. We may have an imperfect president in George Bush, but we elected him freely and generally manage quite well in spite of him; the unfortunate people of Zimbabwe have the deadly and corrupt Robert Mugabe and his cronies who have driven a wealthy nation to the depths of economic disaster. Is it immoral for Mr Mugabe to engineer and preside over such a situation? Absolutely...but it's easier to blame the United States and Europe than for Africans to blame one of their own.
Let's put the moral onus where it belongs. Can the United States and Europe do more to help the rest of the world? Always. Should the rest of the world take more responsibility for fixing its own problems? Definitely.
The world is a big place, and there's room at the table for everyone. Unfortunately, some people and nations are more willing than others to work together to build a better table.
I think that's worth thinking about before we beat our breasts and join the whining masses who would rather heap abuse on the United States and Europe than do the difficult things we have already done to earn our success.
Immoral? If you believe that, I have a bridge you may be interested in buying.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
I have a problem with that statement.
Abortion is, of course, a serious moral issue, but I don't believe that "the economic inequality between the United States and Europe and the developing world" is a moral issue at all, regardless of how fervently many well-meaning people of all political persuasions might wish it so.
That such an economic disparity exists and is a problem is beyond dispute. But casting it as a moral issue, as if the wealth and success of the United States and Europe reflects some fundamental immorality of purpose and action is, in my mind, ridiculous.
As I have often pointed out in this space, it's easier to blame the United States and Europe for all the ills of the world than it is to tackle the home-grown problems that give rise to those ills. Many nations in Africa and Asia possess vast wealth in natural resources, yet are desperately poor. Is this the fault of rapacious Americans and Europeans, or of ethnic groups more interested in fighting to maintain their positions and benefits than in working together to solve problems and improve everyone's lot?
America's success grew out of its founding principle of equality of opportunity: your religion, former nationality, or race didn't matter as much as your willingness to work hard and reap the rewards of your efforts. Americans of all backgrounds worked together to build a powerful and vibrant nation that is the reluctant envy of the rest of the world. This, obviously, is an oversimplification: many nationalities (the Irish, Italians, and Chinese come to mind) and races (blacks and Orientals) suffered years of economic and social discrimination before being allowed to reach their full potential...but few other countries have made the efforts the United States has made in addressing those inequalities and ensuring all citizens not of wealth, but of equality of opportunity to obtain wealth. Europe has addressed (and is still addressing) similar problems, but owes its success in the world to similar philosophies.
So is it immoral for America to be rich and Zimbabwe, for instance, to be poor? Not at all. We may have an imperfect president in George Bush, but we elected him freely and generally manage quite well in spite of him; the unfortunate people of Zimbabwe have the deadly and corrupt Robert Mugabe and his cronies who have driven a wealthy nation to the depths of economic disaster. Is it immoral for Mr Mugabe to engineer and preside over such a situation? Absolutely...but it's easier to blame the United States and Europe than for Africans to blame one of their own.
Let's put the moral onus where it belongs. Can the United States and Europe do more to help the rest of the world? Always. Should the rest of the world take more responsibility for fixing its own problems? Definitely.
The world is a big place, and there's room at the table for everyone. Unfortunately, some people and nations are more willing than others to work together to build a better table.
I think that's worth thinking about before we beat our breasts and join the whining masses who would rather heap abuse on the United States and Europe than do the difficult things we have already done to earn our success.
Immoral? If you believe that, I have a bridge you may be interested in buying.
Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.
Bilbo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)