(If you haven't read my original post, Think About Solitude, I encourage you to do so--but you do not need to have read it to make sense of Part 2.)
I recently read The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr (which I mentioned briefly in Think About Books, Part 2). It was a fascinating book and I will probably refer to it in several upcoming posts. It's one of those books that I keep pondering, even though I finished it two days ago. That seems an appropriate reaction, too, since thinking deeply (or, critically) is one of the main ideas that Carr discusses in the book.
As Carr demonstrates, the internet is changing our brains in such a way that one might say it's creating, generally speaking, a society with technology-induced ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder). The internet limits one's ability to really contemplate and understand the information one reads and how it might apply to his or her life. Carr writes that "[t]he development of a well-rounded mind requires both [my emphasis] an ability to find and quickly parse a wide range of information and [my emphasis] a capacity for open-ended reflection.... We need to work in Google's 'world of numbers,' but we also need to be able to retreat to Sleepy Hollow. The problem today is that we're losing our ability to strike a balance between those two very different states of mind" (p. 168).
Carr later quotes novelist David Foster Wallace: "Learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think. It means being conscious and aware enough to choose what you pay attention to and to choose how you construct meaning from experience" (pp. 194-5).
In other words, we need to "unplug" every so often. We need solitude, nature, and some form of silence. We need time and space to think.
This evening I rollerbladed a little over 11 miles. A lot of people like to listen to music when they exercise; but, when I exercise, I like to just think about things--in the way that constantly "connected" people might not be able to.
Me, unplugged.
While I rollerbladed I thought about Carr's book, and that is when the idea for this blog post came to me. I also pondered my career/job options. I wrote poetry in my head while I rolled along. I thought about my friends and family. I listened to my wheels against the pavement and enjoyed the sound they made. I delighted in the little noises of nature and watched bunnies hop through the reeds along the path. I thought about how, at 90+ degrees (even in the evening), there was no way I could do the full 15.8 miles I've done the last few times I've been out.
And every thought took me back to Carr's book and our society's reliance on technology and the distractedness it creates. I am certainly not immune to this technology-induced ADD; and, as I thought about Carr's book, I realized that I don't want to lose my capacity to read deeply and think critically. Therefore, I think that in order to hold on to this ability, I need to make time to read, write, or do any other activity uninterrupted--time when I'm not texting or checking email, Facebook, or Twitter.
Solitude.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
Think About Money
"There's no such thing as a free lunch."
I think that's the only thing that I remember from my high school Economics class. It seems to be a pretty ubiquitous phrase, and most people are familiar with it. I wonder, though, if many people really understand what it means.
Perhaps I'm in the minority in the way I view money. I don't see it as a goal in life. For example, I see (for the most part, at least) designer labels, fancy cars, and huge houses as crass and gaudy. And, to me, a diamond ring doesn't mean love; love comes from the heart.
Suffice it to say, I'm constantly surprised at how other people seem to see and treat money. I've worked in retail for a number of years, but it's at my current job in a college bookstore where I've seen the most blatant abuse of funds, especially funds that come from other sources (i.e. government). As someone who was taught from an early age how to save money and make wise purchases/investments, I find it disenchanting to see how careless many college students are with their money. While I chock up many of these financial choices to immaturity and materialistic selfishness, it's what they do with government money and other aids and scholarships that irks me the most. Some students even brag about how they will avoid paying it back.
One student who had a bookstore stipend that she didn't have to pay back just started tossing items on to the counter, barely looking at what she was buying. "It doesn't matter," she said. "It's free." I had to stop myself from replying, "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
Another student was buying something with money other people had given him to make the purchase. When given the choice between a less expensive and more expensive item, he grabbed the more expensive one, saying, "I don't care; it's not my money."
"I don't care; it's not my money."
That statement denotes precisely what is wrong with so much in this country. Government programs; federal, state, and local governments; educational programs; school districts; corporations....
In most cases, it's not so much that the money doesn't exist (for various institutions and programs); instead, it's that the people in charge of handling the money don't allocate it smartly. In actuality, a lot can be done with a little.
Think about it; how do you view money?
I think that's the only thing that I remember from my high school Economics class. It seems to be a pretty ubiquitous phrase, and most people are familiar with it. I wonder, though, if many people really understand what it means.
Perhaps I'm in the minority in the way I view money. I don't see it as a goal in life. For example, I see (for the most part, at least) designer labels, fancy cars, and huge houses as crass and gaudy. And, to me, a diamond ring doesn't mean love; love comes from the heart.
Suffice it to say, I'm constantly surprised at how other people seem to see and treat money. I've worked in retail for a number of years, but it's at my current job in a college bookstore where I've seen the most blatant abuse of funds, especially funds that come from other sources (i.e. government). As someone who was taught from an early age how to save money and make wise purchases/investments, I find it disenchanting to see how careless many college students are with their money. While I chock up many of these financial choices to immaturity and materialistic selfishness, it's what they do with government money and other aids and scholarships that irks me the most. Some students even brag about how they will avoid paying it back.
One student who had a bookstore stipend that she didn't have to pay back just started tossing items on to the counter, barely looking at what she was buying. "It doesn't matter," she said. "It's free." I had to stop myself from replying, "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
Another student was buying something with money other people had given him to make the purchase. When given the choice between a less expensive and more expensive item, he grabbed the more expensive one, saying, "I don't care; it's not my money."
"I don't care; it's not my money."
That statement denotes precisely what is wrong with so much in this country. Government programs; federal, state, and local governments; educational programs; school districts; corporations....
In most cases, it's not so much that the money doesn't exist (for various institutions and programs); instead, it's that the people in charge of handling the money don't allocate it smartly. In actuality, a lot can be done with a little.
Think about it; how do you view money?
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Think About Reading
I'll proudly wear the title of Literary Snob. I'm okay with that, I admit it. There are some authors that I won't read because their books don't contain what I think of as "good" writing. They may be engaging stories, but their writing is simplistic and basic. Their characters are flat. No depth.
So, yes, I'm a Literary Snob. I'd rather stay a more-or-less unpublished writer than be an author of a flatly written book. That's just me. I value good literature. Likewise, it's what I strive to write.
However, I also believe that if millions of people are reading a poorly written book, that is far better than not reading any book at all.
Think about everything you might read in a day, words you read without even thinking about it. When I became a tutor for a local literacy organization, I realized just how much I take my reading ability for granted. Twice a week I meet with a student who managed to graduate from high school without knowing how to read fluently. Every day she faces struggles that the average adult knows nothing about. Menus, prescription bottles, recipes, receipts, billboard signs, ingredients on a box of cereal, and on and on.
Although poor writing, grammar, and proofreading skills irk me, having poor reading and reading comprehension skills sadden me. It saddens me because it is often under-privileged children who are the victims of poor reading skills. Through no fault of their own, these children may start school already academically behind their peers, simply because nobody has ever read to them or taken them to a library or even showed them a book.
But what about the children who are not under-privileged? I don't want to make this an issue about the public education system in the United States; that's only part of the problem.
A larger part of the problem in this country has to do with our society's values (or lack thereof?). A large chunk of people in our society put emphasis on the wrong things: money, status, fashion, outer beauty..., to name a few. An enlightening article from the April 18th Publishers Weekly articulated this idea nicely for me. In "The Light at the End of the Publishing Tunnel? On finding fans, not formats," Rudy Shur writes that "[i]nstead of focusing on how our books are going to be delivered to the reading public, we ought to be concerned with who will be left to read books."
Think about that for a moment.
Additionally, he cites that video game sales surpass book sales. Twenty years ago, books were a common form of entertainment. Now, though, a lot of people look for ways to BE entertained, as opposed to finding a way to entertain themselves. To that point, Shur writes: "While other countries focus on educating their children, we seem more focused on amusing them.... However, the responsibility of raising children who value education, and hence read, in any form, is no longer a priority. Without a vibrant and growing reading public to buy e-books or tree-books, who are we going to sell our titles to in the future?"
I will counter Shur here and suggest that many people will still buy books (e-books or otherwise); for some, it's about status--a way to show off their e-gadget--or a way of appearing intellectual. Whether they will read them or not...?
Perhaps the people who have earbuds fused to their brains, ipods sutured to their pockets, and cell phones superglued to their hands actually take e-breaks when they are alone. Turn off the tunes, switch off the television, and power down the laptop. And, then, maybe they simply sit on the couch with a book (or an e-reader).
Ahhh.... Simple pleasures. When I learned to read, my mom told me that a book could transport me anywhere, that I could do anything or be anyone by reading. Not only that, but I soon discovered all sorts of stuff I could learn by reading!
Think about reading. Actually, don't just think about it. Read to yourself or read to someone else. Read to a child!
But, mostly...READ.
So, yes, I'm a Literary Snob. I'd rather stay a more-or-less unpublished writer than be an author of a flatly written book. That's just me. I value good literature. Likewise, it's what I strive to write.
However, I also believe that if millions of people are reading a poorly written book, that is far better than not reading any book at all.
Think about everything you might read in a day, words you read without even thinking about it. When I became a tutor for a local literacy organization, I realized just how much I take my reading ability for granted. Twice a week I meet with a student who managed to graduate from high school without knowing how to read fluently. Every day she faces struggles that the average adult knows nothing about. Menus, prescription bottles, recipes, receipts, billboard signs, ingredients on a box of cereal, and on and on.
Although poor writing, grammar, and proofreading skills irk me, having poor reading and reading comprehension skills sadden me. It saddens me because it is often under-privileged children who are the victims of poor reading skills. Through no fault of their own, these children may start school already academically behind their peers, simply because nobody has ever read to them or taken them to a library or even showed them a book.
But what about the children who are not under-privileged? I don't want to make this an issue about the public education system in the United States; that's only part of the problem.
A larger part of the problem in this country has to do with our society's values (or lack thereof?). A large chunk of people in our society put emphasis on the wrong things: money, status, fashion, outer beauty..., to name a few. An enlightening article from the April 18th Publishers Weekly articulated this idea nicely for me. In "The Light at the End of the Publishing Tunnel? On finding fans, not formats," Rudy Shur writes that "[i]nstead of focusing on how our books are going to be delivered to the reading public, we ought to be concerned with who will be left to read books."
Think about that for a moment.
Additionally, he cites that video game sales surpass book sales. Twenty years ago, books were a common form of entertainment. Now, though, a lot of people look for ways to BE entertained, as opposed to finding a way to entertain themselves. To that point, Shur writes: "While other countries focus on educating their children, we seem more focused on amusing them.... However, the responsibility of raising children who value education, and hence read, in any form, is no longer a priority. Without a vibrant and growing reading public to buy e-books or tree-books, who are we going to sell our titles to in the future?"
I will counter Shur here and suggest that many people will still buy books (e-books or otherwise); for some, it's about status--a way to show off their e-gadget--or a way of appearing intellectual. Whether they will read them or not...?
Perhaps the people who have earbuds fused to their brains, ipods sutured to their pockets, and cell phones superglued to their hands actually take e-breaks when they are alone. Turn off the tunes, switch off the television, and power down the laptop. And, then, maybe they simply sit on the couch with a book (or an e-reader).
Ahhh.... Simple pleasures. When I learned to read, my mom told me that a book could transport me anywhere, that I could do anything or be anyone by reading. Not only that, but I soon discovered all sorts of stuff I could learn by reading!
Think about reading. Actually, don't just think about it. Read to yourself or read to someone else. Read to a child!
But, mostly...READ.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Think About Books, Part 2
Back in October, I posted "Think About Books." After reading an article in the April 11th Publishers Weekly just now, I felt compelled to write on this subject again.
The article is "Books Without Batteries: the negative impacts of technology," written by Bill Henderson. (I read it in the print version, by the way.) Henderson's thoughts echo many of my own, although he has different reasons for them. He refers to the book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr, a book I was not familiar with (but have just requested from the library). Henderson states that Carr's premise is that people cannot read in depth anymore, that people can't think anymore, in general. "They are becoming 'chronic scatterbrains...even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb.'"
I have to agree that many people can't (or, at least, don't) think anymore. Working in retail, I witness this scatterbrain-ness on a regular basis, though I think "scatterbrain" may be too nice of a term. I am not sure if it's due to technology, as Henderson and Carr state, but it's definitely out there. I tend to think that it stems from our superficial materialistic society, in general, and our public education system. But, whatever is causing the problem, it has created a society of people who read poorly, write poorly, and, as a result, think poorly. They just don't take the time to do those things anymore. I regularly see Facebook posts where people use your instead of you're (and vice versa). (It's just Facebook, I know...not a big deal. But it works toward my point anyway. See my post "Think About Professional Communication.")
I'm sure there are many reasons that people love their e-readers, and I have no issue with that. Some people like gadgets, and that's fine. Some adamant proponents of e-readers, though, think that they're good for the environment. Of all the things Americans are wasteful with, print books and the paper they use are probably the least of the problem. One does not usually read a book and trash it. Library books can be re-read for decades. A person who buys a book often loans it to other people or, at the very least, ends up selling it at a garage sale or donating it to Goodwill. In any case, most books get read more than once, usually multiple times, by different people. Even textbooks that go into new editions every couple of years (which is a problem in itself, one that I won't address here) get used more than a couple of times.
E-readers, on the other hand, are like any other gadget in that they become outmoded, sometimes within a few months. Not only does that feed American society's heavy consumerism (which is problematic in itself), but it isn't as "green" of an option as those who rationalize it that way might think. According to Henderson: "To make one e-reader requires 33 pounds of minerals, plus 79 gallons of water to refine the minerals and produce the battery and printed writing. 'The adverse health impacts...from making one e-reader are estimated to be 70 times greater than those for making a single book,' says [a recent New York Times article]. Then you figure that the 100 million e-readers will be outmoded in short order, to be replaced by 100 million new and improved devices..., and you realize an environmental disaster is at hand."
Henderson goes on to say: "Here's what it takes to make a book, which...will be shared by many readers and preserved and appreciated in personal, public, and university libraries that survive the gigantic digital book burning: recycled paper, a dash of minerals, and two gallons of water. Batteries not necessary. If trees are harvested, they can be replanted."
As both an avid reader and avid writer, I can't help but love books. As though they are my own kin, I want to protect them. And, if anyone chooses to read on an e-reader, that is his or her choice, which I respect. But, please, PLEASE, please, don't drag the printed book and all that it encompasses down with you. According to Henderson, "Books are our history and our future. If they survive, we will, too."
So, if you made it through this blog entry and understood what you read: Congratulations, your brain has not yet been stunted by digital society! The world needs more like you! And, if you really understood what you just read, you'll pass this link on to others to read because knowledge is power, and knowledge comes from words. And maybe, just maybe, knowledge can start to displace the ignorance and apathy which are all too prevalent in American society.
(And, trust me, the irony of my platform here--the internet--is not lost on me. However, if someone offered me a book deal right now, I'd willingly put my blog on hold to write for the printed page.)
The article is "Books Without Batteries: the negative impacts of technology," written by Bill Henderson. (I read it in the print version, by the way.) Henderson's thoughts echo many of my own, although he has different reasons for them. He refers to the book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr, a book I was not familiar with (but have just requested from the library). Henderson states that Carr's premise is that people cannot read in depth anymore, that people can't think anymore, in general. "They are becoming 'chronic scatterbrains...even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb.'"
I have to agree that many people can't (or, at least, don't) think anymore. Working in retail, I witness this scatterbrain-ness on a regular basis, though I think "scatterbrain" may be too nice of a term. I am not sure if it's due to technology, as Henderson and Carr state, but it's definitely out there. I tend to think that it stems from our superficial materialistic society, in general, and our public education system. But, whatever is causing the problem, it has created a society of people who read poorly, write poorly, and, as a result, think poorly. They just don't take the time to do those things anymore. I regularly see Facebook posts where people use your instead of you're (and vice versa). (It's just Facebook, I know...not a big deal. But it works toward my point anyway. See my post "Think About Professional Communication.")
I'm sure there are many reasons that people love their e-readers, and I have no issue with that. Some people like gadgets, and that's fine. Some adamant proponents of e-readers, though, think that they're good for the environment. Of all the things Americans are wasteful with, print books and the paper they use are probably the least of the problem. One does not usually read a book and trash it. Library books can be re-read for decades. A person who buys a book often loans it to other people or, at the very least, ends up selling it at a garage sale or donating it to Goodwill. In any case, most books get read more than once, usually multiple times, by different people. Even textbooks that go into new editions every couple of years (which is a problem in itself, one that I won't address here) get used more than a couple of times.
E-readers, on the other hand, are like any other gadget in that they become outmoded, sometimes within a few months. Not only does that feed American society's heavy consumerism (which is problematic in itself), but it isn't as "green" of an option as those who rationalize it that way might think. According to Henderson: "To make one e-reader requires 33 pounds of minerals, plus 79 gallons of water to refine the minerals and produce the battery and printed writing. 'The adverse health impacts...from making one e-reader are estimated to be 70 times greater than those for making a single book,' says [a recent New York Times article]. Then you figure that the 100 million e-readers will be outmoded in short order, to be replaced by 100 million new and improved devices..., and you realize an environmental disaster is at hand."
Henderson goes on to say: "Here's what it takes to make a book, which...will be shared by many readers and preserved and appreciated in personal, public, and university libraries that survive the gigantic digital book burning: recycled paper, a dash of minerals, and two gallons of water. Batteries not necessary. If trees are harvested, they can be replanted."
As both an avid reader and avid writer, I can't help but love books. As though they are my own kin, I want to protect them. And, if anyone chooses to read on an e-reader, that is his or her choice, which I respect. But, please, PLEASE, please, don't drag the printed book and all that it encompasses down with you. According to Henderson, "Books are our history and our future. If they survive, we will, too."
So, if you made it through this blog entry and understood what you read: Congratulations, your brain has not yet been stunted by digital society! The world needs more like you! And, if you really understood what you just read, you'll pass this link on to others to read because knowledge is power, and knowledge comes from words. And maybe, just maybe, knowledge can start to displace the ignorance and apathy which are all too prevalent in American society.
(And, trust me, the irony of my platform here--the internet--is not lost on me. However, if someone offered me a book deal right now, I'd willingly put my blog on hold to write for the printed page.)
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Think About Poetry
Happy National Poetry Month!
I'm not necessarily a fan of "special" months (and it's my understanding that April is the "special" month for several other issues/subjects besides poetry), but poetry is a subject that tends to be underestimated by the general public. Most poets cannot make a living by their art alone. Creative writing, in general, does not usually pay the bills; but fiction writers can, at least, dream of a bestseller. Poets...not so much. That has to tell you something about poets: we write because we enjoy it, because we are compelled to, and/or because reading a well-crafted poem gives us pleasure, so we are constantly attempting to write that poem. Of course, there are other reasons too (I am not speaking for all poets--I'm just speaking for me).
I've been writing poetry regularly for about 15 years. I had dabbled with it before that (mostly in elementary school), but my original (read: childhood) plan was to become a murder mystery author. Because I was born the year Agatha Christie died, I thought it was my "destiny." (Apparently, I thought I'd be as well-known as she was, too.) But figuring out the intricacies of a good mystery plot is quite the task; figuring out the intricacies of ANY plot is quite the task. On the other hand, coming up with a plot isn't really necessary in poetry (and, bingo...a poet is born!).
I write poetry that I hope will be read by others. I write poetry because I want to get it published. Even so, I write from the heart. It's rare that I write a poem that is just for me. However, that's what I've been doing lately. A few months ago I experienced a sort of "trauma" (for lack of a better word) that left me struggling with a lot of "issues" (again...for lack of a better word). I blamed myself for what had happened, my emotions ran awry, and I quickly ran out of coping mechanisms. My instinct told me to write, which I did; but I was still writing for other readers. A number of years ago I used to journal incessantly--and the thought to do this crossed my mind--but I couldn't bring myself to do it. I made little notes to myself, but that was pretty much the extent of it. Finally, somebody recommended I write "journal-like" poetry (not to be read by others), and this is what I've been doing. It's a pretty obvious solution, but perhaps I just wasn't to the point where I could do that before. Interestingly, the woman who suggested this to me was not a writer, but she had gone through a similar "trauma" as I had and had found that writing poetry (she used the term "poetry" loosely, but poetry has a loose definition anyway, so I'm calling it--definitively--poetry for her!) really helped her through it.
So,...yet another reason to write poetry: it's therapeutic! Of course, it doesn't have to be just poetry. Any creative writing can be therapeutic; any creative endeavor can be, for that matter! Drawing, painting, crafting, etc.
To celebrate National Poetry Month, I'm encouraging you to read some poetry, write some poetry, attend a poetry reading, or just take a moment to think about poetry. If you're not writing poetry, at least do something creative. Support the arts in your community; or, just as importantly, be a part of the arts in your community!
And, like a circular poem, I will end this entry the way I began (but with a minor font adjustment):
Happy National Poetry Month!
I'm not necessarily a fan of "special" months (and it's my understanding that April is the "special" month for several other issues/subjects besides poetry), but poetry is a subject that tends to be underestimated by the general public. Most poets cannot make a living by their art alone. Creative writing, in general, does not usually pay the bills; but fiction writers can, at least, dream of a bestseller. Poets...not so much. That has to tell you something about poets: we write because we enjoy it, because we are compelled to, and/or because reading a well-crafted poem gives us pleasure, so we are constantly attempting to write that poem. Of course, there are other reasons too (I am not speaking for all poets--I'm just speaking for me).
I've been writing poetry regularly for about 15 years. I had dabbled with it before that (mostly in elementary school), but my original (read: childhood) plan was to become a murder mystery author. Because I was born the year Agatha Christie died, I thought it was my "destiny." (Apparently, I thought I'd be as well-known as she was, too.) But figuring out the intricacies of a good mystery plot is quite the task; figuring out the intricacies of ANY plot is quite the task. On the other hand, coming up with a plot isn't really necessary in poetry (and, bingo...a poet is born!).
I write poetry that I hope will be read by others. I write poetry because I want to get it published. Even so, I write from the heart. It's rare that I write a poem that is just for me. However, that's what I've been doing lately. A few months ago I experienced a sort of "trauma" (for lack of a better word) that left me struggling with a lot of "issues" (again...for lack of a better word). I blamed myself for what had happened, my emotions ran awry, and I quickly ran out of coping mechanisms. My instinct told me to write, which I did; but I was still writing for other readers. A number of years ago I used to journal incessantly--and the thought to do this crossed my mind--but I couldn't bring myself to do it. I made little notes to myself, but that was pretty much the extent of it. Finally, somebody recommended I write "journal-like" poetry (not to be read by others), and this is what I've been doing. It's a pretty obvious solution, but perhaps I just wasn't to the point where I could do that before. Interestingly, the woman who suggested this to me was not a writer, but she had gone through a similar "trauma" as I had and had found that writing poetry (she used the term "poetry" loosely, but poetry has a loose definition anyway, so I'm calling it--definitively--poetry for her!) really helped her through it.
So,...yet another reason to write poetry: it's therapeutic! Of course, it doesn't have to be just poetry. Any creative writing can be therapeutic; any creative endeavor can be, for that matter! Drawing, painting, crafting, etc.
To celebrate National Poetry Month, I'm encouraging you to read some poetry, write some poetry, attend a poetry reading, or just take a moment to think about poetry. If you're not writing poetry, at least do something creative. Support the arts in your community; or, just as importantly, be a part of the arts in your community!
And, like a circular poem, I will end this entry the way I began (but with a minor font adjustment):
Happy National Poetry Month!
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Think About Spiritual Gifts
I grew up, as they say, "in the church," meaning that it (church) has always been a part of my life. Church services, Sunday School, Bible School, church camp, and youth group: these were all activities that were part of my routine growing up. Not only that, but they were activities that I was expected to be involved in. No, I wasn't forced; it was just what I was supposed to do. It was what most of my friends did, too. And most of the people I knew, in fact.
So, it came as a bit of a surprise (but, really, not a huge shock) to me--about four or five years ago--when I realized that I don't really know very much about the Bible. For having grown up "in the church," I'm pretty dumb about church things. After coming to this realization, I began reading and attending what--at my church--is called Gathering Space (adult Christian education). I still don't know a lot (because, face it, there is A LOT to learn), but I do know a lot more than I did five years ago.
A couple of weeks ago I took a Spiritual Gifts class at my church. This was a wonderful class that has inspired me to learn more about Spiritual Gifts. Those of you who know me are well aware that when I find a subject I want to learn more about, I immediately invest a lot of time and energy (and, sometimes, money--depending on whether or not the books are available from the library) in reading whatever I can on the particular subject. My current quest, though, is not so much about the Spiritual Gifts themselves, but it is about figuring out how I can use mine.
In the class, we took an assessment to figure out what our strongest gifts are. My Spiritual Gifts weren't what I was expecting them to be...until I thought about it (and I'm still thinking about it); then, it made sense. My strongest gifts were assessed to be Faith, Mercy, and Discernment. (This doesn't mean these are my only gifts; it just means that they are, most likely, my strongest ones.)
(Not surprising to me was that my weakest gift was Evangelism. I was also relieved to know that this was okay (phew...) because we all have different gifts; God gave us each different gifts. It is necessary that we all have different gifts.)
"There are different kinds of spiritual gifts but the same Spirit; there are different forms of service but the same Lord; there are different workings but the same God who produces all of them in everyone. To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit." I Corinthians 12: 4-7.
We are to use our gifts with love: this is easy for me to understand. But, finding ways to use them is a little trickier for me. I think I use several of my gifts (including ones that I didn't rate as high on) when I tutor my adult student in reading and writing. Perhaps that explains why the two sessions per week of tutoring are often the high points of those days for me. It's when I'm tutoring that I know I'm doing something useful, something I'm excited about, and, better yet,...I'm doing something with joy and love, something I know I was meant to do.
(Now, I just have to work on doing something like that (making a difference, doing something useful and important, using my gifts) more than just two hours a week...!)
So, it came as a bit of a surprise (but, really, not a huge shock) to me--about four or five years ago--when I realized that I don't really know very much about the Bible. For having grown up "in the church," I'm pretty dumb about church things. After coming to this realization, I began reading and attending what--at my church--is called Gathering Space (adult Christian education). I still don't know a lot (because, face it, there is A LOT to learn), but I do know a lot more than I did five years ago.
A couple of weeks ago I took a Spiritual Gifts class at my church. This was a wonderful class that has inspired me to learn more about Spiritual Gifts. Those of you who know me are well aware that when I find a subject I want to learn more about, I immediately invest a lot of time and energy (and, sometimes, money--depending on whether or not the books are available from the library) in reading whatever I can on the particular subject. My current quest, though, is not so much about the Spiritual Gifts themselves, but it is about figuring out how I can use mine.
In the class, we took an assessment to figure out what our strongest gifts are. My Spiritual Gifts weren't what I was expecting them to be...until I thought about it (and I'm still thinking about it); then, it made sense. My strongest gifts were assessed to be Faith, Mercy, and Discernment. (This doesn't mean these are my only gifts; it just means that they are, most likely, my strongest ones.)
(Not surprising to me was that my weakest gift was Evangelism. I was also relieved to know that this was okay (phew...) because we all have different gifts; God gave us each different gifts. It is necessary that we all have different gifts.)
"There are different kinds of spiritual gifts but the same Spirit; there are different forms of service but the same Lord; there are different workings but the same God who produces all of them in everyone. To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit." I Corinthians 12: 4-7.
We are to use our gifts with love: this is easy for me to understand. But, finding ways to use them is a little trickier for me. I think I use several of my gifts (including ones that I didn't rate as high on) when I tutor my adult student in reading and writing. Perhaps that explains why the two sessions per week of tutoring are often the high points of those days for me. It's when I'm tutoring that I know I'm doing something useful, something I'm excited about, and, better yet,...I'm doing something with joy and love, something I know I was meant to do.
(Now, I just have to work on doing something like that (making a difference, doing something useful and important, using my gifts) more than just two hours a week...!)
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Think About Professional Communication
There's a book called I Judge You When You Use Poor Grammar. I haven't read it, but it's one of those books with fun English language gaffes and flubs. I've read several of these kinds of books and enjoy them. However, I can find enough of these kinds of errors without buying a book or even looking too hard.
Let me back up a second though and assure you that I personally don't judge people based on their grammatical goofs--that's just the name of that book. It certainly does make me sad, though, when educated people make obvious errors; and I think it says something about our country's education system. Communication is one of the most important skills to have in today's world.
It's understandable when people write un-grammatically in a text message, in an informal email, on Facebook, etc., but too many times this informality carries over into the professional world (which seems to be gradually getting smaller and smaller). Proofreading what you write before hitting "send" is an important step to consider. Last week I received an email from a buyer at the corporate office of the company I work for. I was the only recipient and I knew she had been writing it in a hurry, so the error had minimal consequences. She wrote that she "defiantly need[ed] a second pair of eyes." It was apparent that she meant she definitely needed a second pair of eyes. (And, she obviously proved her point!) No harm done.
However, this same company regularly sends out "professional" communications to upwards of 1000 recipients at a time. Not only are these riddled with vague directions and poor organization, they also often contain sentences that are just plain painful to read. For instance: "We are giving store management the opportunity to review the list of patrons who our systems show should be sent to collections before they are sent." Or, "...the PSC will be putting together a patch that will that will update all store's flash plug-in." No, I didn't accidentally write that will twice; that's how it was published. And "all store's flash plug-in"? Ugh. That should be "all stores' flash plug-ins." In these cases, yes, I DO judge the company I work for. I don't judge the actual individual who wrote the sentences though. Not everybody is a grammar guru; not everybody has to be. We all excel at different things. But, for crying out loud, there should be somebody looking over these communications before they are sent out for 1000+ people to read.
Think about the image you want to project when you write something, whether it is personal or professional. Although someone might not be "judging" you, per se, for writing it, he or she just might end up using it as an example in a blog or a book of English errors.
Let me back up a second though and assure you that I personally don't judge people based on their grammatical goofs--that's just the name of that book. It certainly does make me sad, though, when educated people make obvious errors; and I think it says something about our country's education system. Communication is one of the most important skills to have in today's world.
It's understandable when people write un-grammatically in a text message, in an informal email, on Facebook, etc., but too many times this informality carries over into the professional world (which seems to be gradually getting smaller and smaller). Proofreading what you write before hitting "send" is an important step to consider. Last week I received an email from a buyer at the corporate office of the company I work for. I was the only recipient and I knew she had been writing it in a hurry, so the error had minimal consequences. She wrote that she "defiantly need[ed] a second pair of eyes." It was apparent that she meant she definitely needed a second pair of eyes. (And, she obviously proved her point!) No harm done.
However, this same company regularly sends out "professional" communications to upwards of 1000 recipients at a time. Not only are these riddled with vague directions and poor organization, they also often contain sentences that are just plain painful to read. For instance: "We are giving store management the opportunity to review the list of patrons who our systems show should be sent to collections before they are sent." Or, "...the PSC will be putting together a patch that will that will update all store's flash plug-in." No, I didn't accidentally write that will twice; that's how it was published. And "all store's flash plug-in"? Ugh. That should be "all stores' flash plug-ins." In these cases, yes, I DO judge the company I work for. I don't judge the actual individual who wrote the sentences though. Not everybody is a grammar guru; not everybody has to be. We all excel at different things. But, for crying out loud, there should be somebody looking over these communications before they are sent out for 1000+ people to read.
Think about the image you want to project when you write something, whether it is personal or professional. Although someone might not be "judging" you, per se, for writing it, he or she just might end up using it as an example in a blog or a book of English errors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)