pride

Posted: March 8, 2011 in thriving
Tags: , , , , , ,

Pride is complicated stuff.

How’s that? Because it’s about thinking we are better than other people and about thinking we are worse.

It is both, because pride is essentially being overly focused on oneself, making oneself the center, the core, the issue.

Pride puts its nose in the air and says, “Look at my hot car, or body or house or wife or personality or whatever.”

And pride puts its nose down, low, and says, “Look at what a mess I am, and look at how badly I feel.”

This too is a kind of pride because it is all about me or you or whoever is super-focused on themselves.

To really understand pride, we must realize that it is a fiction. Pride is a restoried, manufactured, studied, fictionalized version of reality that we write for ourselves. It takes the story of our life, and rewrites it with our self as the protagonist, the hero, the heroin, the star.

To really understand it might help to see that pride is a lot like a card game.

Life deals us cards. As we grow up, we look over our hand to see what cards we got.  And then, we select our high card, and we begin to play it, for a win, for a winning of  love and money and approval. Our high card  may be our personality, our looks, our smart mouth, our money, our social status, our race, our parents, our attitude, our whatever. There are many high cards, different in value in different contexts, and the cards become high or low, depending on how we and others see them.

This is fine, normal, and this is not so fine, this card game, when pride enters the game. It is not cool,  to play ourselves too much, to  game ourselves, to story game ourselves, to restory ourselves, to dominate, to win by making others lose. It is not cool when we flaunt our cards, when we use them to use other people, to get what we want, to beat down the competition into submission to our superiority.

But this game, the high card game, the game of who is better than who, is played all the time. People get into it or they spend a lot of energy trying to get away from it.

A person who has worked hard on being humble, may then be proud of not being proud. Wow! Tough sledding, the downhill run away from the self.

What to do?

About the only cure for pride is not to think of it at all —  self, self-love, self-hate, dealing with self. The cure comes in turning away from all  of this to other selves. We lose pride when we find the other. We quit playing our high card when we think beyond the game, at what we will all do when we slide our chairs back from the table and go to lunch together.

This matters, the game after the game, the game without the game, the time when we gather to support each other, not to win or lose.

This matters.

The interesting thing is the the Bible sees dealing with pride as the central issue of life, because pride keeps us from God. And to persist in pride, can lead to  God opposing us

Proverbs 3:34 says that God “mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble.”

Cool!  And not cool. If we mock the suposedly inferior, we will be mocked.

Interesting. Being proud will bring us down; keeping away from pride will put God on our side and pick us up.

Nothing better than that.

Think about it.

(Todays blog entry is just a discussion starter. What do you think? I invite you to add a comment.)

Randy

wise stuff

Posted: February 21, 2011 in thriving
Tags: , , , ,

Life is a firehose of information but sometimes we just want a sweet drop of truth. I saw a hummingbird dip its food snagger in a red honeysuckle flower recently. Yum! One sip! Good!

I ran into a couple who had just celebrated fifty years of marriage this week. They agreed that to do that, they had done some serious shutting up. Less is more, over the long haul.

Sometimes we want for small when buried in too much big. Yesterday after being social all day, my pajamas and my bed and my laptop were just right to help me restore.  Simple beats complex, at the end of most days.

In the end, I went to sleep. We all do, always. Sleep is a good simple for it is simply accepting  the day. It is more; the simple act of going to bed each night is preparation for death, the moment when we give in to what was, with no more complicated attempts to change that.

Wise stuff? We need it. More. It explains the world.

Think elegant explanations, like Kepler’s elliptical orbit of the planets,; the beauty is often in the simplicity.

And so, we love a theory and we love a proverb. Short truth delights by telling all with some. We call such collected truth, wisdom literature.

Wisdom literature is ancient, oral, axiomatic, classic, lasting.  It is often pithy, punchy, with a pinch of sarcasm, wit and humor tossed in for seasoning. It skewers us, in a way we like, stabbing sence into our psyches. It shapens up  the mundane into the  sublime.

Want some? 

I invite you to visit    http://modernproverbs.net

the same

Posted: February 16, 2011 in people
Tags: , , ,

I once sat in a small group in San Diego and listened to Henri Nouwen speak about how we are  different and the same. He said that too often we define ourselves by how we are different from each other. Nouwen noted that we modern Americans  are into being unique, but that this is not actually where the joy of life is  found.  Then he had one of his friends, who was disabled, speak to us. They were the same, he and Nouwen; both deeply needed to be loved and accepted.

Nouwen writes, “True joy is hidden where we are the same as other people: fragile and mortal. It is the joy of belonging to the human race. It is the joy of being with others as a friend, a companion, a fellow traveler.”

The famous professor, writer, priest — a fellow traveler with us all. I like it, but I struggle to live it. Many of us do.  There are so many angles by which we are tempted to declare our differences: republican or democrat, conservative or liberal, orthodox or free thinking, gay or straight, poor or rich, educated or blue collar, white, black, brown or red — the points of view encamp around us and invite us to join them for supper and an after dinner yak about —  the enemy. We live, we speak, we react, we differentiate as easily as we breathe.

What is the cure? It is silence, sometimes. Yes we need to dialogue, to say what we think, to put up our boundaries, to air things out,  to be honest, to negotiate and compromise and to work the differences out, and then sometimes we just need to do some serious shutting up. To see how we are alike, sometimes we need to quit talking about how we are different, and then we might begin to put effort into the seeing how we are the same. 

Silence is a quiet opportunity to observe, similarity.

We woo each other gently, by quietness.

My cat Megan sat on my lap this morning. We said nothing. We luxuriated in a blanket and closeness and touch. We couldn’t be more different. She is wise and fuzzy and minds her own business. We couldn’t be more the same. We both needed a moment for a quiet purr, together.

A friend and I recently strung an internet cable through an attic. He pushed the cable through a hole; I retrieved it. We are different; we are so very much the same, especially when we share a common task, like stringing cable. We are the same in that we need each other to be successful.

The solution to different is to get busy doing the same.

I like it better than the different.

One day, in high school, at lunch, I put a coin in the gum machine in a drugstore.  I turned the crank, the gum fell, but not the coin, so I wiggled the crank and the gum just kept coming out. “Humm,” I thought, “I just won the gum lottery.” 

I was feeling grateful then, so I just emptied the machine. It seemed meant to be. Then I went back to the school. But pretty soon I got bored with my gum wealth and gave some gum balls away. I think this created a spirit of mass generosity in the student body and soon  my friends and I were throwing gum balls, from an upstairs window, onto the heads of students below.

Think of it as a kind of Marxist revolution, a proletarian redistribution of the wealth, and it was going really well until I heard a voice behind me,  yell, “Hey!” It was the principal. Oddly enough, he seemed upset. I think, perhaps, he felt left out.

So, anyway, he panicked and he kicked us all out of school. It seemed a bit rash to me on his part, but I learned a lesson from that. If you throw gum at school, invite the principal to join you. And never, ever be afraid to share your gum.

It has been said that the divine smooches the cheerful giver.  I like that; it makes me want to change, to get smooched, to smooch others, to be  happy, by giving. This is it, the thing, the essence, the really gone girl, the madly free bad boy, to let it rain down, from our hands, the gum, the moolah, time, love, generosity  — from each hand, cheerfully. And also, at the core,  to never let anyone stop us from giving – not grumpy, stingy principals, not our own shriveled hearts, not anything.  I want it; I want to relax into unselfishness and throw good stuff in the air and treat someone else and be happy in giving it away.  

For Christmas a few years ago, my wife and I bought my mom and dad, tickets to a local theatre. It was dinner and a Christmas play at the beautiful, classy Hotel Del Coronado. We were excited to surprise them; we could hardly wait to take them there and deposit them in the lobby with the huge, gorgeous Christmas tree and tell them,  “You are here, for dinner and a play.”  When they came back, they enthused, “Oh the five course dinner, the prime rib, the chocolate covered strawberries, and the play — we had a wonderful evening.” Then we regretted not using the tickets ourselves.

No, not, not even close. Even though we had gotten none of this for ourselves, we were so happy for them, and it was so fun to treat them that we couldn’t have been more pleased in the giving.  Anne Lamot says life comes down to a simple law of the jungle, “Stay calm and share your bananas.”

Sharing your bananas, I’ve noticed, is cool because it tends to give back to you, inside, a fullness, a happiness, as sense of having lived well, a calm and even a banana back.

Think children. It takes a lot of bananas to raise one, but if you keep feeding them they yield a return. “Really?” you might say: “I’ve invested in children and all I got back was a lot of bills and some back talk.”  I’ll give you this, the return on children is not obvious at first.  The U.S. Agriculture Department says the cost to raise a child to age 18 is $291,570? That’s astonishing. It’s more money than you can make in a lifetime. And this figure does not include college, which is another $291,000.

But you do get something back, something good, along the way and eventually —  in most cases, with children. My daughter, who is in college, called me this week. We talked on the phone about a date we had gone on recently, to dinner and a play, and just before she hung up the phone she said, “I love you daddy.”

Raising  her,  $291,000. “I love you daddy,” priceless!  And someday, she will pay me back, when I’m old and gum-less and she will give me a much needed hug and pat my head and say again, “I love you daddy.”

It’s good, living this way, staying calm, being happy, living by the truth: Sow small, reap  small; sow crazy big, reap wildly huge and happy.

Into the paper cupcake holders in two cupcake pans I poured a thin layer of super-moist, triple-chocolate-fudge cake mix.

Then on top of the thin layer of super-moist, triple-chocolate-fudge cake, I poured a thin layer of sweet, whipped cream cheese.

Next — into each cupcake sleeve, I gently spooned, on top of the super-moist triple-chocolate-fudge and the sweet cream cheese, a layer of country-cherry pie filling.

Then I poured another layer of super-moist-triple-chocolate-fudge cake, on top of the surpy, cherry pie filling, which covered the whipped cream cheese, which covered the first layer of super-moist, triple-chocolate-fudge cake.

At this point I grew frightened and decided to put it in the oven —  to kill it.

Twelve minutes later, when the little super-moist, chocolate, cheesy, cherry-filled bodies had baked, and then cooled, as part of the embalming process, I spread a thick layer of rich and creamy vanilla, cream cheese frosting on top of each one.

Then — I – ate five!

I hate myself.

Paul, the amazing Christian super saint once wrote, “I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. (Romans 7:15)

Sounds like someone else has been into the super-moist triple-chocolate cupcakes. Of course, the truth is that we all have all been there, where we didn’t want to go, doing what we hated to do.  We have overeaten cake or indulged a nasty character defect or shot off a mean-spirited repartee or harbored an infected and moldy core of unforgiveness. Or if we have not done these then we have indulged something else non grata, not fun, a fair bit of  anguish, the loss of control, the doing what we don’t want to do, the regrets later. This is just what we do — the stuff we hate.

And so, what to do?

I backed our SUV into a telephone pole a few years ago. When I confessed my mistake to my wife, she said, “That’s why we have insurance.” Never once then or after did she say anything condemning about my driving mistake.

Good, very nice. There is a recipe in this. There is a culinary treat to write down, on a card and to keep in a drawer, to Facebook to a friend, to use again.

After any one of us have poured down a super-most layer of triple chocolate fudge blunder, we should pour on top of that a thick layer of  sweet, cream cheese honesty. Then it is best if someone else in the kitchen  with us adds a thick layer of cheer pie kindness. If as so often happens, another layer of triple chocolate fudge mistake is added, and it gets baked all together, as so often happens in life, we  should all yet “cool it,” and  top the mess with a thick swirl of cream cheese forgiveness.

Finally, once we have all our layered delights finished and spread out in front of us, then we should each eat five or more of them, just to help us get the layering pattern “down,” and to help us learn to make this unique way of preparing food a real part of us.

A mistake? It needs a loving relationship.

Then,  “We’re really cooking baby!”

who are you?

Posted: January 24, 2011 in becoming
Tags: , , , ,

“`Who are you?’ said the Caterpillar.

This was not an encouraging opening for a conversation. Alice replied, rather shyly, `I–I hardly know, sir, just at present– at least I know who I was when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then.’

What do you mean by that?’ said the Caterpillar sternly. `Explain yourself!’

`I can’t explain myself, I’m afraid, sir’ said Alice, `because I’m not myself, you see.'”

Alice, as in Wonderland, is caught up in one of our universal human dilemmas — explaining ourselves. The problem? Who we are is not fixed, and it can’t be easily explained to someone else or even to ourselves.

But we are not always as lost as Alice. Consider your bio or your resume. I wrote a short biography of myself recently for my website.  It was supposed to be brief, but I’ve lived long enough that the trouble was in knowing what me to put in, what me to leave out. Then when my office manager transferred my biography to another website which had a different purpose, it didn’t quite feel right there. So I changed it, to fit the context.  Like Alice, I had several iterations to choose from.

Resumes? The same thing. We tailor them to the job we are going for. We present ourselves as a good fit for a prospective employer. At resume time, we are all Alice, before the caterpillar, being asked “And who are you?” and we stand and deliver that we are an Alice that will  fit in caterpillar’s world. And in that moment, we profess,  to know ourselves. Fine, all is well, welcome to selling yourself.  It’s appropriate and so professional to offer up a me-for-them on 24 pound linen paper with a water mark, a well-edited self that briefly presents the me of me that fits the them of them. “Make a good impression,” says my mom, your spouse and her best friend Tom as we all  head out the door for the interview —  “Knock ’em dead!”

But dead or not, at the interview or the funeral, there is yet, the Alice-dilemma. Someone may think I am this, or another may eulogize me as that, and I may myself put this  or that on the fine paper , but who am I really? Who am I to me? Who am I when I-as-caterpillar asks me-as-Alice, “Who are you?”  In other words, who am I employing when I employ myself? This identity is more difficult to get a hand on.  It’s harder, penning the slippery, holistic, authentic day-to-day resume, the one we never write but always live, in front of ourselves and others.

My wife, Linda, is a  survivor. Now there’s a label that offers an identity many people own. She grew up with a dad who said nothing too many times in a row after muttering nothing and yelling again nothing  while devotedly popping another top off another beer after the beer just before the last one. One way Linda survived was to find her place among the stacks — books, and films in a place of something, of resources, a library. She found  a career in storing and organizing help, information, resources. The result? She is an interlibrary loan specialist and a phenomenal resourcer of research professors and students. Have a need for a book or an article? “Call her.” She’ll get it for you or find out where you can get it.  So while a support group might think of her as a “survivor,”  she is really, through and through,  a thriver. Contexts change; we change;  labels change. Is she a child of an alcoholic parent, always? Is recovery always. How long does the past define us? Only as long as we let it.

I’ve noticed that people tend to like  slice-of-the-pie assessments — “survivor, vet, precocious, slow, hot, not.” They don’t so much like the longer, nuanced, whole-pie critique, except when they write their memoirs. Most people go for the quick  labels: “cute, bright, slut, jerk, fun, good girl, bad boy, smart ass.” What are these really? Short hand idenitfications,  stereotypes within the stereotypes of  the stereotype.  Some one told me recently, “You’re smart.” I thought, “Thin slice of me. You just haven’t seen  me dumb, but sometimes I am.” Maybe I just haven’t let them see me dumb. I am, as we all are, a walking contradiction — smart here, dumb there, good here, bad there. Of course, obvious, sure — “Get real.”

I want to. I do. I do want to be authentic, and with authentic people, in the moment, congruent, projecting who we are and have been and still can be. This even means being honest about the me of not me and the them of the essential them. Paul, the radical Christian  interrogator of the self, in one of his finest letters wrote, “I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.” Touche! Paul has it right. He is not always the person he wants to be, and I, like him, do not always act out the me-of-me and the me-I-want-to-be. And so when I define myself, this must be included. Every resume needs an,  “If-you-want-a-different-twist-on-everything-you-just-read-then-talk-to-Frank category. Or perhaps we should add   “Blunders” with dates and references.

The other day a girl told me that she was  in recovery from abusing alcohol and drugs. I told her that in high school and college I had done too much drinking too, and had to move away from that to figure out who I was on my own, without a little help from my friends. As I confessed, I was writing my resume for her, an honest one, a human one, one that she could understand. I like that, authenticity. Who am I? I am a person very much like everyone.

And this gets at one more thing I’m learning — not to listen too much to talking caterpillars wherever they appear, but to look after something much more important, helping the them of not me figure out the them of the essential them. This works, nicely, in diverting the soul from excessive introspection. I live best not storying a self, not inventing a self, but instead spending time reflecting back to other selves who they might yet prove to be.

The other day, I happened on an ordinary thing, that later turned weird, a black mustard plant in the uplands down by the Sweetwater Salt Marsh who was freaking out.  She was a beauty, a Cruciferae, yellow and spring green with long shapely roots, but  she was so  upset. She was out of it really,  insanely exclamatory,  “Wow upon double wow and wow squared!” she  gushed madly, her eyes bent on a black and yellow Swallowtail butterfly who was flapping home to  the cathedral arch of a Sweet Fennel.

It didn’t turn out so well. I was told later, that when this mustardy beauty could take it no more, she grew all crazy for the air and ripped herself from the ground.  And it was said by those who know that she proceeded across the marsh, beating the breeze apart with her quickly withering leaves, and with dirt still trailing off her roots, that she crashed into the ground only about 1oo feet from where she came. 

“Oh!” I grieved for her and for all other selves not happy within the boundary of  themselves, and then I went and sat down with Alice again to hear her out.

Later in the evening, I wrote the tragedy up and posted it on my blog.

Then I kicked back, stretched my long, spotted body, nibbled a leafy snack, checked the feedback from my maxillae, and thought, “Now this is the me of the essential me.”

When my mom got cancer, I was young, but I was not unaware of what I am aware of now, concerning her. 

She had a disfiguring surgery, and she must have had feelings about that, experienced a changed sense of self because of it, entered into some kind differnt kind of self-consciousness regarding her body. And although I don’t know all she felt and yet feels about this thing, in those difficult days, I sat with her by her bed  and  in some way fused with her. It was difficult for me to tell the her from me completely then.  I grieved for and with her then and still do, as I think of how this has changed the way she feels about herself, forever.

Am I a consciousness separated from the consciousness of others?

I am and I am not. I was not, in that season, with my mom, and I have not been at other times, and these have been some of my most acute moments of consciousness, the  moments of awareness of another person and what they might feel given what they have experienced.

My mom  told me a while back that her mom, my grandma, was sexually abused. It happened in this way; my grandma’s dad died when she was little, and her mom remarried,  it was her step dad who abused her.

“Really, mom? I never knew that! In our family — grandma was sexually abused? Wow!”  And after my mom told me this, and I knew it had happened, it entered me, connecting me in some kind of bridging way to my grandma and giving me an option really,  an option to think about and enter into a new conscious awareness of my past.

My mom told me that afterwards my grandma was sent away to live with an aunt. I think of her now, our Nana, tiny like she was,  when she was abused. I imagine her  alone, confused and afraid afterwards, and I know she was, crying under her blankets in her dark bedroom —  alone. And I wish I could have gone to her then, changed like I have changed now,  changed by my own painful experiences into a more authentic self, into one who knows, and talked to her as if she were my family, as if she were my little daughter — time and space swept aside for a moment —  and me patting her on the back, this harmed little girl who was to become my mom’s mom and my very one-and-only Nana,  and me putting my head beside hers like a real dad would,  in an appropriate unbordering of the self, and then breaking down with her, and  saying to  her with the tears running out of my eyes and down my cheeks and onto her cheeks, “What was done to you was so wrong. I’m so sorry it happened! Look at me. You didn’t do anything wrong! You didn’t do anything wrong!  Something wrong was done to you. And it shouldn’t have been done, and I love you, and I am going to protect you now so that this never, ever happens to you again!”

Sticking to ones own consciousness and harboring up with in one’s own self  is overrated. We cross over, at times, into other’s sacred space in moments of human need and pain, and we make the choice ,when time and space allow,  and as we can, when it doesn’t seem to allow, because who and what is allowed is what we allow, to come close to us. 

And I wish I could have gone to her step-dad, and said what needed to be said to him too, in a controlled way, and then gone to other people who needed to look into this in some way that would bring  a new awareness to him, and then I wish I could have taken my grandma away and found a loving place for her, and said to her, “Now your are safe, and you are going to be okay, we are going to have someone talk to you about this and listen to you and help you be okay.”

My grandma eventually married a much older man than herself, whose wife had died, and he was a very good man, and I think he gave her some of that, the place removed from harm for the wounded self to recover — and safety.

It happened then, when I was not a self, still unborn, but now I am, and my consciousness of it connects me with my grandma, but not her with me. It’s common, this chance, to cross over the sacred border of the self.  I’ve experienced this phenomena, again and again, the awareness of pain that fuses me together with someone else,  inviting me to trailer up with them and live in broken-down sameness together for a short time.

I am a self, or I think I am, but am I?

This is a real  consciousness problem, not some kind of intellectualized, obfuscated philosophical triple talk,  and it is my dilemma, and everyone’s– the significant,  long-standing philosophical conundrum of being a consciousness self in a world of other selves.  It sucks, to have this to sort out, kind of.

If you have  read the extensive and abstruse literature on the consciousness, or the concept of the self, then, “I’m sorry,” and if you haven’t, then your on your own, to know the you-of-you, and the you of not-you, and the them of  the-very-not you.

To get after it, I asked my wife Linda today, “Am I you?’ It was a good question, in context, which I was.

We  had spent the morning together. It was a beautiful sunny, Martin Luther King holiday in Southern California. We began by drinking strong coffee and watching the weather report and talking with the caffeine kicking in the way I like to feel it — early and buzzing and crazy good. I read the first one  out loud to her from the Message version, so colloquial-cool with its one-way-to-be and not the other, and its cleverish, “You don’t go to Smart-Mouth College” and other fun paraphrasy stuff.  After, we said a short prayer of gratefulness together, which we do once in a while to help us deframe from the self, and then we rode our bikes down to Target to pick up a bike lock. We got one, with a self of its own, a thick, smooth, serpentine, springly, clickish bike lock. In the future we won’t  have only two options for nearby shopping: walk or take the cars. We  can bike, with the protective serpent, and hopefully not have to buy new bikes, afterward.

As I rode behind Linda, I tried to find my consciousness, my self, my not-her.  And so I engaged in a few random consciousness experiments. I  looked out from my moving self, and I pointed my digital camera-screen eyes at a subject and clicked — on the moving black shadow of my bike on the white side walk below me. I like shadows, and so I rode happily observing my shadow, until it disappeared under a tree. Here and then gone, and then forgotten as I came into an avian racket in the branches above me.

Bird chatter —  I heard it in the background of my shadow centered awareness on the approach to the tree, then nearer, then above, then behind, “Now that’s  got my late focusing attention,” and turning on my bike seat, I  looked back and up, scanning and listening. I couldn’t see any feathered color, only green leaves and grey branches.  “Starlings” I thought, checking my memory for, “yacky birds,” but I couldn’t be sure, and kept pedaling, following my wife, the pleasant avian din receding like a wind chime in a dying breeze —  then gone. I clicked back ahead, 0n some people, standing by the lake, with children. But looking, so to speak, through them, I found myself mostly conscious of my most recent consciousness,  “I looked at what I was interested in, and I heard what I didn’t plan to hear but liked, a lot.” My conscious, of the birds, was not gone with them.

Wow and then superwow on wow, wow, wow! To experience the me and the not me! I am an awareness, which is different from what I am aware of. How good is that, to be separated, like that, and yet to know,  like this? Good and very good! I am sentient! I am conscious of my consciousness.  And I am conscious of my memories of my consciousness. And I am conscious that I can retain a consciousness of my consciousness. And I am conscious that I can enter into the deep consciousness of someone else. Whoooohoooo! How good is that? Write a consciousness psalm! Read it every morning to the world.  This is smart and mouthed, “Sing praise, for consciousness!”

When my wife and I got home we ate lunch and cleaned up the house and sat close. I leaned over and kissed her. I had spent the morning interacting with her and then I had the time alone with myself on the bike, and now I was shifting back  toward the with-her awareness. I felt myself unbordering, as I sometimes do, when I am with her, relaxing into her green tea perfume, the clean smell of  her hair conditioner, the lovely scented safety of her skin lotion  —  and at that moment, I asked her: “Am I you?” It seemed like the thing to say. It could have been meant romantically, but I was thinking about it epistemologically and she took it so.

“”No,” she said firmly, and then threw down her own opinion on the ontological table. “Sometimes you edit my decisions too much, and  tell me what to do, and I don’t like it.” My wife went to Smart Mouth College. She should read the Psalms more. Me too.

That morning, she had wanted to buy the bike lock at the bike shop, “but Target” I had suggested, was “cheaper,” and so this was  not the rhubarb pie and the ice cream on top that we used to share at Marie Calendar’s, close and sugary and funish. No Eastern universal cosmic soul with us. No Nirvana. I’m not her! She said so.

I agree. I resolutely agree, that I’m not her when she, as she is want to do, is not thinking clearly. The problems with some of the classic literature on the self —  Aristotle,  Hume and Freud —  is that they when they talked about the self they forgot about — wives. Intellectual discussions of the self have too often gone on holiday, disconnecting  from smart mouthed marital repartees and mid-morning bike rides and sexually abused grandmothers and love. Wittgenstein, the language philosopher, astutely pointed this out and it is worth remembering.

After my wife brought up my faults, I thought a moment and said,  “The way I see it is that I have good ideas, and sometimes I share them with you, and you can benefit from them if you so choose, so I’m just basically helping you.”  

“You’re  not,” she replied.

So I know who I am. I’m not her, or him or them. Good. Done.  I have a self.  This thought, now in my mind, is mine, and that thought, now in hers, is hers, so, I am in this way, not her way. Kick it; it’s so delicious; so fine. I love having my own observations, experiences, opinions, awareness of my own awareness. This at least in part, what it means to be a conscious self.

And yet, not so fast, like that and this; my edges smear, fuzz and blur, especially when I cry. And I know that as tightly as I’m woven by my opinions and experiences and choices into a unique and personal self, I will, in times of pain, unravel again at the intellectual door. I think again about my grandma, and I know and always have, and will and always will, come to times when my carefully stitched up edges unravel  — I hope. I am and yet am not a separated self, and now perhaps more so not over time. If I have to live  alone someday, I will, if needed, but I won’t like it, especially at  night. I  hate to sleep alone. And I hate to go through hard things alone, and I hate for anyone to have to suffer alone.

I will merge again, I will deframe, and I will unhook from self and time and space and enter someone else’s reality,  my wife, my two daughters and my friends, and I will not be alone  with my self so that they will not be alone with themselves.  I don’t have to do this, but I will choose to do this because this is how I want to live, and I will have a shared consciousness.

It’s interesting, how this extends outward into so many other  intellectual concerns.  Take the idea of God, a big idea, huge in the history of ideas, and much thought about and written on.  Sometimes I think of God and how different he must be from my self, and far off, it feels sometimes like there is this vast space between us, and I think, there really is. Anyone who doesn’t know this is, I believe, somewhat dishonest about their experience. I’m not God, and he is certainly not me. And I don’t apprehend him well, and it is easy to conclude that although he might be here, “He isn’t here,  not now, not in this harsh reality that I am now in.” I doubt if my grandma felt God when she was being sexually abused.

A lot of people say they believe in God, most people will say that really, but they won’t say that they know what he is feeling or thinking or doing at any one given moment because they don’t. Consciousness doesn’t unborder to the divine often, or does it?

What is the deal with the self and the divine? Can we know God as we know our wives and grandma’s and friends? Can we detrailer from the self and hitch a ride on God’s consciousness?

The guys who wrote the canonized Christian literature on this thought so, writing about being personally formed inside their mothers by God himself, writing philosophically that, “In him [God] we live and move and have our being,” saying that our bodies are like churches that God comes and lives in, and that if we open self’s door, God comes inside us and lives in us, and even getting to the radical point where they say that we can come to the awareness that we no longer live our own lives but that God lives out his life in us. It sounds like soft borders again.  God merging with the self?  Christian orthodoxy says so, and sees God as what is called,  “incarnate,” meaning with us, present, close, in the flesh, or not at all. But enough of this ; too much talk like this and we are on holiday again.,

I don’t know exactly where I stop and God begins, but here too, the lines begin to disolve in the details of everyday life.

God, like the birds,  exisits in odd and unexpected moment of consciousness, seen or not. I like it. I’ve experienced it.  Consciousness of literary consciousness, consciousness of past consciousness, consciousness of things universally conscious,  consciousness of the consciousness of others, consciousness of God — this is what it means to be a conscious self.

So I think about this, as I sip my coffee this morning, and I sense the divine consciousness in me and everyone who has ever lived in it all, and as I do, I hear my unseen birds yacking it up in their tree again.

And riding past the tree,  my eyed-consciousness in tack, I see my bike shadow running along with me on the walk, and then  no-eyed conscious, I see my mom, lying in her dark bedroom as I hold her hand, and I see my grandma sitting on a chair in a room that my grandpa is painting and she is smiling at him, her house painter, the renewer of  her own renewed spaces, and I sense that this safe man was someone who was given to her as a gift of another self to shelter in, and I see my wife ahead of me on the bike riding with me to Target, my own other self and yet not, and then I hear, oddly enough, in the shifting range of focus, King Lear yelling in my ear,  “A man may see how this world goes with no eyes.”  And I turn my consciousnnes on the crazy king, the self of the moment that is not me, and see him there, insane before the storm.  I take him by the arm, this wacked out old king,  and I lead him home with me, into me, a piece of my slowly developing self, and find a safe place for him within me, as if he were me, as he really is. He needs a good, long therapeutic nap.

And I call out to no one in particular but anyone who might be in earshot, “The guy has been out there alone for too long. Help me bring him in, and go get his daughters, please — now.”

.

“Aha!”

“What?”

“I get it.”

It’s a moment of clarity. I was boxed in, two SUV’s in front of me on the two lane road, side-by-side and going slow, oblivious or perhaps intentionally blocking me.

I knew what was  up. Sometime when I leave my office in the evening, they make the call, “He’s on the road, headed east on E Street; Get him!” Then out of their homes they stroll, and into their cars they ooze,  the slow people, the hired-guns who won’t gun it, the  decelerated personalities, their brains adagio, men moderato, ladies lento, sent out on the mission, to drive  in front of me and impeded my progress toward home.

It doesn’t work. There is something about slow that speeds me up inside, like the slow line to get my blood tested at the medical clinic the day before the SUV’s blocked me on the highway. Twenty-five minutes in line, just to check in, and then the question, “Did you fast?” from the nice lady behind the counter. “Yes,”  I wanted to say, “I fasted, and I wait-ed!” But I didn’t because I thought that if I got smart with her, she would give me a high number, punishing my insolence, making me wait even longer.  Slow and no go, and it adds up to cummulative-slow. Life piles on slow, the mounting slow of  medical lines, grocery store lines, rush-hour traffic, the agonizingly slow drip of the coffee pot in the morning, dripping at the pace of an IV, as I wait to pour the liquid life into my cup  — pure torture!

Finally, on the commute home from work the other night, one of the SUV’s pulled ahead of the other and I was on his tail until I saw it gap open, the space between the cars, and I made the cut from behind one to in front of the other and there, finally, ahead of me, “finally!” — daylight and the open road. My foot pushed ahead, the car surged and my blood pressure dropped, “I think that now I am going to get home.” And then it came on me, the twinge of guilt and the shame. To think that I thought, “They intend to hold me up,” to be so risky-impatient, to upset myself, by my own skewed interpretation of such neutral, everyday events —  and for a brief humiliated moment, I wished I wasn’t so fast with slow. But I was and I am.

It has occurred to me, in moments of recent clarity, on the road, that the universe is slow, think evolution or human maturity or the coming of dawn when we can’t sleep — slow, slow, slow. I think of the speed of light, fast, but then again slow, so terribly slowed by the vast distances of space, so that light takes years, light-years to get places. Last year, when I drove out to see the Perseids, I binoculared NGC 224 — beautiful, at 2.5 million light years away, our companion, the galaxy nearest to earth. Let’s be clear on this. If I was to head out today toward the Andromeda Galaxy at the speed of light, fast, and travel toward the great star spiral at 286,000 miles per second, I would arrive in 2.5 million years. Far has made the great star house we live in slow.

And so, it is not paranoid of me after all, to think that life is a plot, a slow-moving plot, and that I would perhaps do better to slow with it, to pause over the coffee pot, to luxuriate on the road, to dawdle with the gas pedal, to loiter in space, to ride the languid current of time at its own pace — laggardly. God is slow and has created slow. Who am I attempt fast?

And so this is what it means to live, to be the scientist, the teacher, the discoverer, the rhetor. It is to have moments of clarity — the major premise, the minor premise, the conclusion; the conjecture, the train of events, the conclusion.  “People are slow. I am a person. Thus, I am slow.” And also, “Yesterday was slow. Today is slow. Tomorrow will also be — slooooow.”

I want these deliciously hot and spicy, chai-tea-latte moments of insight, these psychosocial, deductive-inductive epiphanies. I think of Einstein, how he labored to discover  a “Unified Field Theory.”  He was interested in the four major forces: strong interaction, electromagnetic interaction, weak interaction and gravitational interaction and the fields that mediate them.  His unified theory, if discovered, would  bring  the force-mediating fields together into a single framework. He failed.  So have others since then in making this same attempt.  

In physics, there has also been a related  pursuit for what has been dubbed, “The Theory of Everything,” a supposed theory that  explains and links together all known physical phenomena, predicting the outcome of any experiment that could be carried out in principle. Not found.

It is frustrating; we want to know, the spring, the mechanism, the cog, the wheel, the everything; we spend a life on elusive epiphanies and exit in darkness. I salute! The attempt! I love the quest. “Einstein, you are not alone!” in the work, in the failure. Many of us long to know, with you, but we don’t, get there. We can’t — blocked by big, slow SUV’s along the way. We want to measure life, seize on its explanation, the famous answer, the essential theory in our discipline, the next generation’s popular paradigm, the eloquent model that becomes the standard, perhaps not everything, but at least something.

And we do, somewhat, have moments of clarity. The other day, I realized that when I was young I learned to speak up; now that I’m old, I’m learning to shut up. Slow — talk — works — best — sometimes. Last week, someone failed to do what I had asked of them, and I didn’t say anything, yet. There was a time when I couldn’t let such things pass, without a critical remark, stupidly right in the moment. Now I pick my remarks carefully, mostly, and I pick the times when I say things, mostly.

Such restraint is the wisdom of experience. But other insights have come to me uninvited, unannounced, a surprise. They are my unearned wisdoms, my unstudied knowings, my uninvited and subconscious awarenesses.

Unpaid insight? Amazing. There was cell division, so thrilling, “I can increase!” There was cell differentiation, “I’m powerful! What a hoot! My DNA knows.”  And there was birth, that amazing new awareness that there could be an unhooking, a detrailering of my body, a personal voyage into separateness. When I broke out of my mother, my soul  must have shouted,  “I’m free!” What a rush, to escape mother; I think that it can only be matched by death. Coming into the world, breathing, lying alone. The end will be the same, my last-minute, listening to the sound of my own labored breath, lying alone, detaching from family, flying out of my body, alone; I can hardly wait for this to-be-experienced epiphany!

There have been others, major, unsought — decentering, individuating, reattachement, each a new experience an insight.  Sexuality, “What at kick!”My body can feel, pleasure with another body, close, loved, accepted, received. “Who would have thought it?” and then at one stage, I thought it.

I want this too, socially, spiritually, psychologically, philosphically a unifying theory, and a theory of everything, and I now, finally, at this distant point of life, I have it.  I’ve discovered it. I know it, deductively, inductively, revelationally and in every other possible way of knowing.  “Aha!” I have come to a true moment of clarity.

“It is love.”My ultimate moment of clarity is that love glues the  force mediating fields together. Love is the unifying field, everytime it happens. Among the forces physics and of mind and body and spirit soul and object and idea, love mediates. Love links! Love hooks up the other with me. Love creates the time and space continum in which we meet, where spirit and soul connect, where idea and emotion merge. And when I do depart, love will bring me back again. I’ve reasoned this out; I know.

My wife and I sat on the couch last week and talked, about the girls, about her job, about this week’s calendar, chit-chat, small stuff, shared, between us two. It was easy talk, comfortable talk, much-assumed talk among two people who love each other. There are few greater small pleasures, than to talk, with someone you love, slowly. I love this slow.

My mom called me today because it’s my birthday. She reminded that she and my dad have been married 63  years and that my grandma and grandpa, on my dad’s side, were married for  71 years. It’s good martial DNA. She said, “We’ve been blessed.” Nice.  I’ve also been married a bit, trying to catch up, 31 years, to the same woman, who loves me, still and through it all. It’s slow, and long, and good.

I asked my wife recently when she thought that we had most experienced our love, some moment together, when we knew, the romantic now, the turn, the  click, the lock. I said to her, “Was it in Italy?” I was thinking that Italy must have been romantic for us, standing on the arching bridge over the canal in Venice, riding through Tuscany on the bus, the grape vines and castles along the winding road, among the hills. Surely this was the moment of clarity in our love.

She laughed and said, “No.”

I said, “Surely it was in Tuscany, in the back of the bus, remember that moment, when Céline Dion and Andrea Bocelli were singing “The Prayer,” and we were just there.”

She laughed again and said, “That was when you were in love with Italy, not me!” We both laughed. She had it right. She was seated forward; I was in the back with Celine, my beloved journal and the gorgeous Italian landscape.

“It was duing the whole church devastation thing,” she said. “We went through it together. That’s when I really loved you.”

I agree. “Your gentleness with me,” I said, “that’s the thing that made me know you loved me I was so crazy, and you were so gentle, so gentle.” I love gentle. It’s a kind of good slow. 

I remember the day we went to La Jolla Shore for surf day with our daughter Rosalind. The La Jolla Surf club was there, helping people with disabilities surf. Roz surfed. The sun shone. The waves danced, and  I sat disabled on the beach. I was the most disabled person there. I have never felt so crazy, so whacked, so alone in my life. I twitched.

“I’m not sure why I was so crazy,” I told Linda the other day.

“It was because they beat the crap out of you in meetings,” she said. Right. They did, but she didn’t. She was there for me, she believed in me, in my dream, in my future, to be the thinker, the speaker, the writer, the pastor, the lover — of people.

Life can turn out so hard. Stuff happens, and when it does, and people don’t love you, it is just so crazy hard, being alone, having no support.  

A friend of mine told me today that she has a friend who has a friend who died of cancer a few years ago,  alone. “Wow, so sad,” I said. “What happened?”

“Well,” my friend said, “she got cancer, but she was pregnant and so she didn’t have full treatment so that she could protect her baby, and she died just a few days after the baby was born by C-section,  but I was told that some members of her family weren’t there for her at the end, and so I think that she knew in the end that she wasn’t really loved by them as she needed to be, and she knew that she wouldn’t be able to love her baby either, and so at the end she must have been just so alone. ”

Wow and wow! Too sad. What would it be like to die like that? 

It is interesting to me, a real moment of clarity, how love is most needed in pain and loss, and how it shows itself most clearly in the devastation, when in the, “I’ve got nothing left,” the broken on the floor, done in the sand, love rushes into the dark cracks and say, “Not! You’re not alone, and your’re not done. You’ve yet to live, and love and be loved by me.”

When I tell my wife Linda, “I love you,” I know now that the “I love you,”  is weighted, historical, slow. It is full of appreciation for her being there for me. It is full of knowing, who she is, what she wants, how she feels, what she needs; who I am, what I want, how I feel, what I need; who we are, what we want, how we feel and what we need — together. Our love is inductive, packed with patterned experience, logical in the conjecture, the evidence, the conclusion. It has come through the night, the coldest, darkest point when we huddled together against the world, and there it deepened.

I love my wife Linda in a way that I will never love anyone else, not even my two daughters. She was there before them; she gave us them; she was there in the broken hour, and she is here with me now when we are in the process of moving on. It’s all this, and I want her with me at the end, except I want her to move on before me, so she won’t be left alone inside, if I go before her. She is me, and I am her, but not completely, but the most anyone can ever be.

“Aha.”

“What?”

“I get it.”

The unified field theory, the theory of everything, comes clear to me now. It is love that heals, mends, lives on, deepens slowly — over 71 years or 31 or 2 — and lasts. “Love is the essence of the essence, the core of the core, the field within the field, the everything of the everything.

Love is what remains when everthing else is busted flat and gone, inside and out, and then love rushes slow and fast to our sides and says, “It’s going to be okay, because, I love you.”

Clarity.

This morning when I opened the refrigerator and pulled out at carton of soy milk, a large container of feta cheese jumped off the top shelf, hit on the bottom edge of the frig, and emptied itself in a large mucky pile at my feet.  I wanted breakfast. I got to muck around in feta.

Stuff around my house seems to be making choices, and sometimes it is getting the better of me.  

Yesterday, I snaked the hose over to the edge of the backyard to water some flowers. It wiggled under a patio chair leg and then it kinked up so the water wouldn’t come through. After some coaxing we got going again, but only a few minutes later the hose was hung up on a sprinkler head, stubbornly refusing to move with me over to the pond. Ridiculous!

I’m  starting to get it. Things are animated, and I’m on to them. The evidence is overwhelming. Last week I saw my ink pen jump off the center console in my car and hide under my driver’s seat, by the seat track, in the hardest place possible to be retrieved. There is more. When I was going out the back door of my home, a loop on my jacket reached out and grabbed the  knob and jerked me back in the house. Things are leading me to reconsider the merits of animism.I think they may be alive; I suspect they have even talked among themselves, have entered into a pact —  to mess with me. 

I’m not crazy. Respectable people understand this.  In Piaget’s child psychology, he asserted that a child’s mind assumes all events are the product of intention or consciousness. I have always had a child’s mind. Really, we all do.  The feta meant to jump. The garden hose is playing games. Disney has it right; tea pots can sing, and want to, loudly and with joy. The mop can dance.

I am in good company on this. David Hume, a very fine and respected mind, writes in his Natural History of Religion, “There is a universal tendency among mankind to conceive all beings like themselves, and to transfer to every object those qualities with which they are familiarly acquainted, and of which they are intimately conscious.”

I have made the transfer, and I’m wiser for it.  You should too.  If you know that the things in your house are just like you, you can manage them better. The TV wants to stay up at night; just like me.  That’s why when I press the “off” button the TV stays on, because it has switched over to cable mode and must be returned to TV mode to be turned off. Tricky TV.

I put my coffee cup down the other day. When I went back to get it, it was gone. I later found it hiding in the microwave. I know what happened. It got cold and went for a warmup. I understand these things now. And I’m on to their strategies. Things are not always going to stay where I put them so I must sometimes go looking for them in different places than I left them so that they know that they aren’t the only ones thinking. Aha!

And yet with all my new-found awareness and vigilance, I still sometimes get caught unawares, surprised by the resistance or the playfulness or the downright stubbornness of things. I put the bike in the back of the SUV the other day and it jumped back out so that the door wouldn’t close. I had a horse like that once — didn’t want to leave the barn. I get it. Sometimes I don’t want to head out for the day either.

A contact lens jumped out of my fingers recently and took off for the floor. I trapped it in a corner and got it safely back into its case. It gave me a blue glare as I dropped it back into the soaking solution.   

I’m in the game now, and I’m keeping score. This morning as I rounded up my breakfast,  the Splenda took off into the air and got onto the counter top. But the bowl and the spoon minded their manners, and the Wheat Chex, awash in soy milk, stayed nicely between my teeth. At the end of breakfast it was four to one, my favor.

I think it was a pretty good morning’s play. I’m getting ready for the day soon, and I’m wondering if my socks will attempt that sideways thing they sometimes do, where they twist around and get the sole of sock on the top of my toes.

Game on!

Good, I am ready, up for a fight, but there are other force at play. I’ve noticed recently that the game has tentacles that reach further than I first suspected. I have more to dread than flying buckets and dancing mops. I am beginning to think: fear the body.

The other day I was taking a shower when I suddenly caught sight of someone else’s midsection in the shower with me.  I usually bathe alone, but here I was with another person, soaking up soap and water  in my own shower. Upon a closer examination, I discovered that the girth was mine. Shocking!  How did this happen?  I don’t know. I didn’t notice things were going this way. I swear.  But how could that be, for I am myself and this waist is mine. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I usually shower without my contact lenses in. Perhaps, or not, but most likely, when I was asleep, my stomach expanded, without my approval.

What to do? Not stop eating.  In this game, the other sides’ moves can be countered, as most people know, and handled, by covering up, with the right clothes, with a shirt or a coat,  for several years. And I have covered up, but it has come out anyway — on all sides. Too many bowls of Wheat Chex, at night, for a snack, and peanuts, popcorn and cookies, for a treat.  Game on —  in me! 

 How bad it it? “Ten pounds, I’d say.”

My family and friends protest, “Quit whining. You don’t even know.”  But on me, with my skinny legs, and the room addition all on the front of the house, above the foundation, it shows.  The slide, the sag, the wrinkling, the fold, the bulge, I can see it, in the shower, under my shirt — winning. Others can see it too. My daughters named it, “loafy,” as in “He’s a cute little loafy.” How embarrassing! I have a body part, with a name. The toned, smooth, sculpted, skinny, young thing that used to be me, plus my amazing will-power and my youth — “going, going, gone!” It’s a home run, for the other side, and me running after the ball, hopping over the fence (barely), and running fast over the hill (finally), and beyond the dale —  permanently? Wow. Really?

It’s fun, going on like this, playing the game, surviving another round, taking up arms or against powerful enemies, fighting back, against things, with the body, like that. But really, all things considered; this is an issue, important and real, this thing about who or what is in control. It’s a philosophical issue, a scientific issue, a theological issue, a literary issue, long-debated, not agreed on, still-out-there issue. I’m trying to figure it out.

I remember in college, taking a class in psychology. I encountered a world view  new to me — behaviorism. I bridled under the idea of life reduced to stimulus and response formulas, all behavior conditioned, no choices, just reactions. I argued with my professor and wrote a paper on the power of our choices in shaping our environment. Of course I wasn’t the only one arguing, and the cognitive revolution, with its interest in meaning-making process provided plenty of challenges to the behaviorist model.

But despite the opposition, of course behavioral mechanisms are at works, some of the time. This morning, my daughter Rosalind told me her throat hurt. I gave her a bit of post-Christmas candy cane to suck. “Why will that help?” she asked. “It will make you salivate,” I said, as I handed her a broken piece of stripes, “and the  saliva will sooth your throat.” She put it in her mouth and salivated, just like all of  us  thus stimulated, Pavlov’s slobbering canines, simple responses to simple environmental stimuli. I’m a believer, in a qualified behaviorism. Sometimes, stuff around us rules us, but sometimes not, because  our responses are often not simple, and we are not simple and the enviroment around us, not simple. Brains think, and make very important, self-actualizing choices.

Last year a friend of mine quit drinking. “You’re done,” a voice in his brain explained to him. He was, and he quit, and it was a very conscious choice, and highly unlikely. Nothing in his environment had changed. He had been drunk, downtown, homeless, for years, and he still was. It was a lifestyle. But he came to, as recovery people put it, “a moment of clarity,” and stopped. Yesterday, I was talking to another friend who quit drinking, probably ten years ago, and he explained it this way, “You have to want to.” I buy that; I respect that, the exercise of the will, to stop, and start,something new.

It comes down, really to how we see the world. Is it under our control, or is it out of control. Is it guided, or is it random, or is it under its own control, following its own rules, or perhaps someone elses, from the outside, so to speak?

My thoughts go off, fire alarms and siren in the night. I hear voices of researchers in laboratories; I hear the planets turning in orderly fashion; I hear kings commanding and armies rattling their shock and awe and slaughter, and I hear the medics bending over the wounded and asking them, “Can you raise your right hand for me? I need to see if you can lift your hand.”

Dan Ariely, in his book, Predictably Irrational explains a bit of it based on his research. We get stuck in“anchor decisions,” he claims,  and  our initial choices, for instance to buy or not at a certain cost, determine our later decisions. Once we go a way, for instance, we pay a certain price for something, that initial decision dominates our thinking. It becomes our anchor, one that we arbitrarily adhere to, and break away from only with great effort, by an intentional rethink.

Examples come to my mind easily, assuring me that Dan is onto something here. If we grew up on cars getting 15 miles per gallon, we may well think 28 mpg is good. If grew up on 28, then 40 mpg is good. Good is what we know. But when gas goes to $5 a gallon, then it might be wise to think this through again, and come to  see 50 as the new anchor, the acceptable standard, or to come to the conclusion that no gas burned, ruining the earth, is the standard.

I like it, the rethinking things, being astute.  By my own observations, I can clearly see that we all get stuck in arbitrary mindsets, at times, and I think we can rethink that think and then think a new, more rational thinking thought. I’m for rationality, and I’m for choice. I’m not a behaviorist; too pathetic, “We are the products of our environments.” It doesn’t work for me. My environment is not in charge of me:  “En garde, marche, balestra, froissement!”

It’s a fight, against things, and to decide, how we view our world.  Points of view, models of nature, our sense of  objects  — these have, as we can see in the past, operated as hugely powerful historical frameworks, dominating nations, cultures, an era, millions of minds. Consider the Elizabethan world view and the idea of the great chain of being.  In Troilus and Cressida, Shakespeare poetically summarizes the perspective of an era: “The heavens themselves, the planets, and this centre/Observe degree priority and place/ Insisture course proportions season form/Office and custom, in all line of order.” The view here is that there is a hierarchical ordering of existence in the heavens, every thing in order and in place, in the heavens and on earth. The chain of being had the divine monarch at the head, like the sun,  and men descending downward on the social ladder, like the planets, all in order, and meant to stay in order.

Scholar E. M. W. Tillyard explains further, “If the Elizabethans believed in an ideal order, animating earthly order, they were terrified lest it should be upset, and appalled by the visible tokens of disorder that suggested its upsetting. They were obsessed by the fear of chaos and the fact of mutability; and the obsession was powerful in proportion as their faith in the cosmic order was strong … to an Elizabethan [chaos] meant the cosmic anarchy before creation and the wholesale dissolution that would result if the pressure of Providence relaxed and allowed the law of nature to cease functioning.”

We see this view in Macbeth. When the king is  killed, nature is undone After Duncan’s murder,  Ross cries, “Ha, good father, Thou seest the heavens, as troubled with man’s act,/Threatens his bloody stage. By th’ clock ’tis day,/And yet dark night strangles the travelling lamp./ Is ’t night’s predominance or the day’s shame/That darkness does the face of Earth entomb/When living light should kiss it?”

And more, “Duncan’s horses—a thing most strange and certain—/ Beauteous and swift, the minions of their race,/ Turned wild in nature, broke their stalls, flung out,/ Contending ‘gainst obedience, as they would/ Make war with mankind.”

Wow and wow again! They had it all figured out, with God and king on top, and nature troubled when men upset this order, nature responding, disordering and attacking. And yet, this mindset  didn’t work out all that well for the Elizabethans, the great chain  became a bit of a chain for the monarchs and the people, not so great, more chain. Think the War of the Roses. Think Charles the I, beheaded.

 And yet such ideas, the sense that nature responds to the world of men, was not new to the English people. Consider Isaiah, the ancient Jewish prophet writings: “You will go out in joy/and be led forth in peace;/the mountains and hills/will burst into song before you,/ and all the trees of the field/will clap their hands.” It sounds like Shakespeare, and game on, with a positive twist. Those Hebrews, so fun! How cool is that, singing mountains, clapping trees, all that wild-nature, joyful clapping and singing for us. Sounds like the trees are on the move, shades of Tolkein and The Lord of the Rings. What? Is this anthropomorphism, or reality; is it poetic device, or, what?

Jesus, the Jewish prophet, was schooled in the Hebrew line of thinking. When the crowds of miracle followers called him “king,” the legal experts told his disciples to shut them up. Jesus responded, “I tell you, if they keep quiet, the stones will  cry out.” Hyperbole?  Maybe not. Really? Perhaps, “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

We have our philosophical anchors, every age does, and our traditional, of the first order, main stream, educated mind-sets dominate, and then change, with the passing of an era and our passing from the scene. Think the geocentric view of the universe. Gone.  

So what is it? J. D. Watson, Shakespeare, Jesus, Ariely, nature, God, me? Is it what we think it is or what it is, is, is and then is again, despite what we think? Is it game on or game off or just game?

I find it arrogant of folks to act like they can give a final answer to such questions on how it all works, the nature of reality, our relationship to the environment, although I understand the impulse to babble on like one has an inside track; I’ve done it. But it’s a humbug and its quackery, too confident; we don’t know yet, the deep structure of reality, how it all works.  Who knows very much at all? I don’t. 

I love science, and theology, and I read both, but I don’t have to choose between them as if one knows, the other doesn’t. Each one knows part of what there is to know.  I respect validity of the scientific process. I respect the position that there is more here than science has charted and modeled.  I believe our responses are conditioned, and I believe we make choices that break free from powerful influencing factors, and I perceive, in the universe, the presence of  motivating factors, unseen and powerful. The truth is that, just like the Elizabethans or the ancient Hebrews, we live with a mindset, and it doesn’t have a final corner on the truth, and it is really smart to be open, to change, to rethink our current think. I’ve  never heard the rocks cry out, or seen the sun darken when a king died, but it is reported that it got dark in the daytime when Jesus died.

About ten years ago I had a surgery that didn’t turn out well; a nerve was damaged, and I ended up in chronic, daily, mind crushing pain. Under stress from that, and just by coincidence, I’d say, other things unfortunate things went down. My ears began to ring; a nerve in  my foot became pinched; part of my foot went permanently tingley and numb. I developed a severe rash, that resisted all treatment.That was crazy hard. My shoulder began to ache horribly from a pinched nerve in my neck. Then it froze, through lack of use, so that I couldn’t lift it above my chest. My stomach began to swell up when I ate, which acutally is normal, I;ve now discovered, “poor loafy,” but not acceptable. Then mother-in-law died, that hurt, and my wife and I inherited a estate with a whole new set of responsibilities; anxiety set in, and depression. I was comprehensively sick.

Game on! And I was knocked off my game.  “Wow, it was a bad spell there, buddy. I’m sorry.” Yeah. I didn’t kill King Duncan, but the natural order of things was upset — my stomach and all the rest of me.

“I’m sorry this happened to you.”

“Thanks, but, I’m not, very much.”

I am more given to say “I’m glad it happened,” although I wouldn’t want to go through it again, and to add, “I’m changed.” Unlike the Elizabethans, I’m good with mutablity, on pretty much every level of reality. As a result of that tough season, “It’s not so much that I know something different; I am something different,” and I’m really grateful for that, and I have chosen to use what happended to me as a new anchor by which I measure difficulty. I also use what happened as nuclear fuel, because it is, and I’m energized by it now.

“Is it a coincidence that all this happened at once?”

“I’m not sure on that one.” I do think somethings are planned for us.  It seems to me, that the game was on, and plays were being made, to prepare me for something that was to come later, or for someone, other people who have come to me lately. I look them in the eyes and say, “I know.” And I do. And that helps our conversations go well, very well.

I have recovered from being sick, pretty much, or not. We all eventually live with some stuff,  but now I think differently about a lot of things. And I think, that we can rethink, pretty much everything and should from time to time, as the game moves on. 

Perhaps –just perhaps — more is going on than sometimes suspected, our sense of this anchored in our past decisions and their attendant mindsets, but then, that is for us to figure out today.

I say, game, and, on, and I can hardly wait to observe, the next move. 

 

 “No Lennie. I ain’t mad. I never been mad, an’ I ain’t now.” I read the line slowly and looked up at the the class, some students with their eyes in their books, some just watching me, all of us entranced.

“Why isn’t George mad at Lennie?” I asked. We were reading Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, the novel I had picked out for my eleventh grade American Literature students.

I knew the answer, of course, on several different levels, school and home, and so did most of my students in this minority isolated high school with the worst scores in the San Diego School District. They got Lennie, and loved him like George did, and when we read on, and reached the part where George shot Lennie to protect him from the people who didn’t understand mistakes by the people whose brains didn’t work quite right – they got it.

It was personal, in the room, in that moment, for some of them, and for me too. To teach is to “get it,” and help others do that too, print and the real world that fuels it.

Then there is my daughter Rosalind. How many times have I not been mad at her when she has ”done a “bad’ thing,” because I understood that she didn’t understand, and couldn’t have done any better. And sometimes I have been mad, and shouldn’t have been, at her, but should have that the world has turned out like this. I don’t get it, and yet, we cope, in my house, a dropped glass, shattered on the floor – ”Hey, it’s just a glass. Here, I’ll help you clean it up.” 

What are teachers? They are people who get it, and help, but sometimes they pretend  not to. Teachers are people who ask questions that they already know the answers to.  And the longer they know the answer, and practice it, perhaps the better a teacher they are.

It’s interesting. Why did I pick Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men for my students? Why did I pick any of the novels, short stories, poems or essays I chose to teach to my students? I’m not completely sure.  Respect for the literary canon, a choice from within what was available and approved teaching at this level, what I thought my learning-challenged students could handle, what made my heart pound and my eyes water? Print that gets at the core of the core. That’s more it.  The longer I have taught the more I have wanted to get at the thing within the thing, the profound universal in the everyday particular. I love the ”I ain’t mad. I never been mad, an’ I ain’t now.” I’m not mad, about disability, mostly.

I look in the rear view mirror. We are driving home from the movie. In the back seat, I can see Steve’s huge smiling face, grinning crazily, and he is signing to me. Now he is pounding on my shoulder and yelling “Ma, ma, ma, ma!” I smile and nod. I don’t have a clue what he is trying to tell me. Rosalind interprets. “His mom will drive us to bowling tomorrow morning.” Right. Good, it’s all good. I know. I know. I know, know and know. As a teacher, I must always know, and also know how to know.

Learning to teach did not come easily to me. It was painful because of my reserved personality. I think that if I had possessed $20 at when I was doing my student teaching, or had a knack for stealing or was good at quitting, I would never have become a teacher. The other day I watched a mom in a medical center waiting room trying to control her three small boys. They had ruined her body; now they were ruining her mind. It was an endless parade of her saying, “Stop it!” and “No more!” as they beat each other with magazines and lay in down on the floor in front of  patients who were trying to get to the nurse when their name was called. I wondered if she didn’t think, “If I wasn’t so far in …” This is how I felt my first few years of teaching.

My first student teaching role at Southwest Junior High was a nightmare and every school day a stomach ache, and not very good for the students either. I was a flagging instructor there. My master teacher, who was a committed authoritarian, very old school with discipline, instructed me right off to take authority over the class. I didn’t, because I didn’t know how, and because I didn’t feel like abusing young children. Of course she was right, in a way, “Take charge,” but I wasn’t good with it at the time. I wanted my students to want to learn, not to be made to learn. I suppose one might argue for both, but I know the want-to-learn is best. I love Kipling’s “insatiably curious” little elephant. He is like me; he is my literary brother. And so I let my first students be, and I got my trunk pulled hard for this, but I discovered my own preference for how to control a class. I don’t like to play the authoritarian in the classroom, although I have at times, and it seems clear to me now that to have authority over a class, it helps immensely to actually be an authority over your subject.

A few years ago, I took a dance class with my wife. It was interesting to be the student, not the teacher. Taking dance is the kind of thing you do in order not to have it said, henceforth, to other women by your wife, “He wouldn’t.”  My wife and I danced the tango, some swing, a bit of salsa and some waltz. These dances are magical and fine – and we danced them with a hint of schmaltz and a touch of fire. Dancing is good — if you can dance, and even if you can’t, at a wedding with wine, for fun – “one song … okay, one more.”

The best thing about taking dance is after the class, when you leave and brag shamelessly that you are learning to dance. People are impressed, and they think that you are above them. Many people aren’t brave enough to take dance, although they have always thought that they should. They probably shouldn’t.

Truth be told, we lied; we didn’t dance. We made movements with our feet and hands, in a variety of directions, with another person facing us, who was also making movements, but ones unlike our own, and there was music playing that had absolutely nothing to do with the movements either of us were making.

It wasn’t the teacher’s fault. She was a good teacher, and dancer. Really, all it takes to be a teacher is to be slightly superior to someone else and to have the audacity to tell them so. But she was way above us. For a number of years, I taught people to read literature, and to write about it.  I was paid decently for this, but I didn’t earn my keep. Teaching people to write is like teaching people to dance — it works best if you are terminally chipper, given to low standards and have the gift of charity.  

On one particularly beautiful evening in dance class, my partner and I got it right  –  we stepped back, and to the side, forward, and to the side again, together, in perfect synchrony, and for a brief moment we were the dance and the music. We rose and descended as one and waltzed beautifully.

 And then there were other moments, such as during the hip swing of the salsa, when the teacher stopped us all, paused the music, and grew reflective and faintly sad, and went over the steps, gently, hopefully and we tried again. I admired her greatly.

To teach is to repeat something, gently, or not.  I have taught college students word-processing in a computer lab and by doing that, I learned this:  Anything you inadequately explained to the group, you will re-explain to each individual student, one at a frustrating time. Tough lesson.  Not getting this right will wear you out.  At the core of good teaching is getting people’s attention, telling them precisely what they need know, and then saying it again, and again, and again.  And then after you do, someone else will need to tell them again, leaning over the desk and saying, “Press control ‘P’.” “What did he say?” “Control ‘P’.” Repetition is the bitchy mother of good learning.”

When my daughter Rosalind was two we started on the flash cards. And we made Sesame Street a habit. She made good progress – “dog, cat, lion.” We played school. I loved teaching her. I read, read, read to her, “Little Chick,” over and over. Good times! I was a teacher, my wife worked in a library. We loved a campus, a book shelf, a pile of books head high, but something happened, and we had to learn to not make that the standard by which we measured value. One day, when Rosalind was one and one-half, she stopped breathing, turned blue, and started convulsing.  She is 25 now. I haven’t yet fully recovered from that shocking moment. You don’t get over such things; you just take shelter, and comfort where you can. The paramedics came, we went to the hospital. The needle in her baby spine was a hard moment. You spend your life protecting your baby, and then you hold her so someone can hurt her. It doesn’t feel right.

The diagnoses came in turn and over the next few years, “febrile convulsions,” “epilepsy,” “brain damage.” The verdict on how to play school was finally given by a neuro-psychologist after extensive testing, “Retardation.”  And with the labels came the drugs, phenobarbitol,  topamax,  depakote – a sluggish life, lots of naps. I hated it, I still do, but I learned to be okay, kind of, with it.

We kept playing school, but I switched subjects, from reading literature to watching movies, from learning to write to helping her learn not to compare herself with her intellectually capable sister. We’ve studied really hard on, “I’ll never stop loving you.” We were told one time, “She will take her cues from you on what to think about herself. How you feel about this, will probably have a lot to do with how she feels about it.”  We all teach, by how we react.

The things that happen to you in life can make you into a teacher of things you never have wanted to know about. Get cancer; you learn, and teach. My wife has become an outstanding surrogate parent, signing IEP’s for students with learning help and no parents. We find ourselves teaching other parents of students’ with disabilities stuff that we have learned, “If you request that the school psychologist test your child, legally they will have to do that.”

You learn to get by, and help others a little. In my dance class, we had various options by which we could earn our grade. At one point we were told that we could dance in a class contest, organized by our teacher, or we could give an oral presentation on dancing. No one in the class took the oral presentation – except me. I dance best with my mouth.

I stood in front of the class and said things like, “Dance can bring people together,” and “George Bush should dance with Hillary Clinton.“ And I got rude, and said that “the dance floor is the one place in the world where a man should treat a woman as a shopping cart — and push her around.” I went on to say that “life is often awkward before it is graceful,” and “that those who do not risk being awkward will never enjoy being graceful.”It was a hit, and they all clapped, and I felt like a teacher, as I do when my pedagogical attempts go well, but not like a dancer.

When you know and are able to put that out there, people listen, sometimes. And when you know passionately, students really tend to listen. And when you know through experience, and you launch into a relevant narrative, without any transition, the students sit forward then and their eyes glow, and they enter and learn. I watch them now more closely when I teach, for the glow, and I pay very careful attention to their limited attention spans. I try to work them subtly, by means of hidden elements, highly selective content, careful sequencing, a bit of timing and a forward-tending pace.

Lately, I have grown hyper-attentive, texting while watching a movie while writing on my blog while checking my Facebook page while responding to an email on my phone while having a conversation with my wife — bouncing from thing to thing like a young, hyperactive, ADD,  post-modern technophile. And when I teach and write, somewhat the same. I watch carefully over my people, those who have chosen to sit at my feet, as they listen to my jumbled narratives, and then I pull up at the end and become sane again and fall into a more steadied focus. The trick is to somehow bring the story stands together in a final, fatal noose. I story them, and when the stories work, I hang them. They think that I there to  entertain them, but I am not. I am there to kill, to skewer their minds with plot truth and per chance a bon mot, if I can think of it, at the end, nicely placed, and not much more. I’d rather tell a story any day than make one hundred nicely turned explanations. Stories tell — all. Want to be effective as a teacher? Tell stories and then let them be. This is teaching.

But of course it is more than that; for teaching is an art, and a difficult art to master at that. I confess, I am still a humble student. All teachers are student teachers, and students or not, we all teach. We teach by what we do. For instance, we might instruct our children about material things – cars, clothes, food, TV’s — but what we buy and how we buy it, this is more persuasive than what we say. They are watching us, and learning, all the time — scary! Move your hand toward your wallet, you are teaching.

When I was a pastor at my former church I taught about every other week. It was too infrequent, and I couldn’t get up to speed because of it.  It was pedal and then coast when I wanted to be flat-out pedaling hard all the time, right up and over the hill, fast like a crazed, amped up, maniacal biker. Teaching isn’t a single lesson or an isolated lesson but an ongoing climb that coaches an ongoing development and skill, up and over the crest. But it didn’t matter so much at that church, because the group wasn’t moving, toward anything really. It was a good-sized crowd, but shrinking, because something was all wrong, especially toward the end. It was like we were  trying to walk through glue, a river of thick ropy glue that ran deep, right up to our chests. We moved, as if in slow motion, in different directions, going to different places. We lacked a unified focus, and passion and something else –guts, to apply what was being taught, sometimes. I hate teaching when it comes to nothing.

Once, while teaching a writing class at the community college, I got fed up with a class of adult students, who were quite simply, lazy and unmotivated. I said my piece, which was something like, “If you don’t do the work, you won’t get the grade. Prepare to be failed.” They didn’t, prepare, and I ended the semester glad to see them go their ways with their lousy grades and unimproved writing skills. The group chemistry was bad, and it didn’t get good. All teachers have experienced this kind of group failure.  Learning is a dynamic, subtle relationship between the teacher and the subject and the students, all elements mixing in the glass and coming together in a powerful and delicious mixed concoction that brightens up the eyes and makes for fun talk —  nonstop, everyone happy-drunk on knowledge.

I confess; I’ve been drunk, on words, for most of my life.  I’m addicted — to print. I get the shakes when I don’t read. And when I do, read — quickly seduced, on the spot, by language. Truth gets me in a corner and victimizes me, regularly. It’s abusive. Ideas get their arms around me and lick my ear and kiss my mouth hard and stroke my head and I’m undone, a gone little girl, and Dean is muttering crazily in my ear and we are going on down the ideological road together in his old car again with the radio blasting — cool-word jazz.

When the girls were little we read them “Mrs. Nelson is Missing” by Harry Allard. It’s classic children’s storytelling and is taught now in children’s lit classes at universities.  Mrs. Nelson is a sweet teacher; her class is bad. She tries to teach them, but they won’t listen. As all good teachers know, when it doesn’t work, you  must find a new approach. So she does; she goes missing, and the sub, Miss Viola Swamp, really Mrs. Nelson in disguise, comes to class with an iron fist and lots of rules. It’s interesting. What role does fear play in education? In this story, written with a deadpan flair, the children shape up under a strict reign, and want Mrs. Nelson back. And so she comes back, to a class completely changed, good now, for her.

This is what matters in the end, students, changed.Teaching is about truth that transforms. I love knowledge, but not simply for its own sake. I’ve been there, under that spell, seduced by beautiful ideas, beautifully put. Enlightened thinkers triumph it, truth for truth’s sake, but I want more. I want truth for people’s sake. If I teach in a writing class, how to use a semicolon,  it is so that students will use  a semicolon to nail together two independent clauses full of shared meaning, the next time they write. Semicolons must be put to work; good punctuation speaks, as loudly and eloquently as any words. A punctuation mark, nicely placed, is an eloquent statement of truth.

And If punctuation matters, then what about life.

A few days before Christmas this year, some friends and I drove a pick up truck full of gifts to a family in our church, carried all the bright packages into the house, with all the kids excited and helping. We piled them under the tree and then ate pizza together and talked about stuff. Gilbert, one of the little ones, kept grabbing  presents from under the tree, and heading for the back bedroom. I sat on the couch with Robert, Gilbert’s dad, and we talked. Last year, at this time, Robert was drunk off-and-on and the kids didn’t run from the tree with gifts, and no one danced or moved in time with anyone else in this house. “I was like a robot,” he said, “I kept running into the wall, and getting up and doing it again.” He paused, “I didn’t get it, but it’s so different now.”

 Changed.

This last year, it has been my honor to have been able to continue to teach. Robert has been, by his choice, one of my students. I told him af few days ago, on Christmas Eve,  just after the service at the church. “I have no one like you. More than anyone I know right now, you have changed.” Like a father to his son, standing in front of him, I said, “I’m so proud of you, Robert.”

We hugged.  I said, “I love you man.”

He said, “I love you too.”

He didn’t used to say that very much. Gangsters don’t, but apparently, they can learn to.

Teach.