After the Ecstasy, the Laundry

I have been reading a book by Jack Kornfield called "After the Ecstasy, the Laundry". Jack was the author of another book called "A Path with Heart" that was a huge influence on my spiritual path many years ago, and I'm finding this other book to be equally profound. He speaks to my early experiences with spiritual awakening, helping me better understand some of what I experienced in the past as well as my current spiritual path. After we have a profound, blissful, ecstatic spiritual experience, what next? His answer - do the laundry. The mundane affairs of life become our spiritual practice.

If we have felt the bliss of awakening to the way things really are, our next task is not to live in that state of bliss. It is to take the magic we have experienced and bring it into our lives. Having climbed the mountain and seen the view, we then need to come down the mountain to live our lives. But we can also share a bit of the light we've been given. That doesn't mean we have to preach it (though we can); it means we simply live and let that light shine through us. We embrace the mundane and live our lives with the fresh perspective we have been given.

There is so much I love about the book, but I'll just share a couple of pieces. In speaking about flexibility of mind and heart, Jack relates an experience he had with one of his early spiritual teachers:

The dogmatic and rigid qualities of religious fervor give way to the middle path, with a wise presence that is neither indulgent nor fearful.

My teacher Ajahn Chah demonstrated this flexibility when he was most inconsistent, contradicting things he had previously said, reversing teachings he had earlier emphasized. When this was pointed out to him by a frustrated student (me), Ajahn Chah laughed. "It's like this," he said. "There is a road I know well, but it can be foggy or dark. When I see someone traveling this road about to fall in a ditch or get lost in a sidetrack on the right-hand side, I call out, 'Go to the left.' Similarly, if I see someone about to fall in a ditch or get lost in a sidetrack on the left-hand side, I call out, 'Go to the right.' That's all I do when I teach. Whenever you get caught, I say, 'Let go of that too.' "

For years before I left the church of my childhood, I felt that church leaders painted with too broad a brush. At the time, I thought it was a necessary aspect of trying to teach so many people at once, but I think it also comes from a codified creed that begins to feel rigid as soon as it has been written down. Having the flexibility to change your teachings to suit the circumstances of your hearer(s) feels so liberating to me. I love how one yoga teacher handled that - from another part of the book:

Religious traditions often warn us about the dangers of entanglement with the senses, and it is true that we can become overly attached and identified with this body and its pleasures. Our culture has exploited this to an extreme. But in spiritual circles the opposite danger of aversion, fear, and unconsciousness is perhaps even more common. There is, as the Buddha suggests, a middle path to be found in each of our lives. One yoga teacher paused in the midst of teaching a difficult stretch to caution her students, "You strivers here, relax. And you sensualists, straighten up."

Speaking to an entire class, this woman recognized the diversity of personalities among her hearers and tailored her message to the specific tendencies of students. In my early religion, we often heard encouragements to do more, to be of greater service, to strive to be better, etc. Those of us who were already trying hard, sometimes at the edge of exhaustion, would hear these messages and feel burdened. But we kept trying. No doubt there are many who need to hear those messages, but I wasn't one of them. Or maybe I was when I was very young, but I reached a point where I didn't need those messages anymore. But they just kept coming. It would have been nice if we had had more flexibility to call out, "go left" or "go right" instead of "work harder".

Here's another gem from the book:

Zen teacher Edward Espe Brown is the author of many Zen-inspired cookbooks, beginning with The Tassajara Bread Book. Through describing his kitchen practice, he writes of the truths of the heart.

When I first started cooking at Tassajara, I had a problem. I couldn't get my biscuits to come out the way they were supposed to. I'd follow a recipe and try variations, but nothing worked. These biscuits just didn't measure up.

Growing up I had made two kinds of biscuits. One was from Bisquick and other from Pillsbury. For the Bisquick you added milk in the mix and then blobbed the dough in spoonfuls onto the pan - you didn't even need to roll them out. The biscuits from Pillsbury came in kind of a cardboard can. You rapped the can on the corner of the counter and it popped open. Then you twisted the can open more, put the premade biscuits on a pan, and baked them. I really liked those Pillsbury biscuits. Isn't that what biscuits should taste like? Mine weren't coming out right.

It's wonderful and amazing the ideas we get about what biscuits should taste like, or what a life should look like. Compared to what? Canned biscuits from Pillsbury? Leave It to Beaver? People who ate my biscuits would extoll their virtues, eating one after another, but to me these perfectly good biscuits just weren't right.

Finally one day came a shifting-into-place, an awakening. "Not right" compared to what? Oh, my word, I'd been trying to make canned Pillsbury biscuits! Then came an exquisite moment of actually tasting my biscuits without comparing them to some previously hidden standard. They were wheaty, flaky, buttery, sunny, earthy, real. They were incomparably alive - in fact, much more satisfying than any memory. 

These occasions can be so stunning, so liberating, these moments when you realize your life is just fine as it is, thank you. Only the insidious comparison to a beautifully prepared, beautifully packaged product made it seem insufficient. Trying to produce a biscuit - a life - with no dirty bowls, no messy feelings, no depression, no anger, was so frustrating. Then savoring, actually tasting the present moment of experience - how much more complex and multifaceted. How unfathomable.

As Zen students we spent years trying to make it look right, trying to cover the faults, conceal the messes. We knew what the Bisquick Zen student looked like: calm, buoyant, cheerful, energetic, deep, profound. Our motto, as one of my friends said, was, "looking good." We've all done it, trying to look good as a husband, a wife or parent. Trying to attain perfection. Trying to make Pillsbury biscuits.

Well, to heck with it, I say. Wake up and smell the coffee. How about some good old home cooking, the biscuits of today.

When we accept our place in the mandala of the whole, we come back to just where we are. And in this is found joy, ease, simplicity, and courage, and what T.S. Eliot calls the freedom "to care and not to care." 

Pretty cool, huh? That's just a small sample. This book is going to be another of my spiritual staples. I love Jack's perspective on life and his ability to convey its essence with simplicity and love.

If you get a chance to read the book, let me know what you think. If it doesn't work for you, that's ok. I think it's beautiful, the work of a beautiful soul. Thanks, Jack, for casting a bit of light along my path.

Educated

I just finished reading "Educated: A Memoir" by Tara Westover. It's a story of the author's experiences as a girl raised in the mountains of Idaho by survivalist Mormon parents. It's a fascinating and psychologically penetrating account of some of her formative experiences, both beautiful and abusive, and her long journey to move beyond the confines of the subculture in which she was raised. It was difficult to read for many reasons, and I found myself crying multiple times, both for Tara and for myself.

Tara was raised by a father who sounds like he was mentally ill and a mother who supported and enabled his extreme views. They are not bad people. They are products of their biology and of the culture in which they were raised. Tara doesn't appear to blame them; in fact, she seems more open than I felt in allowing for some of the unhealthy behaviors they and others in her family exhibited. In reading her account, I found myself wondering how I could have a more forgiving attitude like her. And I found myself identifying with her experiences, both as a child who experienced less than ideal circumstances and was subjected to some extreme views, and also as the parent who inherited and/or learned some extreme views and passed them on to his children.

If you have read the book, you know that Tara's situation was pretty bad. There are people who suffer abuse much worse, and many who suffer much less. I suppose it's possible there are some children who do not feel they were abused at all. But I'm in the camp of those who suffered less than her. I'm not a martyr. My experiences were far less extreme than hers in almost every way. My parents were good people. They had their challenges, but they did the best they could with what they were given. But I still felt a connection to Tara as she described concepts and principles drilled into her by well-meaning parents and physical abuse suffered at the hand of someone who should have been (and sometimes was) her protector. I feared for her every time she went home, and by the end of the book, I wanted to scream at her NOT to go home. Those parts were hard to read.

But the hardest part for me was seeing myself in her parents. Being raised in a conservative religion pushed me to some pretty extreme views years ago, and I still don't really know what kind of damage I have done to my wife and children as a result. I bought into some conspiracy theories to explain discrepancies between what I saw in society and what I believed a "good" society should look like. My upbringing had taught me to avoid (and sometimes fear) the sinful ways of the world, which set up an us-vs-them mindset that cast me in the role of hero, armed with truth and right, fighting the evils in the world to make the world a better place. The black and white thinking that I inherited along with reverence for authority didn't mesh well with the critical thinking skills I learned later in college. Not that religion and open-mindedness are fundamentally incompatible, but eventually, my search for truth led me to another extreme view - of skepticism of our ability to know anything, which ultimately led me to question and dismantle the rest of my extreme views. And this letting go dissolved the boundaries, connecting me with a world that was more beautiful and loving than the one I had been taught to fear.

I can't comment on the truth of various conspiracy theories. Some are probably true. Most feel false. I can only definitively talk about how they affected me. I was not happy when I explored and embraced them. I was motivated by fear. Those ideas helped me find a mechanism for explaining the degradation of society that would ultimately lead to the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus Christ. This was driven in part by teachings from the Bible and church leaders and partly by my own experiences. From a young age, my relationships with people outside of my church had somewhat inoculated me against the us-vs-them mentality, but I couldn't reconcile a growing sense of the goodness of people with what the Bible said about society's future state leading to Armageddon. Conspiracies filled the gaps. But they left me with a feeling of us-vs-them in a different way. Fear and suspicion tended to crowd out love and acceptance, and my life was pretty dark. My final reconciliation came by letting go of the idea of the end of the world, among other things. Not that the world won't end someday - it will because everything does. It's just that my concept of the world's end is no longer colored by religious teachings. And there is no more division in my mind. We're all just people.

Some of what Tara talks about in her journey is a transition from a black/white mindset to an open and inquiring mindset. I started life the same way. Certainty, dogma, black/white, truth/lies, good/bad, right/wrong, in/out, us/them - these were fundamental to my world view. I can't say how much of this came from my religion, how much from my family, and how much from the larger society, but I'm pretty sure all three of them were instrumental for me. It was a long, slow process of maturing for me to move beyond this fundamental paradigm. To dissolve the boundaries that separate us. To step into the dark and realize the world is so much brighter than I had imagined.

And the process is ongoing. I realized recently that I am still driven by some psychological baggage that was buried at a very early age. Two ideas stand out to me: 1) There is never enough and 2) I am not enough. I think Tara's book helped me uncover those. My scarcity mindset has been challenging for me and my family, and I am getting better at letting those impulses go. I'm hopeful I can transcend that idea completely one day - hopefully soon. But the idea that I am somehow not worthy or good enough is deeply seated and bleeds into so many aspects of my life in subtle ways. I think that I may struggle with that one for quite some time - possibly the rest of my life.

Growing up is hard - whether on an individual level or as a society. I think segments of our society are on the verge of social adulthood and some are firmly stuck in the teenage years, or maybe even the toddler years. Hardline thinking and dogma are powerful forces in our society right now. It's hard to hear one another because we make enemies of anyone who disagrees with us. But what if we dissolved the boundaries? Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world with fewer (or no) boundaries? What if we could tear down the walls that separate us long enough to listen to one another without feeling the need to judge them or prove them wrong if they disagree with us? What if we sought out sources of information that challenged our world view? What if we let go of the need to be right, or even the need for certainty, and allowed the other view to be heard and validated? We don't have to agree with each other. We just need to listen with respect.

We don't see things the same, but we are all trying to do our best with what we have. Maybe we can open our minds, drop our judgment, and through kindness, respect, and compassion build a better world. Together.

Books on Meditation

In my initial post about my spiritual transition, I described a set of books that helped me explore Buddhist and other forms of meditation. I thought it would be helpful to share a little about those books to help others better understand my journey. I found each book useful, but some spoke so profoundly to me that I have returned to them often. I will probably return to all of them at some point to see what they can offer me as time goes by.

The first book I was introduced to is called The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle. Before purchasing it, I read some of the reviews. Most were positive, but one critical review caught my attention. The reviewer was respectful, but took issue with the lack of citations in the book. He then offered a list of books that he felt covered similar material, but properly gave credit to other works, some of them quite old. I looked at each one of those books, read reviews, and decided to just buy them all. So that became my list of books to explore during some time off work. And while the books themselves didn't exactly launch me on my journey, they became an important catalyst for helping me explore what has become for me the most important spiritual practice I have ever tried: meditation.

Here's the list:

1. The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle
2. Wherever You Go, There You Are by Jon Kabat-Zinn
3. Mindfulness in Plain English by Bhante Henepola Gunaratana
4. A Path With Heart by Jack Kornfield
5. Wake Up Now by Stephan Bodian
6. The Method of No-Method by Sheng Yen
7. Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock, Monster Movies and the Truth about Reality by Brad Warner

I also added another book to the list based on some unrelated searching I had done previously: The Gifts of Imperfection by Brené Brown. This last book was really good for me. While it's somewhat related to the other books listed here, it's also a bit different, so I won't spend time talking about it. I wrote about it previously and you can read that post here.

I have since purchased a few other similar works including:

1. A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle
2. The Art of Forgiveness, Lovingkindness, and Peace by Jack Kornfield
3. A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi

I really like Eckhart's teaching style. I found reading and listening to him to be very refreshing. He has a simple, but beautiful view of life and offers an integrated view of religion and our relationship to the universe that is very open and accepting. Many of his insights rang true and through him, I began to see more clearly how my upbringing had led me to strengthen my individual ego and develop a sense of collective ego through association with my family, my church, my career, my nation, etc. I have really appreciated reading his words and entering into his view of the universe. I have returned to his writings and a couple of his speeches several times in recent years.

Of the books I listed, the one that spoke to me the most profoundly was A Path With Heart by Jack Kornfield. I found myself working very slowly through that book. Each chapter required a great deal of thought and I found myself stopping multiple times in a single chapter to think and meditate. Sometimes I was simply practicing what I was learning. Sometimes I just needed to let something he said settle in my soul. Working through the entire book was a very slow process that took me many months. Since that initial reading, I have returned to his book many times for insight, clarity, and a reminder to live life fully, in each moment. I can't capture the essence of what I learned from that book in a short paragraph. But that book alone has dramatically changed the way I see the world. And I am a better man for having found it.

I enjoyed the other books on the list, but I worked through them rapidly, trying to capture the essence of the new paradigm they all seemed to be offering as quickly as I could. With each new insight, I found this new perspective calling to me more and more and I was impatient to imbibe it completely. Recently, I have come back to the book Wherever You Go, There You Are and, working through it slowly, I am finding a lot of great insight (and reminders) that I probably missed the first time through. This has led me to believe that the other books could probably speak to me more profoundly if I give their messages some time to settle in my soul.

I hope some of you will find this list helpful. I know my spiritual transition has been hard on many of my friends and family. To really understand what's in my mind and heart, the best method I know is to talk to me. I'm grateful that I have had two LDS friends who have taken the time within the last year to understand me better. Those two are good men with open minds who, I think, showed a great deal of courage to get to know me in a deeper way. But for most people, that kind of dialog is probably not possible, whether for logistical or other reasons. So perhaps this list of books can offer an easier alternative. Reading them won't tell you exactly what I think, but it may give you insight into an important part of my journey.

If you decide to try these, I would recommend starting with Eckhart Tolle's books. Not because they're the best reflections of my current beliefs and practices, but because, of the books that have had a big impact on me, they're probably the easiest to digest. Then I would suggest A Path With Heart, which may be harder to digest, but is probably a little closer to my heart.

Regardless of what you choose, whether you explore these books, try meditation, or stick with what you've got, I wish you well on your own personal journey. And if you have questions about my journey, please ask. I would be happy to share what I have learned along the way and hear about your experiences too.

Lila

I recently posted about a book called Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert M. Pirsig. I loved it. So I immediately started reading the author's next book called Lila. I finished it the night before last. The big downer in all this is that the author only wrote two books and I want to read more of his thoughts.

In Lila, the author starts out by attempting to do something that initially seemed very foolish to me. He decided to try to create a full Metaphysics of what he talked about in his first book, his concept of Quality. It seemed foolish because Quality was something he couldn't define and seemed diametrically opposed to any kind of dialectic analysis. It seems closer to ideas in eastern philosophy such as the concept of Tao, Buddha, Chi, etc. These concepts appear to be beyond the intellectual realm and so they cannot be directly understood by the mind and are not subject to the tools of intellectual analysis.

But as I dove into the book, I began to change my mind. The author was offering an intellectual analysis of something about which you can't properly intellectualize, but I began to feel that for those of us who are stuck in the intellectual world of western philosophy and science, his analysis may be an excellent way to bridge the gap. 

Although he offers some development of his thoughts, at one point, he just springs on us his fully developed metaphysical structure of Quality and claims that it is exhaustive and complete. I found this slightly annoying at first, but as the book progressed, he offered an impressive number of examples of how this metaphysics, or view of reality, offered a clearer picture and resolved issues and concerns that the classic western view tends to obscure. It was like he was saying, "I stumbled across this pair of glasses as I was wandering and I found they really cleared up my vision. Here, try them on!" And then he proceeds to show the reader just how much more clearly they can see with this new model of reality. 

His Metaphysics says that reality derives from Quality. Other words for Quality might work equally well: the One, the Tao, Virtue, Excellence, Value, the Good. This Quality may be subdivided into two aspects: Dynamic and Static. The dynamic is what eastern traditions such as Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc strive for, eliminating the individual's dependence on static patterns.

But static patterns derive from Quality too. And so he further subdivides static Quality into inorganic, biological, social, and intellectual. This is the division for which the author offers no prior development, but the more I've thought about his structure and have applied it to issues I've been thinking about, the more sense it makes to me. If there are flaws in the structure, I don't see them yet. And I'm learning a lot by wearing the glasses he offered me.

I have no sure method for finding truth, but certain principles help me recognize truth when I see it. The most important idea at work here is whether the puzzle of life fits neatly together given the view of reality you subscribe to. Does your metaphysics explain what you see or does it leave a lot of things unresolved? Does it complete the puzzle or are there a lot of pieces left out? If one pair of glasses offers a more complete explanation than another, I'll keep wearing them. So far, this new metaphysics seems to be working for me. It certainly seems to offer a more complete understanding than the Aristotelean scientific model I grew up with. 

In some ways, the book reminded me of C.S. Lewis' "The Abolition of Man". In that book, Lewis claims we are composed of three things: mind, heart, and belly. You might think of the mind as intellectual, the heart as emotional, and the belly as basic biological drives such as hunger and lust. Lewis claims the intellectual can directly influence the emotional, but not the biological. Only the emotional can control and direct the biological. But our modern intellectual world has waged war on the emotions and has extracted the heart or chest of man, allowing his biological impulses to rage without restraint, and ultimately threatening, in the extreme application of this modern intellectual model, to exterminate or abolish the essence of what makes us men, leaving us slaves to our biological impulses.

Pirsig claims that we are evolutionary creatures composed of four levels of evolution, namely inorganic (matter and energy that obey fundamental physical laws), organic (corresponding to Lewis' 'belly'), social (somewhat similar to Lewis' 'heart'), and intellectual (obviously the same idea as Lewis' 'mind'). He likewise claims that the intellectual, by attempting to solidify its own supremacy, has waged war on society by stripping it of its moral foundation. But society, as a prior evolutionary level, is the foundation on which intellect stands. If society's moral foundation is destroyed, there will be no restraint on biological forces because the intellect will be unable to directly restrain those forces. This, he claims, is one reason for the increase in crime in recent history.

Pirsig spends a lot of time on his divisions of Static Quality and that's what I've spent a lot of time thinking about as I've been reading. But near the end of the book, he comes full circle back to Dynamic Quality, which is the creative force behind the static patterns. Thus, this Dynamic is the supreme Quality. Anything that attempts to place the static patterns above the Dynamic is immoral. So ultimately, we come back to eastern traditions that set aside the static in favor of the dynamic. And although I see great value in his Metaphysics, in the end, developing the metaphysics does almost seem like a pointless exercise. You can't really describe Quality by means of a dialectic analysis because it is beyond the mind. It is at the front edge of experience; before the mind has a chance to fasten on anything, Dynamic Quality has come and gone.

As I've pondered on this idea of Quality, it occurs to me that what is needed in my life is less analysis and more living ... simply living. What I need is to allow the various aspects of my static structure to fall in line with the Dynamic life-giving force to bring about a unity of soul. The biological transcends yet relies on the inorganic patterns of matter and energy and harnesses their power to achieve its own ends. The social transcends yet relies on the organic, biological patterns and harnesses its power to achieve its own ends. And the intellectual transcends yet relies on the social patterns and harnesses its power to achieve its own ends. But ultimately, all is dominated and transcended by a Dynamic element that is not bound by any of these. As we unite with this Dynamic force, perhaps the various static patterns, connected serially to one another, will naturally fall in line like links in a chain as you grasp the chain from the top and shake.

I believe what I am seeking is a union of soul with the universe. This union is not something I understand intellectually and I can't explain it in words, but I feel a compulsion to find this Quality and unite with it. I think the key for me is meditation and quietly putting aside pre-conceived notions of reality so that I can experience reality directly as it unfolds from its source. May I find that Quality and may it fill me.

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

There was a book I heard about in the early 90s that I never bothered to pick up. I'm glad I didn't. I wouldn't have understood it and most likely wouldn't have appreciated it.

I recently felt a pull to revisit it and finally finished it yesterday. It's called "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". I'll call it ZAMM for short. It's not really about Zen. And it's not really about motorcycle maintenance. But at the same time, it's totally about Zen and has everything to do with motorcycle maintenance. Mostly, though, it's a book that is deep, profound, and beautifully written.

When I was in school, even in college, I rarely had a desire to read. Books were being shoved down my throat constantly and I've never been a fan of doing what someone else tells me to do. I tend to rebel. So although I would occasionally read books that interested me, I usually avoided reading completely. Being forced to read for academic areas in which I had no interest really stifled my desire to read anything at all.

After college, I began to see the value of certain fields of study that I had never enjoyed before. I started with economics, then hit history, languages, philosophy, and more recently eastern religions and philosophic traditions. In fact, I've been meaning to blog about what I've been learning about Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. But that will have to wait ...

When I heard about ZAMM, I had no background in philosophy and no appreciation for eastern traditions. Without that background, this book wouldn't have done much for me. But with that background, the author has given me insights into things I've been learning about that feel like priceless jewels. He synthesizes some of the ancient western and eastern styles of thought and offers us a glimpse into his own personal journey of self-discovery.

What I find so interesting about the story is his own misconceptions of the purpose of the journey. A major part of his journey began as he studied the word Quality. Later Excellence from the Greek Arete, which is often translated as Virtue. But Quality - what was it? He couldn't define it. This led him to deconstruct the existing classic worldview and create a new metaphysics based on Quality. This new metaphysics seemed to him to be a way to break down some of the problems created by western culture and possibly even reconcile the divide by east and west and between classical (intellectual, dielectic) and romantic thought. He was ready to offer a great thesis to the world that would break down barriers and bring people together. What it really did was break him down.

And this is the most beautiful part. His whole journey was pointless ... from the perspective of his original intention. But what it did to him made the journey worth all the effort. It broke him down and, if I read him right, led him to a fantastic epiphany of self knowledge that is akin to the spiritual experiences of ancient and modern spiritual seekers. In the process, he was deemed insane, and perhaps he was, or perhaps in that moment of self knowledge, he was one of the few sane individuals in the midst of a crazy world. And he experienced reality directly. He found his Quality.

I'm seeking this same Quality and although my journey will be different than the author's journey, I learned a few things by reading about his journey that have helped me see things a little differently and will, I think, help me in my journey of self discovery. For example, in order to find the answers he sought, he realized he would have to step outside the current mythos. He would have to become an outsider of the culture. He would have to be viewed as insane. And that was ok. Another tidbid: one of the last things he did before finding his Quality was to face his final fear. He had faced them all down and finally emptied himself. There was nothing left inside and that was what was necessary for this Quality to fill him up.

I can't possibly convey the power of this book in a short blog post. I absolutely loved it. Have you read it? If so, tell me your thoughts.

The Gifts of Imperfection

I recently read 'The Gifts of Imperfection' by Brené Brown. This is the same woman whose TED talk I shared in a previous post. The book is brilliant.

Here's my brief summary. Her three gifts of imperfection are: courage, compassion, and connection. I think I see how each of these flows from our imperfection, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on that - especially if you've read the book. Anyway, she gives some very rigorous definitions of terms in the book, including for these three terms, but here's my quick take:

1. Courage: to share your heart, embrace vulnerability, and fully feel both positive and negative emotions.
2. Compassion: to embrace others in their imperfections, recognizing that we've all been there, we're all doing the best we can, and we're all in this together.
3. Connection to others: fuels the most joyful experiences of life. I believe it is relationships that offer us the most important among the possible purposes of life. In my research on happiness, the one factor that comes up in every single study I've seen or heard of is relationships.

She talks a lot about shame and I think a lot of what she says is really illuminating. She spent years researching shame and one of the things I learned from her was that "Shame hates it when we reach out and tell our story. ... Shame loves secrecy."

In the book, she shares an experience where she connected with her sister to share a vulnerable moment of shame. I love her description of the sister's response:

She didn't try to fix me or make me feel better; she just listened and had the courage to share some of her own vulnerabilities with me.

I felt totally exposed and completely loved and accepted at the same time (which is the definition of compassion for me). Trust me when I tell you that shame and fear can't tolerate that kind of powerful connection surging between people.

Very cool. Having the courage to share her vulnerability is what it took to unlock the power of friendship to relieve the shame and fear.

Here's a nice little excerpt on compassion.

The word compassion is derived from the Latin words pati and cum, meaning "to suffer with." I don't believe that compassion is our default response. I think our first response to pain - ours or someone else's - is to self-protect. We protect ourselves by looking for someone or something to blame. Or sometimes we shield ourselves by turning to judgment or by immediately going into fix-it mode.

Wow, that sounds a lot like me. But we don't have to let our fear of pain rule us. Pain is something that, if entered into and embraced, loses its power over us. At least the kind of inward suffering that results from thought processes and emotions.

She then quotes from an American Buddhist nun named Pema Chödrön.

Compassion is not a relationship between the healer and the wounded. It's a relationship between equals. Only when we know our own darkness well can we be present with the darkness of others. Compassion becomes real when we recognize our shared humanity.

She defines connection as follows:

... the energy that exists between people when they feel seen, heard, and valued; when they can give and receive without judgment; and when they derive sustenance and strength from the relationship.

She later says,

Until we can receive with an open heart, we are never really giving with an open heart. When we attach judgment to receiving help, we knowingly or unknowingly attach judgment to giving help.

And,

If connection is the energy that surges between people, we have to remember that those surges must travel in both directions.

This summary is from just the first two chapters of the book. The rest of the book is equally powerful, at least for me. As a recovering perfectionist, I felt like the book spoke to me on so many levels. In fact, I'd love to meet the author. It sounds like she and I have very similar personalities and dispositions ... and a very similar set of weaknesses. Maybe that's why the book seems so perfect for me.

But I don't think the book is just for perfectionists. It's a beautiful set of principles that we can all profit from regardless of where we're coming from. It's an attempt to offer a guide to what she calls 'wholehearted living' and I love the picture she paints of that lifestyle. It's what I want. And I think it's a model for living that will make the world a better place as more of us embrace it.

If you get a chance to read the book, please let me know what you think.

Leadership Books

A few months ago, I was asked to take on a position at work that involved managing a group of about 35-40 people. I blame this new job for my lack of blogging. It has been extremely taxing on me personally and professionally.

When I first took the job, I began to devour books on leadership and management, trying to find good models I could emulate. Some of my favorites were:

Influencer by Joseph Grenny, et al
Lincoln on Leadership by Donal Phillips
Crucial Conversations by Kerry Patterson, et al
The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni
Slack by Tom DeMarco
The Goal by Eli Goldratt
It's Not Luck by Eli Goldratt
Critical Chain by Eli Goldratt
The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership by John Maxwell
Peopleware by Tom DeMarco and Timothy Lister
The Art of War by Sun Tzu
Made to Stick by Chip and Dan Heath

The Art of War isn't really a book about leadership; it's about military strategy, but a lot of businesspeople have applied it to the business world in recent decades. I'd rather not do that. But still, it was an enlightening book.

Of all the things I learned from those books, I think the most important one is the critical importance of trust. Before taking this new job and the reading binge above, I had read Steven M.R. Covey's The Speed of Trust, which I highly recommend. In my business, we try to develop long-term relationships with customers. When trust is established, it's easy to keep business going. Without it, we just look like another expensive vendor. Cold calls and responses to open solicitations rarely lead to contracts, but when a customer trusts us, money shows up sometimes without our even asking.

I think there are three elements of trust. In order for someone to really trust us, they have to trust:

1. Our word,
2. Our intent, and
3. Our skills.

In order to achieve #1, we have to demonstrate integrity continually. A single deception can wipe out trust very quickly. In order to achieve #3, we should demonstrate excellence in all we do. We don't have to be perfect; we just have to do the best we know how to do in every situation. It's so easy to slack off, but that destroys peoples' trust that we are competent to do the job.

For #2, intent, I think we need to dig deep and discover what's really important to us. If people think we're only out for ourselves, they won't trust that we'll have their best interests at heart. Whether they are customers, employees, vendors, or whoever, we have to demonstrate that our philosophy puts people first. We should also be looking out for ourselves, but if we can put our customers' interests on a level with our own, I think that comes across in our words and actions without our even trying. You can hide your true intent for a little while, but eventually it comes out, so working to build others' trust in our intent takes a bit of soul searching on our part.

Recently, because of the stress of my new job, I did a little searching and found a couple books about work habits and finding satisfaction in our careers. Those books are:

So Good They Can't Ignore You by Cal Newport
The One Thing by Gary Keller and Jay Papasan

I liked them both a LOT! Here's a summary of each:

So Good They Can't Ignore You

The first book I mentioned starts off by debunking the myth that you can find happiness if you just center your career around your passion. Personally, I think that's a good place to start, but you also have to consider what people will pay you for. If you're not able to earn a living, it's possible that you aren't adding a lot of value to others. Regardless, it's hard to build a career without income. He discusses many examples from people he interviewed and studies that others have done to illustrate the dangers of what he calls 'The Passion Hypothesis'.

The author then considers what makes for a satisfying career if passion is not the answer. Some things he comes up with include 'creativity', 'impact', and 'control'. The last of those comes to those who become so good at what they do that they can buy their way into the kind of situation they want - where they're too good to be let go. He also discusses the importance of associating your career with a mission that you find meaningful.

One of the cool things I got from the book, among many, is one man's method of managing his time commitments. On page 89 of the book, we see Mike Jackson's work-hour allocation including 7.5 hours for email, 4 hours for lunch breaks, 1.5 hours for planning/organizing, etc. He identifies those things he can't do much about and then lists the things he does that can vary dramatically in terms of the time he allocates to them. Each week, he tracks his time so he can use that feedback to modify his plans and work toward goals regarding where he focuses his time and energy.

One of the sections of the book is entitled 'Turn Down a Promotion'. It focuses on the importance of control in your career, but it reminded me of The Peter Principle. It also made me think about my own professional situation. I've enjoyed many of the aspects of my new job as a manager. I feel I've made a positive impact on our group and I think I've helped build our business. I enjoy leadership, creating a shared vision, strategic thinking and planning, and interacting with customers and employees. I don't enjoy the managerial minutiae, suboptimal processes or absence of useful processes and tools, and I hate politics. It may be that I'm misplaced right now, but I think I still have value to offer and maybe I'll take the author's advice and turn down the promotion I accepted previously.

The One Thing

This is one of the best books I've ever read. The author's premise is that there is one thing you can do right now that will make all of your other tasks either easier or less important. Finding that ONE THING takes some work, but when you do, focus your energies on that and exclude all distractions. He recommends allocating half of your day (at least four hours in a working day) to your ONE thing.

He discusses some myths including the effectiveness of multitasking. I loved that part. Spreading your focus across a dozen different things usually means you're doing a dozen things really badly. Other myths include the idea that 'everything is equally important', 'willpower is always available when you need it', and 'a balanced life is the goal'. The last one seems confusing on the surface, but his point is that you often have to swing far out of balance in work and personal life with the idea that you'll swing back. Trying to perpetually balance involves seeking something that is impossible to maintain. So, sprint when you need to, but take breaks when you need to too.

By asking the question 'What's the ONE THING I can do such that by doing it everything else will be easier or unnecessary?', we can work to find the most important thing among our many tasks or focus areas. He discusses in some detail how we can use this question and variants of it to identify long term strategies and short term goals.

He also discusses the importance of purpose. It sounded a lot like the previous book's focus on mission. While most of us seem to seek happiness as the highest good in life, many of us have a hard time finding it. He shares an ancient tale of a beggar who shows a king a bowl that sucks up everything you put in it. The bowl, he says, represents human desire. Our desires are often insatiable leading to perpetual unhappiness ... unless we change our focus. He comments that happiness happens on the way to fulfillment. And he claims that financially wealthy people are those who have enough money coming in without having to work to finance their purpose in life. And so, according to Keller, in order to be financially wealthy (secure, satisfied, fulfilled), you must have a purpose. Otherwise, whatever you acquire just goes in that beggar's bowl and leaves you unsatisfied.

There are lots of other good ideas in the book, but one last, practical one I'll share has to do with planning. The first priority is to plan your time off, your vacations for the year. Second, you block off time to work on your ONE THING. Third, you block off time to do regular planning and goal setting. He also discusses planning daily rejuvenation activities including:

1. Meditate and pray for spiritual energy.
2. Eat right, exercise, and sleep sufficiently for physical energy.
3. Hug, kiss, and laugh with loved ones for emotional energy.
4. Set goals, plan, and calendar for mental energy.
5. Time block your ONE Thing for business energy.

Coming from a guy who helped build the Keller-Williams realty empire, and knowing that he used the concept of 'The One Thing' in building his business, makes me want to pay attention to the author's ideas. He speaks practically and cogently and although I checked this book out of the library, I think this is one I need to own. I need to review it again ... and again. It's that powerful for me.

The Varieties of Religious Experience

I've been reading a book by William James called "The Varieties of Religious Experience". I've only read about 1/3 of it, but here's a bit of what I've learned so far. First, I've learned that James was absolutely brilliant. And that has made the book a joy to read.

Portrait of William James

James gave a series of lectures at the University of Edinburgh in 1901 and 1902 where he had been invited to lecture on Natural Religion. The book is a collection of his twenty lectures given during that appointment and attempts to explore humanity's religious appetites or man's religious constitution. After reading through his initial lectures in which he bounds the problem and sets up metrics for analyzing various human experiences, he begins to survey what he calls 'The Religion of Healthy-Mindedness'. It is a kind of mindset that sees the world as wholly good, ignores the evil, and strives by optimism, faith, etc. to achieve happiness. The two lectures he dedicates to this topic are well worth reading and remind me of my friend the Witch Doctor and his oriental-inspired healthy mindedness. I see a lot of value in this kind of mentality.

Once-Born

Quoting Francis W. Newman, James says, " 'God has two families of children on this earth, ... the once-born and the twice-born,' and the once-born he describes as follows: 'They see God, not as a strict Judge, not as a Glorious Potentate; but as the animating Spirit of a beautiful harmonious world, Beneficent and Kind, Merciful as well as Pure. The same characters generally have no metaphysical tendencies: they do not look back into themselves. Hence they are not distressed by their own imperfections: yet it would be absurd to call them self-righteous; for they hardly think of themselves at all. This childlike quality of their nature makes the opening of religion very happy to them: for they no more shrink from God, than a child from an emperor, before whom the parent trembles: in fact, they have no vivid conception of any of the qualities in which the severer Majesty of God consists. He is to them the impersonation of Kindness and Beauty. They read his character, not in the disordered world of man, but in romantic and harmonious nature. Of human sin they know perhaps little in their own hearts and not very much in the world; and human suffering does but melt them to tenderness. Thus, when they approach God, no inward disturbance ensues; and without being as yet spiritual, they have a certain complacency and perhaps romantic sense of excitement in their simple worship.'"

The twice-born is not defined until later. As the quintessential representative of the once-born mentality, James offers us Walt Whitman. An extract of his comments about the poet: "Walt Whitman owes his importance in literature to the systematic expulsion from his writings of all contractile elements. The only sentiments he allowed himself to express were of an expansive order; and he expressed these in the first person, not as your mere monstrously conceited individual might so express them, but vicariously for all men, so that a passionate and mystic ontological emotion suffuses his words, and ends by persuading the reader that men and women, life and death, and all things are divinely good."

Portrait of Walt Whitman

Having read Whitman's 'Leaves of Grass' fairly recently, I enjoyed reading James' characterization of Whitman and have to agree. His writings fill me with wonderment, awe, and joy. He is truly a great poet. And his mentality seems to pattern itself after the 'once-born' description by Newman.

James also describes something he calls the mind-cure movement and gives several examples of how positive thinking and other mystical things seems to restore people to health. Once again, I was reminded of my Witch Doctor friend. He has helped me to be healthier through means that I can't really explain. But I can't deny the positive effect on my health and my life.

Twice-Born

After surveying the once-born, James takes us into the dark by describing what he calls 'The Sick Soul'. I suppose if I had never experienced depression, I wouldn't have enjoyed reading those two lectures. But something inside me thrills when I read of others who have faced similar darkness and attempt to wrap some meaning around their experiences. I first encountered this thrill in the midst of my own depression when I read Tolstoy's "Confession". So I was thrilled once again when James used Tolstoy and his book as an example of the opposite of healthy-minded religion. He begins his lecture talking about depression generally and cites examples of religious people who become torn and depressed, failing to see their connection to anything of lasting value.

Portrait of Leo Tolstoy

In addition to Tolstoy, James uses such notable persons as Goethe, Martin Luther, Solomon (author of Ecclesiastes), and John Bunyan (author of Pilgrim's Progress) as examples of highly religious people who represent this mentality so opposed to the healthy-mindedness described above. After describing some elements of this opposite mentality, James tells us, "The surest way to the rapturous sorts of happiness of which the twice-born make report has as an historic matter of fact been through a more radical pessimism than anything that we have yet considered. We have seen how the lustre and enchantment may be rubbed off from the goods of nature. But there is a pitch of unhappiness so great that the goods of nature may be entirely forgotten, and all sentiment of their existence vanish from the mental field. For this extremity of pessimism to be reached, something more is needed than observation of life and reflection upon death. The individual must in his own person become the prey of a pathological melancholy. As the healthy-minded enthusiast succeeds in ignoring evil's very existence, so the subject of melancholy is forced in spite of himself to ignore that of all good whatever: for him it may no longer have the least reality."

Quoting a less well known character, Father Gratry, we read "... every idea of heaven was taken away from me: I could no longer conceive of anything of the sort. Heaven did not seem to me worth going to. It was like a vacuum; a mythological elysium, an abode of shadows less real than the earth. I could conceive no joy, no pleasure in inhabiting it. Happiness, joy, light, affection, love - all these words were now devoid of sense. Without doubt I could still have talked of all these things, but I had become incapable of feeling anything in them, of understanding anything about them, of hoping anything from them, or of believing them to exist. There was my great and inconsolable grief! I neither perceived nor conceived any longer the existence of happiness or perfection. An abstract heaven over a naked rock. Such was my present abode for eternity."

Speaking of such states of mind, James tells us "there are some subjects whom all this leaves a prey to the profoundest astonishment. The strangeness is wrong. The unreality cannot be. A mystery is concealed, and a metaphysical solution must exist. If the natural world is so double-faced and unhomelike, what world, what thing is real? An urgent wondering and questioning is set up, a poring theoretic activity, and in a desperate effort to get into right relations with the matter, the sufferer is often led to what becomes for him a satisfying religious solution."

He continues later, "When disillusionment has gone as far as this, there is seldom a restitutio ad integrum. One has tasted of the fruit of the tree, and the happiness of Eden never comes again. The happiness that comes, when any does come - and often enough it fails to return in an acute form, though its form is sometimes very acute - is not the simple, ignorance of ill, but something vastly more complex, including natural evil as one of its elements, but finding natural evil no such stumbling-block and terror because it now sees it swallowed up in supernatural good. The process is one of redemption, not of mere reversion to natural health, and the sufferer, when saved, is saved by what seems to him a second birth, a deeper kind of conscious being than he could enjoy before."

Now we have a definition of 'twice-born' religionists. Those who pass through the valley of darkness come out of that darkness with a renewed perspective, broader than the simple healthy-mindedness that dismisses or ignores evil, these twice-borns recognize evil as part of a larger whole, but subject to a more powerful good. This seems to me more of a mature faith whose seeds germinated in darkness, despair, and doubt, but lead the sufferer to a greater understanding of light and joy.

Speaking again of the once-borns, James says, "The method of averting one's attention from evil, and living simply in the light of good is splendid as long as it will work. It will work with many persons; it will work far more generally than most of us are ready to suppose; and within the sphere of its successful operation there is nothing to be said against it as a religious solution. But it breaks down impotently as soon as melancholy comes; and even though one be quite free from melancholy one's self, there is no doubt that healthy-mindedness is inadequate as a philosophical doctrine, because the evil facts which it refutes positively to account for are a genuine portion of reality; and they may after all be the best key to life's significance, and possibly the only openers of our eyes to the deepest levels of truth." [emphasis mine]

Wrapping up his lectures on 'The Sick Soul', James says, "The completest religions would therefore seem to be those in which the pessimistic elements are best developed. Buddhism, of course, and Christianity are the best known to us of these. They are essentially religions of deliverance: the man must die to an unreal life before he can be born into the real life."

In a weird way, that last quote reminds me of the movies "The Matrix" and "Inception". The process of a second birth, as James describes it, seems crucial to transcending the vain and transitory aspects of this life to be awakened to a new, more complete reality. Pretty cool.

Steve Jobs

We took the family to the library last week. On the way out, a book caught my eye and I grabbed it. A biography on Steve Jobs by Patricia Lakin. I read through it that night.

I had heard a lot about Steve, but hadn't ever read much about his life. He's extremely impressive. Like anyone else, he had his weaknesses, but here's a little of what I found worth knowing and trying to emulate.

He summed up certain portions of his life in a commencement speech at Stanford in 2005. Summarizing that speech, Patricia tells us,

He told the graduates three stories. The first, he said, was about connecting the dots. For the first time Steve publicly spoke of his adoption by his devoted and loving parents, Paul and Clara. He then told of dropping out of college but dropping in on an amazing calligraphy class at Reed. He urged the graduates to let their life's path be guided by their gut intuitions and their passions. If they did, they'd look back and realize how their own random "dots" or life experiences would connect for them in meaningful and surprising ways. As for choosing a life path, he felt the key was finding what you love and pursuing it passionately.

In the calligraphy class, Steve learned a lot about fonts, spacings, and artistic beauty, all of which were instrumental in designing the Mac computer, particularly in creating a set of fonts based on the calligraphy he learned. Those fonts Apple created were copied by Windows, so Steve's random calligraphy class has touched millions, perhaps billions, of people. Patricia continues,

The second story told of his love for the work he was doing, his shame at being ousted from Apple, but how freeing it ultimately was. He said, "The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life." In addition to talking about starting NeXT and acquiring Pixar, he mentioned his wife and children as being an important part of this creative period.

Steve's third story was about death. He regarded is as a great "invention," for it cleared out the old generation and made room for the new. He also recounted his philosophy of using death to evaluate how he was about to spend his day. "Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life ... Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose.... There is no reason not to follow your heart."

Regarding death, Steve said in that speech,

When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.

For all Steve's weaknesses - and like all of us, he had many - I think his philosophy and approach to life had a lot to do with his success. The world is a different place because of him. I think I could be more productive and have a more positive impact on the world if I imbibed more of his philosophy on death, passion, and trust.

One last quote from that speech:

Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma - which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.

Thanks Steve. And thanks Patricia for giving me a little insight into Steve's life. As a final tribute to Steve, Patricia ends her book with the words from one of Apple's ads called "Think Different:"

Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.

The Federal Reserve

I recently read a book called "The Creature of Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin. It offered a really interesting analysis of the history of banking and the effects of fractional reserve banking and central banking's monetary policies. The title refers to a secret meeting that took place on Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia with several bankers and politicians to craft a plan for creating a central bank in the US patterned after European central banking. The ultimate result of this was the creation of the current central bank of the US, the Federal Reserve. The meeting was later documented by participants, but it was kept secret at the time because public knowledge of the banking industry's involvement in the creation of the draft plan would have killed the political possibility of it being passed as legislation.

I've dabbled in economic theory, but as any economist can attest, I'm no economist. It was helpful to have some economic background going into that book, but I found my understanding of money was dramatically improved by reading it. Griffin gives historical examples of governments that enforced a policy of money backed by precious metals and the resulting stability of the money supply and value.

If Griffin is to be believed - and I think his research is pretty thorough, though I may not be in the best position to critique his analysis - the United States has had only one brief period near the beginning of its existence in which the money supply was truly tied to a precious metal - silver. In other eras, although we haven't had central banking during many of those years (we've actually had three central banks - four if you count the bank of the colonies prior to the revolution), we have allowed publicly-chartered and/or regulated private banks to employ fractional reserve banking, which allows banks to inflate the money supply by a fairly large multiplier depending on the reserve percentage.

In other words, even when we had a gold standard, fractional reserve banking allowed our money system to be inflated by the banking industry with new money generated by debt. If a fractional reserve percentage of 10% is enforced, then as much as 90% of the money supply could be based solely on debt with the other 10% based on precious metal. That's sort of a hybrid between a gold-standard and fiat money. Now, of course, we have total fiat money with no backing by anything of value.

The stability of a gold- or silver-backed money supply, Griffin argues, comes from the fact that the money is itself something with intrinsic value. This money, then, when it becomes less valuable, can be converted into other things of value and taken out of circulation, which bolsters the value of the remaining money. When it becomes too scarce (and consequently more valuable), individuals and firms will be more motivated to conduct mining operations or find some other method by which to obtain some of this more valuable money. Those activities bring the value of the money back down. Thus, traditional market forces tend to stabilize the value of the money itself just as they do with any other commodity when there is no government interference.

With a fiat system, the government indirectly dictates the value of the money through various control mechanisms. The idea that a central control mechanism would offer greater stability is a very socialistic idea. Why would a group of bankers/economists in Washington be more capable of stabilizing the vast financial system than millions of individuals operating within the framework of a free market?

According to Griffin, the brief period following the ratification of the Constitution in which the US money supply was truly tied to silver generated an incredible period of growth and prosperity. As I said, I can't really critique his analysis, but if it's true, it begs for a closer look at the virtue of a sound money supply with value controlled by a distributed market instead of centrally controlled by bureaucrats.

Call me crazy, but I'm more and more convinced that freedom is a key ingredient in the formula for prosperity. Thanks to Mr. Griffin, I have a few more ideas solidified in my mind that give me a stronger theoretical foundation for that belief.

The Power of Leaders ... or Lack Thereof

Our society, and maybe all societies, tends to give too much blame/credit to our leaders. We blame/bless the President when the economy is bad/good. Really, he's just one among many that sets policies that affect the economy. That contribution can't be a large percentage of the total impact of fiscal and monetary policy. Appointed officials such as Fed governors have more influence on the economy than the President, but even they probably get more blame/praise than they deserve.

Tolstoy's 'War and Peace' gives some great arguments in favor of decentralizing the blame and praise. He also makes a pretty good case that in some ways, the guys with boots on the ground have a lot more to do with the success of an endeavor than the guys sitting behind the desk. One of his characters, Andrei Bolkonsky, consciously chooses a path that puts him on the field of battle rather than serving as an aide to the General because he believes he will have a much greater impact on the war in that capacity. I think Tolstoy goes a little too far with that idea, but it's a healthy counter to the ubiquitous concept that the leader is the one making everything happen.

Prince Andrei Bolkonsky

A CEO stepping into a company, for example, often finds his/her hands tied by the momentum of various projects, a corporate culture that may stubbornly refuse to change, or constraints imposed on him/her by predecessors that the new boss is powerless to change.

Leaders are people just like you and me. Their influence may be greater than the average guy on the street, but let's not overestimate their power. And let's not underestimate our own power either. Each of us can be an enormous force for good in this world. We just have to have a vision of what we want and work with firmness of mind to bring that vision to reality.

Dorian Gray and Earnest

I recently read The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde - sad story, but interesting idea based on a Victorian concept that evil actions make themselves known in the physical appearance of the person who commits them. There is some truth to this, but it can also be a dangerous philosophy by which we make faulty judgments of people.

I'm not sure I'd recommend the book. It's clever and interesting, but a bit pessimistic. And I'm not sure I like the morals that seem to be naturally drawn from the story.

A while ago, I read another of Oscar Wilde's books called 'The Importance of Being Earnest'. That book is witty and delightful. I also enjoyed the movie adaptation with Colin Firth. A quick read, funny, witty, satirical - I highly recommend that one. It makes for an enjoyable few hours.

Skellig

We went to the library last night and a book caught my eye in the childrens' section. I started reading it, checked it out, and finished it last night. It's called Skellig by David Almond.

It's a beautiful book about life, healing, love, friendship, and it struck me as a book of poetry that happened to be associated with a story. It was an easy read, but it was so beautiful, I decided to learn a little more about David Almond and William Blake, a poet that Almond quotes several times in the book.

Blake was a fascinating man and I think I'd better read some of his works. And I'm really fascinated by Almond and think I'd better search out some more of his stuff in the library. That book was in the childrens' section, but that only makes sense to me as a short work of fiction. It's a book of poetry, philosophy, and beauty and as an adult, it appealed to me strongly. Now I'm off in search of more beauty from Mr. Almond.

It's strange to find a contemporary author I enjoy, but I think this book has a quality that could turn it into a classic that endures after Almond is gone.

David Copperfield

I finished reading David Copperfield by Charles Dickens a few days ago. No, it has nothing to do with the magician. I love everything I've read by Dickens. His stories are neatly woven, a little too neatly perhaps with loose ends being tied up in unrealistic ways, but the stories are beautifully poetic, witty and funny, and delightful to read. The book was really long, but enjoyable.

I think my favorite of Dickens' books so far is Nicholas Nickleby, but I enjoyed Copperfield too. I'm not in the mood to give it a thorough review, but in researching Dickens' own life, it sounds like there's a lot of correlation with his personal experiences and his fictional story of Copperfield. That book is probably the closest thing we have to an autobiography of Dickens - though calling it that is a bit of a stretch. In the preface, Dickens tells us that Copperfield is his favorite fictional creation. Perhaps that's because he sees so much of himself in the character. It seems to me that he may have created in Copperfield a romanticized, idealized version of himself that, if I were him, I would imagine I would look on with some fondness. Fun book. If you haven't read Dickens, give it a try. And tell me what you think.

Library Part Deux

And the saga continues in the living room ...

See the previous post for part one of the story. I love my family.

Library

I love libraries; don't you?

No school today, so the family engaged in a favorite pursuit. I love this picture!

We Are All Karamazovs

I read Dostoyevsky's 'Brother Karamazov' a while ago and wrote some of my thoughts at the time. I recently read it again because ... well, why not? I enjoyed the book and didn't know what else to read. I had a couple more thoughts as I read it this time and I wanted to document them.

Knowing the basic storyline really helped me focus on Dostoyevsky's ideas without getting distracted by wondering how the story would end, how the trial would turn out, whether Dmitri really killed his father, etc. Two things came out clearly that I hadn't quite grasped before.

 Fyodor Dostoyevsky

First, each brother represents an aspect of human nature. The oldest brother represents the physical; the second represents the mental; and the youngest represents the spiritual. Although some wonderfully graphic arguments are brought about contending against God and absolute morality, I think it's clear where Dostoyevsky stood on the question. At the end of the book, the only brother who is truly happy and free is the youngest who represents the spiritual side of man. The oldest brother is in prison with plans to escape, though we never learn whether those plans come to fruition. The second brother is terribly ill and possibly mad and/or dying.

Second, very near the end, a prosecuting attorney is making a speech in which he discusses the nature of the Karamazov family and he talks about each of the brothers in turn. It's a very lucid speech except for the conclusions he draws about the crime he's prosecuting (which I think is pretty ironic) and I get the sense that Dostoyevsky was using this character to share some of his own philosophy with us. Although the prosecutor is wrong about the case, his philosophy is more sound than the philosophy of the defending attorney, who happens to be correct about the case. Among other things, the prosecutor claims, more or less, that we are all Karamazovs. And it occurred to me that that is exactly what Dostoyevsky wanted to do with his work. His story of the three brothers is an analysis, not only of eternal questions including God and the devil, but of human nature. He examines the extremes to which human nature will tend when emphasis is placed upon one of the three aspects of that nature - the body, the mind, or the spirit. His conclusions on the happiness of humans who choose a certain path based on those different elements of our nature are seen in the state of the characters at the end of the story. Though the fates of all three are uncertain at the end of the story - the end is a bit unsettled compared to many books I've read - the state of each character at that point is sufficient to understand Dostoyevsky's view on the ultimate ends of three fundamentally different approaches to life.

Tolstoy, a contemporary of Dostoyevsky and one of my favorite authors, is mentioned in the book and I understand that Tolstoy had a copy of Brothers Karamazov with him when he died. Knowing the circumstances of Tolstoy's death, I believe he must have had a great love for the book. I can understand why. It's a deep and powerful piece of literature.

Till We Have Faces

Some years ago, I read a book by C.S. Lewis called "Till We Have Faces". It's my favorite of Lewis' works. I'm sure you've read a book or seen a movie where you're led to believe something - a certain paradigm for viewing the world and particularly whatever story is being told - only to have that paradigm dashed near the end. I had that experience with this book the first time I read it. I bought into the story Lewis was weaving and took the part of the main character without regarding the hints Lewis was dropping of another reality. Near the end, I had a pretty dramatic wake-up call as I saw what had actually happened as the main character realizes the same things I was coming to understand. Lewis is a master storyteller.

I recently picked it up again and read through it, knowing how it ended, and savoring the two opposing viewpoints as the story weaved itself so beautifully in my mind. I enjoyed it so much that I read it a third time shortly after I finished the second reading and even more interesting ideas presented themselves to me as I went through the exercise again. I am in awe of Lewis' talents as an author, an artist, and a philosopher. I'm grateful he was able to capture some of that philosophy for me to enjoy years after his death.

The story is a retelling of the Greek myth of Cupid and Psyche, but with a very interesting twist. It's Lewis' twist that gives the story its power. And it sets the stage for Lewis to share with us some of his thoughts on life and on God. But his philosophy isn't in your face in this book. You could read the book and just enjoy it for its symbolism, beauty, and genius. But if you're interested in his philosophy, it's a lot of fun to tease it out as you read. And if you're like me, it may take multiple readings to really grasp what Lewis is trying to say.

One of the things that struck me on my last reading was Lewis' thoughts on love. And it occurred to me that what we call love is very often something different. It usually has elements of love in it, but often it's mixed with greed, jealousy, pride, and even hatred. Near the end of the book, as Orual, the main character, is forced to examine her life and motives, I felt compelled to examine my motives and I have determined that much of what I often call love is really selfishness. I think we're born with a great capacity to love as children, but it's mixed with a very self-centered view. This selfishness seems to be so ingrained in our natures that it would take a miracle to change us into loving creatures. As Orual says, "I was ... ugly in soul ... greedy, blood-gorged. But if I practiced true philosophy, as Socrates meant it, I should change my ugly soul into a fair one. .... [But] a horrible memory crept into my mind of those days when I had tried to mend the ugliness of my body with new devices in the way I did my hair or the colours I wore. I'd a cold fear that I was at the same work again. I could mend my soul no more than my face. Unless the gods helped.".

If I say I love my wife, that's probably true to a large extent, but if I'm honest with myself, my feelings for her are mixed up with the good that I derive from the relationship and a selfish desire to have her near me for the way she makes me feel and the benefits I obtain from being with her. That may not necessarily be bad, but it's easy for that to become something negative if I'm not motivated by a pure love - the kind of love that says "I want what's best for you even if that brings pain to me." Orual is faced with a decision where she ultimately chooses something for someone else and she selfishly makes a choice that brings misery to everyone. She's not an evil character, but near the end of the book, she undergoes a transformation that teaches her (and the reader if he's paying attention) about what love really is and she experiences a kind of revolution and cleansing of the soul that prepares her to meet God (or the gods) and her loved ones after she dies.

There is so much to this book and I've given it a very inadequate review here. I can't even explain the meaning of the title of the book without giving away something that might make the book less powerful for you. But I highly recommend it. And if you have a chance to read it or if you've read it before, let me know your thoughts. I feel like I'm a little better man for having worked through it a few times.

Thanks Lewis for the life you lived and for your wisdom that you've shared with me over the years. I hope you have found the beauty you were seeking.