“To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all.” - Oscar Wilde

Tell me. What do you do for a Living?

I’m eager to know.  Because I don’t think what we do for a Living necessarily is our “job”, or even our “profession”.

I was thinking about this one morning, discussing with Jizo-Sama regarding the titles we take on willingly, or don’t allow ourselves to take on.  That’s a whole OTHER post.  But it sparked something in me about the fact that we label ourselves all the time, but almost always about our job or profession.  Joe is a plumber.  Sue is an Administrative Assistant.  Mr. So-and-So is an Attorney, and Ms. So-and-So is a Graphic Designer.

But that’s not really what we do for a Living.  That’s what we do for existing.  For bill-paying.  Some of us are lucky enough to have jobs that would qualify as “living”, or even get to do their preferred “living” actions within the confines of their job.  Perhaps Mary Smith loves to write, but does it within her annoying Copywriter job.  She could probably ditch the other aspects of her job, but it allows her to do one thing she LIVES to do all the time.

But the majority of us put up with corporate world in order to Live a certain way, to Do certain things.   They rarely have anything to do with concepts we associate ourselves with, and even more often these days, have little to do with what we studied in school. 

I find it interesting that we ask a seven year old what they want to BE.  They are allowed to BE anything.  When children get older, we ask them what they want to DO.  Now we have narrowed it down from dreams to interests and hopes.  At adulthood, we don’t even deal with the term “want” anymore.  What DO you do? 

That’s like asking: What do you do now that you’ve given up your dreams and interests?

I’m reminded of Fight Club where Tyler says, ”You are not your job.”  I am not my job, but I willingly take on those labels specifically when people ask me what I do for a living.  But in reality, that says so very little about me.  In fact, it says near to nothing. 

So I asked myself: what do I do for a Living? Not my job, but my dreams and joys.  What do I do to experience life?  What would I call myself? 

Thinker. Dancer. Writer. Blogger. Singer.  Lover. Pennsic-goer. Reinactor. Traveler.  Seeker.  Retail Therapist.  Activist.   

So what is it that you do for a Living? 

These things can always be looked at several different ways.  After listening to WNYC’s RadioLab on “Where Am I?”, I was very uncertain about the brain’s role in religion and spirituality, and how we might create the “proof” for these beliefs.  When the brain loses track of the body, experiences similar to “near-death experiences” occur.  Perhaps these situations are merely a reaction of the brain being confused? Does this call into question other spiritual experiences as really being physical manifestations of some issue, misinterpreted as something esoteric?

Then Dr. Taylor has this stroke of inspiration, which I’m reposting here.  She was featured in the New York Times just last week.  According to Dr. Taylor, nirvana is attainable by choosing to behave and perceive using more of one’s right hemisphere.  There isn’t clarity of exactly how one is supposed to go about doing that (perhaps you need to buy the book?) 

But it is an interesting proposal.  Add in the RadioLab information, and the question becomes even more convoluted. 

First - is it merely an electrical stimulus of the brain we are perceiving as peace? 

Second - does it matter? Does the fact that one can choose to be in nirvana make it less desirable to attain?  Less of a challenge?  I mean think about it - part of the method of attaining nirvana was to let go of the physical - and now we have some indication that nirvana is purely phyiscal?  A matter of making synapses happen more on the right brain than the left.  Does that alter our understanding of most metaphysical teachings?  Meditation?

Perhaps spirituality has less to do with what’s OUT THERE as opposed to what’s IN US, and how we connect to others. 

Anyway - have a look.  (If this video isn’t working for you, go here.)

I was sent this earlier today:

Edit: By the way, the webcomic for this is hilarious, and all geeks should get on this asap!

As a beginning, I would say that I am too often prompted to make posts by reading Penelope’s Brazen Careerist blog.  And rarely because we are discussing careers.

She posted, on Monday, about the Emily Gould article on the NYTimes.  I’d already started reading this post last week because it was left up on the Mac at home (which was probably a fortuitous accident rather than a planned jab).  At that time I’d only ready one page before I had to start preparing for my weekend activities.  Today, I read the whole thing.  My review?  Eerily accurate in the description of online addiction to immediate gratification and communication.  Otherwise?  Sort of a prodigal daughter story mixed with your average rise and fall of a job experience.  Just because it was in the fast-paced and exciting “blogging” career-field doesn’t make it any different than any other job experience.

However, beyond Penelope’s response of a jealous-tinged, “No one is special.  Get over yourself,” it makes me begin to think about online exposure and what propels us to be so open.

It’s an interesting topic.  Privacy is something we fought to protect, and has been included in the interpretation of the 9th Amendment to the Constitution.  How often do we receive privacy notices in the mail, or agree to them online?  Regulation S-P has pushed privacy into the forefront of the investment world.  We can opt out of mailings, opt out of getting phone calls.  How many times do we assert that other people can’t tell us how to live our own lives?  All on the basis of privacy.

So, how do we explain our nation’s growing love of invading privacy and displaying our lives openly?

The Emily Gould article discusses the online blogging phenomenon in a way that  I think many online bloggers might find a little too close to home.  It seems that online, we feel much more safe to share our personal information than if perhaps someone called us and asked.  If someone were to open our diary and tell everyone what we feel, we might freak out.  But we in essence do the same in our blogging world.  Some of us use alternate names for the people involved, but others do not.  And sometimes they don’t have to - as in the Emily article, or with Penelope, we all know who the individual is.  What prompts us to share so much of ourselves online?

Add in myspace, Twitter, and other online apps that allow you to keep in touch all the time, across the globe, and it becomes dizzying how much our culture is moving towards compromising our own privacy.  I admit - I easily put information out there about my life, at times perhaps more than I should. 

Let’s go further - what about Reality T.V.?  No longer happy with the typical soap opera fiction, we have show after show that delves into the lives of real people and their dramas.  The axiom to avoid airing your dirty laundry has changed to promote putting it all out there - even the stained underwear.  And it isn’t just an American phenomenon - Europe loves Reality TV. Reality tv is the definition of uncomfortable levels of sharing - it really exemplifies the whole “watching a train wreck” phenomenon. 

But at the same time, it also evokes a sense of salvation and after-school specials.  Lessons that used to be learned after 30 minutes of family sitcoms like the Cosby Show are now lived out, in painstaking episode after episode, inviting us to learn about “raw and uncut” human nature.  Either you are unsave-able (remember Omarosa of The Apprentice?) or a stray sheep who just needs a little direction to get back to the flock (just about anyone on The Biggest Loser, The Nanny, etc.)  Each person’s success or downfall is watched, discussed, and analyzed.  What did they do wrong?  Who deserves to win?  What are good traits to have, and what are failures?

Even within fictional tv shows such as Sex and the City, we are getting more and more personal in our displays and discussion.  The topics go deeper into the human condition.  Six Feet Under gets pretty vivid into our relationship with life- and with death.

Penelope’s blog is about where work and personal life intersect - and perhaps that’s a telling statement in of itself.  In our workplaces, we hear more and more about work-life balance (subject of future post) which makes us feel as if the two are interconnected more than they used to be.  Dealing with individual’s feelings about their job, their goals and personal issues have become a part of what your manager has to think of on your review.  These things used to not be part of the workplace, but today, you are quite the recluse if you don’t share what you did over the weekend, or talk about someone’s upcoming divorce.

Both Penelope and Emily talk about how they are “moved” to be completely honest with their readers, to share their innermost feelings.  This seems to set them apart from the crowd of bloggers who still use vague references or pen names - and garner them a whole lot of flak from commenters…and family. But is it really them, or a growing cultural phenomenon to open up to strangers?  They aren’t the only ones doing it.  And as Penelope points out, history has had those who felt the need to chronicle their lives and experiences. 

Why would we have this desire to open up to strangers anyway?  It seems antithetical in a world where identity theft is very real and information management is big money.  Even branding has a lot to do with projecting the right brand information out there, not all the brand information.  Is it narcissism and self-infatuation?

Or could it be born of a lack of community?  In our world we are so very separated from each other physically.  Once upon a time, we had a community of people we interacted with, we shared with, we lived around.  Now, this is less so - and perhaps that prompts us to seek out new communities (Livejournal, Tribe, myspace, Facebook, blogs…) in which we can get that human connection again.  In a world where it is sometimes deemed weird to look people in the eye while walking down the street, we feel able to talk about our favorite sexual position online.  Or share our poetry.  What we did last weekend.  Our breakup, our loss of a friend, our one-night-stand, our embarrassing drunken situation.  Things we might only tell a diary or a close friend…

And further - we are able to be whatever we want to be.  In the physical community, if you talked a lot about being a dancer, but no one ever saw you dance, few would believe your initial statement.  Now, someone can go online and do a minimal amount of researching to have an opinion on anything, and then position oneself as being part of that community.  And few people will be able to check your credibility because they don’t REALLY know you, despite how many IM’s you share.  Perhaps we feel free in expressing everything not because we feel close to the people on the net but because we feel separate from them - protected?  From revelation, from being who we really are, from having to explain ourselves.  Entitlement?

These are all just theories and thoughts - I don’t have an answer.  But I’d like your theories and thoughts.  I’d also like to throw out a couple of questions for those who inspire my post.  I’d really like to get insight into the source of their sharing.

Penelope:  What drives you to post about your personal life?   You could just write a diary and keep it to yourself, or write emails in gory detail to a friend.  What prompts you to feel you should share these things with others? Is it a feeling?  A liberation?  Is it a self-established code that you live by?

Emily:  Your article really seems to indicate that you feel the person you were who shared everything was the wrong person to be and that you’ve changed.  What makes you feel you should share less?  Is it your negative experiences?  What is it that pushes you to distance yourself from the online sharing - and why do you think that is better than what you were doing? 

Ran into an interesting article today - U.S. Postal Service Begins E-Waste Recycling Program

This is the first national program for the U.S. and is set to try and deal with the 2 million tons of e-waste we generate each year. Right now, it is only available in a few cities, but if it is successful, it will expand nationwide this fall. 

How will it work?  The Post Office will provide pre-paid envelopes in which you can put your unwanted electronics - digital cameras, printer cartridges, MP3 players, blackberries, cell phones and PDAs.  These will be mailed to Clover Technologies Group who will either refurbish them or strip them of all their components and recycled.  Clover pays for the postage for the envelopes, so our postage will not go up.  Additionally, Clover has a zero-to-landfill policy that is ideal.

You should be able to pick up the envelopes at the Post Office, and then drop the filled envelopes into any blue postal box.  Easy, right?  I think so!  I may even go down to Chicago to pick up some of these envelopes so that I can support the program for the future.

If successful nationwide, other electronics may also be included in the program. 

This isn’t the first program running at the post office.  Did you know they also have a program for recycling lightbulbs? I didn’t.  It is for CFLs, and you have to go and buy the recycling kits from Sylvania.  Not as sweet as the Clover program, by far.  And other alternatives exist. 

But it is nice to see the Post Office getting involved. 

I think this may, in fact, be true.

Take off your cynicsm hat, and put on your open-mind cap.  And dispose of any “psychological clap-trap” judgment meters.  This may push the boundaries of self-help, but give it a chance.

I was contemplating upon many things that have happened in my life, including my recent impending divorce.  PNC (Personal Negativity Coach) stepped in and said, ”Guess Love doesn’t really conquer all.”

And I felt down.  I felt like somehow I’d failed to do…whatever it was I was supposed to do to save my failed marriage.  That if I’d really “loved” this person, that it should have worked.  I felt as if I’d neglected to follow the blueprint for a successful marriage, and that I didn’t love “enough”.

Or - the converse - that love is really just sort of a nice thing to have in a relationship, but it isn’t necessary or dependable.  That “head-over-heels” will ultimately become “bending-over-backwards” and “laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank”.  Furthermore, that love is only one aspect of many aspects of marriage that needs to be sound.

While I don’t disagree with the latter statement that love cannot be all you have in a relationship, it still doesn’t fit that whole idea that Love Conquers All.  So - there I was, feeling low for a moment in thinking that either A) I was a failure at Love or B) Love is not as powerful as it seems.

Option B is surprising to me.  I am moved to do so many things through Love, moved further than any other feeling moves me.  I sacrifice more, I give more, I am more vulnerable to fulfill the mandates of Love.  I would have once said that Love moves me to make poor choices, as well.  So, not only was I possibly a failure at Love, but it might be less worthwhile to pursue.  How depressing is that?

But something inside me disagreed.  I recognized a voice that was distinctly NOT PNC.

No.

It isn’t the lack of Love, or that Love is less powerful than believed to be.  It is the shifting of Love.  The balance of it.  Love does not push me towards poor choices.  Instead, I love the poor choice more than I love choosing something better.  I loved a man more than I loved myself, more than a healthy relationship.

It was only because I began to love myself again that I chose to leave. It seems odd, because in those dark moments you seem so very far from loving yourself.  In those stark times of making the final decision to leave, you wonder how you could love yourself, how the shattered pieces of what you had represent how UNlove-able you are. 

But in reality, you are making that decision to choose a better you.  To allow yourself to be loved - by you, by someone else.  To choose something healthy over something unhealthy, no matter how much it may seem to hurt you at this time.  Because you Love, you choose wisely.

This brings me to realize that many of those old axioms about fools and blindness in Love are missing something.  There are hundreds of sayings: I am two fools I know, for loving, and for saying so - Love is blind - To be wise and love is scarcely granted to the angels above.  And sure, many people who are experiencing the first light of Love seem to be heart-sick, unable to see someone’s faults, wearing rose-colored glasses and all the other trite phrases. 

Maybe Love really doesn’t grow until that “glowing” phase goes away.  Until you interweave yourself with this other person.  Or in the case of self, until you sit inside your own being and really feel.  Building a Love for yourself enables you to open up and truly Love others, beyond dependency, beyond allaying loneliness.

When you really Love, you see the person for who they are.  And you see yourself for who you are.  You make choices wisely for the good of both of you.    The sacrifices you make take into account the balance of Loving someone and Loving yourself.  Love helps you to see how you can be happy for yourself and with another.  And Love helps you see when it is time to move on.

That is the powerful nature of Love. 

Amor Vincit Omnia.  Love conquers all.

I would like to introduce you to someone.  Someone very personal to me, who knows everything about me, and is always ready to give an opinion …that will bring me down.

I’d like you to meet PNC, my Personal Negativity Coach.  PNC is the voice that exists in the back of my head that is always willing to negate my actions, goals and feelings.  PNC takes personal pleasure out of being judgmental, divisive and generally complaining.  PNC is bolstered to greater success when something truly negative does happen - a bad experience at work, negative feedback from a friend, or a car blowing up just as one gets onto the Beltway through Madison. 

In fact, PNC is resilient and ever-ready.  PNC takes paranoia to a new level by getting involved in my daily observation of the world and trying to classify everything - usually to my detriment.  That person talking quietly near you?  Obviously, they are talking about you.  That email you got with the ambigiously professional language?  That means the writer is upset with you and distancing themselves.  Truly, there is no end to the possibilities for PNC in Negativeland (which is also the name of an interesting band.)

Don’t paint me a freak.  I don’t follow PNC’s advice all the time, or even give him much of my attention.  It’s in those moments when I’m feeling low that I can hear the voice a little more clearly.  I’m actually a generally positive person. Many times, my hopeful and energetic nature impedes me from acknowledging the real difficulty of getting around obstacles until later.  Which is why it is always good that I sit with an idea or goal for a while before running ahead on it (as evidence, please take note of the tote of fabric I own, yet I still do not know how to sew and therefore have not completed any of the projects I was so excited to start).  I am generally open to new experiences and don’t let fears stop me from doing things I want to do…or at least initially trying them.

It’s just that when you are having major changes in your life, PNC feels he has a duty to raise his voice and question everything you think, do, say or feel. 

And PNC is not always wrong - which is why it is hard to just discredit him.  For example, I recently came to terms with the fact that I should work more on listening to people.  PNC has been telling me this in ways for years.  But now, I am realizing that what I thought was “listening” was really more like hearing.  That I may listen, but I am not a “good listener.”

And that means listening to PNC too.  Listening to what PNC has to say and connecting that with what feats I harbor about myself, my world, and my choices.  Hearing the inner voice, but not letting it rule me.  In fact, using it to undermine PNC by really making an effort to keep negativity from invading my life.

I know I’m not the only one that has ties with PNC.  PNC is known by others often as their “Inner Critic” and sometimes as “The Mind” if you read the Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle (yes, he does sort of remind me of a deranged elf.  Next question.)

Negativity exists, but dwelling on it can be damaging to yourself.  It’s been shown that negativity is easily absorbed and changes how your brain works.  Happy people are better able to think logically, as cited by Creating Passionate Users’ blog article on “Angry/Negative People Can Be Bad For Your Brain.”  Specifically interesting in this article is the reference to Mirror Neurons.  Mirror Neurons reveal so much potential for the individual that it would be crazy, nay, ludicrous to waste that potential with negativity.

And as proof that negativity affects your brain, and therefore your feelings and decisions, the AP reports that negative political ads actually work.  It causes a lot of philosophical ideas, including free will, into question. Personally, when I see negative ads, it makes me dislike the person putting them on the t.v. more.  Perhaps that classifies me as an independent.

I got a ton taken care of this weekend - many things done, bedroom final coat of paint on, artwork framed that I’ve owned for over 6 years, artwork frames that Jason’s owned for a long time too.  Awning fixed, walk taken through the park, breakfast eaten on the balcony, dishes done, aerator replaced in bathroom, visit to the BGB and discussion had there, friends renewed, games purchased and played, sickness overcome, magnetic paint obtained, magnets obtained, light switch fixed.  Good time had in general.

So, at 6pm I sat down to do some work, and I’m finding that the Network is down - or I just can’t connect to the Law Department’s files.  This is what I get for putting it off till Sunday night, but really, who wouldn’t have? 

And today is so sunny, beautiful.  The grill is popping and a chicken is being made for dinner with some homemade pilaf and roasted veggies.  I will try again later tonight, but really - what can I do?  I can work on my impromtu poems.

This is Just To Say

I did not work
from home
this weekend
as I promised 

network’s down
6pm on a sunny
Sunday
evening

Forgive me
the park beckoned
and I was
so happy.

This Is Just to Say

I have eaten
the plums
that were in
the icebox

and which
you were probably
saving
for breakfast

Forgive me
they were delicious
so sweet
and so cold

There was a bit on This American Life about this poem, and how many offshoots it has inspired.  There are many takes on what this poem really is saying, but most agree that he is not truly apologizing, but instead saying, “I couldn’t help myself, I am not sorry, but I hope you won’t be mad.”  Or does he even care if she is mad?  And is he feigning the uncertainty about her breakfast?

It made me think that there are many things that fall into this category.  It’s like the old joke, “I’m just sayin’”.  The situation where you say, “You’re fat,” to someone and they get upset, and somehow, responding with, “I’m just sayin’” somehow indicates that it just had to be said, and it really isn’t your fault.  Like that statement makes everything cool now.

So, I might, here and there, as inspired by This American Life, occasionally post a This Is Just to Say poem about something I am going to do, or did, that I’m not really sorry about, but I really would like people to not be upset.  They may be real, or they may be figments of my imagination.  Whatever inspires me.

 And they might not even happen…so in that eventuality, I’ll start with one right now.

This is Just to Say

I have not posted
poems mimicing
his style and arrogance

Which I stated
I would post
in earnest.

Forgive me,
But this is my blog
and I change my mind
often.

I’m having a dilemma - one I thought I’d never face. 

I want a hybrid vehicle.  It’s part of who I want to be and how I want to express myself as an environmentalist.  Soon, my vehicle will not be staying together terribly well, and it is an opportunity to trade in for a better, greener vehicle.

But I can’t decide.  A year ago, there wouldn’t have been a question: I wanted a Toyota Prius.  Hands down.  It’s a roomy mid-sized car that’s been around for 10 years and everyone I’ve spoken to LOVES theirs.  I mean, how could you not love it?  Just take a look at it!

Today, I am not as sure that a Prius will serve my needs.  Today, given the things I want to do (camp, go on road trips cross country, cart around a couple kids someday, do bellydance gigs) it seems like a Ford Escape Hybrid is what I would want.  It’s got more space for supplies and the junk I’ll need to cart around on these trips.

This makes me feel badly, however.  I feel like I should not be giving into the idea of “bigger is better”.  And I’d only really need the Escape on trips for camping, dance seminars, events with a number of people involved - I wouldn’t need it to get to work, or go to the grocery.  In fact, I probably don’t even need a vehicle at all for local stuff - I could walk or ride a bus.  But for the larger, longer, involving more stuff trips (specifically the camping), the Prius probably wouldn’t cut it for carrying the stuff I would need.

Furthermore, aren’t SUVs a part of the problem?  Isn’t the idea of a hybrid SUV like a low-fat brownie? The brownie isn’t good for you, but at least it isn’t as bad for you as it once was.  I don’t want to be a part of the problem, a neon-green environmentalist.  I want to make a difference with my choices.

There’s the other hand that says - by buying the Escape Hybrid, I am telling Ford that green is good, and they will pump more dollars into green technology, right?  Or am I saying - Hey, I don’t really want to compromise, so keep giving me these half-hearted attempts to make me feel better about my choices, but not really make any dramatic change?

Don’t get me wrong - moving in a green direction is better for everyone, all around.  All of the vehicles should be getting this sort of mileage, if not better.  We should have electric options, fuel-cell options - whatever will make a difference.

But I don’t want to be one of those people who buys a hybrid SUV and feels I’ve done enough to better the earth. 

But I also can’t be someone who lives entirely off a bicycle and mass transit (at least the crappy version that Milwaukee offers) - I will need a car of some sort that can carry stuff.

There has to be a way to balance this situation - can I only use the Escape for those long trips, and have no other car? Can I sacrifice in other ways in my life to ensure I’m living as green as possible?  Needless to say, I have a lot of green hope, but not a whole lot of green action.

And one of the best ways to be actively green is to not purchase more than you need.

There are probably some ways to get around this, but I’m not sure what they are yet.  If you have any ideas or suggestions for how to deal with occasional SUV-sized travel needs, but otherwise live in a small to mid-sized car world, let me know.