Choose

There are thirty people in a room.  There are explosives tied to these thirty people.  There is a madman,  in a remote location with his finger on the detonator, and he is waiting for you to make a decision.  You say the word, and he will push the button, annihilating those thirty people.  But also, in his other hand is another button that he is just as willing to push.  All you have to do is tell him which one.  This other button can remotely detonate a different location, on the other side of town.  This other room has a single person in it.  Which button do you tell him to push?  There are no other choices.  He is going to press one with or without you telling him which one.  If you do decide to tell him which one to push, he will comply with your wishes, but no matter what, he is going to push one.

We now arrive at a moral dilemma.  How could we possibly choose someone to die?  Who are we to play God?  Well, the obvious choice is to save the thirty people by losing the one, right?  Could you really tell this madman, "Yes, go ahead and kill the guy."  Congratulations, you just saved thirty people!  But, conversely, you will have to live with the fact that you are responsible for someone's death.  You may justify it to yourself because of the thirty you saved.  

Let's think about this again, but with a minor change.  Imagine the one person alone in room number two is a loved one.  A spouse, a child, mother, father, whatever.  Someone you love very deeply.  Now what?  Still save the thirty people?  

For a while, I thought about it and decided, "Nope!  I will not make the call.  I will let this lunatic with the two buttons decide which one to press and then I can live on, conscience clear of any wrong doing because it was not me who decided that someone should die.  Of course!," I said to myself.  "Well played.  I guessed the correct answer, ethics in tact."  But the more I thought about, the less sure I was.  What about this:  the madman will press both buttons if you don't come to a decision.  This puts a kink in the idea that not deciding is a morally sound choice.  More people die if you don't tell him which to press.

The point I guess I'm trying to make, albeit in a non-intuitive way, is that sometimes we are forced to choose the lesser of two evils.  When no choice is a good choice, at least maybe one could be a better choice.  We often meander through life in this way, making acceptable choices given a buffet of choices, some good, some bad.  Then, as in a game of chess, we sacrifice a good choice for a bad one, because sometimes the risk of a bad choice is acceptable.  Just like sacrificing a pawn to get in a position to take a better piece, a rook, perhaps.

Our goal, in life, is to make good choices more often than bad, and to delineate the lesser of two evils and choose that one, and to weigh the consequences of a bad choice and decide if it is worth making.  Most people, I would guess, make decent choices.  But I wonder, too, what makes a choice decent?  If I benefit from a choice, is it then a good choice?  Ideally, and I'm really only postulating since I just don't know what the right answer really is, or if there even IS one, a person should settle on a choice that benefits one's self while not infringing on someone else's ability to make good choices.

I would like to think of this as the meaning of life:  to be faced with a cavalcade of choices and always try to choose either the best ethical option or the lesser of evils.  Depending on your particular religious belief, if we are to be judged upon death, those choices become extremely important--in fact, it is what we are being judged against.  And even though it's a BIG no-no, let's face it, we judge the hell out of others too.  How people view you is wholly based on what choices you have made and how predictable you will be when you are confronted with a future decision.  When we feel that we can predict, with some level of accuracy, what someone else's choice in a given matter will be, we feel like we know them.  We are comfortable with them.  Our entire life is defined by the choices we make, is what I guess I'm saying.  And we choose to be close with people that would make similar choices.

When they are cornered and must make the best choice among bad options, it is then that we see a person's mettle, it is then that a leader can be born, or a will can be shattered.  Decisions can be tough sometimes, and hindsight can always force someone to second guess, no matter the choice.

So the clock is ticking.  Choose wisely.  Look at the big picture and never, under ANY circumstances, get into a situation where you must decide who gets blown up.

7 Reasons People Fail

Everyone fails. Sadly, everyone fails more often than they succeed. If success were easy, it wouldn't be a goal worthy of attainment. So, let's go! It's just around the corner! A little effort and you've got it! In this blog, I postulate that success isn't hard. I also postulate that when we fail, we fail most often because of inward influences. I postulate, (now I'm just using the word gratuitously) that there is a proven method of success for every endeavor you may wish to pursue. If it can be done, chances are, someone's already done it, right? I'm obviously not speaking absolutely, here! Gee whiz! Cut me some slack. There are things that have never been done....trying to beat world records and such. I mean generally speaking. Most things that you, or anyone, wish to do, have already been done by someone. So, no matter what your goal, no matter what the measure of your success may be, there are things that keep us from that goal. The list, however, contained herein, may not be a complete list. There may be other, personal influences keeping you from success, but it's likely that most or all of the obstacles you face are in this blog somewhere. So, without further narration, as I tend to be long winded....can writing be long winded?....maybe the term is long prose-ded....or expositionous? Now I'm just making up words. The point is...the list of reasons why I have surmised that most people fail:

1. Lack of ability. This is one of the few seemingly external reasons people fail. And even though, upon first glance, it seems like an external reason, it's still internal. Lack of ability. Is the lack of ability really a lack of ability? Or is it a lack of practice? A lack of research? A lack of understanding of what you are trying to succeed at? Have you devoured every scrap of information on the subject? Have you studied the people successful at this same thing and understand how they arrived at success? Success, at any endeavor, requires an understanding of the process it takes to be successful at it. That's why the beginning of this blog, I stated that there is a proven method of success for any endeavor. Obviously, someone has seen success in the same field in which you are striving for success. Learn their story. History can teach you about possible pitfalls, before you have to experience them. Lack of ability, to me, really boils down to lack of knowledge. Make no mistake, though, knowledge of the success of others doesn't mean instant success. There are other factors. Let's explore another one.

2. Lack of effort. You can have an amazing grasp of what it takes to be successful in whatever area you are trying to be successful in. But understanding and education are static. Now, you must act on them. Lack of effort is one of the strongest contributing factors of failure. You didn't try hard enough. You didn't put everything you had into it. Most of the rest of the reasons for failure explore the motive behind this lack of effort. There is no amount of research you can do on a topic that will cover for it. There is no amount of conditioning or practice that makes up for not being fully invested when it matters most.

3. Self defeatism. Just who do you think you are, trying to do this? You must have some nerve! You are a fake! You are a fraud! All your life you've been a nobody. All your life you have failed at everything you've tried. You should quit now, while you're ahead, so you don't have to experience another failure. We tell ourselves all the time what we cannot do. Eventually, we start to believe it. The clichéd phrase "a can-do attitude" is desirable because if someone has it, they are willing to at least give it a try. Are you willing to give it a try? Are you going to try it, but then convince yourself that it's beyond you? This is a mental battle and it's hard because you can't clearly see to opponents, two sides. This is why we believe ourselves. Surely our own subconscious has our best interests in mind? If you can't trust yourself, who can you trust? This requires a paradigm shift, and it's not simple to do. It is case by case. Don't let yourself fail before you've tried. A positive mental attitude can bring you to the finish line.

4. Fear. This is a tough one because it requires you to explore what it is, exactly, that you are afraid of. I mean, beyond just the failure. As an example, I will tell you what I fear the most when it comes to success. I fear that I will not have a lack of effort, that I will not self defeat, that I will try my hardest.....and still fail. Because of this fear, I often choose to save face, let people see that I didn't try my hardest. It's a fail safe. If I succeed, then great. If I fail, well, obviously, I wasn't trying as hard as I could have. And people know it. Once upon a time, I was an excellent basketball player. The people that knew me and my ability always picked me first for their team. Because of it, there was pressure to perform, to succeed in the role they believed that I could fulfill. Often, when I was not playing to what I thought was my best, I purposefully stopped exerting my usual effort. People knew that I wasn't trying my hardest, and I was content with them thinking that. My pride simply couldn't handle people thinking that I had played my best and still performed substandard. It was, at the time, a happy compromise. But, of course, a simple game of basketball is less important that the real success we try to achieve everyday in our personal and professional lives.

5. Importance level/Commitment. This almost should go without saying, but it's a point that, however apparent, must be stated. If the importance level of the success is not high, who cares? If your commitment to it is not high, then failure becomes an acceptable option. Why even try to begin with? If it isn't important, brush it off and move on to other endeavors that meet the requirement. Are you wasting time and energy on trying not to fail at something that is inconsequential? Are you draining time and energy from something that isn't inconsequential? This is a common misdirect. Focus on the things that matter. If you spend a lot of time cleaning your house and take pride in every pillow on the couch being in place, the curtains just right, everything organized and being in its place, what does all of that matter if ITS BURNING TO THE GROUND?! Grab a fire extinguisher, call the fire department! To hell with your bed being made! Focus on things that matter. Look at the big picture as often as you can remember to.

6. Complacency. After seeing the same thing for so long, as humans, we learn to accept it. That's why some of these reality TV shows are even in existence. They make over homes and people, rescue failing restaurants, teach parents how to discipline their kids, show people how to lose weight, etc. We get complacent. Don't feel too bad about it, though, it's human nature. We need an outside view, sometimes, to pull us out of our complacency. Imagine if we could look at our home, or business, or life with an outsider's eyes. Try it. It's tough. You really have to think about it. But it's possible. The point is, then, don't get complacent.

7. Refusal to change. If it's not working one way, try a different way. People have failed because of the simple inability to admit that the decision they made failed. Why continue to do something if its not working? It's not going to miraculously and suddenly start working. Change it. If you own a failing restaurant and you opened it as a steakhouse, but there are ten other steakhouses nearby, not only did you not follow rule number one, you are holding on to a failing decision. You need to switch your cuisine to something the market has a need for. Seems obvious, right? Your pride is in your way. It may also be a bit if rule number six-complacency, but the bottom line is: you need to make a change. Don't not change and continue to be unsuccessful. Take the leap. Change. The new decision may also fail, but at least you have eliminated another failing idea to get to the successful one.

Anyone who has been a success at anything has experienced multiple failures before the success, from Ernest Hemingway to Michael Jordan. It is how we respond to failures that will define us as successes and usually, when people succeed, we all reap the rewards of their successes.

Are You A Good Person? (Intention vs Action vs Perception vs Reality)

The thought has occurred to me on many occasions and it is just now that I have decided to consciously notate it here, quasi-indelibly. By it's very nature, I'm not sure that the word "indelible" can be prefixed with the word "quasi" but I use it loosely to begin with because by "quasi" I mean that this blog is only as permanent as allowed by its owners which, in every case, is not me and can therefore be rendered a death of which i cannot control. But I'm getting off topic here, so let me reign it back in...

The thought has occurred to me on many occasions: What makes a person good? I suppose first we must agree on an absolute definition of what we take for goodness. I don't typically deal in absolutes, because nothing, to me, is an absolute. Yet, to be fair and to stifle variables, to quell arguments of the definition of such a subjective idea, let us suppose that "good" in the most narrow scope as possible means morally and ethically sound according to the most popular consensus of what people understand it to be. The Christian bible is as good a place to start as any, because, though most people may not know it, this is the ultimate rule book that dictates what most of society considers right and good. It lays out an ethical code one should follow for righteousness. Religious or not, most of the world population can agree with many of the rules the book puts forth. In fact, I posit that we all know them so well, we could usually make an accurate guess at what choice, in an endless sea of choices, would be more ethically sound, given any number of scenarios. Then we come to that Einsteinian problem of relativity. From a different vantage point, a good choice could be a bad choice, and so the question then becomes "good for whom?" But for the moment, I will dispense of all relativistic issues, dispense of all subjective possibilities and throw out tedious interpretations of what good really means. Lets get basic.

So, really now, what makes a person good? Four possibilities. One. What if there were an intention of goodness, but the end result turned out bad? Two. What if there were an intention of goodness, everything worked out, and it turned out good? Three--the darker possibilities: What if there were an intention of evil, but things went wrong, and the end result is good? And finally, four, what if there were evil intentions, success, and the evil idea came to fruition? I contend that it is intention that makes a person good. Even if something turns out bad, it is the intention of the individual that really shows where their heart is. I'm talking true intention, here, not simply saying that good intentions were present. But then there's another problem, and funny how logic problems can turn a simple solution into a dilemma so quickly. We now have a problem of perception against reality.

Perception IS reality. What I perceive to be true and real, really is true and real--to me. If I perceive the ocean to be yellow and the sky to be red, these things are real to me. I'm sorry, but no amount of arguing will convince me otherwise. The rest of the world could see the ocean and sky as blue, and that would be their perception, their reality. But not mine. And so my point is that perception is reality and we all live in vastly different worlds of reality. It could be a tone of voice that changes a positive statement to a negative one. I hear the tone of voice and interpret it as sarcasm. You hear that same tone of voice but interpret it as emphasis. The interpretation can change our perception of reality. And whatever we perceive is real to us. To tie this all together, I'm basically saying that I can see a good action, despite the disposition of the intention and perceive someone as a good person. Their intention could have been negative in nature, but they failed and a good action came about. In my perceived reality, that is a good person despite the intention they had to do evil. So, then, can intention really matter at all in the scheme of things?

I think there is no accurate way to decide if someone is good. We can only judge by a person's actions, never by their intentions. We are in a best guess scenario when it comes to judging others. If we see that most of an individual's actions are good in nature, we might be able to correctly assume that their intentions align with those actions. But that's all it ever is: an assumption.

The only thing we can truthfully decide upon is whether or not we are good people. It is a self assessment. We know our own intentions. We understand our own motives. But we are in a brilliant world, a world congested with competing personalities, all trying to assess one another.

This all comes down to a skill most of us have adeptly refined. It's one that I believe holds a negative impact on one's righteousness. And that skill is perception manipulation. We constantly try to force other people's perceptions. We want people to see us a certain way. We want to inflict an impression of ourselves onto someone else. So we weave a reality from the fabric of perception. The intention here is to control the environment, to hold the power of how people perceive reality. We want to be the puppet masters controlling the show and we try, with all of our might to force the view. Again, I feel that this is negative behavior. We all want to be good. We all want to be liked. The power is truly in the hands of those who release the attempt to control perception. Live life. Create your own reality. Let others perceive their own reality without interference. It is then, perhaps, that you have become a good person.

OZ The Great And Powerful (movie review)

I remember my mom and dad setting my sister and I down in front of the TV about once a year for the annual CBS playing of The Wizard Of OZ. Not only did we love watching it because it was a great movie, it aired in the evening and we got to stay up just a little later than normal. I can't remember if we watched it every year, or if we even watched it more than the one year I am currently recalling, but I remember, this one time in particular, at least, it was a family event. That is the memory I associate with the original movie. How could a new rendition of the original even compare? And after watching RETURN TO OZ? Forget it. That movie ruined my belief that a new OZ movie could work. Return to OZ was a decent movie, but it was too different, too weird. As a stand alone movie it would have been better, but they really bastardized a classic there.

So The bottom line becomes the top line: I have decided that I liked the movie. Shame on me, I didn't build up any suspense! A movie review is suppose to build pros and cons and then, to keep the readers in suspense(and hopefully to keep them reading), I'm suppose to reveal my final assessment at the end. Well, if you haven't noticed yet, I'm not really into doing or writing what is expected. So my final assessment is that the movie was good. Here are my observations during and after viewing the film, for whatever it may be worth:

The word "prequel" is not in my Oxford English Dictionary for a reason. It's not really a word. Spellcheck, however, has maintained it's relevance by adding the word to its list of recognized terminology, slang added for the sheer purpose of helping one understand the trends in today's ever changing world of misguided and perverse twistings of a once eloquent language. I once took a creative writing course in college, in an attempt to hone my fiction-writing skills into something entertaining, or at very worst, readable. We were coached in multiple assignments to open the story with an attention grabber. Invest the reader immediately, to dispense with initial exposition. This is why George Lucas started with Episode IV with no intention (at the time) for Episodes I II and III. It's why he started Dr. Jones in a cave, deep in a jungle and hunting for a golden statue right off the bat. A prequel, by its very nature, should be expositional. It's all the mush before the main action starts. A good writer can make anything into a compelling story, but because it should have been a boring description of events leading up to the really cool stuff, it ends up being forced despite the skill of the screenwriter. Don't get me wrong. Writing a prequel must be way more difficult than writing an original. There are already world rules established. There are already fans that will be expecting these rules to be followed and they'll also be extremely critical with any liberties that might be taken. Yes, a prequel is a difficult write, indeed. So this new OZ, this highly computer animated, visually spectacular feature is a prequel to the original, if you didn't know. It, in a nutshell, is the wizard's venture into OZ and what he must overcome to establish himself as such. The movie never gives us much of a timeframe in respect to its relation to the first film, but it does give us a date at the beginning and eludes to a timeframe by reference of names and generations. But you've gotta be sharp to catch it.
The opening credits were a striking embodiment of Danny Elfman's musical signature. Danny Elfman, composer of the Beetlejuice score, Edward Scissorhands, and a slew of other Tim Burton films, has a distinct staccato, circusy sound that is difficult to ignore. Going into it, I didn't know that he was the composer of the score and while he composes great music, I would not have thought he could pull it off. Refreshingly, his signature was subtle and only widely considered during the opening. His score didn't pull me out of the world of OZ and if anything, his subtlety amplified the experience. Kudos to Danny Elfman. He exercised his compositional maturity by scaling back and not overpowering the action.
Homage was payed often and respectfully to the original film. It began in black and white, but not only that, it was in a 4:3 aspect ratio: a square box. It's an aspect ratio used for the old square tube TVs. In other words, it was not formatted to fit the movie theater's screen. Upon entering OZ, the aspect ratio smoothly and slowly corrects for wide screen and the color appears. I knew it would happen, but the transition was done nicely. L. Frank Baum, the creator of The Wonderful Wizard Of OZ, was given his due respects in the opening scene. We begin with a carnival, the Baum's Brothers', indicated by the banner at the entrance. It's starts the movie on a good note, I think, even though the opening felt at least a little contrived. The camera panned past carnival barkers until it arrived at the great wizard's trailer, who, straight away, was revealed to be a womanizing fraud. But it was the carnival barkers that made me feel that the movie would be an imposter. It felt almost too--stage act. Does that make sense? The scene's only saving grace was that the barkers could still be heard once they were off camera, making me relax a little, knowing that their lines went beyond the scope of the camera, adding a little bit, albeit, JUST a little bit of realism that the scene desperately needs.
This movie, unlike the first, starts at the Emerald City and works it's way back to munchkin land. The route they take is true, first entering the forest, then arriving at the corn field, then into munchkin land. They come to the corn field from the correct direction, which is odd to me that I noticed--but I did, so good. Apparently, they detour through Chinatown, which is not a decree of nationality, but instead a town fully comprised of fine ceramic, china. As in the original, the wizard begins to meet characters which add themselves to his party. I personally did not experience this foray into Chinatown because during this part of the film, I was gently scooting past the people in my row, careful of drinks and being sure not to bump knees. My son, whom I was there with had to use the restroom. Therefore, I only have second hand accounts from my wife and two girls of the existence of Chinatown. I cannot comment further on it, but I did see the result of the wizard's presence there, so I know it probably did happen.
I had a hard time with Theodora, the wicked witch of the west. She was played by Mila Kunis famed actress of That 70's Show and the voice actress of Meg from Family Guy. All I could hear was Meg from Family Guy, and it took me out of the moment on several occasions. Bummer. She played the part very well, but it was hard to look past that recognizable vocal talent and see her as someone--anyone else.
My final gripe is when the wizard first landed his hot air balloon in OZ, the whole thing was overdone. He landed in a river, in his balloon basket and floated down it as he saw many of the natural wonders of OZ. The scene was trying to be fantastic. Giant flowers opened as he passed by, a tree composed of nothing but butterflies scattered and flew all around him. Multicolored songbirds flocked around him, and he passed reeds that made music. It WAS fantastic, but it went on for too long and it was too much, as if the animators were just trying to come up with something to throw in that would be fun to animate. It was simply too much.
As a fan of the original movie, and skeptical that this one would be even remotely decent, I was quite surprised by the strict attention they payed the original and pleasantly surprised that I didn't hate the liberties they did take. Overall, it was entertaining and magical, much like the original. Go see it if you have an opportunity. I suspect the big screen does it more justice than a home television.

Attitude Is Everything

Jamie posted a picture on Facebook today of captain Jack Sparrow. It said, "the problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem." Obviously this cannot really be attributed to Johnny Depp playing a role in a movie. He spoke a line a writer wrote. But the quote is definitely worthy of reflection. I think it holds true.
I have seen it so many times. I've been guilty of it on WAY more than one occasion. I'm sure that you, who are reading this, have committed the foul before. Attitude is everything. Attitude is everything. I had to write it twice. This one idea is the single most powerful idea that can shape who you are, how others view you and how much of an impact you can potentially make in another person's life. People don't typically want to associate with someone who is always negative. Don't misunderstand. There are times when it is appropriate to be down, negative, or irritated. But whatever it is, it's not the end of life, existence, humanity. Step back. It's a problem that can be dealt with and overcome. Doom is NOT nigh. The sooner you pull yourself up by your bootstraps, the sooner you will handle the issue and move past it.
I observe people. I watch closely how people react. Without getting too New Agey here, I get a general feel for people based on how they react to problems. I'm not saying that I can read your aura. It is simply observation. And I may or may not be good at it. All I'm saying is I, like most people, consciously or unconsciously, make a judgement of someone's character based on human interaction. Then, subconsciously, we make a decision on whether or not that person would be someone we want to regularly interact with. Constant negativity is exhausting to deal with. It drains us of positivity. And whether we realize it or not, we tend to push those people away. Now. Here's the hard part. Look in the mirror. Not literally! But just look at yourself and analyze your general attitude. Be honest with yourself. But don't make the call as yourself. The trick here is this: how do other people view your attitude? We all believe ourselves validated. Validated to hate, or be frustrated. Validated to be in a bad mood. Validated to be negative. We have good reason for it--in our own minds. After all, who the hell knows what I've been through today? I spilled hot coffee all over myself right before an important meeting, got a flat tire and accidentally bounced a check. What do people know of my problems? Fuck them if they don't understand why I flew off the handle for something seemingly simple! They don't know what kind of day I've already had! Validate your negative energy. It's what we do. We all have problems. But how do people typically view your attitude? That's the question and the answer is an eye opener. So, as "unholy" as it is to judge, lest WE be judged, let's face it. We should all have law degrees for as much as we judge others. It's human nature. Lets move past it. Everyone forms an opinion about everyone and everything.
Attitude is everything. There. I wrote it three times. I have gotten promoted in my professional life several times, not because I am insanely good at everything I do, but probably more often than not, because of my positive attitude. I'm not saying I'm perfect. I'm far from it. But its the attitude, the "I can handle anything you throw at me" attitude that wins the day. And here's the secret: it is noticed because most people don't have it. You want me to what?? Work a 16 hour shift and no break? Are you fucking craz----? Stop. Sure, I'll do it. Man, don't worry. I got this.
"I gotta be honest, Bill, I was expecting a little pushback. I was nervous about asking you to do this on such short notice." No problem boss. I'm your guy. The impression, now, is that I'm the go-to guy. Bill is good. He doesn't hesitate to do what we ask when we ask it. All because I didn't complain. I just handled it and with a positive attitude. Is being a "yes man" a bad thing? I guess it is if you don't exercise your opinion when you are asked for it. If you disagree, disagree. It's possible to disagree with a positive attitude.
This is a long dissertation on a simple quote, but dammit, attitude is everything! There is no can't (now I sound like Yoda--I'm leaving out the, "there is only do, or do not) or won't, unless it violates your ethical code. Everything else is manageable. Everything else is doable. Be that guy. Be that girl. The one that people know they can go to because you are positive and reliable. Trust me, it is a breath of fresh air in a room stale with negativity, in a sea of, "I can't because...."
Make it happen. Just do it. Nike has cornered the market on this phrase. Push your stupid pride out of the way and just do it.
"The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem." --Captain Jack Sparrow
Thanks, Jamie!

Wear A Purple Hat

     Somewhere deep within, somewhere quietly brooding inside of my psyche, there is a malnourished, socially unkempt, and psychologically naive hunchback of a person clawing at the walls of my brain to be released from the confines of his tiny cell. He emerges occasionally, just to make his presence known, just enough to give his host that odd quirk, that almost normal edge that fools people most of the time. And I beat him back, trying my best to decommission the bastard, but he always recovers and comes on again, just as strong as before, just as nimble and adept at the attempt to fortify his position as the premier personality as he always is.

     At first glance, I fit in. At first glance, I am a social giant, an agent of normal society, outgoing with charm and personality to boot. In a snapshot, I can make the whole seem like a masterpiece, the music heavenly and inspiring--all of that. But I get inside my own mind. My uncontrollable urge to inwardly reflect damages my ability to prove that the whole suite IS a masterpiece. Instead I'm forced to demonstrate the simple etudes and sell people on the fact that the rest is of equal quality. I'm a pretty good salesman. Despite my ability to sell the full suite sight unseen, there are times when a piece of the drivel goes public, leaked beyond my ability to curtail its release. This small fact has made me a master of cleanup, able to reign the crazy back in, and present a beautiful snapshot of sonata in behind it almost immediately. So fast in fact, that people often wonder if that glimpse of mush ever really happened at all. It has become an arrangement I can at least comfortably handle.

     I often wonder if other people have this inward process of thought. If others, too, are suppressing bouts of second guessing, lack of confidence, and unhealthy self examination. Maybe it's human nature. Who can really say they are openly honest 100% of the time? I believe that most people are not. Not are they not honest with others, they probably are not even honest with themselves. But the reality of it is that I really don't know if this is the case at all, and so I can only judge it from my own instincts, my own inward mental activity and strive to at least be honest with myself, which is a hard pill to swallow. That pill is proverbial, for your reference, in case you thought I might ingest a foreign hormonal crutch into the already unbalanced mix. In digression, I think that personal honesty is important to one's development as a human being. It is a facet to life that humanity pays too little attention to. This process of internal awareness and personal growth can be practiced without anyone else's knowledge of it. It's strictly a mental exercise. It takes time to become honest with yourself, to examine how you truly feel about something and why. It's so easy, as busy as we make ourselves to accept the surface feeling of something and then move on, without much more thought about it.

     Language is a barrier to feelings. If we can not articulate how something makes us feel, how can we really even justify those feelings to ourselves? It's difficult, and often, the feeling of difficulty is so great, we don't even try. It takes too much time. Anything worth doing is difficult. I've heard that somewhere before. It makes sense, I guess. So, I suppose what I'm really wondering is do I fit in? Can I fit in? People ask this question of themselves. Normal. Am I normal? And I wonder, then, what defines normal? Normal is what most people are doing. If the population of the world wears purple hats, and I don't, I'm not normal. It is a little distressing how willing I am to make sure that I fall in line, that I too purchase a purple hat so that I'm not outcast, exiled from the right of humanity. We are defined by our individuality as people, and what we, personally, have to offer that others cannot. Yet, we don't want to be TOO individualistic, TOO off the grid and unable to reconcile what the masses consider to be normal.

     So, I'm saying that my desire to be normal is a forced action, a fraudulent move so that others can feel comfortable interacting with me. My inner hunchback, that abnormal creature clawing to get out is my individualism, my need to be different, expressive, and creative. But everything in me tells me to keep him chained up, locked away because people just won't understand it. Not in this world, where purple hats are the going trend.

Check out my book! Shift!

There Is No Such Thing As A Dream Job

What is your dream job? Money is no object. No matter what you pick, you will make enough to live comfortably. Just take earnings out of the equation. I'm trying to dial down to what job, regardless of pay potential, would make you happy just by the sheer act of performing it. Think about it. I mean, REALLY think about it. There is no interview process. You will get the job. There are no other candidates. You must go to work and do the job for at least 40 hours a week. But pick wisely. You have only this one chance to choose your dream job. Once you pick, that's it. Of course you can quit, but then you're back in the real world and must pick from an available slew of jobs that the market dictates. There will be other candidates and the pay is the pay. Think about it long enough? Okay, here we go....
Here's your schedule. Here's two days off a week. Heres nine hours a day, plus a one hour lunch. Here's your benefits package and your pay. Here are the tools, the training and the know-how to do your job effectively. Now, lets get to work!
What did you pick? I know, it's a tough decision. Well what are your hobbies? Do you like to paint? Do you like to play golf? What do you truly enjoy doing? Make it your job, right? WRONG! Anything you like doing, will turn to dislike when it becomes a job. When an activity turns into a non-optional grind, it becomes a chore. There's a reason the phrase "the grass is always greener" is a phrase to begin with, and it illustrates my point perfectly. Human nature is to always think there's something better. No one is ever truly happy with anything they have. It makes me ask what is the point? Let's put aside the job debate just for a moment and really try to consider exactly what it is that would make you truly happy. It's likely a different thing for all of us. But let's really consider it for a moment. For some people it's stuff. I would be happy if I had a 90" television. I would be happy if I had a large house. I would really be content if I had a new car. How long does the happiness that comes from stuff last? It's a pretty brief feeling a accomplishment, a euphoric blink into happiness. But now you have that thing that you said would make you happy. What now? Now you want something else. But I thought that after you got that thing you wanted, you'd be happy, content to live out the rest of your life without another desire? Nope. Guess again. What many people don't realize is that it's not the thing, job, or concept that you get a feeling of happiness from. It's the journey. It's the journey and then at the end, the accomplishment of acquiring the rewards from the journey. Once you have arrived, once you have acquired that holy grail of what you were after, you begin to get thirsty again. Not for the thing, but for the chase.
Back to your dream job. Back to the grind. Be there at nine o'clock sharp! Don't be late. Now you must perform! A job is a place where you provide a service or product for--and here's the rub---someone else. Someone else tells you what to do. You don't have the freedom you thought you had. It's not a hobby anymore, it's a profession. You have deadlines, there is pressure, there is stress. Perform! Get it done. I've always thought that my dream job would be to write fiction for a living. Yes, a novelist! How great would it be to make up stories all day and get paid for it? But think about it. I would have a deadline. There would be pressure to deliver. I don't care if you're feeling under the weather today, CREATE A STORY YOU SON OF A BITCH! CREATE! Same deal with painting or anything that takes a creative touch. You no longer get to do it when the desire moves you to do it. You must deliver. CREATE! We hold these things on a pedestal, because we see the result, not the work of these jobs. I went to college with a music scholarship and figured out pretty quickly that, while I wanted that life, the ability to perform on stage in front of an audience that would enjoy it, that I wasn't willing to do what it took to get me there. I was not willing to spend nine to ten hours a day alone in a practice room. I was not willing to digest volumes of music theory when not in class. I was not willing to practice scales all day to learn the different keys inside out, manage alternate fingerings and rehearse nuances of pitch and volume. I just wanted to perform. But one cannot perform without the hard work that creates the end result. We see jobs for the prestige but not for the grind. It's all a grind. It all becomes a grind. At the point when someone tells you you HAVE to do it, when it is no longer an option you have decided for yourself, it becomes a job. You are now doing whatever it is for someone other than yourself.
The grass is always greener. Keep your hobbies your hobbies. Do them in your spare time because that's what you choose to do with it. A job is work. A job is getting through the day, as happy as you can, while someone else tells you what you have to do. Your day on the job is a break from what you wish you could be doing instead. I have a hard time believing it when people tell me they love their job. Liars! A job is where you go to dream about doing something else that you would actually like doing. But remember: it's just a dream. The reality is different, and the journey of getting there is the magic. Happiness comes from growing. It comes from getting from point A to point B, not from simply staying on point B. If you stay on point B, you'll always wonder what the view looks like from point C. Well, dammit! Pack your bags! Get a move on! Point C isn't that far, you can do it! Your life will be perfect when you're at point C! Unfortunately, you can just barely spot point D off in the distance and WOW! that looks like a nice place to be. Pack your bags get a move on! It's not that far! Everything will be perfect at point D, I just know it! And so on.....see what I mean?
All I'm really trying to say here is enjoy the journey. Stop briefly to smell the flowers. Stay as long as you like, but keep growing. That is happiness. Don't forget that it's the journey that makes the trip, not the destination, because the destination will never be as glorious as the anticipation of it.