On Professional Success

For some reason, chauffeuring my daughters to the airport inspires very good conversations.

Recently, I mostly listened as Eldest talked about her work at a humanities library in Chicago. I’m proud of how well she is doing and how independent she has become on her modest salary. Even cooler is her emerging self confidence and ambition to take on more responsibilities to continue learning and growing.

She’s feeling more ambitious than ever before, not for status and money, but for influence at another non-profit or in a political campaign. To make the world a better place.

I emphasized knowing people who are known and liked by the hiring decision makers since that type of recommendation is often a tie-breaker. It has dawned on me though, while using the first few weeks of my sabbatical catching up on The New Yorker, that when it comes to professional success, there’s something much more fundamental than that.

A powerful template for professional success is found in these profiles of two of the more successful writers working today, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and  Otessa Moshfegh. In a few words, singleminded sacrifice, otherworldly discipline, a clear sense of life purpose.

Check this interview with Moshfegh. Specifically, 1 minute in.

Favourite holiday. . . “I don’t know if I’ve ever been on holiday.” If you didn’t write. . . “Trying to be a writer”.

Ngozi Adichie is married and has a daughter. Moshfegh is engaged. But they’re writers first, then partners, mothers, whatever else. If their marriages endure, their partners understand that and are okay with it. Both writers isolate themselves for extended periods and willingly make lots of other sacrifices for their art. Their sense of life purpose precludes any concern for “work-life balance”. Work is life.

Both are naturally talented, but at least equally important, they outwork all the other writers seeking their prestigious awards and book sales.

So when you dream about a challenging, consequential, and rewarding professional life, the best question isn’t who do you know, it’s what are you willing to sacrifice?

IMG_0052.jpg

Both daughters looking pretty self-condifent

 

Trump, “I Said Would Instead of Wouldn’t”

More on the dystopian novel we’re trapped in here.

“President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he meant the opposite when he said he didn’t see why Russia would have interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections. ‘The sentence should’ve been: ‘I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia’.”

Cue the Twitter comedians:

• I obviously meant to shout “I DON’T OBJECT” sorry that I ruined your wedding.

• I mean, I might have ruined it, or I might not have. It was probably your fault for inviting me to the wedding. Both sides are to blame.

• I meant to say “It is NOT safe to cross” which I can see now might have made a big difference.

• I also meant I want to build a MALL between the US and Mexico.

 

Paragraphs To Ponder

John Gruber, at Daring Fireball, on what the Russians most likely have on Trump:

“I don’t think it’s the infamous pee tape because even if real, the pee tape might not sink Trump. I think it’s money — that Trump’s entire company, and therefore his personal wealth, is held afloat entirely by Russian money and Putin could pull the plug on it with a snap of his fingers. But whatever it is, it seems clear there’s something they’ve got on him.”

Gruber again:

“I’ve been thinking for a few months now that the most powerful person in the world isn’t Trump or Putin but Rupert Murdoch. If Fox News turned against Trump — not against Republicans, not against conservatives, but only against Trump and his family — it would sink Trump’s presidency within months. Politically, Trump couldn’t breathe without the support of Fox News. Rupert Murdoch could make that happen.”

 

Pacific Northwest Heatwave

In the Pacific Northwest, when the mercury rises above 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32C), everyone gets a little nutty, similar to how Southern California drivers lose their minds when it rains. Last night it was 90 degrees at 8pm, plus it was high tide, so the salt water beckoned me from my reading chair. The Sound is cold, but less so at high tide, since the rocks heat up during low tide.

As I stood in the waist deep water, I thought I was all alone, but two friends emerged from the wooded trail and joined me. Griffey and Eddie, two hyper friendly dogs, were even more excited to swim than me. Summertime fun.

Tangent. On the walk home, I may have spied my neighbors’ empty glass bottles which were set out on the street for once-a-month recycling. You may label this nosey eavesdropping, but it’s more sociological analysis. How much alcohol do people drink? Do they prefer wine, beer, or spirits? If beer, the cheap stuff or expensive craft labels? How are their family economics?

Another tangent. If your doc is like mine, she probably asks you how many drinks you have a week. I’m guessing people seriously underreport. I mean docs are scary in their lab coats and all and you know the answer they’re looking for. Same as when your scary dental hygienist asks if you floss. “Several times a day.”

Then I walk by your house and there’s a Giza Pyramid of empties on the curb. Pants on fire. Hey docs, here’s an idea, stop with the questions and walk your patients’ streets on recycling night.

In an effort to outsmart my similarly sociologically inclined neighbors, I’m masking my drinking habits this summer via aluminum cans which get tossed into a larger, enclosed receptacle that they’d have to lift the top off of to see inside. No one would go that far would they?

download.jpg

 

 

Thursday Assorted Links

1. Today’s higher education case study—The (dreaded) University of Southern California.

2. This is what it’s come to. On the new game show Paid Off, lucky winners put holes in their student debt.

3A. Signs of a thaw for Ethiopia and Eritrea.

3B. The Addis Ababa art scene.

4. Trump tariffs spare clothing industry. How convenient.

5. Bloody Sunday. A preview.

Maybe You’re Like a Friend of Mine

Intelligent. Curious. A bit perplexed by young people’s identity politics and social activism.

I did my best to explain young people’s politics and activism to him based upon my relationship with my subset of university students who tilt decidedly left.

My primer was kindergarten. The graduate seminar is taught by Hannah Gadsby on Netflix. Her story is titled “Nanette”. Watch it if you’re the least bit curious or perplexed.*

For afterwards, here’s an interview with Gadsby. And here’s a “cheater’s guide to Hannah Gadsby and ‘Nanette'”.

From the guide:

“If you’re looking for a few giggles after a long day in the office, ‘Nanette’ is not for you. As you can probably guess by now, most of the show is not funny at all. It is disturbing, it is furious, it is sensitive and it is incredibly smart.”

Exactly right.

*turn on subtitles to avoid missing any of the quick, quiet, subtle Australian English phrases

The Kavanaugh Nomination Explained

Thank you Lili.

“The nominee looks good on paper—he’s Ivy-educated, Federalist Society–approved, and has the sorts of credentials serious thinkers like to solemnly enumerate. More importantly, though, Kavanaugh isn’t just a booster for presidential power, he’s someone who—having once laid out the grounds for impeaching President Bill Clinton—has since (in a move his advocates will no doubt cite as evidence of his broad-mindedness) changed his mind about how presidents should deal with being investigated. In brief, he doesn’t believe they should have to: ‘[T]he President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office,’ Kavanaugh wrote. ‘We should not burden a sitting President with civil suits, criminal investigations, or criminal prosecutions,’ he added. The ‘indictment and trial of a sitting President’ would ‘cripple the federal government.’

Imagine Trump’s feelings when he heard that. Trump used the phrase equal justice twice in his speech, but what he really wants is exceptional justice. And Kavanaugh is willing to give it.

But installing a judge who will quietly immunize you from any legal consequences for wrongdoing requires finesse. It’s a challenge even for a showman of Trump’s caliber. A maneuver like this must look quite, quite normal in order to successfully mask his real rationale. It can be easy to forget, especially on the heels of a bile-filed rally in Montana, that Trump can ‘code switch’ when he has reason to, and he had reason to do so Monday, when what he needed was to make filling a Supreme Court seat look like the act of a statesman rather than a robber baron.

Kavanaugh went out of his way to play his part in catering to Trump’s ego.”

 

Highly plausible. I also LTM (laughed to myself) as Kavanaugh’s acceptance stretched from one minute to seven or so and Little St. Don couldn’t mask his complete and total annoyance at having lost the limelight. I’ve heard some people have been saying he’s a bit of a narcissist.

There’s Something Different About Them

Good sermon pastor, thank you. You’re right, the church does need to involve itself more directly with the “affairs of the city and state”. Apolitical churches do lack vitality.

But I wish you had concluded with “To Be Continued” because there is so much more to consider, isn’t there? It seemed like at least a three-parter.

As members of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, it would be nice if our mutual effort to be more Christ-like was sufficient for us to quickly and simply come to common agreements about candidates, policy resolutions, and Supreme Court nominees.

But that’s fantastical, “pie in the sky” thinking. Why do I think that? Because there’s one other congregant in our church who I sometimes struggle to discuss politics with. Even though we have similar values and political philosophies, sometimes when we think and feel differently about a specific “affair of the city or state”, we get defensive, even offended to the point where one of us ends up with hurt feelings.

Given our congregation of 250-300 people, multiply the political pitfalls the two of us sometimes succumb to by 125 or 150. Reaching any kind of consensus on the “affairs of the city and state” is so difficult, most churches don’t even try.

I contend it’s impossible to reach any kind of consensus on candidates running for office and on policy issues, even those that directly overlap with Jesus’ example like what to do about homelessness, low-income housing, and taxes.

But that shouldn’t be the goal.* The goal should be to delve ever more deeply into “the affairs of the city and state” knowing that people will come to different conclusions. The goal should be to listen to one another more patiently, to extend more grace to those who think differently, and to maintain caring relations despite differing political philosophies and affiliations. For visitors to conclude, “There’s something different about them. Something compelling.”

The question you left me with is whether we can be an oasis for people who are completely burned out by political partisanship, rancor, and hatred. Can we learn to “do politics” differently, by listening to, empathizing with, and genuinely respecting one another despite our contrasting political philosophies and affiliations? So that we can be an outward looking, positive presence in our community.

I don’t know that answer to that, but I suspect our future depends upon it.

*especially if we want to maintain our tax exempt status

Saturday Assorted Links

1. Alison Byrnes’s dream vacation. Maybe yours too?

2. Kate Wynja, high school golfer of the year.

“. . . it broke my heart for the team.”

3. Restaurants of the future. Count me as pro simplification.

4A. Female members of congress by party affiliation.

4B. The future of the Democratic Party. Maybe.

5. Republicans’ latest tax con.

6. The future of cycling.

Good Morning Customers—College Is Now Half Off!

Add the Richmond, Indiana Quaker giant, Earlham College, to the list of endangered liberal arts species. You’ll find it right before Evergreen State College.

Paragraph to ponder:

“Nationally, the average tuition discount rate for first-time, full-time students climbed to an estimated 49.9 percent in 2017-18, according to a report by the National Association of College and University Business Officers. As a result, even as colleges have increased tuition, the net revenue per student has declined.”

If you’re shopping for a college, and they tell you tuition/room and board is $50,000/year, please understand that’s only the STICKER PRICE.

Only suckers pay sticker price.

If you’re an average negotiator, say half as good as St. Don, you should pay $25,000 out-of-pocket.

We should stop saying college tuition is going up and instead say where colleges are starting their negotiations with families is going up. Where will this ever increasing discount rate arms race end? Earlham and Evergreen are just a few of the growing number of canaries in the cave.