[with a z] ...

such frivolous things as manners …

2009/08/28
2 Comments

i know, i haven’t blogged in a while. i’ve decided that i am a popcorn blogger;  someone that decides to blog when an idea, thought, or reason pops up, in other words, sporatically. i admire people who blog daily, monthly or even regularly but that’s not me. so, today i had a thought…. actually, it’s been in my head for awhile now but i have never felt the urge to write much about it until now. i wrote a similar blog a while back but this one is a bit more simple, straight-forward and to the point. it’s about manners. first of all, let me say that manners are not frivolous. manners do not beg interpretation. unlike many things, there is an unspoken yet globally agreed-on set of basic rules that are the very least that we, as members of the universal society , can do to assist in spreading just a little bit of civility, peace, and respect throughout our world. it is the first and foremost step to humanitarian action. manners are essential in a human society. i do not understand why some people feel like the use of them are optional. technically, i guess one does have the freedom to choose whether or not they  engage in mannerly behavior  but i simply do not understand anyone who would choose not to. are they trying to make a point that nobody dictates anything to them? are they trying to make a point to the person to whom the manners should be directed that they do not acknowledge, appreciate or respect them? do they have some sort of impairment or disorder such as attention deficit [a.d.d.] that interferes with their memory every single time they need to make an effort?

manners_matter

specific manners differ around the world.  however, there are certain actions of primary decency inherent in every society that have evolved for the survival of the species which include peace, respect [funny how that word keeps coming up] and a general sense of just “being nice” that is internally or even externally based, in some people’s situations, that is necessary in the global community. having experienced  numerous occasions where some he or she did not even bother to be mannerly,   i have come to the conclusion that people like this are either mentally challenged [they simply do not and cannot understand], egotistical, immature, manipulative,  or just plain mean. i can no longer give excuse to store clerks who do not greet their customers in a pleasant manner, to friends that fail to communicate at least minimally, to anyone that receives a gift [relished or not] and does not issue some form of thank you, to children that address their parents inconsiderately, to those fake nice people who use tone and facial expression to insult, or to any of the many people out there that somehow, somewhere decided not to practice this basic human survival tactic. in addition, it is my view that people guilty of being non-mannerly should apologize [another basic human survival tactic]  to the person to which they acted upon such a way. i have a theory, supported by research [it is late, i will be glad to provide sources upon request later], that natural selection is still occurring. who do you think will be the ones to survive? the mannerly or the non-mannerly? i don’t think the answer to that is even a question. if you do not have manners, you may get away with it for awhile, with people to whom you’ve convinced you have a valid reason for acting in such a barbaric way, but in the end, you will have fewer friends,  less respect in your family and community, and most probably, less satisfying marriages and i would leap to surmise, less successful children than those who practice being mannerly . those with manners have succeeded in the first step of looking beyond themselves and it is these people and their bloodlines which will endure through the process of natural selection. social behavior is as important as physical attributes, mental prowess or emotional awareness. there is a song entitled ‘only the strong survive‘. true human strength is a combination of many elements. so think about it. are you mannerly? is there someone you need to go back and make things right with because of your dis-mannerly conduct? do people respect you or have a lowered opinion of you because of your lack of polite ways? do you evenlike yourself? perhaps you need to garner respect for  yourself before you can even begin to take the baby step of branching out to be respectful of others. don’t wait; if you do, you might find yourself “voted off the island“.

politeness

there simply is no excuse for this kind of rudeness and to me, that is exactly what people who do not practice proper manners [whether they feel like it or not] are; simply rude. i was on a social networking site tonight chatting with a gentleman from yorkshire. he asked me what i liked so much about england in contrast to the united states [i had made several comments to that effect on my profile].  one of my answers was simply manners.  to take it a bit further, think of maslow’s heirarchy. basic needs must be fulfilled before one can move on to attaining lesser needs and eventually desires. it is the same with manners. if a person never learns to be mannerly, they will simply become stuck within thier own selfishness and be unable to progress through the social conventions designed for success, fulfillment and joy. i do not  know about you, but i would not  want to spend my whole life missing out on those things i wholeheartedly admit that no one is perfect; i am sure i have offended a few people in my lifetime and i have tried to make things right, general statement right here and now,  i apologize. the thing is, our world is what we are. a lot of people out there are trying to make it better. they moved past this manners thing a long time ago. these are the people that are changing our world. musicians like bono, coldplay, greenday; organizations like oxfam, amnesty international , and conservation international;  politians like barack obama [obama’s angels]; independent groups like the elders. how does it make you feel to read about all the things these people are doing while you refuse to utter so much as a simply thank you?  please, don’t brag about “going green” or  volunteering at a homeless shelter if you don’t have the decency to be a proper human first. in summation, i  could rant on for hours about this and tell you stories you would not believe but i wi’ll end for now. i am sure you have gotten my point. if you are one of these un-mannerly people, do yourself and our world a favor… look past yourself and start in on the manners. you just might find it brings more to you than you put out. thank you for taking time to read this blog. i felt it was important and feel much better having had my say. good day!

find out about yourself

do i have good manners?

are you rude or nice?

rudeness, interrupted: are you rude?

helpful hints

how to be polite

how to be polite to everyone

how to have good manners

dealing

fed up with rudeness?

how to handle rude people

reward yourself

i practice good manners T-shirt

*note: there is a plethora of great books out there on manners; one of my favorites is “Miss Manners: Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior”, but remember, you have to read it, not just use it as a home decor accessory

polite01


the technology of art… or is it the art of technology?

2009/01/03
1 Comment
self-portrait with monkeys, freida kahlo, 1942

self-portrait with monkeys, freida kahlo, 1942

i love art. i love technology. i have always been described as a rather creative and artistic person. my technology skills are not bad but are limited to use without  theory. until a few months ago, i viewed art, and all the disciplines and practices that it encompasses, as a work of pure talent and skill born of creative genius [or accident], but nonetheless, birthed, so to speak, by the unique qualities and attributes of the artist themselves. but then i began to think … and this is what always gets me in trouble … well not in trouble, but shall we say preoccupied with an idea that floats and contorts within my brain until some logical sense of it can be formed? i started thinking about something i love to do. photography. most would call photography an art form. there are art museums dedicated to photography. amsel adams = art. but lately, photography seems to be more about technology than the creative eye. i mean, with the right camera and the right software, anyone can take a damn good picture.  what does this mean? should we reclassify photography as a technological process [or even art-form if you want to be specific and buy the meshing concept] … or should we rename what this new photography is and limit the true art of photography to that which is limited in and of itself by human ability and innate talent? personally, i do not know. but, i do know that a lot of previously “special” things are being made ordinary through the addition and/or substitution of technology in art. trust me, i am not one of those anti-technology persons. in fact, i love technology. i love gadgets. i love efficiency. but, don’t we need to leave some room somewhere for something to shine forth in it’s pure, raw form so that we can enjoy those special things again? photography is just one example.  need others? how about home decor? ten years ago about 1 in every 25 houses could be said to be “tastefully and artfully” decorated; but now, thanks to whole networks, reality shows, and suburban stores dedicated to teaching the easy art of 1.2.3. “have an amazing house”, it seems that one almost expects a home to be en some kind of vogue if not a carbon copy of the latest edition of architectural digest. in fact, i would gander to say that if most of us walked into a undecorated, simply lived-in, as-is, uncoordinated, un-themed, untidy house, that we would notice it much more than if we walked into the smith home from trading spaces episode 192. it’s actually sort of strange. the un-artsy things are becoming more special than the artsy things simply because they are occurring less and less. this all makes me go hmmmmm. so many examples… music that is not music. not that it is bad, just that it’s origins are not what has been historically considered art. what else? you tell me. i can think of a million things. well, maybe not a million but a lot. fashion. cooking. our bodies. how about our bodies? it seems to me we have become a nation [if not a world] obsessed with learning everything we can externally about everything we have in the past, loved and appreciated because of their internal origins. once again, don’t get me wrong. i love art. i love technology. yes, i do think that there is a place to the two to meet, enhance, and even marry each other… but….. i do wonder what will be left to emerge simply out of human creativity. and yes, to chase that rabbit, i do view the advances made in technology as an art in and of itself. what i am speaking of i guess… are those things that are special just because they are rare and provide us with, from time to time, a different view of the world.old-school-camera

for me, i ‘m thinking of investing in an old school 35mm camera just to see what turns out in my darkroom these days. of course, i’ll still drool over the latest digital slr with the latest advances in technology as well. but, i think i’ll feel better knowing that just maybe, perhaps, there are some things i can create that are, well… just doable by me.  if not photography, then i’ll find my art, but this whole idea thing has inspired me once again, to remember to keep a balance and in a world of stepford wife beauty, not be ashamed to be an ugly betty if that’s what makes me unique and human. i guess i kind of miss the unibrow and the monkeys. :/


labeling humans

2008/11/30
2 Comments


i have been thinking about the practice of labeling humans and turning it around and over in my mind and so i thought i’d throw down a blog about it.

first, let’s look at the word label

Label Definition

la·bel (bəl)

noun

  1. Archaic
    1. a narrow band of cloth, etc.; fillet
  2. a card, strip of paper, etc. marked and attached to an object to indicate its nature, contents, ownership, destination, etc.
  3. a descriptive word or phrase applied to a person, group, theory, etc. as a convenient generalized classification
  4. ☆ an identifying brand, as of a company producing recorded music

for the purpose of this blog, i shall be referring to the definition of label as seen in no. 3 above : a descriptive word or phrase applied to a person, group, theory, etc. as a convenient generalized classification

as previously stated, i have been thinking a lot about labels. all kinds of labels. the kind that one finds on products. the kind one uses as an instruction. and the kind that are also applied to people.

from my experience, most people do not seem to have a problem with the first two types that i mentioned. we welcome these abbreviated, yet concise, holders of information.

  • without a label, how would we know what size the sweater was? we might be able to figure it out after some experimentation and  time, but why go to all that trouble?
  • without a label (usually referred to as signs), how would we know where were going while on holiday? we might be prone to travel form place to place referring to points of geography as “that town” or “this place”; hardly an efficient way to communicate or to travel.
  • without a label, how would we know what point of the day or hour we might find ourselves enjoying? isn’t the numerical system we apply to time simply another form of labeling

point, is. just about everything we use to communicate with is some form of label, including the words you are reading right now. so, what seems to be the problem with using “labels” to  aid  in the description of a characteristic type of person? if we go by our definition that a label is a “generalized classification” then perhaps the problem people have with being “labeled” is that of non-specificity. Furthermore, one might see an avoidance of human labeling as an attempt to retain the right to change at any given point of time or will.

If this is the case, it is my opinion that one might just be taking the word [or the label] much too seriously. Don’t forget the purpose of labels – for information and guidance. Can labels be wrong? Yes, of course, but more times than not they are helpful. Helpful in allowing the human mind to form a sort of rough draft within which to expect certain behaviors, actions, etc. The word rough is very important here. All a label, when applied to a human being, implies, is that that human being shares a lot of the characteristics of a group of other human beings – which – does not necessarily mean they share all or even the same attributes varied within the defined group.

approached like this [viewing labels as a cognitive framework rather than a complete description] the concept of labeling might not seem quite so restrictive to those who tend to view it as such. in fact, if one wants to communicate the essence of their true selves as efficiently and with as much precision as possible, one might actually encourage as much labeling as possible through self-assessment, social feedback and professional opinion. in other words, the closer we are to the target at the start, the easier it should be to locate.

so, yeah, i am pro-labeler [if that word exists]. not for the purposes of lumping a bunch of people together to strip their personal differences but to have as many tools at my disposal as possible to aid in the understanding of who a person really is, which is most always much wider and variant than the label[s] suggest. to me, a label is merely a signpost steering me in the best direction to understand and communicate efficiently with another person.

danger can occur when people begin to see the individuals whose statistics, when put together, form a subset of the population, and that subset is given a name [or label] and that label is given a definition, and each unique member of the subset is defined solely by that label. this is not only morally wrong, but bad science. no statistical study is ever without it’s margin of error and/or statistical outliers.

so…. next time you observe yourself or someone else reacting to some human label  [and it is interesting that some have negative connotations simply put there by bad interpretation] … think of the real definition of a label, it’s intention, and perhaps even, how it can be utilized toward a positive end.