Blind alleys and dead ends.

Posted: November 13th, 2009 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , | No Comments »

I drove number one to school today. On the ride over, I mentioned to him that I had started working on a new story. I asked him if he would read it and give me some feedback. He is always my harshest critic; I value his opinion as he is frank and his observations are generally both helpful and insightful. He asked me what it was about so I started to outline the plot. It is an experimental piece that may be categorized as “post-modern” fiction, where the varied writing styles are as much a part of the work as the plot. I did not tell him this, I just described the basic plot.

He asked me a few a questions and then told me that it did not sound like a literary work. I responded “Shakespeare’s works were not considered literary when they were written.”

He snapped back “So you are comparing yourself to Shakespeare?”

I answered him quietly. “No, you are comparing me to Shakespeare. I just asked if you would read my story.”


I have a problem with God.

Posted: November 9th, 2009 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | No Comments »

I have a problem with God. Or more precisely, I have a problem with the word God. I believe it is a product of convenience: a word created by humans to describe the indescribable. An artificial semantic construct that subtly shifts the inconceivable into the realm of the near tangible. It is a word that allows us to apply convention to something that is not just far beyond our physical capability for understanding but something that is seemingly beyond our abilities of abstraction and imagination.

By assigning a linguistic, etymological or symbolic value to that which can not be described, we simultaneously limit its scope and define it in our own terms, dragging it into the world of matter and energy in which we reside. And I believe that is both supremely arrogant and more importantly, a disservice to ourselves as it inhibits our ability to connect with something that is paradoxical and life altering.

As previously mentioned, the universe that we all know, the universe in which we exist, the universe described by Newton, Einstein, Bohr and Hawking comprises less than 4% of what astrophysicists can currently measure. Physically, we have no choice but take up space and conform to the limitations of this tangible universe. However we are not just physical. Thoughts are not physical. Insights are not physical and love is certainly not physical. We just choose to define and relate to them exclusively in physical terms. And by doing that, we limit ourselves from truly being who we are and experiencing that which can not be described.


Fail 7 out 10 times and you are truly extraordinary.

Posted: November 2nd, 2009 | Author: admin | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , | No Comments »

I am not a big baseball fan primarily because it requires a large time commitment to really follow any given team. A regular season schedule is 162 games played from April through October. That is 5-7 games per week over a 7 month period. If you are a starting player, you are going to bat on average about 3.5 times per game which corresponds to 500+ “at bats” over the course of a season. A batting average or relationship of hits to at bats is one of the defining benchmarks in the sport.  The absolute best lifetime batting average belongs to Ty Cobb at .367 while Derek Jeter is ranked 65th with a .317 average.

So what is the take away from all of this? If you ask a random person how they would characterize someone who fails 7 out of 10 times when they are doing their job expect to hear words like mediocre, loser or pathetic. But in Baseball, failing 7 out of 10 times at bat elevates you to one of the best of the best. So in baseball as in life, persistence and consistency rather than perfection is what ultimately determines success and defines a person’s efforts. Go ahead, swing and miss -just make sure that you get back up to bat.