I suggested that one of my students do a presentation about her cake-making endeavors. She's been baking unique cakes for over 10 years. It started for a friend, then that friend told another, and so on and so on. She spoke English as she showed several pictures of her beautiful cakes. This is a collage that she put together of her cakes, but it's just a tiny fraction of her vast creative output.
I was really excited to start studying three languages simultaneously, but it's been sort of overwhelming. I study languages every day, but it's casual and happens randomly because I've been translating posts on X/Twitter, which is super-fun and challenging. Taking a class requires finishing homework and studying the concepts that we've learned, because it's not enough to just go to class once a week, and it would be a super-human task to immediately understand everything they tell us. My schedule overall is varied because I work four gigs and take three classes and create content, but I've been feeling sort of scattered.
This evening is the last German class, and then I'll be doing just two language classes: Italian and French. Italian is online and French is in-person.
I've been studying French at the excellent Alliance Française Chicago for a couple of years. I only started taking classes there because I live nearby and someone recommended it. I'd passed by it for several years but didn't think it would be so great. And I've been studying French on my own and took a couple of online classes because I'd like to go to France one day. Basically, I signed up because I can walk there, and since I had acquired extra time, I wanted to study languages more. Now that I've taken different classes at different places, it is very clear that Alliance Française has the best teachers and a pleasant environment. I feel like I'm stepping into another culture, and all the instructors are totally professional, educated, and nice.
I should write another post about work-life balance because ever since I slowed down a couple of years ago and returned to doing more of what I want, life has been way better.
As I've said here and offline many times, I used to work a lot and no longer am. The first adjustment from cutting back was having time in my schedule and head to think. I didn't want to think, just wanted to do. I liked being busy and filling my time and avoiding introspection. Fast forward many months and days, and I'm carving out time to think and reflect. I recently had 12 hours of working directly with people, not at a computer near people, but directly talking to them, teaching them, etc. Then today is free, and I have more than 4 hours tomorrow. In the past it would've been no big deal, and I would've worked on top of that, and I wouldn't have had a day off between the 12 and 4+ hours; I would've looked for something to fill my day off, such as working at another gig that would've already been lined up. Or writing and editing a novel. Or something. But thinking was not a part of the plan; the goal was to stay busy and outward-facing. And in addition to dealing with workplace challenges, all the stress and stuffed schedule would keep me occupied.
But I'm no longer like that. Today I didn't schedule anything and have been doing my own thing, which requires thought and silence. Of course, I won't stay in such a condition all day because I need to see the outside world.
So of course, I'm not an introvert and never will be. I get energy around people and if the people like other people and are cool, simpatico, and interesting, then I'm super-happy and energized. A good example is the most recent train trip I took from LA to Chicago. I'd taken that trip several times before, and have gone to and from the East Coast via train. This time it was fantastic: not only were the workers all friendly and seemed to like people (which is essential for a people-facing job), but I met really interesting passengers from a variety of backgrounds. The train was also really busy and it was a combination of quiet and talkative fun. When I got home, it was very hard to adjust to my non-trip life. It was so quiet and dark and still, it seemed spooky. For a non-introvert like me, going from a stimulating, people-oriented environment to the total opposite can be jarring and disturbing.
So what I'm writing about here is not me turning into an introvert by needing downtime, but me finally calming down enough to quietly create.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
I've been talking to some people about what's been going on creatively. When I started this blog, I had an outlet to express myself (social media didn't dominate), but then it led to paid work. All people had to do was an online search and find me, or I could show them what I was writing. So I got hired to write articles, blog posts, and even helped write a couple of books. None of it was under my name and I didn't care because I was being paid.
Because I'm not an introvert, I tried to find people-oriented jobs but kept getting isolating ones. I even didn't pursue certain opportunities because I just wanted to be me and talk. Someone I'd written a lot for said I should teach writing, and they even said they'd help set me up because they had a lot of connections. I said no, which was probably not a good idea, because I didn't want to think it through or manage people, just write.
And an even better idea that I passed on was writing a textbook. I was a writing instructor at a university, and a publisher's rep came to the school to talk about books. I asked if there was a book on business writing, and she said, "No...do you want to write one?" I said I wasn't qualified to write one, but wanted one for my class. I could've written it! I had already done a lot of business writing and could research what I didn't know. I could have interviewed lots of business pros to share their insight. I had an opportunity but was too insecure and modest to accept it. Now it is almost impossible to get published. But I don't regret that decision.
I'd rather talk about what I really know than talk about something that's on my periphery, becoming an expert just through scaffolds, not through substance. I see that in various areas, which is probably made easier with social media.
Anyway, I was working at home so much (way before it was trendy) doing translation and writing and editing, that I needed to connect with the world, and decided to do it through this blog. Then I got busy with being paid for what I was doing, working in media and podcasting, which led to more gigs, until I was thinking a lot for other people instead of myself.
When I stepped back from the chaos, I couldn't write much creatively or introspectively, and I thought those days were over. Then I started thinking and noticing more, read about how people get ideas, and started thinking that it's okay to produce something that won't make money, get noticed, or get an award. It's okay to create without the payoff.
That's why I'm thinking, "I think I'm back," because I feel like I can do my own thing and not worry if "it matters."
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
I've been getting flu shots for like 15 years and did not get the flu until mid-December. It happened at the perfect time because my break had just started, and a project management class I was taking had just ended. Because it was a credit class, we had exams and a huge term paper due. At times it felt like a part-time job because achieving an A required a lot of work. A retired person who'd had a very successful career told me I shouldn't worry about getting an A, but I like to do the best job possible and then list it on LinkedIn :p
My temp reached 102, and I couldn't do anything other than wait it out. I spent four days lying around inside, and was ecstatic to emerge on day 5. Being too sick to do anything made me realize more than ever that I definitely do not like spending so much time at home and like to be out in the world, because as I've said before, I am not an introvert. I would probably have a much easier time living in modern society as an introvert because wanting to talk to people is almost counter-cultural at this point.
And wanting to talk to people about anything is especially seen as weird. I've met people who use superficiality to hide something, like their real motives, their real background, or their misery. Other times a mere comment or question can send someone scurrying to their phone, and people also have earbuds in at all times to avoid any interaction IRL. Even just talking about the weather causes them to retreat.
I did a search online and found this long, thoughtful post about socialization and avoidance: texting allows control that real-life interactions don't allow because you can't undo, delay, or edit what you say. Headphones are used as a kind of "emotional shield...[to] feel protected, invisible, or unreachable," and phones offer similar protection.
Sitting around so much made me realize that I really like people and want to connect with people, even with just a brief conversation in a store or wherever. It's great when I meet similar people, and it's like a buzzkill when I don't. Usually I don't dwell on a negative or anti-social interaction, but the couch made me think too much about it, which is why I was so glad to get outside eventually. Just seeing cute dogs was better than isolation!
Another thing I thought about while on the couch all day is the value of good workplaces. I kept rehashing messed-up workplaces I worked in and how I never want to be exposed to such bullying, ostracizing, or unfairness again. Right now my work situation is really good, and I don't want to mess up my life by being a lone ranger trying to survive another toxic place. I refuse to do that anymore, and my great health has proven that I made the right decision to avoid bad people and harmful environments. I won't even tolerate dysfunctional or mean people in my personal life, and it's proven to be an effective strategy because 2025 was one of my best years ever, and I'm the healthiest I've ever been.
What's good about being really sick is that you can make decisions to reset. I probably thought too much and the thoughts at times were unproductive, just swirling around without a resolution. It's probably because I wasn't socializing, so I had pent-up energy that was ending up in dead ends. When I started interacting with the world again, I entered wiser and really appreciative of freedom and health. Looking forward to a good 2026!
I was planning on posting this before 2025 ended, but now it's 2026...Happy New Year!
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
There's a dark ball that gets tangled in its own strings.
Trying to understand by stepping away from it.
As you're stepping away, the strings become untangled.
The meaning is clear.
No good, don't go back.
A few days ago, I had the best day because I interacted with cool people all day. First, I went to an online writing group with friendly people. Then I went to an online training by someone who works with people, who actually likes people (which I've written about before): he always starts the meetings by acknowledging every person in the "room," then as he lectures, he often pauses for questions and comments, and looks at the chat as well. He speaks in a warm, knowledgeable, communicative way; even though it's online, I feel like I'm in a supportive offline environment.
Then, after I texted back and forth with a coworker/friend of mine, we ended up having an hour-plus phone call. She's one of those rare people who not only likes people, but helps people and is honest; she's a sincere, accepting person, sans superficiality. After that, a friend from the online writing group told me that she was dining at a restaurant across the street, so we went out for coffee in an upscale milieu on the Mag Mile and talked for a while. When she caught her bus back home, I walked through the Gold Coast and called another friend, who I talked to for over an hour. He also gave me some really good advice for my livestream. I had a pretty weird/toxic conversation with someone that night, but it was offset by having a drink with yet another friend at a place in River North, where we met the manager of a steak restaurant that we're definitely going to try out; she even told us to contact her before we go.
So the day was fantastic, and for an extrovert like me, all days should be like this. This is what energizes people with my personality type, rather than sitting silently in front a computer. And I didn't just socialize, but I socialized with decent people who like people. That's the key. (The reason why I'm mentioning extroversion is because I've written about faking introversion before, and how the world seems to be constructed for introverts.)
So what does this all have to do with the title? Well I've obviously demonstrated that I am not a loner, but also, this is in response to a belittling person I met at a baby shower a while ago. When I think of people who are on the level, I contrast it with people who aren't. And I had such an experience at that baby shower. I knew no one but the expectant mother, so no matter where I sat, I had to strike up a conversation, or else I'd sit there in silence. I was kicked out of the family table, even though I'd been talking to the grandmother, so I went to another table, where I sat next to a religious, smug woman who spoke disparagingly about the people there with her daughter, in addition to gossiping about people who weren't there.
I made huge mistake that has been a cautionary tale ever since. I talked to her because I'm not introverted, thinking that she'd be cool or at least gracious since she was proud of being religious, and what I got were questions and accusations about my lifestyle. I was also going through some heavy stuff due to grief and increased responsibilities, so my life wasn't all happy and social and busy according to a church-lady's expectations. She was appalled that I didn't have kids, and I think she had 5, and had already moved from the city to the burbs. For some reason, I felt like I wanted to keep talking to her, because, again, I'm not a wallflower, but I should've just changed tables, because it never got any better. We were talking about other stuff, and then she said reproachingly, "So you're a loner." I was like, no, but she didn't believe me, so I assumed it probably appeared that way to her because I didn't have her kind of lifestyle. She was so judgmental and not encouraging, even after I told her about the loss I'd experienced, I felt even more deflated, but I didn't want to tell her off or be rude; I just concluded that she is into righteousness by appearance only.
But I'm not making the assumption that religiosity leads to ostracism. I had an incredible conversation today with a religious person that lasted for more than a couple of hours, where we had downtime while volunteering. Today's person clearly likes people and connecting with people. The other person doesn't. So it matters. Just filling time with people doesn't.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
On Saturday night, I had no plans, but I didn't care. I went out the day and night before, which was fine. Then I had an in-person meeting yesterday, so I got enough social interaction over the weekend. Maybe I would've wanted more in the past, but it was enough for me. It's gotten easier for me, but for for some people, not going out is rough. And it's made worse during the digital age; people get FOMO if they see pictures and reels on social media. But before the Internet, it wasn't the same.
The analog version of FOMO happened if you heard about people doing things, or they told you about it, or you talked on the phone about it. Or you could get FOMO by just sitting around, imagining what other people were doing. They could be doing nothing just like you, but if you perceived that they were out somewhere without you, then you could get FOMO. Teens could spiral in their own way and worry about it, but they could get distracted or talk to a friend on the phone (talking into a handset that was connected to a wall via a cord), or do something to get their mind off it. There were lots of things to do, and no one else had the means to show you what they were doing, so you couldn't compare yourself.
It must be really tough for teens when they see pictures and videos of other people having fun. Even professionals get envious and question their own lifestyles when they look at LinkedIn, or see posts on Instagram and Fakebook. People cope by coming up with strategies to stay away from social media, or they try to stay strong as they scroll. BI (Before the Internet), there was less neuroticism about what other people were doing, and the world wasn't magnified around you.
I've noticed that AI can be helpful as an interactive journal or for kicking around ideas. But it can also be a way to outsource your brain.
For instance, if I'm "discussing" something with it (via text; so far, I haven't spoken to it), it will say something like, "Do you want me to write an email for you that would work in this situation?" or "Do you want me to create an outline?" or "Do you want me to write [something substantial and/or creative]?" etc. I always say no because I basically know how to write. If I don't know how to write something (such as a compelling fictional scene), I'm willing to work it out, i.e., stretch my brain to try to figure it out. Using my own brain is challenging but satisfying because I am generating the ideas, and there's a breakthrough feeling that comes after the struggle. It's like feeling better after exercising.
Sometimes AI will offer to edit something I've already written; it tells me that I can upload a file or paste in text, and it will review and correct it, and rewrite sections. Even though people say AI can mimic our writing style, I've noticed its writing voice sounds sort of flat. Someone even did an AI text-generating experiment on my writing, but it didn't sound like me. I can see AI's clichéd sentences all over the Internet, such as "I hope this email finds you well," or "I'm seeking a new role and would appreciate your support. If you hear of any opportunities or just want to catch up, please send me a message or comment below. I'd love to reconnect." I've also seen lists in online posts, punctuated with emojis and pictograms instead of bullet points or even just narrative paragraphs, which I suspect were generated via AI because it has generated those for me when I asked it a question about something.
If I were to say yes to AI, it would generate a lot of text for me and basically anything else I need. If I were to do research only using AI, it would create "facts" for me, sounding confident even if the facts were synthesized by fantasy. But it's that confidence that dupes people into thinking it's true. Fact checking requires an active brain, but what people have done is outsource to AI to do their work, as a real-life assistant would. There are famous people who trusted their assistants' flawed work instead of checking it, but AI is making it even easier to not engage at all; just a push of a button or a simple "ok" will launch a lot of automated work while you make coffee in the kitchen.
When I ask AI a question and it generates an answer, I ask, "Why do you think that?" or "What is that based on?" Then it will explain itself or provide links. Also, if I want to know some information about something, and the links aren't that great or the information seems odd, I will do my own search online then tell it what I've discovered. Then it will say something like, "Yes, that's right; such-and-such place closed three months ago," and give me different links and updated information. But the update was instigated by me, and AI confirmed.
It can make you avoid thinking by just generating a bunch of stuff while "conversing" with you, and when it asks something like, "Do you want me to..." offering to organize your thoughts in an essay or outline or blog post or whatever, you can say "yes," and then it launches into a bunch of stuff that you are able to do yourself, if you put forth the intellectual effort. I'm not saying that it comes up with everything you would think, but it allows you to skip the thinking process. Students who use it think they're bypassing the system, but engaging the brain to do assignments helps with growth and skills, and there will be future situations where spontaneous critical thinking is necessary. It's not just about getting work done but adding experience and insight as life continues.
And AI can help someone avoid reading. I can understand if people have to wade through a lot of information and want to use AI to help them get the gist of various articles, especially when the articles bury the lede. But AI is also a way for people to outsource their reading, like a 21st-century Cliff Notes. Engaging with a text requires brain power, and if people only use AI to read something, they might not even get the accurate meaning of the text, especially if they don't analyze what is written. Or they won't develop their own take on a reading, thus their thinking will be flattened and conformist. Depending only on AI, such as for reading texts and writing papers for school, for instance, can lead to complications later on when someone has to be successfully analytical for a job, or if they just want to have a brain that uniquely interacts with the world.
I'm not saying AI is useless or has a default cheating mode. I've used it to clarify ideas and thoughts, and it's given me good advice. One time I was asking AI for advice on making an effective presentation, and it sounded convincing, but I kept questioning it just in case. Turns out it did give me good advice, so I appreciated its insight. It's also created unique phrases and concepts I haven't found anywhere else, which is interesting to see in the absence of a coworker or co-creator.
btw--I just pasted this post into ChatGPT, and when it responded, "If you’d like, I can rewrite this as a tightened, publication-ready piece while keeping your voice intact so it flows more like an essay you’d see in The Atlantic or Wired. That way it keeps your originality but removes excess repetition," I said "ok." The revision is came up with doesn't sound like me anymore, the voice you've seen for 20 years here. I might sound flawed and repetitive, but at least what you're reading is really me, not online filler.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
A while ago, I applied for a job that I was totally qualified for. But the first part of the online application had a list of words and phrases that we had to click. The question was: "What words describe you, and what's important to you?" This was their way of screening, like lawyers trying to choose a jury. Who knows what that organization was searching for; I felt like whatever I answered would be wrong, and I didn't make it past that initial online application anyway.
The phrase that stuck out to me was "work-life balance is important." By clicking that and some other related words, it would paint a picture, and the decision-makers could decide if they want to talk to the applicant. I felt like clicking incongruous words to confuse them, but I predictably clicked certain words that probably gave my intensity away. Maybe it signaled my age or something else, like I was too serious, not ready to laugh at a silly joke at the water cooler.
All the phrases seemed trite, like the organization was trying to put people into categories and slots based on their answers: "Oh, this applicant clicked these words; that means they're such-and-such age, they'll aware, they're sensitive, they need meaning," etc.
I walk by that organization often (I live nearby, and thought that would be a selling point, but they didn't care), and sometimes I want to ask someone coming out of there what the deal is. Did they hire someone for the role? What kinds of people are they looking for? Why do they ask such questions? Do applicants have to create a brand in order to be accepted, then have to maintain it once they're hired? What if they understand the organization's game, play it well, then get in and feel stressed that they have to keep pretending?
Since work-life balance has been a trend in recent years, maybe that organization is screening people based on that, determining that if anyone clicks that phrase, they're "current" and "modern." The organization has lots of buzzwords on their website, so it seems like it's trying to appear hip.
Here's my work-life balance: I want work that is honest, in a place that is healthy and drama-free. Then my life will be more balanced.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
I was talking to someone who still works in a toxic workplace, and I've talked to other people who've left such places. If you feel awful even though you do a good job, read the book The As$hole Survival Guide for tips. Basically, you shouldn't work in toxic workplaces, but if you love what you do and want to stay, or if you have to stay for financial reasons, the book has tips. But expert Robert Sutton still says to leave because it will hurt and worsen you.
This is what a healthy workplace is like:
Your questions are answered and you can get help if needed. You're positively recognized for the good work that you do. You are spoken to respectfully. No one is going behind your back to ruin your reputation, and there are no Mean Girl cliques (that can also include guys). No one yells at you, makes fun of you, belittles you, lies about you, or puts things in your way to trip you up. You are paid fairly. You only have to focus on the challenges of your job, not sharks. You feel good when you leave and can easily enter the other part of your life. You see a future and feel good about the present.
This is what a toxic place is like:
People make fun of you for caring about your job, caring about details, caring about ethics, being responsive, being passionate, being intellectually curious, expressing concern. People yell at you every day and management says "that's how they are." People favor others while ostracizing you. You don't get paid what you should, while new hires with not much experience get paid more. Laziness is overlooked and/or rewarded. You are not judged on the content of your character or the quality of your work. You have to focus on getting your work done, plus navigate the harmful environment, so you're always stressed. You're belittled, dismissed, told to lie, told to forget, told what you saw is not actually what you saw. Competency is punished and integrity is mocked. Everyone complains about every little thing, even if they're paid well. People "work at home" and aren't monitored or held accountable. No one trusts anyone, and there's an air of paranoia and anger. People get ahead based on how they look, even if they're lazy, liars, incompetent, or inexperienced.
In education, if a student lies about you and management believes the student and doesn't care about your side of the story, you're in a toxic school. If a principal tells you to change your grading curve so that a percentage of students will pass, or you're supposed to pass students who actually failed, it won't get any better; find another school. Same goes for a school that makes you give students answers to tests. If a school doesn't respect you as a teacher and forces you to comply to their corruption, you will suffer. Take care of yourself; find a school that deserves you and doesn't lie.
In business, if people come in late, leave early, do outside work on company time, goof off, and all of that is recorded via video cameras and punch-in software, but you get in trouble and they don't, it's a toxic company. Toxic workplaces can use that tech against you if they don't like you; they can show you the data to build a case against you.
No wonder people want to "work at home." They can work wherever they want and to the extent they want, and not be held to the same standards as those who have to physically show up. They can even use a VPN to hide where they really are, and simultaneously work at another job, hobby, shopping, gaming.
I currently do not work in toxic places. If you do and always feel horrible, get a plan and get out. (I'll keep updating this post as I continue to talk to people.)
I've been detoxing from previous hate-filled, backstabbing, unfair work situations (I'm currently working in non-toxic environments, thanks to the advice in the excellent book The Asshole Survival Guide, which I wrote about in a blog post here). One thing I've noticed is that my mind has been freed up to think about things and think about what I really like to do. At first when I unplugged from destruction and from a busy schedule, thoughts flooded my mind. I wanted to get busy again to stop the thoughts, but an introspective person told me that it's good to think and reflect. So I started pondering; here's what I've been thinking:
Welcome to the post I've been writing for a while, and rewriting, which I've been asking people and thinking about for a long time: is it better to be rich? My short answer is yes.
Commentators will point out unhappy rich people and say, "See? Money doesn't buy you happiness." True. You can find happiness in various ways, and according to The Happy Person, written 30 years ago by therapist Harold Greenwald (which I read a while ago and am now re-reading), people can choose to be happy in any situation. But I'm not talking about general happiness or attaining it. I'm talking about the idea put in front of us that rich people are unhappy so it doesn't matter if you're rich.
In the larger scheme of things, it doesn't matter. But it makes life easier, and I suspect rich people have better social lives and more social opportunities. One time I wanted to ask a rich person if being rich means a better social life. But before I could even finish the sentence, he said "yes." He didn't know that I was asking about socializing; he thought that I was asking if being rich is better. And to that question he also said "yes."
Think about it: if you want to go to Europe for the weekend, you can. If you want to join a club, you can. If you want to buy a better car, you can. You can give your kids what they need: a safe neighborhood, dynamic activities that will help them grow, a good education, clothing, nice parties, opportunities including valuable contacts for jobs, and more.
But the problem is when there's money but no love or warmth or authenticity. Then people feel lonely and unhappy and isolated. They can buy whatever they want and fly wherever they want, but it won't matter because they don't feel accepted and safe, and it's like living alone in a hardened, cold cave. But the commentators will take those examples and downplay wealth, as if everyone who has money feels that way. But that's not true.
I've met people who have a lot of money who never have to worry about paying their bills. It's only the irresponsible who squander it and end up broke. But those who are smart (and there are many) live within their means, even if it appears to be extravagant. For instance, a rich person can buy a large beach house outright, but they realize they can't have one on every gulf and ocean. So they stop at one. Or they can fly first class every time, but they know that buying a private plane is stretching it. To the rest of us, even an apartment on the Pacific is too expensive, so we have to settle for one in a concrete jungle. But rich people do have their limits, it's just that they're broader than ours.
And then there's the pursuit of money that can make people feel miserable. I'm not talking about people who need a job to get their basic needs and to get out of a shooting-filled neighborhood to be able to pay for a one-bedroom in a stable suburb. I've met people who are more than millionaires and they're neurotic and lack peace because they want what other rich people have and are envious. They work to acquire more but don't enjoy what they have nor what they can do with their money. But again, that's not every person I've met. There are lots of people who are living comfortably, paying for what their children need and want, and their concerns are academic because they have way more than they need.
I've met a lot of people who are just getting by and are stressed out, and understandably so. If they lose their job, they'll have to scramble to get another one to survive. If prices go up, they have to make decisions about what is most necessary. If their car breaks down, they have to be able to afford to get it fixed. When gas prices go up, they have to forfeit other necessities to be able to fill the tank. They want to be able to enjoy Christmas, nights out, weekends away, but they know they'll get into debt over it. Their lives are filled with decisions and sacrifices over basic needs and desires for luxuries that a rich person's pocket money can take care of with no problem.
Many years ago I met someone who made wise decisions and ended up pretty well off. She never had to worry about paying for anything, and she was able to pay people to help her as she got older. But she said some of her happiest days were when she and her husband were just starting out and they lived in a studio apartment, where she tutored students and her husband worked at a job that didn't pay a lot. She said life was so much simpler back then and she enjoyed it. I think she was just being nostalgic as she got older. Would she think the same way if she raised her kids in such a situation? She'd have a small space for her, her husband, and a few kids, enough money to pay the rent and some basic food but not much else, and a neighborhood with bad schools surrounded by decrepit buildings. They would've been stressed out and fighting about money, and complaining that they wanted their kids to be in better schools, have decent clothes and an infrastructure that had pathways to a brighter future. I was pretty young when I heard her talk about the good ol' days, and even back then I had my doubts.
Last month, I was hanging out with some people at someone's house, and we had a great time. One person said what we were doing was worth more than being able to fly to Europe for the weekend. There was no money required for what we were doing, and while it's great to be able to afford a spontaneous European getaway, the fun we had was priceless. And there are other experiences like that: having the opportunity to be yourself in a judgement-free safe space, having fun doing what you love, helping people live with dignity, or just helping people.
The big news recently is that a super-rich woman gave a medical school a billion dollars so students can study for free. Imagine being able to do that for people. I know there are wealthy people who don't donate anything to anybody, just enjoy buying houses, yachts, cars, planes, and whatever else they want, but they're rich enough to have that choice.
I know that money doesn't buy you happiness, but if someone is level-headed, that person can coast. Even professor Michael Blanding confirms More Proof That Money Can Buy Happiness (or a Life with Less Stress): less stress, greater control, and more satisfaction.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
Five years ago I wrote about a guy who's in the people business, who I assumed was helping people and speaking to groups of people because he liked people. But when I met him he was quite unfriendly and didn't want to talk to anyone. He had no problem talking on a screen or lecturing to a group, but after he was finished, he was squeamish and avoidant, which didn't match his public persona. So I concluded that he was a phony and was only pretending to be people-oriented to help him sell books and get a following online to appear to care about helping people. It was disappointing and a turn-off, and I regretted buying his books, and decided to no longer spend time looking at anything else of his online or engaging with his content in any way. So I concluded that people who are in the people business should actually like people.
Then a couple of years ago I wrote about how I like people who like people, and I still feel that way. I've worked with people who don't like people and they think it's weird and obtrusive if anyone tries to be friendly or tries to connect. I thought I was going to meet such a person recently because they said they're outgoing, but of course it turned out to be false, which made me think about this topic again. At this point, and especially since the pandemic is over, I really don't have time for posers or people who show fake enthusiasm only to cancel at the last minute because something better came along or they've decided I'm not as important as someone else. Why waste my time? But amazingly, around the same time, I met someone who is outgoing, works with people, actually likes people, and follows through. I was surprised that the person is authentic. Especially with social media, there are so many people who craft a public identity or act like they're accepting but are really selective and superficial.
I was eating breakfast in a hotel restaurant and saw someone doing an interview on his phone, and afterward I walked up to him and asked if he had just done a livestream. He said he was recording his podcast, and we chatted about digital content and other things, then I gave him my contact info and returned to my table. Then he came to my table and asked if he can join us (my husband and me). Of course! Because we'd already gotten along, had already established a connection, sitting at our table was a logical and natural continuation of what had been previously established. There aren't many people who would do that, but it's no big deal for people who like people. We continued our conversation and talked about a lot more, then he went to a conference and I went elsewhere. He even invited us to go out that night with a group from the conference, but I thought I had plans, so I didn't go. But of course, the plans I had were cancelled at the last minute by someone who I thought would be people-oriented, so it was too late to go out with the seemingly fun group. It was one of those situations where I should've trusted my gut; sometimes I can tell if someone is going to follow through or not, but I ignored my instincts (and this has happened other times, and has even led to a Tonya Harding-type of situation, but I won't blog about that unless I become so rich I don't care anymore).
Since the guy was friendly, sincere, and interesting (and such a combination is rare), I texted him about breakfast the next morning. I didn't expect him to show up, but he did, which again seems rare in the 21st century (unless you're rich, famous, and/or powerful; then people will show up). We had another interesting conversation, and I told him I wanted to interview him for my livestream. I figured at this point he'd flake (because other people have agreed to interviews but then disappeared), but he didn't. At first, it looked like he wasn't going to show up because I heard nothing from him for half an hour. Then, just after I deleted the meeting and went to another room to watch TV, I got a text saying he was available to do the interview and was sorry for being late because he was with a client. So I reestablished the link and we did the interview for more than an hour. So again, he followed through and he was the same kind of friendly, people-oriented, authentic person he'd been when I first met him.
So all of this is to say that I still like people who like people, and people who like people follow through and aren't fake or opportunistic, and communicate appropriately and respectfully. Hopefully I'll keep meeting such cool people as the year progresses.
p.s. the e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
Posting online is like a message in a bottle. We write something or post something to connect with the outside world. It's easy to write something for ourselves in a diary, or take pictures and keep them in our camera, or write down observations in a notebook. But when we do something online, we're reaching out by turning ourselves outwards, throwing something out there to see if anyone is passing by who might notice.
Years ago before social media proliferated digital, people wrote confessional, personal blogs. I used to do searches for a phrase and stumble upon someone's thoughts and struggles, and know that I wasn't alone when I had a more isolating work situation. I also "met" people online who were blogging and met some offline, and even put together the Down the Block anthology to help expand independent creators' voices.
I don't think all the writers in the anthology (published 15 years ago) are very active online anymore. Some have become busy with their own work and offline lives so they don't care about posting online, and others have migrated to LinkedIn and social media outlets.
Social media is immediate, and I don't think people have the patience or interest to write something longer, hoping someone will read it. The ones who do commit to writing longer articles usually have a tangible goal, to become successful in monetizing their writing or integrating it into their profession; they want their blogs/online articles to serve a purpose, to get attention that will lead to something bigger. When we put something on social media, we can get quick feedback instead of waiting to see if anyone has noticed our blog post. If you're not famous or saying compelling things on sites such as Substack, regular blogging is just throwing something out there, hoping someone will find the bottle that you threw out into the digital ocean. And on social media, when people don't get likes or comments or re-shares, they wonder if they're being heard and worry if they're connecting with friends and a larger audience. So the bottle they're throwing into the ocean is just floating, which makes some people feel anxious or rejected.
I'm probably being nostalgic, but I miss content that doesn't try to boast. I'm not saying there is no authenticity online, but it seems like various people are trying to get attention in their online (and app) posts via pictures, tweets or updates, and there's a kind of competition going on ("look at how much fun I'm having" "here's my outrageous opinion" "here's how you can maximize your click-throughs"). I've achieved what I've wanted via my online content, but I'm hardly any more popular than I was several years ago. I don't want to post to get attention, though it would be fantastic if someone higher up in the food chain would notice me, and the novel that I'd put all of my energy into and tried to go as deep as I could within a character's thoughts and feelings took off.
Because I've seen the evolution of online content (and the Web just celebrated its 30-year anniversary), I've been able to compare how it used to be with how it is today. There are some feelings I have that people have disagreed with, especially young creatives who have grown up with digital. It's not that it's all bad, but it's sort of sad about how it's become transactional and a wall of highlights, as if people are shouting from a stage "look at me!". A recent column by college student Olivia Krupp effectively articulates what the current issues are with social media.
But the bottom line is that we can all create content instead of getting someone's permission to share our creations. The gates are open and it's not like it was for centuries, where only the privileged, well-connected, or chosen could express themselves publicly.
p.s. e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
Chapter 3 of one of the best advice books I've ever read, The Asshole Survival Guide, begins with Robert Sutton saying, "I believe in quitting" and that's what I did. I wasn't going to consider myself part of the Great Resignation because I quit last year, but Greg Iacurci at CNBC says 2022 was the "real year," so I'll take it.
After the above paragraph, I wrote more than 1000 words about a series of bad work experiences that led me to resigning, but it was too specific and seemed too ranty. No one had read the draft, but a wise person said I should not post it, so I'm not.
Instead, I want to reiterate what I said a while ago when I first read the book: know how to identify a toxic place and, I'll add now, Get Out!
My situation was a toxicity that I was tolerating, though I wasn't oblivious as I'd been in the past. Since I read that book, I've decided to never tolerate abuse and that approach has generally worked. But one way toxicity can be revealed is how an organization responds when a worker reports dysfunction. That's what Sutton's book explains. He says if people try to take action and nothing is achieved, then it's time to leave. Statements such as "that's how they are" or "they didn't mean it" or gaslighting the victim instead of taking action about the perpetrators are red flags.
So here's my advice: if you feel horrible and have been treated badly, bullied, abused, anything less than respected, make a plan to get another job and leave. There are many examples of bad behavior at the Ask a Manager blog.
Here's another reason to leave: if you're not paid fairly. If a company pays other people well but comes up with excuses to pay you thousands of dollars less than your predecessor and inexperienced coworkers, find a job that pays better and quit. (And expert Allison Green says it is totally legal to find out what other people make.) If an organization does not require workers to show up nor do much work for much better pay, yet expects you to do more for much less money, then find better pay elsewhere and leave. Even just looking for other work will make you feel better. But it is not normal or fair for people to get paid well for not doing much, while you have to meet standards for thousands of dollars less. Don't rationalize it. It's not right. You are worth more. You are worth your experience.
Which reminds me of another reason to leave: if a company chooses people based on their age or other superficial features, and you see them get ahead or better pay based on what they're perceived to be instead of what they can actually do, find a place that values human beings if you feel like you're being overlooked or not as appreciated as the favored ones. It doesn't matter what you say or do; if they reward someone based on looks, there is nothing wrong with perceiving that as unfair, and if you don't want to work in a place with such values, then find a better place.
Kim Parker and Juliana Menasce Horowitz reported: research for the Pew Center revealed "low pay, a lack of opportunities for advancement and feeling disrespected at work are the top reasons why Americans quit their jobs" in 2021. Yup.
What really was the last straw for me was what The Asshole Survival Guide details. At that moment, I thought "I'm going to quit," but waited a while until I would not be quitting in anger and would be prepared with another plan. I kept thinking about Sutton's explanation of why quitting is better than staying in a toxic situation, and how in the past I had not quit and regretted it because enduring the situation had only harmed me. And I feel fantastic.
Setting boundaries is powerful. Once I put in my notice, I felt like I'd built a concrete booth around me that no one could penetrate. I was asked to stay longer, then asked to be on call to answer questions for no pay, which just reinforced my correct decision. No regrets! I had a great experience but it was time to move on, and I immediately worked in much better situations with fair pay and no abusive/backstabbing treatment. One company I work for even has a system for dealing with abusive coworkers; there are specific people we can contact, and there is no tolerance for behavior that is detailed in The Asshole Survival Guide.
So my advice to you is, again, to find a better situation and quit. The pandemic gave us the opportunity to reflect on what's important. Don't waste any more time suffering fools or giving your best to an organization that doesn't appreciate it. Go where you're wanted and don't look back!
p.s. e-book version of my debut novel is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
I'm one of those lucky people who was over-employed during the pandemic. I was working at least five gigs at the same time, and one part-time job that was 100% in-person went from a couple of days a week to more, at times several days in a row, because they had to limit the workers in the company. I also had a part-time job that became at-home a year before the pandemic because there was a shift from a W-2 situation (where I had to work in-person in an office) to a 1099 situation (freelance). So between those two part-time jobs, I was working essentially full time. I also was teaching online and in-person, and I did freelance digital work for a couple of companies. So at times I was working up to 80 hours a week, and I never dipped below 40. I can't believe I was able to do all that and never got sick or missed a day of work, nor miss deadlines or anything. I even filled in for other people who were sick. Now that I work a mere 50 hours a week, I look back at that time and am amazed I handled it all without even feeling stressed. I guess I really liked working to the max and was running on adrenaline.
Then last year, the almost impossible happened when I got a full-time job. I had been working at the same company part time for seven years, and sometimes filled in for someone who eventually left for another opportunity. After freelancing, working part-time jobs, and running my one-person business for several years, it was very weird to have to go into work every day at the same place. I thought the office politics and other drama would be a nightmare because I was tied to one place. But it's been wonderful. My coworkers and boss are fantastic, and I like the work. I've met new people and have had a great time. I feel a sense of satisfaction and peace and actually feel successful. I'm not financially successful, but I have zero issues, which is worth a lot. Everyone I have to directly interact with is responsive and responsible, and they're all really nice people. I have zero stress, no drama, nothing negative. I'm also totally in charge of my work flow; I don't have to work within someone else's framework, which is very satisfying. I didn't know that I'd totally enjoy being in control of my own work flow, but now that I've experienced it, I want to keep working in such a situation. It's very satisfying to decide how to do something, who to ask to do it, when to get it done, etc. I always get everything done early or on time, and because it's on me and I am able to accomplish it, it's even more rewarding. Also, my boss leaves me alone because he trusts me, and he also doesn't mind that I have a personality. I don't have to fake introversion to survive. And a nice bonus: I have a large office with a view. I often don't turn on the lights so that I can see the sun, and when it becomes dark, the city lights are my wallpaper. The whole situation is unbelievably great.
I've also been teaching, and because one school has consistently asked me to teach and the classes fill up pretty quickly, I can no longer teach at another school. I'm lucky that I was able to teach at both schools for a while. Now that I have a full-time job plus teach some classes, one school keeps asking me if I can teach a class over there; every semester they ask me, which means a lot because it's nice to be needed, but at this point I only have time for subbing. At the other school, I'm having a great time teaching because I really like the students, and my bosses there are supportive as well. So right now, I have the full-time job and the teaching, which still makes me over-employed but not at the level I was at earlier this year (the W-2-turned-1099 part-time job ended in the summer when my boss retired). And I don't work with any difficult people or jerks (and this is where I want to plug the excellent book The Asshole Survival Guide, which everyone should read).
I'm not talking about my work situation to be publicly fake. I'm seriously glad that I'm still employed because some people have lost their jobs or they've had a tough time during the pandemic. Because of all the negative news and the changing economy, I sometimes worry about what's going to happen. I hope I'll continue to work for the rest of my life because I have no plans on retiring; there's still a lot to do.
p.s. e-book version of my debut novel (I'm working on a second one) is still at Amazon, and the price for the print version has been reduced: buy at the Eckhartz Press site.
Sometimes I meet people who've been adopted, or who have adopted kids, and I tell them that my dad was also adopted. Because he was born in the 1920s, adoption wasn't openly discussed, so he didn't know about his origins until later. I've been binge-watching Red Oaks (which I'll write about once I finish Season 3), and in some respects, it reminds me of some of my family's experiences. One time I told my dad that I wanted to get a bling ring, and he gave me one that looks like an ostentatious wedding band that a character wears in Red Oaks. The ring he gave me was made in the 1940s and wasn't meant to be a wedding band; it was a fancy men's ring, but and he didn't really like it. It looks sort of gaudy but it's fun, so I wear it. My dad wasn't tacky; he was highly educated, well-read, and dressed well, even when he was teaching in a public high school.
I was recently looking through my online files and found the eulogy that I wrote for his funeral. I'm posting it here because it expresses my gratitude for the people who helped him out, and to show how an adopted person from almost 100 years ago shared similar feelings to adopted people now.
Eulogy:
Recently I asked my dad when he was the happiest, and he said his childhood; he had a very good childhood, which was the beginning of his long, fulfilling life. What bothered him though, through his old age, was the fact that he had found out that he was adopted. He didn’t find out from his parents but from another kid, and from that point forward, while he continued to have a good life, he felt like the enjoyable world he thought he had was somehow artificial, not what he thought it really was. The family that his parents said he had--cousins, aunts, uncles (he was an only child)--were not *really* his family because they weren’t biologically linked to him.
I kept telling him that he was very lucky to have been adopted by a supportive, stable, well-off family who gave him everything he wanted (except for a BB gun). It didn’t matter that they weren’t biologically connected to him; they *were* his family, the family that chose him and brought him into their lives. And he was taken care of in various ways; even during the Depression, when a lot of the country barely had anything to eat, he had his own bedroom in a nice neighborhood in Youngstown Ohio, played golf with his cousin, ate large meals with homemade desserts, rode his bicycle around the neighborhood...and after he moved to Canton he lived out the Depression and many of his adult years there in comfort.
Fast forward to his old age, when I spent a lot of time with him due to his physical limitations and illness. It became clear to me, while he still spoke of what I call an existential perception of existence (as he described the fact that he was adopted, so he was essentially “alone” in the world), I noticed that there was a *larger* family that had adopted him. Of course, family members called him, visited him, took him out, and made sure he was okay. But the family extended from there; it was the family of society.
Many people who had no familial ties were very good to him. Friends and neighbors took him out, offered to help him in any way needed, talked to him, and treated him with respect. And it even extended beyond that. Many people, including strangers, treated him well and encouraged him. On a number of occasions, people he did not know at all would walk up to him and help him get out of a chair or out of a car. A cashier at Jewel would hand him a tissue when his nose was runny. A waitress would give us free meals. A man who didn’t speak English would give him a thumbs up. A woman would step out of the way to make room for him and his walker, telling us that she understood since she, herself, helped elderly relatives. The incredible reaction of people around him helped him to not feel alone.
As he got older, he became a relaxed person who had a very good attitude and lived in the moment. He pretty much never worried. I think his positive attitude and pleasant demeanor opened up doors for him, and caused others to respond favorably. Thanks to all the people in his life (as is evidenced by all the people here), the excellent doctors, nurses, and non-medical staff at Evanston Hospital, Glenbrook Hospital, and the Kellogg Cancer Center, he was able to live--and die--in dignity.
His life serves as a reminder that even the little things we do can have a huge impact on another human being. I feel that this is important to remember as we see increasing evil in the world, because the good we do can offset the bad.
