Listen and Sell

It’s summer time here at the U, so we have some time to breathe, and to enjoy the laid back atmosphere. This also means my schedule shifts, and no more Sundays until September.  I like having the Sundays off because it’s more aligned with normal people, but also because I get to brunch again with real humans at a place, not just making a large late breakfast and drinking champagne on a Wednesday by myself at home. I’ve been ignoring my roulette, and to some degree my self-appointed blogging duties for a while due to other projects (more on that coming soon). But that means I can just shift my roulette over to Friday and keep on it.

Today I chose a random book from our book sale here at the U. Sometimes professors or other people affiliated with the University will make large donations, and every now and then there are multiple copies of the same book. I looked over at the sale shelf and saw about 40 copies of a new book, so I had to go and see what it was all about.

The book for this week is called:

Masters of Sales: Secrets from Top Sales Professionals That Will Transform You into a World Class Salesperson by Ivan Misner and Don Morgan.

IMG_1392 - Copy

I flipped through the book and noticed that each little section is written by different folks from the profession sharing lessons and advice, etc. I opened up randomly to this excerpt:

Earning the Right to Be Heard by Stuart Mitchell

Two of the strongest criticisms about salespeople are:

  1. They are only interested in selling me something
  2. They don’t really care about me

By contrast, I listen to my prospects and clients and win national sales awards year after year, while consistently doubling my sales targets. My claim to fame is that I actively listen to my prospects and clients. “Active listening” is like a bank account. The more active listening deposits you make, the more sales withdrawals you get. It works this way. When you listen to your prospects – AND THEY KNOW IT- they will, in return, listen to what you have to say about your product. This leads to more sales.  (Misner & Morgan, 2007, p.103)

I’ve always had a tough relationship with sales people, I always assume they are up to no good. I often avoid them when I see them approaching me at a mall, or try my very best to never have to change phone plans, or bank accounts or whatever.  I usually tell them what I need, but they don’t really help me with that. Often times I end in programs or plans that are more likely to help them hit their “numbers” while putting me in a less than ideal situation. Maybe I’m too much of a pushover; maybe I just give everybody the benefit of the doubt when I shouldn’t. I don’t know but me and the idea of sales have just never mixed. This isn’t a blanket statement; there are good sales people out there. I worked in real estate forever ago, and in the many loan officers I met there were actually a couple of decent ones, they were good at what they did, and looked out for their clients. I don’t know if the field has changed much, but these good seeds were pretty few and far between.  But what makes a salesperson “good”?  In business they usually see your numbers, not your client satisfaction, which may be where the trouble comes about. I wonder how much the world would change if instead of money/revenue/numbers/ products sold companies actually paid attention to customer satisfaction as the rating for sales people and made this the gauge for if they kept their jobs or got bonuses. How well people were treated by salespeople and companies in general would definitely change, for the better.

There will also be times in your life when you have to “sell” yourself. As much as this makes me cringe it’s true, there’s job interviews, writing resumes and cover letters, online dating, even friendship s sometimes begin with trying to convince somebody that you are indeed cool enough to hang out with. So maybe let’s take deeper look into this “active listening” and see what it’s really about and how it can be used to benefit a situation.

 

Here is one definition of it:

 

Active Listening: An approach to interpersonal communication that requires sensitivity and open-mindedness on the part of the listener and a willingness to share information and opinions on the part of the speaker. Listening actively allows the one who is hearing to comprehend the underlying message beneath the content of the words voiced, to evaluate fairly the speaker, and to reconsider previously held attitudes. Being heard in a nonjudgmental manner gives the speaker the confidence for self-expression without fear of criticism or intimidation and a sense that what he or she has to say is of value. Active listening has been used successfully in the workplace and in other social settings, as well as in health and mental health practice, to bring about changes for the better in both the listener and the speaker. Learning the art of active listening takes practice. (Sullivan, 2009)

 

So basically, it’s allowing the person speaking to say what they need to say without judgment in an open minded setting. One of the interesting parts of this definition it says active listening allows the listener to find the underlying message in the words of the speaker.  When I hear underlying I think of reading between the lines, so it feels to me like a way to decipher something and get a meaning that may lie deeper than the surface.  Maybe somebody says “I want dessert, and I really haven’t had ice cream in so long” you could actively listen and get that person some ice cream. Even though they didn’t say, “hey I want ice cream, can you get me some?” This allows you to understand what they are trying to get across on a deeper level. That may be a really bad example, but I kind of want ice cream right now so, sorry, but you get the point. I could see how this could be useful in many aspects of life, business, friendships, and most definitely romantic relationships.

 

I meet with a group of women each month, where we practice active listening with one another, and the way she describes it is like the speaker is a rock being dropped into the water. Her words are like ripples in the pond. Let her say her truth, and sit silently, absorb it, don’t respond to it or say, “yes I agree” or “me too” because that lessens the value of the words being said, also, if you are busy trying to formulate a response then you aren’t really listening. You lose what the person is saying because you are somewhere else in your own head formulating a comment. Once the ripples are gone, a few moments of silence, and another woman can start in. I don’t practice this enough to say that its life changing, but I should more often. As the definition says it takes practice. As much as I don’t like sales people I’ve also never liked to listen to others so this post is all about those hard things. I do feel the excerpt is pitchy and  sounds like it’s written by a salesperson, there is much value to what is being said there. I don’t think I’ll be reading the rest of this book, but if you are interested, consult your local library. Or, just come here we have like 40 copies for .50 cents each.

 

 

Misner, I. & Morgan, D. (2007). Masters of Sales: secrets from top sales professionals that will transform you into a world class sales person. New York; Entrepreneur Press.

 

Sullivan, L. E. (2009). Active listening. In The SAGE glossary of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol. 3, pp. 6-6). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412972024.n33

 

A Bee in One’s Bonnet

It’s Friday, it’s spring break. Not much happening around these parts today, and there hasn’t been since Wednesday. I a lot of copy cataloging done for the special collections, and worked with the archivist to clean up our digital collections landing page. I almost blew the building up yesterday trying to learn how to use Adobe Illustrator which was interesting. But, I got by with a little help from my friends, and ended up making a pretty cool new header for our online stuff. All was not lost, but today it’s hard to feel motivated. Cataloging is fun, but it’s an ongoing job, it’s never going to be finished. Sometimes that gets me down. I’m never going to get through all the piles, it’s impossible there’s always more books, more information. I guess in another way that makes me happy that the flow of information, knowledge and entertainment is so abundant.

The upside of all this weeks working is that I have a weekend off. What? A whole weekend? A Saturday AND Sunday like the rest of them? Yes. So I’m here doing my roulette early and to wish everybody a happy St. Patty’s Day. Since the weather in So Cal has been so nice, I decided to celebrate a little early last night, and go drink beers on outside patios. This could be what is contributing to my overall resistance to be enthusiastic this morning, but I think I will start to perk up in an hour or so. I have given myself the assignment of finishing my coffee and drinking a gigantic bottle of electrolyte water by the time 11:30 rolls around, it’s doable.

As I was grumping along towards my office this morning, I found a book that jumped out at me ever so sarcastically from the reference shelf. It’s called: Life is Just a Bowl of Cherries: And Other Delicious Sayings by Anne Beltran.

IMG_0565

Here’s the sayings I opened up to today:

The proof is in the pudding. You cannot be sure that you have succeeded until you examine the result of your efforts.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. People often mean well but do bad things. (Can be a strong rebuke implying the person you are addressing did something bad and his or her good intentions do not matter).

The rotten apple spoils the barrel. A bad person influences everyone he or she comes into contact with, making them bad too. (Also the cliché a rotten apple, a person who is corrupting others.

The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. People cannot do what they know they ought to do; people are not always physically capable of doing what they are willing to do. (Biblical).

(Beltran, 1997, p. 206-7)

What are these sayings really? Advice, warnings, and casual conversational phrases we use to describe situations that we all face in life? There is something about saying things in such a way that resonates with us. As humans, we don’t always point blank say what we mean, and I think the reason is that the story or real life example that we attach to it may help us understand the lesson that the words are trying to say to us on a deeper level. For me, it’s something in the visualization of it, and how I relate it to things I’ve known in my various experiences. I actually really like the proof is in the pudding and use it quite often even though it may be a little antiquated. I don’t eat pudding on the regular, nor do I think making it is some enormous feat that would warrant a sense of accomplishment that you indeed could do something amazing as mixing water with some powder and letting it sit in the bowl in the fridge for two hours. But it makes sense to me. Like hey, you can say all this crap, and act like the actions you are taking mean something, but the results are what really matters. The results are where the truth lies. So stop talking about it and be about it, make sure your pudding is full of proof.

Of course the road to hell one is pretty common too. It reminds us that “intention” is not really what matters, it’s where the deed or action ends up that makes the difference. Like the time I meant to save a bee that was trapped in my house, but ended up ripping off one of his legs, and probably ultimately being the cause of his death in the process. I wanted to get him outside and back to his happy bee life, but I really was the major contributing factor in his death (I still feel guilty about it months later). But does the fact that I MEANT to help matter, nope? The bee is still dead.

Sorry bee, I really am.

So what’s your favorite saying? Is there one that you use often, just one that comes to mind that makes you laugh or reminds you of a situation you are facing in your life? Say it to somebody today, see if they understand what the heck you mean by it.

Bertram, A. (1997). Life is Just a Bowl of Cherries: And Other Delicious Sayings. Lincolnwood, IL; NTC Publishing Group.

Robo Trumble

It’s the Saturday before spring break week, and despite some sort of Pan American Debate thing going on here, there’s not much happening here today. We are closed tomorrow, so I finally after 10 days get a day off, and a Sunday at that. Sunday Funday this week will probably consist of me binging on food and Netflix in bed, but isn’t that what Sundays are for? I haven’t done my roulette in a while, it’s actually pretty difficult to do sometimes, and I feel like the last couple ones have been especially so topic wise. Today I’m feeling like it could be a bit more fun. After getting my random numbers I found myself poking around the math/computer area and found a gem from 1982. There’s nothing like seeing old technology books, twenty five years ago technology wise seems almost more like one hundred years, but there is something nostalgic and endearing about these old books. Today I picked: Computers That Think? The Search for Artificial Intelligence by Margaret D. Hyde.

IMG_0540 - Copy

And just because I opened up to such an awesome picture I’ll post that below the excerpt. The section I opened up to reads:

The word “robot” did not come into popular use until the early 1920’s with the appearance of a play called R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots) in which artificial zombie-like creatures took over the world. Although there are many definitions of robots today, they are generally described as creatures, or machines that function under their own power and control. (Hyde, 1982, p.52)

1234 - Copy

So, according to this book we now know how the word robot came into the vernacular. The writer Karel Capek was a Czech writer who mainly wrote science fiction stuff including R.U.R. and War With The Newts. R.U.R. deals with robots so real they are often mistaken for humans and can think and act on their own. The usual A.I. plot twist occurs in which the robots that were made to serve, rebel, and well we know that never ends well. Or does it? I don’t know in this case I’ve never heard of the play so you may have to find out for yourself.

Project Gutenberg has all the info, including full text of the script here if you want to indulge in some sci-fi drama and get all the details.

The idea of artificial intelligence and robots are a hot topic in the science fiction genre, and have been for a long time. I just recently got absorbed into this while watching Westworld, which I think I already blogged about so I won’t get too deep into that again. On one hand I like to think that it would be impossible to fool me and that there will never be a robot built so realistic that I couldn’t tell that it wasn’t human. But on the other hand I am not even sure if I could do the Pepsi Challenge and make it through. I think the fascination in all of this is that with artificial intelligence we are trying to create something that can make its own choices, and develop emotions and logic, but also something that we can control, which seems pretty impossible. I’m not entirely comfortable with it, I don’t even really think that roombas are that helpful, but that’s just me. I think that the less it looks like a human the better, those mechanical arms at the factories don’t bug me as much as something that looks like me, the discernable difference between those two types of robots is comforting. It’s a big argument, why even toy with artificial intelligence, what can we gain by creating something as close to human as possible?

Well anyways, it’s a debate for sure. But at least we learned one thing for the day, and that is how the word “robot” came about.

The whole thing reminds me of a song I once heard….

 

Hyde, M. (1982). Computers That Think? The Search for Artificial Intelligence. Hillside, New Jersey: Enslow Publishers.

Whiskey Rebels

It’s hopping here at the U on a Sunday. I guess it’s that time in the semester when the undergrads are starting to collect their sources for senior thesis projects. I think I’m still getting used to the ebb and flow of when the busy times are here,  but there’s so many programs, Master’s, PHD, traditional undergrad, and adult programs are all on different schedules.

I just literally spent over an hour trying to help a kinesiology student find studies about preoperative rehabilitation’s effects on postoperative outcomes of ACL surgery. Even after an hour we were only up to 4 solid ones. Sometimes people are looking for only a very specific type of article like there’s going to be a plethora of articles written on exactly what they want, and it’s just not the case. You have to pull your subject apart, look for other angles at some point.  It also makes me question my role sometimes as a research librarian at times. So you need a list of 15 articles, I can give you tips and pointers of where to look, how to look, and help with keywords, but I can’t produce a list of exactly the number of articles you need and hand it to you. It’s just not reality. I do love to help, and provide information, but there does come a point where I can’t do much more and the digging must be done by the student. The point of the educational process is for the student to research, and I get that, but also these topics can be frustrating, and you don’t want to turn people away without an information need filled. AH it’s a struggle. Maybe it’s also a pride thing, like dang, if I can’t find X amount of articles on the topic then maybe there’s something wrong with my searching skills. I don’t think so, but….

I digress.

So I got my numbers today, 2, 6, 19, Right. This led me straight to the substance abuse section. Yay! Who doesn’t love a good book about addiction, and more specifically so about a major poison of choice that I know all too well, Alcohol!

Today I pulled the book: Drink: A Social History of America by Andrew Barr.

copy-123-copy

Flipped open to a random paragraph and here we go:

The impossibility of incorporating the Scotch-Irish notion of “natural liberty” within the federal system was demonstrated when, at the instigation of Alexander Hamilton, the secretary of the treasury, Congress voted in 1791 to impose an excise duty on domestically produced spirits. The following year a group of western Pennsylvanians petitioned to congress to repeal the tax. “To us,” they argued, “that act appears unequal in its operation and immoral in its effects. Unequal in its operation, as a duty laid on the common drink of a nation, instead of taxing the citizens in proportion to their property, falls as heavy on the poorest class as on the rich; immoral in its effect, because the amount of duty resting on the oath of the prayer, offers, at the expense of the honest part of the community, a premium to perjury and fraud.” (Barr, 1999, p.320)

In what could have appeared to be a somewhat exciting book (based on the cover and topic) I have managed to pick one of the most boring paragraphs in it. I get it, putting an excise tax on spirits would make it harder for the average man to get his booze on than a man of higher means. Booze, as referred to here is called the “common drink of a nation” both rich man and poor man have spent nights way longer than they should belly up at the bar with no regard to tomorrow, but man tomorrow when it does come also rewards both rich and poor the same way, with a hangover. If we must find something in common then, let it be our love of booze. That kind of makes me laugh a bit.

What I don’t know about is this instigation of Hamilton in 1791. (I do wonder if I would have seen the musical if I would know more, but something tells me probably not). It appears that Mr. Hamilton suggested this excise tax on spirits to congress, and it passed.

This was something called the 1791 Excise Whiskey Tax. Here’s the info from the historical site of the House of Representatives:

After a spirited debate, the House passed, by a 35 to 21 majority, the Excise Whiskey Tax—legislation that proved wildly unpopular with farmers and eventually precipitated the “Whiskey Rebellion.” The measure levied a federal tax on domestic and imported alcohol, earmarked to offset a portion of the federal government’s recent assumption of state debts. Southern and western farmers, whose grain crop was a chief ingredient in whiskey, loudly protested the tax. In 1794, farmers in western Pennsylvania attacked federal officials seeking to collect tax on the grain they had distilled into whiskey. The administration of President George Washington dispatched a force of nearly 13,000 militia to put down a feared revolt. Resistance, however, dissipated when the troops arrived. (The 1791 Excise Whiskey Tax, 2017.)

I see now how this caused a ripple effect in society down to the farmers who produced the grain to go into the Whiskey. The “Whisky Rebellion” sounds like something I do to myself when I go out and have a couple stiff ones and think I can rebel against bedtime and the fact that I have work the next day. Now I have to chase the rebellion, see what that’s all about, and see if they got any farther than the farmers who backed down against the militia, or if that’ is just part of the rebellion.

It looks like that last part with the people backing down was only the second part of the story.

Enforcement legislation touched off what appeared to be an organized rebellion, and in July of 1794 about 500 armed men attacked and burned the home of the regional tax inspector after a smaller group had been fended off the previous day. The following month Pres. George Washington issued a congressionally authorized proclamation ordering the rebels to return home and calling for militia from Pennsylvania and three neighbouring states. After fruitless negotiations with the 15-member committee representing the rebels Washington ordered some 13,000 troops into the area, but the opposition melted away and no battle ensued. Troops occupied the region and some of the rebels were tried, but the two convicted of treason were later pardoned by the president. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2017).

What was really important historically here I suppose is that the American government squashed the rebellion. But it could also go to show you, don’t mess with people’s booze and their god given right to drink it. Anyhow, our country really isn’t that old when you think about it, and the fact that this only happened 226 years ago kind of puts that into perspective. I was hoping that drunk history had done this as a skit so I could link it, but I couldn’t find it so maybe that could be for another episode.

If you are interested in reading more about the Whiskey Rebellion and all those involved, I did find this in my diggings. I would read it myself if my list weren’t 1,435 books long.

The Whiskey Rebellion: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and the Frontier Rebels who Challenged America’s Newfound Sovereignty.  By William Hogeland

The publisher describes it as: “A gripping and sensational tale of violence, alcohol, and taxes, The Whiskey Rebellion uncovers the radical eighteenth-century people’s movement, long ignored by historians, that contributed decisively to the establishment of federal authority”

Until next time… have a glass of Whiskey for these brave rebels, who ultimately failed. But hey, at least they tried.

 

 

Barr, M. (1999). Drink: A Social History of America. New York, NY; Carroll & Graff Publishers, Inc.

The 1791 Excise Whiskey Tax. (2017). Retrieved from: http://history.house.gov/HistoricalHighlight/Detail/35785

Whiskey Rebellion. (2017). In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://0-academic.eb.com.leopac.ulv.edu/levels/collegiate/article/Whiskey-Rebellion/76786

 

4.6 Billion Years Ago..

My random numbers today were 3, 8, 12 and direction R. It’s usually floor 3 or 1, which is fine, because that is where most of our stacks are.  I’m always kind of silently hoping somebody will send me to 4 since that is we have all of our old periodicals, and those are really fun. So it’s up the stairs over and around and I find myself smack dab in the middle of… Brace yourselves… The geology section?

I’m starting to realize more and more as I do this that I actually know very little about many things. But I guess that is why we have libraries, and available information. There were so many small pamphlets and reports, I did see a title called Geology for non-geologists (which in retrospect I should have grabbed) but something else ultimately caught my eye.

Today I have picked: Meditations at 10,000 Feet: A Scientist in the Mountains. By James S. Trefil.

asdfasd-copy

Yes, I picked it solely because it had the word meditation in the title, although I think it’s used in a different way than I thought it would be. I did my random flip through and landed on this passage:

All the other radiometric dating techniques follow the same principle, although they don’t all use exactly the same logical sequence to arrive at an answer. All, however, share certain limitations. In the first place, it is essential to the accuracy of the method that none of the product nuclei escape. Argon, as we have noted, is a gas, so if a rock is heated in the normal course of the geological cycle, some of the argon may be driven off. In effect, such an event resets the geological clock. When the rock is analyzed, the date determined by the radiometric techniques will be that of the heating even, not the formation of the rock. Sometimes this problem can be dealt with by analyzing an entire rock rather than just certain minerals in it, since the decay nuclei may well be in the rock even when they’re no longer locked into the mineral structure. This sort of error leads to an age that is too small; it always underestimates the true age. (Trefil, 1986, p.109)

So he’s discussing one of the pitfalls of radiometric dating for rocks? I think? I have no idea what radiometric dating consists of, I have a feeling it has changed since 1986, but let’s look shall we?

Radiometric dating became a possibility with Becquerel’s discovery in 1896 of natural radioactivity. Rutherford postulated that radioactivity could be used to determine the age of the Earth. His and Soddy’s discovery (1902) of the transmutation of the atom became the basis for understanding exponential decay and the evolution of decay products (“daughter” elements). Age estimates for the Earth that had been determined by rate of heat loss (Lord Kelvin) now had to make allowances for the heat energy associated with radioactive decay. Thus, scholars were able to argue for great antiquity of the rocks on Earth. It was really with the advent of data collection technologies after World War II that the radiometric dating field began to develop with rapidity.

Radiometric dating must be viewed as having two forms: (1) techniques that rely on the decay of an isotope of an element, the production and decay of daughter decay products (radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon, argon-argon, and uranium-lead, uranium series) and (2) the techniques that rely on the crystal damage that is generated by the ionizing radiation generated by the decay of radioactive elements (thermoluminescence, electron spin resonance, and fission track) (Pavish, 2006.)

So without the big words, it’s a fancy way of telling how old the rocks on the earth are by the amount of the decay of the elements inside that rock. I’m going to assume the excerpt is talking about argon-argon series of dating, but I really can’t be sure really.

So why is it important to date the rocks on the earth? Does it matter how long we have been around? (I mean not US, but the actual floating sphere in space that we reside on) Sure it does. Well I think it does, but for me I see this post as something more philosophical than scientific because, well I guess I’m just more right brained. I did a quick google search “Why do we need to know how old the earth is?” and really all I’m getting is How do we know how old the earth is? I went through about 10 pages of this and saw no why.

I guess maybe it’s implied that more knowledge is better. To figure things out scientifically is what makes us advanced as humans. There is an innate need to figure out the world and universe around us and how it works. The two most famous ways are faith and science, and by nature seem to conflict. What’s funny is as I’m sifting through the basic google results a lot of biblical stuff is coming up. Maybe the purpose of radiometric dating is to scientifically refute the bible, or at least point out the loopholes in its plots. I’m also seeing a lot of weird political stuff out there too. Man the internet really is full of lots and lots of opinions.

I’m going to assume most of the literature published on the subject of radiometric dating may use lots of jargon and ideas that may be a bit over my head and would take far too long to decipher and explain than we have in our short period of time here. A quick easy search of “radiometric dating” AND accuracy AND rocks actually only afforded me one hit, the Funk & Wagnall’s New World Encyclopedia, this should be more readable, oh and it gives a general reason too. That’s good.

Dating Methods, in earth science, methods used to date the age of rocks and minerals. By applying this information, geologists are able to decipher the 4.6-billion-year history of the earth. The events of the geologic past—uplift of mountain ranges, opening and closing of seas, flooding of continental interiors, changes in climate—are all recorded in the strata of the earth’s crust (Funk & Wagnall’s, 2016).

Scientific dating methods prove that the rocks and minerals found on the earth range back to 4.6 billion years ago. They can also track geological events such as flooding, mountain range shifts and climate changes. This is important. It’s nice to be able to track a history of something, and I see how it’s beneficial for the future to know these things.  I can’t help but think of how different things have become today with all the awful stuff we do to the planet and it’s atmosphere and ecosystems with the products, waste and emissions we have as humans. I know that recycling has become big in the course of my life, that’s a step. Now public transport is gaining speed, as well as re-using things to reduce waste. I try as much as I can to reduce my footprint and I feel like many people are doing the same which is a great step too. I mean do you ever really think of where all your trash goes? What that looks like? The amount of square feet or acres of just pure trash that you throw out in your one little life? I often think of this when I’m cataloging DVDs. There’s a box, then plastic shrink-wrap, then a sticker, then like 5 pieces of paper for ads inside. (So much that’s doing so little).

According to Nat Geo:

Americans generated 251 million tons of trash in 2006, the most recent year for which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has data. Our per capita trash disposal rate was 4.6 pounds per person, per day. Sixty-five percent came from residences, while 35 percent came from schools and commercial locations such as hospitals and businesses. (National Geographic, 2017).

The EPA has it at about the same, give or take. Look at that jump from 1980 to 2000. I wonder what the deal is there. I want to say at LEAST we are kind of leveling off, it would be nice to see it go down, but taking population growth into consideration it doesn’t seem like we are spiraling.

statistic_id186256_us-municipal-solid-waste-generation-1960-2014

I can’t even fathom how long 4.6 billion years is, nobody can. But I think it’s safe to say that the earth is something that is much older and wiser than us as humans. So we better respect it. From scientific jargon, to philosophical ranting, to standing up for environmental causes. Another Sunday, another random library book.

Dating Methods. (2016). Funk & Wagnall’s New World Encyclopedia, 1p. 1.

Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). U.S. municipal solid waste generation from 1960 to 2014 (in million tons). In Statista – The Statistics Portal. Retrieved February 12, 2017, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/186256/us-municipal-solid-waste-generation-since-1960/.

Kulpinski, D. (2017). Where does it all go? Retrieved from: http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/human-footprint/trash-talk.html

Pavlish, L. (2006). Dating techniques, radiometric. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 5, pp. 707-707). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412952453.n238

Crucibles

It’s Sunday, and I have about an hour left here at the library. I figured it would be a good time for roulette, yay! Today I found a book on our book sale cart that stood out to me so hard that I just had to use it for this purpose. It’s called Geeks & Geezers: How Era, Values, and Defining Moments Shape Leaders by Warren G. Bennis and Robert J. Thomas. Mind you the spine just said Geeks & Geezers and this is what caught my eye in the first place.

img_0315-copy

Open up at random to page 98 and here’s the random paragraph:

The difference between fasting and starving

Crucibles vary in duration (and in anticipated duration), in harshness and in other ways. But there are two basic types: the ones you seek and the ones that find you. There is a world of difference between the two-the difference between jumping into an abyss and being pushed in, between fasting and starving, between emigration and exile. Some of our leaders had their crucibles forced upon them- Sidney Rittenberg’s sixteen-year imprisonment may be the cruelest example. The majority of our leaders chose their crucibles, although rarely with a full understanding of what the experience may bring. Some, such as Arthur Levitt Jr. became seekers of crucibles, constantly looking for the kind of challenges that would stretch them (Bennis & Thomas, 2002, p. 98).

Ok that’s kind of an interesting thought. Think about the things you seek out in life and also the things that just happen to find you. Which do you think are more powerful? I like the example of the idea of being pushed into an abyss vs. jumping. Sometimes in life we meet challenging people can be stuck with difficult attitudes and situations that we have no control over, but sometimes we CHOOSE that challenge. Why ? I don’t know, maybe because it makes us stronger people, better people, something along those lines. The idea of leadership itself has always intrigued me, the power to persuade, for good or evil, all of those things.

But what do they mean by crucible? Sadly I don’t know what that word even means. Just from the context I’m going to think some sort of event, or person, or action that brings about a situation that has to be solved or dealt with. I know that there is a play called the Crucible by Arthur Miller, but I have not the slightest clue what it’s about. Let’s define:

cru·ci·ble

ˈkro͞osəb(ə)l/

noun

noun: crucible; plural noun: crucibles

  1. a ceramic or metal container in which metals or other substances may be melted or subjected to very high temperatures.

“the crucible tipped and the mold filled with liquid metal”

  1. a situation of severe trial, or in which different elements interact, leading to the creation of something new.

“their relationship was forged in the crucible of war”

(from google.com)

I’m going to go with definition number 2. Wow that’s pretty powerful. Severe trial, many elements, something new. I like that a lot. It’s kind of inspiring isn’t it? To think that our trials make us new again. Sometimes in my job I get to sit with people and do more than research. Talk of articles about co-leadership and eBooks can often turn into hopes and dreams with a side of past turmoil, hurts and abuses. Working with people like we do often times we are able to really make a connection with somebody and be inspired by them. I met an adult student yesterday that told me a story of her youth, and her struggles, her cycles of emotional and physical abuse, and how she got where she is today. She was studying business, but really wanted to study psychology and work closely with children who need a place to turn and to help guide them. She wanted to be the somebody that she never had when she was a child. It was downright amazing and I wanted to cheer her on the best way I could. Dreams man, they are the best thing in the world. But you can see that the trials in your very own life, the fires, the pain, all of it just forges you ahead and can turn you into something bright shiny and new. It’s really never too late for that. Now you can take all of that, learn, teach and help others to leave this world in a much better state than how you found it. Oh my lord I’m inspiring the heck out of myself here and I have to stop before my brain explodes from over use of the word inspiration.

That’s the thought of the day then I suppose. Get out there and seek out a crucible, do it. You never know what can happen on the other side of it. Something new, something better?

 

Bennis, W. & Thomas, R. (2002). Geeks & Geezers: How Era, Values, and Defining Moments Shape Leaders.  Boston, Massachusettes; Harvard Business School Press.

Fair Isabel, Poor simple Isabel!

Sunday, rainy, rainy Sunday. There’s very few students here in the library today, everybody is at home listening to the rain or watching football or whatever. It is the last week of Jan term, so things should pick up soon. I figure the old Sunday tradition of roulette should pass some time here today, on top of working on the digital collection for Japanese Interment (which I AM doing, but slowly). I got some random numbers, 3, 4, 8 and this time a direction, R. And end up with some good old poetry. Yay, my favorite.

Now I’ve heard of John Keats, never read any of his stuff so far though. So I opt for something on the safe side and pick out: John Keats: Selected Poetry.

img_0254-copy

(With a dreamy far off look in his eye).

I picked a random page and opened up to stanza 43 of Isabella; or the pot of basil. Which is labeled as a story from Boccaccio.

Here goes the excerpt:

43

When the full morning came, she had devised

How she might secret to the forest hie;

How she might find the clay, so dearly prized,

And sing to it one latest lullaby;

How her short absence might be unsurmised,

While she the inmost of the dream would try.

Resolv’d she took with her an aged nurse,

And went into that dismal forest-hearse.

 

44

 

See, as they creep along the river side,

How she doth whisper to that aged Dame,

And, after looking round the Champaign wide,

Shows her a knife. – ‘What feverous hectic flame

Burns in thee child? – What good can thee betide,

That thou should’st smile again?’- The evening came,

And they had found Lorenzo’s earthy bed;

The flint was there, the berries at his head

 

45

Who hat not loiter’d in a green church-yard,

And let his spirit, like a demon-mole,

Work through the clayey soil and gravel hard,

To see scull, coffin’d bones, and funeral stole;

Pitying each form that hungry Death hat marr’d

And filling it once more with human soul?

Ah! This is holiday to what was felt

When Isabell by Lorenzo knelt.

 

46

She gaz’d into the fresh thrown mould, as though

One glance did full all its secret tell;

Clearly she saw, as other eyes would know

Pale limbs at the bottom a crystal well;

Upon the murderous spot she seem’d to grow,

Like a native lily of the dell:

Then with her knife, all sudden, she began

To dig more fervently than misers can.

 

(Keats, 1818)

 

WOW that’s pretty dark. Apparently young Isabella has lost her lover, and she just can’t take it anymore and in an attempt to see him one last time, even rotten and in death, she takes her old lady friend, marches out to the woods armed only with a small knife and begins to dig Lorenzo up. I assume this was her plan all along, but the dame had no idea what she was getting in for.

 

This raises many questions for me… What crazy kind of love it that? Is there anybody in your life that you could dig up with a knife if they died just to see them one last time? Is that passion or pure insanity? Is there even a line between the two? I know this is a poem, but I wonder if anybody on the face of this earth has ever really done this. I would assume so, it’s a big place, and humans have been around for a little while.

 

I don’t know their backstory, seeing as the poem is pretty long and I only opened to this one part of it. The poem is from 1818 and it’s an adapted poem from another Italian called The Decameron of Giovanni Boccaccio by Giovanni Boccaccio. The original work is actually on Project Gutenberg: helloooo public domain. If you feel like reading it check it out here.

The Decameron of Giovanni Boccaccio by Giovanni Boccaccio.

Or if you want to check out the whole narrative poem and see how Isabella got into this whole hot mess and how it all pans out, here’s a link to a site with the full poem.

Isabella, or the pot of basil

And just in case you were curious about the man behind the work, here’s a short author bio:

John Keats was an orphan who studied medicine. He was an apothecary, but abandoned the profession to pursue his writings. He had financial problems and loss of loved ones throughout his life and saw life’s “vale of tears and substituted the concept as a ‘vale of soul making'” (Cook, 1996). (Now there’s a positive spin on things.) Keats died at the age of 25 from Tuberculosis.

Cook, E. (Ed.). 1996. John Keats: Selected Poetry. New York, NY; Oxford University Press.

 

Sunday, Library Roulette Time…

Geez. I think I’m in over my head with this one. I have no idea how to discuss this topic, it’s boring to me, I know nothing about it, and it’s not particularly pleasant or exciting.

Today I pulled this book…

Diary of a Dirty Little War: The Spanish-American War of 1898. By Harvey Rosenfeld.

54-copy

Wow. War. The first thing that comes to that mind is that song, something along the lines of… What is it good for? Absolutely nothing… (Say it again!)  But that’s only a tip of the iceberg I suppose. Here’s the passage I randomly opened up to:

Monday, May 30: At long last, the military invasion of Cuba had begun, or at least it appeared so. Troops in the Gulf ports began breaking camp and boarding transports. Some 25 ships stood ready to receive some 30,000 men. It was reported that the men would depart from Mobile and Tampa, with the transports converging at Key West. The belief that departure was near was strengthened by the order that troops at Chickamauga leave for Tampa. The safety of the troops would be ensured by convoys of warships provided by Admiral Sampson (Rosenfeld, 2000, p. 88)

If I have to be honest here I don’t really even know what the Spanish American War was all about. I love history, but certain parts of it that aren’t of particular interest to me aren’t held in my memory very long. Maybe I learned about this war at some point in high school, or college? The only thing I can think of to do is you guessed it… Research!  Let’s get the backdrop:

The war began with Cuba struggling for its independence from Spain in 1895 and Spain was pretty brutal in its attempts to stop that from happening. The U.S. caught wind of the brutalities and pretty much demanded that Spain withdraw its troops and give it up. Spain decided then that it was time to wage war on the U.S. in return for that demand. Long story short Spain loses and they end up signing the treaty of Paris in 1898 where Spain gave up any claim to Cuba and ceded Guam and Puerto Rico to the US, along with the Philippines for a cool 20 mill. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2017).

I wonder how many people died in this war. Let’s see if I can get some numbers. According to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs the US totals were as follows:

Spanish-American War (1898-1902)

Total U.S. Servicemembers (Worldwide): 306,760

Battle Deaths: 385

Other Deaths in Service (Non-Theater): 2,061

Non-mortal Woundings: 1,662

From what I can tell from a quick google (Non-Theater) means these deaths did not happen on the battlefield or in combat, and could be non-related to combat. According to the Library of Congress the reason for the non-theater deaths was much higher, stating that almost 90% of the US military losses were due to infectious diseases. Yikes. (Library of Congress, 2011)

I’m having a hard time finding the Spanish stats. I couldn’t track down a trustworthy source.

This whole lot is just rather depressing really. The thought of war, death and violent conflict. Let’s hope that a lesson was learned here. I don’t know what that is, but the purpose of history and knowledge of history I think is to understand how things became the way they are, to get an insight into human nature (which let’s face it is pretty much timeless) and to keep from repeating mistakes. However boring or depressing this random roulette has turned into nothing but a short and shallow history on the Spanish-American War. So at least I learned something today. Always a good day to learn something new. Cue that star streaming across the screen…

enhanced-32005-1422840611-40

Yep that’s the one.

 

 

Department of Veteran’s Affairs. (2016). Fact Sheet: America’s Wars. Retrieved from: https://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf

Library of Congress. (2011). The World of 1898: The Spanish-American War. Retrieved from: https://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/1898/intro.html

Rosenfeld, H. (2000). Diary of a Dirty Little War: The Spanish-American War of 1898. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.

Spanish-American War. (2017). In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://0-academic.eb.com.leopac.ulv.edu/levels/collegiate/article/68989

SEX! now that I have your attention…

Itssss Sunday, time for Library Roulette..

I let my co-worker do the honors of giving me the numbers this week. 2nd floor, 5th row, 14 dividers back. A new section I’ve never been in, this one was all about sexual issues and disorders. OK this got interesting. There was a lot of eye catching ones to choose from but the one that ended up the winner today was a black spine with the title. I flip to the cover page to find the full title:  Disorders of Desire: Sexuality and Gender in Modern American Sexology. Didn’t even know Sexology was a term, I learned a new one today. Wasn’t expecting to talk about sex here at all, but I have to discuss the random-ness I find here in the stacks any and all items shall be discussed.

123-copy

Flip to a random page, 107. The Title heading is Sexology at a Crossroads: Sexual Science and Sexual Politics. The actual passage I put my finger on is an excerpt from a leaflet, but to make the whole thing make sense I have to give it a background. During the 1980’s there was a large outcry of feminist groups against pornography.

A group called “D.C. Feminists Against Pornography” passed out leaflets of protest criticizing pornography as “a mechanistic approach to human sexuality which ignores the political, economic, and cultural factors that so deeply condition sexual behavior”.

The leaflet added:

Sexology cannot develop as a science without addressing sexism and the real condition of women’s lives. We expect the sexologists participating in this congress to acknowledge their responsibility to women, revise their research agenda to examine the context of sexual behavior (not merely the mechanics), and to integrate a feminist analysis into their research and practice, so that we in a joint effort can work to eliminate sexism in sex. (Irvine, 2005, p.107)

The study of sex and human sexuality has always interested me. I think it probably interests most people because it’s an innate human need, much like sleeping, eating, and breathing. I suppose there are some adult humans out there that don’t want or need sexual relationships, but they may be few and far between. But, as sex almost seems like a basic function of the animal kingdoms need to reproduce and keep the species alive it is so complicated in humans. Must be our big brains. There’s so many factors involved with us, so many emotions and motivations. There’s perversions, fetishes, different aspects of the act itself. There’s no universal sex or sexuality, no real right or wrong (amongst consenting adults rather). All I know about it really is that sex really is a very powerful thing. On one side of the coin sexual abuse and mistreatment can ruin somebody’s entire being, their emotional structures, and patterns. On the other side, when used properly it can be life altering in a positive and fulfilling way.

Think of the access that people have to pornography now versus the amount that they had in the 80’s. I think now that we live in an age when people have such easy access to over sexed advertisements, and internet porn of all kinds it’s important to educate people about how much of it really is an acting or portrayal of, versus the real thing. This brings to mind a book that was recommended to me by Phillip Zimbardo, Man Interrupted. I’ve had it now for over two weeks and haven’t skimmed it yet, but I will tonight after this post (I swear). He is a well-known psychologist that explores the overstimulation of today’s men and how it could be effecting them. Here’s a link to his ted talk from 2011:

The Demise of Guys.

 

I agree with the above statement from this weeks selection that we should take the sexism out of sex, but that goes both ways. We have to explore and acknowledge that this influx of sexual images can be a detriment to both of the sexes if used to set unrealistic standards and examples of what sexuality is and should be.

So what is sexology then? This is for me since I have no idea.

Sexology is an interdisciplinary science that focuses on diverse aspects of human sexuality, studying human sexual development, relationships, and intercourse, sexual malfunctions, sexually transmitted diseases, and pathologies such as child sexual abuse or sexual addiction. It has still not been fully recognized as a separate professional field but is most often found as a sub discipline within fields such as biology, psychology, anthropology, medicine, sociology, epidemiology, and sometimes criminology. (Horvath, 2009).

I think that it interests me most from a psychological standpoint, as most things usually do. Even though “sexology” doesn’t appear to be an entire field of study, it seems to touch many subjects as a sub field. Which makes sense, considering there’s so many sub fields of ourselves and society involved in sex.

 

 

Horvath, A. (2009). Sexology and sex research. In J. O’Brien (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gender and society (pp. 752-755). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412964517.n379

Irvine, J. (2005). Disorders of Desire: Sexuality and Gender in Modern American Sexology. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Press.

 

What’s in a name?

Well. What is in a name? Most people when asked the question “who are you?” will respond with their name. I know I do, because what the heck else are you supposed to say. But really it’s just this label, this thing, this wordy identifier that our parent bestowed upon us at birth. It can be anything, and these days some people name their children very interesting things. For many a name is something that is passed on in a family. Something of pride, tradition, showing that you belong to a part of a larger whole, a network or circle of like people that carry parts of the same blood in their veins, the same genes. There can be a lot in a name. Here In America we usually have three names. First, middle, last. What’s with the middle? I never understood that. Many countries don’t have middle names, just first and last. The last name seems to be more of a “tribe” unifier, seeing that most people from the same immediate family have the same last name. Some think it’s so important to carry a name down, others don’t. Some people like to be unique or individual, while others prefer to be named something more common. Have you ever known somebody to be one name their whole life then they want to be called something else? NO. It doesn’t work that way, you have labeled them, and identified them for life. Or you have those situation where you think… Hmmm, she doesn’t look like a Janet. What does a Janet look like? Your best friend from elementary school? We may equate names with historical figures, literary figures, characters, gods, saints, etc. Much effort and thought can be put into this, or it could just be something somebody thinks is funny, or cute. In a way we will always identify with our name.

Why the hell am I ranting about names? Well, I decided to do my roulette early this week since I won’t be here Sunday. Today I chose 5, 2 first floor. This led me to a shelf full of books that are supposed to help you name your unborn children. I did kind of wonder why we had so many here in an academic library but here they are. Is this just another stab at my obviously empty womb? Maybe. But probably not. There seem to be babies everywhere these days, so maybe it’s relevant to think about this, not for me but for others. ‘Tis the season.

The book I pulled this time is called: What’s in a Name? The only baby book that includes, histories, numerologies, astrological signs, colors, gem stones, elements, herbs. By Susan Osborne. Published by the Philip Lief Group in 1991.

copy-copy

Not only does it list the names origin but the corresponding signs, elements, numerologies, etc. . My kind of weirdness. When I do the flip I land on page 318, right in the middle of a section so I’ll go back to the start. Page 317, the name Hugh. I don’t know a single person named Hugh, Hugh Grant is the only person that comes to mind.

Let’s see what this book says about Hugh.

There are two supposed origins for Hugh, in ancient German it supposedly means “thought”. This is derived from German mythology and some ravens sitting on Thor’s shoulders, one was named Huginn which represented thought. It could also possibly come from one of the oldest names among the Welsh, Hu. It relates to the number 8, the astrological sign Aries, and the color Burnt Carmine (what?), the stone Essonite, the element Manganese and the herb Cinnamon (Osborne, 1991).

Well that’s quite a lot to say about a name. I wonder how long it took the author to look up all these meanings and where she got her sources from. That’s just the reference side of me speaking. The less logical side of me finds that all rather interesting. I want to see what they say about Keren while I’m here. (Of course I will look it up under the common spelling Karen). Let’s see… The K’s start with Katherine, which is apparently the root name for Karen. Most say it is derived from the Greek word katharos meaning “pure” but other sources say it make be linked to the word “aika” meaning “torture”(Osborne, 1991.

My interpretation: to be Keren is to be pure torture ha! But really that’s strange, it could mean two totally and very different things. Also my color is supposedly Jonquil. Whatever the heck that is. I should definitely look into wearing more Jonquil. Thanks for the insight weird 90’s book.