Seems to me that a lot of people make a production of telling the rest of us how much they appreciate this blog then undermine it by shutting out some, ridiculing or downplaying others, and rushing to validate (if not outright kiss up) the ones that are acceptable to the group, all the while giving lip service to how important it supposedly is to learn or share. That doesn7kt sound like learning to me. It sounds like game playing and attention seeking.

But to each his own.

I guess, at the end of the day, the choice is up to the individual. It was my choice to stick it out, curios where this was all going. The time comes, too, to make the choice that wherever it’s going is not a place you personally care to be.

You’re right Softly – it’s an opportunity to share and learn. That’s how I look at it.

Have a nice day all and always ready to learn, Rach

I get the quote, even the tactful version, but why here? Why now? Why so gloomy?

This meeting here could be an opportunity to rejoice in the quest, to discover new avenues, to enjoy the gift of others freely giving their take on things. There is no contest here and it can only get brighter.

Let’s lighten up and learn

Softly

Before propelling myself into the body of this entry, I respectfully yet definitively request that no comments be posted in response to the following text. This is a one-time entry submitted in both defense and support of a fellow writer. It must be stated, therefore, that I do not consider myself a “fan” of “Paul Michael Glaser” but instead a writer, author, mother of three, student of the human condition, and fellow human being who–having seen (and experienced) both the most glorious as well as the most horrific actualities this life has to offer–feels in every way compelled to make the following statement, regardless of the inevitable outcome.

Curious about the progress of the upcoming work, (“Chrystallia”), I logged on to this blog and was, as a writer, appalled by the consistent perversion of the words, thoughts, and ideas of another in order to support some unrelated agenda. There is no worse feeling for a writer than to have his or her work refitted then taken out-of-context for misuse by others. There were entries in which readers challenged (in some cases excoriated) the views Mr. Glaser presented; however, criticism (in most cases) helps one train him/herself to be more mindful of how best to approach the way concepts or imagery is presented. It is not pleasant; yet it is necessary in learning how to achieve clarity in one’s own personal writing style, in conveying one’s perceptions to others. Still it must be pointed out that criticism is far different than blatant misinterpretation for the purpose of–by taking selected words and phrases completely out-of-context–using another’s words to support an unrelated perspective. Perhaps Mr. Glaser is able to shrug off such misuses of his statements and/or personal theories; yet some inexorable sense of outrage deep at my core would not allow me to let such an injustice go unchallenged.

The bottom line is this:

Whether one agrees with the concepts presented or not, these are the thoughts, observations, and impressions of a human being (not a soulless, emotionless, one-dimensional character depicted on a television screen) who–having endured the unendurable, survived the unimaginable–reached a point and time in his life at which he deemed it important to share with others portions of the lessons his life and experiences imparted upon him. The man made the time, took the effort to initiate frank, open dialog for no other reason a desire to share and encourage equally stimulating conversation. The least others could do in response is show due respect for the integrity of another human being’s beliefs (not to mention their significance to the individual who expressed them)!

In short: listen, share, question, discuss, exchange, examine even debate, by all means…but stop twisting this man’s–this writer’s– words to suit your own purposes.

Come on, people!

–cjjo

P.S.

Laertes, as (ironically) the author/originator of the, frankly, rather obscure quote cited above, I absolutely must state that you, my college professor, and my late mother were probably the only three people on the face of this planet to have read and/or purchased that particular (decades old) analysis on the comprehensive works of William Shakespeare!

“…and so the world became a darker, crueler, more barren desert, all for the souls of those who inhabit it.”

Let me get this straight – I would in no way saying you can harm someone by helping them. There is an old saying ‘sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind’. Whereas that is an extreme way of putting it, there is some truth in it. Sometimes it helps someone to tell them to ‘snap out of it’, ‘get your act together’, ‘get real’ ‘stand up and smell the roses’ (or whatever cliché is the buzz at the time); it gives them a chance to reassess their own capacities.
On the other hand….if we encourage dependence we are not helping anyone. Ah but were is the happy medium?

I dispute this remark “The problem is that people no longer want to take the time to be there for others.”. If Michaela took the time to look around she would see that there are thousands of people going out of their way to help others. The evidence is the opposite (or maybe she hasn’t noticed what is going in in Haiti right now).
Being there for someone can be painful; we have to face out own demons when helping them face theirs. but if you are a true friend to someone you take the risk – go out on a limb….and if you can do that for a friend you will do it for someone else who needs you.

And yet…and yet…her grandmother gave her a bit of real wisdom and she understood that.

We can only do our best…get it right or get is wrong; try, and succeed; try, and fail. And by whose lights is it success or failure anyway?

When I was a kid I had a book called The Water Babies. It was old fashioned even then; a little schmaltzy in places and full of the kind of half-veiled ‘moralism’ that the Victorians excelled in. (and not a patch on Dickens for pointing fingers at injustice)…but I digress.
In that book their were two characters. Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby (who was a kindly soul) and Mrs Bedonebyasyoudid (not such a nice person)…well as I said it was a Victorian ‘moral’ story.

their names are worth reflecting on.