I feel fragile this days. I feel like I am stumbling and I can't get it together. I feel like I make the wrong choices and I can't follow my own instincts. This happens. I go through these phases. But today feels hard.
I always want people to think I'm tough, that I have a thick skin. But I get upset too easily. I try to act like a roll with the punches, but I feel jarred when things go the wrong way. I cry too easily.
Maybe it's not that I don't want anyone to know. Maybe it's that I'm afraid that if someone knows, they still won't care.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Shoot and score
I have ordered a new camera. It's not a DSLR and it's mirrorless, which are things that mean very little to me. I love taking pictures, but the details of what a camera does and what make one better than another isn't interesting to me. I barely know who much my camera can zoom. But this camera is, from what I have read, a good camera for those who want something more than a point-and-shoot, but don't want too much crazy going on. That sounds a lot like me.
I do love my point-and-shoot and I expect it will still be the one I carry around on most days. But, under certain circumstances, I get frustrated with it. Low light, action shots, certain indoor circumstances don't give me the pictures I want. There are times I see what I want to capture, but that's not what shows up. I suppose that will happen with any camera, but I'm hoping it's a bit less. I'm hoping to be able to get a good picture of the next full moon.
What pushed me over to the buying territory is that Sony is upgrading this camera in the next month, so the current model dropped in price by $200. I couldn't resist. It's possible that these upgrades in the newer version would be nice, but I'm thinking that won't be the case as the rumored upgrades have to do with video capture (something I never do with my current camera) and blah-blah computer interface. If you know anything about me, I'm about ten years behind on anything technology-related, so even the "old" computer-ish stuff is still at least five years ahead of anything I'm going to be using. Do I think those upgrades are worth over $200? I'm taking that bet and buying the current model.
I am worried about the bulk of this camera. I'm already pushing bag-lady status with the amount of stuff I drag around on a regular basis, so this might just push me over the top. "Don't mind the suitcase; it's carry-on size." Actually, I am more worried the bulk will have me leaving it behind and not using it enough. I will have to push myself on that.
Sometime next week, the new toy arrives. I'm very excited! Stay tuned for updates.
I do love my point-and-shoot and I expect it will still be the one I carry around on most days. But, under certain circumstances, I get frustrated with it. Low light, action shots, certain indoor circumstances don't give me the pictures I want. There are times I see what I want to capture, but that's not what shows up. I suppose that will happen with any camera, but I'm hoping it's a bit less. I'm hoping to be able to get a good picture of the next full moon.
What pushed me over to the buying territory is that Sony is upgrading this camera in the next month, so the current model dropped in price by $200. I couldn't resist. It's possible that these upgrades in the newer version would be nice, but I'm thinking that won't be the case as the rumored upgrades have to do with video capture (something I never do with my current camera) and blah-blah computer interface. If you know anything about me, I'm about ten years behind on anything technology-related, so even the "old" computer-ish stuff is still at least five years ahead of anything I'm going to be using. Do I think those upgrades are worth over $200? I'm taking that bet and buying the current model.
I am worried about the bulk of this camera. I'm already pushing bag-lady status with the amount of stuff I drag around on a regular basis, so this might just push me over the top. "Don't mind the suitcase; it's carry-on size." Actually, I am more worried the bulk will have me leaving it behind and not using it enough. I will have to push myself on that.
Sometime next week, the new toy arrives. I'm very excited! Stay tuned for updates.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Pronoun confusion
"We built it!" chant the Republicans. This is in answer to a statement that President Obama said about small businesses. First of all, that statement about not building a business by yourself, besides being quoted out of context, is absolutely true. Even in the commercial of the guy rebutting the President's claims, he claims that he and his father built their business. Are they not even listening to themselves? When they chant, "We built it!" do they not see that the pronoun they are using implies that they don't do it alone?
Besides completely missing the point, that a business needs the infrastructure, roads, community, etc, to succeed, why is this considered a bad thing? Why is the idea of assistance something undesirable? I went to public schools and the government paid for a nice chunk of my graduate school. And where's the line? If you get a scholarship to college, should you turn it down? Should you avoid the interstate and get an off-road vehicle? I need answers!
I have no doubt that being a small business owner is a challenge and loads of hard work. But isn't this why you would want more help, not less?
Besides completely missing the point, that a business needs the infrastructure, roads, community, etc, to succeed, why is this considered a bad thing? Why is the idea of assistance something undesirable? I went to public schools and the government paid for a nice chunk of my graduate school. And where's the line? If you get a scholarship to college, should you turn it down? Should you avoid the interstate and get an off-road vehicle? I need answers!
I have no doubt that being a small business owner is a challenge and loads of hard work. But isn't this why you would want more help, not less?
Thursday, August 23, 2012
What we talk about when we talk to Genoa Jeff
When I was in high school I was one of those girls who spent hours on the phone. It was before the days of cordless phones, so I had an extra-long cord and I could cover my entire bedroom while chatting. We'd talk and do other things; they were less like conversations and more like just keeping each other company. We didn't have email or texts or facebook, so it was the phone.
I had a handful of friends I could turn to for these non-ending phone calls. Most of them were not my boyfriends, as my boyfriends weren't very interested in the rambling chatfest. It takes a certain type of person to be on the phone for hours and hours.
One of my phone friends was Genoa Jeff. I met Genoa Jeff when we were in the All-Ohio State Fair Band together. The AOSFB was three weeks away from home with 300 other band dorks. I loved every minute of it. I honestly don't remember how close Genoa Jeff and I were when we were at the fair, but he lived just close enough that calling each other wasn't long distance, so we could spend hours on the phone.
Genoa Jeff was skinny and sarcastic and smoked all the time. Looking back, I realize that he must have hated living in small-town Ohio (heck, Genoa wasn't even big enough to actually be a town), and he envied me, living in the big city of Toledo. He would ask for all the details of my high school, what music we were playing, how many people were in the band, did we really have ten tubas in the marching bands? Being a high school girl, I couldn't be more thrilled to talk for hours about my life, so it was the perfect arrangement.
We would talk and talk, until my dad kicked me off the phone. What in the world did we talk about? I suppose it doesn't really matter. We just told each other the stories from our day, no doubt editing our lives to make them more interesting or dramatic. Our lives barely overlapped, so any artistic license was purely for entertainment.
I'm not sure when we lost touch. He just sort of faded from my life, and, when I realized that he was gone, it was too late. I wonder what happened to Genoa Jeff. The sad truth is that I don't even know his last name, and googling "Genoa Jeff" isn't any help. So I just remember, long talks about nothing and everything.
(Thanks to Bru, who inspired this post.)
I had a handful of friends I could turn to for these non-ending phone calls. Most of them were not my boyfriends, as my boyfriends weren't very interested in the rambling chatfest. It takes a certain type of person to be on the phone for hours and hours.
One of my phone friends was Genoa Jeff. I met Genoa Jeff when we were in the All-Ohio State Fair Band together. The AOSFB was three weeks away from home with 300 other band dorks. I loved every minute of it. I honestly don't remember how close Genoa Jeff and I were when we were at the fair, but he lived just close enough that calling each other wasn't long distance, so we could spend hours on the phone.
Genoa Jeff was skinny and sarcastic and smoked all the time. Looking back, I realize that he must have hated living in small-town Ohio (heck, Genoa wasn't even big enough to actually be a town), and he envied me, living in the big city of Toledo. He would ask for all the details of my high school, what music we were playing, how many people were in the band, did we really have ten tubas in the marching bands? Being a high school girl, I couldn't be more thrilled to talk for hours about my life, so it was the perfect arrangement.
We would talk and talk, until my dad kicked me off the phone. What in the world did we talk about? I suppose it doesn't really matter. We just told each other the stories from our day, no doubt editing our lives to make them more interesting or dramatic. Our lives barely overlapped, so any artistic license was purely for entertainment.
I'm not sure when we lost touch. He just sort of faded from my life, and, when I realized that he was gone, it was too late. I wonder what happened to Genoa Jeff. The sad truth is that I don't even know his last name, and googling "Genoa Jeff" isn't any help. So I just remember, long talks about nothing and everything.
(Thanks to Bru, who inspired this post.)
Sunday, August 19, 2012
You're my obsession
I'm not sure when things changed for me, but I wasn't caught up in the Olympics like I was years back. Don't get me wrong: I still paid way too much attention to what's happened and I spent plenty of time checking results on-line. But something was missing. A lot of people blamed the coverage (which had plenty of problems), but there's another issue for me.
When we watch the Olympics (or other world-class sports), we are watching people who are obsessed. There's a commercial that ran during the games showing various folks training and the voiceovers are statements like, "I haven't had dessert in five years," "I haven't read any books," etc. The idea, of course, being that these people are so focused on the athletics, they have time for nothing else. But is that appealing? Is this a good thing?
It is amazing watching what some of these athletes can do. You watch them fly through the air, run faster than seems possible, and you know that you will never ever be able to come even close to that. But you also hear the stories: how they left home at 12 because they wanted to train with a certain coach or how they've had the same knee repaired three times already before the age of 25, and I have to wonder if we really should be celebrating these athletes.
Maybe I'm a bit jealous. I've never had that singular focus. I've had times when I've had goals, and I've gone after them, but, deep down, I don't think I could have given up a big part of my life to go after just one thing. It's not that I've cut corners or walked away from a challenge, but I prefer balance over putting all my eggs in one basket. In fact, I'm happiest when I have the back-up plans and the different things to do.
When I was younger, I admired that focus that these athletes have. I wasn't consciously aware that this was part of the equation, but I would wonder what it would take to be an Olympic athlete. Now that I'm older, I realize that there is an element of "these people are crazy" that goes into this class of training and commitment. I'm not sure if we should be admiring this. And maybe this is why I'm a little more jaded when I watch the Olympics.
When we watch the Olympics (or other world-class sports), we are watching people who are obsessed. There's a commercial that ran during the games showing various folks training and the voiceovers are statements like, "I haven't had dessert in five years," "I haven't read any books," etc. The idea, of course, being that these people are so focused on the athletics, they have time for nothing else. But is that appealing? Is this a good thing?
It is amazing watching what some of these athletes can do. You watch them fly through the air, run faster than seems possible, and you know that you will never ever be able to come even close to that. But you also hear the stories: how they left home at 12 because they wanted to train with a certain coach or how they've had the same knee repaired three times already before the age of 25, and I have to wonder if we really should be celebrating these athletes.
Maybe I'm a bit jealous. I've never had that singular focus. I've had times when I've had goals, and I've gone after them, but, deep down, I don't think I could have given up a big part of my life to go after just one thing. It's not that I've cut corners or walked away from a challenge, but I prefer balance over putting all my eggs in one basket. In fact, I'm happiest when I have the back-up plans and the different things to do.
When I was younger, I admired that focus that these athletes have. I wasn't consciously aware that this was part of the equation, but I would wonder what it would take to be an Olympic athlete. Now that I'm older, I realize that there is an element of "these people are crazy" that goes into this class of training and commitment. I'm not sure if we should be admiring this. And maybe this is why I'm a little more jaded when I watch the Olympics.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Four more years!
I started this blog four years ago. Sometimes I can't believe it's been that long, but it's not like nothing's happened during those four years. Since I started this, I've had three different jobs, three residences, two computers, three cameras, a divorce, and an amazing new relationship. There's been a lot going on.
I'd like to say that when I started this blog, I thought I had it figured out or that I'd have no idea that things would change so much, but that's not true. I had a feeling a storm was a-brewin'. It was one of the reasons I started this, to have an outlet. I knew I was looking for something, and I still am. But, as cliche as it sounds, I see that getting there is half the fun.
I started writing here because I felt a pull of writing. I sort of expected to write a few posts, then let it fade away. I know that's not the most positive of attitudes, but I also know how these things go. I have more than a handful of half started projects hanging around the house (I probably will never knit that scarf.)
If I'm being honest, one of the reasons I started this blog was to reach out to (the former) Mr. Higgy-Piggie. This isn't the place to go into details about everything that happened or dig at old wounds, but, looking back, I know how many times and ways I tried to go to him, but there was never any attempt by him to move towards me. I started writing this, and he never read it once. Not a one time. Not when I started, not when I moved away, not when I told him that I didn't want to be married to him anymore.
I am now with Handsome Writer Man, and I am smiling, just writing this. As he is also a writer, it is not surprise that HWM reads this as well as any other writing I am willing to show him. He supports me, not only in my writing, but in so many ways that I was not supported before. I am happier now, but I am also stronger, and I am thankful for this every single day.
Thank you to everyone who has read this over the years. I know it's not a huge audience (if Statscounter is to be believed, I have yet to hit 7000 views), but I appreciate every single view. I will probably be writing here, on and off, until the idea of a blog goes away. I thank you, again, for reading and for all of the positive words.
I'd like to say that when I started this blog, I thought I had it figured out or that I'd have no idea that things would change so much, but that's not true. I had a feeling a storm was a-brewin'. It was one of the reasons I started this, to have an outlet. I knew I was looking for something, and I still am. But, as cliche as it sounds, I see that getting there is half the fun.
I started writing here because I felt a pull of writing. I sort of expected to write a few posts, then let it fade away. I know that's not the most positive of attitudes, but I also know how these things go. I have more than a handful of half started projects hanging around the house (I probably will never knit that scarf.)
If I'm being honest, one of the reasons I started this blog was to reach out to (the former) Mr. Higgy-Piggie. This isn't the place to go into details about everything that happened or dig at old wounds, but, looking back, I know how many times and ways I tried to go to him, but there was never any attempt by him to move towards me. I started writing this, and he never read it once. Not a one time. Not when I started, not when I moved away, not when I told him that I didn't want to be married to him anymore.
I am now with Handsome Writer Man, and I am smiling, just writing this. As he is also a writer, it is not surprise that HWM reads this as well as any other writing I am willing to show him. He supports me, not only in my writing, but in so many ways that I was not supported before. I am happier now, but I am also stronger, and I am thankful for this every single day.
Thank you to everyone who has read this over the years. I know it's not a huge audience (if Statscounter is to be believed, I have yet to hit 7000 views), but I appreciate every single view. I will probably be writing here, on and off, until the idea of a blog goes away. I thank you, again, for reading and for all of the positive words.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Carsick
I get carsick. I get carsick like a little kid. I was told I'd outgrow it. Sadly, this was not to be. It seems so minor, but it affects a lot more than you might realize. I'm not going to pretend that it's a serious illness or that some people don't have bigger, truer issues, but it's something I wish people wouldn't just dismiss it as nothing.
When I think back on being a kid, about half my memories involve carsickness. My best friend's mom used to take us around in large, older cars with the heat cranked up. The car smell liked plasticized vinyl and that fake pine from one of those air-fresheners hanging on the rear-view mirror. (To this day, when I see one of those silhouettes of a pine tree, I get slightly nauseous.) I don't blame any driver for causing me to get sick. I get carsick at an Imax theatre. I've made myself carsick with my own driving, which should earn me a special prize or something.
I can't always predict when it'll hit. Generally, I need as few stops as possible. I am less likely to get carsick on a 50-mile ride down a highway than a two-mile trip to the store on back roads. Heat is always a factor, so if you see me place my wrists on the cooler window, I'm just trying to cool down a bit. (I'm not sure where I got the wrist thing, but it works on a limited basis.) I'm better in the front seat than the back, and I'm best of all when I can drive, which is why I will often volunteer to do the driving.
When I get sick, I starts out as a touch of queasiness, a rumble in my stomach. I cough (a reaction I have to being nauseous because just turning green and trying not to throw up is never enough.) At this point, I am usually trying to get fresher air, cool down, concentrate on not being sick (which is often not the right action because then my body starts crying, "I'm carsick! I'm carsick!" My body is a jerk.) It just builds from there. Often there's nothing I can do but just hope we arrive at our destination soon. I rarely get to the point of actually throwing up, but, once I'm out of the car, I do need some time to recover.
It's embarrassing. It really is. For me, it's the usual reaction to a ride in the car, but, for a lot of people, they want to check to see if I'm alright or they get overly concerned. I just need some fresh air and a few minutes. I don't want to discuss it, because I am highly suggestible and the more I talk about it, the more I feel it. (How suggestible am I? I'm slightly carsick just writing this post.) The good news is that it never sticks around. Five or ten minutes after I'm out of the car, it's over.
You probably don't realize how often you just pop in the car with a group of people: you go to lunch, you run an errand together, you pick someone up. I do, because every single time, I have to decide if a bout of carsick is worth it. I dread when someone picks me up to go somewhere. Every Christmas, my family wants to drive around and look at the lights, and I have to ask them to limit the drive.
Of course, it's not just cars: planes and boats are just as much fun. Sailing is just an invitation to revisit my last meal. I'm not afraid to fly, but I hate the idea of getting sick when I fly. I can feel it the second a plane starts circling an airport. I can't read when I travel -- that would be too much. (I have found that mahjong on my Kindle is a good diversion, but I have to shut it down when we approach, which is when I'm most likely to get sick. Flight attendants do not take this as a reason to violate FAA rules.)
It's not deadly and there are bigger problems in the world. Just understand that when I ask to ride in the front seat and a touch more air conditioning, it's just an attempt to enjoy the ride.
When I think back on being a kid, about half my memories involve carsickness. My best friend's mom used to take us around in large, older cars with the heat cranked up. The car smell liked plasticized vinyl and that fake pine from one of those air-fresheners hanging on the rear-view mirror. (To this day, when I see one of those silhouettes of a pine tree, I get slightly nauseous.) I don't blame any driver for causing me to get sick. I get carsick at an Imax theatre. I've made myself carsick with my own driving, which should earn me a special prize or something.
I can't always predict when it'll hit. Generally, I need as few stops as possible. I am less likely to get carsick on a 50-mile ride down a highway than a two-mile trip to the store on back roads. Heat is always a factor, so if you see me place my wrists on the cooler window, I'm just trying to cool down a bit. (I'm not sure where I got the wrist thing, but it works on a limited basis.) I'm better in the front seat than the back, and I'm best of all when I can drive, which is why I will often volunteer to do the driving.
When I get sick, I starts out as a touch of queasiness, a rumble in my stomach. I cough (a reaction I have to being nauseous because just turning green and trying not to throw up is never enough.) At this point, I am usually trying to get fresher air, cool down, concentrate on not being sick (which is often not the right action because then my body starts crying, "I'm carsick! I'm carsick!" My body is a jerk.) It just builds from there. Often there's nothing I can do but just hope we arrive at our destination soon. I rarely get to the point of actually throwing up, but, once I'm out of the car, I do need some time to recover.
It's embarrassing. It really is. For me, it's the usual reaction to a ride in the car, but, for a lot of people, they want to check to see if I'm alright or they get overly concerned. I just need some fresh air and a few minutes. I don't want to discuss it, because I am highly suggestible and the more I talk about it, the more I feel it. (How suggestible am I? I'm slightly carsick just writing this post.) The good news is that it never sticks around. Five or ten minutes after I'm out of the car, it's over.
You probably don't realize how often you just pop in the car with a group of people: you go to lunch, you run an errand together, you pick someone up. I do, because every single time, I have to decide if a bout of carsick is worth it. I dread when someone picks me up to go somewhere. Every Christmas, my family wants to drive around and look at the lights, and I have to ask them to limit the drive.
Of course, it's not just cars: planes and boats are just as much fun. Sailing is just an invitation to revisit my last meal. I'm not afraid to fly, but I hate the idea of getting sick when I fly. I can feel it the second a plane starts circling an airport. I can't read when I travel -- that would be too much. (I have found that mahjong on my Kindle is a good diversion, but I have to shut it down when we approach, which is when I'm most likely to get sick. Flight attendants do not take this as a reason to violate FAA rules.)
It's not deadly and there are bigger problems in the world. Just understand that when I ask to ride in the front seat and a touch more air conditioning, it's just an attempt to enjoy the ride.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Toms shoes: A story of really awful customer service
I bought two pairs, liked them, so I ordered a pair of plain black canvas ones. For what they are (basic canvas shoes) they're pricey, but they were want I wanted. It took two months to finally have these shoes.
When I ordered the black canvas shoes, Toms sent me the incorrect ones (these). I did everything correctly when I placed the order (I didn't click the wrong style or anything like that), but Toms expected me to handle the return in the sense that they would email me a UPS label, and I would have to repack, label the box, and take the box to a UPS store, then, once received and processed, they would send me a replacement pair. I asked if they would at least pick the box up at my door, and the customer service rep said that I would have to drop it off. I don't live by a UPS store and I work, as I explained, so she suggested I flag down a truck and they would take it. As this was the extent of the help, I told her I'd figure it out.
Unfortunately, I was unable to get the return to a UPS store in the 30-day window attached to the label (I wasn't aware of the time constraint until I got an email stating that my label had expired), so Toms offered to send me another label. I replied to the email that, yes, I would like a new label.
I heard nothing back.
I sent another request via email.
I heard nothing back.
I called directly. Unfortunately, even though I called during Toms business hours (which are limited and West Coast times), everyone was away at a team-building event, so there was a message to call back even later in the day. I called back later and was on hold for over 20 minutes. Unacceptable. Look, I get that they want to be this hippy-dippy-California place who does team building on a work day. Terrific! But now that you're back to work, answer the damn phones!
It was suggested to go to email (although my email experience was a series of non-replies so I didn't go down that road) or live chat, where, much to my surprise, there was no one there as well, just this message, over and over:
"All TOMS Customer Happiness Team members are currently assisting fellow customers. We appreciate your patience and a SOLEutions specialist will be available to assist you shortly. Please have your order number ready."
I got that at least 20 times. You can only imagine how pleased I was at this point. I'm on hold and the live chat was sending form letters.
I finally did get someone to talk to me and send me a UPS form. I didn't want to go through that again, so I sent it off right away. And waited almost three weeks for my replacement shoes. Toms is one of the few places that still charge shipping fees and, yet, their shipping system is incredibly slow. Frustratingly slow. In that time, I realized I needed shoes for a vacation, and since these weren't coming, I ordered from Zappos.
What is going on over there? These shoes are not inexpensive, but I thought they'd be worth it. When I got my first pair, I thought that I had found that shoe that I could wear almost anywhere. My sister, who has all sorts of foot issues, also raves about how wonderful her Toms feel. But, honestly, how can I continue to support a product that doesn't seem to be interested in its customers?
So, as I do, I wrote an email to customer service detailing everything above (in fact, most of the post is from that letter.) Their response: "We are following up regarding your request for a return shipping label for a recent TOMS order error..." Yes, that was the point of this email: my request for a return shipping label. I ran screaming into the night.
I know that some of the delay was my own delay in sending the shoes back, but this whole experience has soured me on Toms. I appreciate their causes and wanting to help others, but they need to fix the basics. I just refuse to support a company that ignores customer service.
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Love in a work climate
This isn't about office romance. This is a question for those out there, working for The Man: how much do you owe The Man? Where is the line between company loyalty and selling your soul?
Let's start with the basics: you owe your company however many hours promised per week (usually 40, which is another discussion, but, for now, these are the rules of the game.) But no one really talks about the quality of those hours. Of course, you have to talk to your coworkers, but there is a difference between discussing a deadline and chatting about the kids' soccer games. But, then again, getting to know your coworkers makes the work environment more pleasant and makes working with these folks that much easier.
Should you be updating your facebook page? "Heavens no! Not on work time!" Except it's been shown that a bit of web surfing can actually increase your productivity, so maybe not checking facebook is a bad thing. Maybe you owe it to your boss to be tweeting.
How many hours in excess to the base 40 do you "owe" the company? Should you be checking your email at night and/or on the weekend? How about when your on vacation? Or sick? How many extra hours should you put in to get that big project done? What if there's no big project and they just expect you to be working more and more? There is a definite "you're lucky to have a job at all" vibe that some companies give off, but don't they owe you a reasonable workload? Is it fair for a company to demand that you work extra hours to fill out your 5-year plan?
Another big question: when is it time to look for the next opportunity? Sometimes the grass is truly greener someplace else or there might be rumors of lay-offs and cut-backs. Is it being "disloyal" to look for other places to work? Is it fair that companies frown upon such behavior, yet have no issue with a "reorganization" that leaves hundreds of employees behind? Do companies have a right to upset if someone browses LinkedIn? What about going to a job interview?
Back in the day, people would work for a company for 20 or more years, so, not only were you loyal to a company, but a company would be loyal to you. Now, it's a different dynamic, but companies still expect a loyalty that I'm not sure they deserve. If you truly love your job, you may not get that commitment that you want or need. Maybe it's easier to not get your heart broken if you have love outside of the office.
Let's start with the basics: you owe your company however many hours promised per week (usually 40, which is another discussion, but, for now, these are the rules of the game.) But no one really talks about the quality of those hours. Of course, you have to talk to your coworkers, but there is a difference between discussing a deadline and chatting about the kids' soccer games. But, then again, getting to know your coworkers makes the work environment more pleasant and makes working with these folks that much easier.
Should you be updating your facebook page? "Heavens no! Not on work time!" Except it's been shown that a bit of web surfing can actually increase your productivity, so maybe not checking facebook is a bad thing. Maybe you owe it to your boss to be tweeting.
How many hours in excess to the base 40 do you "owe" the company? Should you be checking your email at night and/or on the weekend? How about when your on vacation? Or sick? How many extra hours should you put in to get that big project done? What if there's no big project and they just expect you to be working more and more? There is a definite "you're lucky to have a job at all" vibe that some companies give off, but don't they owe you a reasonable workload? Is it fair for a company to demand that you work extra hours to fill out your 5-year plan?
Another big question: when is it time to look for the next opportunity? Sometimes the grass is truly greener someplace else or there might be rumors of lay-offs and cut-backs. Is it being "disloyal" to look for other places to work? Is it fair that companies frown upon such behavior, yet have no issue with a "reorganization" that leaves hundreds of employees behind? Do companies have a right to upset if someone browses LinkedIn? What about going to a job interview?
Back in the day, people would work for a company for 20 or more years, so, not only were you loyal to a company, but a company would be loyal to you. Now, it's a different dynamic, but companies still expect a loyalty that I'm not sure they deserve. If you truly love your job, you may not get that commitment that you want or need. Maybe it's easier to not get your heart broken if you have love outside of the office.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
May the odds be ever in your favor
I'm wearing my good luck earrings today. I'm not sure how they became my lucky earrings but it always seems like I have good days when I wear them. I don't wear them too often because I don't want to use up the good luck. It's like praying to St. Jude for every little thing: he'll get tired of answering all those little prayers, and when you really need him, he'll be ignoring you.
I got these earrings from a bad boyfriend. He was one of those boyfriends who doesn't treat you right but you stay with him to prove that he is actually a good boyfriend to everyone who's telling you that you should break up with him. He worked nights and was always tired and was still in love with his last girlfriend. He acted like seeing me was doing me a favor, and, looking back, I'm not sure why I was with him as long as I was, because I can't even say I was really in love with him. I probably was vain enough to think that I would eventually break the spell his last girlfriend had over him and then he'd be wonderful. No spell was ever broken and I finally had enough.
They're probably my favorite earrings of all time, and it's not just the luck thing. They're what are called "threader" earrings, which you can find pretty easily now, but when he gave them to me, I had never seen earrings like that before. They're gold and delicate and easy-to-lose. I remember being so surprised when he gave me these, as he was not good at the gift-giving. He was the kind of guy who'd forget your birthday or buy you something that should be useful to you ("You said you needed new spark plugs!") Maybe it's one of the reasons I love these earrings: they remind me that unexpected things can happen.
I don't think of him when I wear these earrings. When I put on those earrings, I am hoping for something, and they remind me that life is full of possibilities. Maybe it's not the earrings that are good luck; maybe I am bringing luck to the day.
I got these earrings from a bad boyfriend. He was one of those boyfriends who doesn't treat you right but you stay with him to prove that he is actually a good boyfriend to everyone who's telling you that you should break up with him. He worked nights and was always tired and was still in love with his last girlfriend. He acted like seeing me was doing me a favor, and, looking back, I'm not sure why I was with him as long as I was, because I can't even say I was really in love with him. I probably was vain enough to think that I would eventually break the spell his last girlfriend had over him and then he'd be wonderful. No spell was ever broken and I finally had enough.
They're probably my favorite earrings of all time, and it's not just the luck thing. They're what are called "threader" earrings, which you can find pretty easily now, but when he gave them to me, I had never seen earrings like that before. They're gold and delicate and easy-to-lose. I remember being so surprised when he gave me these, as he was not good at the gift-giving. He was the kind of guy who'd forget your birthday or buy you something that should be useful to you ("You said you needed new spark plugs!") Maybe it's one of the reasons I love these earrings: they remind me that unexpected things can happen.
I don't think of him when I wear these earrings. When I put on those earrings, I am hoping for something, and they remind me that life is full of possibilities. Maybe it's not the earrings that are good luck; maybe I am bringing luck to the day.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
The house on the hill
Let's pretend: you need a place to live. You're not sure exactly where to live or the type of place you want, so you talk to a few realtors. These realtors show you these lovely, huge house, full of rooms you may never use. You never thought you'd ever live like this! It's all so beautiful! Of course, it's way more than you need, but, hey, you only live once!
As you've never gotten a place before, you're not even sure how much you can afford. But every single realtor sits down with you, "crunches the numbers," and assures you can can afford these amazing places. On one hand, it doesn't seem right: they're quoting numbers like $10,000 a month and you only earn $35,000 a year, but they pull out spreadsheets, tell you about grants, low-interest repayment plans, all sorts of ways to get money for this house. They explain to you that living in a place like this will make *you* more valuable, and this amazing house will pay for itself. Now, imagine you're 18 and being told all this. Would you believe it?
Isn't this how college is sold to kids these days? College is not cheap. We all know this. But an 18-year-old looking for a place to spend those next four years might not see all the money:
A breakdown of costs
They see your their place on their own, professors that seem to know everything, parties, big-time sports. It's all very exciting. They don't see the potential debt they may be graduating with:
Lots of stats on college debt
(I won't even talk about how much it might cost if they go to graduate school, but additional education seems to be required more and more these days.)
I would never suggest that kids shouldn't go to college. I am a firm believer in education taking you to that next level. I've got my degrees, and I needed to get them to be where I am today. But I think it needs to be done smarter. Should you be sending your 18-year-old who scraped by in high school and isn't sure of his major in to a private college using loans that he'll have to pay back after he graduates? Maybe that's not the best place for him to try to grow up. There are a lot of kids who might benefit from taking a year or so off and work for a while. See what a dollar buys these days, see how limited their opportunities might be. Colleges should embrace the kids that come back, although I'm not sure if this is the case.
Another part of this mess is the decision of major. I get the argument that college is not a placement service, but there is something to be said about giving someone all the facts before making a decision. There's nothing wrong with warning a kid who's paying $40K a year for college that, given the average salary of a person in her chosen profession, it'll take her roughly 20 years to pay back her college loans. I would also say that a decision about how this 18-year-old will pay back any college debt isn't stomping on someone's dream, but, rather, a practical decision.
There are a lot of ways to get an education. I am saying that the model of sending every 18-year-old who gets in to an expensive college without direction is probably not the best choice. While four years away in college may be a wonderful experience, paying off that debt for so many years to come may offset some of that.
As you've never gotten a place before, you're not even sure how much you can afford. But every single realtor sits down with you, "crunches the numbers," and assures you can can afford these amazing places. On one hand, it doesn't seem right: they're quoting numbers like $10,000 a month and you only earn $35,000 a year, but they pull out spreadsheets, tell you about grants, low-interest repayment plans, all sorts of ways to get money for this house. They explain to you that living in a place like this will make *you* more valuable, and this amazing house will pay for itself. Now, imagine you're 18 and being told all this. Would you believe it?
Isn't this how college is sold to kids these days? College is not cheap. We all know this. But an 18-year-old looking for a place to spend those next four years might not see all the money:
A breakdown of costs
They see your their place on their own, professors that seem to know everything, parties, big-time sports. It's all very exciting. They don't see the potential debt they may be graduating with:
Lots of stats on college debt
(I won't even talk about how much it might cost if they go to graduate school, but additional education seems to be required more and more these days.)
I would never suggest that kids shouldn't go to college. I am a firm believer in education taking you to that next level. I've got my degrees, and I needed to get them to be where I am today. But I think it needs to be done smarter. Should you be sending your 18-year-old who scraped by in high school and isn't sure of his major in to a private college using loans that he'll have to pay back after he graduates? Maybe that's not the best place for him to try to grow up. There are a lot of kids who might benefit from taking a year or so off and work for a while. See what a dollar buys these days, see how limited their opportunities might be. Colleges should embrace the kids that come back, although I'm not sure if this is the case.
Another part of this mess is the decision of major. I get the argument that college is not a placement service, but there is something to be said about giving someone all the facts before making a decision. There's nothing wrong with warning a kid who's paying $40K a year for college that, given the average salary of a person in her chosen profession, it'll take her roughly 20 years to pay back her college loans. I would also say that a decision about how this 18-year-old will pay back any college debt isn't stomping on someone's dream, but, rather, a practical decision.
There are a lot of ways to get an education. I am saying that the model of sending every 18-year-old who gets in to an expensive college without direction is probably not the best choice. While four years away in college may be a wonderful experience, paying off that debt for so many years to come may offset some of that.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Who's calling during dinner?
As you may have heard, there's an election coming. Welcome annoying political ads, welcome phone calls convincing you to vote a certain way. Even better, most of these calls are done by a machine, who can't tell it's leaving a long, rambling speech on another machine.
Last election, I was "lucky" enough to live in a swing county in a swing state, so I got the robo-calls. Lots and lots of robo-calls. Every day, there were multiple calls to sort through just in case a real person called and left a message I needed. Then all evening, they called. I suppose I felt slightly less guilty hanging up on a real person rather than a machine, but only slightly. I just wanted it to be over.
I suppose as annoying as they are, these calls have a purpose. Sure, they want you to vote for whatever candidate they are selling. (I do wonder if they accomplish their goal with these non-ending calls. By the election, I was so tired of all the candidates, I almost didn't have the energy to actually vote.) The other purpose was to get money for whatever candidate or party they were trying to push on me. "Hi, I've just completely interrupted your evening? Can you give me some money or we can afford to do this more?" I have to wonder, does this work?
I maintain they're doing it all wrong. Here's how you get me on your good side and get money from me: offer to stop calling me. You heard me: I will pay money to not get any more calls. Just imagine it. If you support a certain candidate, they'll put you on a list and not call you. No robo-calls, no interrupted dinners, no email. For more money, they could widen the net: no calls from the party associated with the candidate. Now, that's something I'd pay for: silence from a candidate. The problem is that if you could afford it, you'd probably pay for both sides. Of course, then you'd have to actually decide on a candidate based on issues rather than advertising. Wouldn't that make the election interesting?
Last election, I was "lucky" enough to live in a swing county in a swing state, so I got the robo-calls. Lots and lots of robo-calls. Every day, there were multiple calls to sort through just in case a real person called and left a message I needed. Then all evening, they called. I suppose I felt slightly less guilty hanging up on a real person rather than a machine, but only slightly. I just wanted it to be over.
I suppose as annoying as they are, these calls have a purpose. Sure, they want you to vote for whatever candidate they are selling. (I do wonder if they accomplish their goal with these non-ending calls. By the election, I was so tired of all the candidates, I almost didn't have the energy to actually vote.) The other purpose was to get money for whatever candidate or party they were trying to push on me. "Hi, I've just completely interrupted your evening? Can you give me some money or we can afford to do this more?" I have to wonder, does this work?
I maintain they're doing it all wrong. Here's how you get me on your good side and get money from me: offer to stop calling me. You heard me: I will pay money to not get any more calls. Just imagine it. If you support a certain candidate, they'll put you on a list and not call you. No robo-calls, no interrupted dinners, no email. For more money, they could widen the net: no calls from the party associated with the candidate. Now, that's something I'd pay for: silence from a candidate. The problem is that if you could afford it, you'd probably pay for both sides. Of course, then you'd have to actually decide on a candidate based on issues rather than advertising. Wouldn't that make the election interesting?
Friday, May 25, 2012
American Idol: Make Number One More Better
Every year it sucks me in. I say that I'm only going to watch part of an episode, and I end up watching the whole season. I'm not sure why, but I think it's mostly because it's easy and predictable. You know what you're getting when you watch "American Idol." This isn't a bad thing. It's comforting, in its way.
It's still the number one show on television (ratings-wise), but the ratings are slipping. There are lots of people complaining that they get the same type of winner, year after year, but I don't think that's the problem. Sure, it's a bit boring, but winning "American Idol" guarantees nothing, so give the tweet girls what they want. However, I'd like to offer a few suggestions for improvement.
Let me start out by saying that I don't think it should change much. It's never going to be that powerhouse it once was but that's alright. Except for the random slip by Steven Tyler, it's safe, fun, family-viewing. And although I've stated otherwise, I've decided that the simple format of the person with the lowest number of votes goes home is the way to go. Other shows have tried other ways, but one of the charms of "American Idol" is that the audience really does pick the winner. "The Voice" was on its way to winning the ratings war, but they screwed up by making the judges too powerful and the system too complicated to understand. I say leave "American Idol" as it is; the one judges' save is enough.
So, if the voting should stay the same, what should be changed?
First, and most important: fire Randy. Yo, dog, I'm just not feeling it, dude. He says his ridiculous little phrases, drops a few names, but adds nothing. I don't get why they keep him, and I doubt that anyone is watching the show for his pearls of wisdom. When the contestants do a musical tribute to your lack of originality, it's time to go.
Why isn't Jimmy Iovine a judge? Wouldn't he be the perfect replacement for Randy? He actually knows music, he has a relationship with the other judges and the contestants (even if he can't get Jennifer's name right), and he always has good insights into the performances. Make this happen! Also, I miss the occasional guest judge. Guest judges add a different perspective. After a few weeks, you know what the regulars think of the various contestants. It's nice when someone new gives their opinion of what's going on in the competition.
I'd like a little more behind the scenes. I like knowing which contestants are friends, which ones compete against each other. It certainly makes the elimination shows more interesting. When Colton got voted out, watching Phillip's reaction was part of the drama. I love watching the process of picking the songs. Some contestants come in with terrible choices and Jimmy guides them to a better fit, and sometimes Jimmy doesn't agree but they show him that it is the right choice. Don't turn it into "The Real World" or anything like that, but the personalities are part of why we watch. This is why everyone loves Hollywood week.
The biggest change "American Idol" needs to make is to update the song catalog. Through these many years, "American Idol" has made roughly a gagillion dollars. Please, use a fraction of this to pay for songs that have been released during these kids' lifetimes. Other shows seem to be able to do this. Why does Idol cling to standards? Why is Hollie singing a song from 1945 in the finale? I seriously doubt that when Joshua found out he was going to get an opportunity to sing with his idol, he wanted to sing a song that was written 22 years before he was born.
At least now they allow the contestants to admit they hadn't heard of the song when it was assigned to them. But how do we get a sense of what kind of a singer they'll be if they don't get to actually pick songs they know. I don't mind having the various theme weeks, but we need more songs that these kids genuinely love. If I'm placing bets, I'm thinking that the girl voice-powerhouses would rather sing Adele than Whitney. And if they fall on their faces, at least they did it singing a song they love.
It's not much, but a little update would be nice. And, truly, get rid of Randy.
It's still the number one show on television (ratings-wise), but the ratings are slipping. There are lots of people complaining that they get the same type of winner, year after year, but I don't think that's the problem. Sure, it's a bit boring, but winning "American Idol" guarantees nothing, so give the tweet girls what they want. However, I'd like to offer a few suggestions for improvement.
Let me start out by saying that I don't think it should change much. It's never going to be that powerhouse it once was but that's alright. Except for the random slip by Steven Tyler, it's safe, fun, family-viewing. And although I've stated otherwise, I've decided that the simple format of the person with the lowest number of votes goes home is the way to go. Other shows have tried other ways, but one of the charms of "American Idol" is that the audience really does pick the winner. "The Voice" was on its way to winning the ratings war, but they screwed up by making the judges too powerful and the system too complicated to understand. I say leave "American Idol" as it is; the one judges' save is enough.
So, if the voting should stay the same, what should be changed?
First, and most important: fire Randy. Yo, dog, I'm just not feeling it, dude. He says his ridiculous little phrases, drops a few names, but adds nothing. I don't get why they keep him, and I doubt that anyone is watching the show for his pearls of wisdom. When the contestants do a musical tribute to your lack of originality, it's time to go.
Why isn't Jimmy Iovine a judge? Wouldn't he be the perfect replacement for Randy? He actually knows music, he has a relationship with the other judges and the contestants (even if he can't get Jennifer's name right), and he always has good insights into the performances. Make this happen! Also, I miss the occasional guest judge. Guest judges add a different perspective. After a few weeks, you know what the regulars think of the various contestants. It's nice when someone new gives their opinion of what's going on in the competition.
I'd like a little more behind the scenes. I like knowing which contestants are friends, which ones compete against each other. It certainly makes the elimination shows more interesting. When Colton got voted out, watching Phillip's reaction was part of the drama. I love watching the process of picking the songs. Some contestants come in with terrible choices and Jimmy guides them to a better fit, and sometimes Jimmy doesn't agree but they show him that it is the right choice. Don't turn it into "The Real World" or anything like that, but the personalities are part of why we watch. This is why everyone loves Hollywood week.
The biggest change "American Idol" needs to make is to update the song catalog. Through these many years, "American Idol" has made roughly a gagillion dollars. Please, use a fraction of this to pay for songs that have been released during these kids' lifetimes. Other shows seem to be able to do this. Why does Idol cling to standards? Why is Hollie singing a song from 1945 in the finale? I seriously doubt that when Joshua found out he was going to get an opportunity to sing with his idol, he wanted to sing a song that was written 22 years before he was born.
At least now they allow the contestants to admit they hadn't heard of the song when it was assigned to them. But how do we get a sense of what kind of a singer they'll be if they don't get to actually pick songs they know. I don't mind having the various theme weeks, but we need more songs that these kids genuinely love. If I'm placing bets, I'm thinking that the girl voice-powerhouses would rather sing Adele than Whitney. And if they fall on their faces, at least they did it singing a song they love.
It's not much, but a little update would be nice. And, truly, get rid of Randy.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Face the face
Can we talk? Well, according to Sherry Turkle in The New York Times, we cannot. Here's the full article. There are points that are valid: there's nothing I hate more than someone checking their phone while you're talking to them (and, yes, of course, I've done that as well because we've all become that gross.) I also agree that there is something wonderful about a conversation between people. However, she showed how people can't converse by quoting a 16-year-old boy who states that he'd "like to learn how to have a conversation." When were 16-year-old boys ever able to have a conversation, especially one with a 50-something college professor?
There's something very cranky, "you kids get off my lawn!" about this article. She complains about the "young people" at work who wear headphones instead of chatting with the senior partners at work. I have to wonder if she asked any of the "young people" why they wear headphones? In my case, I work as a writer in a noisy office space (because, despite her statements about the lack of conversation in the modern workplace, there are loads of conversations happening at my work.) Because I am not a senior partner (or equivalent), I have a shared office space. I need those headphones to get my job done. This doesn't prevent me from chatting with my coworkers, but it does allow me to control hearing every social update.
I am tired of the narrow definition of communication so many people cling to. Turkle is one of the many who insists that a conversation is "sitting in the same room talking." (It's unclear what she feels about talks on the phone, but I'm guessing she's anti-that as well.) I'm not saying that conversations like this aren't a good thing, but it's terribly narrow. I communicate with people in so many ways: email, twitter, facebook, blogging, text messages, phone calls, flickr. In fact, one of the reasons I do all of this is because some people in my life are more reachable these ways. I need and want all of these ways to have the people in my life communicate with me.
This lack of acceptance of other forms of communication feels like intolerance to me. I'm not saying somone has to do all the forms I do (because, clearly, I have a problem), but if you are only reachable by one form of communication, you have cut me off, not the other way around. These other ways of communicating show different sides of a person. I have gotten to know people through facebook, their blogs, twitter; I am in a flickr group with two of my aunts, and I'm seeing their lives in a new way.
Turkle writes about "sips" of conversation as if it's a bad thing. Sometimes a sip is exactly what you would want. Sometimes chugging isn't the way to get to know a person. Some people need to ease into your life. She also makes the assumption that verbal communication is better than written. There is something wonderful about the written word that isn't captured in long, rambling conversations.
The art of conversation is changing, but it has always been changing. I am sure that when the telephone was invented, people decried the lost art of letter-writing. Perhaps instead of all the hand-wringing, we should be celebrating that we have so many ways to communicate with one another.
There's something very cranky, "you kids get off my lawn!" about this article. She complains about the "young people" at work who wear headphones instead of chatting with the senior partners at work. I have to wonder if she asked any of the "young people" why they wear headphones? In my case, I work as a writer in a noisy office space (because, despite her statements about the lack of conversation in the modern workplace, there are loads of conversations happening at my work.) Because I am not a senior partner (or equivalent), I have a shared office space. I need those headphones to get my job done. This doesn't prevent me from chatting with my coworkers, but it does allow me to control hearing every social update.
I am tired of the narrow definition of communication so many people cling to. Turkle is one of the many who insists that a conversation is "sitting in the same room talking." (It's unclear what she feels about talks on the phone, but I'm guessing she's anti-that as well.) I'm not saying that conversations like this aren't a good thing, but it's terribly narrow. I communicate with people in so many ways: email, twitter, facebook, blogging, text messages, phone calls, flickr. In fact, one of the reasons I do all of this is because some people in my life are more reachable these ways. I need and want all of these ways to have the people in my life communicate with me.
This lack of acceptance of other forms of communication feels like intolerance to me. I'm not saying somone has to do all the forms I do (because, clearly, I have a problem), but if you are only reachable by one form of communication, you have cut me off, not the other way around. These other ways of communicating show different sides of a person. I have gotten to know people through facebook, their blogs, twitter; I am in a flickr group with two of my aunts, and I'm seeing their lives in a new way.
Turkle writes about "sips" of conversation as if it's a bad thing. Sometimes a sip is exactly what you would want. Sometimes chugging isn't the way to get to know a person. Some people need to ease into your life. She also makes the assumption that verbal communication is better than written. There is something wonderful about the written word that isn't captured in long, rambling conversations.
The art of conversation is changing, but it has always been changing. I am sure that when the telephone was invented, people decried the lost art of letter-writing. Perhaps instead of all the hand-wringing, we should be celebrating that we have so many ways to communicate with one another.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Dear Headhunter (Part 2),
How wonderful to hear from you again! Truly. I know that I asked you to not call me at work, but when you called me yesterday during business hours, you were just showing me how determined you are! You didn't let the fact I didn't give you my number the last time deter you. Good for you! Once again, you went through the switchboard at work. Because if I'm looking for a new position, my goal would be to make it as difficult as possible for you to reach me.
You're so clever, you even called me at lunch. How nice of you to assume that if I'm too busy to leave my desk at lunch, that I would want to talk to you on top of everything else. I know I was a bit short with you, and I apologize. After all, you were simply interrupting my day at work to take care of something that is really important to you. I really should be thinking of your needs a bit more.
I will admit that I'm a touch confused as to why you are contacting me again for a position that you discussed with me less than a month ago. The exact same one we talk about at length. You acted like you didn't remember this, but certainly that can't be true. Is your record-keeping really this poor? Should I be trusting my career and livelihood to someone who is this disorganized? Surely, you wouldn't expect that! And the fact that you didn't apologize for wasting my time is more my issue than yours.
Just to remind you, we discussed, in detail, that not only am I not interested in relocating at this time, but I am not a good fit for this particular position. There were a number of reasons: geographic, wrong field, etc. Maybe I wasn't clear: just because the position is in the same state where I live, it's not a reasonable distance for me to drive. I suppose use of a map and a basic knowledge of DC traffic is too much to expect from someone who's in New York City, but I ask you to believe me on what I view to be a reasonable commute.
I did think I made it clear that this position is not a good fit for me. I have skills, but not the right ones for this position. I am not an MD. Trust me as a person who's actually working in this field, I know what's required here. The HR rep who told you otherwise is looking to fill a slot and not exactly looking out for my career. But I'm sure your determination is enough to get me a promotion years from now.
I have to say, I am curious as to how far you will ramp this up. Will you stop by my workplace in person? Will you send flowers to my home? A horse's head in my bed, perhaps? Oh, I kid, but you do realize that you're pushing really hard. When I mentioned that you were being invasive, maybe you shouldn't have been so offended.
I'm sure I'll be hearing from you again, whether I wish to or not. Until then...
You're so clever, you even called me at lunch. How nice of you to assume that if I'm too busy to leave my desk at lunch, that I would want to talk to you on top of everything else. I know I was a bit short with you, and I apologize. After all, you were simply interrupting my day at work to take care of something that is really important to you. I really should be thinking of your needs a bit more.
I will admit that I'm a touch confused as to why you are contacting me again for a position that you discussed with me less than a month ago. The exact same one we talk about at length. You acted like you didn't remember this, but certainly that can't be true. Is your record-keeping really this poor? Should I be trusting my career and livelihood to someone who is this disorganized? Surely, you wouldn't expect that! And the fact that you didn't apologize for wasting my time is more my issue than yours.
Just to remind you, we discussed, in detail, that not only am I not interested in relocating at this time, but I am not a good fit for this particular position. There were a number of reasons: geographic, wrong field, etc. Maybe I wasn't clear: just because the position is in the same state where I live, it's not a reasonable distance for me to drive. I suppose use of a map and a basic knowledge of DC traffic is too much to expect from someone who's in New York City, but I ask you to believe me on what I view to be a reasonable commute.
I did think I made it clear that this position is not a good fit for me. I have skills, but not the right ones for this position. I am not an MD. Trust me as a person who's actually working in this field, I know what's required here. The HR rep who told you otherwise is looking to fill a slot and not exactly looking out for my career. But I'm sure your determination is enough to get me a promotion years from now.
I have to say, I am curious as to how far you will ramp this up. Will you stop by my workplace in person? Will you send flowers to my home? A horse's head in my bed, perhaps? Oh, I kid, but you do realize that you're pushing really hard. When I mentioned that you were being invasive, maybe you shouldn't have been so offended.
I'm sure I'll be hearing from you again, whether I wish to or not. Until then...
Sunday, April 15, 2012
One touch
There was a morning after a storm, I driving to work in New Jersey. It was a drive I did every morning, on auto-pilot, changing lanes without thinking. I was maybe half-listening to the radio, when the announcer pointed out that some live wires had come down. I looked up, and the wires above me were intact. But my mind started wandering: what if a wire came free? What if I touched that wire? What if, for one instant, I abandoned logic and instinct and reached out and grabbed a live wire?
For some reason, that scene in my head haunted me. The idea of one stupid thing changing everything. You'd like to think that you'll always do the right thing, but we know it's not true. We know that we do dumb stuff; what happens when the dumb stuff is a big deal?
I guess I've been lucky: I haven't done anything major like (obviously) touched that live wire. But I have done stupid little things that ruin a perfectly wonderful occasion. The overreaction to something so minor, it's embarrassing. ("The meal was delicious, but I noticed that the frosting on the cake was a little too sweet, so I am freaking out in the kitchen!") In fact, it's so embarrassingly stupid, you can't even believe you are acting that way over something so silly, so now you need to make it a big deal to justify it. ("Everyone knows that that frosting sets the tone, not only for the meal but for the year. It's a birthday, after all, yeah, that's it! It's important that this is perfect, so my reaction was not kooky or nutty!") Justifying the overreaction rarely works.
The reality is that you want to make that moment of crazy go away, but it's out there. People have already reacted to your outburst. In fact, you're now upset that you've gotten everyone else upset and you've behaved like a five-year-old, but everyone still thinks you're upset about the first hunk of crazy you've delivered. And you will never make it go away.
In case you are wondering, right now I am embarrassed by so much previous bad behavior. I am thinking of one thing in particular, though. One stupid bit in a sea of amazing.
I am so sorry. I can't untouch that wire. All I can do is hope it didn't cause too much damage.
For some reason, that scene in my head haunted me. The idea of one stupid thing changing everything. You'd like to think that you'll always do the right thing, but we know it's not true. We know that we do dumb stuff; what happens when the dumb stuff is a big deal?
I guess I've been lucky: I haven't done anything major like (obviously) touched that live wire. But I have done stupid little things that ruin a perfectly wonderful occasion. The overreaction to something so minor, it's embarrassing. ("The meal was delicious, but I noticed that the frosting on the cake was a little too sweet, so I am freaking out in the kitchen!") In fact, it's so embarrassingly stupid, you can't even believe you are acting that way over something so silly, so now you need to make it a big deal to justify it. ("Everyone knows that that frosting sets the tone, not only for the meal but for the year. It's a birthday, after all, yeah, that's it! It's important that this is perfect, so my reaction was not kooky or nutty!") Justifying the overreaction rarely works.
The reality is that you want to make that moment of crazy go away, but it's out there. People have already reacted to your outburst. In fact, you're now upset that you've gotten everyone else upset and you've behaved like a five-year-old, but everyone still thinks you're upset about the first hunk of crazy you've delivered. And you will never make it go away.
In case you are wondering, right now I am embarrassed by so much previous bad behavior. I am thinking of one thing in particular, though. One stupid bit in a sea of amazing.
I am so sorry. I can't untouch that wire. All I can do is hope it didn't cause too much damage.
Friday, April 13, 2012
Why I don't write
I love writing here and I feel guilty when I don't have time to write more often. The reasons vary but it's usually that other things crowd out time for writing here. The past couple of weeks, it's been visitors, work, house stuff, the life stuff. I have intentions, but taking the time to put the thoughts down doesn't happen.
Sometimes I don't write here because I honestly can't think of anything to write about. (It may be hard to believe that rants about American Idol make the cut, but there you have it. Spoiler: I may not be very deep.) Of course, if I think about it, that's not entirely true. I always have an opinion, but sometimes I'm not sure exactly how to say what's on my mind. There are thoughts, but they're flitting about, not so interested in forming a cohesive narrative. Sometimes I send emails to myself with a line or two. Sometimes those emails sit in my inbox for years.
Often I am writing, just not for this blog. I actually make my living as a writer. I also do some writing on my own, keep a diary, write the usual emails to folks, etc, which means that there are times I just really don't want to write another word. Sometimes the creative outlet goes elsewhere, like when I end up taking pictures rather than writing. Sometimes I get tired of my own thoughts.
I am trying to grow comfortable with the fact that writing here is a sometimes thing. There may be a time when I write a bit more regularly but, right now, I hope you're alright with the occasional rant about "Glee."
Sometimes I don't write here because I honestly can't think of anything to write about. (It may be hard to believe that rants about American Idol make the cut, but there you have it. Spoiler: I may not be very deep.) Of course, if I think about it, that's not entirely true. I always have an opinion, but sometimes I'm not sure exactly how to say what's on my mind. There are thoughts, but they're flitting about, not so interested in forming a cohesive narrative. Sometimes I send emails to myself with a line or two. Sometimes those emails sit in my inbox for years.
Often I am writing, just not for this blog. I actually make my living as a writer. I also do some writing on my own, keep a diary, write the usual emails to folks, etc, which means that there are times I just really don't want to write another word. Sometimes the creative outlet goes elsewhere, like when I end up taking pictures rather than writing. Sometimes I get tired of my own thoughts.
I am trying to grow comfortable with the fact that writing here is a sometimes thing. There may be a time when I write a bit more regularly but, right now, I hope you're alright with the occasional rant about "Glee."
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Take a sad song and make it better: Another American Idol post
Let's talk about Heejun Han for a bit. If you're not watching, he's the slightly kooky Asian guy on "American Idol." He started out as a fan favorite, but now he's getting a lot of negative stuff thrown his way, which is completely unfair.
At the beginning of this season, Idol used his humor and "fish out of water" act to "sell" him. His audition featured him blowing his nose and gently teasing Ryan and the judges, acting like he wasn't sure exactly what all this "American Idol" stuff was all about. During Hollywood week, he could be counted on to make dry, witty comments about what was happening all around him. Throughout the process, he's the guy who's been a step above it all, observing the crazy and shaking his head. And, until recently, the show seemed to turn to him for a break in the action or a bit of humor. But the show counted on Heejun eventually playing by their rules and it didn't really happen.
The past couple of weeks, things have started to turn which has more to do with Idol taking itself too seriously rather than Heejun not taking it seriously. Heejun was never going to be a traditional, pretty boy pop star. He clearly has no interest in playing that game. He's a guy who likes to sing and, if it turns into anything, that's a bonus. He doesn't need the judges or Jimmy Iovine to give him his sense of self-worth. He is singing to the kids he works with and to the people he loves. If he grabs other fans, it's a bonus.
The thing is Heejun is an adult. He's got a real job that makes him happy and has a family who clearly supports him. Heejun is happy with his life, no matter what happens. He's not one of those starry-eyed 16-year-olds who think that a singing career is about fancy clothes and cheering audiences. If this ends tomorrow, he'll go home and back to his life and look back on all of this and smile. I can't imagine he'll have a second of regret or "gosh, if only..." thoughts.
At the beginning of this season, Idol used his humor and "fish out of water" act to "sell" him. His audition featured him blowing his nose and gently teasing Ryan and the judges, acting like he wasn't sure exactly what all this "American Idol" stuff was all about. During Hollywood week, he could be counted on to make dry, witty comments about what was happening all around him. Throughout the process, he's the guy who's been a step above it all, observing the crazy and shaking his head. And, until recently, the show seemed to turn to him for a break in the action or a bit of humor. But the show counted on Heejun eventually playing by their rules and it didn't really happen.
The past couple of weeks, things have started to turn which has more to do with Idol taking itself too seriously rather than Heejun not taking it seriously. Heejun was never going to be a traditional, pretty boy pop star. He clearly has no interest in playing that game. He's a guy who likes to sing and, if it turns into anything, that's a bonus. He doesn't need the judges or Jimmy Iovine to give him his sense of self-worth. He is singing to the kids he works with and to the people he loves. If he grabs other fans, it's a bonus.
The thing is Heejun is an adult. He's got a real job that makes him happy and has a family who clearly supports him. Heejun is happy with his life, no matter what happens. He's not one of those starry-eyed 16-year-olds who think that a singing career is about fancy clothes and cheering audiences. If this ends tomorrow, he'll go home and back to his life and look back on all of this and smile. I can't imagine he'll have a second of regret or "gosh, if only..." thoughts.
Heejun got a lot of heat about last week’s performance. If you didn't see it, he started out all serious, but switch to singing "My Life". He was dancing around and, while not the strongest vocal performance of the evening, it at least kept me awake. There was a lot of chatter about Heejun being disrespectful, but I disagree. He was sending a message, but it wasn't a negative message. He sang it: "I don't need you to worry for me 'cause I'm alright..." Unfortunately for Heejun, the Idol Powers That Be don't like a kid who isn't going to kiss up to them, so there was a lot of frowning and tut-tutting.
I hope this doesn't change him, but I'm afraid it might. What Idol doesn't need is a(nother) boring kid who's just so excited to be here, but that's what Idol is demanding. Idol would rather having Tommy Hilfiger "style" the contestants into his idea of a "star" (by the way: good call taking Erika, who was already one of the least-recognizable singers, and making her completely unrecognizable.) Heejun pokes the Idol machine and they don't like it. Unfortunately, Idol will make sure Heejun toes the line, and then they will wonder why they are losing viewers.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Dear Headhunter,
I know that you think in this economy, I should be excited to get a phone call and/or email from a headhunter. I get that this position you are dangling in front of me is just fabulous and, in your mind, I am a perfect fit. It is flattering. But the truth is, I get at least one call a week from you guys, and, I don't want to be burning any bridges, but some of you are just starting to piss me off. To make both of our lives easier, I have a few tips for you:
1) Unless I tell you otherwise, do not call me at work. Ever. I hope you can understand why that's not cool with me. Even if I were looking and wanted to talk to you, I wouldn't be doing it at my current place of employment. I work in a cube. I have no privacy at work. My boss (and plenty of other coworkers) just stop by whenever they wish. A VP's office is about four steps away. I do not want to be overheard discussing other opportunities, no matter how great they might be. If you found me on-line, please, contact me that way. I will get back to you if I'm interested. And, no, I don't think you're especially clever for contacting the front desk and getting through to my direct line. In fact, I think you are probably more aggressive than I am comfortable with. You do not get bonus points.
2) If you contact me and I email back a polite response that states "thank you but at this time, I am not looking for a new position," please, believe me. I'm fine with a response that states something like "if you change your mind, keep me in mind" or "good to know, but here's a couple of current positions I'm looking to fill that I'll attach, and if you're interested, just contact me." But that's it. Don't push for the reasons or a phone call. Truly, if this position is so incredible, the description will get me to contact you. Also, can we not be coy about location and details of the position? Send me that information right away.
3) Not everyone will drop everything and move across the country for more money and/or (possibly) a better title. Take me at my word when I tell you that I am happy in my current position at this time. I really have no reason to lie to you. This isn't a personal insult to you or a diss on this position; I have my reasons. I really don't have to justify this choice to you.
4) Please, take the time to read my LinkedIn profile. I know you did the keyword search, but you should look at the whole picture. I've lived mid-Atlantic East Coast area for 25 years. I probably don't want to uproot myself and move to California to stay in a similar position. Related to this, if we do talk, please listen to me. I know what I can do and what I want to do. I also know the things that are my deal-breakers and must-haves. I'm not teasing when I say that moving further south is not in my future, so I'm not going to take that job in Texas. I also am not interested in that position where I'd be making significantly less at a lower title. I don't expect you to know everything about every position, so I may see things that you do not. Trust me when I say "no."
5) If I decide to dip my toe in the water, I expect you to be an advocate for me. I've worked hard over the years and I have skills and education and I do bring something to a company. I need you to at least try to negotiate with folks looking to hire me. For example, if they want to set up an interview in two hours and I tell you that I would like it the next day, don't call me back and say, "so, the interview is in two hours!" (This is based on a true story.) If I ask you if this position could be a work-from-home position, don't tell me how great Boston or Phoenix or wherever is. Yes, you are "selling" me to a company, but you're also selling the company to me.
And on that note, if you hear something is not so great, be honest. Some companies kind of suck. Some positions are hard to fill because management is wacky. Help a gal out. I may still be interested. It might be that I'm desperate to get out of my current position, so I'll put up with a lot. Or maybe I'd be willing to put up with it because of a bump in salary or a step up to go to other things. But if you tell me that is a fantastic company that's growing like crazy, and, when I get there, a hiring freeze kicks in, I'm a touch annoyed. At you. And I will tell my friends. It's a small world, and when you play in a particular field, it gets even smaller. Believe me, there are loads of headhunters out there. We have options.
Here's the thing: a good headhunter is awesome. I have worked with some that have been just fantastic. If you do it right, we both walk away happy. Most of this is just being polite and professional.
Thanks for listening.
1) Unless I tell you otherwise, do not call me at work. Ever. I hope you can understand why that's not cool with me. Even if I were looking and wanted to talk to you, I wouldn't be doing it at my current place of employment. I work in a cube. I have no privacy at work. My boss (and plenty of other coworkers) just stop by whenever they wish. A VP's office is about four steps away. I do not want to be overheard discussing other opportunities, no matter how great they might be. If you found me on-line, please, contact me that way. I will get back to you if I'm interested. And, no, I don't think you're especially clever for contacting the front desk and getting through to my direct line. In fact, I think you are probably more aggressive than I am comfortable with. You do not get bonus points.
2) If you contact me and I email back a polite response that states "thank you but at this time, I am not looking for a new position," please, believe me. I'm fine with a response that states something like "if you change your mind, keep me in mind" or "good to know, but here's a couple of current positions I'm looking to fill that I'll attach, and if you're interested, just contact me." But that's it. Don't push for the reasons or a phone call. Truly, if this position is so incredible, the description will get me to contact you. Also, can we not be coy about location and details of the position? Send me that information right away.
3) Not everyone will drop everything and move across the country for more money and/or (possibly) a better title. Take me at my word when I tell you that I am happy in my current position at this time. I really have no reason to lie to you. This isn't a personal insult to you or a diss on this position; I have my reasons. I really don't have to justify this choice to you.
4) Please, take the time to read my LinkedIn profile. I know you did the keyword search, but you should look at the whole picture. I've lived mid-Atlantic East Coast area for 25 years. I probably don't want to uproot myself and move to California to stay in a similar position. Related to this, if we do talk, please listen to me. I know what I can do and what I want to do. I also know the things that are my deal-breakers and must-haves. I'm not teasing when I say that moving further south is not in my future, so I'm not going to take that job in Texas. I also am not interested in that position where I'd be making significantly less at a lower title. I don't expect you to know everything about every position, so I may see things that you do not. Trust me when I say "no."
5) If I decide to dip my toe in the water, I expect you to be an advocate for me. I've worked hard over the years and I have skills and education and I do bring something to a company. I need you to at least try to negotiate with folks looking to hire me. For example, if they want to set up an interview in two hours and I tell you that I would like it the next day, don't call me back and say, "so, the interview is in two hours!" (This is based on a true story.) If I ask you if this position could be a work-from-home position, don't tell me how great Boston or Phoenix or wherever is. Yes, you are "selling" me to a company, but you're also selling the company to me.
And on that note, if you hear something is not so great, be honest. Some companies kind of suck. Some positions are hard to fill because management is wacky. Help a gal out. I may still be interested. It might be that I'm desperate to get out of my current position, so I'll put up with a lot. Or maybe I'd be willing to put up with it because of a bump in salary or a step up to go to other things. But if you tell me that is a fantastic company that's growing like crazy, and, when I get there, a hiring freeze kicks in, I'm a touch annoyed. At you. And I will tell my friends. It's a small world, and when you play in a particular field, it gets even smaller. Believe me, there are loads of headhunters out there. We have options.
Here's the thing: a good headhunter is awesome. I have worked with some that have been just fantastic. If you do it right, we both walk away happy. Most of this is just being polite and professional.
Thanks for listening.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Press "play"
My relationship with organizing is a weird one. I really want to be organized, but it's not my natural instinct. I go through periods of "love me: love my clutter" but then guilt overwhelms me and I go on a bit of a cleaning frenzy. (Unfortunately, I rarely have the energy to complete the task, so I rely on an old family technique called "The Bag Method." For those unfamiliar with this, it goes as follows: you put it all in a bag.) It's like I know that hanging with certain kids would be a good thing for me, but I'd rather just hang out with the stoners and laugh at their stupid jokes. I really, really would love to get my nonsense together and have some organization, but I end up watching old seasons of "America's Next Top Model."
Nothing shows off my mess more than the simple question, "Can you just print this out?" My printer is my walk of shame. In all fairness, I rarely print out anything at home, so I need my printer only about once a year. But when I do need to use it, it's a disaster. I actually have a nice location for it (there is space in a bedroom closet where it is propped perfectly on an old milk crate). I get it out and I think I'm ready to go, but then I realize that I need cartridges. Well, this isn't exactly true: last time I used it, I thought I only needed black cartridges (I had a box of color ones), and I actually remembered to get them the last time I was at CostCo.
This morning I go to set up and pop in the new black one, and when it's adjusting, it's apparent that I need a color one as well. Turns out that box I thought was holding a spare color cartridge doesn't have any; the heft of the box is due to the free photo paper that was included. Of course, it wouldn't even mattered, as I realized I have no idea where the cord that connects the computer to the printer is. (I am sure it's in that bedroom but, as that room is the recipient of The Bag Method, that's not terrifically helpful.) I'm sure it'll turn up when I'm looking for something else and I'll be all,"I needed this for something..."
The good news is that I found other two things I've been missing, so it wasn't a complete waste of time. Maybe this weekend I'll tackle a couple of the bags up there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)