The Lesson I Should Have Learned...

Ted Geisel is a name that, for many, rings no bells. He also rang no bells for the more than forty publishers that turned down his first bestseller, The Cat in the Hat. Better known as Dr. Seuss, he went on to publish more than sixty books of the same variety including Oh, the Places You'll Go!, One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish, and Green Eggs and Ham.

It is the last one on the list that caught my attention today. Every night, I read one of Dr. Seuss's books to my 3 year old son, and every night, I wonder why Oliver DeMille listed the entire series on his classics for children list (see A Thomas Jefferson Education). Last night, it struck me: the lesson is "persistence."

As many of you may recall, the story is about a character who calls himself "Sam-I-Am," presenting a plate of green eggs and ham to another character, who is certain he hates them. In true Seuss fashion, they travel through a world of literally pictured rhymes and odd associations. All the while, Sam-I-Am continues to change the circumstances of his pitch as he sticks to his product.

I say product because Sam-I-Am is that greatest of salesmen: naive, enthusiastic, helpful, persistent, and eventually successful. The one advantage that Sam-I-Am has over the grumpy character is faith in the quality of the green eggs and ham. He  never bats an eye at the other character's attacks, but keeps smiling, eventually wearing the other character down. He is helpful, because he knows the grouch has never experienced this food, and is missing out. Of course, the grumpy character's attitude toward Sam-I-Am completely changes when he realizes what the salesman has done for him.

Sam-I-Am demonstrates one of the traits of a leader, and that is why it is a classic. However, many parents, I fear, are annoyed by this trait. They attempt to suppress (perhaps unknowingly) what makes life difficult for them, rather than nurturing the strong individual in the child. This problem continues in education and media, where authorities of all kinds seek a docile, easy to lead mass of men (and women).

Henry David Thoreau said, "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." I know from personal experience that this begins with the stifling of rewards for persistence. When a child finally gets the point from failing, that there is no point in trying, his will is broken and he becomes afraid to try.

This is the lesson I should have learned when I was young: always persist.

On Minorities

I have recently been reading through Allan Bloom's book "The Closing of the American Mind." It is too soon for me to say whether I agree with his particular views, though I appreciate much of his observations on both education and modern media. So far, the book has been a journey that has challenged my thinking in certain areas—the kind of challenge that tends to make one angry. That particular brand of anger is just the sort of feeling that shields us from having a more open mind. If we are not willing to read things we do not agree with, we cannot truly be open minded.

In any case, a quote from early in the book concerning minorities prompted me to write a brief article as to the what I thought he meant by it. I hope this will be mind-opening for you, even if you disagree.

***

"For the Founders [of America], minorities are in general bad things, mostly identical to factions, selfish groups who have no concern as such for the common good." - Allan Bloom

Minorities represent aspects of humanity which are not necessarily good or bad, just not as common as other aspects. Basically there are three kinds of minorities: physical minorities, defined by race or other physical characteristics; political minorities, defined by culture or other social and civil thought; and spiritual minorities, defined by passion of purpose or other philosophical beliefs. (As a side note, religion is an aspect of political life and is distinct from spiritual life, though one informs the other.)

Instead of creating unity by embracing commonalities which the majority (an act which might gain them more acceptance and strengthen society's understanding of natural principles), minority groups create divisions by embracing their major differences, then fighting for "equality." Inherently, they value being different for the sake of being unique, not necessarily because they are right. Therefore, they tend to disregard—as judgmental and closed-minded—those comments which might suggest they are in the wrong, because they feel such comments threaten their individuality. It is therefore ironic, that it is often the minority which is closed-minded. This, of course, makes learning impossible for the minority.

A value for differences is the opposite of unity, as unity can be founded on common ground. This common ground is what we speak of as "truth" or "natural law." Diversity is desirable not because of differences, but because of the strengthening of unity despite differences. It is the civil disagreements between individuals allied in common purpose, which tempers the resources for the battle. "Iron sharpens iron." The Founders of America understood this, according to Mr. Bloom, when they sought a system of majority rule.

Whenever any system seeks to impose arbitrary regulations to benefit the minorities, it ultimately makes the problem worse. Take, for instance, Affirmative Action: a set of rules meant to give racial and gender minorities a "fair" chance. It was meant to be a step forward in equality, but in assigning value arbitrarily to race, et al, the divide between minority groups and the majority deepened. A person's minority status became more important than his skill level or other human qualities. This also re-enforced prejudice that certain minorities were not hard workers. If it is not a person's performance, but the color of his skin or the group to which he belongs that gets him into an organization, why bother pursuing excellence?

Paradoxically, all fervor over minority inequality fundamentally disregards the fact that we are all human and therefore equal by nature, a trait that should be at the forefront of any understanding of society. Considering anything else in priority above equality by the nature of being human, is the very definition of inequality.

FEATURED MEDIA: The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom, is a book about the degeneration of higher education in America.

Crash is a fictional film about prejudice in Los Angeles. Several different characters from all walks of life "crash" into each other, revealing some interesting thought nuggets on race and class distinctions.

Media and Mealtime

I've been in the habit of referring to certain media (especially fictional films) as "candy." Upon further reflection (over-analysis), I realized that the term "candy film" is a misnomer. Given that I am normally not referring to mass media, of which I am constructively critical when I do, the use of a junk food analogy is incorrect. Therefore, what I used to call "candy films" will now more accurately be called "snack films."

To continue the mealtime metaphor, media can be constructed for the purpose of snacktime or dinnertime. It is not the volume or density of a given work that ultimately determines its literary significance, but its ability to fit the role for which it was intended. As with food for the body, media provides a full range of nutritional options for the mind. So it follows, in our contemporary fast-food age, that it is also more convenient and cheaper to feed the mind junk than health (same flaw, different industry).

"Dinner media" (or supper, if you prefer) would constitute the densest, most challenging content for regular consumption. It is the meat of a person's intellectual diet. Not only does it showcase images that are difficult to bear, but it offers strong advice for success in life. It deals with the network of twisted justification and manipulation that constitutes the struggles of the higher self. It is hard on both the mind and the spirit, with the aim of strengthening.

Dinner-media is necessary for growth, but I am finding that this seems to be the only form of media acceptable to those who profess the need for Liberal Arts. I agree that all people eventually need this meat in their diets. However, as with physical starvation, one whose mind is starving should be cautioned against launching headlong into regular dinner-media, which would actually have a negative effect despite its level of nutrition. This is a question of capacities, which can be expanded over time through the use of smaller meals. With time, any "savage" can be sophisticated to the high arts—with time.

"Lunch media" probably describes most of the media in circulation. It is not meant to be challenging, but sustaining. Its purpose is to remind people of things they already know and values they already possess. If it ever stirs anger, that anger is directed at the villain, who represents what the viewer hates. It relies on safe, agreeable ethics like not lying, not stealing, and not murdering—or a general sense of honor among criminals. It does not discuss dilemmas of when-and-if exceptions to these ethics might be made, nor does it delve into the spiritual questions of why a person would break these rules despite warning. It is for the mind, but not the spirit.

If I have a concern with media at this level, it would mostly revolve around the fact that it is too prevalent. If one is only presented what he already knows, then no growth is possible. That being said, if non-media factors (from a family tragedy to a great mentor) have the effect of stirring one's soul, then well-developed media which speaks to his purpose can be motivational—a launching pad for great things.

"Breakfast media" is simpler in nature still, mostly serving as children's media. The characters are not complex, but embody either hero or villain with minimal grey areas. While it might deal with political issues, its coverage of any subject is foundational (like breakfast), but not substantial (like lunch). As breakfast of the mind, this media is more about teaching the forms of media than it is about sharpening understanding or growing wisdom about life. Since many people are starved for variety in forms of media, it is important that such foundational media be available to everyone not just children.

Finally, this brings me back to "snack media," which can, in spirit, be like any of the above levels of media. The difference is in its scope and substance, which it is usually lacking. Snack-media can posit a deep question of the soul—but usually only one—and does not provide a path to the answer, merely the question. It can present a thought nugget that clarifies a personal philosophy, but it does not explore it, or provide a path to explore. It can cast light on forms many times revealing flaws, but it is not substantial enough to provide a solution.

Snack-media can be great when it is properly used, but by definition, it is devoid of much depth. It is media to get you through to the next meal, an appetizer before the main course. Without a certain measure of discussion, willingly pulled from other sources in response, snack-media can become junk media. It is very easy to cheat in your intellectual diet with a snack.

FEATURED MEDIA:
Dinner-Media: Schindler's List - Story of Holocaust profiteer, Oscar Schindler.
Lunch-Media: Pirates of the Caribbean - Action film about a pirate curse.
Breakfast-Media: Monster's, Inc. - Children's movie about bureaucracy.
Snack-Media: Sunshine - Sci-fi film about a mission to re-ignite the Sun.

The Origin [of Truth in Fiction]

[Reposted from CTIF.blogspot.com. Original post date: 9/20/08]

Why truth in fiction? It sounds like a bit of a contradiction in terms. Is it even possible to have truth in a story that is inherently false? I now believe it is, but the thought had never crossed my mind until recently. And even so, it was a long time in the making...

I've always been the analytical sort, passionate about determining why one film is better than other. This concept came about from three specific sources, which were connected by a principle I uncovered one day. I can't say how they came about chronologically, but one was a quote from a talk show, another a documentary, and the third, a TV Series. The principle was that in all things, we should seek to create value (that means value to others, not just ourselves), rather than seek to make money. Money is not the only thing of value, but anything of value can be traded for money.

I have tried to find the source of the quote, but cannot remember what talk show or what guest said it. I do, however, remember the gist of the conversation. I believe it was Oscar season, and the guest was talking (or perhaps complaining) about the old-school way that the Academy chooses movies to be nominated. From his point of view, he thought that the movies that made the most money should be the movies that won the awards.

I immediately felt there was something wrong with the statement, but wasn't quite sure what. For a while, I wrote it off, saying that the money was the reward for those movies, but GOOD movies needed to win awards to get noticed. Eventually, I thought it through, and came to the realization that entertaining films (such as summer blockbusters) make a lot of money by promoting an adequate film to a broad audience for one big weekend, while artistic films (i.e.: the Best Picture Oscar films) create a culturally relevant, valuable, film that makes its money over time by winning one fan at a time.

"The Lost Tomb of Jesus," was a TV documentary which sought answers to the question of whether Jesus' remains might actually have been found (contrary to scripture). Having been raised a christian, this was unsettling for me at the time. But what struck me was how irrelevant it seemed, whether Jesus actually rose from the dead. That was when I realized that the truth of the Gospel story was not necessarily in historical accuracy, but in the impact the story had on culture: it has given hope and purpose to people for 2000 years. It spread one "fan" at a time for a very long time.

The final piece came when I watched through David Chase's "The Sopranos." For those who haven't seen it, The Sopranos is unlike any organized crime story I've ever seen (though I don't profess to be an expert on the subject). It follows the life of fictitious New Jersey mobster, Tony Soprano, who, though very successful in his "trade," is having a sort of midlife crisis. He begins seeing a psychiatrist to deal with his stressful life. For those of you who are thinking of a particular movie along the same lines, bear with me.

Now, I find that most mob stories take sides. They either paint mobsters as honorable, men of respect, and law enforcement as insufficient or clueless; or they paint mobsters as thugs and murderers, destined to foolishly fall into the hands of keen detectives. From the very beginning, "The Sopranos" seemed to me to be what life in the mob would really be like. Though I've never been in the mob, or read anything about the mob, I was sold on its "accuracy." Why? Because it was truthful on a deeper level. Tony Soprano could have just as easily been a corporate manager, struggling with fairness and ethics in a legal business, or he could have been a dad struggling to keep his kids in line despite a messed up world. David Chase chose to create a mob story, and all the violence and sexual content speaks to the truth of the story. It neither glorified, nor patently criticized organized crime. And though no story is perfect, I believe "The Sopranos" presents one of the greatest examples of Truth in Fiction, and will, therefore, stand the test of time.

How does this all tie together? It goes like this: William Shakespeare took many, if not all, his stories from mythology. Those who've studied Greek and Roman myths know that the various gods and godesses fought and loved, betrayed and conspired amongst themselves. These tales portrayed interactions: those that work, those that don't, and why. Like may scriptures, including the Holy Bible, the stories always presented the consequences. The consequences of the feud between the Capulets and the Montagues was that their children, Romeo and Juliet, died tragically. "All are punished," quotes the Prince.

The point is this: we can't let short-sighted economists destroy the value of our art for the sake of making more money faster. To make money quickly, they must appeal to what most people want to hear right now, but most people are selfish right now, so the consequences of appealing to people's selfishness is that you enable them to be more selfish because you provide justification ("everybody's doing it"). Stories that portray the consequences of selfishness are inherently less popular, but because they are truthful, they remain relevant for longer AND they influence culture in a POSITIVE direction.

Fewer films made with quality will produce more value, and thus, more money than big business Hollywood over the long haul.

FEATURED MEDIA:
    "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" is recommended because it is well-made and the logic is sound. However, due to the insufficient evidence inherent to archeology and the natural tendency of people to form biased assumptions to fill in the gaps, I can't say this proves anything. The value of this documentary is in its ability to challenge your beliefs, whether you ultimately agree or not.
    "The Sopranos" is worth watching because of its reality. Viewer discretion is certainly advised.
   "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" is one of many compilations and series of Shakespeare's work, all of which are worth reading. His works are among the Great Books of the Western World.

It's Not Fair!

It's not fair! How many have heard that phrase uttered by people in America? It seems to me that the frequency of that careless phrase is increasing, spurred on, perhaps, by politicians and others who stand to gain by telling you they can make it fair. I could say that life's not fair, and offer you no more wisdom than that, but there is more to the story of fairness.

It's not fair that we are so sheltered in this country, that we think anything less than easy is a crime against nature. It's not fair that we have cars that run or public transit or bicycles with more than one gear. It's not fair that our taxis are gas-powered rather than pedal-powered. It's not fair that gasoline is so cheap in this country (and that's the truth).

It's not fair that we eat three meals a day, only to waste much of what we don't finish. It's not fair that we have shelter, heat, and electricity. That things like free wi-fi and continental breakfasts are standard in hotels. For that matter, it's not fair that we have clean beds in rooms with locks on the doors, much less hotels with all their ammenities.

It's not fair that we have properly trained doctors and the best healthcare in the world. Oh, I know it's free in other countries, but that's not better just easier. It's not fair that we have modern hospitals with cable TV and room service, however bad we might complain the food is.

It's not fair that we are free to live our individual lives, practice our religion or no religion, read what we wish to read and say what we wish to say. It's not fair that we are free to take advantage of opportunity, and it's really not fair that we are to scared to live free.

Think of how blessed you are, and consider supporting a program like The MORE Project.

FEATURED MEDIA: "City of God" is the story of a young Brazilian man, growing up in the darker, crime-filled slums of Rio de Janeiro. A dense movie, it is sure to make you think outside your comforts.

The MORE Project is a cause to help the children and single mothers living in those slums. Among other things it builds housing and trains young men how to be fathers.

Experience Life

Much is learned in spirit despite the best efforts of practical theory to be all-inclusive. Knowledge is great, but until you build a house (or make a movie, or run a company) you really don't know how to do it. I'm talking about experience and the wisdom that is only earned through experience. No one ever accomplishes anything great with low expectations, though high expectations and lofty goals often mean failure.

One immutable principle of life is that one cannot succeed without failure. It seems counter-intuitive, but it's true. Study the lives of successful people and you will inevitably stumble upon a mountain of previous failures. Of course, if one never studies successful people—or has no mentor or proper role model—that person would necessarily come to the conclusion that success is luck. I mean, it must be luck if we mere mortals are mired in struggles and failure—unable to move forward—while a select few rise to the top?

When you hear that an Olympic skier broke both her legs during a bad spill in training for the games, what do you think? She's finished? When you find out she is back on the same slopes as soon as she can walk again, what do you think? Idiot? Or do you think "Champion"? If you are anything like me, raised on laughing at videos of people hurting themselves, you probably think the former. I know I used to, and consequently I was terrified to stretch myself on the slopes.

The mass mantras of today have us sold on the idea that what we should be learning from mistakes is to fear them. Which, in the days of the Apollo program with billions of dollars on the line, used to be a vital response. But not any more. Today, with the internet, social networking, and any number of consumer electronics, a person can be a media mogul for a few hundred dollars. It only takes the willingness to fail until you find your niche.

So how about it, are you willing to give your spirit a stir? Live a little, put yourself and your weaknesses on display.

Sure beats the walking dead.

FEATURED MEDIA: "The Pursuit of Happyness" is based on the true story of Chris Gardner, whose failure as a salesman led to him raising his young son on the streets. Instead of giving up on his dream, Chris pursues a stockbroker internship by day, while sleeping in a homeless shelter at night. The film's director, Gabriele Muccino, is quoted as saying, "To understand the American Dream, you have to be a foreigner."

"Brainwashing: Seven Ways to Reinvent Yourself."

“Years ago, when you were about four years old, the system set out to persuade you of something that isn’t true."
- Seth Godin

Seth Godin is a phenomenal writer and thinker. He has written a number of books related to current society, especially with regard to our social media culture. ChangeThis has published his new "manifesto" entitled, "Brainwashing: Seven Ways to Reinvent Yourself."

Seth's manifesto echoes what FITmedia stands for. Happiness is found in chasing your purpose, and the energy to succeed at it comes from happiness. No one has to be stuck, but some people need to see things a different way, or see different things entirely.

Download the PDF file here.