Dr. B's Notes

236 Thoughts Inspired by Quotes I like, #1

8/3/2022

Along with the cartoons which I collect from across the internet (and the daily papers), I also keep my eyes open for quotes I encounter which I find interesting, inspiring, or otherwise memorable and thought-provoking. So, for this post, I thought I’d take a look at some of them and just see what develops. I think it’s going to be interesting, but I’m not really sure where it will take me.

We sometimes watch various programs on PBS (we can get PBS programming from TWO different states [Iowa AND Nebraska], which gives us quite a broad spectrum and a variety of broadcast schedules). I was, understandably enough, I suppose, particularly interested in some of the programs which were broadcast related to the “rebirth” of Broadway theatre after the trials of the COVID pandemic. One of these was a “Great Performances” program called “Keeping Company with Sondheim,” which discussed the closing of the newly revised production of Company, just a few days before it’s scheduled “official”opening, and which then waited 600 days to officially “open.”

Christopher Fitzgerald, who played David, discussed his experience through the time of being closed and the pre-reopening. I think he said something rather profound about his experience which sheds some light on the meaning of doing theatre for many of us who have spent much of our lives in the service of that art. He said,

It was like a death, it was. It was. It was like, it was, it was a death of our connections, our,
     you know it is the…. Being in a room with a group of people and telling a story is so
     elemental to being human and to just like strip that in the moment of its happening was
   like, it felt like a death to me, and I think to a lot of us. And so, it really feels like coming
     back to life.

I think I understand that feeling, even though I’m no longer actively involved in producing theatre. The end (closing) of a show was always a bit of a “downer,” even if you were moving directly onto another one, as I did most of the time (and, sometimes, even before the current production actually closed). Just the idea of having a show in limbo for such an extended period of time, had to be excruciating.

Of course, Broadway (and the rest of the theatre world) has more, or less, managed to reopen after the worst depths of COVID, but I do strongly identify with Kristen Chenoweth when she gave a brief “curtain speech” at the reopening of Wicked on Sept. 14, 2021. Her first words were, as she stepped out in front of the (closed) curtain were; “There’s no place like home.” I think she expressed a feeling many theatre people were having about that time, and since.

While I’m discussing “theatre” quotes, a long time ago (sometime around 1970, as I remember it) I encountered the statement that; “Acting is the art of making an audience believe that real things are happening to real people.” I confess that, at that time, I was quite unsure that I believed that. In fact, I still think that not ALL acting necessarily has to have this as its ultimate aim, as not ALL theatre is about “human-seeming” characters, nor need it be. However, thinking about this led me to decide that the statement might be more correct if it read; “Theatre is the art of making an audience understand that the imaginary reality of the stage can help us to better understand the actual reality of real life.”

I suppose that that quibble is at least partially the result of my work in children’s theatre where characters may be animals or other fantastic beings, and I don’t mean to deny the commitment to honesty which is ALWAYS necessary in acting, but it IS hard to think of a squirrel, for example, as a “real people.” I also don’t think that Theatre is the only art which creates an artificial reality which reflects on “real” life, but I do think it is an important one. And that it was important enough to devote much of my life to it. And I am NOT (at least in my mind) in any way limiting the idea of Theatre to just acting.

I think the notion of assisting an audience to better understand “real” life must be a part of every mind engaged in the creation of theatre. That’s why I enjoyed the idea of having computers, etc., to assist in the control of lighting, sound, etc., as a part of live performance, but was always nervous about “automating” the performance too much, even on the technical side. I firmly believe that if theatre becomes too “mechanized,” “computerized,” or, otherwise lacking the emotional commitment of all of its creators each time it is created, it will cease to truly be theatre. It MIGHT be worthy of our attention, but it won’t be “Theatre.”

Some of my former students will probably remember my saying that; “Theatre is an art of pursuing perfection, in the face of the certain knowledge that it will never be achieved.” I don’t believe that I ever claimed that that was an original thought of mine, or that I was unique in feeling that way, but it IS an idea of which I have been fond for a long time. Needless to say, when I encounter a statement which seems to be closely related to this notion expressed by someone more eloquently than I think I ever achieved, I have tried to take note of it, so here are a couple of quotes which, I think, may help make this point more clearly than I have.

On CBS’ “Sunday Morning” a while ago the architect, Frank Gehry spoke about his idea of “creative insecurity.” He described this creative insecurity as a constant questioning—looking for ways to bring a fresh perspective, new idea, or different angle to the work. The reporter suggested that as he listened, he thought of the concept of having a “beginner’s mind,” which he described as a Zen Buddhist concept that maintains that only when you are a true beginner can you really learn anything. Through that lens, we discover without the weight of preconceived beliefs and thoughts. There is an openness to embrace something novel and the courage to take a journey.

It was suggested that Gehry’s creative insecurity didn’t seem to come from a tenuous place of fearing the unknown or of thinking little of himself, but from a place of wanting more to be revealed. That even as a master or expert in our field, we can approach situations with a beginner’s mindset. That constant questioning is a mainstay of curiosity, which leads to a creative impulse to seek out new information and experiences. I can’t be sure, but I think that’s much the same thing as my notion of seeking perfection while knowing that it won’t be achieved.

Peter Hall, the British director, in his book, Making an Exhibition of Myself, discussed the impact of theatre on a person’s life. Among the many things he said, he noted that,

The theatre keeps you humble and it keeps you young; you learn your job to the very end,
and always feel unsure with every new job: 'Can I still do it? Shall I be found out?'

Ralph Richardson defeated the fears; he liked long runs: he was able to go on practising.
     He often told me that he loved the nightly expectation of going down to the theatre. He
     felt like a woodcarver trying to repeat an ever more delicate decoration. He would re-carve
     his performance each night, making it a little finer, a little more economical. Some nights,
     the knife would slip and he would spoil a whole section. He knew that perfection was
     impossible, but the important thing was to continue carving. If the run was happy, the
     carving would improve, though the improvement might be hardly discernible from
     performance to performance.

Well, I’ve rambled on for long enough for now. Having reached my elder days, I’d like to think that at least some of what I have learned and thought about through my life might be useful to some others. I hope that’s the case. If it’s not, I accept that I should have followed Yoda’s advice: “If Stupid You Are, Speak You Should Not” and I’ll try to do better in the future.

🖖🏼 LLAP,

Dr. B

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”
— Nelson Mandela

“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.”                                                                       ― Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

0 Comments

235 Thoughts on Felininity

7/20/2022

0 Comments

Okay, so my dictionary insists that the word is “felinity.” However, that doesn’t really capture the quality which is stirring my thoughts at the moment. There’s just something about cats that I find fascinating, but which I’ve never been able to define. I’m quick to point out that I am nowhere near unique in suggesting the truth of this, but I’m right in there supporting it. There is simply some sort of “je ne sais quoi” about cats which I, like many people, find absolutely fascinating.
I guess that I’ve always been a “cat person.” I have shared my home with one, or more, cats for much of my life. I first remember having a cat when I was six or seven and our cat (name long forgotten) showed up at the back door with a dead blue jay in it’s mouth. Needless to say, my mother was not pleased and I have no clear recollection of what happened to that cat, except that the vast majority of my cats have been (virtually exclusively) INDOOR cats. That’s not to suggest that none of them ever got outside, but it was actively discouraged and, given concerns over fleas, disease, etc., I refuse to apologize for wanting MY cats to be “house” pets.

My family did have a dog for a while, as I was growing up, a golden Cocker Spaniel, with a penchant for running away if she got out of the house, and a need to be walked morning and night (at least) which became MY job. I didn’t really mind, as I remember it, but I hardly considered walking Taffy to be a treat, either, especially during the winter.

Eventually, she left us and my mother (my Dad was NOT involved with pets) acquired a cat named Perkins (or perhaps it was Purrkins, as I never saw it written out as I remember it). Obviously, she was not spayed, as she produced several litters, and it was one of her first offspring, Koko (who was dark brown and white), who came to live with Bonnie and me in our trailer in Bloomington while I was doing my Master’s work and was a member of the Indiana Theatre Company.

Since much of the floor of our trailer was tile, Koko developed the interesting habit of starting in the kitchen (tile floor) at one end of the structure, dashing across the living room (carpeted) and down the hall (tile) almost to the other end of the space, then trying (desperately) to make the turn into the bathroom (also tile). Needless to say, he usually did NOT make the turn and would entertain us with the sound of “scrabbling claws on tile” as he attempted the turn, followed by the sound of cat crashing into the wall. He never seemed to get injured, and he never stopped attempting this feat. During this timeframe, we also acquired a second cat, Marshmallow (all white), so, for a while there were four of us before we had any “real” children.

After I got my MA and we moved to Evanston (when I joined the Children’s Theatre) we had to give them up, a MOST unhappy circumstance, but necessary, as there was very little rental property (none we could afford) which allowed pets as residents. We were able to “adopt out” Marshmallow, but we had to turn Koko in to an adoption shelter. Bonnie and I both sat in the parking lot at the Orphans of the Storm adoption center and cried for a while that day.

However, a couple of years later, I started at Western and we moved to Sylva, where we first lived in a rental house and acquired a cat named Spook. She was an indoor cat (as was our practice) although at least two sets of our neighbors thought we were very cruel because we didn’t let him out. I think they changed their tune when both of them had cats killed on the road in front of our houses in less than six months, while Spook remained happy and healthy, but we didn’t rub that in.

I don’t think we’ve been without at least one cat any longer than we felt we had to at any point since then (1971), although we were catless for the time we lived in Married Student Apartments in Athens, when I was doing my PhD classes at UGA in the mid-’70’s and, after our return to Cullowhee, while we lived for several years in Faculty Apartments. Of course, having small children, (Maggi was born while we lived there) was a considerable compensation.

Shortly before we left Faculty Apartments, Bonnie “borrowed” a pregnant cat named Motley (who was eventually returned to her owner after producing several kittens [Kate had an interest in kittens and got a chance to be “involved” with the births]). One of these was Bilbo. Bonnie and I were both quite amused that our local vet’s office insisted on calling him “Bill Boy,” apparently not getting the LOTR reference, but we had him for only about a year, as Maggi was very small and had difficulty understanding how gently a small cat had to be treated.

So, again, we were catless until we got our first house in 1986. Shortly after we moved in, Bonnie found “Twilight Zone” up for adoption in front of the Sylva Public Library. She was so named because she always seemed just a little “out there.” A few years later, about 1992, Maggi earned her Girl Scout Silver Award and wanted a kitten, so we adopted “Crash” from the pet store in the Asheville Mall. She was so named because she “crashed” on Maggi’s shoulder all the way home, but she also had a habit of running full speed through the house and abruptly dropping into a heap, dead asleep, wherever she happened to be when she stopped.

Anyway, by 1994, the girls decided that I needed a MALE cat to support me as I was seriously outnumbered by females (three human and two feline by that time, so, for my birthday, I got a wonderful, big, neutered, male cat who looked like a Maine Coon, but who we did NOT believe was“pure bred,” (but who sure looked like he could have been.) The girls insisted that he be named “Fiction” because 1.) he was MY cat; 2.) I liked to read; and, 3.) he (the cat) had a terribly tall tail (sp.). Anyway, both of the girls (mostly) grew up with cats in the house and became aware of the “ups and downs” of parenting cats as a matter of course.

After the girls both had left home and the various cats passed on, we considered not having a pet, but in late 2008, we acquired two declawed, male, littermate “kittens” from a friend of Kate’s who needed to be relieved of them due to serious allergies, as I recall. So, we drove up to western Virginia to pick up these “kittens,” who turned out to be a year and a half old and BIG. This friend, and her kids, had called them something stupid like “Smokey” (all grey) and Chip (all black). We quickly changed their names to Fred and George, in honor of the Weasley twins, as they DID look a bit alike and they WERE littermates, etc. They lived with us during our last years in Sylva and moved to Omaha with us. Then, one morning in early 2018, we were watching the morning news and heard a “thud” in the kitchen.

Apparently, George had suffered a heart attack while looking out the window from atop a “cat condo” and simply fell over dead. It struck me at the time that, “If you gotta go, that might be the way to do it.” As best we can tell, he was alive and (apparently) happy, then he was gone. Not a “happy experience” for us, but he wasn’t the first cat we had lost and it is, after all, a part of life…. So, we were a one cat family again.

Then, about the end of March 2021, Maggi and Brian went to look for a cat to replace one of theirs who had passed. They found a pair of brothers, whom they named Sherlock and Mycroft, but also informed us of a pair of older, spayed sister cats who had had to be given up by their previous owner who was too old to care for them properly. However, they had been born in 2009, so they were not young, had been declawed (fronts only, of course) so they couldn’t be outside, and the original owner didn’t want them to be separated (which seemed reasonable, as they had always been together). So, we acquired Bellatrix and Narcissa (after the Black sisters), who had originally been “Pixie” and “Sweetpea.” (Passing thought: why do people insist on giving cats stupid names? I mean them, not us!) So we have been a family of five again for a bit over a year.

Anyway, thinking about all of this put me in mind of considering what it is about cats which I find intriguing. I CAN conceive of not having a cat (or more than one) about, but it’s not something I would rush to seek out. There’s just “something” about having a cat to curl up with, climb on your lap, purr in your ear, etc. It’s one of the good things in life, even if it’s true that, “Dogs have owners, cats have staff.”

Anyway, here are a few cartoons, I’ve collected which seem to speak to this truth…. I think this is from The New Yorker, but I’m far from sure that’s true. It does seem to me that I could well have gotten it from that publication, however.

Yes, cats can certainly be demanding, especially when they have decided that it’s time for food! On the other hand, they often appear to be very affectionate, which tends to suck people into the morass of assuming that their pet is actually reciprocating the emotion which the “owner” wants to believe exists. On the other hand, Wiley, in Non Sequitur, probably has a greater understanding of the actual situation than many cat lovers would care to admit.

It’s probably true that the majority of the problem is that cats tend to be thought of as “cute,” so people tend to “mother” them, tickle them, pet them, and, generally, spoil them. All of which speaks to the truth of this sign, which I encountered in a store(?), at some point.

Then again, it’s SO easy to fall into that sort of trap because cats at least appear to respond so pleasantly (at least most of the time) when we indulge them. I mean, just look at the expression on Jon’s face…, and his “present” to Garfield only cost a few minutes and a wee bit of effort! I hate to admit how common is this sort of reaction.

The problem here is that the “adults” in the room (yes, I mean us cat “owners”) are so easily suckered by our pets that it’s often hard to figure out who is REALLY in charge. After all, there’s a LOT of truth in THIS statement….

Still, while cats CAN be a bit frustrating and, much of the time, insist on being treated with considerable respect like the dignified people that they think of themselves as being, they can (at least sometimes) be conned. For example,

Don’t try THAT with a human baby, or even a dog. It’s unlikely to achieve any sort of RESPONSE, let alone success. But, almost any, non-sleeping cat, on the other hand….

🖖🏻

LLAP,

Dr. B

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”
   — Nelson Mandela

“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.”                                                                       ― Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

P.S.   Our “guys” at a quiet moment after breakfast (and much of the rest of the time).

0 Comments

234 A National Celebration

7/7/2022

0 Comments

It’s Hot! It’s just a bit past Midsummer. Around here, people have been setting off fireworks at all hours in spite of the laws against such behavior, etc. It MUST have just been Independence Day (also known as the Fourth of July)! As the day we celebrate the birth of our nation, I suppose that that’s a day worth celebrating, however I think some people DO over do it a bit, especially in the light of recent developments in law and politics.

Too many people (especially among our political “leaders”) wish to claim a proprietary interest in the idea of “patriotism” and suggest that only their supporters can be considered as such. But, ideas like that suggest a complete misunderstanding of the real notion of patriotism. Personally, I’m rather fond of the way Mark Twain put it when he said that, “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.” I like this because I believe it agrees with the belief which I developed during the Vietnam War era as I watched my government engage in activities which I was pretty sure were, at best, unwise, and probably should have been considered criminal.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I love my country. It’s a place where I can trace my roots back to about 150 years before the idea of the United States ever occurred to anyone. But, I am also aware that our “experiment” in democracy has not been without a good many flaws, often of a serious nature. Some of those flaws have cost me some friends in Vietnam and other places. Some of those flaws really deny my country any right to claim that it actually stands for what we have always SAID it did. Yes, I am fully aware that, as a country, we are NOT and never have been perfect.

Some would use that statement to suggest that I’m not a “true” patriot. I disagree. I do so because I firmly believe that only by acknowledging that we have not been perfect; that we have made mistakes; that we have not always done the truly “right” thing; do we have a chance of actually taking the steps to make things better. The fact is that you can’t “Make America Great Again” unless it’s been “great” before, and a close look at our history would suggest that while we, as a nation, have done a lot (some of it even pretty good), we still have some challenges to achieve the “greatness” we aspire to.

And, in fact, looking at history with the idea of correcting mistakes and righting wrongs is NOT all that uncommon a practice. Virtually ALL religions (I think) have some version of this concept, although they may call it different things and it may take a variety of specific forms. Politically, I would suggest that it is a necessary step towards resolving the challenges of creating the “more perfect union” which citizens of the US claim is the driving force behind our politics. How can THAT be “UNpatriotic?”

I’m sorry to say that the past half-dozen years of US politics have been disappointing to me. Actually, it probably goes back further than that, back to the point at which far too many people started to decide that politics was REALLY just about “winning and losing.” For those people, “Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing,” as Vince Lombardi is quoted as having said. I would suggest, however, that Lombardi was not talking about politics, but about the game of football; not the same thing, at all. I think the difference lies in the reason one plays the game. Of course everyone WANTS to win any game, but when the “game” ceases to be a game and becomes one’s validation as a person (or, perhaps, the means for one to accumulate money, power, and influence) then it’s not just a contest; and it may well become a need to destroy anyone who might “defeat” you. And, that does NOT seem to fit in with the ideas expressed in the Declaration of Independence and our other founding documents. After all, how does one accomplish destroying the opposition?

Well, short of actual violence, the lessons of history suggest it’s by making people afraid, then giving them someone (your opponent) to blame for causing that fear. Or, as suggested below:

Not a very clear picture, I know, but it says, “Support FEAR AND LIES.” History strongly suggests that the quickest, easiest way to achieve power is to make people afraid of someone, or something. Common choices usually are someone who can be identified as not being like “us.” There doesn’t have to be any real reason for it, but if I can make you afraid, I can then “save” you by telling you how to “fix” that fear (usually by telling you to support me and my ideas and oppose my selected scapegoat) because “Only I can solve your problems!” It’s worked like a charm in a lot of places for a lot of years. A good part of Twentieth Century political history was based on this idea.

Case in point, I’ve heard that our neighbors to the North (Canada) have become concerned about too many people from the US trying to emigrate to their country due to the mostly self-inflicted problems of the US, and they may be trying to do something to discourage such shenanigans, but I don’t know that for certain. Still, I did run across this picture of Canadians building a wall a while ago….

I confess, that I’m not sure this would be an effective solution, except, perhaps, for folks coming from, say, Florida, or Texas.

Other folks, from various places, seem to have decided that the best way to deal with the acrimonious state of US politics is to simply walk away and ignore the whole damn thing. In fact, some, apparently, had that idea back a few years back…

I hope that such folks have decided to give the USA another chance, as tempting as it may be to just ignore the whole situation. I think the “American experiment in democracy” is salvageable and worth the effort. At least I hope so. After all,

Call me stupid, if you wish, but I DO think this is a true statement, even if not the best grammar. I’m still young enough (at least at heart), naive enough, perhaps even Romantic enough to think that the ideals of our Founding Fathers are worth the effort it will take to confront, accept, and at least make an honest attempt to resolve our mistakes of the past and still retain an, essentially, democratic society. I can understand the temptations of Fascistic “order,” but I can’t believe that the result is worth the collateral damage to freedom.

Probably, the first step towards resolving the issues which face us may be to consider if Sherlock Holmes, as pastiched by Loren D. Estleman, was correct when he complained about the lack of criminal imagination in England, saying, “There isn’t a criminal with imagination left on our island. They have all emigrated to America to run for public office.” If this observation is true, we have to find some better people to fill these positions.

Whether Holmes was right, or not, however, the first thing to actually do is to resolve to become better voters during the next election. That would seem to require each of us to seek out candidates willing to look beyond name-calling and “trust me” sorts of policies and accept the fact that issues are NOT always all that simple and that progress may require making difficult and, sometimes, unpopular choices. The important consideration is whether our selected candidate will support the rule of law and the principles of our Constitution even when it’s uncomfortable to do so. I can think of no better way to celebrate our nation than by VOTING. Make sure you are registered, get informed about the candidates and their principles, and VOTE. It’s the patriotic things to do! And, it’s probably the most meaningful way to celebrate our Independence!

🖖🏼 LLAP,

Dr. B

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”
— Nelson Mandela

“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.”
― Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

0 Comments

233 Accepting Getting Older #1

6/22/2022

0 Comments

More and more frequently I find myself having to accept the fact that I’m getting older. Most of the time I still feel like I’m as alert, awake, and aware as I ever was, although I know that’s probably not really true. There’s also the fact that I don’t seem to have either the desire, or the energy, to just go full tilt all day and into the night, like I once did. And, I have to admit that there are the general aches and pains which remind me that the human body, remarkable piece of engineering that it is, wasn’t designed (nor built) to last forever. Hence, I have one “rebuilt” knee and (given the advanced arthritis in the other one) I’ll probably need my “mechanic” to rebuild the other one before too many years. And, there are other signs of age which I COULD complain about, but I won’t because it wouldn’t get me anywhere, anyhow.

This “Funky Winkerbean” comic a while ago really hit me hard.

Mind you, I’m not really complaining, I think I’ve had a pretty good life, all things considered, and I have no plans not to have it continue a good while yet. There is the fact, though that I am more aware of getting older than I used to be, all of which is just a long-winded way of getting around to the fact that this post is going to include some of the stuff I have collected which seems to relate to the idea of getting older. I find much of it a little ironic, but mostly amusing, and I hope you will, too.

Society, generally, loves to make fun of us “olders.” Our health, our memories, and the fact that many of us (myself included) aren’t considered to be really “with it” in terms of “modern” trends, seems to be a constant source of amusement to “youngers” (who are getting older every day). (Revenge is SO sweet!) Anyway, here’s a few things which relate to the fact of aging which I actually enjoyed.

Yes, I identify with that as I can remember being referred to as a “Hippy” back in the day because of my “long” hair. Of course, I would never have been described as such by those who actually were…. And, of course, it’s certainly not a problem now.

Of course, a major difference between MY generation and the current one was the lack of “social media.” The more I think about it, though, the more I doubt that we ever felt the loss.

Social media is, of course, a product of the ABSOLUTE NEED for INSTANT CONNECTION to EVERYONE at ALL TIMES, brought to us by the “magic” of the cell phone. Am I the only one who isn’t convinced that this is not necessarily a positive trend? After all, there’s a good deal of truth in THIS picture!

Go ahead. Call me “old-fashioned,” but I don’t go into a rest room to listen to your phone call and I’d really rather that you conduct your “phone business” someplace else!

I don’t think of myself as a complete Luddite, but I also don’t think that something is automatically better just because it’s new(er). I DO have (and actually use) a GPS device in my car(s), although I have to admit that I sometimes find it unnerving in it’s vocal comments. For example, I ran across this statement somewhere not long ago: “I felt uncomfortable driving into the cemetery. The GPS blurted out ‘You have reached you final destination.’”

Perhaps it’s just the choice of phrasing, but I think the GPS makers MIGHT be able to find a better way to have their devices phrase this.
Then there’s also the fact that I can do (at least have done a good many times) things which those who want to hold my age against me are apparently not able to do. Witness THIS sign, for example.

How can you claim to be even remotely competent to serve as a valet parking attendant if you have no ability to drive a stick shift? I realize that there are fewer of them on the road today than there used to be, but really.

Oh, well, I know I’m getting old, and I’m TRYING to accept it with some amount of grace, but it’s not always easy. Life has a habit of sneaking up on you when you don’t expect it. I mean, this (below) is what they say is supposed to happen, but it hasn’t worked for me yet, at least not reliably…

I do have to admit that, whether you believe him or not, Dumbledore did understand one thing about growing older.

After all, “One can never have enough socks.”

There’s also the fact that, like many “olders,” I do (on occasion) catch myself (as I do something foolish) wondering…

Still,

I’ll be back…. And, I’ll probably do this again sometime.

🖖🏼 LLAP,

Dr. B
“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”
— Nelson Mandela
“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.” ― Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

0 Comments

232 I’m Angry!

6/8/2022

0 Comments

Okay, so what’s my beef now? Mostly, I’m extremely annoyed at the fact that my blood pressure is up, the “stupidity meter” is pegging the high end of the scale, and the only way I know of to try to contribute to resolving the problem at hand is to spend the time I usually enjoy working on this blog, researching and writing about things I find interesting and/or amusing, is to spend my time and emotional energy trying to deal with the insanity of the USA’s obsession with mass shootings.

On June 3 of this year, as I was trying to avoid thinking about this stuff, ABC’s “Good Morning America” reported that there have been 233 “mass shootings” (that’s four, or more, dead) so far this year. Since June 3 falls during week #23 of the calendar year, if that is the correct number, it means that we are averaging better than TEN such incidents a week! Wow, there’s a record we can all be proud of! Of course, unless we live where one of these happens, the odds are we won’t even hear about any individual case. Yeah, we might hear about a “big” deal, lots of dead, a big school shooting, a well-known church, a concert or movie theatre, but probably not just a run-of-the-mill mass casualty “incident.” I’m tired of such things.

What’s been stirring things up lately, of course, is mostly the school shooting in Texas where nineteen kids (aged 9, 10 & 11) and two teachers got killed and, a week later the police still can’t figure out how and/or why their response was so badly handled. There’s no reason to believe, of course, that, if they had actually followed the standard operating procedure any of the victims would have been saved, but it seems pretty likely that the “Keystone Kop” approach that appears to have been used did NOT contribute to saving any lives. Nor does one inadequate/improper response explain or excuse the other incidents of the recent past.

What it DOES provide, obviously, is yet another chance for too many politicians to offer their “thoughts and prayers” for these dead, while refusing to do anything about the problem. Yes, it does look like some, few, steps might be proposed, but it seems VERY unlikely that they will actually even be voted on, let alone accomplish anything. After all, the Constitution (please note that it WASN’T God) grants all citizens the right to “… keep and bear arms…”. Of course, even the Supreme Court has allowed restrictions to this “right,” including certain types of weapons (strangely enough, there once WAS a time when even assault rifles, larger magazines, etc., which seem to be the weapons of choice in mass shootings) and for certain individuals (convicted felons, the mentally incompetent, children, etc.). So, I CAN’T go out and buy a surplus tank or a bazooka for my personal protection even if I have the resources and the desire.

But, apparently, the National Rifle Association, a group which has never had more than about six million members out of the 330+ million in the US population, thinks that even acknowledged “weapons of war” should be available to anyone who wants to buy them. And, since the NRA has the backing of the arms industry, they can provide us with the best politicians that their money can buy. (Those politicians who vote as the NRA leadership desires.) I confess that it seems highly unlikely, at least to me, that the six million NRA individual members actually have donated the sizable amounts of money that the NRA has already spent on political campaigns in 2022. If I am correct, logically, that money must be coming from arms makers, for who else would see this as being to their advantage, Russia?

In any case, apparently, the NRA has bought enough politicians to make it impossible for Congress to recognize that the very open-ended “right to bear arms,” which was probably reasonable and sane when applied to expensive, muzzle-loading, single-shot flintlock rifles, or similarly loaded and fired smooth-bore muskets, may not apply equally sensibly to high powered, semi-automatic rifles firing thirty (or more) cartridges in a matter of seconds when our military is well-funded every year as a matter of course. The result of this situation is that we have the situation shown in the map below:

I think that the chart says it all: Three hundred twenty-eight dead in the sixteen worse “incidents” in the past decade. Not mentioned, of course, are the hundreds of “not worst” ones which have occurred during the same period. One can, of course, quibble about the exact data, but the fact is clear that this is a situation which is a great distance from the situation in ANY other advanced country. The most common explanation for this situation by supportive politicians is that “the problem ISN’T guns, it’s mental health.”

Of course it’s a “mental health” problem. Anyone who obtains a weapon (Note: that weapon is usually one specifically designed for the purpose of killing the largest number of people possible in the shortest amount of time) and uses it to invade a school, church, synagogue, store, mosque, nightclub, or other gathering place, is clearly and obviously mentally disturbed. We have DEFINED this to be a form of insanity. Therefore, of course it’s a “mental health issue.” We have DEFINED it to be so, apparently in order to not blame “the gun.”

By the way, strangely enough, I DO support the idea that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” It is a fact that a gun, left alone, untouched will rust away to uselessness without some form of human interaction. If such a gun isn’t cocked beforehand, it seems quite improbable that it would ever fire itself. A person has to load and cock a gun for it to do anything. But, one could suggest, that, under those circumstances, it isn’t really a weapon, it’s just a chunk of metal. But, back to the “mental health” issue.

Citizens of OTHER countries are also subject to “mental health issues,” but ONLY in the USA is it so easy for any person to OBTAIN the commonly chosen type of weapon as well as the magazines and ammunition to engage in “mass shooting” behavior. This seems relatively obvious when someone can LEGALLY obtain such a weapon, etc., today and have it simply sitting around until that person, or someone else, decides to use it for whatever purpose he/she desires. (Note: mass shooters seem to be almost exclusively young males.) I would think it obvious that these do NOT seem to be appropriate weapons for hunting, or other (normal) uses, due to the damage they are designed to do when they strike a soft target, like flesh.

Even if it were legal, which I don’t think it is, anyone who needs a semi-automatic rife with multiple 30 round magazines and, perhaps a telescopic sight to hunt legal game seems a poor candidate for a hunting license. Such a rig MIGHT be appropriate to hunt a group of grizzlies by yourself, but that suggests a mental “challenge” of a different sort, at least to me. Our Founding Fathers granted the right to “… keep and bear arms…” in the day of single-shot, muzzle-loading flintlocks and made NO provision for a permanent “standing army.” Applying the same rules for access to modern assault rifles with high capacity magazines is NOT constitutional “originalism,” it’s more of a “mental health” issue than the resulting mass shooting incidents. It’s time that SANE people stepped up and proposed ideas and actions which might actually help solve the problem. Playing word games with definitions doesn’t seem to be doing much good.

I’m not opposed to allowing people to have reasonable access to guns for personal protection, hunting and other, reasonable and regulated uses, provided that the owner takes complete responsibility for that firearm. I do think that it’s not unreasonable to require some amount of regulation for gun ownership and use. After all, currently, you have to get a license to go hunting, but you don’t need one to own the gun you use to hunt with! Does THAT make much sense to anyone? I tend to agree with the late Isaac Asimov when he said, “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge’.” I think he is correct in implying that facts and logic make more sense than ignorance, and are more likely to enhance democracy.

I wish I had a solution to offer which people might accept, but I think some people simply don’t want the problem solved. Apparently, they have bought into the classic American mythos that guns can, and do, SOLVE problems. After all, the myth of the “American frontiersman” is based on the idea of the “noble American” taking his gun and “solving” whatever problem is at hand through the use of force, whether the problem is a lack of food (kill some animal) or danger from another human (kill the “bad” guy, the “Indian,” or somebody else). Often, the “solution” also involves “solving” the problem at hand by forcing others to accept that they should all do what some, elite, few want. Of course, that’s NOT anything resembling democracy, it’s actually Fascism (read the definition of that term), which can be on the “Left,” or the “Right.” Personally, I tend to agree with Jason McCullough (in “Support Your Local Sheriff”) that throwing rocks is preferable to “throwing lead.” The difficulty with that, as Forrest Gump pointed out is that “Sometimes, I guess there just aren’t enough rocks.”

I’m tired of politicians’ insincere “thoughts and prayers.” I’d like to see Congress actually take the words if the Preamble to the Constitution to heart and actually “… promote the general Welfare…” of the nation. I’m tired of being the laughingstock of the civilized world. It’s time to do something constructive while we haven’t yet killed, scarred, or just scared all of our children. I really don’t care which political party anyone belongs to. I’d just like to see our “leaders” actually lead. I don’t think leadership is based on public opinion polls and who gave my campaign the most money. I can’t think of anything more important than protecting our citizens from gun violence. Yes, look into mental health issues, but, perhaps, keeping military weapons out of the hands of average citizens has its place, as well.

Or, maybe you think that “thoughts and prayers” will solve our problems. I encourage Senators and Members of Congress to consider that I, and I hope many others, will be voting, now and forever, based, not on what they say, but on their actual behavior. I suggest they give THAT some thought because some of them may not have a prayer after all the votes are counted.

🖖🏼 LLAP,

Dr. B

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”
   — Nelson Mandela
“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.”                                                                       ― Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

0 Comments

231 Is a College Degree Worth the Cost?

5/26/2022

0 Comments

I was watching “Sunday Morning” on CBS (as Bonnie and I usually do) not long ago, when they had a “Cover Story” relating to the high cost of a college education today and the amount of debt with which many students graduate, etc., etc., etc. Having spent my career in higher eduction, I am quite aware of the “student debt controversy” and the concerns expressed by many people over the cost of a college degree, which is viewed by many people to being an absolute requirement for a successful career. (Note: I strongly suspect that what defines a “successful” career for many, perhaps most, people is that it is one from which a person can make a lot of money.) Personally, I’m far from sure that this is, or should be, a valid, let alone the only, criteria, but it does seem to rank high in discussions of “success.” Besides, the subject of “success” is a topic for another time.

Okay, student debt is something of a crisis. About 43 million Americans owe a total of something like $1.7 trillion dollars in this type of debt, which, it is claimed at least, is due to the high cost of an education. I suspect that part of the reason for this is that so many more students go to college now, as opposed to the past. I have seen figures which suggest that, at present, about 14.66 million folks attend public colleges and about 5.15 million go to private ones; meaning about 19.81 million students total. In 1966, about the time Bonnie and I graduated, 4.35 million attended public institutions and 2.04 million went to private ones; or about 6.39 million total. That’s more that three times as many are now students as were then. Like it or not, that’s going to increase costs because three times the students need to be provided with classrooms, housing, faculty, etc.

In the same period, I know, based on information I received while I was Chair of the Faculty at Western, that many (I was led to believe MOST) of the states who own the vast majority of public universities, tended to reduce their per student support for their state schools. The best information I have at present is somewhat limited, but “State appropriations per full-time student have fallen from an inflation-adjusted $8,489 in 2007 to $7,642 in 2017, the last period for which the figures are available, according to the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, or SHEEO.” That means that, “State” schools must engage with an increasing number of students with fewer resources. That puts a greater burden on the student and, of course, his/her family. On the other hand, college was NEVER free, except under the most unusual circumstances affecting VERY few students.

The major example used in the “Sunday Morning” story I saw was a twenty-eight-year-old woman who now works for “the government,” lives in a basement apartment with her boyfriend and owes “around $280,000.” The story said that, “She followed the classic recipe for success, by graduating from Penn State. But now, she's facing down decades' worth of debt.” That seems pretty obvious. $280,000 is a lot of money to owe.

Of course, there is a great deal we don’t know (and CBS didn’t tell us) which could have had at least some impact on this situation. Penn State is, of course, a STATE university. Was this student from “in-state” or “out-of-state?” That DOES make a difference, frequently, quite a substantial one. Anyway, I looked up the current estimated costs on the Penn State web site and this is what I found. An in-state student should expect tuition and fees to cost about $34,500 for two semesters, while an out-of-state student should expect to pay about $52,000 for the same period. Penn suggests that the costs of travel, personal expenses, texts and supplies can vary from about $1800 to about $5,000 per year, which seems to allow for a lot of variation, but it’s what they quoted. Apparently, at least some of that variation depends on the program/major/discipline. Room and board (on campus housing and meals in dining halls) are the same cost for all at about $12,000.

As I figure it, an in-state student in a low-cost discipline would pay about $34,500 for tuition, $1800 for expenses, and $12,000 for housing and board. That’s a total of about $48,300 for one academic year (two semesters). Now, an out-of-state student in a high cost discipline would pay $52,000 for tuition, perhaps $5000 for expenses, and $12000 for housing. That’s a total of $69,000 for the same academic year. A difference of $20,700 per year.

Assuming 4 years (eight semesters) to graduation, our mythical in-state student will spend about $193,200 total, while that mythical out-of-state student will have spent $276,000 for his/her degree.

Okay, these ARE CURRENT estimates (which I would suggest means that they are probably on the low side, but are likely higher than these costs were ten years ago). BUT, they ARE the figures available to work with and while there HAS been some inflation, it does appear quite possible (considering the costs of loans) that this student’s $280,000 debt isn’t all that surprising, if essentially ALL of her funding was borrowed.

Personally, I would fault CBS for not giving us the specific information we need to actually understand the example they have provided. Was this young lady a resident of Pennsylvania, or a student who went to Penn State from say, San Francisco, where she currently resides? Did she seek any scholarship support to assist in paying her costs? Did she work while in school to help support herself (as many students do)? Did her parents contribute towards paying for her education? NONE of these questions were asked, nor answered.

It was said that she now “works for the government.” What does that mean? What does she do? Did she major in something which was related to what she does, or in something which has little bearing on her employment? It was also stated that she “…lives in San Francisco.” I looked it up and salary.com says that the cost of living in San Francisco is more than 86% higher than the national average. Perhaps she could pay down her debt a bit faster, if she lived somewhere with lower costs? Even if she had to commute.

I also found it noteworthy that she was quoted, when speaking about the effect her debt was having on her life, as saying, "We can't go out as much as we used to for dinners, and we can't take as much trips as we want to unless it's in our budget. So, it does affect us.” When asked if college was worth it for her, she said, "I mean, I had fun in college. It was a great experience. But for the lifetime of debt I'm gonna be living with … (sighs) That's so hard. That's such a difficult question.” Perhaps the possibility of educational debt is a question which she should have considered prior to going to college?

Okay, I will admit to some (perhaps a lot of) prejudice here and it is true that things have changed a good bit since the mid-1960s when I graduated from undergraduate school. And, I have to acknowledge that I was fortunate enough to have parents who could (and did) finance the vast majority of my undergraduate education, although they were NOT rich. I didn’t have a car of my own until I was in my Junior year and it was a 1954 Plymouth sedan which ran, but was certainly neither new or fancy. Like all Freshmen, I lived in the dorm and ate in the cafeteria. Later, I lived in a room in a rooming house, and I was always on a pretty strict budget, so I didn’t go out to eat or to movies, etc., much. Of course, I was pretty busy working on, or being in, theatre productions and I could (and did) usher to get a free seat to those productions I wasn’t directly involved with. I had a good time, but my life was more than somewhat spartan.

I, basically, put myself through grad school by getting a “fellowship” as a member of the part-time, semi-professional, touring Indiana Theatre Company (which came with free tuition for my MA classes) and a small stipend, which was most of my financial support. When Bonnie and I got married, it was “on the cheap.” I couldn’t buy her a diamond ring to be engaged, we got married in her grandfather’s church, she bought her bridal dress on sale, and our reception was in the church basement meeting room with a cake and punch. We lived in a used 10x50’ mobile home in Bloomington with an 8x12’ roll-out” expansion of the living room which Bonnie got her folks (not rich either) to buy for us with the provision that we pay them back (which we did) while Bonnie supported herself working retail in a local department store (where I ended up working while I finished my MA thesis after 2 years of part-time classes thanks to the ITC. Much of that time, we drove my ’54 Plymouth.

After I finished my Master’s degree, I got a job with Theatre 65 - The Children’s Theatre of Evanston as Technical Director and sharing Scenic and Lighting Design responsibilities, while Bonnie worked for Washington National Insurance Company because my income couldn’t support us and Bonnie wanted something to do anyway, as opposed to staying in our one-bedroom apartment while I was working on productions all day, many nights and a fair number of weekends. And, we needed the money. Then, the local school district closed the theatre after I had been there two years, so I had to (quickly) look elsewhere, ending up at WCU, where Bonnie found part-time work until Kate was born.

The first few years at Western weren’t a whole lot less busy, but we did manage to get a few dollars ahead so that I could do my PhD class work at The University of Georgia because it was close to Cullowhee (which came in VERY handy after completing my classwork while I was writing my dissertation) and I got a good assistantship managing the Fine Arts Auditorium on the UGA campus, which gave me free tuition and a small stipend so that we could afford (barely) to live in married student housing and survive on our few savings while Kate was a wee babe.

Much of this, of course may sound like sour grapes, but it isn’t intended to be such. We were (relatively speaking) poor, but we got along. However, we knew the difference between luxuries and necessities, so for a good many years, we didn’t go out to dinner or take many trips because we couldn’t afford it. My job kept me busy and Bonnie raised the girls, kept the house running, and built up a fair craft business and, eventually, part-time employment with Dogwood Crafters in Dillsboro. A busy life, hard at times, but we managed and I don’t think we suffered, even if we didn’t make a lot of “vacation” trips except to see (and stay with) family. We didn’t really miss going out to dinner with great frequency because there weren’t many options for doing that in Sylva (Hardee’s really didn’t count) and my theatre schedule didn’t give us too many opportunities, in any event. Later, we DID go out for lunch in Asheville every 4-6 weeks, or so, when we’d go up there to go shopping, as Sylva didn’t even have a Wal-Mart in those days. Eventually, when the girls got older, Bonnie worked at Western in various jobs, ending as Secretary to the Honors College. But, I’m getting distracted by my annoyance at someone who seems to feel that her education is much less important than enjoying the “entitled” life style she seems to think she deserves.

Towards the end of my career, from 2006 to 2010, I served as Chair of the Faculty of Western which meant I was President of the Faculty Senate. As such, I had fairly frequent meetings with several of the highest administrators and learned (or had reinforced) a lot of the truth about “higher education” in the US. That was a while ago, but I suspect that it really hasn’t changed that the “average” student (whatever THAT means) changes major more than once during their college career. (Actually the number I remember was 2.3 times, but that always seemed a little high to me and I couldn’t source it.) According to Peter Cappelli, an acclaimed expert in employment trends, the workforce, and education, only 40% of full-time college students — less than half — graduate in four years. This seems plausible to me considering the numbers I heard from the administrators I met with frequently. In fact, as I remember it, it was the five-year graduation rate that was most commonly discussed in academic circles, potentially adding an additional 25% to the total cost. Of course, at Western, there were MANY students who were the first generation of their families to go to college at all, which also poses challenges.

Because student numerical growth is quite frequently used as a measure for a university’s institutional success, many schools have, certainly in the last twenty years, emphasized the idea of education as job training. I know I have seen billboards, etc., advertising many schools as producing graduates who are “Job ready on day one!”, or some such catch phrase. The idea, of course is that college prepares you for the workforce, an idea which actually goes back to the 1950s and 60s. As Cappelli, a professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business, points out, only about 8% of Americans had a college degree in the early 1960s. "And now it's getting close to 40%. So, it's a big difference. You were pretty special in the 1960s if you had a college degree.” What he doesn’t say (or at least isn’t quoted as saying) is that that is no longer true. College graduates are, really, not all that ”special.” And, I would suggest, that wasn’t REALLY true back “in the day.”

I don’t know how many times I heard it said, back in “those” days, but it was a common saying (and belief) that business and industry wanted liberal arts graduates for higher management positions because those people could learn how the company did things. They didn’t want people who would try to do things “by the book,” they wanted people who had proven that they could learn. In fact, it was widely stated that businesses didn’t want College of Business graduates for top-level positions, they wanted people who could “think and communicate,” which was said to mean liberal arts majors. Business majors would end up in “middle” management, and engineers might be hired to create new stuff, but the “people who ran the business” needed different (liberal arts) skills and could learn how “we do it.”

So, as the number of people wanting to go to college increased, universities started and continued the expansion of “Colleges” of every sort of thing you can think of. In almost all cases, these “colleges” have some sort of requirements which reflect the idea (which dates from the Renaissance or earlier) that a college degree is supposed to encourage what is referred to as a “liberal” education. But, most people don’t consider THOSE courses to be of much real importance and they are frequently minimized and deemphasized. Still, it might be a good idea to consider what “liberal education” means!

The Association of American Colleges and Universities says, “A liberal education is a system or course of education suitable for the cultivation of a free (Latin: liber) human being. It is based on the medieval concept of the liberal arts or, more commonly now, the liberalism of the Age of Enlightenment." It has been described as “a philosophy of education that empowers individuals with broad knowledge and transferable skills, and a stronger sense of values, ethics, and civic engagement ... characterized by challenging encounters with important issues, and more a way of studying than a specific course or field of study.”

Personally, I prefer the definition of The American Association for the Advancement of Science which describes a liberal education in this way: "Ideally, a liberal education produces persons who are open-minded and free from provincialism, dogma, preconception, and ideology; conscious of their opinions and judgments; reflective of their actions; and aware of their place in the social and natural worlds.” Liberally educated people are skeptical of their own traditions; they are trained to think for themselves rather than conform to higher authorities.

Of course, these days, many right-wing politicians will argue, like the grandfather of one prospective Western student, that he didn’t know about this “liberal” education idea because he was a conservative and didn’t care for “liberalism.” Well, if being a “conservative” means that we should try to maintain, or recreate, the world of the past, then I’m going to disagree quite strongly. I would also suggest that it has been, for a VERY long time, considered that the fundamental purpose of education is education.

Certainly I have no major objections to one acquiring skills which can be related to employment along the way, but if what we want is “job training,” there is relatively little need for most people to be truly educated. In fact, one can earn quite a good living, I am told, by being a plumber, carpenter, electrician, welder, etc., without any real need for much actual education. Training, yes, but a lot of education doesn’t seem to be necessary. Perhaps we, as a society, should recognize that we have redefined the “Middle Class” solely on the basis of income instead of including the other traditional factors of occupation, education and social status. On the basis of the most recent census, you would be considered “middle class” if your income was between ≈$45,000 and ≈$135,000 a year. I think it’s worth noting that these limits exclude many of the professionals (doctors, lawyers, managers, politicians, etc.) which used to define the “middle class.” Apparently, they are now the “upper” class of our “everybody’s equal” society. Of course, they don’t think they are, but, when you include, two, or more, cars, the boat, the lake “cottage,” the cruises, the RV, etc., one does start to wonder….

I would suggest that we, as a group, need to engage in some serious thinking about what we really desire from our educational system. If what we want is “job training” and sports teams, there are probably better, cheaper ways to accomplish that. If we want research institutions (which is, in fact, where MANY universities put their real emphasis), it probably isn’t necessary that so many states sponsor so many of them. But, if what we want are self-aware people who have a relatively broad knowledge base and “… are open-minded and free from provincialism, dogma, preconception, and ideology; conscious of their opinions and judgments; reflective of their actions; and aware of their place in the social and natural worlds,” then we need to figure out a way to achieve that which is both affordable and accessible to more people. Perhaps we should even go back to making it a major priority of our various governments! If we want an educated public, perhaps we need to do more to support public education.

After all, if what we wish is for EDUCATED people, then all those “General Ed” courses aren’t “frills,” but an important part of the process of education. They AREN’T “throwaway” courses just added to the major which aren’t really of much real use, they are the center of one’s education. The major exists as a means to achieve a greater depth of knowledge in some specific facet of learning. It’s a PART of an education, not its sole point.

Convincing ourselves of this truth will not be easy. First, we have to accept the idea that this is what we want/need. Then, we have to take on the difficult task of providing an educational process which will allow the American Experiment in democracy to succeed against the forces which would have us all just “shut up and do as we are told!” Success in this endeavor will not be easy, but I think it is possible, if we decide to do it and are willing to pay the price to make it happen, but we NEED to make that decision. What we currently have isn’t really accomplishing either of these options all that successfully. I know which option I prefer, but I also know that I can’t resolve this issue by myself.

As to the “Sunday Morning” interviewee who started me on this rant; it’s hard to decide if her degree was worth the cost without any idea as to whether it has had any impact on her career. Apparently it’s not supporting her as she would wish, but we don’t know if that had any bearing on her choice of institution, major, job prospects, or interests. My guess is that she may well have really been seeking an “Mrs” degree, which she hasn’t received yet. If that’s the case, the actual degree probably wasn’t worth the cost, but it almost certainly wouldn’t have been in any case.

🖖🏼 LLAP,

Dr. B
“Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic; capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.” ―Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

0 Comments

<<Previous

236 Thoughts Inspired by Quotes I like, #1

235 Thoughts on Felininity

234 A National Celebration

233 Accepting Getting Older #1

232 I’m Angry!

231 Is a College Degree Worth the Cost?

Archives

Categories