Just Plain Bill

Do you have a favorite poem or verse?

As I was researching a few of my favorite poems, I came across a poem written by one my favorite poets, Emily Dickinson, a fabulous writer whose 1,800+ poems were little known until after her death. It’s called This world is not Conclusion, and once I read it, I was blown away. I printed it and taped it above my computer at home where I do most of my work.

This World is not Conclusion.

A Species stands beyond -

Invisible, as Music -

But positive, as Sound -

It beckons, and it baffles -

Philosophy - don't know -

And through a Riddle, at the last -

Sagacity, must go -

To guess it, puzzles scholars -

To gain it, Men have borne

Contempt of Generations

And Crucifixion, shown -

Faith slips - and laughs, and rallies –

Blushes, if any see -

Plucks at a twig of Evidence -

And asks a Vane, the way -

Much Gesture, from the Pulpit -

Strong Hallelujahs roll -

Narcotics cannot still the Tooth

That nibbles at the soul –

WOW!

What role does poetry play in your life? For me, ever since I moved beyond my mother’s edict that poems had to rhyme, I’ve been attracted to several verses that have provided inspiration and meaning to my life. I’ve even been courageous enough to write a verse or two - a subject for a later blog.

My three most favorite poems, ones that I’ve actually memorized…

I would rather be ashes than dust.

I would rather that my spark should burn out

in a brilliant blaze,

than it should be stifled by dry rot.

I would rather be a superb meteor,

every atom of me in magnificent glow,

than a sleepy and permanent planet.

The proper function of man is to live, not to exist.

I shall not waste my days, in trying to prolong them,

I will use my time.

                                                           -    Jack London 

I often recite that poem at the conclusion of my leadership and management seminars, or whenever I wish to leave something for participants to think about after engaging in some meaningful discussion of a variety of intellectual concepts.

Another favorite is one I used when I was an elementary school teacher, asking students to either draw a picture or write a comment about what that poem meant to them. I remember distinctly the picture of a sunrise drawn by Edwin, one of my more quiet third-grade students. He said the poem reminded him that we would always have our dreams, which no one can take away from us, and that dreams are always there, even when things are not going well.

Hold fast to dreams

For if dreams die

Life is a broken-winged bird

That cannot fly

Hold fast to dreams

For when dreams go

Life is a barren field

Frozen with snow

                                                           -    Langston Hughes

Finally, a simple but powerful commitment for not living “in vain.”

If I can stop one heart from breaking,

I shall not live in vain:

If I can ease one life the aching,

Or cool one pain,

Or help one fainting robin

Unto his nest again,

I shall not live in vain.

                                                 -    Emily Dickinson

What’s your favorite poem? If you have one, jot down a few verses and send them to me. Please.

Just Plain Bill

Surly, with just a touch of arrogance

My wife recently pointed out to me that I’ve been using the word “surly” quite a bit lately when describing someone’s attitude or demeanor when responding to a question. I finally looked up the definition, which led me to realize that I was often mixing up the word surly with arrogant, another adjective, but not nearly the same attitude intensity. 

“Arrogant” describes a person full of himself…a projected superiority based on self-importance. “Surly” however, describes a threatening person full of himself. Take a look at these definitions for surly:

·     Churlishly rude or bad-tempered

·     Unfriendly or hostile; menacingly irritable

·     Dark or dismal; menacing

This research led me to ask: “What gave rise to my increased use of this term, or my increased sensitivity to the ‘attitude’ expressed by the responder?”

The latest occasion when I used “surly” was during an interview with a football coach who was asked what he thought about one of his players getting into trouble with the law. His response was beyond “arrogant” and even well beyond “defensive” for his player or program. To me, his response was to the point of being rude, menacingly irritable, and downright dismal.

Is it my imagination that with the exponential increase of news “coverage”, there is a monumental increase in the opportunity for someone to be “interviewed” to the point of overkill?

Perhaps I’m simply remembering the good-old-days, when we were not subjected to a constant stream of questioners arrogantly probing for a scoop, while poised to catapult even the simplest “incorrect response” into the Twittersphere.

Am I becoming cynical? Am I becoming suspicious when a responder takes on a surly tone - tending to believe there’s something to hide? Or is surliness now a legitimate and necessary defense mechanism?  

What do you think?

Just Plain Bill

Teaching History Backward –

From the Present to the Past

In my early years of public school teaching, I had an opportunity to teach a non-credit history course to a small group of fifth and sixth graders who were part of an experimental class.

After consulting many texts and popular sources on teaching the subject, I decided to adopt a radical approach. I had an idea that the past, or “history”, is of relatively little value to children (and maybe to many adults as well). That idea became a belief as I looked back at events that occurred prior to my age of understanding, what events influenced how I lived my life, and if any events affected the decisions I made.

As children, we hear too many stories that start with “When I was your age” or “You don’t know how easy you have it because in the past…”, and even “You need to learn from the lessons from the past.” In short, I’d concluded anything that has occurred outside of a child’s young life is primarily an academic exercise for that student, perhaps of interest as a special event, but having no real meaning or relevance in terms of the child’s decision-making process.

So, after checking with my principal and informing the students’ parents, I created the six-week curriculum to start with the present – recent current events – and then to take “a look back” and discuss what events might be considered or predicted to become future “history.” We looked back over the previous 20-year period, enough to cover a generation, but focused primarily on the past 90 days. 

And then another thought crept in. What about George Santayana’s prophetic statement: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”  Often quoted when commenting on some major, political, or social edict, it implies that the value of learning and remembering events from the past – “history” – will empower future generations with great wisdom...or at least a chance to make their own different mistakes. By not focusing on the usual pattern for reviewing past events…those that someone has already determined to be historically significant…was I failing to prepare my young students to avoid the mistakes from the past and thereby negatively influencing their decisions in the future?

I chose to stay my “course” for the next six weeks.

Since this experience took place before the advent of the Internet and our 24/7 news cycle, the students had to depend on newspapers, periodicals, and radio and TV news broadcasts for their project research. They also engaged their family and friends while focusing on three specific questions:

Who was impacted by an event? How was the event communicated? And, can a prediction be made regarding any possible lasting impact of an event so important as to be reported in the media? A few events were reviewed for any “editorial” views that were available.

The class created a reverse time line, three feet by 20 feet, starting with the present and moving back into the past for 20 years. We held discussions in class and the students eagerly built our class discussions into their own with their parents, relatives and friends, while weaving a genuine appreciation into their newly discovered perspectives of what would be remembered as a “historical event” in the future. 

The students did not disappoint. Their points of view were enlightening and their debates were engaging. Early on, they assessed why some current events might be memorable, while others would be of temporary interest only. At the end of the six weeks, the students were eager to prepare a formal project. Remember, this was a non-credit course.

For me, this was a very successful approach, although far different than the customary study of history through memorization and recitation of past events. It provided the students the opportunity to better understand why some events are remembered, in contrast to those that are not. I also had the privilege of being able to “look back” from my adult perspective to see how many of my students’ events truly became “historical” in nature. 

Just Plain Bill

Another NCAA Black Eye

In this time of world and national crises, you may wonder why I would spend my time writing about something that might be considered a trivial matter to most folks, but I have a “bone to pick” with the National Collegiate Athletic Association about their abdication of responsibility for the ongoing, persistent movement of college football and basketball coaches.

If college athletes wish to move from one college to attend and compete for another, in most cases they have to sit out their next year of competition. Yet football and basketball coaches are free to jump from one school to another, regardless of the length of their commitment in their signed, “binding” employment contract. There’s no one-year waiting period for them as there is for the very same athletes they coach. Especially egregious are those football coaches who announce their intent or actually leave their teams for a new position just prior to an end-of-season bowl game. Those coaches abandon personal commitments to both the school and to the young men and women recruited, ironically, for their very own long-term personal commitments to the same school. 

This thought came to mind while watching The Blind Side once again, the great movie about a young man’s journey from abject poverty to college and NFL success – thanks to the incredible generosity and gifts of a special family. The movie depicts the steady stream of major college football coaches paying recruiting visits to the home of this football player, plying their wares, selling the merits and benefits from their individual schools and football programs – all with a heavy dose of personal appeal.

What blew me away is that many of these coaches at prominent schools at the time the movie was made, played by the actual real life coaches, are now at other schools or have left the profession. Of all depicted in the movie, all extremely well paid I might add, not a single one of them is still coaching at that school portrayed in the movie, or they have left coaching for broadcasting

Question: Why are coaches allowed to walk away from their signed contracts to serve, and leave schools at any time they want without penalty? We’ve even watched this happen at schools where improprieties involving NCAA rules took place: the perpetuating coach is free to move on to another college, the pros, or to broadcasting it appears, without cost or consequence. 

There. I’ve said it and I do feel a little better.  I realize it’s unlikely my blog on this topic will affect change. Far too many leaders of universities are focused on the financial rewards that might result from having a “big name” coach in their employ – regardless of flaws in character and in the NCAA system.