A bird, a kid, a rude remark

August 13th, 2010
cardinal fledgling

This cardinal fledgling is taking on adult form and color. But will he fly right, on his own?

Funny how the little things add up some days, like eggs in a basket, eggs that soon may spoil.

Yesterday was one such day, bringing that kind of skein of phenomena we’re too busy usually to notice or to feel. But their coincidence struck me hard and balled me up too.

In the evening my wife Jen and I were driving to St. Paul to meet our son Gabe and his family for dinner. We’d hardly started out when we came upon, in the middle of a busy intersection, a male cardinal and one of his brood. It was just a flash of red, Big Red as I call the male bird, descending suddenly on a dubious pile of fluffy feathers. It was a traffic light that had just turned green, the roaring of vehicles out of the starting gate once more, and the sight of the Red Bird vainly trying to pick up his chick and fly away with it from danger. He plunged down, plucked at the fledgling, and rose up only to lose his load. The fledgling, motionless already or nearly so, dropped down, and we sped on, ignorant of the fate of the fledgling, who may have been on his first flight and, failing to rise, hit a car, or of the father bird for that matter. We sped on, as who in his right mind would stop and pluck a half-live, half-dead fledging out of the busy road at rush hour?

Dinner was fine, fun, at a St. Paul deli called the Cheeky Monkey. Jen and I, Gabe and Heidi and Ruby, and my sister Jeannie chowed down on wonderful sandwiches, cum and sans meat. I tried the cubano, which was prepared as a salad (option on all sandwiches), loaded with meat and wonderful greens. Ruby, our almost 3 year old granddaughter, ate pretty well off our plates and behaved nicely, a good challenge for one and a half hours. But when we left the restaurant she darted away from us on the sidewalk directly in front of the parking lot exit. We all simultaneously yelled at her — just as another customer’s SUV approached the drive. He slammed on his brakes, and we all breathed in alarmed relief. Too close a call for our little fledgling. We scolded her, and she took it all in solemnly a moment, then gave us the raspberry.

Later in the evening, back at home, Jeannie was telling me about a new trend in yoga, which she practices enthusiastically, religiously. It was something about using yoga to companion the sick. Dubious and skeptical as always, I scoffed — at the language and yoga, too, it must have been. This scoff was produced automatically, a real knee-jerk (throat-jerk) response. To companion a sick person? What nonsense! Jeannie teaches college English, as I have done, and I thought she should be more sensitive to this awful jargon. I huffed and puffed and if I didn’t blow the house down I made it haughtily clear, in short order, that sick people were not to be companioned!

(I find, in doing a quick Google search, that this idiom has indeed caught on in the health care field. Here’s the title of an article I’m sure you won’t rush out to read any time soon: “Decreasing Companion Usage without Negatively Affecting Patient Outcomes: A Performance Improvement Project.” Oh, shudder, shudder. We purists of the language, we high priests of usage simply shudder.)

But however I feel about such jargon, what was telling was my quick, rude reaction, cutting off my sister before she could make her point. She is attached to yoga, as I say, the way people are attached to religion. And it seems to have done her good, judging by her lean and healthy look. But I wasn’t having any of it, rude dog that I am. I preferred to assert my own opinion rather than listen to another’s. I swooped down on my sister the way the traffic swooped down on that little bird, and who would rescue her or care to stop?

Revolutionary Road still hits hard

August 11th, 2010

As you may know, Richard Yates’ 1961 novel Revolutionary Road has been made into a movie with Leonardo DeCaprio and Kate Winslet. I haven’t seen the movie, yet, but I’ve just read the book, which my daughter-in-law Heidi loaned me.  (Thanks, Heidi! Glad you’re on the side of the better angels, who, according to a New Yorker cartoon, urge us to read the book while the worse angels urge us to see the movie.)

Richard Yates

Richard Yates, 1960, about the time of the publication of Revolutionary Road.

The book is about a young couple, Frank and April Wheeler, who live in a shady suburb in Connecticut in the 1950s. They both come from backgrounds that today we’d call abusive. April especially suffers from mysterious deficits in her childhood and is prone to depression. It’s she who hits on the scheme of quitting the rat race and moving the family to Paris, where, sure, she can get a full time job and support her husband, the creative sort, in following his bliss.

Alas, it doesn’t turn out that way. In the contest between the muse and the meatball (thanks, Ron Black, old pal, for this metaphor), it’s the meatball of Madison Avenue that wins.

Frank is a lowly white collar worker with Knox Business Machines (read IBM). He goes into the office in New York City and pretends to work, while his bosses pretend to pay him. But one day, under duress, he blasts out a quick description, for a dealer, of the workings of these mysterious new machines, computers. And is noticed by a higher-up and conscripted to write copy for a big advertising campaign.

Pfitz! go the plans for life in Europe. It’s that Manichean contest I mentioned above (between books and movies), only here it’s for the soul of the man. The meatball has lured Frank with a lucrative offer that, as they say, he can’t refuse.

His doubts mount, and he and April go round and round about their moving plans, which they have announced with some fanfare to friends and neighbors. They’ve gotten the friendship and approval of a mad man in the story, the son of the local realtor—mad, I mean, like a fox, and locked away he’s so brilliant crazy. He sees their moving to Europe as a way out of the madness that is American life in the 1950s, decade of post-war enrichment and engorgement. And, in his foxy crazy way, approves.

Without bothering you with all the details, let’s just say that Frank goes down the road of the big money (or prospect of same). April gets pregnant (and aborts the child, and dies). And life goes on—at least for some, it goes on.

A depressing book? A look at a vanished past? I don’t think so. For the real can’t be depressing, finally, if it smacks us with the truth. And the past can’t be vanished that repeats itself, as the 2010s repeat the 1950s.

Yates’ book hits hard, like that old Santayana aphorism, for we who do not learn from history (and literature, its dreamy friend) are condemened to repeat it.

Our new neighbors

August 6th, 2010

It’s one of those sad ironies of life that just as we put our house on the market and are about to move, five very simpatico new neighbors move into the house across the street.

There’s Papa Bear, Mama Bear, and Three Little Bears, and all of ‘em are bright, warm, amiable, available. They all skip rope, it turns out — as I espied the other night, looking out our sun room window — skip, skip, dust and shuttle shuttle boom. And this goes on some time, so I’m tired just watching.

It’s a family that gardens, does house repairs, drives a BMW,  runs its own business, drinks wine (Mama and Papa Bear, on our deck: olé!), and skips rope (if not school). They are sociable, ambitious, athletic, lively, and lovely.

Alas.

For it’s time for us, Jen and me, to move on.

Kylia's tongue

Kylia shows off her tongue roll (mother and sister in background)

The three little bears are Ian (10) and his two sisters, Kylia (8) and Nya (7). They shoot basketball in their driveway, scoot the street on their Rollerblades with hockey stick in hand, fish for friends on Facebook (Ian), model for Target (Kylia), offer to buy our house so they can take up separate residence across from their parents (Nya).

Lawrence runs his own commercial alarm installation business. He worries about the holes in the wall (outside and inside) that his predecessor, the owner, occasioned with errant hockey shots. Sonya gardens, watches the kids and drinks wine with such gusto, says Kylia, that she goes snap, crackle, pop!

Now let’s see what life brings on. (Sure, bring it on.) Now that another parting is imminent. Now that we’re leaving many relatives and friends behind, following our son and his family south to Fayetteville, Arkansas, it seems, and turning the dial of our own life course toward full circle.

Alas.

And what can you do? I’ve always believed that philosophy is better, and cheaper, than impossible dreams.

Putzing

July 26th, 2010

Friend Roy, that stolid patient uncomplaining Swede and “Norwidgen,” as he calls it, who grew up on a farm and learned to do and make everything for himself, claims that home maintenance and repair are just “putzing.” Just putting one foot ahead of the other and making solid progress toward the goal.

Faucet

The faucet is female, he decided ... with whatever reason or apparent reason ...

So he pronounced one day when he was installing a new faucet for the tub in our bathroom. I found the solid brass parts online, and he installed them, one stoical step at a time, just putzing. So he confirmed a bit later when he re-plumbed my hot tub, installing the mysterious, complex plumbing parts he’d bought 

(Obviously, you have to know what’s what, in materials and methods, before you can begin to putz!)

When I think of my own efforts at home  repair, it’s almost always with a blush. I’m so un-Norwidgen, unstolid, unsolid, irascible that when anything goes wrong, with tools or technique — and it always does — I cuss and jump up and down like Rumpelstiltskin. Madder and madder I get, deeper and deeper into the wrathful hole I’m digging toward that China of the psyche we’ve all been warned about. (Sure, there are hungry children down there, and they’ll eat your lunch if you let them!)

It takes a step back — yes, against the tide of progress — for me to calm down and have a little laugh at my own expense. I breathe more slowly, then, and step back, literally, away from the project. I smell the roses (and my greasy, blistered hands). And go on living for another day.

Putzing also reminds me — that is, the word “putzing” — of my early years learning German and so, inevitably, a bit of Yiddish. My Lehrjahre at the University of Minnesota, where I met my wife Jennifer in a German class, included bits and pieces that would contribute to my lexicon of humor. I can’t remember when I learned the word “putz,” but it must have been in the form of the common German verb “putzen,” to polish. Du putzest deine Zaehne (you brush your teeth) oder dein Haar (or your hair).

Of course, you can polish things so much that it’s ridiculous, nicht wahr (not true)? Remember the admiral in Gilbert and Sullivan, for one, who “polished up the [brass] handles so carefully that now [he] is the ruler of the King’s navy!”

If you insist on polishing to the point of exhaustion and perfection, relying on elbow grease to make your way to the top, your underlings may well think of you as a putz. A good German or, rather, Yiddish word for dick, dickhead, penis. You dumb putz, look what you’ve done now! A clumsy Kerl, to boot.

But there are dicks and then there are happy dicks, the latter including those who love putzing, just taking their time, accomplishing the task without blowing it in hot angry haste, those who putz placidly, patiently, at their job are like a lover with slow hands. (“He doesn’t come and go in a heated rush,” as the illustrious Pointer Sisters point out.)

It’ll take him a while, but he won’t regret it, this kind of Lothario, whether his object is a woman or a faucet, you see. Nor will the object of his affections regret it: she (faucet/woman) will be grateful, and then (afterward) she’ll be wistful.

(I know this analogy is odd. Bear with me. It might make more sense if English were a language with gendered nouns, if a faucet, that is, were female. But for the sake of this essayette, this trying out of ideas, let me merely proclaim the femininity of faucets.)

Hawkfest

July 13th, 2010

This summer, like last fall, the red-tailed hawk or hawks have returned to our leafy neighborhood.

My neighbor Roy saw one swoop down in his back yard and make off with a songbird. (The songbirds, he attests, are making themselves scarce the last few days since the predator has returned.) Roy also saw the same hawk, could be, the same day, jumping up and down on his paver patio, impaling a chipmunk.

Red-tailed hawk

Found this red-tailed hawk down, in the grasses, near the Minnesota River a few years ago. It was evidently wounded, looking for cover and its old ascendant place in the heavens.

The next morning, when I opened my garage door, I saw a big bird shape swoop by. What the heck, I thought, is that? A glance up into my neighbor’s oak confirmed the return of the red-tailed hawk  (Buteo jamaicensis). He had something in his talons, but I couldn’t make it out, until the bird began jumping on the branch; then I could see the shape of the chipmunk clearly, caught in the hawk’s talons.

Hurray for the red hawk, efficient bird of prey. There is certainly no lack of chipmunks around here. Au contraire. They overrun the yard, nesting under our deck, squeaking and skedaddling up the downspout every time I walk by, scaring the lights out of me.

Welcome, all red-tails. Plummet, ye avengers of the air, and seize in your fierce talons all small (and obnoxious) rodents that you will. (Even the bunnies are thick these days in these parts.) Cease not from your culling of these little squeakers on account of me. Be my guest. Enjoy your feast. Eat your bloody fill.

Are company brochures just so much crap?

July 7th, 2010

A blogger named Seth claims that brochures will not be read. Photos and captions will be glanced at, sure. The brochure as a whole read, no. Perused, no way. Analyzed, forget it.

At its best, a brochure is begging for someone to judge you. It says, “Assume that because we could hire really good printers and photographers and designers and writers, we are talented [surgeons, real estate developers, whatever].” And more often than not, people [assume] just that.

Aside from the proven effectiveness of his advice — and you can judge for yourself — his polemic reminds me of a meeting I had some years ago when I was soliciting business from an HVAC contractor and commercial plumber.

The crusty old prospect — untutored, unlettered, unimpressed — followed me through my portfolio, grudgingly admitting that certain brochures (including one for a rival HVAC company) were attractive.

But you know what? he said. People are going to just throw them away.

And he took the liberty of demonstrating his contention by tossing one of my pieces into the trash basket.

They’ll remember if they like you, sure. They’ll remember you have a snazzy presentation. But they won’t keep your piece, and it won’t persuade them one way or the other.

Civilization and Its Discontents

Freud saw the deep connection between being civilized and being unhappy. Are brochures just one more way of making us civilized beings unhappy?

Geez, I felt like saying. (Of course, I resisted his real-world illiteracy, his vulgar practicality.) Just ’cause I don’t know anything about your product (plumbing) doesn’t mean I would think it was crap and throw it away!

In fact, there’s a world of difference between the ridiculous bodily aspect of our being, including our bowel necessities, and the sublime pretensions of our art work, whether fine or commercial. Perhaps, it’s all shit. Perhaps we all follow it down the loo.

This may be another case for Dr. Freud, who wrote so eloquently about civilization and its discontents (in the volume called Civilization and Its Discontents). Do we really turn so ardently to our work because we can’t kill each other (as for making insulting comments) or live in filth?

The simplest, cleanest, keenest pleasures

July 5th, 2010

Yesterday, the 4th of July, was filled with exhausting and simple pleasures.

Grandma and I had our granddaughter Ruby Mae with us while her parents drove to Fayetteville, Ark. to scout a new home. As sometimes happens, she kept us up a bit during the night, so we groped through the day groggily.

Ruby and I saw a bit of the annual Richfield July 4 parade, but at less than three years old she didn’t much cotton to the politicians and clowns (politicians as clowns?), the commercial floats, even the music. Instead, we stole away and played on the playground equipment, and Ruby showed she is fast becoming a little monkey, walking her way to the top on a platform up two parallel and curving bars.

In the evening we visited with friend Steve, his girlfriend Beth, and Steve’s menagerie (Beth is too smart and proud to be numbered among the creatures of the menagerie). Ruby was wary of the wagging and waggish Portuguese water dogs, Tarpon and Meghan, even when they joined the feast and chomped down chocolate cupcakes, the surreal blue frosting clinging like something out of a Van Gogh painting, momentarily to their lips.

Boppa and Ruby in the creek

Boppa and Ruby splash their feet in the gravelly bottom of Minnehaha Creek, near the falls.

On the way home, taking the river road, we stopped at Minnehaha Park and showed Ruby the falls. The park was still full of picnickers (about 7:30 pm), patrons of the fish restaurant, and enjoyers of natural beauty. Once we saw the falls, from several vantages, we walked upstream just a bit and found a gravelly shallows that looked very inviting.

Who needs more than one invitation on such a warm, humid summer’s day?

Ruby and Boppa (that’s me, Grandpa) removed our shoes and wriggled our toes in the gravelly bottom. My, how swift and clear the water was! We avoided the more rapid, treacherous mid-stream, and contented ourselves with the shallows. The pleasure of just walking a few steps, cooling our heels and soles, dipping our bottoms, splashing a bit was too great for words. Grandma stood on the bank of the creek, uttering continual warnings. Don’t step into the middle. It’s too fast. It’s dangerous. You’ll be swept away.

But even in the shallows Ruby and Boppa were swept away by the sheer bliss of the moment. Something so clear, so clean, so keenly flowing. Something so natural and close to town. (It was IN town.) Something we could escape to ease heart’s sorrow and foot’s itch, not to mention the discontents of civilization and excessive, commercial patriotic display, as in the parade and the evening’s fireworks (yes, we attended them also).

Somewhere close to you, I trust, a river runs through. Runs through your town, your heart, your person. It would be a shame not to see it and feel it. It can wash all impurities away.

This miracle solution will wash away life’s problems

July 1st, 2010

Got a visit last night from a lanky black kid, dressed in black pants and white shirt with tie, who was canvassing the neighborhood.

“Hey!” I called out. “You a Mormon?” (We do have Mormon neighbors, and sure they dress like this, but have not tried to proselytize us.)

“What say?” he said. “Me, a Mormon? No, man, not at all!”

What he had to sell, it seems, was not God but man, that is, a manmade solution of magic liquid soap, a blue solution in a spray bottle that would clean everything that was filthy, whether walls, or floors, or dishes, or fabrics (he examined my filthy tee-shirt with interest: I’d just returned from helping a friends unclog their drain). Why, the magic soap could even get the oil and dirt stains out of my driveway. (He pointed helpfully.) What about my soul? I inquired.

The young man was Leo, and he hailed from the South Side of Chicago. He was 24 years old and had been with this company of traveling duffers for just a month now — in Arizona, and Utah, and now Minnesota. Dropped off in an alien neighborhood, he and his young colleagues would drop a white towel to mark the spot (what they had in lieu of Hansel and Gretel’s bread crumbs) and then set out to befriend and beleaguer the residents.

Leo didn’t get too far with me, as I pointed out we were about to leave this area (and didn’t point out what a scam I thought the sale was). He didn’t get so far as to mention prices; he gave a halfhearted demo on a picture window on the deck, where I was sitting, and settled down to talk.

He told me how far he and his friends were driven, literally and psychologically, by their manager — a dozen of ‘em in a van speeding all night through the Plains States, staking out territory in no man’s sales land. The manager didn’t seem to know any more than they did. Each city was new and foreign. But they’d drop their towel, not to surrender but to mark their place, and hike out through the territory.

Leo’s biggest conquest seemed to have been a “mountain” in Salt Lake City. When he arrived at the first hausfrau’s door, a swanky place on the mountain top, she stopped him immediately. “I don’t care what you’re selling,” she said. “I’m not interested. But how did you get up here?”

“I walked, ma’am,” he replied.

And the woman shoved him out the door and, at the same time, stuffed his pocket with a twenty dollar bill.

By the time he arrived at the next house, the neighbor already knew the score. She, and then eight more housewives in a row, pushed him down the hill but gave him twenty bucks each time for his aspirations and his climbing pains. Man, he made two hundred bucks by just climbing up the mountain, then coming down.

“Just like Moses!” I asserted.

I’d been fixing to fry some burgers on the grill, and Leo assented to join us. Pretty quickly, we had fresh, tasty burgers and a guacamole salad ready, thanks to Jennifer, and the three of us sat down on the deck table, and Leo devoured his dinner. Mighty fine food, thank you, ma’am, he said to Jen. Were those little red things in the salad tomatoes? (Pointing to cherry tomatoes in the guac.) Why, I only ate ‘em once before in my life, and didn’t like ‘em. But these is good. And this green stuff, too. What’s that?

If he didn’t know tomatoes, he wouldn’t know avocados, for sure. But, as I say, he devoured both burger and salad; checked his watch; and with a cheery wave was off to find the white towel, which he’d thrown down and perhaps, considering the way he’d spent the last hour, thrown in. He would look for his manager, dang it anyway, and maybe, some day, a better, fairer job.

(Yes, if Leo seems shanghaied into a magazine-type selling scheme, it’s no wonder. He’s young, unschooled, moneyless, clueless. But he has a great personality, I think. Keep him out of the ghetto, where he’d been shot at least once — he showed me a couple of long calf scars — and he might have a chance.)

Creativity and schizophrenia

June 28th, 2010

Recently my brother emailed me a link to a very interesting BBC article titled “Creative Minds ‘Mimic Schizophrenia.’” Long a subject of fascination to Gerry and me, this link between madness and creativity runs, you might say, in the family.

crashing planets

We think we walk on solid ground, while all about us the planets buzz and crash.

Without divulging too much of the family dysfunction (let’s just say we don’t have to do too much original research to be conversant about this topic), we can say that the seven Zeck kids, like the seven dwarfs, hey-ho and go off to work with a mad twinkle in their eyes. On any given day, they may produce strokes of creative genius or tear their own, and their colleagues’, hair out with their absolute nuttiness. (Here’s a bestseller possibility for half of our family charter: Habits of Highly Ineffective People.)

For Gerry and me, in particular, connections come quickly, surprisingly, madly. One thing is connected to the next, apparently unlike thing, apparently random thing, with lightning speed. And it may take outsiders (saner audiences) some time to realize the series of jumps that product the connections. For me, a writer, this madness is a matter of metaphor. For Gerry, an artist and photographer, it’s visual images. (See the therapeutic ink drawings on his blog.)

At any rate, as the BBC article says, both schizophrenics and creative people “lack important receptors used to filter and direct thought.”

No, you won’t find us muttering into our beards on the street corner or begging there for food or drink. But we do, for sure, mutter into our creative beards and come up with all kinds of thinking that may be called, charitably, or from the point of view of “normal” society, whatever that is, aberrant or absurd.

What such shizzy thinking does, seems to me, is break down the absurd and shaky lines between the verities or realities posited by the “real world” of logical positivism. Day to day, we may need such psychological structures in order to convince ourselves that we and our allies are on solid ground, that the world is not continuously quaking beneath our feet, that we are not momentarily on the verge of the abyss, in the yawning jaws of a Haitian hell.

So is our world structured. By mutual assent we live on in the cheery air and solid ground. But the madman and the artist threaten this complicity, don’t they? Their minds LEAP over the abyss, and they cackle at our collusion in such madness. The world is solid? Have it your way. The planets are in their orbits? Have a nice day. The night skies flame with colliding worlds. Meteor showers crash on our houses. We stay abed dreaming our perfect world, our comfy living, our lovely kids.

Gustave Flaubert and his sentimental education

June 22nd, 2010
Gustave Flaubert, 1821-18830, master of the moment

Gustave Flaubert

Just finished reading Flaubert’s novel A Sentimental Education (1869), one of the signal works of fiction of the 19th century.

From the beginning, the hero, Frédéric Moreau, is an ingénu . He comes from the country to the city and is blown away by its rich spectacle. Even on the way, in fact, he is enchanted by the sight of a lovely married woman, Madame Arnoux, and it’s his connection to her, throughout the book, that forms the governing metaphor.

Frédéric wavers in and out of Marie Moreau’s sight, wooing her discreetly, implicitly, because he both admires and respects her and because her husband, rascal philanderer and scalawag that he is, is a friend of Frédéric’s.

There are a few moments when Frederic draws so near to her that he can caress her and confess his love, but at the rapturous height of these approaches his mistress, an uneducated girl named Rosanette, bursts in on the scene and spoils the effect. Well, spoils Frederic’s romantic or sentimental designs, anyway, at the same time she furbishes the plot and drives it on.

While today’s romance reader might be crushed by such a development, it accords perfectly with Flaubert’s design. Life is not a bed of roses, whether with Rosanette or Marie (or the rich woman, Mme. Dambreuse, he plans to marry for her fortune). Life is not a straight route from province to capital and thus to perfect happiness and fortune. Frédéric is, after all, only “moderately gifted,” as the book’s jacket copy suggests. He’s the average and sensual man with all his dreams and distractions. And he flits from one to the other. He studies law, but doesn’t pursue it. He yearns for art, but is not trained in it. He aspires to a political career (this at the time of the 1848 revolution), but does nothing to earn it.

He’s inherited a small fortune, which allows him to live comfortably in the capital, but does not give direction or coherence to his life.

At the end of the book, he concludes that he has suffered from “too much sentiment” or passion, even as his best friend, Deslauriers, a lawyer, has been overcome by too much lawyerly logic.

It’s this 19th century use of the word “sentimental” that informs the title. It’s not that Frédéric is a weepy nitwit, but that passion rules his life. He is a true heir to Goethe’s Werther, who shoots himself for unrequited love (The Sorrows of Young Werther, 1774, is mentioned in Education).

Frédéric is thus not a true hero, nor yet the modernist anti-hero. He is a shmuck in some ways, or schlemiel. The reader may become impatient with him, as we see him throw himself this way and that, with no clear direction. Or see the author throw his puppet around, at any rate, and chuckle a bit, up his sleeve, at his character’s misdirections.

On the other hand, we may sense in Frédéric our own false steps, our lack of clarity, our appreciation of passion as an overruling value.

So it seemed to me this morning when I read in the Star Tribune about a candidate for governor of Minnesota who has an entire history of litigious passions behind him. A lawyer himself, he has sued, and been sued, by vendors and lawyers. He has pursued a career of righteous indignation. The article used the word “feisty” in the headline, but we may wonder if “obnoxious” and “irascible” aren’t better character clues. Perhaps the candidate combines passion (Frédéric) and logic (Deslauriers, the lawyer). Perhaps we voters should assess his character and make an intelligent choice. If we’re sick of lawyers in high office now, should we be just as wary of litigious fools?

And should we step back from our own life’s steps and missteps, and see if we are on a profitable path?