What if the solution to ignorance isn't found in formal education?

You often see people interpret any ignorance they observe as a failure in education. "They should teach this in school," they say, "they should make it a required course."

I wonder if this might be doing us all a disservice?

As I've blogged about before, I didn't learn everything I needed to know about anything in high school, but rather got a starting point for learning things myself as the need arises. I'm wondering if, by treating ignorance as a failure of education, we're collectively absolving ourselves of our own responsibility to keep learning? If people don't know what prorogation means, even if they should have learned it in school and didn't, their job now as adults and functional members of society is to recognize that they should know what it means, and find out what it means. Not having learned it in school isn't nearly as bad as sitting there going "Waah, I don't know what prorogation means because I never learned it in school!" instead of spending 30 seconds googling.

I also wonder if, by deeming it a job for formal education, we're inadvertently giving it a mystique, framing it as something that needs to be taught instead of something that you can figure out yourself. And I'm worried that this will, in turn, alienate people who aren't so very into formal education. I read in Big Sort (and have observed hints in real life) that sometimes people who have not gone through formal education tend to perceive formal education as Other (and sometimes as a bit suspicious). If we view ignorance as a problem to be solved with formal education, would we be marking it as Other for people who don't have formal education, giving the tacit impression that understanding these things isn't for them, and/or that learning them is only for people who have formal education.

I'm not opposed to adapting our formal education system to meet our ever-evolving needs, but I am worried about giving the impression that formal education is the only way out of ignorance, rather than that people should be bringing themselves out of their own ignorance.

Missing Scene In Death

From Naked In Death:

[Eve:] "It's a lot of house for one guy."

[Roarke:] "Do you think so? I'm more of the opinion that your apartment is small for one woman." When she stopped dead at the top of the stairs, he grinned. "Eve, you know I own the building. You'd have checked after I sent my little token."

"You ought to have someone out to look at the plumbing," she told him. "I can't keep the water hot in the shower for more than ten minutes."

"I'll make a note of it."

What the book really needs is a scene where, the next time Eve takes a shower at home, she has epic hot water and water pressure. We know, based on the characterization that develops as the series go on, that Roarke would in fact actually have someone fix the plumbing, even if he'd heard of the problem from someone less important to him. I think showing this so early on would make him a much more sympathetic character, and would make it far more believable that Eve falls in love with him.

Nearly everything Roarke did in his early courtship of Eve came across as arrogant and pushy. Every favour or kindness he did for her came in a context where he forced his way into her space in a way that would trigger alarm bells in anyone who read Gift of Fear. He is made more nuanced, more likable, less assholic as the series goes on and we learn more about him and actually spend some time in his head, but at the point of the scene above I hadn't seen any of this and found it completely unrealistic in a trashy romance novel way that Eve found anything appealing about him. I continued reading the series because I enjoy spending time in the universe, find Eve inspiring (at this point despite the fact that she fell for Roarke), and already had the second book on my library holds list, but I don't think I would have added it to my holds list if it hadn't already been there.

But a simple half-sentence mention that there's now plenty of hot water would show Roarke being kind to Eve (and to everyone else in the building) in a way that does not aggressively push forward his own agenda, thereby leading the reader to a much more sympathetic interpretation of the character. Roarke hasn't yet at this point won over either the reader or Eve, so it's better to show us why he will rather than assuming it's inevitable.

I love New Year's Day

It's nothing to do with a fresh start or anything optimistic like that. The reason I love New Year's Day is that there are no actual or implicit expectations. There's nothing specific that I should be doing (or that it's "sad" if I don't "get to" do), no family or religious connotations, not even the social idea that we should be having fun. Plus it's one of the more widely-practised statutory holidays, which means hardly anything is open and I'm perfectly justified in not getting any errands done. I can sleep late and stay home and do whatever I want without any guilt. More statutory holidays should be like this.

"Media elite"

It's a common collocation. But is anyone questioning it? The media doesn't strike me as especially elite. Some of them are (I was surprised by the number newspaper columnists who own houses in Toronto), but some of them also strike me as rather base.

More Information Please: prorogation edition

So what was the government's ostensible/official reason for proroguing? I know that conventional wisdom is that they want to avoid an inquiry into the Afghan detainee scandal. But don't they have to give a plausible-sounding nominal reason before proroguing with legislation still on the order paper?

We Will Rock and Roll You

Queen vs. Joan Jett, with 50 Cent popping in:

The Ugly Glasses Chronicles

I suppose, objectively speaking, I can't quite call them ugly. They were bold. They were rectangular. They were trendy, in both the positive and negative senses of the word. They were chosen by a friend whose objective fashion sense I (still do) trust implicitly, and any halfway competent person could fully justify them as a fashion choice. They were also a wise purchase. The day I tried them on was the last day that they were on sale for 50% off (bringing their price BELOW the limit covered by my insurance!!), and three separate Lenscrafters employees assured me that I could return them for a full refund (which I ended up doing), so I decided to give myself time to see if I'd grow into them.

But the more I wore them, the more they made me feel hideous.

Their rectangular shape emphasized the squareness of my jaw and the lines on my forehead (which I detest not because they're lines, but because they are exactly the same as my father's). The thicker frame completely boxed in and emphasized the dark skin around my eyes when I wasn't wearing makeup, making me hesitant to even run to the grocery store without full makeup. Wearing my hair up was no longer an option, which is problematic at hip-length. Red lipstick no longer worked (and what's the point of life if you can't enjoy red lipstick?) I felt butch. I felt like a laughingstock. I felt like a fashion victim. I felt 13 years old again. I cried myself to sleep. I avoided making eye contact with my reflection in mirrors. I couldn't imagine wearing them with a sexy dress. If I had run into a client with whom I've only corresponded by email, or someone from high school whom I haven't seen in 10 years, I would have been embarrassed to be seen in these glasses.

So I went back and got the glasses I'd had my eye on in the first place, the pair I was, despite my best efforts to be open-minded, daydreaming about wearing. The pair that I fully expected would cause my fashion-savvy friend to say "We can stop shopping right now, this is perfect!" (In reality, they were relegated to about 4th place.) They're less fashion-forward, but I feel like myself in them.

I felt better now. I could breathe. I could stop crying, knowing that glasses that made me happy were on their way. But it would still be 10 days until they could be made. During that time, I had to navigate the city, meet with clients and convince them of my competence, get beauty treatments from people who are cooler than me, buy things and return things, deal with relatives over xmas, and generally perform as a competent adult despite the fact that my every instinct wanted to vanish into shame and shoegazing like my 13-year-old self.

So I had to very quickly learn a new skill. I had to fake being confident in these humiliating glasses. I had to aggressively externalize my energy, pushing the green of my eyes beyond these thick plastic rectangles that were boxing me in, convincing the world that I'm a confident hipster and this look is totally on purpose and of course I can totally pull it off. It was exhausting, but it was effective. I think I managed to carry myself as though this were a deliberate fashion choice, and somehow I managed to develop an effective "quelling glare" (as Miss Manners puts it) on the way. And, in the process, I fulfilled one of my birthday horoscopes from last year.

Overall, it was very much a learning experience. I went in not trusting my fashion instincts because my previous pair of glasses (which I love) were counter to most of my fashion instincts at the time of purchase. But from wearing the ugly glasses and then going back to the ones my instincts first wanted me to wear, I learned a lot about which of my fashion instincts I should trust and where I should and shouldn't follow trends (which is something I consider an essential adult life skill, but I haven't yet perfected it for glasses as much as I have for clothes). The energy and body language skills I developed trying to appear confident in the ugly glasses will serve me well as I work on Entitlement. I've developed a much better sense of where I'm comfortably willing to spend money on glasses, and I've gotten better at working with opticians to find something that suits me. Lots learned, good life experience. All of which is very easy to say now that I'm not stuck with the ugly ones for a whole year.

Excellent customer service from Lenscrafters

Props to Lenscrafters, specifically their Fairview Mall location, for allowing me to easily and effortlessly return a pair of glasses (in keeping with their 30 day return policy) simply because I didn't like them.

I am fully aware that, as a competent adult, I should be able to tell whether or not I like the aesthetics of something when I'm first shopping for it, and returning a custom-made product is rather high maintenance. I know they can't resell my glasses, they lost money on the transaction, and someone might have even lost commission (which I do regret, but I really couldn't find anything else I liked in the store). And yet, despite all this, they still allowed me to return my glasses outright for a full refund without any drama or guilt, and without my needing to be assertive about it. There was an initial offer to help me find a pair I like better, but there was no further pressure once I told them I'd already found a pair I like better elsewhere.

I am very happy with the service I received, it makes me feel safe shopping at Lenscrafters, and I very much look forward to doing business with them again in the future.

See you guys on the other side

Scared

As I do every year, I read every birthday horoscope I could find. Like 80% of them suggested that a lifestyle change would be happening in the next year. This scares me, because a) I've never had that degree of agreement among different horoscopes before, and b) apart from the possibility of a dog entering my life, I can't think of any way my lifestyle might realistically (i.e. no winning the lottery) change for the better. I'm in a good place now, I have what I need and what I want, I can't really see any realistic room for improvement.

Many of my horoscopes also talk about overcoming new challenges, in that bright, perky, slightly desperate tone of optimism used by people who have been laid off and decide to/are forced to go it alone as "entrepreneurs" in contract hell.

My horoscopes always come true, but never in a way I could have predicted. However, given the limitations of reality and the finite nature of the resources available to me, I can't see any possibility of a change in lifestyle or new challenges to overcome being a positive thing. And intellectually I know I've already had more than my lifetime's share of good luck.

I'm scared. I just want to stay safe.

I don't think I like my horoscopes this year

Star:

This year, you want to transform your daily life. Your vision might not coincide with what really happens. Examine your long-term desires, and don't focus on the status quo. If you are single, you will open a new door. The person you choose could be from a foreign country. If you are attached, the two of you will benefit from better communication and a willingness to detach. Work on the friendship that exists between you as well.

Globe and Mail:

You have big plans and you get a kick out of telling friends and relatives what they are but at some stage you are going to have to stop talking and start doing. Time may not be running out exactly but it is certainly counting down. If not now, then when?

Poetry reading

Idea of the moment: Sonnet 29 being half-screamed, half-wept by a Beatles-movie-style fangirl trying to corner her idol at the stage door.

More information please: detainees edition

Why does the Canadian military in Afghanistan have detainees in the first place? Most of the media coverage I've seen doesn't explain how they came to be detainees. The impression I've gotten (which may well be incorrect or not entirely accurate) is that they track down people who have planted bombs etc. and arrest them like you'd arrest a civilian criminal in peacetime. Is that normal? It doesn't seem very military to me, and vaguely offends my sense of fair play. Would Canada have arrested people similarly during, say, WWII?

I have heard of prisoners of war, and I'm assuming that these detainees aren't prisoners of war or they'd be calling them that. Why aren't they prisoners of war? Are Canadian troops equipped to handle prisoners of war? If not, why not? If they are equipped for prisoners of war, why are they outsourcing their detainees?

Crossover fanfic bunny

Eve Dallas crosses paths with Dexter Morgan, who, it turns out, killed Eve's mother (for perfectly valid, Code of Harry reasons).

Dexter would be about 80 by then, which is well within life expectancy in the In Death universe, and it would be easy to create reasons for him to be wherever Stella was in 2030 and then to be in New York (or for Eve to be in Miami, or for them to both be in the same third location) in 2060.

Dear Amazon.ca: please ship by Canada Post, not UPS

I get into the elevator. I press the number for my floor. A UPS lady is standing in there for some reason, and when she notices the number I press asks me my apartment number. I tell her, and she hands me a signy thing and a package...from Amazon! "Weird that Amazon is shipping through UPS," I say as I sign the signy thing. "It's a new contract," she tells me.

Dear Amazon: Please go back to Canada Post!

Canada Post is easy and convenient. They just leave it in my mailbox. If it's too big or they need a signature, the post office is a block away. Effortless!

However, UPS can't leave stuff in my mailbox and requires a signature for every delivery. Like most people, I work during the day and am never home during UPS delivery times. Today I only just caught the lady as she was leaving, and that's because I didn't do errands after work like I normally do. So I end up having to go an hour out of my way, by bus, to the UPS depot on a remote stretch of Steeles. And on top of this already-disproportionate inconvenience, there's not much around the UPS depot (the street backs onto the back end of a field) and there aren't many eyes on the street, so I don't feel particularly safe waiting for the bus there after dark, which comes at about 4:30 pm this time of year. (This is where I'd have to wait for the bus. In comparison, when I have to wait for a bus in real life, it's usually in a place that looks more like this.)

Frankly, if they're going to ship by UPS it simply isn't worth it for me to buy from Amazon any more, which is tragic because Amazon has always been the easiest and my preferred way to buy anything that they sell. I sent them a note through their customer service thing, hoping it will get directed to the right people. (It's so hard to find an actual contact address on the Amazon.ca site!)

Update: I got an email back from Amazon saying, among other things, that they are passing my concerns on to the shipping department. If you share these concerns, I'd suggest you let Amazon know too. Wouldn't you rather have your purchases in your mailbox than at the UPS depot?

Things They Should Invent (throwing money at problems edition)

1. Equip all food drives to collect money as well as cans

Food drives are inconvenient for me. Apart from my 72-hour kit, I tend not to have unopened nonperishable food on hand that I don't plan to use in the very near future. And when I find myself in possession of unopened nonperishable food that I don't think I'm going to get any use out of, I tend to put it in the food bank bin at the grocery store as a matter of course. So if I'm going to give actual food to a food drive, I have to either buy food specifically for that purpose, or I have to buy food specifically to replace the food that I removed from my kitchen.

However, I am happy to give money. I also think I read somewhere that money is actually more useful to the food banks, because they can get food for cheaper than retail (either bulk discounts, or wholesale prices, or suppliers giving good deals to food banks) and they can use the money to buy whatever food they're low on at the moment.

I totally see the appeal of giving actual food to food banks, but if all food drives were equipped to collect money as well, it would be easier and better for everyone.

2. Hybrid potlucks

Some people like potlucks because it saves money; these people don't mind going to a bit of inconvenience to save money. Other people don't like potlucks because they're inconvenient - these people don't mind spending a bit of money for convenience. The problem is when you have a mixed group. You just want to have a fun social event without burdening anyone unduly, but some people feel unduly burdened by having to spend money for a restaurant meal, while others feel unduly burdened by having to prepare a dish that's good enough to serve to others, big enough for a large group, and can be transported to the destination without being ruined.

Solution: a hybrid potluck. You can either contribute a dish, or you can contribute money. All the money is pooled and used to order pizza or buy catering. Perhaps one person's contribution could be to collect all the money and use it to fill in whatever gaps are remaining in the spread. That way everyone can contribute in the manner that's least burdensome to them.

Things They Should Invent: effortlessness awareness

At an environmental presentation last year, I sat next to an investment banker who was initially skeptical when I explained that New Yorkers have a significantly lower environmental impact than other Americans. “But that’s just because they’re all crammed together,” he said. Just so. He then disparaged New Yorkers’ energy efficiency as “unconscious,” as though intention were more important than results. But unconscious efficiencies are the most desirable ones, because they require neither enforcement nor a personal commitment to cutting back. New Yorkers’ energy consumption has always been low, no matter what was happening with the price of fossil fuels; their carbon footprint isn’t small because they go around snapping off lights.

I've seen this sentiment - that optimal behaviour achieved effortlessly doesn't count - in a number of places. It's something a lot of people seem to land on without much critical thinking. You see it often in environmentalism (c.f. the plastic bag thing). Those calculators and websites that measure your environmental footprint tend to give you more credit for making drastic changes to negative behaviour than for having positive behaviour in the first place. Remember the One Tonne Challenge? If you reduce your greenhouse gas emissions from 8 tonnes to 7 tonnes, you win. If you reduce your footprint from 2 tonnes to 1.5 tonnes, you don't win. During Commuter Challenge week, you get credit for carpooling to work if you normally drive alone. However, you don't get any credit if you normally walk to work as a matter of course.

You also see it in health and fitness. Remember the thing where you're supposed to take 10,000 steps a day? You see all kinds of hints about how to get steps in by going slightly out of your way. (Park far away! Take a walk after dinner!) I happen to have inadvertently achieved it by living and working a few minutes' walk away from subway stations. But I have had people tell me on one hand that I'm being lazy by wanting to live an effortless walk away from the grocery store (as opposed to a distance that is either an effortful walk or a short bus ride), and on the other hand that I really should make the effort to maybe walk to the next subway station for health and fitness reasons.

You also get it in financial planning. I stay in the black primarily by diverting a certain amount of money from each paycheque into another account that I have to go to some effort to access. It never passes through my chequing/debit/bill-paying account, so I don't feel like I have it, so I don't spend it. Crude, but effective. Even if I spend every dollar in my primary account, I still have some money. But in some quarters I'm considered financially irresponsible because I buy my lunch instead of packing it, buy my groceries at the most convenient store rather than wherever each item is cheaper, etc.

I'm thinking it might be helpful if the general population became more inclined to appreciate effortlessness. Then when people go about making changes to things, they might be more inclined to look for solutions that will make optimal behaviour effortless rather than trying to get people to make additional efforts, however small.

So how do we raise awareness of effortlessness? What if there were websites/quizzes along the lines of the environmental footprint ones, but with the intention of drawing your attention to what you're already doing? They could determine the behaviour of the average person, and set up the quiz to identify where you're doing better and congratulate you for it. "Congratulations! Just by going about life normally, you're already using 10% less energy than the average person!"

Of course, we can't stop there because everyone would become complacent. So the next step, once we have everyone aware of the good their already doing effortlessly, is to promote ways to introduce effortless optimal behaviour next time people are changing things. Why next time they're changing things? Because that's a time when things are changing anyway, so may as well change for the better. For example, rather than "Replace all your lightbulbs with CFLs," say "Next time a lightbulb burns out, replace it with a CFL." Rather than "Walk or bike to the grocery store," say "Next time you move, try to find a place where walking to the grocery store is just as easy as driving." Rather than "Stop all not-strictly-necessary spending and pay off your debt," try "Next time you get a raise, put the entire amount of the raise towards paying off debt on top of your normal repayment schedule."

I think if people had more respect and appreciation for effortlessness, a great many things would get done better.

Things They Should Study: what is the impact of xmas on flu pandemics?

Public health officials are being accused of overinflating the flu threat get rid of extra vaccine doses, with the thinking that the flu threat is currently winding down.

But it seems to me that xmas could exacerbate the spread of the flu just because people tend to travel back to their families of origin.

By a quick mental head count, over xmas eve and xmas day I'm going to be seeing, talking to, and eating with (in rather close quarters) people from about 20 different households and 15 different schools/workplaces, including a few medical institutions. They could carry in viruses from any of those places, and any viruses brought in could be carried back to any of those places. And this is happening in many many families all around the world.

Surely that would have some impact on the spread of the flu?

My trip home today

I enjoyed this sequence of songs my ipod gave me on the way home today.