Two Hours on the Tarmac

I flew to Dallas this week on an unnamed carrier (rhymes with Bamerican). The trip down was great - until we got to the gate and they were unable to attached the jetway...for 30+ minutes. The interesting people-watching thing was: not one of the people who LEAPT to their feet (and in some cases slipped 4-5 rows forward in a heartbeat) sat back down as the wait grew longer.

I'm not sure if it would have been too difficult to reinsert themselves back to their ticketed seat(or if it would have made their truly rude, gazelle-like move apparent to everyone)...but they stood...and stood. One guy was so tall, he had to turn his neck to avoid hit the top of the plan (not the overhead, but the fuselage!) but he did not sit down.

It was a Tinkerbell moment -- we all mentally clapped our hands that we DO believe in airport maintenance...we do! we do!

Then a few days later, the return flight boarded very quickly (even for a 100% full flight) and we taxied away on time...then the pilot said they had grounded all planes going north due to weather. He turned off one engine to avoid having to go back to the gate for more fuel (or just to save money)...and every 15 or so minutes he said it would be a bit longer...and 2 hours later we finally took off.

For the most part, everyone was resigned to the delay...I assume, like me, they were playing the "well at least" game.... Well, at least we don't have to go back to the gate...well, at least the flight isn't cancelled....well, at least it will still be daylight when I get home.

All you can really do is go along like cattle once they have you in the plane....and plot your own gazelle-like move that will allow you to stand at row 9 instead of row 12 (ha, progress!) while you wait for First Class to leave their cushy seats, replace their footrests (footrests!?!) and exit the plane.

Attempt an Iron Cross on the Curtains

Most of the time and for most skills, people seem pretty willing to accurately gauge their own skill level. I mean, very few people watch the Olympic gymnasts and say, "oh yeah, I could do that -- watch I'll show you!" and attempt an Iron Cross from the living room curtains. (right?)

We watch open-mouthed as these talented athletes in dozens of categories seem to defy gravity and control their bodies and minds in ways most of us can't even imagine.

Same thing is true in other categories --- If you don't know how to cook, you don't sign up to cater your (soon-to-be-former) best friends' daughter's wedding. If you can't balance your own checkbook, you don't offer to help your friend prepare for his tax audit. We know where are skills are, and we are pretty honest in reporting them to others.

Except....you knew there was an "except" coming, didn't you?

Except for driving - I think 100% of Americans think they have above-average driving skills. And at least 20% think they are extraordinarily talented. And it gets them into trouble. They take chances they shouldn't and are usually oblivious to the wake of dangerous maneuvers and annoyed responses their idiocy leaves behind. When they eventually cause an accident, I think they are genuinely surprised----they never understood all the hundreds of times they were almost in an accident and the statistical inevitability of this one.

Except for singing - this one's not as pervasive; there are a huge group of people who will refuse to sing (and with some we should be grateful for the choice...but with others, it's sad they've had the joy of singing taken away from them by some negative voice in the past). BUT, and one night of American Idol auditions will prove this observations: there are many many people who think they are world-class singers. Not only are the absolutely sure of their own skill, they think they are above all feedback and critique. Of course, the irony there is that truly skills performers (in any arena) relish feedback as the path to improvement, not matter how hard it is to hear. So the very act of defiantly refusing criticism is a marker for inflated self-value of a skill.

We know how to do something fairly well, and we do it.
We know we don't have skill, and wisely don't attempt it.
We THINK we have great skill, and we act like idiots.

So where do computer skills fall in this?

Many people seem to want to classify really learning and using a computer well as something they cannot do today and don't want to learn how to do -- like high diving or sky diving. In today's world, however, choice or circumstance forces them to use the computer frequently -- "I know just enough to be dangerous" is a common refrain...and they punch the keys and click the mouse, but don't seem to really understand...or make an effort to learn. It's a 4th category: actively rejecting increasing skill while working at the task. WHY?

I worked with a woman a long time ago who printed our beautiful spreadsheets for meetings. One day I got the electronic version and found that all the data was hard-coded. There was not one calculation in the spreadsheet--she had done it all on a calculator and typed it into Excel. Even after I showed her how to use Excel for this task (something would have saved hours every week), she refused to use it. She just "wasn't comfortable."

I don't know how to respond to the juxtaposition of acknowledge lack of skill, on-going use of the tool, and unwillingness to augment skill. The spreadsheet case was extreme, but by no means unique.

I think the key to maintaining this attitude is a rationalization that anyone who's good at computers has an unfair natural advantage... like some freakishly supple gymnast, chess savant, or a 7' tall basketball star. How can you be expected to compete with that? So, throw up your hands, roll your eyes, and keep banging on the keys and talking about how "it" does things to mess you up or "it" won't let you do something.

I know next to nothing about true computer skills: actually developing software or working with hardware. I would never attempt either, without a serious investment in training.

I do know a lot about using applications. And I've worked hard to increase my knowledge and skill as new tools become available. Yes, I've actually read the manual.

At the same time, I agree: Natural talent or tendency plays a role. Computers just make more sense to some of us than to others. But, and this is critical....90% of what I know about computers, I learned by playing around and seeing what happened---click the mouse and pushing the buttons just like those say they don't really understand...but the secret is, I then PAY ATTENTION to how things work or didn't work.

I learn and adjust...just like you do with any skill.

I guess my point is: if you are a person who routine throws up your hands at computers and rolls your eyes at the "nerd" who understand them....I challenge you to think about other parts of your life where you have strong skills:

How did you get them? How do you maintain them?

You built them over time. You practice them regularly. You use feedback (from others, from the universe) to identify where to focus your energy to improve.

Let's remove the rationalization that you're just not computer-oriented.
It's a skill. You've learned many before; this one is no different.

Be willing to work past the frustration point -- that's where learning occurs!
You have to go through it; stopping short will never get to the destination.

Take down the wall that you "can't."
I know you. You can.

What's the Deal with a Kick-Line?

Did you see the XXIX Olympics Opening Ceremony? China put on one heck of a show!

Though I admit I made generous use of TiVo to move through some of it. I get the idea that host nation has spent years thinking through how to tell this huge story -- but sometimes I don't have the patience to listen or watch in real-time. Thank God for TiVo, I say.

But my original point was: China did amazing things with technology, but (IMHO) the coolest parts were the ones that were people-driven. I mean 2008 people doing anything is impressive...but 2008 people doing almost exactly the same thing? That's over the top. And creating geometric patterns so big they can only be seen from a blimp? Now that's cool. And how about that wonderful "dance" (and I wonder-filled!) they did with the Chinese printing blocks (creating water ripples, wind, characters, etc) -- I assumed that was driven hydraulics, but then i saw some legs at one point, and at the end "popping the top" of the blocks and a hundreds of people waved....truly amazing.

The creativity of the concept and precision of the execution were both jaw-dropping.

Which brings me to my title: What's the deal with a kick-line? I've seen a lot of shows and been in my share. Why in the name of all that is holy does the audience feel they should applaud when ANYONE joins arms and kicks---and I mean anyone from Rockettes to a half-dozen chubby grandpas! Now I will grant you--doing a kick-line well (with creativity and precision) is difficult, and a cool effect should be applauded. But I've noticed most people start applauding on the FIRST kick...no matter how ragged the line or how uneven the kicks or how uninspired the context....they go wild.

I just don't get it.

And I've observed the same audience that finds kick-lines to be, one must assume, soul-stirring... will be basically non-responsive to truly innovative and beautiful choreography---so it's not like they are aficionados of the dance!

If there are creative "products" in this world as amazing and beautiful as the Chinese Opening Ceremony---why do 5 uncoordinated fools flailing their legs around deserve applause?

Have they all taken leave of their senses? Or are they paying so little attention to what is true and beautiful that have defaulted to some Pavlovian response to a kick-line? Or maybe they just think it means the performers are almost done, and they (the audience) and sink back into their stupor?

Wake up, people -- the kick-line is NOT the Holy Grail of the Performance!

Practice discernment, I beg of you.
Leave your hands in your lap until your heart (not your eyes) tells you to acknowledge the performer.

Would Anne have Blogged?

OK. I get it. The world is blogging. Find a quiet place and you'll hear the tip-tippy-tap of keyboards around the globe as will spew our angst and hopes into the ether. We're a community of writers, for sure.

But who are the readers? Are there even enough eyeballs in the world to read all the tripe that's produced each day? And that's assuming everyone could (or would want to) read the language in which any particular post is written.

So maybe this is just a virtual diary. If she were around today, would Anne Frank have blogged? And if so--and this is the real question -- would anyone have READ her entries in time to save her?

Sadly, I'm thinking not.