The Understanding Tree

Standing under

The Understanding Tree

Rain clouds thunder

Threatening over me

Shelter beckons

Standing under the tree

Low boughs welcome,

Reach n' call out to me

Blossoms open

Caring and lovingly

Giving tokens

Swapping melancholy

Arms out stretching

Branches enfolding me

Always catching

Kindly words holding me

Knowing wonder

Understanding set free

Standing under

The Understanding Tree

Spock, The Rosie Project and a Black and Blue Dress

What do Spock, the book The Rosie Project by Graeme Simsion and the internet phenomena of the black and blue dress have in common?

Spock, sadly died today. Ok, I mean Leonard Nimoy, the iconic actor who played Spock. This news displaced the blue/black white/gold dress conundrum online for many. And both remind me of the book The Rosie Project. The link? Logic and Perspective.

I had been wondering how to describe Don Tillman from The Rosie Project. First I thought of an older version of the boy in The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time by Mark Haddon. Then I thought of Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory. But today I realised that he was a modern day Spock (bar the pointy ears).

In The Rosie Project, a witty and oddly insightful love story, we find opposites don't attract, or at least at first. Don Tillman is a man of science and research and ordered process. He plans to find a wife to suit him. How? With science and research and ordered process, or more precisely with a questionnaire. Lots of questionnaires. This story sheds light on some of the thought processes and behaviour of a man in his late thirties, who doesn't know he has Aspergers. Much in the same way we enjoyed Spock's observations in Star Trek we enjoy Don Tillman's view on the world.  We get a whole new perspective of life from someone who engages with the world from a mainly logical context without emotional bias or connotations.

I've always been interested in visual illusions which I consider are good analogies for the importance of context to perspective. Whether it's the Ponzo effect or truth (which I talk about in Perspective: Relativity ), everything seems to be relative.

The black and blue dress then tells us we cannot believe our eyes. Some see it as black and blue and others as gold and white. And its all to do with context. It is what it is only in relation to what we know. We think what we see is there. We couldn't do this even if we all had the same physiological ability to see. And we don't. I wear contact lenses which alter my vision, improving on the quality (which is not as good as some people's and better than others),  trying to bring me in line with the average. I have good night vision and my mother, like many others, doesn't. Many males are colour blind but I'm not. So already we have variations of what different eyes see. And then there is interpretation...what is the context and what does my previous experience make of it?

So much to take into account and so much we can't even see. No we can't always believe our eyed. Again I must concur with Nietzsche, there can be no facts - only interpretations.

On Writing: Themes

Diane Doubtfire in 'The Craft of Novel Writing' starts with the theme - what the story is about, not the plot but what it is that concerns the writer, the subject of the the novel, like 'lonliness, revenge, betrayal, self discovery', and whatever the writer wants to say about it (p.1).

Doubtfire warn us that we might not start with a theme but that it will 'clarify as the book evolves'  (p.3). I didn't start writing my book with a theme. I always knew what my book was going to be about and certain issues I wanted to address but were they related to my theme?  I thought about this, having already written 60,000 words. My book, so far, was about life, death, coming of age, self-exploration. Is my theme, mortality?

And if this is my theme what does this mean as I go into the second half of editing this draft of the book? I know that I still have some action which I haven't pinned down in the third act and wonder if thinking of it in terms of what connects most to the theme will spark any ideas. With this in mind I thought about plot gaps and what action could be theme-led and realised that if I wanted to say more on the theme that that meant someone had to die. I already had someone die 'off-screen' but realised that either they had to come to the fore or I would have to look elsewhere. My main characters started to mill about in my imagination, looking concerned, wondering if they were going to be next to be killed off. I wasn't sure, I decided I would have to start writing to see.

I remember doing Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, with my daughter when she was homeschooled.  We talked of themes then, as you do with GCSE English Coursework. The themes were related to the dreams and hopes that come from the fear of loneliness.

George tells Lennie, that usually guys like them are 'the loneliest guys in the world' but they are different because they have each other and they have a 'future' (the 'American dream'). As they get to know the other isolated characters and as the other characters get to know them, they become part of their friendship and part of their future, linked in their fate.

As we get to know each character we enter into a relationship with them and the more we understand their stories, the more we feel for them, hoping their dreams come true.

Base Theme: Try To Understand Each Other

 

'In every bit of honest writing in the world… there is a base theme. Try to understand men, if you understand each other you will be kind to each other. Knowing a man well never leads to hate and nearly always leads to love. There are shorter means, many of them. There is writing promoting social change, writing punishing injustice, writing in celebration of heroism, but always that base theme. Try to understand each other.'

John Steinbeck (1938, Journal, cited by Susan Shillinglaw in Of Mice and Men introduction)

Don't Listen

East End Graffiti (2005)

Many management and self development courses list 'listening skills' and the improvement of such skills in their course outlines. Interviews and matchmaking websites have prospective candidates, in an effort to impress, purporting to be 'good listeners.' Last week I, in an attempt to learn more, committed to concentrating on this life skill to improve on the quantity and quality of my listening. After a week I had enough.

Enough Listening

Plastic Ducks Listening

I have had enough of listening. I do it all the time. It's my job and inclination. However its not an appropriate word to describe the level of interactivity and engagement that is necessary in community work. Just hearing isn't enough. Paying attention is key. I can hear and not understand or empathise or have any emotional reaction, which some may actually call 'being professional'. Professionals feel. Professionals are allowed to feel. Professionals should feel. We just have to be professional in our response to those feelings.

The Dead have Something To Say

Listening is limited to living people. There are so many people we should pay attention to who are dead. Fortunately we can know what they have to say in their writing. From Shakespeare to Helen Keller, they may be dead but we can still learn from them. As Steven King suggests, when we read what authors have to say its like we are reading their minds. Even dead minds.

Can Deaf People 'Hear'?

Some Deaf people do - some Deaf people don't. All Deaf people communicate, respond, translate and interpret and understand. Whether understanding comes from reading sign language or lip reading or reading braille or reading by the touch of the hand or simply reading, listening is not necessary to that understanding.

Not Hearing Right?

What about the people we hear who we don't want to hear, like the person in the cafe quoting from the book 'Is God Anti Gay.' We aren't book burners so we try to concentrate on not snatching it from his hand and setting it alight within a minute of hearing what he has to say. We pay attention instead to what our reasonable colleagues say. Perhaps he was explaining how ridiculous religious prejudices were and using the book to provide evidence. We understand and love them for their optimism. And they are right – we don't know the context.

Who Listens to Themselves?

Our thoughts and our bodies and our souls in between - do we 'listen' to them? Do we heed the signals? Are we paying attention to our prejudices to avoid discrimination? Are we mindful of our habits to avoid the bad ones? Are we aware of our bodies subtle signals to avoid ill health? Do we just ignore the communication and let our subconscious deal with it without our conscious attention? That is until it gets to the point when it is like a large billboard on the highway of life and the driving force of the conscious can't ignore it anymore?

Don't Listen

Let's not listen. Let's be mindful. Pay attention. We want to engage and understand and learn. Not just listen. I propose that we attend. That we apply our minds and energies. That we stop inactive listening. And we start understanding. That's all there is really.