Friday, May 5, 2017
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
A Mid Week At Work Query: When you were a teenager, what did you want to be?
From The Natural
Pop Fisher: You know my mama wanted me to be a farmer.
Roy Hobbs: My dad wanted me to be a baseball player.
Just a week ago I posted a query about your dreams about what you wanted "to be" when you were a child.
And now I'm going to those troublesome teen years.
About this time, coinciding really with entering junior high school, or middle school as it apparently is more commonly called, this question comes up with increasingly frequency in direct and implied fashion for nearly everyone. "What are your plans?" "What do you want to do?" Everyone has experienced it. For many people, for the first time in their lives they're forced to consider that question. Indeed, the education system itself is partially geared towards helping you to make that decision, or should I say forcing you to make it?
And I'm not necessarily saying that's bad, I'm just saying it occurs.
It's really at this stage that I start to take some people seriously when they declare that their later vocations were their earlier goals. As earlier noted, when somebody tells me "I've always wanted to be a lawyer, doctor, accountant" etc., I think "oh bull". But if somebody tells me that they formed that goal in high school or middle school I credit it.
But how often do those high school dreams pan out? I wonder.
When I was in middle school I didn't have any sort of really defined career goals. I had a bunch of potential aspirations. This carried on, really, to high school, or at least up to my senior year of high school. I thought about entering the service. . .maybe the Army. . maybe the Marine Corps. . . maybe the Air Force (the Navy always struck me as something I didn't want to do) but by the time I was in middle school that childhood aspiration had really declined a great deal. By the time I was in the later stages of high school I knew that what I really wanted to do was to be a rancher, a particularly frustrating goal if deeply felt, which it was, and you live in the later part of the 20th Century. By that time I was well aware that buying ranch land was out of sight for my family and that homesteading had ended in 1932. That didn't keep me, however, from investigating northern Canada (homesteading, oddly enough, in the far north had just been halted) and Alaska (where it still goes on, on a state level, but where it's frankly geared towards the hobbyist and outdoorsman, not the real farmer). So that was clearly out. So what then?
Well, clearly, an outdoor occupation.
The one I strongly considered was becoming a game warden. Indeed, by the time I was a senior in high school I'd decided to become a game warden.
I'm not a game warden.
I changed my mind on that for the simple reason that my father noted that there were a lot of guys around here with wildlife management degrees who weren't working in that field, which was likely true. In retrospect, that was an example of making a big decision on little information and, hindsight being 20/20, I doubt it was the right decision. The field I did enter involved an extremely difficult course of study and ended up in no employment anyhow, not necessarily a better result. Indeed, likely a worse one.
Sometime around my senior year I vaguely decided to enter the field of geology. And I do mean vague as I can't recall it every being a hard and fast decision at that point and it didn't really fix until I was in college. Geology, I thought, was an obviously outdoor career. That was my reason for entering it; that and that my mother used to note, probably in the form of encouragement, that I was good at science. I was, but I was never any good at math, and that meant I ended up taking a lot of math in college, but I also ended up doing fairly well at it.
One thing I was good at was writing, and I seriously thought about trying to become a writer. I knew even then, however, that breaking into writing in a serious way was a tough thing to do. I really wanted to write history, but a person can't really just write history. I briefly considered majoring in history in college but I didn't know where I could take that, so I didn't (again, as it happens it would have qualified me as much for my ultimate occupation as my geology degree did). When I was in high school I was on the school newspaper for a year and I entertained trying to be a newspaper writer, but for whatever reason its an aspiration I dropped fairly quickly.
So returning to the question, what did you want to do as a teenager, and are you that? Of the five things I thought I wanted to be when I was a teenager; solider, game warden, writer, geologist, and rancher, I've been three on a part time basis. I guess those aspirations sort of worked out, but sort of not. Being a part time soldier worked out well, but being a part time rancher was something that came late and never fully. I've written quite a large number of magazine articles and one book, but I have found that my occupation precludes me from really having the time I need to write history like I want to. And I've started a novel, but it's slow moving and has been slow moving for years. Again, a writer needs time to write.
Lessons learned?
Well, I don't know that there are any.
How about you? What did you want to do, and did you do that?
The Casper Daily Tribune for May 3, 1917: Lazy men and soldiering, and the start of a Casper landmark
There are a couple of items in this May 3, 1917 issue of the Casper Daily Tribune that are relevant for later eras.
For one thing, the boom in the town was now reflecting itself in the new professional appearance of the newspaper. Gone was the small town appearance of purely local news. Casper, for the first time, now had a paper that was starting to rival the big established papers in other regions of the state. This paper doesn't even resemble the appearance of the Casper papers of just a couple of months ago.
The church, as can be seen above, is of substantial size and that also points to the change in Casper's economic fortunes in this period.
Finally, from the various news articles I've seen, I've sort of taken it to be the case that Casper, which was a tiny town prior to 1917, did not have a National Guard unit up until this time. I could be in error, however, as Casper's newspapers were of a fairly poor quality and they aren't all available by any means. Douglas had one, however, and its small papers reported on that unit extensively. Over the last couple of issues, however, its clear that the National Guard, which was actively recruiting for new units in the opening weeks of American participation in World War One, was recruiting for just such a unit to be formed in Casper.
Earlier we noted that 1917 was the year that really made Casper. This newspaper, in and of itself, provides some pretty good examples of how that is true.
Blog Mirror: Seven Office Menswear Dilemmas—and How to Manage Them
Ah, standards of dress.Seven Office Menswear Dilemmas—and How to Manage Them
A suit and tie was a cinch. But relaxed dress codes have left men tense about workwear. Here, some angsty issues and solid advice
By“ARE YOU GOING FARMING?” Not a question you want to find yourself fielding at the water cooler, but when Glenn Yarris wore light-wash denim jeans and a thick belt to work, he received exactly this reaction—from his boss. Mr. Yarris, 32, had unwittingly strayed from the uniform of dark jeans and sport-coat to which the men at Humanscale, an ergonomic furniture company in Manhattan, he . . .
A topic we've touched on quite a few times here.
Good stuff in this article.
Tuesday, May 2, 2017
Baseball's Only Double No Hitter, May 2, 1917
On this day.
The Reds v The Cubs. Ten innings. One run. Victory to the Reds.
Fred Toney v. Hippo Vaughn. They both pitched the entire game.
When the run came in, and the Cubs lost, Cubs owner Charlie Weeghman stuck his head into the Cubs clubhouse and yelled at the team, “You’re all a bunch of asses!
Winning pitcher Toney.
The Reds v The Cubs. Ten innings. One run. Victory to the Reds.
Hippo Vaughn.
Fred Toney v. Hippo Vaughn. They both pitched the entire game.
When the run came in, and the Cubs lost, Cubs owner Charlie Weeghman stuck his head into the Cubs clubhouse and yelled at the team, “You’re all a bunch of asses!
Charlie Weeghman, far left, in 1914.
The Vision Blues
Some time ago here I posted about my struggle with vision in the context of work and daily life.
It isn't that I have really bad eyesight. I don't. But my eyesight has arrived at the point where my distance vision isn't changing but my near in vision has reached the point where I need my regular glasses, which are bifocals, for reading and distance vision, but I needed a separate set of "computer glasses" to work with computers.
Yippee.
The problem that presents is a lot more irritating than it sounds. With computer glasses on, my vision is clear for maybe about three feet. Or, more accurately, from about 12" out to about 3'.
Now, one of the things about practicing law is that you use your computers anymore a lot. It's something that I'm highly acclimated to and its something that newer lawyers can't imagine not being the case. But, when I stop to think about it, it's been enormously revolutionary. That wasn't always the case by any means.
Lawyer Mabel Willebrandt in her law office, probably about 1920. She became an Assistant U.S. Attorney in 1921, something really remarkable for woman in that era. She's doing what we used to all do, read hard texts in an office full of books. We still do that, but we are also typically on the computer all day long.
And that has meant that I must put on my computer glasses for large stretches of the day.
What this has taught me, however, is that a lot, and I do mean a lot, of people drop in my office all day long. I hadn't really appreciated that until I started wearing computer glasses. As I couldn't see them clearly, what that meant in turn is that I was taking my computer glasses off and putting my regular glasses back on constantly.
That's a pain.
That's particularly a pain if, as in my case, you wear glasses that have a temple frame, which very view people do. As I noted in an earlier post on my glasses tribulations:
Temple frames, as you can see, have those ear hook things.
Very few glasses have that now.
I don't know exactly why they were so common at one time and are not now, but what I do know is that glasses reached this basic configuration, nose pieces and ear hooks, due to horseback riding. They went to that basic style as these sorts of glasses are more secure than others. Frankly, that's why I liked them as well, in part. Not only are the lenses smaller than those so typically found on eyeglasses today, save for "fashion" glasses, but they hooks mean they stay on. Having had glasses come off, on odd occasion, in the field, I can tell you that's bad.
Indeed, at least as late as the 1980s one of the two pair of highly ugly eyeglasses issued to enlisted soldiers in the Army had the hook type ear pieces.
Me, wearing my GI glasses, at Ft. Sill. We were apparently shooting on
the day this photo was taken, as I'm wearing my glasses, and we're
cleaning M16s.
Well, while I like that sort of frame as they stay on, if you are taking them off and putting them back on a million times a day, it really becomes a pain.
My computer desk. . . okay, that's actually a very old "secretary" that I've re-purposed as a computer desk, which it does very well as I might add. I'm embarrassed by the state of messiness in this photo, but it shows where I spend most of my day most days.
Which is why I finally reached a point I couldn't stand it, and now I'm wearing contact lenses at work for the first time ever. And wearing contact lenses again for the first time since probably 1985 or 1986.
I don't really like it, even though everyone says that I would (pretty much).
I really hate putting them in. Next to that, I hate taking them out.
And I hate feeling vain. That may sound odd, and I wasn't expecting to feel that way, but I do.
I guess that's because I'm old enough that contact lenses weren't the default eye correction for most people. When I first had them in my early twenties they were sort of a way of not wearing glasses, and as I hated my glasses at the time (and that was a particularly ghastly era for glasses) that's sort of what I was seeking to to at that time. That isn't really the case any more. Even my recently departed next door neighbor at work wore contact lenses, and he was in his 90s when he passed away.
And it wasn't what I was seeking to do now, and in part that may just be because I do look different without my glasses, I'm used to them (and like them) and its odd. The glasses sort of became a part of my established appearance even to me. And of course people noticed.
But. . . . it did solve the dilemma I was facing. I change my glasses much less often now. So it worked.
I really hate putting them in. Next to that, I hate taking them out.
And I hate feeling vain. That may sound odd, and I wasn't expecting to feel that way, but I do.
I guess that's because I'm old enough that contact lenses weren't the default eye correction for most people. When I first had them in my early twenties they were sort of a way of not wearing glasses, and as I hated my glasses at the time (and that was a particularly ghastly era for glasses) that's sort of what I was seeking to to at that time. That isn't really the case any more. Even my recently departed next door neighbor at work wore contact lenses, and he was in his 90s when he passed away.
And it wasn't what I was seeking to do now, and in part that may just be because I do look different without my glasses, I'm used to them (and like them) and its odd. The glasses sort of became a part of my established appearance even to me. And of course people noticed.
But. . . . it did solve the dilemma I was facing. I change my glasses much less often now. So it worked.
Recalling the World War One Over Reaction
New York American: This Must Not Be. Cartoon published May 2,
1917.. "Cartoon shows a woman labeled 'Liberty' being chased down the
steps of the U.S. Capitol by a man labeled "Congress" with a whip
labeled 'Espionage Bill.' "
Headquarters, Eastern Department of the Army, May 2, 1917
The New York Times, on this day, ran a collection of photographs of officers at the Eastern Department of the Army, which no doubt was inspired by US efforts to built up its Army now that war had been declared.
"U.S. Army officer (Major General) James Franklin Bell (1856-1919) who was put in
charge of the Eastern Department of the U.S. Army in May, 1917." LOC Caption
Note that Bell is wearing a wrist watch, something that was only just starting to become popular with men and, it is often claimed, due to the war.
"(Col.) John Park Finley who served at the Headquarters of the Eastern
Department of the U.S. Army at Governors Island, New York under General
James Franklin Bell." LOC title.
"Col. William A. Simpson who served at the Headquarters of the
Eastern Department of the U.S. Army at Governors Island, New York as
Adjutant General under General James Franklin Bell." LOC Caption.
"Col. William A. Simpson who served at the Headquarters of the
Eastern Department of the U.S. Army at Governors Island, New York as
Adjutant General under General James Franklin Bell." LoC Caption. Col. Simpson's mustache wouldn't pass the regulations that the Great War brought in.
"Captain Richard I. McKenney (1880-1936) who served at the
Headquarters of the Eastern Department of the U.S. Army at Governors
Island, New York, under General James Franklin Bell." LoC Title.
Today In Wyoming's History: Updates for May, 2017: Caps and Clothing of 1930s Working Men.
This month's update thread on our companion history blog:
Today In Wyoming's History: Updates for May, 2017:
May 1: Wyoming State hiring freeze added for 2017.
Totally unrelated to the updates, what a great photo of engineer caps in use by railroad men in the late 30s or early 40s. The men in foreground are reading newspapers (a couple of them must be travelers) and the ones in the background are playing dominoes (they are at work, but obviously waiting for something).
Indeed, what a great photo of work men's attire in general. The man standing on the right has an engineer's cap, boots, "carpenter's" pants, and a leather jacket. All when working men generally dressed to fit their roles (which they still often do), leather was common, not a luxury item, and before the dominance of the baseball cap.
I missed this one when doing what was formerly our most popular thread here, Caps, Hats, Fashion and Perceptions of Decency and being Dressed. Too bad, it's a great one. Lots going on, and it says a lot about all kinds of things.
Monday, May 1, 2017
Blog Mirror: Today In Wyoming's History: May 1. The state completely freezes hiring, but are things stabilizing , and does that matter?
From our history blog:
I know why the state has done this. The recent economic downturn, which I posted on a lot in 2015 and 2016, dried up a lot of the state's funding. The irony, however, is that coal production is actually back up quite a bit. Oil seems to be coming back as well, although the price remains in the $60/bbl region. This may, therefore, be a bit of the backside of a cycle not catching up with the front. I.e., maybe the "hard freeze" made more sense a year ago than it does now.
Of course it may also be that we're in a new economic era in the state, as I've noted before. If so, we may have to acclimate to a smaller government, indeed a smaller everything, for quite some time.
Today In Wyoming's History: May 1:But what does that mean? Do they not even fill vacated positions? I think not, but I'm not sure.
2017 A complete freeze on state hiring commences.
I know why the state has done this. The recent economic downturn, which I posted on a lot in 2015 and 2016, dried up a lot of the state's funding. The irony, however, is that coal production is actually back up quite a bit. Oil seems to be coming back as well, although the price remains in the $60/bbl region. This may, therefore, be a bit of the backside of a cycle not catching up with the front. I.e., maybe the "hard freeze" made more sense a year ago than it does now.
Of course it may also be that we're in a new economic era in the state, as I've noted before. If so, we may have to acclimate to a smaller government, indeed a smaller everything, for quite some time.
The Garden, 2017
LSAT Angst and the Logical Process
Some people study for the LSAT.
Some even take courses to prepare for it.
And many worry about it.
I know this because as a lawyer I accidentally see advertisements and posts etc. along these lines.
And I occasionally see ones where some poor soul is concerned because he or she is taking it for the third time and is now convinced, not without good reason, that the dream of being a lawyer is about to fade away.
Well. . . dear reader, if you can't get a good score on your LSAT simply by showing up, you probably have less business in law school than a trained bear.
I wasn't aware, when I took the LSAT back in 1986, that people freaked out about it. I took that and the Graduate Record Exam, the GRE, at the same time and I didn't study for either. Somebody counseled me to get a book to study for the LSAT, which I did, but it was so boring I didn't put much effort into it and rapidly gave it up. I really wasn't aware of the freak out nature of the test until I was waiting in line to take it and there were some nervous folks waiting in line who had taken it before and scored low. I scored high on the LSAT and the GRE without studying for either. And that is how it should be.
According to the LSAT folks:
The LSAT is designed to measure skills that are considered essential for success in law school: the reading and comprehension of complex texts with accuracy and insight; the organization and management of information and the ability to draw reasonable inferences from it; the ability to think critically; and the analysis and evaluation of the reasoning and arguments of others.
If you can't do that stuff on your own, you may need to study, but not for the test. In other words, studying for the test may camouflage your inabilities in these regards.
Now, let's be honest. Law school, any law school, is easy. Everyone thinks its super hard simply because of the myth surrounding it. But if you have the ability to read and a mind that naturally uses logic, rather than emotion, to analyze, it's a breeze. It was so much easier than my geology undergrad it isn't even funny. It's probably a lot harder than majoring in some major designed only to get you into law school, but that's hardly a fair comparison.
But practicing law is hard. Really hard. And it never gets easy. You may get better at it, but as you do the complexity of the problems you face will grow along with it.
And hence the point. If you can't do well on the LSAT, maybe you should really consider doing something else.
Sunday, April 30, 2017
Saturday, April 29, 2017
Blog Mirror: Why ‘free’ stuff destroys our sense of worth – a lesson from photography
Why ‘free’ stuff destroys our sense of worth – a lesson from photography
I read a while back that a proportion of the photos being taken these days don’t even get looked at afterwards. The advent of the cellphone camera hasn’t just killed the ‘pocket snappy’ camera, it’s thrown us into the age of disposable imagery where photographs are taken and then forgotten . . .
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)