Interviewing the Readers

Posted on 03/30/2009 by Jane Devin

I asked, you answered, and I must say that other than getting somewhat lost in the Gmail maze of threaded email, this was a fun project for me. I’m nerdy like that — I like to know something about my readers other than their screen names — and I appreciate your openness. I was touched by some answers, agreed with several, and some left me quite surprised. So, without further ado I present, largely unedited, you.

Sharon: If you were given the opportunity to be financially secure for the rest of your life, but first had to spend five years in a grueling state of poverty, including bouts of homelessness, would you do it?

My answer is no. Besides being too old to give up those five years, I’m not a very big risk taker. Also looking back on 66 years of life I realize some of the best times were those of financial insecurity. That is when I am most creative. It is also the time when I must trust more and have faith that all will be okay. This has proven to work out many times for me.

Sandy: You have five minutes left to live. You will be lucid and able-bodied. How do you spend your last five minutes?

I would spend my last five minutes telling my family how much I love them and one special thing about each of them (my husband’s eyes that change colors depending on his outfit, my son’s enormous capacity to forgive, my daughter’s ability to assess a situation and find a solution in a snap.) Then I would say something funny so we are all laughing when I die. I want to go out laughing.

Veronica: You have to spend one year on the Island of Passion or the Island of Principle. Which would it be and why?

I have spent 47 years on the Island of Principle, and it’s been good. However, I believe in being open to new experiences and adventures and that having your underlying assumptions about life challenged leads to growth. I’ve only recently acknowledged the strength of my passions and would love to spend a year on the Island of Passion learning about myself and alternative ways of being and doing.

Peggi Jean: What is your single biggest pet peeve and why?

My biggest pet peeve is a sink full of dirty dishes, when there is an empty dishwasher within easy reach. why: because it means their time is more valuable than mine

Julia: A considerable amount of money or a considerable amount of privacy? You can only choose one.

Considerable amount of money. I’ve had privacy. While it’s been nice not to be openly judged for poor choices in my life, I think I’ve gotten a little thicker skinned about what people think of me. So bring on the money. I’d happily try the other life for a while.

Callie: You have just had a vigorous, passionate, and fascinating conversation with a 36 year old stranger. You later find out the s/he dropped out of school in seventh grade and works as a bus driver. What would your immediate thought be?

I would now be even more interested in this person. I would assume s/he were something of an auto-didact, and that circumstance had possibly played an unfortunate part in this person’s slipping through the cracks of the educational system.

Melissa: You become friends with an incredible artist whose talent you greatly admire. A few years later, she hits a creative dry spell. You don’t think anything about it, because it happens occasionally, but when she begins to create again you notice that all of her new work bears a striking similarity to your own — if not exactly replicated, then very similar in concept. What is your response?

I find that humor can often diffuse a sticky situation. I might carefully review her recent work and make several positive comments. This alone may elicit some ‘admission’ from her. If not, I would then say, “Well, I see you’re almost finished with your homage to my work. I love it!” (I would be sure to say this in a very playful manner, not in a mean or sarcastic way.) Hopefully, this would give her the space to talk about why she had gone this direction. If she’s still not saying much….I might have to resort to the old cliche about the sincerest form of flattery! Hopefully, breaking the ice via humor would open the way to a constructive and honest conversation. Most likely, this phase of her work is going to be quite temporary anyway. Maybe some part of her psyche is trying to reach out to you.

Nikki: Has anyone ever told you they found you intimidating? If so, did they tell you why? If not, have you ever wished to intimidate someone?

Yes, people have told me they find me intimidating until they get to know me, but I don’t get it because I see myself as a wimp. There are several people in my work life I would love to intimidate! Alas, no luck.

Shelley: You are ill with a disease that’s not terminal with medical intervention, but would be without. With treatment, there will be permanent and unpleasant consequences, but they will not be painful. At this point in life, you are single, with grown children, and have accomplished as much as you could. Your children and friends want you to have the treatment. What is your decision and why?

Always a difficult decision until you are really there, however, the decision will very likely be to NOT have the treatment. I do think about this often. There are two reasons I would choose to not have the treatment based how you phrased the question: I have accomplished as much as I could and my children are grown. In my opinion, that is the point of life. Once I have accomplished all that I can, it is ok to go. I do not want to be in pain (even though you stated the treatment would not be painful), but I don’t want to have an unpleasant voyage either. If I know I will have two days, two weeks or two months to live, I will enjoy those last days to the fullest but without unpleasantness rather than years with.

Lisa: Thinking about the worst thing you’ve ever done to someone else, intentionally or not, do you feel it was resolved or ever will be? Why or why not?

No, because the guilt is so deeply engrained in my psyche that it has become a part of me. Damn that Catholic guilt. What a thought to start my Monday with!

Carol Lynn: You have been given 30 seconds to broadcast a message that will be played to the world. What would the subject be and why?

Let all religious persecution and wars cease and let us all respect one another’s right to worship in they way they choose, or not at all. So much harm is done in the name of religion that we all ought to be ashamed and vow to be better people and societies for the betterment of our world.

Doris Rose: Your friend is a very talented guitarist but a mediocre singer. She decides to start her own band, and gets a gig at a local nightclub. You know the keyboard player is the better singer, and you know a talent agent will be in the audience that night. What, if anything, do you do?

My good and gifted friend has formed a small band comprised of a very talented keyboardist/singer and a non vocal drummer as well as a musical composer/singer/ bass. My friend sings adequately and plays acoustic guitar brilliantly. Their first paid job is a small coffee house with a loyal discerning crowd that has been very supportive and enthusiastic. My role had been cheerleader/roadie and have taken the job of logistics–chairs, lights, handbills, and water bottles.when we learn that the following weekend will have a talent scout in the audience, my friend asks me what could make their good performance great. Knowing the time is short and options limited for change without insult; I focus my comments on the numbers where my friend and the keyboardist have duets and enthusiastically praise her foresight and ability to do the tight, complex harmonies which could be the bands signature sound, and suggest focusing on just those numbers. (If she didn’t ask, I would not offer).

<b>But wait, there’s more! Click here!

Share this:

The Science of Being Human, Pt. 2: But Who Are We, Really?

Posted on 03/28/2009 by Jane Devin

“The study investigates the relation between people’s personality and the content and style of their writing…” – email from Washington University in St. Louis.

We Judge, and Hopefully Well

Eminem wasn’t the first person to shrug his shoulders in exasperation and say “I am whoever you say I am”. Humans have a long history of expressing frustration with other people’s perceptions of their character and personality. We warn each other not to judge — a book by its cover, lest you be judged, hastily — or even slightly because, after all, “who are you to judge?”

Yet it’s imperative that people judge each other, and that we do it proficiently and well if we wish to avoid the type of trouble that comes from failing to accurately assess another person’s character or intentions. The question isn’t why we judge, so much as how. What criteria, besides the obvious ones of intuition and appearance, do we use when forming opinions about another person’s personality and character?

In day-to-day life, we have the opportunity to study one another’s general way of existing in the world. We watch actions and reactions, and ask each other questions in a give-and-take sort of way. Our impressions are usually not based on answers alone, but also on tone and expression.

Popular personality tests like the Big Five O.C.E.A.N test (an acronym for openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism), remove the eyes, ears, and experience from human study, and claim to offer an objective and accurate analysis of personality based on the types of scaled questions discussed in part one.

I wanted to test the accuracy of the Big Five test, not just against my own self-assessment, but against the impressions of my real life friends. I was also curious what judgments total strangers might form about me based on nothing more than my answers to a series of random questions. I wondered how much variation would exist between real-life impressions, the judgments of strangers, and test results. What I found was surprising.

But First, Let Me Tell You Why I Have A Problem With This…

Personality tests like the Big Five were originally devised as a therapeutic resource for psychologists. I have no issue with tests like this being used by psychologists and their clients as part of therapy, where there is face-to-face interaction and the give-and-take of discussion. However, personality tests have worked their way into the mainstream, most harmfully in the field of employment, where some companies weed out applicants based on nothing more than a short Q&A test — which can be highly misleading, if not in many cases wildly inaccurate.

Does a person who enjoys her solitude make a lousy customer service representative? Not necessarily. She may simply cherish being alone at night after a long day of work and mothering. Will a person who loves museums and art be open to a company’s continuous changes? Maybe not. Perhaps their appreciation for art is based on its traditions rather than its fluidity. Will a person who keeps their desk clean be the most conscientious employee? Or simply the office neat freak, who is more interested in color-coordinated paper clips than in the company’s bottom line?

Of course, many people who take these tests in the course of employment are familiar with what answers are expected, and fill in the blanks accordingly. Those who want a job aren’t likely to tell a prospective employer that they’re messy, uncomfortable around people, and easily stressed out. Yet, human resources offices around the country continue to rely on personality tests in order to help inform their hiring decisions.

A well-known coffee shop is one such employer. Their online application process includes a personality test. If you fail the test, your application will not be processed and your name won’t make it to the list of potential hires. I tested their system by filling out two applications with the information of real people. I answered one personality test truthfully, and one as I imagined a “perfect employee” might answer. The fictional “perfect employee” made the list. I did not.

Real Life Judgments vs. Test Scores

I believe that Washington University’s study would be more accurate if they simply asked writers to rate themselves on the Big Five scale of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. The saying “no one knows you better than you know yourself” tends to apply when the people in question are generally rational and lucid. I know, for instance, that while I don’t mind talking to a lot of people at a party, I likely wouldn’t accept the invitation in the first place. I also know that while I procrastinate over chores, I’m one of the first people my friends call in an emergency.

The Big Five test I took for the University pegged me as being more neurotic than 63.3% of others, more open to experience than 82.3%, and more extroverted than 63.6% of others. According to the test, 82.7% of other people are more conscientious than I am, and 74.3% are more agreeable.

In other words, according to the Big Five, I’m a highly-strung, open-minded, gregarious person who can’t be counted on. I can’t think of an employer who would want that particular combination in an employee, can you?

Being familiar with my own strong points and shortcomings, I thought it would be interesting to see how others, strangers and friends alike, would rate me on the O.C.E.A.N scale. The friends part was easy — I simply asked three people who know me well to look at the definitions of the Big Five traits and assign me a score from 1-10, with 10 being the highest. Averaged, my friends rated me:

8.0 – for Openness
6.0 – for Conscientiousness
5.3 – for Extroversion
4.7 – for Agreeableness
5.6 – for Neuroticism

My friends tended to agree with the Big Five’s assessment of me as open but not highly agreeable — but they disagreed that I was more extroverted, far more neurotic, or far less conscientious than average.

Having strangers assess my personality was a bit more difficult. I questioned whether I should use the 60 questions from the Big Five test, but then decided no — I wanted to use the type of questions that real people ask in the day-to-day when they’re more interested in getting to know something about another person.

A psychologist would argue that the questions aren’t specific to the Big Five categories, therefore it would be difficult, if not impossible, for lay people to accurately assess O.C.E.A.N. traits from homegrown Q&A’s. My argument is that in real life people form impressions and make judgments not through pinpointed analysis, but through a much more diffuse and intuitive set of criteria. A question like, “Mayonnaise or Miracle Whip” may not work for the cause of clinical psychology, but in human interactions, answers like “mayonnaise, preferably homemade or organic” tell us something about a person. Some may think the answer indicates a person who is health-conscious; others may think the person is a snob; still others may think this is a person who puts way too much effort into making a sandwich.

It is as often the minutia of another person’s existence that informs real life judgments. The person to whom health is important may assign extra points in conscientiousness to the person who makes their own mayonnaise — while the person who thinks it’s a waste of time to make what can easily be bought may view the mayonnaise maker as more neurotic than most.

The larger question is — on average – are the resulting judgments made by strangers based on nothing more than a random series of Q&A’s, markedly different than the results of psychology’s Big Five test? How far off are the results of strangers vs. friends, or a self-assessed score?

Interestingly enough, only one person who was familiar with what I was doing doubted whether they could judge the Big Five traits based on random Q&A’s — and she’s a friend who majored in psychology. None of the five strangers who participated expressed any hesitation or difficulty in assigning O.C.E.A.N. scores based on my answers to 40 Questions Asked by Readers.

Here are the averaged scores assigned to me by strangers, who are not readers of this blog, were not informed that the answers were written by me, and who did not know the reason for this experiment. Their assignment of points is based on their own perceptions of my answers and a provided description of each of the five traits:

7.8 – for Openness
7.4 – for Conscientiousness
6.6 – for Extroversion
5.8 – for Agreeableness
6.0 – for Neuroticism

Looking back on how my friends rated me, I was surprised to find that perfect strangers — based on nothing more than a series of random Q&A’s — rated me similarly in every category. There was a difference of .2 in Openness, 1.4 in Conscientious, 1.3 in Extroversion, 1.1 in Agreeableness, and .4 in Neuroticism.

The University’s Big Five test would seem to agree with friends and strangers alike that I am more Open and Extroverted than average. Friends and strangers, though, both rated me significantly higher than the Big Five would seem to in the categories of Conscientiousness and Agreeableness, and roughly about the same in the category of Neuroticism.

My self-assessed scores (7.5 for Openness, 6.0 for Conscientiousness, 5.5 for Extroversion, 5.0 for Agreeableness and 6.5 for Neuroticism) were highly similar to the scores given to me by friends — so similar that there is not a full one point difference in any category. However, the assessments by strangers also come very close, with the only significant differences being that they gave me 1.4 more points than myself in Conscientiousness and and 1.1 more points in Extroversion.

My Judgment

While personality tests may have their place in psychology, I don’t believe they are accurate enough to use as a tool in studies like the one being conducted by Washington University, nor should they be used in guiding employment decisions.

When a group of perfect strangers can more accurately glean information about another person’s personality through a blind reading of random Q&A’s than a standardized psychological test can, it’s time to reevaluate not just the accuracy of such tests, but how they are being utilized, and to question the conclusions drawn from their use.

While inaccurate theories sprung from the Big Five test on subjects like the personalities of writers may be fairly innocuous, personality testing in other realms, such as employment, are not.

Had I taken Washington University’s test in the course of a job application rather than for a study, I likely would not have been hired by any company looking for conscientious, agreeable, non-moody personalities. Also, as previously discussed, according to recent theories, (Pt. 1) many geniuses — who are said to be largely introverted and somewhat hostile — would also find themselves unemployed.

While the coffee shop may not want or need a high I.Q. barista, few highly intelligent people start out at the top. Many work dead-end jobs to pay for college or to support themselves while working on other projects. There are also millions of people who fall in the spectrum between capable and genius. The artist who works in a factory. The banker who’s messy at home but proficient at work. The 21 dealer who spends his weekends meditating.

The ability to perform at a job well often depends much less on a person’s personality than on their basic abilities and desire to earn a living. I can give a pretty good speech, although it’s one of my least favorite things to do. I can — and have — cleaned up after horses, driven a frozen foods truck, soldered diodes to a circuit board, managed an office, bought media, created advertising campaigns, managed million dollar budgets, ghostwritten a book, and delivered mail. I’ve done all of these jobs proficiently, either utilizing parts of my nature and personality, or working around them.

Of course, it doesn’t take a genius to fake a personality test, but the point is that they are misused, likely to be inaccurate, and sorely out of place in human resource offices. They are simply too full of interpretive holes, too black and white, and too narrow in their definitions of what constitutes positive and negative personality traits.

Footnote: I would like to thank Kayce, Catherine, Kimberly, Allison, and Haley for taking me up on my offer to grade a stranger. They did not know who or why, and I appreciate their interest and participation.

Share this:

The Science of Being Human, Pt. 1: 40 Questions

Posted on 03/25/2009 by Jane Devin

After writing, The Invisible Jesus in Psychology, I had an idea I wanted to test. To help me do that, I invited readers to ask me any question they’d like. Nothing was off-limits. Here are the questions they asked, and my answers.

1. Do you have regrets? What is one? Do you believe that regrets have a valuable place in our life, or do they distract us from moving forward? – Danielle

I do. One of them is marrying at 19. There were years-long consequences to that, even though the marriage did not last long. Yes, I believe regrets are valuable. I think if we never regretted anything, we’d not only lack a conscience, but be more likely to repeat mistakes. I don’t see how having regrets would prevent anyone from moving forward, unless they stemmed from something long-term, such as having children or getting into a certain career, but even then we can only move forward.

2. Have you ever been attacked by cyber-bullies and how did you handle the situation? – Palestar

I have, and I didn’t handle it as well as I should have. I took it much too personally. In retrospect, I should have done more to ignore it and understood that as personal as people get on the internet, they have no way of really knowing you, or you them, on the internet.

3. If you could live your life over, choosing the location, your profession, etc., what would you change and why? – Debbie

I would have started with different parents, never left California, completed my degree, and remained a technical writer unless my literary career took off. In reality, a restless spirit, combined with some incredible hopes and a love for adventure, took me many places, some good, some not. Now that I’m older, I wish I’d managed to be a little fonder of stability in my 20′s and 30′s.

4. And for you: Pizza, steak, Mexican, or Chinese? – Laurie C.

Chinese food, steak, then Mexican food. Pizza way, way far down on the list.

5. If a person could read your tea leaves, and the tea leaves of others accurately without knowing you or them, how would you explain it? – Ann Parker

As a fluke or a set-up, because I don’t believe in such things and have seen too many other similar things, like astrology, seances and psychics, roundly debunked.

6. If you had no choice and could choose, which would you rather lose, your sight or your hearing and why? – Marcie

No doubt, my hearing. You can still “hear” people through their body language, expressions, and writing and you can “hear” things like wind and thunder through sensation…but it’s much harder to see people and things without vision.

7. What is your favorite aphorism? If you were given the choice to learn your date of death would you choose to know? Have you ever seen the movie School of Rock? – Elaine

“Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds” – Einstein. This became a particular favorite this past election season. And yes definitely to #2, and yes oddly enough to #3 (I’ve seen about five movies in the last six or seven years).

8. If you could live anywhere in the world where would it be and why? – Tammie

Hawaii. It’s beautiful, warm, lush, surrounded by the ocean I love, and there are no slithering things.

9. I am a total foodie…so I need to know…what one comfort food do you turn to when you are blue? – Jeanne

Do I have to be blue? I’m a latte fanatic everyday. Chocolate is something I don’t eat often anymore, but I crave it when my energy is low. As far as a comfort meal, I’d have to go with chicken and dumpling soup.

10. Do you lust after the new Mac Airbook for just it’s beauty and style and wow factor and if so wouldn’t the new super slim Dell be just as cool, or are there other internal differences about the Macs you love? – Susan S.

I had a Mac a number of years ago and remember it as being intuitive, fairly problem free, and easy to remedy when there was problem, which has not been my experience with PC’s. I am frustrated by how long it takes to end a program that has quit working, and the number of times that happens even when the memory is nowhere near capacity. I’m frustrated by the updates that seem to almost always cause something else to quit working, and by Windows built-in preferences for its own substandard other services.

11. Why are you important? – Woodrow

I don’t feel I am in the context of self, or what I presently give to the world at large. When I was raising children whom I was solely responsible for, I felt important in the sense that other lives and futures depended on my own. My children see me as important to their lives even though they are grown and competent, and there may be others who find me important in their lives for other reasons, but I think if death was imminent, I’d be at peace knowing I’ve loved, nurtured, and given to my best capacity.

12. Do you have any true friendships with people who’s opinions regarding religion and politics strongly oppose yours? If you don’t, do you believe it’s possible? – Chris

Yes to religion and no to politics. I have among my friends a Lutheran, two Catholics and one Mormon, but none of them are staunchly, wholly conservative. I think my friends tend to take what’s best or most meaningful for them from their religion and apply it to their personal lives without expectation that others should do or feel the same. I have friends who are anti-abortion, for instance, but who wouldn’t want a law that denied abortion for others. They view religion as personal, not political. I don’t think I could be friends, or want to be, with neo-conservatives, because their beliefs are not just personal, but societal and often global. They want their beliefs, including their personal religious ones, to inform government, law, science and more.

13. What really pisses you off… makes you so mad you could scream…? – Theresa

Purposeful ignorance. Someone who is so intent on holding onto a certain belief, philosophy, or way of being that they absolutely refuse to process or understand any other information.

14. Why do you write? I know what rankles and activates you. What brings you: joy? peace? serenity? Describe your ideal Friday night. – Kate

I write for different reasons. Sometimes because I don’t understand something until I’ve laid out my thoughts and questioned them, sometimes because I’m excited, outraged, or heartbroken and sometimes, oftentimes, because I see or hear something I totally disagree with and I want my perspective put out there as a balance. What brings me joy-peace-serenity isn’t an absolute unless we’re talking about the well-being of my children. Where I’m at now, I take those things wherever and as often as I can find them. My ideal any-night is being “in the zone” and writing something that I think is meaningful and that others will enjoy.

15. My question: We all have defining moments in our lives. Moments that shape us, our ideas, our writing, our outlook. Name one defining moment in your life and how it shaped you. – Corina
& When did you know you were a writer? – Sharon

This is not a lovely answer, but true. It was when my mother choked me into unconsciousness when I was in the 4th grade. It was field day at school – we were given permission to wear shorts – but my mother wouldn’t hear of it, so I put the shorts on under my dress. She had been violent before, but never that deadly. I realized my own mortality then, and on some level finally understood that my mother’s violent outbursts and hatred had to do with something other than who I was or how I behaved. After that incident, I became less of an inward child and began to write in order to find my voice.

16. Who was your biggest influence and why? – LBJ

For better or worse, my mother. The one who gives us life and then nurtures — or not — is the one who sets the foundation from which all else springs. That’s not to say that we can’t build anything we want from there, but the influence from childhood is lifelong, even if it becomes our life’s work to do everything quite the opposite way.

17. What are the things that have made your heart soar to unfathomable heights never reached before? – Tash

Three things: 1) The birth of my children – more than anything in the world. 2) Making love to someone I really loved – the second most-high experience. 3) An article I wrote that seemed to touch a lot of women, but this last one was kind of a fluke because it was something that was linked to from a celebrity site, and so it was her fans that commented. It made it difficult to know if they liked the piece on its own merits, or because she did. A famous person could start using a grocery bag for a purse, and many people would think that was cool. That doesn’t really make grocery bags cooler than they were before the celebrity started wearing them.

18. All that is left of the great artist is: A painting she has done of the cat and the cat itself. You must save one. Which will it be and why? – Laura

The cat, of course, because it is a living, feeling creature.

19. When are you gonna come for dinner and let me cook for you? Red or White…whats your fav kinda wine? – Loony

If I’m ever in that part of Canada, Shoeless Acres will be my first stop, and I’d love a glass of Cabernet Sauvignon.

20. What is your favourite curse word? – Peggi Jean

Fuck. Hands down.

21. Miracle whip or mayonnaise? – Caron

Mayonnaise, preferably homemade or organic.

22. Why are people [so willing to ] turn over the control of their lives so easily to an unknown force? – Jeff

The world can be frightening, unjust, and unforgiving. I think people seek to give “control” to an unknown force because it not only lessens their fears and anxieties, but also gives them some hope for all that the unknown force usually promises — which is usually centered around blessings, redemption, and peace. Of course, the ultimate control is always an individual’s, but a belief that one will ultimately be rewarded for being good, and others will be punished for being bad, helps many people get through their days.

23. If you had to pick a single word to guide you through the next year, what would it be and why? – Sandi

Change. Obama’s campaign slogan is also mine — I would like to make and see many changes in 2009, none of them easy or easily accessible, but I’m going to push as hard as I can to make this year really count.

24. What’s your ultimate dream/goal/fantasy as a writer–meaning what would your ideal writing life look like? – V-Grrrl

One bestselling book that will buy me a small house in a beautiful place, and the rest of my years spent writing whatever I wanted with no concern about ever needing or wanting to sell it to a publisher. I think JD Salinger did it right. Unfortunately, it’s the rare writer who can now be both published and a hermit.

25. What do you wish people knew or understood about you that they do not? – Julia

That despite everything I have known and seen, I have a deep core of innocence, and am still easily amazed, affected, and moved by even small, simple gestures, words, and situations.

26. How is the you of 5, 10 years hence going to be different to the you of today? – Karen

I likely wouldn’t be much different 5 or 10 years from now, unless one counts having additional experience as a substantial change.

27. Why is it you, and other female writers, such as Annie Proulx and Amy Bloom, start out life as wives and mothers and then change their sexual orientation? – Carol

I can only speak for myself, but I was bisexual as a child, I just didn’t have a name for my attraction to girls. There were no discussions, no role models, no people I knew who were gay. When I was a teen, I went out with boys because that’s what all the girls did. I married when I was still a teen, at 19, and it was very brief. Afterwards, grown up and on my own, I felt freer to explore my feelings and be honest with myself. I realized that while physically I could be attracted to either sex for the short-term, my long-term desires, physical and in every other way, were for women. I would not say I changed, but grew more self-aware and more comfortable with who I was.

28. Do you believe in God? – Suzanne / What defines you as Jewish? – Neil

I suspect, or want to believe, that there was some intelligent force behind the creation of life, but I also believe the science for evolution is well-proven — which is at odds with the Biblical version of God. I have problems with the great leaps of logic apparent in all the the religions of men, because I believe that any force capable of creating life would not be illogical. Outside of a few very minor species, it takes a female and a male to procreate, meaning if there were a God he would have had to have a mother. It is irrational to believe that God would be born alone from the vapors of the Universe, yet a taboo question in religion is “who created God”. I also believe that human beings have the brains that we do so that we can evolve and reach our highest potential — something that organized religion often seems to want to undermine in favor of blind faith, dogma, and tradition. I find comfort in liberal Judaism not as much for the traditions but for the spiritual, emotional, and practical aspects, such as community, service, self and global awareness, progressive beliefs, inclusion, and a strong belief in education.

29. Huge fan of food network so….you’re given zucchini, pineapples, dried dates, maple syrup, and polenta, what would you make having to use all these ingredients? – Steve

I would make a mess! I was curious, though, so I googled your combination, and discovered that I could make a breakfast polenta of sorts, although the zucchini would be a rather odd ingredient.

30. Why is the desk in the room of your own vision great and big and mahogany? – Tre

I have absolutely no idea! I may have seen something like that as a child and been impressed, but if so I don’t remember where or when. Mahogany has always been my favorite color/grain of wood.

31. What is the one piece of advice, over all others, you would give to someone who wants to be a writer? – Lucie

To try to look at the people, situations, and circumstances around them as writer — a recorder of physical, factual, emotional, and contextual detail. I think most writers begin by writing through a self-reflective lens, which helps them explore hidden parts of themselves, and find their own rhythm and voice. The evolution is in being able to look at something through multiple lenses while not losing your individual vision.

32. What do you think is the next step for feminism? Or is this as good as it gets in a patriarchy? – Callie

First, thank you for acknowledging that we still live in a patriarchal society. I’ve been stunned by how many people deny this is true, despite the continuing imbalance of power. We still live in a time when language like “the state’s first female governor…” is spoken with peculiar pride or surprise. I believe feminism, as a self-sustaining concept, was lost in the mire of several other causes it attached itself to in order to gain more supporters, build solidarity, and present itself as a stronger political force. Those other causes, such as ending racism and gaining LGBT rights, have not been as inclusive of, or outspoken about, womens’ rights as the cause of feminism was to theirs. The brightest and most passionate feminist voices seem to have slipped away to the ivory towers of academia, leaving an entire global generation with only a dim knowledge of domestic inequalities, and the horrors that millions of girls and women face around the world. The only thing feminism can do to revive itself, in my opinion, is step back in the fight. Not with more studies, not with more panels — but as they did it in the glory days — by gathering the tribe, screaming into megaphones, expressing their rage at podiums in college auditoriums, picketing in the streets and demanding to be heard. Without that kind of passion, I don’t think feminism will evolve or be revived.

33. With all that we have at our fingertips in the late-20th and 21st century I think we are lucky to live in the time we do, especially for women, but we do have a long way to go. If you could pick a time period (of the past, of course) to have lived, when would it be and why? – Shelley

I would have liked to have been born fifteen or twenty years earlier so that I could have been there when so many of the people I admire were at the peak of their expression. To hear Adrienne Rich or Gloria Steinem in person? Listen to the beat poets? To see Janis Joplin in concert or Joan Baez at a coffee shop? I would have loved that. I also would have loved to have lived in Berkeley or San Francisco then, and to have contributed something to that spectacular mix.

33. If you could produce a TV show, what would be the premise? Do you feel truly accepted? If you won the lottery, what would be the first thing you would buy for yourself? – Pat (was funny and asked 17 questions, I answered three)

1) I would like to see the return of a network Phil Donahue type show, or Oprah before she got the feel-good “discover your spirit” format. Serious issues that used to be given focused air time aren’t getting but a fraction of that now and when they do, they pile on the guests until the stories are diluted. 2) No. 3) A small, cozy house near the ocean.

34. How would your writing and life be different if the internet and blogging had never been invented? Would your writing be altered or take a different path? – Lisa

Given my minor publication history, and my lack of effort or interest in submitting work during the last few years, I can reasonably guess that without the internet my writing would be less public. I also think I would not have written on as many topical things subjects, such as current events and politics.

35. If you could have one super power what would it be? if you had one last thing to say to the world, what would it be? – Kris D.

The ability to be invisible because the possibilities in that are nearly endless. As for the last thing I’d say to the world, it would probably be a repeat of one of the first things I ever said, Why?

36. Favourite character on Happy Days? – T. Fraser

None! I really didn’t like anything about that show.

37. Do you fear death? – Nikki

No, only any pain that might lead up to death.

38. Do you possess enough rage to take a human life? – Doris

No, but I think if I needed to defend my life or the life of someone else, I wouldn’t hesitate.

39. What is your Meyers-Briggs type if you know it? – Melissa

The last time I took the test, which was about 1998, I was an INTP.

40. When you are feeling lost, and down, and depressed, and you don’t know what to do, and you can’t write, and it feels like everything is wrong everywhere in every dark depressing corner of your head … what do you read? What author do you pull off your shelf, knowing that it’s going to lift your soul? What can you read, over and over again, and just know that it’s going to inspire you, or at the very least make you laugh a little and realise that things aren’t that bad? – Tamara

It’s not a book I reach for, but cards and letters that people have given me over the years, including my daughter, who has written me beautiful notes since she could hold a pen. I’ve kept every card and letter that’s ever moved me, and when I need an infusion of sun or a way to revive my spirit, I open that box.

_ _ _

Part Two: What impressions might my answers give a group of strangers? How much might those impressions differ from the results of the personality test recently discussed on this site? Stay tuned! I also asked readers questions, and got some fascinating answers!

Share this:

20 Questions & A Prize

Posted on 03/19/2009 by Jane Devin

UPDATE: Congratulations to TRESHA, the winner of the $20 Amazon gift certificate. Thank you to everyone who participated!

I’m working on a project, and need your help. I’ll tell you what the project is after it’s done, but right now I’d like you all to put on your reporter hats and interview me. I know it’s weird, but there really is — well, maybe not a great reason — but a solid reason I’m asking.

I need at least twenty people to ask me a question, and you can ask anything. Be as simple or as creative, as earthy or existential, as silly or serious as you’d like. If I get more than twenty questions, that’ s fine, too. I’ll answer them all in my next post, even if there’s a hundred. Unless, of course, no one asks anything. That would be really embarrassing.

I’d also like to ask each of you a question in return — that’s not for any particular reason other than I think it would be fun — so let me know if you’re willing to answer by leaving a YES or NO at the bottom of your comment.

To make this worth your while, one commenter will be chosen at random to receive a $20 gift certificate from Amazon.com.

Post will close to comments and winner will be chosen Monday, March 23rd at 6:00 p.m.

Okay, on your mark. . .get set. . . GO!

Share this:

The Invisible Jesus in Psychology

Posted on 03/18/2009 by Jane Devin

Universities in the “Show-Me” state of Missouri seem to like studying blogs and the characters of those who write them. Last year, the Missouri State University in Springfield asked me to participate in a student study on media ethics and the “Wild West” of the internet. Yesterday, Tal Yakoni and Dr. Simine Vazire of the Washington University in St. Louis sent me an email soliciting my participation in a personality test to help them study the link between a writer’s personality and the “content and style” of their writing.

I had my choice between a 10 minute, 100 question test or a longer 300 question version. I’m impatient, so I chose the option that took the least amount of effort. I’m pretty sure that psychology would give me a demerit for that, since its a subjective science that seems to use Jesus as a role model — and we all know that Jesus wasn’t a slacker.

As a school of thought psychology, like Jesus’s Christianity, seems to value a sense of altruism and sacrifice in its adherents. It advances a pseudo-religious creed of love for all mankind, unselfishness, and an unbridled spirit of empathy and compassion. It wants disciples who will strive to maintain a happy, positive attitude no matter how wretched or difficult a situation might be.

But are the ideals and expectations of psychology rational? Do the terms and labels employed by psychology work toward better understanding and social enlightenment, or are they simply a convenient way to exclude in some way those who don’t fit the mold?

One of the agree/disagree statements on the personality test was: “You have a good word for everybody”. This is a question meant to measure one’s level of “agreeableness” — the value an individual places on getting along with other people. The higher your score, the more “considerate, friendly, compassionate, generous, helpful, and willing to compromise” you are considered to be. In other words, you’re that much closer to Jesus.

The problem with the “good word” question is that it’s illogical. Jesus might say there’s no such thing as an illogical question, but how rational was a man who believed he could walk on water and rise from the dead? Jesus today would have been locked up or put on some heavy doses of anti-psychotic medication yet the school of psychology, perhaps unwittingly, relies on a role model very similar to Jesus to inform its beliefs on what constitutes the most positive and desirable individual traits.

As a rational person, I don’t have a good word to say about murderers, child abusers, rapists, suicide bombers, white collar thieves, war mongers, wife beaters, and baby slayers. Jesus might have felt a calling to dig into the dark souls of the wretched and pluck out a ray of light — but I don’t see the point. While it pays to understand the why and how of society’s predators so that we can work on prevention, I feel no particular compassion, empathy, or mercy towards the who that committed the crime. A person who can rape a child, beat a woman to death, kill dozens in a bombing — or who revels in the high life after stealing millions of dollars from others — does not, in my opinion, merit empathy, but disdain.

Another unqualified test statement was “You like to make people happy”. I know there are some people who might rejoice (such as neoconservatives and child abusers) if I never wrote another word, but I don’t really care about their happiness. I’m also sure it thrills my neighbor when I clean up his dog’s shit from the communal lawn, but I don’t do it to make him happy. I do it because I have a dog and don’t want the condo association to change its pet-friendly policies.

Jesus would probably clean up after the lazy neighbor as a good deed. Jesus liked to do good deeds even if they weren’t rewarded — but of course they usually were. In fabled stories, the wicked would see Jesus’s good example, have an epiphany, and fall to their knees in gratitude.

In real life, I resent picking up basketball-sized mounds of German Shepherd shit, and the only epiphany my negligent neighbor seems to have had, despite letters and conversations, is that someone else will eventually take care of the mess. I don’t delight in Sunday mornings hunched over piles of dog poop with rubber gloves, but I might feel quite differently if my neighbor was incapacitated or actually needed my help.

Like most people, I also enjoy making those I love, admire, or otherwise value happy. There’s gratification in giving to friends and family members, as well as to those whom I see as deserving but less fortunate. So do I like to make people happy? It depends on who they are and whether or not their happiness is important to me.

The test asked if I agreed or disagreed with the statement: “I am not interested in abstract ideas”. Again, it depends. I met a philosophy student once who insisted that a Pepsi can only existed because I thought it did. He did not believe that material reality could exist outside of one’s own beliefs. I wasn’t interested in his abstract (nonsensical) theory at all. Carl Sagan, though, has put out some abstract theories that are fascinating — and so did Jesus — which is what I believe is at the root of psychology’s odd mix of mysticism and studied rationales.

The “think positive” movement is a prime example of mixing magical thinking with academic study. “Think it and be it” and other reality-defiers are buoyed by massive studies that lead to such sterling conclusions as “happy people are happier”.

The feeling of happiness, despite the reality of circumstances, (think Job, think Jesus on the cross) has, in tides and trends, been sold like a mandate to the masses, and this mandate has diluted even our language — there are no obstacles, only challenges. We don’t have problems, but issues. We don’t have realities, but perceptions. What would Jesus do?

Jesus likely wouldn’t have invented electricity, the telephone, the automobile, or the MacBook Pro that I covet. While I disagree with much of the criteria that psychology professor Dean Keith Simonton used to define genius in his recent book, I agree with his general conclusion that geniuses tend to be “open to experience, introverted, (and) hostile. . .”. In other words, not very Jesus-like at all.

What label, besides “hostile”, does psychology put on those who are emotionally reactive and therefore more likely to experience “negative” feelings such as anger and frustration? Psychology calls them neurotic. The old testament God would have scored very high in this category but the softer, gentler Jesus would have scored low. According to psychology, the mythical God, creator of the world — the one who was emotionally reactive, moody, and easily irritated – would have a diminished ability to “think clearly, make decisions, and cope effectively with stress”. Jesus, by contrast, would be “calm and emotionally stable”.

If Simonton’s personality theory of genius is to be believed, then shouldn’t we be concerned with how much potential is being thwarted in classrooms when non-conforming smart children, who are easily bored and irritated, are taught a curriculum that’s geared towards the average and not the exceptional? What about adults with above-average intelligence who find themselves frustrated by slow thinkers, outdated methods, and irrational beliefs?

The Jesus-model of psychology would have everyone believe that they are special and unique — but no more special or unique than anyone else – which really gives “special” a whole new meaning, one that’ s not quite sameness, but more like same worth. To feel that you may have more intrinsic or social worth than someone else, (no matter how base, unethical, or irrational that someone might be), is considered by psychology to be arrogant, narcissistic, grandiose – even delusional. It’s just not very Jesus-like.

Jesus died on the cross for the sins of others, and didn’t whine enough about it to be considered a martyr or someone suffering from persecution complex, therefore it stands to (psychology’s) reason that people should be selfless enough to see the positives in their own adverse circumstances. It’s not what happens to you, it’s how you feel about it. You choose your own feelings. No one else and no other circumstance can dictate the way you feel — it’s a choice — so think positive.

Try to keep that in mind the next time someone slams your finger in a car door or empties your retirement account. What would Jesus do? He’d forgive, of course, and then find a way to make it a positive, life-affirming experience because, after all, happy people are happier. And happier people are just a whole lot more fun to be around than those who are always questioning reason and authority and letting themselves be bugged by facts or circumstances that are not in their milieu or immediate power to change.

Yet no change occurs in a vacuum, and every grassroots social cause begins with disgruntlement or unhappiness over a certain situation — whether or not it is our own, or even on shared soil. Positive changes, in other words, often stem from “negative” feelings and thoughts. While joy is certainly a preferred feeling for its euphoric qualities, this doesn’t lessen the validity or rationality of other emotions, such as frustration, anger, or sadness. That some people might feel these “negative” emotions more often than others might not indicate neuroses, but a heightened sense of awareness of the world outside their own front door.

Another flaw in personality tests is that questions are often asked in slightly different ways in order to measure truthfulness, but for many people, including myself, a change in wording is a change in meaning. “Do you feel that you have had more bad experiences than most other people” is, to me, a totally different question than “Do you feel that you are cursed”. One may be an arguable fact, while the other indicates a belief in the mystical concepts of blessings and curses.

The storied Jesus, while hanging on a cross, went through a range of emotions, at first blaming his father for forsaking him, then believing that he was being tortured so that others could be forgiven. I believe Jesus’s MMPI scores would have fluctuated dramatically given the day. In the end, though, it’s the feel-good story of Jesus — as a simple, self-sacrificing, loving, humble, calm, altruistic forgiver of all wrongs — that seems to inform psychology’s definition of social harmony and mental health. There is no doubt that many people, particularly the religious, find this not only acceptable but somehow perfect. After all, who wouldn’t want to be more like Jesus?

There’s a disparity between Jesus and mere mortals, though, that many seem to forget. Jesus could turn water into wine, heal the sick, stop a storm, and drive the evil spirits out of the wicked and possessed. Is it any wonder he was such a calm, affable guy? I know I’d be much less stressed out if I was capable of pulling off a miracle or forty-seven. I’d definitely be a lot more agreeable.

If psychiatry is to psychology what science is to art, (and I believe there’s truth in that), but both rely on the Jesus model to some degree, then both would seem to be less rational, less tolerant of difference, more bent on conformity, and ultimately much more limiting to the advancement of humanity, than they make themselves out to be.

How many employers are now using personality tests to decide who gets a job and who doesn’t? How many “introverted” people or “hostile” geniuses are being excluded from consideration due to these supposedly undesirable traits? In schools, how many extraordinarily bright but “easily frustrated” children are being labeled with ADD or personality disorders? How many potential “beautiful minds” have we lost by insisting that they are not socially harmonious or agreeable enough for our schools, our workplaces, our institutions?

How many potential Galileos and Van Goghs would the modern day world of psychology have us abandon to the mythical, invisible role model of Jesus?

Footnote: The results of the personality test I took determined that I am more neurotic than 63.3% of you, more open to experience than 82.3%, and more extraverted than 63.6% of you. However, 82.7% of you are more conscientious, and 74.3% of you are more agreeable. Which makes most of you much more Jesus-like than me. I’m also an INTP according to Meyers-Briggs, a confirmed caffeine addict, and neurotic enough to believe that most of you won’t have had the interest or patience to read this entire essay.

Share this:

A Starry Starry Night

Posted on 03/12/2009 by Jane Devin

It’s a room with clean white walls, hardwood floors, and a blue rug. There’s a big window at the rear of the room, open to the breeze, and white curtains that lightly billow. In the middle, there’s an old mahogany desk with lots of drawers, and a comfortable chair — sometimes blue, sometimes brown. I am wearing a warm gray sweater, and feeling something so profoundly different that I know I’ll wake up every morning for the rest of my life and have that one startled moment of disbelief before I comprehend that it really is mine — this room of my own. This place that feels like home, steady under my feet, worn and sun-bleached in all the right places, humming with such a calm sense of place that even during the night storms, when thunder splits the sky and rain beats against the windows, I feel nothing but gratitude.

Some things really never do change. I’ve imagined the same room since I was nine years old.

I also fell in love with Vincent Van Gogh in grade school, and I still get lost in his night skies and fields of flowers. There’s something about his heavy-handed painting that makes me ache — that makes me want to jump into the scene and find comfort in the company of the Potato Eaters, or to reminisce alone under the awning of the Night Café.

I didn’t know then that Vincent and I shared a birthday. When I found out, it felt like an eerie, beautiful connection — even if one that was created out of nothing more than my want for a brother who could light a night sky with yellow swirls and ease the lines of weathered faces. Warren Beatty could never do that, even though he was also born on March 30th. I wonder if my mother remembered that detail from some horoscope section somewhere – I can’t imagine any other reason she would have picked Warren’s name when, in fourth grade, I asked who my father was. I actually believed her for two months, and read everything I could find about the actor and his sister Shirley at the Washoe County Library. I was such an idiot when it came to my mother. She never stopped lying, and I never stopped wanting to believe her.

In Minnesota today, it’s some ungodly number of degrees below zero. The wind is whipping up snow in cold swirls, the lights are flickering on and off, and I’m feeling the type of restlessness that comes from wanting to be somewhere else, not just in winter but in life.

However, like the room of my own, the dream of “somewhere else” is elusive. At 46, I still feel my desperate teen days of walking the highways and scrounging for food and friends in bus stops too viscerally to ever want to repeat the experience. Through four states and countless cities, I’ve learned – there’s more to leaving than merely being gone. There has to be a safe harbor, money to make it through the rough spots, a plan, a job. And right now, realistically, I’m at least three or four years away from making all of those things come together.

So I stand where I stand. And there’s a gnawing in my gut that won’t go away, no matter how many yellow swirls I imagine in my night skies, or how many weathered faces I seek to ease.

I’ve written a lot of crap lately, and I apologize to those who come to this blog looking for something better. The restlessness has gotten to me, and there’s a feeling of being torn between a world where I need the support of people, specifically you, and my turbulent interior world, where the story of Mila is scratching to get out – but I’m so afraid of spending/wasting more time writing another rejected novel. There are only so many years left, and the roads are narrowing with each one that passes.

And I’m not oblivious, although I often wish I could be. A hurt world is seeking humor and finding relief in comedy. Even bathroom comedy is more welcome than reality right now. When there is a drama, people want a happy ending. They want the slumdogs to miraculously become millionaires. They want the child actors to be lifted up out of poverty in a day, in a month, and they are willing to suspend every other truth in order to create a scene that’s as simple as good vs. evil – and where good, in all of its innocence, ultimately triumphs. Life is just not that clear-cut, but that’s another story.

This story is about standing where I stand, and knowing that there’s no solid foundation under my feet, and no room of my own or redemption on the horizon. And somehow, ironically, I have to make peace with that.

Starry, starry night.
Paint your palette blue and grey,
Look out on a summer’s day,
With eyes that know the darkness in my soul.

Swirling clouds in violet haze — swirling clouds of snow. And somewhere, someplace, someday. . .a room of my own.

Share this: