Showing posts with label Scandinavian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scandinavian. Show all posts

Sunday, December 25, 2022

Jul, jul, strålande jul--a beautiful Swedish Christmas song


"Jul, jul, strålende jul" is a Swedish Christmas song from 1921 with lyrics written by Edvard Evers and music composed by Gustaf Nordqvist. 

Jul, jul, strålende jul        (in Norwegian)

Glans over hvite skoger
himmelske kroner av gnistrende lys
skimrende buer i alle Guds hus
salmen som favnet om tid og sted
med evige lengsel mot lys og mot fred

Jul, jul, strålende jul
glans over hvite skoger

Kom, kom, hellige jul

senk dine hvite vinger
over en strid full av blod og larm
over hvert sukk i fra menneskebarn
over de slekter som går til ro
over den ungdom der livet skal gro

Kom, kom, hellige jul

senk dine hvite vinger

---------------------------------------------------------

(and here is the translation to English, with help from Google Translate): 

Christmas, Christmas, glorious Christmas

Brilliance over white forests
heavenly crowns of sparkling light
shimmering arches in all of God's houses
the hymn that embraced time and place
with eternal longing for light and peace

Christmas, Christmas, glorious Christmas
brilliance over white forests

Come, come, Holy Christmas

lower your white wings
over a battle full of blood and noise
over each sigh from human children
over the generations that are laid to rest
over the youth whose lives are just starting

Come, come, Holy Christmas

lower your white wings
------------------------------------------------------

Here are the Swedish lyrics:

Jul, jul strålande jul 

Tekst: Edvard Evers (1853-1919)    Musikk: Gustaf Nordqvist (1886-1949)

Jul, jul, strålande jul, glans över vita skogar,
himmelens kronor med gnistrande ljus,
glimmande bågar i alla Guds hus,
psalm, som är sjungen från tid till tid,
eviga längtan till ljus och frid!
Jul, jul, strålande jul, glans över vita skogar!

Kom, kom, signade jul! Sänk dina vita vingar
över stridernas blod och larm,
över all suckan ur människobarm,
över de släkten, som gå till ro,
över de ungas dagande bo!
Kom, kom, signade jul! Sänk dina vita vingar!

Jul, jul, strålande jul, glans över vita skogar,
himmelens kronor med gnistrande ljus,
glimmande bågar i alla Guds hus,
psalm, som är sjungen från tid till tid,
eviga längtan till ljus och frid!
Jul, jul, strålande jul, glans över vita skogar!


If you want to listen to other versions of this song, here are some links: Jul, Jul, Strålande Jul – Zero8 - YouTube  and Jul, jul, strålande jul | UiB - YouTube

Friday, February 3, 2012

The road out


I’m often asked how I dealt with leaving my birth country for this one, especially since I did so as a young adult and not as a child. I answer—it was difficult to do so, but my situation was quite different than for many other foreigners here. I was not an immigrant or political refugee looking for a new life in a better place or an opportunist seeking materialistic gains. My decision to move was made carefully, but it was made in order to give a personal relationship that was still a seed, a chance to grow. I knew that if I did not give it that chance, that I would regret not doing so down the line. At the time I chose to move to Norway, my life was ready for change—both professionally and personally. There were a number of factors that came together in a type of synergy at that time, that made moving here the right thing to do. And over twenty years later, I can say that I don’t regret having moved from the USA to Norway since that budding relationship and my life generally changed in ways that have been mostly positive, challenging, and rewarding. But the past twenty years have not been a bed of roses either. Nothing good is ever achieved without struggle and frustration; that I’ve learned. I’ve also learned that nothing is ever handed to you in this life. At least that has not been the case for my life. It has rarely, if ever, happened that any road I’ve chosen has been an easy one initially. We all choose our respective paths to follow. Mine happen to be strewn with other types of challenges than if I had chosen to remain for the rest of my life in the town of my birth. If I had done that, I am sure that I would have faced other types of challenges. But that is not my life story. I had no idea when I was starting out in the work world that I would end up working and living in Europe.

The difficulties any foreigner faces when in a new country have mostly to do with learning the language and trying to understand the new culture that you find yourself in. Scandinavian culture is not very unlike American culture in the sense that we enjoy the same things—a materialistic way of life that does not lack for most things—food, clothing, shelter, vacations, cars, and luxury items, political freedom, family interest (focus on the nuclear family mostly), a mostly secular lifestyle, interest in books, movies, and other media, and many other things. It does not feel foreign to live here as it might have felt had I moved to a poor backward country or one that was a police state or totalitarian regime. When I go out to the malls here to shop, I could be anywhere in America at a big shopping mall. The only difference is the language spoken. So yes, that is a difficulty and it takes several years to learn to speak a new language. For some it may go faster; for me it did not. It is the subtleties in any culture—the unspoken codes of conduct at work and even in social situations, that also make living in a new country difficult. Some of those codes are impossible to crack, or if cracked, impossible to understand. I have given up trying to understand some of them here; I used about ten years doing so and after that I folded. I don’t think like a Scandinavian from the start point. I would have had to have been born here for that to have happened. So I believe in myself, in who I am as an American, am proud of my heritage and my roots, and have truly reclaimed my identity as an American living in a foreign country, despite all the problems in America, the crazy politics and politicians, the contradictions, the inequalities, the disparity between rich and poor, all those things. Scandinavian societies do not have such disparity between the rich and the poor, but there are other problems associated with most people having more or less the same standard of living. It might sound utopian to those who do not live here; it is not. It leads to an odd kind of social conformity, one that I am not particularly comfortable with. It also leads to a kind of complacency that is the result of knowing that the government will take care of most of your needs.

The biggest difficulty for me in living abroad is not being able to see my family and friends in the USA as much as I’d like. And even though I know that I wouldn’t see them all that often if I lived in New York now, it would be easier to do so because the physical distance between us would not be large. It is the possibility of doing so that I miss, perhaps the spontaneity associated with socializing. My annual visit to New York each year is a well-planned event; I start preparing for it many months ahead of time. I hope to spend more time in my country again when I retire; retirement is still years away, but it is not too soon to plan for it. And I am doing that, slowly but surely, so that it will be possible to visit with friends and family for longer times.

Sunday, June 5, 2011

The market economy in Norway

In keeping with the theme of my previous post, I thought I’d write about the economy in Norway generally. I’ve written a fair amount about my work life here in Norway since I started this blog a little over a year ago, but not so much about the type of market economy that exists here. The common view is that Norway is a socialist country, however that is defined, but the reality is in fact much more complex.

The New York Times and other American newspapers are very fond of presenting Norway in a glorious light—you can almost see the halo as they sing the praises of Norway and of Scandinavia in general—especially when they discuss the social welfare system, paid health care, subsidized education, shorter work hours, longer vacations, and other things that make daily life easier. The fact of the matter is that Scandinavia and the USA have some similarities and some differences when it comes to matters of the economy and social support systems. And to some extent, both countries could learn from each other. Norway is not an absolute socialist state that shuns capitalism; it is a mixed market economy that includes aspects of both capitalism (privately-owned industry) and socialism (public/state regulation of markets). It is the strong regulatory component and the involvement of the state in any aspect of a market economy that makes diehard capitalists in the USA uneasy. But the USA is also considered to be a mixed market economy. The major difference between the USA and Norway is that government involvement in the market is much less in the USA than in Norway and Scandinavia generally. But it is not true that there are no market and trade regulatory agencies in the USA. A Google search turned up a number of such agencies, among them: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC“responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex , national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information”), Federal Trade Commission (FTC—“responsible for preventing unfair methods of competition in commerce as part of the battle to “bust the trusts”), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA—responsible for protecting health and the environment). These exist to protect employees, fair trade, and the environment, but how well these agencies function, or how much power they actually have, is anyone’s guess. I really don’t know the answer to that. And last but not least, who can forget the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), which exists to “protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation”. In other words, they police Wall Street to a certain extent, whether Wall Street likes it or not. And Wall Street needs policing, as the recent packaged loan scandal and resultant global greed demonstrate. I believe that in the absence of rules and regulations, entropy ensues. Greed becomes dominant and the middle class and the poor end up suffering. It seems as though the SEC was just as much taken by surprise as the rest of us (was it asleep?) when it came to the recent corruption on Wall Street. That shouldn’t be. In any case, the rich will always survive well, in any country, and that goes for Norway too. The truly rich enjoy privileged lives here just like they would anywhere else—big houses, vacation cottages, yachts, fancy cars, multiple vacations each year, etc. Wealth has its privileges in any country.

But the fact remains that none of the privileges that Scandinavian citizens enjoy come ‘for free’. All of them are funded through taxes. I’ll simply refer to Wikipedia for information about the tax system in Norway—it’s easier than my trying to explain something I am not very competent to discuss in detail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Norway. But suffice it to say that the Norwegian government uses the tax system to raise money for public expenditures such as those I’ve mentioned already—comprehensive universal healthcare and a comprehensive welfare system. There are three components of the tax system: a) progressive taxation (there is a marginal tax rate on income, and Norwegians are taxed for their stated net worth); b) value-added tax (VAT), which is the largest source of government revenue--the current sales tax is 25% for most store items, 14% for food and drink, and 8% for movie tickets and public transportation; c) special surcharges and taxes on a number of items including cars, alcohol, tobacco, and various kinds of benefits (info from Wikipedia). I don’t have a problem with paying higher taxes knowing that the revenues go to fund universal public healthcare and those sorts of things. What I do have a problem with is paying an inordinate amount of money for a new car. New cars cost a lot of money, much more than most Americans would be willing to pay. For many years, my husband and I drove very old cars simply because we could not afford to buy newer (and more environmentally-friendly) cars. We drove gas guzzlers and exhaust-spewing old cars. Environmentally-friendly? No. Affordable, yes. Now we have a better personal economy, but still, I would not buy a new car because of its expensive sticker price. When new car prices come down, I’ll re-think it. But it has always seemed strange to me that a country that prides itself on being ‘green’ has done little or nothing to encourage its citizens to buy cars that don’t pollute the environment. I believe the reason is because they would prefer that people did not drive cars at all (a pipe dream if ever there was one). But that idea lies dead in the water. No matter how much the authorities encourage the use of public transportation, the fact remains that people will continue to use their cars because they are the most convenient way of getting from point A to point B despite a fairly efficient public transportation system within Oslo. The public transportation system within the city is in fact very good—punctual for the most part, with good connections between trams and buses. But it is expensive. A single ticket to ride the bus or the tram will cost you close to 6 USD at present. If you buy a Flexi-kort (8 rides), that will cost you about 30 USD. If you use your car, regular gas is more expensive than diesel; gasoline costs about 2 USD per liter (1 US gallon = 3.78541178 liters), so a gallon of gasoline costs about 7.5 USD. That’s a lot of money, and I don’t think Americans are willing to pay so much for gasoline. Americans will need to re-think their attitudes about how much tax they are willing to pay if they want universal comprehensive healthcare, for example. The only way that can be done is to raise taxes, and raising taxes is never popular politics for any president or political party.

So what is it that many American politicians, corporations and employers fear when they look at Scandinavian economies? It seems to me that the largest fear is that government regulation of business will become too extensive and that taxes will increase in order to fund social welfare programs. The rich may fear being taxed excessively in order to ‘distribute the wealth’ more fairly. It’s hard for me to imagine why a society would fear a more equal distribution of wealth and universal healthcare. It has something to do with the American idea that we should be independent and survivors—pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps and don’t rely on anyone else for help. Which is all well and good if it were true. The truth is somewhere in between complete self-reliance and complete dependence on the government. Most Americans I know work hard, save money to buy homes and cars, and save money toward retirement. But the inequities start when you realize that a comprehensive healthcare program really only exists for those working for private companies that pay for these programs for their employees. If you are self-employed, you must pay for your own health insurance as far as I understand from those Americans I know who are self-employed. So problems start there if self-employed people fall ill or cannot go to work for a few days. If they cannot afford insurance, they must pay through the nose for medical care. Having universal low-cost healthcare for all is a worthy goal and has nothing to do with a socialist mentality. The costs of medical care are only going to increase as people live longer and as the medical research profession continues to find cures for different illnesses and diseases. The cures cost money—to develop, to test, and to promote. Nothing is ever free in this life. We pay for everything in one form or another. The questions just become—how much are we willing to pay for the goods and benefits that we enjoy, and is it fair that whole segments of the population that don’t work for others cannot enjoy these benefits?

Friday, June 3, 2011

Work-life balance in Norway

The Huffington Post just published a list of the 10 countries worldwide that have the best work-life balance; Denmark topped the list, followed by Norway in the number two spot. Finland and Sweden also made the list, as did the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Portugal and Germany. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/01/top-ten-countries-with-work-life-balance_n_868224.html#s285271&title=1_Denmark
The USA was conspicuously absent. The work-life balance as defined by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) was assessed using three indicators: “(1) the amount of time spent on personal activities; (2) the employment rate of women with children between 6 and 14 years of age; and (3) the number of employees working over 50 hours a week”. Scandinavia in other words has a good work-life balance, meaning that work life does not eat up all free time, leaving time for personal activities and for child-raising. After living here for over twenty years, I can attest to the fact that there is a good work-life balance here. But I also have to say that after studying and working in New York City for over ten years prior to moving to Norway, it took me a long time to let go of the idea that I had to work long hours to get ahead, to have a successful career. So when I first moved to Norway, I worked long hours, as did my husband who is Norwegian. We are both scientists, so there is no fixed time that one must spend in the lab. Your weekly hours are often defined by the types of experiments you are doing that week in the lab. Sometimes the experiments required 60-70 hour weeks. Sometimes they required that we worked one or both weekend days. The life of a scientist is not really a 9 to 5 affair. But I see now that the younger scientists are making it so. They are getting their experiments done between 9am and 4pm, because many of them have to leave then to pick up their children from daycare. There are a lot of factors that figure into this new equation; young couples make deals with each other—one drops off the child in the morning and the other picks up the child in the afternoon. Maybe they alternate weeks or months—such that each person gets a chance to stay a bit longer at work if necessary. But by and large, they are better than my husband and I were at leaving work at a decent hour each day. I often say to my stepdaughter that I wish we had spent more time with her when she was growing up. Not that it seems to have affected her too much that we worked late hours or talked a lot about science when she was a child. She has also chosen a career in science, as has her husband.

The point is that it’s possible to have a good career here without killing yourself, without working 70-80 hour weeks. But that’s where the problem begins for foreigners who work here, and I am not just speaking for myself now. You come to Scandinavia with your expertise, competence and willingness to work hard and to make a good impression. You end up working overtime and it is not necessarily looked upon favorably. It does not score you any extra points as it might in the USA. In fact the opposite is true, you might be viewed rather suspiciously—why are you working so hard when the others around you have gone home? What is it you are trying to prove? Are you trying to make the others look bad? It was exceedingly hard for me to accept that this is how I might have been viewed at one point when I had first come to Norway. One of the elderly professors at my institute—who did appreciate long hours and hard work—often said that if he was at work late, he knew that it was only foreigners who were there working late along with him. The Norwegians had gone home for the day. This is not absolutely true. I know a number of Norwegian medical doctors and scientists who put in long hours each day. But overall, the general attitude is that it is not necessary to kill yourself, so if you choose to do so, you do so at your own ‘risk’ without promise of reward. You do so because you absolutely love what you do; you might even be slightly obsessed with your work—a workaholic. I was one for a while. I am not one anymore, for a number of reasons. But ultimately, it becomes hard to not be influenced by the society you live in. In the beginning, I worked overtime, worked holidays, and took short summer vacations, simply because that is the way I did things in New York. My husband, who also loved his work, did the same. Our life proceeded in this way for about fifteen or so years; after that a lot of things changed, especially for me. Suffice it to say that hard work does not always yield the expected rewards. I don’t regret working so hard, but I don’t work that hard anymore. The problem with letting go of the ‘work hard’ ethic was the guilt associated with giving up my intense work ethic. Believe me, guilt is real. It nags at you. It tells you that you should be working when you are doing something fun. I’m past the guilt now. I will never be Norwegian, but I have adopted the Scandinavian work ethic. And in the process, I have learned something about myself and about the society here. It is possible to get a lot done in a shorter amount of time. It is possible to let go of the idea of having to be at work and having to be so incredibly efficient all the time. It is possible to not be a robot for the company you work for. And by letting go of my workaholic life, I found time for my hobbies—writing, photography, biking, cultural events, and so forth. Not that I didn’t try to do these things when I was working 70-80 hour weeks; just that it wasn’t always feasible because I was so tired. And that’s the main difference now. If I go home at 5pm, I have an evening ahead of me—to plan as I want. It may mean dinner out for me and my husband, or it may mean that I have more time to prepare a good dinner at home. It means that we can take a walk in the evening without feeling exhausted; it means that we don’t just come home anymore and collapse in front of the TV, dead tired after a long day in the lab.

Why is it possible to have a good career here without having to kill yourself with overwork? Because at some point, you hit the salary ceiling. For example, as senior scientists, we make decent salaries and get cost-of-living raises each year (and sometimes small merit salary increases if we have done something extra special during the year). But we know that we are never going to get huge raises, and there is a ceiling above which we cannot rise unless our job title changes to Research director or Hospital director. So staff scientists who have worked in their positions for a number of years, cannot rise very far salary-wise above their fellow staff scientists, thanks in part to the union we belong to, which ensures each year that the small amount of money appropriated for individual merit raises gets spread fairly among the members. You can rebel against this idea, or you can learn to accept it. Either way, you won’t find yourself in a ‘special’ or ‘favored’ position. That’s just the way it works here. The ‘goods’ get spread around, like it or not. And sometimes I haven’t liked it because it means that the lazy workers benefit in the same way as the hard workers. The hard workers are not necessarily rewarded. That’s the flip side of the coin. That’s the negative aspect that you simply have to learn to swallow. You’re on your honor here. If you slack off, you get paid anyway, and you most likely will not get fired. Workers’ rights are strong here—very protected. If you work overtime, you won’t get paid any more than someone who works normal hours, at least not in academia. So you end up choosing to work normal hours, to value your free time, to use your vacation time (30 days each year), to take a week off at Christmas and at Easter, and to sometimes leave work early in the spring and summer when the sun appears. After twenty years in Norway, I understand why people leave work early when the sun comes out to go sit outdoors in cafes and restaurants, or at seaside cottages, or wherever. Because the sun is to be worshipped---the months of summer pass quickly and then we are back to the dark winters again. I have learned. I love the sun, I love my free time, and I look forward to summer vacation. There is something to be said for an easier and more peaceful life after years of working long hours, overtime, and intense striving, first in NY and then in Norway during the first ten years or so until I finished my doctorate. I’ve let go of my earlier intense work ethic after some internal resistance, and I can honestly say that I don’t miss it. I still have a strong work ethic, but I've made room for the other things in my life that are just as important, if not more important, than work alone. That's what balance means, and when I was younger, I didn't have that balance between work and life outside of work. 

Friday, April 1, 2011

Musings about change and depression

Nearly a year has gone by since I began writing this blog. I began writing it to help me deal with the many changes that were occurring in my workplace, among other things. The changes themselves would have been difficult enough to deal with in my home country (USA), but the fact that they happened here in Norway made them even tougher. That is because it has been nearly impossible to ‘crack the code’ in terms of understanding how my workplace functions, what leaders want (or don’t want), how to get ahead, how to ‘get around’ some of the ancient rules that govern it, and so forth. It has made me feel somewhat better to know that many Norwegians in my workplace haven’t been able to make sense of the changes either. Cold comfort, but comfort nonetheless. Because unless you’ve lived in another country for a number of years, you have no idea of what can happen to you and your sense of judgment in a different culture. No matter what happens, you will always question yourself and your sense of judgment first when things don’t go as planned. Did I interpret this wrong, was I to blame, did I misunderstand the other person or the conclusions from a meeting, and so on. I have spent many years trying to fit in ‘career-wise’, trying to understand the Scandinavian corporate/business/academic mentality, doing my best, giving my all, in the quest to do a great job and to succeed as a research scientist. It has not been easy. It would not have been easy anywhere else either, but it was doubly hard here to succeed in any way because of the extra effort that had to go into trying to figure out the system. I have not been fortunate enough to have had mentors or sponsors. My husband has been a wonderful support system but he has also had difficulties of his own trying to figure out his workplace (we now work for the same hospital conglomerate, just in different locations of the city).

During the past year I have written a lot about my work life in an attempt to understand what happened to my workplace and by extension, to me and my colleagues during that time. The past three to four years have been transition years involving a lot of reorganization and restructuring associated with a huge merger of four major city hospitals, and when the dust settled, it was time to start the process over again since the powers that be who organized the first restructuring were not satisfied. And so it goes. I’ve written about colleagues who have had difficulty adjusting to all the changes; I’ve written about my own struggles adjusting to so many changes. Not all the changes have affected us directly, but even if they have not, they affect workplace morale generally, because budgets have been cut, the quality of patient care is always being questioned, research grant support has been reduced, and there is a lot of talk about the good old days when there was more money available and less bureaucracy and administration. But there is no point in talking about the old days. They are gone. There is much more bureaucratic control now, and a hierarchy of leadership that did not exist before. Is it a better system? Only time will tell. If it works out, it will be because employees made a concerted effort to make it work. There is no guarantee that it will work out, however, and that is the big gamble. The politicians who decided on this huge merger can be voted out, and the new ones who come in can in principle decide to reverse some of what has happened if they don’t like what they see. Plus there is always something new on the horizon, some new social trend or policy that can be implemented so that the legacies of different politicians will be ensured. In the meantime, huge social experiments go unremarked. I wonder if there are sociologists studying the effects of huge mergers on employees. I am waiting for the data from those studies. But so far, I haven’t heard of any such studies.  
 
Massive changes can make workers unhappy and even depressed, especially when they do not really understand what is happening around them. To be fair, despite considerable effort to keep employees informed, it is nearly impossible for a workplace to prepare them for all eventualities. But what employees want to know is not how fantastic everything is going to be once the dust settles; they want to know how the changes are going to affect them personally. They need reassurance that their jobs are not in danger. They need to hear that they are more than just chess pawns who can be pushed around on the chess board, plucked up from one area of the board and set down on another. They want to hear that they are doing a good job; they want to know that their projects can proceed as usual; they want some normalcy and stability in a highly unstable situation. There are always employees who thrive on continual change. The majority of employees thrive on stability, and that has to be recognized and accepted by workplace leaders. You cannot demand loyalty and obedience from your employees while telling them that their jobs might be in danger. You cannot tell them to ‘get out’ if they don’t like what is happening around them. This was essentially the message from one of my workplace leaders in a lecture she gave prior to a Christmas party (of all things) several years ago. Some people may have liked her style. I found it unappealing and rather tactless, because she was stating the obvious and didn’t need to. It’s aggressive and unnecessarily so. It’s not how you win friends and influence people. A better approach might have been to have said that there will be changes and that some of them may be difficult, but that we are a team and that if we all pull together, we can get through the changes and perhaps come out stronger. But she is a pawn herself in a long line of pawns that have to spout the company line. I doubt she felt comfortable spouting the rhetoric. If I am representative of the average worker, all I can say at this point in time is that the vagueness and ambiguity that existed prior to the merger have gotten larger, not smaller. It is not possible to get an overview, no matter how hard one tries. I find it difficult in any case. Do I need the overview? I don’t know. I’ve been told that I do, that it’s important to understand the workplace and management structure. Some people I know wonder who their bosses are, because in some cases, people now have three or more bosses—some who have administrative responsibility for employees, some who have the professional responsibility. But when employees ask who their new boss is, they don’t get an answer. So is it any wonder that employees get depressed?

Depression, according to the psychiatrist and author Rollo May, is the “inability to construct a future”. For some reason this definition resonated with me. I responded to it viscerally and intuitively. Why? Because it felt true. When you are depressed, you are stuck. You don’t know which way to turn, because you don’t have a clue about the future. You cannot envision your future nor can you see how to go about building or creating it. In order to create anything, you must be able to visualize it first. With depression you lose the ability to visualize the future. You are stuck in the now. All your creative and mental energy goes into figuring out the ‘now’.  It’s as though a fog settles over your head, blocking your forward view. You are forced to stop driving and to sit on the side of the road. You become passive, waiting for instructions or a road map for how to proceed further. Your energy flow gets blocked. Or you may drive around the same area over and over, stopping at the same stop sign, and not getting any further, because you have lost your sense of direction. Depression may not be a bad thing if you manage to deal with it eventually, if you get frustrated enough with being stuck. It is harmful when you give up and give in and those approaches become a permanent way of dealing with the trials that life deals out.

The Chinese talk about chi (qi), the energy flow in a person, as being an important aspect of a person’s health and life situation. It makes sense to me. If that energy flow is blocked, it will affect the health and energy level of a person. Again, I respond to this intuitively; it just makes sense. The blockage must be dealt with in order for the energy to flow. The goal is harmony for the mind and body. Sometimes it is enough just to read an inspirational text; the blockage may dissipate once the mind understands the situation in a new way. That is the beauty and the power of the written word. In other situations, a good film or conversation may achieve the same thing. The important thing is to free the energy

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Overcoming the 'jantelov'

When I first moved to Norway, I often heard the expression ’du skal ikke tro at du er noe’ (you shall not believe that you are something). It was often mentioned in discussions about successful people or individuals who had achieved something great and how these same people could be ‘put down’ by others in society with this expression. Some of my Norwegian colleagues warned me about the ‘jantelov’, a mentality/behavior that punishes individual achievement or individuals who break away from the pack and achieve success on their own. I found it hard to understand this mentality until I understood that it has envy as its basis. The jantelov is basically envy in action. So that if someone says to you that you should not believe that you are somebody, you can rest assured that they are envious of you and of your achievements, and that you are in fact ‘somebody’. What you can also be sure of is that you have actually achieved something, if you were at all in doubt. And you could be very easily in doubt about your merits in Norway. It can be very confusing to figure out if you have achieved success in Norway because you will seldom hear someone say to you ‘great job’. You will hear that you did a ‘grei jobb’ (ok job), or you might hear that ‘den var god’ (it was good), but the kind of high-fiving, hand-slapping, enthusiastic ‘way to go’ or ‘yippee, great job’ or ‘terrific’ that you might have heard in the USA, you won’t hear here. Often you will not hear anything at all—in other words, no feedback, or you will hear that you could have done a better job or that you could have done it differently. The latter is the most common. The behavior is very confusing, especially when you know intuitively that you have done a terrific job. But the jantelov exists in other places as well, just under different names. There are some people I knew when I was growing up in the USA that would hesitate to praise you or your accomplishments for fear that the praise would go to your head. It seemed to be part of child-rearing for some adults and teachers. So this mentality also exists outside of Scandinavia. But it seems to have been honed to a sharp finish here. If you are the type of person who relies on positive feedback to progress in a job, you will be disappointed. You need to learn to trust your instincts about your successes and to ignore the negative or confusing comments. Not so easy, I can tell you.

What is envy, really? I looked it up in the dictionary and it is defined as a ‘feeling of discontent or covetousness with regard to another’s advantages, success, or possessions’. What then is jealousy? According to the dictionary, envy and jealousy are closely related. Envy has more to do with longing for the success or advantages that another person has, whereas jealousy has more to do with resenting that another person has that success or advantage instead of you. So I guess it’s human to feel envy and jealousy at times. Everyone has been envious or jealous at one point or another. The key is to not let them get the upper hand, because if they do, you end up living your life in ‘reaction’ to the person or people you envy or are jealous of. You will ignore your own individuality and focus entirely on another’s. You will ultimately diminish yourself and your own creativity because you will spend most of your time trying to imitate another person or badmouthing him or her if the former doesn’t work. It is said that ‘imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’ (attributed to Charles Caleb Colton) and that ‘flattery will get you nowhere’ (proverb). The latter is the truth. There is no point in imitating another person out of envy or jealousy. If you imitate another person in an effort to learn from him or her at the start of a personal venture, this is harmless enough and may help you on your own path to success. But it hardly pays to do this constantly. For one thing, you will alienate the person you are imitating, and then you will ultimately understand that you lack the creativity and competence to continue down this path. It is a pity that more people don’t realize that they have their own individual talents that are just waiting to be explored, that they don’t have to imitate others to feel important. But sometimes out of fear, people will not explore them because it is safer not to. If you don’t explore them, you can live safely within the crowd, you can maintain your anonymity, you don’t have to stand out. But if you never step outside the crowd, you will diminish yourself routinely and experience more envy than a person who has at least ‘tried on’ his or her individuality, even if he or she has not accomplished great things by doing so. ‘Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all’ is a good motto. So perhaps the cure for the jantelov is to step outside of the crowd more, to be an individual, to let your light shine, to try--and not worry about failing. With all this activity, you won’t have time to be envious or jealous. And that is the key to a happy life, forgetting about what the others think or will think of you, and basking in the warmth of your efforts and small successes in love, work and daily life. 

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

All things Scandinavian

Our connection to Scandinavia as children was limited to my uncle Hans who came from Denmark (he was married to my father’s sister and they settled in Maryland) and to Hans Christian Andersen, the children’s story writer from Denmark. My uncle used to make us pancakes for breakfast when we visited our cousins. I don’t remember exactly how they were made or even if they were really Danish, but he sprinkled them with sugar when they came out of the frying pan instead of serving them with maple syrup and that made them different—not American. They were excellent.

We read a lot of Andersen’s fairy tales as children. ‘The Little Match Girl’ comes to mind—you would have to search very hard to find a sadder story than that one. ‘The Little Mermaid’ story also stands out. When I finally saw the Little Mermaid sculpture on the waterfront in Copenhagen, I thought it was lovely but actually quite small, not at all as I had imagined. I guess I thought it would be larger than life.

I don’t remember anything particular that stood out about Norway, Finland or Iceland when I was a child. I don’t think I had heard much about Norway before I moved here. I paid more attention to small news items about Norway once I met my husband-to-be, but before that Norway could have been Denmark or vice versa for all I really knew about it. I do remember that Continental Airlines and SAS formed an international partnership in 1988 and that meant that SAS would fly into and out of Newark airport in NJ. The prime minister of Norway at that time, Gro Harlem Brundtland (a woman), was pictured in the NJ Star Ledger newspaper visiting Newark airport for the celebration ceremony, if memory serves me correctly. I do remember Sweden being held up as a very secular and liberal country in the USA, especially when it came to filmmaking. The Swedes stretched all the censorship rules. Vincent Canby reviewed movies for The New York Times for many years, and I can remember that he wrote about the controversies connected with some of the Swedish movies that made it to America when I was a pre-teenager and teenager. But I don’t remember the names of the films. And of course there was the Swedish filmmaker Ingmar Bergman, but I never saw any of his films until I was an adult, and most of them I have seen while living here in Norway. I remember hearing about the Vikings, but they never really interested me that much. What I now know is that the Vikings were from Denmark, Sweden and Norway (and even Greenland), not just from one country.

In 1985 I saw the film ‘Out of Africa’ and became fascinated by the Danish writer Karen Blixen (Isak Dinesen) and her life. Visiting her house in Rungsted in Denmark was one of the first things I wanted to do when we first visited the country. I also read her biography by Judith Thurman (‘Isak Dinesen—The Life of a Storyteller’) which I can recommend. We combined that visit with a trip to Roskilde (in 1991) to attend one of the biggest annual European four-day rock concerts. That trip was a mixture of good and bad happenings—the concert started out well, we had pitched our tent and were enjoying ourselves. Then about two days into the concert, all hell broke loose. A major storm with high winds and pelting rain hit that area of Denmark. My last semi-comfortable memory before the storm really hit was listening to Billy Idol at midnight sing ‘White Wedding’ under one of the big tents. The following days saw us sinking into mud up to our knees and watching our parked car sink down about as far as that as well. But seeing Karen Blixen’s home did save the trip from being a complete washout.

My father, who was a great reader, was a fan of the Norwegian writer Sigrid Undset. She won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1928. I have not yet really explored her writing, but I know that she converted to Catholicism during her adult life, and that fascinated my father. I have read the works of other Norwegian writers and poets—the novelists Knut Hamsun and Sigurd Hoel and the poet Rolf Jacobsen. They are definitely worth reading.

Another poem--Dreams Like Smoke-- from my collection Parables and Voices

Dreams like Smoke   The many misconceptions  That love would somehow  Answer many unanswered questions,  Fill the void--  Free them from unw...