Letting go of who people used to be--wise words from Heidi Priebe

I saw this online today and it resonated with me, despite the sadness contained therein. Whether it's growing old(er), becoming ill, becoming tired, wanting to give up--it is a blessing if those roads that people end up going down are shared with those they love, if those who love them want to join them on their journeys. That is not always the case for all. And it might be good to remember that we ourselves can let go of the people we used to be. Sometimes we hang onto them for dear life, thinking that we have to remain a certain way, when in truth we do not. Sometimes the people we were no longer serve us. We do not have to be accountable to the people we were in our twenties, thirties, forties, and so on. We can let go of them and be who we are in the present. Best to come to terms with who we were in order to embrace who we are now. Because now is all we have. 

To love someone long-term is to attend a thousand funerals of the people they used to be. The people they're too exhausted to be any longer. The people they grew out of, the people they never ended up growing into. We so badly want the people we love to get their spark back when it burns out, to become speedily found when they are lost.

But it is not our job to hold anyone accountable to the people they used to be. It is our job to travel with them between each version and to honor what emerges along the way. Sometimes it will be an even more luminescent flame. Sometimes it will be a flicker that temporarily floods the room with a perfect and necessary darkness. 

~Heidi Priebe (from her book: This Is Me Letting You Go)

Pay it forward--a little prayer

When I was in New York at the beginning of September, I reconnected with a college friend whom I haven't seen in years. We met in Manhattan and spent two happy days visiting the JP Morgan library, eating well, and catching up. She is a former minister (now happily retired), and has always read inspirational literature that she likes to share with others. This time around she passed on a book to me entitled The Only Little Prayer You Need by Debra Landwehr Engle. She'd read it and wanted me to have it. I've always been fairly skeptical of books that promise happiness, abundance, and wealth, if only you do this or that. But I gave this one a try because my friend recommended it. It was an easy read and had some interesting points to make, among them that many of our thoughts during an average day are fear-based (rather than love-based), leading us to behave in ways that keep ourselves protected, but still scared. But the flip side of choosing that protection is to choose a fear-based life. In other words, we're not living our lives in the fullest way possible, because if we choose how we act out of fear, we limit ourselves. It really is that simple. So the little prayer she shares is the following: 'Please heal my fear-based thoughts'. 

I got to thinking about the fears we live with each day. Mine often include worrying about some event several months in the future that I have planned or am planning, or to which I have been invited. I worry that I won't manage to get it all done, that something will happen to put a monkey wrench in the planning or execution, or that I won't really enjoy the show/party/dinner etc. to which I've been invited. There's a small little voice egging me on saying--stay home. I ignore it mostly, but it's there. Other fears include worrying about not having enough time to do the things I want to do, about my health issues or worrying about the health issues of loved ones, worrying that I'm not living up to my obligations, feeling guilty about that, or feeling guilty about a host of other things that I won't go into here, but that often have to do with what (I perceive) other people think and feel about something I'm doing (or not doing). Not being able to (or not really wanting to) live up to the expectations of others is a fear, a wholly irrational one, since I have been the dutiful child, student, employee, partner etc. for my entire life. I meet others' expectations and sometimes go beyond them, especially when I was working. I don't think I've ever been a slacker during my entire work life, or in my life generally. What surprises me is that the fear of not wanting to be a slacker has been a motivating and driving force my entire life. In that context, I wonder if I've ever really understood the word 'relaxation'. I have one friend who always tells me that I look so relaxed now that I've retired. I've never really thought about it, because in my mind, I retired from my job as a scientist, but I've filled my days with writing and other things that continue to drive me and to occupy my mind. The to-do list is long, even though I no longer work at a formal job. Sometimes I think, no wonder I'm tired half the time. I don't allow myself to really relax. I should, but I know it won't be easy to unlearn some ways of thinking. 

Engle lists some of the fear-based thoughts/feelings we all have and deal with--abandonment, feeling not good enough, guilt, judgment, conformity, control (not only over people but in terms of having to have things a certain way), need for power, jealousy, meanness, irritation, anger, pessimism, shame, scarcity--the list is long. She doesn't say that these thoughts/feelings are bad in and of themselves. It's when they get control over us that they become problematic. None of us are exempt from feeling them; it's part of the human condition. But they can interfere with having a peaceful and serene life--a happy life. Engle doesn't define happiness in terms of material wealth or the absence of pain and suffering. 

The key is to catch yourself having the fear-based thoughts. Once you can learn to be aware of them, you can begin the process of choosing thoughts that are rooted in love. Love-based thoughts/feelings as she describes them are acceptance, compassion, forgiveness, generosity, kindness, playfulness--among many others. But of course we're talking about a daily exercise--saying the prayer--and letting in the change we want in ourselves. I doubt it's easy. Since I finished her book, I've been trying to stay aware of my thoughts that are rooted in fear and saying the prayer in that moment. It's interesting to say the least. I am passing the book on to another woman whom I think might benefit from reading it. Pay it forward is a love-based thought (the recipient is free to read the book or not read it). Engle's overall point is that if all of us acted more on our love-based thoughts rather than fear-based thoughts, it would (perhaps) result in a better world, a more peaceful world. And given the current world situation, that might not be such a bad idea. 

Updates on my blog--A New Yorker in Oslo and on my book--A Town and A Valley: Growing Up in Tarrytown and the Hudson Valley

Last month this blog had almost 41,000 visitors, most of them Americans. That is the highest number of visitors ever; I was overwhelmed by the sheer number of visitors. Thank you to everyone who has checked out the blog, read a few posts, and enjoyed what they've read. I've been told by several people that it's not possible to leave a comment on the individual posts; that's not true. If you'd like to leave a comment, you can. Please do, I enjoy hearing from readers. 

My book, A Town and A Valley--Growing Up in Tarrytown and the Hudson Valley, was purchased by the Warner Library in Tarrytown and can be found in the Local History section. It has also been purchased by the Historical Society in Tarrytown. For those readers who would like to know more about the area of New York State where I was born and where I grew up, the book might be of interest to you. It can be purchased on Amazon: 

A Town and A Valley: Growing Up in Tarrytown and the Hudson Valley: De Angelis, Paula Mary: 9798842022946: Amazon.com: Books

and also on Barnes & Noble: 

A Town and A Valley: Growing Up in Tarrytown and the Hudson Valley by Paula Mary De Angelis, Paperback | Barnes & Noble® (barnesandnoble.com)

A book recommendation for my Norwegian readers

I just purchased the following book recently, as I was looking for a book that described the bridges over the Akerselva river (my second favorite river after the Hudson River). As luck would have it, a couple of Sundays ago my husband and I stopped to drink coffee at Hønsa Lovisas cafe, and while we were waiting to be served, we took a look at the books on the small bookstand near the entrance. Akerselvas Bruer og Fosser (Akerselva's Bridges and Waterfalls) by Kjell Egil Sterten was one of them. I'm happy to support anything to do with local history, be it in Tarrytown NY where I grew up, or in Oslo where I live now. The author is a local historian and lecturer who clearly loves Oslo. You can buy it from different online bookstores; here are the links: 

Akerselvas bruer og fosser by Sterten, Kjell Egil. 9788230333198. Innbundet - 2016 | Haugenbok

Akerselvas bruer og fosser | Kjell Egil Sterten | ARK Bokhandel

The Gifts of a Garden

A Town and A Valley: Growing Up in Tarrytown and the Hudson Valley

The lies we tell others and ourselves

I am currently watching The Lying Life of Adults series on Netflix, based on the book of the same name by Elena Ferrante. I read the book in 2021 and wrote a post about it (A New Yorker in Oslo: Elena Ferrante's The Lying Life of Adults (paulamdeangelis.blogspot.com). The Netflix series encompasses six episodes, and I've already seen four of them. Elena Ferrante has been involved in the writing of the script for the series, and you can always tell when she has had her hand in things. There is a certain identifying mark that raises the overall quality to very good (this series: The Lying Life of Adults (TV Series 2023– ) - IMDb) to superb (My Brilliant Friend on HBO: My Brilliant Friend (TV Series 2018– ) - IMDb ). The series was created by Edoardo De Angelis (every time I see his last name on the screen I have to smile since it is my last name as well, spelled the same way). His wife Pina Turco plays Nella, whose husband Andrea leaves her for Costanza, a family friend. But by extension, he leaves his teenage daughter Giovanna as well. The series is about Giovanna (very well-acted by Giordana Marengo) and her growing up amidst the turmoil around her: her parents' separation and divorce; her father's eventual remarriage to Costanza and his new home in Posillipo (an affluent area of Naples) on the Gulf of Naples; Giovanna's introduction to her aunt Vittoria (wonderfully-acted by Valeria Golino) and to the family of Enzo, Vittoria's now-deceased lover; her relationships with her two best friends, Angela and Ida, who just happen to be Costanza's daughters. But it is her relationship with Vittoria (Andrea's sister whom he cannot abide) that changes her life and moves her firmly into adulthood. 

Andrea, Nella, Costanza, Mariano (Costanza's ex-husband), and Vittoria all lie to others and to themselves. Andrea and Costanza have lived a lie for years by having an affair and keeping it secret. Nella has either refused to see the truth or has turned a blind eye to it; in any case, she continues to defend Andrea and to call him a good man. Vittoria initially seems to be the most honest of all the adults in Giovanna's life, but she too turns out to be a liar who tells herself and others (particularly Giovanna) that she loved only Enzo and has never been with another man since he died, but this is not true. Giovanna learns that she cannot trust very many people, which of course is the demarcation between childhood and adulthood. What do you do with that knowledge? What do you do when you find out that the adults in your life are no better at handling/navigating their lives than the teenagers they are trying to raise? What do you do when you find out that their lives are as miserable and chaotic as yours? 

The lies we tell others and ourselves, when others ask us how we are, how our lives are going. How many people really answer honestly? We do so with those few people we love and trust, with our closest friends. We know we can trust them to listen to us without judging us, without abandoning us. That is a rarity in a world that seeks to judge (and cancel) another immediately without knowing or being interested in the facts. Of course we can ask, what is the truth? Is your side of a story truer than mine? We all lie to ourselves to some extent; we do so in order to deal with each day. We tell ourselves that our spouses and children are better than those of others we know, but the reality is otherwise. All families have problems, perhaps the same types of problems but to varying degrees. All families have squabbles, some have real fights, and some are on the outs with other family members for entire lifetimes. We may not have much of a relationship with a sibling, but we say that he or she has a busy life and we talk to them when we can. A spouse may not be all that involved in the family life at home, and we make the same excuse--he or she has a demanding job that keeps him or her busy. Those who are workaholics know that they are overworking to avoid something else in their lives, perhaps an unhappy home life, and those who are diehard alcoholics, drug addicts and overeaters tell themselves that they have their addictions under control, that they can quit drinking, doing drugs, or overeating any time they want. But deep down inside, they know the truth; they can't quit overworking, drinking to excess, doing drugs, or overeating, not without help and a lot of motivation to change. Lying to ourselves, even just a little, helps to mitigate the intensity of our problems. And for most of us, it does; we get through each day without major calamities ensuing. But for those with serious problems, those problems just get worse. 

It might not be a good thing if we were always honest about our thoughts and feelings in relation to others. Little white lies help us survive in what could be awkward situations with loved ones. We do our best to be truthful, but sometimes you have to weigh the situation and ask yourself if others (or you yourself) can tolerate hearing the truth or the answers to the questions they've asked. I think of those I know with health problems; is it better for them to hear that their overall prognosis could be good if they do this or that, rather than dismal because of the type of illness they have or because of one's hereditary tendencies? Nobody wants to be told straight out that they are going to die in a few months or years. And if people are told that, they often want to consider themselves the outliers--those few who fall outside the norm. Can you blame people for thinking this way? I think we are hotwired to think this way to some degree, due to the idea of self-preservation and the instinct for survival. We lie to ourselves in the hope that it will turn out alright. And sometimes it does. 

The year of pandemic living

I just finished Elizabeth Strout's new book, Lucy by the Sea, and found it to be a good read. The main character, Lucy Barton (a writer whose second husband recently died), finds herself riding out the pandemic in a rented house in Maine together with her ex-husband William, who has orchestrated the entire arrangement. He and she have remained friends after their divorce; he contacts her right before the pandemic hits bigtime to tell her that they need to leave Manhattan immediately. She acquiesces rather quickly, knowing that he is a scientist (parasitologist) and that he probably knows something she doesn't. The novel details their year together in a house by the sea, and how their relationship is rekindled after many years of living apart. William is now in his seventies and has major health problems, whereas Lucy appears to be in her late sixties and still relatively healthy, although she suffers from anxiety and the occasional panic attack. They are older and (presumably) wiser, dealing with regret and with the knowledge of their mortality. He is sorry for how he treated her (had affairs); she seems to be struggling with being alternatively judgmental and forgiving. In that sense, she is like all of us who have been hurt by someone--we want to forgive, we do forgive, but we wonder if we are being weak by doing so. We wonder if we should be hard and unforgiving. The novel deals frankly with the pandemic and the political events of the past several years. 

What struck me about the novel was the description of the loneliness that many Americans felt during the pandemic, as well as the panic and anxiety that many of them lived with each day. It was different here in Oslo; we underwent a similar type of lockdown, but I don't remember feeling that loneliness, the way Strout described it. It felt so empty, so desperate, so sad. And yet, I can only speak for myself. I know that the pandemic affected many people here in similar ways, especially those who lived alone. Perhaps that is what made the difference--having someone with whom to share lockdown. Because social life as we knew it ceased to exist. There were no get-togethers, parties, weddings and reunions were cancelled, bars and restaurants were closed, and people worked from home. I didn't find the latter bothering at all, in fact, I preferred it because I never felt lonely at home as I did at work. But again, everyone is different, and I can only speak for myself. 

Strout's book has gotten good reviews, but as always, I'm interested in the negative reviews as well. Those who are negative about the book are so because they did not want to read a pandemic book that reminded them of a horrible time. Additionally, they felt that very little happened to the main characters and that there really wasn't all that much to write about. While the former is true, I disagree that there wasn't really much to write about. The exploration of one's emotional life is not nothing. Lucy finally has the time to figure out how she feels about many things, and what she finds out is that life in general and her life in particular are complex, and that most of us live in the gray area between the black and white. In other words, while we would like life to be black and white, it is not. We are always struggling with our thoughts and emotions. But in the end, we are who we are and as we approach the last chapter of our lives, it is unlikely that there will be major personality changes. If you are the forgiving gentle type, you will most likely remain that way. If you are the aggressive unforgiving type or the philandering type, ditto. So that begs the question of whether she can trust William when he tells her at the end of the novel that he loves her. He seems to, and perhaps he always did, throughout his affairs and their divorce. The question, as her daughters remind her of, is whether she can trust William. The novel provides no answers to that question, and as Lucy herself points out, “It is a gift in this life that we do not know what awaits us.” How true. 

One of Many--my poem from Parables & Voices

Apropos my last post about doubt--I wrote this poem many years ago. The italicized paragraph describes a woman who has 'chosen' not to pursue her dreams because the man she is with cannot keep pace with her and is angry about that. My guess is that there are many women who do this to keep the men in their lives placated.  

One of Many (Portrait of a Lady) (apologies to Henry James)

 

In some future time she knew
In that way that only women can know
That regret would exact its pound of flesh
For all the choices cast aside, for all the roads not taken.
 
For there were so many roads down which
If she had gone, that life may have been brighter.
Not tinged by so many shadows, not clouded
By the sufferings of others that she took upon herself.
 
In some future time she knew
That she would look back at life
As an old woman and wonder why it was
She chose a man ahead of most everything else.
 
Was it love or perhaps hate that tightened the bond?
Was it fear that made it impossible to live a life unfettered?
Fear of loss, fear of the other, fear of aloneness.
But what is fear if not lack of trust (in oneself and in others).
 
The fierce desire to prove independence from others,
Has led to only this, that she cannot any longer
Act without him, cannot think, cannot be who it is she once was,
For better or for worse, without him looming there before her.
 
A kind of prison, forged by fear and lack of trust,
By uncertainty and a self-image which is negligible at best,
His and in the end it will be hers, chosen by her because it seemed
That if he could not advance then it was her duty to demote herself.
 
Once was pretty, once was lively, once was open.
Once was…..a long long time ago.
Now is diminished, now is careful, now is remote,
So as not to awaken the sleeping beast inside him.
 
For he smiles on the outside, but the inside
Is filled with hate for others and a desire
To be above them since he cannot control them.
He cannot be them, and she cannot be them, by extension.

(From Parables & Voices, copyright 2011, by Paula Mary De Angelis)

Men who leave and men who stay

We're back in Elena Ferrante territory today. Apologies to her for paraphrasing one of the book titles in her Neapolitan quadrilogy--Those Who Leave and Those Who Stay. I finished Days of Abandonment today; it was written in 2002, prior to the Neapolitan quadrilogy. The latter books are more riveting than Days of Abandonment, but Days of Abandonment has its riveting moments as well.

Men don't come off very well in Ferrante's books. They are mostly sexual predators at heart, constantly looking at other women, faithless, disloyal, and uncaring opportunists. They are not child-friendly nor are they really interested in family life. As Olga in Days of Abandonment says to Mario, who has abandoned her and their two children for a woman almost half his age (Carla), "you are an opportunist and a traitor". Which he is. Unfortunately he is not much more than that as written by Ferrante. The book is really about Olga and her breakdown after he leaves her. She must cope with all of the mess while taking care of her two children Gianni and Ilaria and the family dog Otto. She doesn't do a very good job of any of it and she knows it. Her identity unravels and she is forced to do the work of finding out who she is at the age of thirty-eight. She doesn't particularly like what she sees--a woman who gave up her writing career and her identity to marry Mario and have children. The roles of wife and mother became her identities. She thought her marriage was happy; perhaps it was. Even if marriages are happy, one partner can always be unfaithful and stay in the marriage, or be unfaithful and leave. Mario does both, actually. He starts his affair with Carla when she is still a teenager and leaves Olga for her when Carla turns twenty. He closes the door on one life and begins another. He does not tell Olga where he is or with whom he is living. She doesn't even get to know where he is living and does not find out about Carla until midway through the book. And then all the pieces come together for her. The description of her breakdown is disturbing and uncomfortable, perhaps as it should be, but it dragged on too long for my taste. Otto dies after being poisoned with something he ate that was laced with strychnine while Olga was out walking him in the park. Her son Gianni becomes ill with a high fever. She feels like she is falling apart. But this experience made its point. 'The only way out is through'. By the time Olga has gotten through it, she discovers she no longer loves Mario. It's as though she has stepped outside her own life and become an observer. She watches as her children visit Mario and meet Carla, she listens as they praise Carla, she eventually deals with Mario adult to adult, she reclaims her identity as a writer, she listens to him complain that his children will ruin his relationship with Carla, and she finds that she really doesn't care about any of it. She understands that Mario is an opportunist and a traitor and tells him that. She no longer needs him. In other words, she grew up. She grew out of a stale banal marriage that her husband abandoned years ago in secret. She stepped out from under Mario's shadow. The patriarchal dominance that has ruled her life for so long is gone. She finds that she does not want to date or be social or be with other men, at least not if she has no say in how these events are to happen. But eventually she starts an affair with the older musician who lives below her and that is how the book ends. She is nearly forty and she is writing again. The rest of it is just the life around her in all its messiness and discomfort. She learns to live with both. Days of Abandonment is an angry book, but the anger is directed both at Mario and at herself for giving up so much of herself. No one asked her to do that; she chose the prison of the wife/mother identity and became entrapped. She could have continued writing, she could have insisted that Mario help more with the children. So many things she should have done, but she didn't. She tries to understand why Mario left her, and discovers that she really didn't know him. She constructed the idea of a happy marriage around them; his idea of what their marriage was did not seem to interest her. Or if it did, she ignored his attempts to break free. But in any case, nothing she could have done would have kept Mario from straying. He was a man who leaves, not one who stays. 

There is autobiographical content in her novels to be sure. Exactly where, in which novels, remains a mystery and that's fine with me. Ferrante writes under a pseudonym for reasons that only she alone knows. This places most of the focus on the stories, where it should be. But after having read a number of her books--the Neapolitan quadrilogy, Troubling Love, Days of Abandonment, and The Lying Life of Adults, it seems to me that she has dealt with a number of emotional and psychological issues (traumas?) that have preoccupied her throughout her life, through her writing. Men cannot be trusted to be faithful since they leave their wives for other (often younger) women. Love is mostly about sexual bonding and less about loyalty and empathy. Mothers and daughters have volatile relationships; mothers love their daughters but are also jealous of them, particularly if the daughters have the chance to pursue higher education while they did not. The relationships between mothers and children generally are also precarious; they are fraught with frustration, weariness, irritation and real anger in addition to the maternal bond of love. Ferrante makes it clear that children change everything in a marriage, for better and/or for worse. Her ambivalence about the roles of wife and mother is clear throughout her writing. She has no qualms about bringing up the 'worse'--being chained to these small beings who demand attention and love, the banality of childcare, the reduction of woman's role to wife and mother and not much else. Ferrante is an Italian novelist but her novels are international bestsellers, which is illustrative of just how relevant her themes are on a global level. The interesting thing is that Days of Abandonment was written in 2002; it could have been written in the 1970s, when the women's movement was dealing with many of the same issues--women's identities, self-realization, marriage versus single life, having children or not. It tells me that the issues that women face now are not so much different than those they faced in the 1970s or those that our mothers faced in their generation. Men left their wives and children back in the 1950s and 1960s too, for many of the same reasons as they do now. If you ask them directly, they will answer selfishly. They want a woman who is sexually exciting, who is interested in sex. They want a woman who pays attention to them. What they want is often at odds with what they get from marriage and family, where there is often limited time for both sex and personal attention. And so it goes. As long as couples have children and children become the focus of marriage, there will always be men who leave and men who stay. And perhaps women who leave and women who stay. Perhaps it's worth repeating that one should choose one's life partner carefully and marry a person who is faithful and loving. But how do you know that when you marry? How can you be sure of how the future will turn out? You can't, so you do the best you can and commit to the choice you make. How it turns out is often the stuff of novels. 

Revisiting 'The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People'

I read The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey during the 1990s (it was first published in 1989) and recently reread it. I enjoyed rereading it, now that I have the perspective of someone who was in the workforce for over forty years and just recently retired. He imparted his wisdom as a leader and a teacher, much of it practical, but he also emphasized the necessity of reflection in order to help us make the choices we need to make. His book is really a primer for how one should live one's life, even though the book is often utilized as a primer for how to be more effective in the workplace. 

The seven habits are as follows:

1. Be proactive
2. Begin with the end in mind
3. Put first things first 
4. Think win-win
5. Seek first to understand, then to be understood
6. Synergize
7. Sharpen the saw

I'm not going to give detailed analyses or summaries of each habit, as I encourage you to read the book and reflect upon his advice. I agree with much of what he writes. It is important to be proactive, not reactive in most situations where there is an actual choice, and it is beneficial to try to understand the other party first before wanting to be understood. Those two habits alone will help you in the workplace but also in most interpersonal relationships. I would add that it is important to try to understand oneself as well because that will also contribute to better relationships with others. 

Many people don't understand what proactive means. I've written before in this blog about being proactive. Proactive is a conscious choice to act instead of react. It is a choice for rather than against positive change. It could mean facing a difficult situation and taking the reins oneself in order to try to solve it instead of passively waiting for someone to come along and solve it for us. Often we wait for the latter because then we have someone to blame if the situation doesn't work out. We may not consciously want to blame others, but it's the easy way out, so we 'choose' it. You'd be surprised at how many people play the blame game; whether they need to play it or like to play it is inconsequential. The point is that playing the blame game is reactive behavior. But sometimes the division between proactive and reactive is not so clear. There are situations in life (personal and work) where you have tried everything and nothing works to solve a specific problem. Inertia rules the day. You've tried being proactive and reactive. So you let go and move on because taking care of yourself becomes the priority. 

I would have liked to have met Stephen Covey and discussed some aspects of work life with him. I would have asked him for his reflections about specific situations, e.g. when you have bent over backward trying to understand frustrating and incompetent workplace leaders, when you have been proactive and positive and tried to help them and give them what they say they want, but there is no response. You meet a wall of no response no matter what you do. After a period of time where you give them the benefit of the doubt, you let go and move on. Because that is best for your health--physical and psychological. 

The main misconception that most advice-givers and motivational teachers have is that workplace leaders are very invested in their employees' career advancement and overall job satisfaction. But sometimes they are not. Sometimes all they want around them are yes-people who make no waves and who demand nothing. Some leaders just want to be left alone so that they don't have to deal with those they view as bothersome employees. Covey doesn't really address such situations in his book. In other words, most of the situations he presents are win-win for both parties--the success stories. That's great but it's not always real life because both sides have to think win-win, and it's not all the time that both sides do. 

I'm glad I reread his book, because I realized that I've figured out a lot for myself by myself over the years, even though I have on occasion sought advice in such books. I mostly didn't rely on others to solve my workplace issues and I came through them a changed person--stronger and more capable of dealing with bullshit-dispensing leaders or leaders who simply didn't care about their employees. The latter exist, make no mistake about that, and those are the leaders with whom I've had to deal sometimes. The problem with people who believe that there is a solution to all problems is that they believe their own hype. I believe in trying to find solutions to problems, yes, but I also believe in letting go and moving on when it no longer makes sense to hang around. That may not be viewed as a positive solution by those who want to solve all conflicts in a positive manner, but sometimes leaving forces change in the people who need to change, including the person who leaves. 

One of my favorite Hallmark Christmas movies--A Shoe Addict's Christmas

Last December I wrote a post about romantic Christmas movies, the ones (many of them Hallmark films) that have shown up on three different television channels here in Oslo this year. I think we need these films more than ever this Christmas season, after a year that no one in his or her wildest imagination could have predicted. They are relaxing to watch, you pretty much know the outcomes, they tug at your heartstrings, and they are enjoyable overall. The word is nice; they are nice films. 

Here is a link to the post I wrote last year: A New Yorker in Oslo: Romantic Christmas movies (paulamdeangelis.blogspot.com)

Tonight, I re-watched A Shoe Addict's Christmas; it's one of my favorite romantic Hallmark Christmas movies. The movie is based on the book of the same name by Beth Harbison. It's the story of a young woman, Noelle, played by Candace Cameron Bure, who has pretty much given up on her dreams for her life, both personal and professional, and settled for a comfortable life without many risks. She works in Fulton's department store in the HR department, having given up on her dreams to open her own photography studio after her boyfriend dumped her on Christmas Eve three years ago. Three years pass, and she ends up locked by accident in her department store during a snowstorm. While waiting to be rescued by the fire department, along comes her slightly ditzy but totally lovable guardian angel Charlie, played by Jean Smart, who is perfect in the role. Every time Noelle puts on a pair of shoes or boots, they take her back or forward in time, courtesy of her guardian angel, to show her what her life could have been like had she made different decisions and choices. It's essentially a modernized and romanticized version of A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. Noelle is not Scrooge, however, just a disillusioned young woman who has lost her faith in the fun and adventure that life can hold. She meets Jake, played by Luke Mcfarlane, who is also perfect in his role as the fireman who rescues her and who just happens to be her upstairs neighbor as well. Watching these two get together, and how the guardian angel facilitates their doing just that, is so worth watching. It's a heartfelt movie with a believable message, and at Christmastime, it's a nice message to hear--have faith, trust in the process, and don't give up on your dreams for your life. 

Survivable Losses--a collection of short stories

Check out this collection of short stories. You won't be disappointed. 

Survivable Losses  by Francesca Stokes 

The Giver of Stars and patriarchal societies

I just finished reading The Giver of Stars by Jojo Moyes, and can highly recommend it. Moyes wrote a fictional novel about a group of women in Depression-era Kentucky who became the Pack Horse librarians—traveling by horse to the rural mountainous areas of Kentucky to deliver books, magazines, comic books and recipes to households wanting to become more literate. The Pack Horse library project was part of the Works Progress Administration (WPA) set into motion by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. These women braved bad weather, treacherous conditions, brutal men, ignorant people, and despite these hindrances, pushed on, providing a much-needed service. In the process, they became friends, and that is really the book’s story. It is an empowering book for women, because it presents their daily lives and struggles in ways that any woman could understand. It also presents how the women deal with issues of race, abuse of women, unhappy loveless marriages, patriarchal attitudes toward women, feminism, self-identity, self-esteem, love, and friendship. It is impossible to read this book without becoming involved in the lives of these women; you end up rooting for them, admiring their intelligence, perseverance and cleverness when dealing with the patriarchal attitudes and threats from some of the men living alongside them in their small Kentucky town. You also feel their fears; the threats of rape and violence if they don’t toe the line or do what some of the more ignorant men in the book want them to do. Luckily, Moyes balances the ignorant and often violent men with men who are the opposite—open to learning/changing and empathic. The latter are the men who love these women and who support them, in often non-conventional ways. It is impossible to read this book and not reflect on the damage that patriarchal attitudes have done to relationships between men and women, but also between men and their children (both male and female—many of them cowed into submission to brutal fathers). It made me think about how what my life could have been like at that time. Was it just a toss of the coin that led to your being married to a good man or a bad one? Some of the parents didn’t seem to care one way or another if a man was violent to his spouse; in the book, it is not the husband who was abusive to his wife, but his own father---a powerful man in the town and a truly nasty character that you end up wishing would suffer or die or both. One might have expected that the town’s priest would support the woman rather than her father-in-law, but no, it was her duty to return to that house where she lived with her husband and his father. She does not return after she is battered by her father-in-law, and that leads to all sorts of problems for her and her fellow traveling librarians, one of whom is also a target of this nasty man, because she lives her life on her terms, and that is anathema to a man like him.

Those of you who know me, who read this blog, know that I am no fan of patriarchal societies, families, religions, or workplaces. I cannot now (and was never able to from the time I was a teenager), support policies and laws that are unjust to, exclude or demean women. The one way to guarantee that I will fight for something is for men I have no respect for tell me how women should live, work, think, or otherwise exist. If you want to fire me up, that is the sure-fire way to do it.

Firstly, it is important to mention that I respect a lot of men. I have written many times in this blog about my bosses at my first job in Manhattan and how much they supported and encouraged me in my scientific career. I’ve talked about my father and what a good man he was; he never told me directly that I could not do something in the society I was growing up in because I was a woman. We rarely talked about the difficulties I might face because I was a woman, but when we did I knew that was because he wished to protect me from some of the crap he knew I would eventually face, especially in the work world. So many times I wish he was still alive so that I could talk to him about some of the things that I’ve experienced up through the years. One of the last conversations I had with him shortly before he died was one where he told me that he just wanted me to be happy, and that meant more to me than anything else at that time. He did not say to me that I should follow the written and unwritten rules in society for how women should live and behave, he did not say to me that I should abide by the tenets of my religion when it came to my personal life (nor did my mother). He did not push me to marry or to have children or to do any of the traditional things that women were often expected to do. He left those decisions up to me. He would never have forced me to marry someone I did not love. He was no patriarch. Yes, he could be strict and stubborn at times, but he was both a smart and empathic man. He felt others’ pain, responded to it by trying to alleviate it, often at times when he had his own pain, especially as he got older. One of the nicest memories I have is when he called me at work one day just to tell me he loved me. I was lucky to have him as my father. A lot of men simply cannot hold a candle to him.

The men I don’t respect are the ones who want to run roughshod over you, the ones who dominate you in all conversations with them, who do not acknowledge that you have anything important to say, who bully women verbally and psychologically, who never fail to remind you that nothing you do is good enough for them (and of course they know exactly what you should do to better yourself). You might think that they don’t exist in 2020, but they do. They are the men who know best—ALWAYS. They know what is best for you, what you SHOULD do, who become ill-tempered or directly angry when you don’t agree with them or follow their 'advice'. They are the men who berate you for your opinions, privately or in front of others (preferably in front of others so that they look powerful and you are humiliated). They are the men who compete with you instead of supporting you as mentors. They are the men who will offer support but only when they are interested in you sexually. They are the men who make rude, nasty, or sexually-tinged remarks, the ones who think they are being funny by doing so. They are the powerful men who hold others down, women and men alike. They are the ones who work behind the scenes to keep others down, freeze others out, and destroy others’ careers if they challenge them in any way. They are the ones who pull the strings; others should just dance to their tune like the good puppets they think others are.

I want liberty and justice for all. I don’t want a continual war between the sexes, but I don’t want women to surrender in all situations just to keep the peace and to preserve relationships. Some marriages should end, rightfully so, if women and children are treated badly/abused by their husbands and fathers. There is no point in preserving such marriages, and no reason for society to support abusive patriarchy at all costs. This type of patriarchy destroys lives and costs society a lot—abused children need a lot of support to get past the trauma of their early lives, so that they do not grow up to perpetuate the pattern of abuse. Patriarchy may have served a purpose at one time, although I’m not sure what that was. That was a time when men ruled society and women and children were considered to be their property. In modern Western societies, women and children are no longer the property of men, but some of the subtle patriarchal attitudes remain in the workplace and in personal life. Why are there still discussions and surveys about who does the most housework in the home? If both husband and wife work full-time, they should be sharing the chores equally. That brings me back to my father; after a long day at work and the commute home from Manhattan to the suburbs, he had a nap before dinner, and then his evenings were spent focused on us before we went to bed. He made sure we did our homework, quizzed us for tomorrow’s tests, and helped us with different subjects. By the time we went to bed, he had perhaps an hour to read a good book before he ended up asleep in his chair. That was my dad. He enjoyed spending time with his children; he wasn’t constantly running off to pursue this or that hobby, and he didn’t complain about that, nor did my mother. Many of my friends had fathers who behaved similarly; they know their fathers loved them. So not all men who grew up in patriarchal times behaved the way they were expected to behave; not all of them bought into the hype that success meant sacrificing your family on the altar of money, greed, arrogance and betrayal.

Howards End--the TV series

I watched this four-part series from 2018 last night, and can highly recommend it. It is based on the book Howards End by EM Forster. Matthew Macfadyen, Hayley Atwell, Philippa Coulthard and the rest of the cast are just wonderful. Rather than my writing a review about it, I'll include the Imdb link to the show: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2577192/?ref_=ttexrv_exrv_tt   Enjoy watching some excellent television.........

A quote from Jackson Katz's book The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help

I haven't read Jackson Katz's book The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help, but I am impressed by this quote from his book. It's uncomfortable to read it, and yet, if you are a woman, you learn to do many of these things already when you are quite young. Here is the quote:

“I draw a line down the middle of a chalkboard, sketching a male symbol on one side and a female symbol on the other. Then I ask just the men: What steps do you guys take, on a daily basis, to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? At first there is a kind of awkward silence as the men try to figure out if they've been asked a trick question. The silence gives way to a smattering of nervous laughter. Occasionally, a young guy will raise his hand and say, 'I stay out of prison.' This is typically followed by another moment of laughter, before someone finally raises his hand and soberly states, 'Nothing. I don't think about it.' Then I ask women the same question. What steps do you take on a daily basis to prevent yourselves from being sexually assaulted? Women throughout the audience immediately start raising their hands. As the men sit in stunned silence, the women recount safety precautions they take as part of their daily routine. Here are some of their answers: Hold my keys as a potential weapon. Look in the back seat of the car before getting in. Carry a cell phone. Don't go jogging at night. Lock all the windows when I sleep, even on hot summer nights. Be careful not to drink too much. Don't put my drink down and come back to it; make sure I see it being poured. Own a big dog. Carry Mace or pepper spray. Have an unlisted phone number. Have a man's voice on my answering machine. Park in well-lit areas. Don't use parking garages. Don't get on elevators with only one man, or with a group of men. Vary my route home from work. Watch what I wear. Don't use highway rest areas. Use a home alarm system. Don't wear headphones when jogging. Avoid forests or wooded areas, even in the daytime. Don't take a first-floor apartment. Go out in groups. Own a firearm. Meet men on first dates in public places. Make sure to have a car or cab fare. Don't make eye contact with men on the street. Make assertive eye contact with men on the street.”

― Jackson Katz, The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help


I find it sad that we have come to this point in society, where women cannot really trust men to treat them respectfully. Where women cannot trust men to help them if they are threatened with sexual assault (when the men that could help just stand there and watch as their friends rape a woman). Where women are treated like objects for men's sexual (often violent) proclivities. Where 'no' is always taken as 'yes'. What has brought us to this point? Has hardcore porn played a role? I think it has. But of course that view is poo-pooed by so many people who want so desperately to be liberal in every way. I remember my father, whose view on men was not very promising, to say the least. He would always tell me that a lot of men were just no good and that I should watch out for myself. When I was young, I didn't want to believe that what he was saying was true. But as I got older, I understood. I have met many good men, but I have also met others who were simply the opposite--crude, rude, sexually-aggressive, violent, hate-filled, and envious. Men who think everything is a joke. Men who disrespect women by interrupting them constantly, belittling what they say, overpowering them by yelling, and so on. Men who become angry when told 'no'. Men who abuse women verbally (telling them they're stupid, for example), psychologically, and physically. The list goes on. So if Jackson Katz can teach men how to behave respectfully toward women, kudos to him. He deserves a star in my book.

What Employees Want and Why Employers Should Make Sure They Get It

Available on Amazon
https://tinyurl.com/y84hcu9j

Day 2 of the favorite novel FB challenge

I can recommend both the book and the film (from 1988). Milan Kundera is a wonderful writer; I've read several other books by him, but this is the one I like best.

Facebook's new seven-day challenge--Post the cover of a novel that you love each day

Facebook now has another seven-day challenge: "For seven days, I post the cover of a novel that I love -- no review and no explanation -- and each day that I post, I nominate a friend for the challenge."

I'll be posting my favorites on Facebook and here too for seven days. Here's favorite #1--A Perfect Spy, by John le Carré. A Perfect Spy is really a perfect book; a masterpiece of psychological insight into the life of  double agent Magnus Pym, whose father was a con man and a huge influence on his life. I won't give the story away; I will just say that you won't want to put it down.

And after you read the book, I recommend the BBC TV series of the same name that was first broadcast in 1987:   http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092425/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Praise for my Blindsided book

I published the second paperback edition of my book Blindsided--Recognizing and Dealing with Passive-Aggressive Leadership in the Workplace in 2009. Nine years ago! I am still hearing from readers who are fans of my book. It is always heartening to read their words to me. Some tell me that they loved the book; others that it is insightful and interesting. They make me realize that I did a good thing by writing it. I shared disheartening work experiences at a time in my work life that nearly devastated me psychologically. I understand enough about myself to know that writing the book was therapeutic. I re-read parts of it from time to time and realize that many of my insights from that time were spot on. I wrote a good book, an inspired book. It is true what people say--times of sadness and depression can sharpen your insights and understanding. So if pain is good for something, it is good for mental growth. It forces you out of your comfort zone; it forces you to hop out into the unknown. And that is scary as all get-out. But had I not hopped out into the unknown, I would never have gotten the chance to become a writer. I am very glad that I got that chance. And I am very glad for the opportunity to meet my readers, and for the knowledge that I have in some way touched their lives. It's a humbling experience to hear from readers who share their stories with me. I think they feel less alone knowing that someone else has experienced what they have experienced; I know that I certainly feel less alone because they wrote to me. To all my readers--thank you from the bottom of my heart, not only for reading my book but for taking the time to write to me. And for those of you who might want to read the book, here is the link to it on Amazon: http://tinyurl.com/l5xbj7y