Curiosity

The word 'curiosity' makes me curious about the actual word. What is its derivation and what does it mean? Curiosity derives from the Latin cūriōsitās, from cūriōsus "careful, diligent, curious", akin to cura "care") (Wikipedia). 

When we say that someone is curious, we usually mean that he or she is eager to know something about, to learn about, an object, person, or happening in his or her life. When we say that people have curiosity, we mean that they are interested in and invested in the life around them. They are eager to learn, to know, to explore, to experience. They want to know the whys and the hows involved in certain processes. They want to know why people behave in certain ways. They want to understand the meaning of this life, even though they know that this is the most difficult challenge of all. They don't shy away from the unknown; they investigate it and make it a part of themselves. They expand their inner lives, their spiritual lives, in order to do so. 

Curiosity is held up as a positive thing as one gets older. There is a lot of talk about retaining one's  enthusiasm for learning and for waking up each day wanting to experience all that the day has to offer. Curiosity provides a meaning and a purpose for a well-lived life, whether it means picking up a new book, finding a good film or tv series, going to a concert, discovering a new hobby (like gardening), trying a new recipe, finding a new travel destination, finding out how to be of service to others. The list is long. 

I think curiosity is whatever 'sparks' you. It's what keeps you motivated and what gives you the desire to keep going. Because each day is different, unlike the one before, even though people who say they are bored say that all the days are alike. They aren't. Bored people are missing the opportunities that each day has to offer. There are a myriad of possibilities for things to do and experience in the course of a day. I think I learned this as a scientist; a scientist's job is to explore and to test the unknown. Rarely does a scientist start an experiment knowing what the outcome will be. Curiosity is part of being a scientist, and when I look back on my career, I am very glad that I chose to be a scientist. I may no longer work as one, but scientific curiosity is a huge part of who I am and is likely to remain so. 

I can truthfully say that I am rarely, if ever, bored. There is simply too much to do and experience in this life, and I know that I will never experience all of the things I want to experience. I have a list of books that I want to read that is a mile long. Ditto for films. There are travel destinations I will never get to. I don't live my life anxious about any of this. I look forward to exploring a new city or country. I know that each day is something to look forward to, and I plan ahead in a realistic way. My brain enjoys multitasking; it can savor each new day and plan for a trip or a social event or meet-up with friends at the same time that I am making breakfast. I look forward to the planning and the trying-out of new experiences, and they can be as simple as making a new type of bread. I am grateful for life in all of the ways it presents itself. 

Two really cool recent dreams

Two of my recent dreams have fascinated me, if only because I have never dreamed like this before. Of course I was interested in their interpretations. I have been interested in dream interpretations since the early 2000s, when my friend Gisele introduced me to the writings of Edgar Cayce, a clairvoyant who examined the hidden meanings in dreams. Normally I dismiss such things since I am a born sceptic. But there was something about Cayce that intrigued me enough to not dismiss him as a quack. 

My first dream took me back to college days and to a large party with many unknown people. My husband and I were there. As always in dreams, you are suddenly someplace else, and I ended up in a long hallway in one of the college buildings. I was in a seated (yoga-like) position, but not sitting on the ground. I was rather floating/gliding along the hallway. I remember looking at my hands, and there was light flashing from my fingers. The sense of amazement that I felt was tangible. I had no idea where I was headed, but the experience was very relaxing and not at all frightening. I searched online for an interpretation of this dream, and this is what was returned from the AI overview, which in and of itself is just as cool as the dream: 

AI Overview

Dreams about gliding down a hallway while light flashes from your fingers are rich with symbolism, often pointing to a surge in personal power, transition, and spiritual or creative awakening.

Here is what these powerful dream symbols typically mean:

🌟 1. Light Flashing from Your Fingers (Manifestation and Power)

In dream psychology, hands and fingers represent your ability to manipulate your reality, create, and take action.

• Creative Energy: Flashing light suggests you have a powerful spark of inspiration or a breakthrough idea waiting to be expressed.

• Personal Power: You are realizing your own agency. It symbolizes a feeling of being "electrified" or capable of directing energy, solving problems, or bringing clarity to a situation.

• Spiritual Awakening: Light emanating from the body often represents heightened intuition, consciousness, or a deep alignment with your higher self.

2. Gliding Along a Hallway (Transition and Flow)

Hallways are classic symbols of transition, moving from one phase of life, mindset, or project to another.

• Effortless Progress: Walking suggests labor, but gliding implies that you are moving through a transitional period with grace, ease, and a sense of detachment from standard limitations.

• Lack of Grounding: Sometimes, gliding or floating indicates you are relying heavily on your intellect, spirit, or imagination, and might need to bring your focus back down to earth.

• Exploration of the Subconscious: Passing doors in a hallway can represent exploring hidden memories, untapped talents, or future opportunities.

🔄 Putting It Together

Your dream suggests that you are navigating a period of transition with immense creative energy and confidence. You aren't just walking through this phase of life; you are moving through it smoothly, carrying a powerful force of insight or creation right at your fingertips. You have the tools and the clarity within you to light your own path forward.

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

The second dream was equally fascinating. I was standing in a large open field and there was an atom with orbitals (shells) floating near my head, Using my index finger, I was able to touch the orbitals, thereby distorting the circles. They were fluid-like, so that touching them with my finger induced waviness. I remember the amazement at being able to do that. I studied physics and quantum chemistry for one semester each in college. This picture of an atom with orbitals is about what I remember from both courses. It's safe to say that I do not understand either field. 

The AI overview of this dream was quite intriguing. This was the answer I got:. 

That is a fascinating and deeply visual dream! Dreaming about using your finger to distort atomic orbitals blends the subatomic world of quantum mechanics with a powerful sense of personal touch and manipulation.

In physics, atomic orbitals—like the sphere of an \(s\) orbital or the figure-eight of a \(p\) orbital—are not solid objects. They are mathematical probability clouds showing where an electron is likely to be.

Here is what your subconscious might be playing with in a dream like this:

🔬 The Symbolism of the Dream

• Bending Reality: Orbitals represent the fundamental building blocks of matter. Distorting them with a single finger suggests a subconscious desire for extreme control, influence, or creativity over your environment or a complex situation in your waking life.

• Making the Invisible Visible: Quantum mechanics is famously abstract and impossible to see with the naked eye. Your dream brought the microscopic world into the macroscopic realm, meaning you might be trying to grasp, visualize, or solve a highly abstract problem right now.

• The "Observer Effect" Made Literal: In quantum physics, the act of observing or interacting with a system changes its state. Your dream took this concept literally—your physical touch directly warped the quantum state of the atom.

🌌 Visualizing the Distortion

If you were to actually warp an orbital, you would be changing the energy states of the electrons. In a macro-world visualization, it might look like pulling and stretching a glowing, fluid-like cloud of neon light, forcing the electron probabilities to bunch up where your finger pushes, creating beautiful, irregular geometric ripples.

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

So there you have it--two equally fascinating dreams with symbolism that is entirely new to me. Neither dream was unpleasant, rather, both intrigued me and made me curious about what they could mean. Of course, they could just reflect the abstractness of the workings of the mind, but in any case, I'd love to dream more about being able to glide along a hallway, to fly of my own accord (I've had dreams that I could fly since I was a child), and to change the course of direction with a single touch. Almost like magic. 

Well-said

I couldn't have said this better myself.......

 

Self-absorbed people

Apropos my last post, I got to thinking about people who are very wrapped up in themselves, totally self-absorbed (narcissistic), oblivious really to the goings-on in others' lives. These are the kinds of people who rarely ask you how your day went, how your trip abroad was, what you think about this or that. They listen only superficially to what you have to say. And they are rarely able to show any sort of gratitude for a gift, advice, or moral support. They react casually to most things, dismissive almost. When you are together with them, you feel unimportant and excluded at the end of an evening together. Obviously these are not good friends or family members and it would be a mistake to think of them in that way. Mostly you can choose not to deal with them or to avoid them. But not always, for example, work situations where such people are your leaders and/or colleagues. 

These people don't understand the meaning of generosity of spirit, of warmth, of kindness, or of civility. They don't understand themselves and their own needs, because if they did, they'd be warmer and kinder because they would want to be treated with warmth and kindness. Some of these kinds of people are just plain stupid; they lack the self-introspection that would allow them to see their own shortcomings. They're not interested in changing or acquiring an introspective spirit. These are people one can choose to avoid in personal and social situations; it's more difficult in work-related situations. 

Choose wisely

The FB page Buddhism has suddenly appeared in my feed. Normally I don't pay much attention to extraneous sites, but this one caught my eye because it feels 'real'. Or at least it presents truthful content to which I can relate. I especially like any content that advises you to walk away from toxic situations and/or people. Always a good reminder. There's no changing them and it's best to care about yourself in the sense of keeping your sanity and moral clarity. Someone asked me recently if you always choose to walk away from such situations or people, if that will lead to not caring about them at all. I answer no. You can always make the decision to care about toxic people, but you do not need to subject yourself to their toxicity. You can wish them well and go on about your own life, unencumbered by their negativity. And by negativity, I mean extreme negativity, the kind that demoralizes and immobilizes you. That type of negativity is soul-crushing and ultimately life-crushing. 

 

New York in my heart, for always

My annual trip to New York this year started in Manhattan, where I met Cindy, a college friend, on the first weekend of September (5-6). We stayed at the Warwick Hotel in midtown, one of our favorite hotels in NYC. As luck would have it, the weather cooperated with our plans, which included a jazz cruise on the Hudson River (leaving from Chelsea Piers) and attending the musical Schmigadoon. The jazz cruise was quite enjoyable, and moving--especially when we drove past the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. This at a time in the USA when it doesn't seem that immigrants are particularly welcome anymore. I thought about my paternal grandparents who came from Italy in the early 1900s and who made a life for themselves, first in Brooklyn and then in Tarrytown, New York. They never returned to visit Italy, which must have been quite sad for both of them. Cindy and I also got tickets to see the musical Schmigadoon which spoofs on other musicals like Brigadoon and Oklahoma, but that is also quite touching in its own way. I can recommend both the cruise and the musical. 

The following week included visits with my sister Renata and her husband Tim and their new dog--Burrito, as well as visits with good friends Maryann and Gordon from my Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center days, and with Stef, a good friend from childhood. The weekend of September 12-13 was spent with Judy, my good friend from high school, and her two sisters Betty and Joan. We drove up to Hyde Park, NY on Saturday to visit the Culinary Institute of America, where we ate a very good lunch and enjoyed a food tasting event and a tour of the institute. On Sunday, we managed to visit Springwood, Franklin D Roosevelt's summer home on the Hudson River, and Val-Kill, Eleanor Roosevelt's place of business and eventual home located a short distance away from Springwood, across the main road. Both are national historic sites. I've written about FDR's home before in a 2016 post: A New Yorker in Oslo: Making memories--two weeks in the States  Visiting Val-Kill 'completed' the story of the Roosevelts for me. FDR and Eleanor were a good political team; their marriage endured a number of infidelities, but they supported and defended each other and had each other's backs. On Monday, the four of us took a 1.5 hour boat trip on the Hudson River that departed from Kingston, NY. We had lovely weather and managed to see the Esopus lighthouse as well as some Gilded Age estates along the Hudson River. 

I then visited with Jola, another good friend from my Memorial Sloan-Kettering days, and we spent our time together talking, catching up, eating some good lunches and dinners, driving around Tarrytown, and visiting Untermyer Park and Gardens in Yonkers, NY, which I have written about before (A New Yorker in Oslo: Two gardens worth visiting--Untermyer Gardens and the New York Botanical Garden). And then I made my way to Jean's house (I call it my second home), where I always end my NY vacations. Jean and I go way back to high school; we have a lot of shared history and are very close friends. Maria, another close friend from childhood, came down for the four days I was there, and we hung out together, eating, talking up a storm (Jean calls it incessant gabbing), and having fun. We've settled on a visit to St. Augustine in Florida for this coming winter's annual trip. St. Augustine has history, culture, and relaxing beaches. Our trips together have become something to which we really look forward. The major consideration is the weather, so we are keeping our fingers crossed that snow and/or bitter cold won't throw any major wrenches into our plans. 

Of course, no trip of mine would be complete without a snafu here or there! This time it was a major circuit break/cut in the cables that control the air traffic control grid for the NYC airports. All flights were cancelled at Newark, La Guardia, JFK, Teterboro, and Philadelphia airports on the afternoon of Monday September 21. My flight back to Oslo on SAS was cancelled, but SAS did manage to rebook me on a later flight (United) to Brussels (they worked quickly and efficiently to rebook me). Their hope was probably that by the time the plane left for Brussels (8:30 pm), that the circuit would have been fixed (it was). But nothing was certain and I booked a hotel room at Newark Airport just in case. A shout out to the Howard Johnson hotel at the airport for kindly refunding my money; they could have been sticklers for the regular routine of not allowing customers to cancel unless it was 24 hours prior to arrival. They made an exception for me and I thank them. 

I'm also glad that I arrived and departed New York when I did. This weekend would have been a messy affair to put it mildly--storm, wind, rain, and flooding. A Nor'easter that traveled up the East Coast of the USA, wreaking a bit of havoc and leaving a real mess in its wake. A lot of rain and flooding as far as I can see from the news reports. There would have been no boat trips and very few outdoor activities had I been there this weekend. So the weather gods were with us earlier in September!

Although traveling can be tiring and sometimes unpredictable, I love it. I love the expectation of new adventures as well as the emotional constancy of visiting with close friends and family. I have said it before but I'll say it again--I am forever grateful for the wonderful friends who grace my life. I will continue to travel until I am no longer able to travel. It would have to be poor health only that would stop me from seeing those I love. In my next post, I'll include some photos of the places we visited on this trip. 

More about Ad orientem

I have looked further into the Ad orientem issue and understood that it has been quite controversial for quite some time. Apparently the Ad orientem format is traditionally preferred because it forces the congregation to focus on the actual celebration of the mass and not on the priest who is saying the mass. It is supposed to be more reverential. I had never thought about this before and in truth I've never particularly focused on the priest who says mass except when he steps into the pulpit to deliver his sermon. 

I'm including some links in this post so that you can read more about it if you are so inclined. 

Facing the People, or Facing the Altar? | Catholic Answers Magazine

Ad Orientem – Immaculate Conception Catholic Church

Why is Ad Orientem worship so controversial?

I retain my opinion--that I prefer the Versus Populum format of the liturgy, where the priest faces the congregation while saying mass. I understand that Ad orientem is the historical and long-practiced way of saying mass. It doesn't change my viewpoint. 

If we are first going to choose tradition and take up this priestly orientation again in order to promote reverence and avoid distractions, then my suggestion is to go further and ban the use of guitars and all other musical instruments except the use of the organ in church. I would also ban the singing of modern songs/hymns and focus only on the time-honored traditional hymns that we grew up with (and that many people got tired of--not me). I would ban musical groups from performing in church at Easter and Christmastime. I would ban singing altogether with the exception of church choirs that sing only traditional church music. We did not have musical groups performing prior to Vatican II, so they are not necessary to the celebration of mass. Nor did we have liturgical dances on the altar (as was the case at times when I was a teenager). They are distractions. We have one Latin mass (the high mass) each week on Sundays here in Oslo at my church. If we are going backward in time, then all the masses should be celebrated in Latin as that is the language of the early church. Why focus on changing only one aspect of the mass? 

It has become quite silly in my opinion to focus on changing only one thing--how the priest faces during the celebration. I have never focused on the priest except when he faces us to give his sermon, which we could also do without since most of the priests simply regurgitate the gospel that can speak for itself for the most part. We can return to my childhood days when my mother would attend weekday masses that were quiet, short, and without sermons, just the celebration of the mass. And while we're at it, remove most statues and the accompanying small chapels that honor the saints. These can also be distractions.   

I realize that I sound quite harsh (some of what I write is of course a bit satirical). But if you are going to choose tradition, then go all the way and return the church to pre-Vatican II times. Streamline every aspect of the mass and boil it down to one predictable format. If that's what the Vatican thinks is going to draw in more of the faithful, then let them try. I'm not sure that the lack of attendance at mass has to do with these things. But I don't know. Perhaps there is a backlash against all things modern. For those of you who think that I am planning to leave the church, I am not. But I am voicing my right to have an opinion. 

Time in a Bottle--Jim Croce

This song was running through my mind today, as I thought about holding on to time. How quickly it flies by. "Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives"--the opening line to the soap opera Days of Our Lives, a soap opera that my mother used to watch a long time ago. The days of our lives are fleeting. They are like sand that we pick up in our hand, only to have the sand flow through our fingers. It's hard (for me) not to be melancholy at times about the passage of time. There's no stopping it or changing its format, so there's no point really in feeling sad about it, but nonetheless, I do sometimes. 

Ad Orientem and Versus Populem

The mass I normally attend on Sunday mornings, the 9:30 am Norwegian mass in the St. Joseph chapel, has changed its format. By that I mean that the priest, who used to face the congregation when he celebrated mass (versus populem or toward the people), now faced away from the congregation (ad orientem or toward the east). I stayed in my pew for all of ten minutes and then left the church, hoping that the 9:30 am English mass at St. Olav's church across the street would have the usual format with the priest facing us. Luckily that was the case. But this is going to become a dilemma for me if the ad orientem format completely replaces versus populem. The St. Joseph chapel has now physically moved its altar against the back wall so that the priest has to face away from us. This was done deliberately and I have no idea why. I only know that I hate the change. I find it rude, stiff, and unwelcoming. The priests have celebrated masses versus populem for over sixty years, since the Vatican II Council, and I see no reason to change the format now. This means that all masses in the chapel will now have the priest facing away from us, and God only knows how long it will be before the masses in the larger church will remain versus populem. And this is not just Oslo, Norway. It's also the case in many churches in the USA, New York City and Tarrytown among them. I have to ask why. The decision to change the format is up to the local bishops and pastors. This means that the pastor of St. Olav's church decided to change the format without even consulting his congregation, asking us what we think of such a change. The ad orientem format is supposed to align the congregation with the priest so that we all face the same way in the celebration of the liturgy. It is supposed to be more solemn and respectful and less narcissistic. The focus is supposed to be more on solemn worship and less on emotion and feelings. Again, it makes no sense to me. 

You may think that I am making a mountain out of a molehill. You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that this is another example of 'change for the sake of change'. The actual change has neither been discussed nor explained to the congregation. It's just another example of a religious patriarchy forcing unnecessary changes on the faithful. 

So I wrote to the church pastor and told him how I felt. I mentioned that I will no longer consider increasing my financial support of the church, as I had actually thought about doing. That's life, and I owe no explanations to anyone. I mentioned that Christ sat around a table at the Last Supper and broke bread with his disciples. He didn't have his back turned to them. He wasn't rude or unwelcoming. I said that I found it rude that the priest now faced away from us. We could hardly hear what he said as he mumbled to himself. I did not feel more in touch with the celebration of mass; I felt annoyed and disappointed. Irritated at a religious patriarchy that again decides what is best for everyone. They will not drag in more churchgoers this way. I need only think of the Church of St. Vincent de Paul in Albany NY that has its altar at the center of the church and chairs for the congregation clustered in a circle around it. Those masses are packed with people. Those masses are welcoming, inclusive, warm, not stiff. I've written about this church before: A New Yorker in Oslo: The Church of St. Vincent de Paul I wish there were more like them, and I hope that they do not change their format. 

The pastor of my church did write back to me, thanking me for my concerns. He hoped that we could one day sit down and discuss our viewpoints. I wrote back and reiterated my concerns and my disappointment, and mentioned that perhaps the church as a whole should consider addressing the pedophile scandals that have plagued the Catholic church for many years. Those are the issues that need addressing and resolving, not worrying about changing the orientation of how the priest says mass. I have not received a reply and I know that I won't. Ad orientem or versus populem is a distraction from the more important issues facing the church. For the first time ever in my life, I wished that I was at a service in a Protestant church, where women can be ministers and where the tone is welcoming and inclusive, the way that Christ would have wanted it, in my opinion. I wonder sometimes if any of the religious clergy actually consider what Christ would have wanted or preferred. They think they know with certainty what Christ wants, because they are ordained as priests. But I don't think they do, in my humble opinion. They're only human, and humans are not infallible. 

(For an interesting discussion and debate of these issues, I refer you to this article: Ad Orientem: Thoughts on debating the non-essential | Catholic Culture The author presents the pros and cons in depth. But still, I want the priest to face us when he says mass. It's what I've know for my entire life, and I don't see the point of this change now, especially when there are no good reasons for and explanations of it). 

When is enough, enough?

Taylor Sheridan is a good writer who has written and produced some very good series. So therefore I have to ask--what's with the sexual sadism and gratuitous nudity in the series 1923? What's the point of it? And why do we need to see this? There are enough viewers so that it's not necessary to justify showing this to audiences in order to drag them in and keep them hooked. Or is that the motivation? I really don't know.

We're done watching 1923, and while I think it's a good series overall, I have major problems with Sheridan's treatment of women. They get battered and pushed around an awful lot, a little too often. There is sadism, rape and sexual abuse; there is the threat of rape and sexual abuse, as well as sexual perversions that are graphically portrayed. Do we need this in a world that is already overly-violent to women? No. In 1923, we've been witness to lesbian rape scenes, sadism toward prostitutes, and unnecessary nudity. It's cringeworthy and gratuitous. These types of scenes make me wonder about the motivation of the writer. What is he trying to impart? What is the point of these scenes? To titillate? To show cruelty in all its grotesqueness? Isn't that what horror films are for? Perhaps Sheridan would defend this by saying that the wild west was a brutal place, and that men ruled it. Sure it was, and sure they did (and still do rule the world, despite the advances that women have made during the past fifty years). We all know that. It was survival of the fittest, dog eat dog, every man for himself. Women had to be tough in order to survive. Women had to know how to shoot to kill. But still, they were abused at the hands of physically stronger, evil, cruel, sadistic men, and in some cases, sadistic women. Many didn't survive. Many men didn't survive either. You carried a gun at all times. Out in the wilderness, on the plains, you were subject to the elements--weather, droughts, locust plagues, animal attacks, and attacks by cruel human beings. And many women died in childbirth. But still, you don't need to show it all. If you do, then why stop at the savagery of men? Why not show wolves, bears and mountain lions ripping men and women apart and eating them? Why is that off limits? Why not show rotting corpses, beheadings and close-ups of scalping? Because there are limits and Sheridan knows that. But when it comes to sexual scenes, he can push the limits. Why push them? 

I sometimes wonder how average ordinary men would feel if the majority of television programming showed men being raped or sexually abused in graphic detail. I doubt that most men would find it entertaining. Yet the depiction of women being raped or sexually abused passes for entertainment. Why? Because men run the show in nearly every arena, and defend this by saying that this is the way it was at those times in history. If the women in Sheridan's series aren't being battered and abused, then they are often portrayed as temptresses or harridans, with some exceptions. I think Dutton Ranch is the show I like the best, mostly because the main female character, Beth, played by Kelly Reilly, is one tough lady with a strong sense of justice who can hold her own. Helen Mirren and Michele Pfeiffer also play strong women in 1923 and The Madison, respectively. I don't want to see men and women being raped, being scalped, being tortured, being eaten by wild animals. You can very well insinuate that those things will happen, but you do not need to show them in gory detail. If viewers want that, they can go to see any number of horror films that will show them exactly that. 

Reflections on the tunnels in which we find ourselves

I've been thinking lately about the tunnels that we let ourselves enter and then get lost in. It struck me that we should be more careful about the tunnels we choose to enter, because it may be quite difficult to extricate ourselves or to find the way out once we're halfway in. I've never liked tunnels because I'm claustrophobic, so I literally avoid real tunnels if I can. But avoiding the figurative ones is not as easy, because sometimes you don't realize you've tunneled yourself until you're lost or can't find your way out. 

We live in a society that is constantly striving to seduce us, to engage us, to capture our attention, to keep us on our phones and scrolling through our feeds on social media. A society that wants to suck us into one or another tunnel. Excessive use of social media is one type of tunnel that sucks us in and from which it's hard to extricate ourselves. Other tunnels are certain schools of thought, political philosophies, religious beliefs, and so on. Any type of extremist beliefs, whether they be political and/or religious, are dangerous tunnels to enter because they only lead us deeper into them. The tunnels get darker and deeper and narrower, like caves, and it becomes harder to see the exits or how to turn around. Much like a forest that we can wander into and in which we lose our bearings. The light disappears and the forest begins to impede our movements. That's what eventually happens; we trap ourselves into a mental immobility. We lose flexibility, freedom of thought, freedom to change our minds. 

I remember Christ saying in one of the gospels that we have to be vigilant, be constantly aware, because we can never know when he will return. Keeping the lamps lit was what I remember from that reading. Always at the ready--spiritual readiness. If we have wandered too deeply into our tunnels, the lamps will go out and we won't find out way out. We won't be ready. It's a dark thought, one that can scare me if I focus on it. Loss of hope, despair, negativity--these are other tunnels from which it's difficult to extricate ourselves. Staying vigilant--that is our hope and our salvation. Guarding against a sheep mentality--thinking and doing what most others are doing--is our salvation. We were given intelligence for a reason; we should use it often and responsibly. 

The value of keeping your mouth shut

This post is inspired by one person who never shuts up. He thinks that everything he has to say is worth listening to. He thinks that every utterance that comes out of his mouth is pure gold. It isn't, not by a long shot. He is insulting, aggressive, snotty, mean, angry, vengeful and old. Grumpy old man. Up all night, can't sleep, taking out his vitriol on others. There are a lot of grumpy old men, but most of them are not in leadership positions, thankfully. 

There is one thing he is good for, and that is inspiring young people to think before they speak, if they open their mouths at all. My mother used to say 'if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all'. She was right. We were also taught not to comment on other people's appearances. Her generation was right about so many things. They had lived through the Great Depression and WWII and knew what true hardship was. They were careful with their words because they were taught to be careful. Children were taught to 'not speak until they were spoken to'. We as children could not just mouth off constantly; our parents would not have tolerated it. The value of monitored speech can be debated, but it made for a quieter world. And perhaps a nicer one. 

Sometimes I just want to scream out 'shut the f--k up'. Please, all you politicians who think your words are so impactful. I listened to JD Vance recently talking about how he thought Joe Biden ate an ice cream cone in a weird way, and thought--please just shut up. You're making a fool of yourself and embarrassing yourself in front of your children. I don't care if you are Ivy-league-educated. I don't care if you have written a best-selling book. I don't care. Just shut up. 

And that goes for all the grumpy old men who feel entitled to comment on women's attractiveness whenever they feel outclassed or challenged by women. They feel entitled to say that women are ugly, or that they look like men, or that they have lost their looks. The list of insults is long. I wonder if any of these men have taken a long look at themselves in the mirror lately. Do they see what the rest of us see and are mostly too polite to comment on? Perhaps more of us should speak the truth about how they look. Really, their narcissism and ignorance boggle the mind. Again, just shut up. No one wants to hear you.

Because here's the value in a collective societal shut-up. We others get a chance to think for ourselves, to enjoy the peace of reflection. We get a chance to focus on things that matter to us, rather than be continually distracted by your nonsense. This collective shut-up goes not only for politicians, but for media pundits and news-people who need to find something interesting to say 24/7. How to find peace? Turn off the tv and tune out social media. It's hard to do. We are addicted to scrolling on our devices. That's how we get our news updates nowadays. But it's a two-edged sword. It's good to stay abreast of what's happening in society, but we have to learn when and where to draw the line. We need quiet time in order to function normally. We cannot be 'on' all the time, listening to the babble that many politicians spout. I am not anti-government, I am anti-babbling. I am anti-nonsense. I don't want to listen to rambling stupid speeches, I don't want to listen to angry old men tell me how to think and feel. And this goes for any other angry old men who are in our faces 24/7, poisoning our society with their vitriol. 

Just shut up. 

Happy 250th Birthday, America!

I am hopeful again, after several years where I had begun to wonder if the USA would survive the onslaught of grifting and negativity in which so many of its leading politicians participate. I have written so many times about how money rules in politics. It still does. But there are rising voices against this tide, voices that proclaim that the USA remains a country committed to the highest principles--freedom, justice, opportunities for all. Voices that say that how much money you have cannot define your worth as a human being. Voices that are less capitalist and more, dare I say it, socialist, but in the best way. Call it Christian socialism--concern for others, easing the financial burdens of ordinary people, making housing accessible for more people. The list is long. I see that some universities and educational institutions are making tuition free or at least reducing the annual fees. We are a diverse country populated by blue- and white-collar workers, and the rich. We cannot make life simplest for the rich and ignore the others. It cannot work that way. We cannot continue to be a divided nation, undergoing a cold civil war. That way of thinking is simply is not sustainable in the long run. Average ordinary people do not want polarization, division, war, aggression, bitterness, negativity. If you do, there has to be something wrong with you if that's what floats your boat. A country has to appeal to the best ideals in its citizenry. It has to inspire them with hope and the possibility for change. Otherwise it is a nation in decline. 

So Happy 250th Birthday, America! My country by birth. Happy July 4th! I root for you and I know that you will survive this dark period in your history. There are new leaders on the horizon who will lead the country in a new direction, and it's about time. The useless dinosaurs will soon become extinct. 

Summer in the city

I enjoy living in a city for the most part. I like having people around me, knowing that I am in the midst of a sea of people. When I worked in Manhattan, there was something about the hustle and bustle of people on their way to and from work--the commuters. I liked being a part of the movement, the buoyancy, the spirit, the goal oriented-ness, and the anonymity. As I get older, I appreciate having what I need around me, and not having to get into a car and drive to get what I need as I would have to do if I lived more rurally. I can leave my home and walk (takes all of five minutes) to the local shopping center to the supermarket, pharmacy, liquor store, bookstore, home goods store, and bakery. The latter is great to have on chilly days, when we stop in for a pastry and a cup of coffee. The hospitals and medical centers are also close by, and that aspect is not to be dismissed as one gets older. I know people who live an hour or more away from the nearest hospital, and that can mean the difference between life and death in an emergency. 

The public transportation system in Oslo functions well and covers most of the city. I have an app that lets me buy different kinds of tickets for the trams and buses, and also lets me connect to the trains that take you to the towns and cities surrounding Oslo. That's a plus. I use my electric bike during the summer months, and there are plenty of bike lanes to get me where I want to go. Also a plus. Oslo is a livable city and I enjoy living here, as do many people. That may be a problem for the future, because it is getting more crowded for each year that passes and there simply isn't enough housing to accommodate all those who wish to live here. 

I do look forward to the exodus of Oslo folk when July comes, vacation time rolls around and people go to their summer cottages or travel to other countries. The city gets quieter and more relaxed, which coincides perfectly with a truly peaceful summer feeling. I remember that feeling from many years ago, when I would travel into Manhattan on Sundays during the summer months. Manhattan was then quiet, peaceful, and mostly devoid of crowds. A joy to be there. That was mostly because the commuters who normally traveled into and out of the city for work, were absent on the weekends, and that was true for any time of the year. But during the summer months, true (and wealthy) Manhattanites went to their summer homes on Long Island for the weekend or for a few weeks. 

I don't want to live rurally, I never have, in the middle of a forest for example. I could very well live in the suburbs (like where I grew up--a small river town) as long as they're close to stores and hospitals. I don't want to have to deal with bears and coyotes and other wild animals that have slowly made a return to upstate New York, for example. Even where I grew up, in Tarrytown, there are now coyotes and bears that can be found in the forested parks along the river where we used to hang out as teenagers. I don't want to meet them, at least not by myself. I'm glad for their return, and I don't want them eliminated, but I would not walk by myself in some of those parks anymore, as I used to do just ten years ago. You may meet a fox in Oslo, as sightings have become more frequent, but they tend to run in the opposite direction when they see you. I would rather meet a fox than an angry badger; the latter will also run from you, but if you surprise it, it may hiss and growl and act menacingly. 

We tend not to plan two-week or longer vacations anymore during July and August for the most part. That's because the weather is usually very nice during the summers here, which is also good for my garden. Plus it means some enjoyable boat trips together with immediate family. As far as my garden goes, I cannot just leave it for several weeks without a backup plan, which is usually that my nearest garden neighbor in the allotment garden waters it for me when I'm away, and vice versa. That's a plus, to have garden neighbors who will look after your garden for you if you go away or are sick. Again, the advantages of being together with a group of (like-minded) people. They too enjoy summer in the city like I do. 

Anxiety and a crisis at every turn

My teenage years seem so long ago, but I can remember so much about them--the insecurities, anxieties, and confusion about where I fit and didn't fit in many aspects of life. That was pre-internet. I was a good student who preferred books to most other things and that got me through the tough times. Plus I had good parents who let me be me, who didn't push me to succeed at any cost. I enjoyed studying and the pursuit of knowledge, but not the stress of exams or competition. Competition was a huge part of our growing up, and while I think it's necessary to inspire the ambition to succeed, too much of it is not a good thing. There is too much of it now among teenagers, but not in the traditional ways--studies and sports. Nowadays it has more to do with online activities--listening to influencers, watching and following TikTok videos, and constantly trying to live up to beauty and social standards that are impossible to live up to. 

We did not have internet when we were teenagers, and the more I read, the more glad I am that we didn't. It must be exhausting and stressful for teenagers now to be coupled to internet and social media 24/7, worrying about where they fit not only on a personal level but on a societal and global level as well. Young people now are bombarded with the issues of the world and their societies at every turn--wars, violence, crime, climate change, politics, dating, planning a future, getting a job, buying a house, and so many other things that were easier to keep at bay when we were teenagers. We could deal with these issues one or two at a time. Not anymore. No wonder so many of today's teenagers suffer from anxiety issues. We had tv news, radio news and newspapers, but we could limit our access to them. Or a better way of putting it--they limited themselves. News was not 24/7 like it is now, ditto for newspapers that were published as morning and/or afternoon editions. Reading a newspaper was something you did at the beginning of the day; the weekend editions were larger and you could spend a day or two perusing them. But there was no stress attached to reading them, even though the news they reported wasn't good for the most part. There were wars, violence, crime and all the rest of society's ills at that time too. But for some reason reading about them wasn't overwhelming like it is now. Perhaps there is something to that--reading about an event that has taken place rather than having it blasted at you 24/7 on tv and social media. Everything seems to have a sense of urgency now. A crisis at every turn. If it's exhausting for adults, I can only imagine that it is overwhelming for teenagers who haven't lived long enough to learn how to filter out what is psychologically harmful for them. Parents have to emphasize that to their children--to uncouple from their devices, to slow down, to relax, to read a book, to show them how to enjoy family life. But that means that parents too have to do the same--uncouple from their devices and be present for their spouses and families. I understand that it's not always easy to do this, but it's necessary. 

Using wealth for good purposes

I keep thinking about how the gap between the rich and the poor gets wider and wider for each year that passes. The injustice of it. It has nothing to do with envy. I don't want huge amounts of wealth and never have. My dream as a child was never to become wealthy, but rather to have a rewarding career that paid decent wages, enough to live on with the possibility to save toward a house or car or some nice vacations. I've achieved that. I can't imagine what I would do with huge amounts of wealth--as in billions of dollars. I'd probably give it away like the philanthropists Melinda French Gates and MacKenzie Scott. Seriously, what does one need or even do with all that money? 

There's only so much one can accumulate in this life. You can't take it with you, as the old saying goes. The ultra-wealthy have multiple homes--huge homes, private jets, luxury yachts, the best of everything. But what is the best of everything? How would you define the best food ever? Or the most beautiful home? It's all subjective, dependent upon what we like or dislike. I think we are designed to be perpetually unsatisfied, always in search of the new 'best' thing on which we can spend money. But do we need all the things we buy, whether we're ultra-rich or simply well-off? 

When you have to find excuses for what to do with your money, then you have too much of it and can give a lot of it away. Give more to charities than you would normally do. Do it quietly so that no one knows what you've done. Give more to your churches. Finance sorely-needed school renovations or road renovations. Donate money to local gardens and parks. Pick a cause. Me, I'd go for beautification of cities and towns--public gardens, botanical gardens, many more allotment gardens, public parks--the list is long. It would be a wonderful idea to get more people interested in gardening and growing their own food. A good idea to get young people off their phones--you can't weed a garden and scroll endlessly on social media. Organizations that help the needy and the poor need your help. Build more houses for low-income families. There are plenty of projects to support that need your help. And how you help will determine the future of many of them. Rather than buying a private jet with your millions, why not buy up thousands of acres of land to give to the state(s) with the sole purpose of preserving the land for posterity. The Rockefeller family did that The Rockefeller Legacy: Philanthropy and Conservation. We need more wealthy people like them and less of those whose flashy lifestyles and unbounded consumerism find their way into the news on a daily basis. 

Making sense of what cannot be explained or proved

Interesting sermon today at mass given by one of the more enlightened priests in our parish. He has won over a lot of parishioners with his short, concise and relevant sermons, and with his ability to lead a straightforward mass without a lot of 'extras' (singing half the mass in Latin, a long drawn-out liturgy, boring sermons that merely repeat the gospel message). This is the way you get people on board with attending mass. It tells me that it is not necessary to subject people to boring sermons and an exaggerated liturgy. There is room for hymns and music, yes, but there should be room for a mass or two each week that is short and to the point. 

The sermon today had to do with faith--belief in some of the things that the church teaches, for example, the Trinity. Or that communion is the intake of the body and blood of Christ. He stressed that the latter is not just a symbolic idea. I've always wondered about this, because it is one of the things that makes Catholicism different from Protestantism. I've accepted certain Catholic theological ideas on faith alone, because there is no proving what we say we believe in. And that was the priest's point. We live in a world that wants proof, wants to measure and define everything, a world that wants explanations for all things related to religious faith. But in other areas of our lives, we 'accept' things that are impossible to explain, define or prove. So why should our religious beliefs be any different than what we accept on faith when we talk about love, trust, fidelity, and hope. We believe in love, in the existence of love, and while doing so, we accept that love exists with zero proof that it actually exists. We cannot really define it or explain it. We feel it, we know it to be true with our rational minds, but we cannot prove its existence. And yet we fall in love, marry, are faithful to our partners, and trust that our partners are faithful to us. We build lives based on hope, another intangible entity. The lives we live, based on love, fidelity, trust and hope reflect the existence of these things, but they are not scientific proof of them. 

This made so much sense to me. It was a perfect example of someone saying something so wise and so relevant that it will stick with you forever. It makes it easier to accept some ideas on faith alone without needing proof of them. I can accept this as a scientist, because I learned that even in science, there were thousands of things that we could not explain. But we like to believe we can explain most everything. We cannot. Some things, like religious ideas, love, fidelity, trust and hope, we must accept on faith alone without being able to define them.  

The daily dose

The daily dose of negativity, anger, rage, hubris, narcissism and curse-filled criticism spewed out on social media platforms and on news platforms of all kinds. The continual harassment that never stops and never leads anywhere. Daily haranguing of normal ordinary people who just want to go about their business and not have to deal with a rage-filled vengeful old man's problems. Because let's face it; he's old. He's more than a grumpy old man at this point; there are enough of them in the world. He is a breed apart. Every time he shows up on tv or in my social media feeds, every time there is 'something important, some crisis', yet again, that he just has to share with us, I turn the channel, close social media, turn the page. I block him out. I don't want to hear his voice or see his face. I don't want to see the faces of his family either. I don't want to have anything to do with him or them. I don't want those close to me to even talk about him, but of course that's not possible to expect.

A destructive force. A destroyer of peace of mind, calmness, clarity and rational thinking. He is chaos defined, with no focus and no real aims except to destroy others. He is a cause of anxiety in normal ordinary loving people. I ask the question that I've asked of several of his supporters--how would you like it if your husband, wife, or children behaved toward you like he does toward others? How would you like it if you got shut down every time you opened your mouth, told you were ugly or stupid, told you were useless? I never get an answer. Because there isn't one. His behavior qualifies as emotional and psychological abuse, nothing more and nothing less. I know, because I've experienced this type of abuse, many years ago. But for some reason, his supporters tolerate it. Why?

The USA is 250 years old this year. I was hoping for some positive celebrations of its history, some presentations of the historical experiment that is the country. I don't see much emphasis on a presentation of our history. I guess Americans have to settle for professional wrestling and car racing. I have nothing against either. I just thought that this birthday would be a great opportunity to teach young people the importance of preserving democracy, free speech, and non-partisan political behavior  and of putting one's country first--looking out for the common good. I'm not sure if young people even know what that means anymore--the common good. Who can blame them if they don't know--they've grown up in a society that worships money, greed and consumerism. That's why it would be important to show another side of the country--the side inhabited by decent citizens who work hard, raise their families, all without needing to attract attention to themselves 24/7. The salt-of-the-earth types who are what make the USA great. They can be of either political persuasion in my book, as long as they keep a civil tongue in their heads. We need to make America civil and respectful again. That's a tall order but not an impossible one. Miracles do happen (the new pope is one of them). 

All about robins (the European ones)

I follow several Facebook pages having to do with European robins. These robins are the smaller versions of their North-American counterparts, and in my opinion, much cuter. They are also quite friendly to humans. I think they understand that kind humans are a good food source, especially during the winter. But they are more than smart. They are curious creatures, as I've experienced when I'm working in my garden. The one that visited my garden last year (up to late December) hung around, watching what I did. He hopped up to me, standing in front of me as if to say 'I'm here', wandered around the greenhouse, and let me feed him and take photos of him. He never landed on my finger, but we were very close to that point. I fell in love with him. There is another robin that visits now; I can tell because the new one has several black markings on his chest, unlike the previous one. 

I don't know what happened to my little friend from last year. I'd like to think he's doing well and visiting other gardens, but my gut instinct tells me that he has passed. Whether it was a natural death (the mortality statistics for the first year of an European robin's life are poor) or death by cat, crow or magpie, I will never know. Perhaps the new one who visits now is his son or daughter. I'd like to think so. They tend to remain in one place, and our allotment garden is filled with many interesting gardens to visit. There is an abundance of worms and insects--a smorgasbord for birds of all kinds. 

I'm reposting the post I wrote in December 2025 about my little robin friend. I will always treasure the time I had with him. He appeared in my life right before I had a major operation, and as they say online 'robins appear when loved ones are near'. I'd like to think that he was channeling all those whom I loved who have passed and were rooting for a successful operation. In any case, he appeared at a time in my life when I needed him. 

A New Yorker in Oslo: My little garden friend

These are my people

Gardeners. Who knew? Gardeners are my people, the ones with whom I feel most at home. They can have small or large gardens, balcony gardens, you name it. We click and bond over shared gardening experiences (sometimes failed experiments), types of seeds, what garden store is having a sale, and what we can share with each other. The latter is the most important to me. Gardeners are generous. I have not met one gardener in our allotment garden who hasn't been willing to share plants, seeds, or advice. Yesterday we had our annual Volunteer Day in the garden; we all pitch in to do weeding, raking, clipping, etc. for a few hours, and then afterward we gather together over cake and coffee. It was a lovely day, weatherwise and socially. Such events are important for strengthening the bonds between us and also for getting to know the new gardeners, those who have recently gotten their allotment gardens.

Why do I feel comfortable with gardeners? They are not flashy or chic. There are no in-your-face displays of wealth, even though there are probably a number of gardeners who are well-off. There is no overt competition among us, at least in our allotment garden. I don't feel like I'm competing with my fellow gardeners to 'have the best garden'. Each gardener is an individual with unique ways of expressing their love of gardens, and that is reflected in their choice of bushes, trees and flowers, as well as vegetables. My garden neighbor has tried growing artichokes; this year I'm attempting to grow asparagus. The lack of overt competitiveness is refreshing in a world that values 'being the best', sometimes at all costs. I'm simply not interested; perhaps I was at one time, early in my career. But even at that time, I worked together with colleagues who were more supportive rather than competitive. I'm thankful every day to be away from a work world that values competition and being the best above all else. The falsity of that way of thinking lies in the reality that only one person can really and truly be the best. All the others are accordingly ranked less. And that's ok for me, but it wasn't for our workplace leaders who did not care at all for those whose careers didn't measure up to snuff. I do not miss that world at all.

I know that gardening can be quite competitive; there are contests for having the most beautiful flower garden or for growing the largest vegetables or the most fruit. But like art, literature, and music, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You can judge the beauty of a garden, but it is a subjective evaluation. There are no objective criteria for what characterizes a beautiful garden. I respond intuitively to gardens that have a 'soul', but that too is subjective and emotional. There is much in our past and in our subconscious that is wrapped up in our gardens and garden choices. For example, when I plant tulips, I remember my mother ordering tulip bulbs from Holland and planting them on the front lawn. The resulting tulips were beautiful. Lilies of the valley remind me of a neighbor from childhood who had them lining one side of her house. They were my favorite flowers for the longest time. Basil and salad plants remind me of a family friend who grew them both in her backyard; we children would pick them for dinner when we visited her. Tomato plants remind me of my friend Jean's father who grew them in their backyard. The tomatoes were delicious. She has carried on the tomato-growing tradition.

As I get older, I am drawn to visiting public and private gardens. New York State is full of lovely gardens--The New York Botanical Garden, Innisfree Garden, Kykuit/The Rockefeller Estate, and Untermyer Park and Gardens, to name just a few of the ones I've visited. There are more on the list and I look forward to experiencing them in the coming years.