Happy Spring! (with update)

Wow, a month without a post. I don't know if I have ever gone this long. I have been pondering the reasons, and I think there are several. First, I am writing more places these days! Here are a few of my recent posts elsewhere. I am quite pleased with this development, but also regret that it seems to be making it harder to write on my own blog. Time to write is a precious commodity these days, and I must admit that the larger the potential audience for a piece, the higher its priority on my task list. But I also find myself wondering if maybe this blog is moving into the autumn of its life. Everything has its season, and I don't know if Round Unvarnish'd is still going to be telling tales when I'm in my eighties. But who knows? Maybe some day it will no longer be "A Round Unvarnish'd Tale" but "A Much Rounder, Unvarnish'd, Peeling, Cracked and Weathered Tale."

So, I guess an update is in order. Several weeks ago we enjoyed spring break with Caitlin. Now she is back at school and Trevor is home. Ah, that we could have them both at the same time. But I guess this way, the joy is spread out over a longer period. This past week we went to see Trevor play for the last time with the UNL Symphony. He won the undergraduate concerto competition for strings/piano two years ago when he was a sophomore and again this year as a senior (winning his sophomore year made him ineligible to compete his junior year). Here is a video of his performance on the winners' concert:

Brahms Second Piano Concerto, Finale from Cheryl on Vimeo.

I have been sick for about two weeks now. Not stay-in-bed sick, but dragging-by-the-end-of-the-day-I'm-behind-on-everything-because-I'm-so-drained sick. It started out as a cold, but the cough is hanging on, and hanging on, and hanging on. I will go to the doctor this week if I don't start seeing improvement.

Our pastor had a stroke. He is only in his mid-forties. Thanks be to God, it was a minor stroke, brought on by things that can be better treated and managed. His family--wife and four sons kindergarten and under--and his congregation are praying many prayers of thanks that he was preserved in life, is recovering well, and will in time be able to return to his call as a shepherd of souls. What a gift is life, always.

In two weeks Evan will take his First Communion at Easter Vigil. I only wish his big sister and brother could be here for the occasion.

Under the heading of "what I've been thinking about," I happened across a video of Monica Lewinsky giving a TED talk on what it's like to be publicly humiliated. It was quite compelling and made me think of the OU student who was videotaped singing a terrible and racist song on a bus. Here's an article expressing the hope that that young man's entire life is ruined because that is what he deserves. I am troubled by the thought that we live in an age where someone can do something admittedly cruel and stupid but even after repenting and apologizing and trying to learn from the mistake be never, ever able to put it behind him (or her) because of how thoroughly documented and public our lives have become. I am not thinking now of Parker Rice--I can't speak to his character or the sincerity of his apology--but of people in general and the problems posed by the permanence of the internet. Even those of us who are not public figures (and so have not sinned in such visible ways) can probably relate to the admonition that "the internet is forever." Most people have posts they wish they hadn't written, comments they wish they hadn't made, pictures they wish they hadn't shared--and how much more dangerous is the terrain for young people who are still in the phase of life where they tend to think they are invulnerable. I am reminded of that picture often shared on Facebook expressing gratitude for having come of age before social media. Oh, to be able to take back that word, that tweet, that . . . whatever. And yet, more often than not, we can't. Because even when the world with its short attention span has moved on and forgotten, and the "sinner" is redeemed and going on talk shows and writing books, there is still the knowledge that the offensive thing remains intact, floating in the cloud, retrievable at any time.

It is a knowledge that makes the forgiveness of sins and the forgetfulness of God all that more astounding.

Words, Words, Words

It happened again.

Someone, somewhere on the internet, used a word someone else didn't like.

I don't know the particulars of the situation. What I do know is that the situation was discussed at length elsewhere online, and the person-in-question's discernment and integrity questioned, without any mention of an attempt to approach him about his use of the word or to inform him that it had hurt someone.

I find this both sad and disturbing: sad because I love the written word but increasingly see the futility of much of it online; and disturbing because this could have easily happened to me. I didn't know the word at issue had become politically incorrect. In fact, I saw it used in print today, by a distinguished and respected scholar and columnist. I guess he didn't get the memo either.

I say this could happen to me. Actually, it has happened to me. I am not going to share particulars either of the current example or my past one, because I don't wish to get into debates about individual words. But what I would like to suggest is that if a word offends you, there are helpful and unhelpful ways to respond. If you sincerely believe the word to be offensive to a large number of people, you can go to the person who used it and, for his own good, suggest that he not use the word. In this case you would actually be doing him a favor. Maybe he will heed your advice; maybe he will not. But at that point you have done what you can, and it is time to drop it. If you want to appeal to the general public to avoid the word, by all means, do so. But make the focus of your appeal the word, and not the person or people who used it. Here's how you do that. Instead of rolling your eyes and asking what kind of clueless, insensitive dummy uses that word, issue a carefully considered and earnest plea about why you find the word objectionable and why you would appreciate people avoiding it. ("I saw the word _____ in print today. This word bothers me because . . . .")

Or, alternatively, you can choose to overlook. For my own part, I do this a lot. I have come to realize that I am more sensitive than most people about language. I think it is in part because I grew up in a home where words were frequently used as weapons. I compare it to having an allergy. I was exposed to great amounts of second-hand smoke growing up, and now I can't stand to be around cigarette smoke and have an immediate and strong allergic reaction whenever I am. In the same way, I grew up among frequent uses of profane and vulgar and just mean talk. I now have no tolerance for it, and I realize that this is my own issue. For me, "cra*" is vulgar, but for many people it doesn't seem to be. I can't abide the acronym "OM*" because to me it is nothing short of taking the Lord's name in vain. But I also realize that many people who use that expression don't hear it as such. I have expressed my opinion to my family and, whether or not they agree with me, they respect my position and in love don't use that phrase (and others) around me. If I see or hear the expression elsewhere I look the other way and remind myself that it is probably not the intent of the speaker or writer to break the Second Commandment or to offend anyone. If I choose to be offended, that is my problem.

I would like to think that it is still possible to have fruitful discussions online about things that matter. I increasingly doubt that to be the case. But maybe if more of us gave more thought to both our word choices and our reactions to them, we would come a little closer to the mark.

Measuring Our Words and Those of Others

Rebekah has a thought-provoking post at the CSPP blog right now. It reminds me of this one I wrote a few months ago. I think both posts make the point that when it comes to that thing we call "best construction" we can be decidedly selective in how we apply it. We will move heaven and earth to read the words and actions of our friends in the best possible light but when it comes to those about whom our feelings are more, shall we say, ambivalent, we don't always look for the most positive "spin." With our friends, we readily tolerate, turn the other cheek, forgive, and explain away whatever we must to maintain harmony, but with those we feel less charitable towards we are sadly inclined to look for offense.

The question, then, is what to do? The theme of my post linked above is taken from a story my husband tells his music students: "just play." In other words, don't worry about how you are going to be perceived because no matter how you play your friends will cheer you and your detractors will point out what you did wrong. I think it's good advice. I have a problem with caring too much about what other people think--about me, about my family, about my church--and I am working on that and realizing there is not much I can do about it--they will think what they will think, regardless of what I do, whether it's based in reality or not. But I also think when it comes to internet communication there are things we can all do to make it more likely that our interactions will be positive. We have all experienced online disagreements, both those handled well and those handled poorly, and if we are honest with ourselves we have at various times contributed to both. Of course, there are some people who seem incapable of the former and who always do the latter, and they are the ones we learn to avoid at all costs because when we disagree with them we will invariably have our heads handed to us on platters. But most people are more reasonable than that, and since we do so much communicating on the internet these days, isn't it worth our time to take the extra care that we can rather than toss words out thoughtlessly and carelessly, putting the onus on others to read them in the right way and pleading "you are so sensitive" and "you can't take a joke" when they don't?

Now certainly, big boys and girls should be able to disagree on matters of principle without getting mad at one another. And they do--I see it done well all the time. So what is it that turns a difference of opinion into something in which at least one person has taken offense? Usually it's because the difference of opinion has somehow become personalized. So the question is how to keep that from happening?

The best way to do that is to keep the focus on the substance of the disagreement. You like Mac and I like PC and we ought to be able have a discussion about it and go on peacefully coexisting. However, if the substance of the disagreement is akin to "Your daddy is lazy and your mama is fat and you all go to a stupid church" it's probably time to walk away from the discussion. :-) You can ask for clarification, but if the same thing comes back a second time you will have to decide if you want to argue the point (probably not advisable) or just let it go (bingo!).

If, however, you decide to continue a discussion in which there is a substantive disagreement, the avoiding of offense usually boils down not to the "what" of our words but the "how" of them. And therein lies the challenge. It's that elusive thing called "tone" that is easy to hear in speech but hard to pin down in writing. Certainly it can be identified--as a writer and teacher I would not argue otherwise--but it can also be easily misinterpreted, especially when one is predisposed to do so. This is where Rebekah's point about the hearer comes in. If we feel secure with the other person, if we feel trusting, if there is a friendship there, we tend to hear the words one way. If the person is someone we don't know or like or trust, we are more likely to hear the words in another way. I don't know how to get around that--it's just the way it is. But it is why, more and more, I question the use of sarcasm and snark and the like in written communication, especially communication that we intend to be substantive. It is just so easily misread. If we are really interested in meaningful communication leading to understanding, our words need to be chosen with the utmost of care and delivered with the greatest level of reasoned objectivity that we can muster. We should avoid what is known in the study of rhetoric as "loaded" language--words with high emotional content. And as hearers, we need to take time and care and go above and beyond in trying to understand one another. We need to ask, "Did you mean to say?" and withhold hasty judgments and turn the other cheek and proceed in caution and gentleness at all times.

All easy to say but harder to do. Here are some examples of utterances that are not conducive to achieving understanding, followed by suggested alternatives that keep the focus on the subject at hand rather than redirecting it to the individuals involved:

If someone says something you find surprising, don't say "You have got to be kidding" or "You should have your head examined" or "It's sad to see that some people still believe that silly notion." Instead say, "That surprises me [focus on you, not the other person]. Why do you think that?"

If someone appears to be getting worked up, don't say "Clearly I have touched a nerve." It sounds like you are enjoying feeling as though you have the upper hand. Instead, just continue in as calm a manner possible. Maybe the other person isn't getting worked up at all. Maybe you have misread the situation. But if emotions are starting to run high, you may be able to diffuse them by not calling attention to the fact and by remaining humble and carrying on as reasonably as possible.

If someone mentions a book or movie or song you can't abide, don't say, "You're reading/watching/listening to/singing that piece of crud?" Instead say "That's not my preference" or "I'm not sure about that. Why do you like it?"

If someone says, "I don't understand" don't belittle him for not understanding something that you think everyone ought to easily grasp. Ask, "What don't you understand?" and then try to explain it to him.

If someone expresses dislike/disapproval for something you are fond of (a certain fashion, perhaps, or maybe a particular decorating theme), don't take it personally. Sometimes I see people wear things to church that I would never wear or decorate their homes with items I would never choose. It doesn't mean I dislike them or think less of them for the choice they have made. We have a difference of opinion about what is appropriate or attractive. We can still be friends (as long as I don't attack their choice derisively by saying one of the phrases above!).

Realize that, ultimately, criticizing someone's tone is a red herring. That's not to say tone doesn't matter--we should all aim for the highest possible level of discourse. But once you have leveled a charge of "I don't like your tone" you are abandoning the substance of the argument and turning your attention to its execution. Perhaps that is what you want to do. But it is a different issue from the one at hand.

Finally, this may run counter to what you might think, but with the advent of more and more written communication I think people tend to go overboard in their efforts to lend expression to their words through the use of capital letters and punctuation and colorful turns of phrase. My advice, if you are communicating with someone you don't have an extremely close relationship with, or if you find yourself disagreeing online with anyone at all, is to err on the side of less, rather than more, expressiveness. Be formal rather than informal and objective rather than subjective. If you truly want to come to understanding and a harmonious ending, make every possible effort to inoculate your words against misunderstanding. Exclamation points, capital letters, and colorful expressions draw attention to you and your personal voice rather than keeping the focus on the subject at hand and are as a result generally not helpful.

It's an internet jungle out there. It truly is, and hiding behind every tree is a wild animal waiting to pounce or some quicksand ready to suck you in. If at all possible, when you sense danger turn around and go the other way. It is possible to come out alive, but realize if you venture in that you probably won't completely escape injury. But with some care you can minimize the risk to both yourself and others and along the way you may encounter enough beauty to make the trip worthwhile.

Fun Facebook Games

This is from a pastor friend of mine. I respect him for all sorts of reasons, most recently what he has taught me about Facebook. Thank you, Pastor Cwirla, for helping me put things into perspective.

Pastor Cwirla's Fun Facebook Games, or How Not to Take Facebook Too Seriously

#10: Instigate endless threads. Award prizes for milestones such as the 1000th comment.

#9: Defriend someone who insults a friend of a friend of a friend of yours. Relive those great junior-high social dynamics.

#8: "Like" posts and comments you obviously disagree with. The parliamentary version of this game is speaking for motions you actually intend to vote against.

#7: Respond to every post as though it were written about you. Narcissism is self-rewarding.

#6: Pick an arbitrary friend and "like" every comment on his or her wall for a month regardless of content. Creepy but very affirming.

#5: Post a link to your recent brilliant blog, then defriend everyone who doesn't like it. Easy way to trim down that bloated friends list.

#4: Hijack every thread and turn it into a discussion on bacon.

#3: Post a snarky comment and then get offended because everyone is offended. Embrace the passive-aggressive beast within.

#2: Make a post on how people waste too much time on Facebook. Revel in the irony.

#1: Ask for an opinion on something and then tell everyone why they're wrong. Epic fun.

Facebook Thoughts

A few days ago I read this article on National Review Online:

"Ages Apart"

It concerns increasing age stratification in our culture and the long-term effect it is having on us. One of the areas the author considers is online communication: social networks, texting, email and such. He provocatively compares Facebook, specifically, to C. S. Lewis' description of Hell in his book The Great Divorce:

Lewis envisioned that the damned suffer not a fire, or any physical torment or confinement, but absolute dominion and inalienable rights: the liberty to roam an infinite and borderless land, and to freely and instantaneously build castles wherever they like.

Lewis’s damned enjoy this freedom by abandoning locations and acquaintances the moment they become inconvenient. The awkwardness of an exchange with a neighbor we think has slighted us can, in Lewis’s Hell, be evaded by simply moving away. So after a few years’ stay in Hell, each of the damned is thousands of miles away from any other, pacing solitarily in his castle.

The political moral is that unchosen obligations, restraints, and dependencies are the things that push people together, despite our irritableness and our inconvenience to each other. Our limitations and inadequacies counter our selfish bent, and become a foundation for community. (Lewis’s cosmic allegory, then, doubles as theodicy, showing how it can be good for us that we do not always get what we want, and are sick and feeble.)

We’ve been making Lewis’s Hell for ourselves for a long time, expanding autonomies in ways that cause social separateness in general, and generational separateness in particular. . . .

Facebook appears to have been modeled on [it]. It is the acme of modernized society, allowing us unrestrained control over our relationships — we literally choose the face that others see, and can start or end a friendship by tapping a finger. These friendships never become inconvenient, because no obligation can impose itself through the digital medium. The irony of Facebook, and of modernity’s expansion of social autonomy generally, is that total, unlimited cosmopolitanism in the end produces more parochialism, homogenization, and even chauvinism than geographical confinement does: I can now commune with people all over the world of all nationalities and tongues and races who are just like me. As human interactions become less contingent on geography, and more on the preferences of digital cosmopolites, communities became more horizontal — incorporating similar kinds of people across broad territories — and less vertical.

When I read this I found myself objecting in part. I have all kinds of people in my Facebook friends list, from all age groups and walks of life. I will admit it is heavy on the Republican and homeschooling and Lutheran fronts. :-) But Facebook has allowed me to create connections with many people I would otherwise have not been able to connect with. It has enlarged my world by giving me a peek into the days of others, many of whom are leading lives very different from mine. I live in the Chicago suburbs but I have Facebook friends who live on farms and ranches, in small towns and big cities, overseas, even in third world countries. So I think Facebook gives me a broader picture of the world than I would otherwise have. And when I think about all those people out there, living their lives, carrying out their vocations just as I am, I find comfort in it. I kind of like knowing they're out there, drinking their cups of coffee, enjoying time with their families, going to their respective churches on Sunday. So I would say that my Facebook experience has overall been positive as I have learned and laughed and prayed and been prayed for by others.

And yet . . . .

I think what Mr. Shaffer says also has great merit. Facebook is not the real world and if we aren't careful it can skew our perceptions of how human beings should relate to each other. I worry that as people, especially young people, spend more and more time there, they may be learning behaviors on Facebook that they will end up applying in real life, behaviors that are not realistic and that are, in fact, harmful.

So here for whoever is interested is a list of suggestions for not letting Facebook get the best of you. I am really writing this for my children. It is not my place to tell others how to behave on the internet. But it is my place to guide my children and to help them learn from my experience. I have experienced some unpleasantness on Facebook and I would like to help them avoid that if possible and also encourage them to comport themselves in a way that doesn't cause unpleasantness for others.

Facebook - A User's Guide

1) Decide what purpose you want Facebook to fill for you and behave accordingly.

For some Facebook is a playground. For others it is all about business. For still others it is a way to keep in touch with close family and friends or a place to advocate for a particular cause. It could be all of these things at the same time, so it is worth deciding what role you want Facebook to play in your online life and then carrying out that decision in a way that is respectful towards others. If a church member sends you a friend request but you prefer to limit Facebook to business contacts, send a polite note back explaining that policy. If you want to limit Facebook only to those people you know in person, and someone you only know online friends you, again, send a polite explanation. If you daily spout right-wing politics and a family member that you know is quite liberal sends you a friend request, write back and explain the situation and suggest that if you become friends the two of you will avoid posting on each other's walls on political topics. Most people will understand and respect the boundaries you have set up and thank you for explaining them.

2) Keep in mind your audience. This follows logically from #1. For most people, talking on Facebook is akin to standing up and talking about yourself in church. Some of the people who are reading are your closest and best friends, while others are casual friends and others are peripheral acquaintances or near strangers, especially if, like me, you have a broad friending policy. You should not put your most personal "stuff" on Facebook for all to see. What is helpful here is Facebook's apparatus for creating sub-groups within your friend list. That way you can send family related posts to family, church-related posts to those in your church body, and political rants to those who are interested in reading them. Also, if you are going to post something that you think will be a "hot button" or sensitive topic for someone in your friend list, you can block him or her from that particular status update. Why cause that person or yourself grief? It is worth taking a little extra time to preserve some tranquility.

3) Think before you post. Post things that you think will be useful, informative, interesting, entertaining, edifying, and helpful. Try not to be a downer. Everyone occasionally does a little whining on Facebook, and it's a nice place to get encouragement from friends when you're having a rough day, but a steady stream of angry, snarky, complaining and negative posts gets old and ultimately reflects poorly on you. Don't give people a reason to hide you from their news feed.

4) Show good manners. Be ladies and gentlemen. Know when to walk away--it is okay to let someone else have the last word and it doesn't mean you "lost" the debate. Don't use foul language. Avoid posting potty humor, dirty jokes, R-rated pictures, and the like. People have different levels of tolerance for that sort of thing and again, the things you post say something about you. And there is no such thing as a "back" key on the internet. Once it's out there, it's out there. And once you have hurt someone's feelings, the damage has been done.

5) Don't put your dirty laundry on display for all to see. People do not need to know the details of your latest huge fight and breakup (or reconciliation) with your boyfriend or girlfriend. I'm not saying it's wrong to talk about your life--I certainly do it--but use some common sense and maintain a little dignity.

6) Avoid vague-booking. This is not to say that you have to provide every detail of everything you choose to share. But posting cryptic messages that no one or only a handful of people will understand or posting updates that will cause people to worry about you unnecessarily is a childish way of making you feel powerful because you are in the know and your reader is not.

7) Don't be passive aggressive. This can take many forms. It might be as simple as posting something like "Thinking of weeding out my friend list." If you want to weed out your friend list, fine. But why talk about? Just do it and spare your friends the grief of wondering, "Is she talking about me? Did I do something to offend her?" Another form of passive-aggressiveness is taking a veiled swipe at someone in your friend list that other people might not get but the target probably will. Now, it is possible that you will make a comment that someone will take as a slap when you didn't mean it that way. That's not your fault. But please don't consciously say something that, if understood, may hurt someone's feelings. It's just mean.

8) Avoid playing the blocking/unfriending game. It reeks of junior high and whether they admit it or not, hurts people's feelings, even if they don't know you well. It is only human to take such things personally. So be kind. If you end up friends with someone that is annoying but not dangerous, try hiding him or her from your news feed. You can also use this strategy for keeping your news feed of a manageable scope. But consider using that annoying person as an opportunity to practice tolerance, forbearance, and overlooking. Maybe in time you will find he or she is not as annoying as you thought. Maybe the inconvenience of being that person's friend will turn into a blessing. God does work in strange ways! If you must unfriend someone send a note explaining why and make the note about you rather than the other person: "I just don't have time to keep up with my contact list and I'm trying to narrow down to only my family and very closest friends" or "You make me uncomfortable but it's because of something I'm going through, nothing that you are doing." And don't block people for trivial reasons. It is simply immature.

9) If someone is truly harassing, stalking or threatening you, don't think twice about unfriending or blocking him. Your safety is paramount.

10) If someone blocks or unfriends you, think long and hard before you ask why. If you think you may have committed an offense against that person, by all means, ask forgiveness. But if you are puzzled by the action, it may be best to just let it go because it probably has less to do with you than with the other person. If you do ask, prepare for the worst. You may get it.

11) Remember that Facebook is all about perception. The "people" you see there are not complete people. They are snapshots in time. You may have a fuller picture of some of them by virtue of having relationships that go beyond Facebook. But the picture you get on Facebook (or other online forums) is a tiny, tiny part of a person's identify and life. Try not to make judgments based on one or even a few posts. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Put the best construction on their words. Ask for clarification. Measure your own responses. Avoid sarcasm--it is so often misunderstood--and express yourself with earnestness and sincerity.

12) If it seems like Facebook World is bringing out the worst in you or otherwise causing you distress, take a break from it. It is not real life. There are all kinds of people out there who don't "do" Facebook. Go read Pastor Cwirla's list of "Silly Facebook Games" (see next post) and put it all in perspective. Don't let Facebook make you sad.

In short, instead of trying to turn Facebook (and the like) into an ideal virtual paradise of which you are the supreme ruler with the power to condemn those whom you find annoying, strange or inconvenient, look upon it as a microcosm of the real world, one in which there are all kinds of people who are sinners just as you are, struggling to get through their days just as you are, and in need of love and acceptance just as you are. Block and unfriend, as a last resort, those who are harassing you, who are an obvious threat, or who are tempting you to sinful behavior. Otherwise look at Facebook as big tent, one that causes you to moderate your own comments in light of the broad audience and that expands your world by giving you more people to love. Even if you can't love them all in a one-on-one way, you can love them all in your prayers. You can love them by being open to them and tolerant of them. And you can love them by modeling good behavior and a generous heart and spirit.