Hiding in Plain Sight

I just read an excellent article by E.J. Dionne Jr. in The Washington Post titled, "Trump's greatest single achievement almost never gets mentioned." And what is that achievement? It is "whether Russia colluded with Trump's campaign to help elect him."

Great point. Maybe as some have said, we are living in the age of the spectacle. That is, little stays in the public eye for long. Just a few months ago it was the key topic discussed by columnists in newspapers. I thought (maybe naively) it would never go away, that it couldn't go away. It seemed that there were so many angles to the story that it would be solidly faceted in the news for many months. Well, I was mistaken.

But there is some light. As Dionne says, "Fortunately, as John Adams taught us, facts are stubborn things, and the Russia story cannot be suppressed forever. Indeed, there was progress on Tuesday when--in a display of bipartisanship that is truly astounding at this moment--Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) of the House Oversight Committee jointly asserted that [Michael] Flynn [Trump's first national security adviser] may have violated the law by not fully disclosing his Russian business dealings when seeking a security clearance."

Former President Nixon said, "If the president does it, it's not illegal." It might be deja vu all over again.

***

Derealization and Depersonalization

I recently met with someone who was experiencing what is called "derealization." This is where the person looks out on the world and experiences it as unreal or less real than he or she did in the past. Closely related to derealization is "depersonalization." This is where the person questions their existence, either their physicality (i.e., their body) or their sense of being a self (i.e., a coherent being), usually both. Extreme episodes of these can be terrifying.

Seeing this young person going through this episode brought home to me the intensity these events can cause. I myself have experienced both, a number of times. Like a lot of cases I've read about, my worst few times were brought on by smoking marijuana. One time in particular, when I was about 17 or 18 was the worst episode. My case seems similar to many others.

For me it was like taking a strong sleeping medication and falling asleep, and someone moving my body to a new setting I've never been in. And when I woke up, I felt totally disoriented. Wondering where I was, and how did I get here? (Anyone who has a read some of Haruki Murakami's short stories realizes he sometimes picks up on this theme.) Yet, for the rest of that evening that disorientation didn't go away. There was a sense of questioning everything, as if a fog had come down and all things seemed "less real" than I previously thought, myself included.

Yet, the heartening thing about these experiences is finding out the bulk of the population has gone through some version of it--usually to a milder extent--and that the episodes are self-limiting (meaning the feelings gradually decline, so long as the person doesn't continue to fuel them with extreme thoughts). From what I can surmise, a good bit can be explained by biology. Just as when someone has a panic attack (which appears to relate to these disorders, making the episode much worse), many symptoms can be explained by how the body is reacting to our thoughts.

***

Hitting "Pause" on the Rat Race

I just read an interesting article by David Leonhardt in The New York Times. It was titled, "You're Too Busy. You Need a 'Shultz Hour.'"

The article is about George Schultz, who was secretary of state in the 1980s. Mr. Schultz would take an hour each week just to think. He would try to look at the larger questions of his job, rather than being mired in the usual day-to-day details. He would only receive phone calls from his wife or the president. Schultz said this hour helped him greatly.

The article reaffirms a lot of what I've read lately. That is, that being on the go all the time just ain't wise. Yet, few people take it to heart. Most people I know, and that I know about, seem to have their smart phones appended to their bodies. What I'm most surprised about is how many people, when you text them, will text you back within one minute. Doesn't anyone watch movies anymore (without constantly looking at their phone)?

It is puzzling. People can read stories and studies about what is best for them, agree to it, but keep on doing what they've always been doing.

And alas, sometimes I'm the chief of sinners.

***

Some Random Thoughts

I was just thinking (not to sound like the late Andy Rooney) about some of the people who could qualify as "seers" or "prophets," those who have seen deeper into some of the dynamics of our American society.

Some individuals come to mind.

Rollo May, for one. A great therapist and an eloquent writer, he seemed to be one of the few who could perceive much that was subterranean in our society, and state it clearly. I think there are a number of academics who see various aspects of our contemporary society with clarity, but most can't state it so the average lay person could take it in. But May, especially in his work, The Cry for Myth, shows us some of the ways our society ticks.

And I would sum up his message simply as, "America's god is money." Which may remind some people of William James's famous statement concerning success in America (the bitch-goddess, success).

The older I get, the more I agree with May and James.

***

Maybe Less is More

I just read an interesting article at nautil.us. It was titled, "Darwin Was a Slacker and You Should Be Too," by Alex Soojung-Kim Pang. It's actually an excerpt from his book, Rest: Why You Get More Done When You Work Less.

I've given a lot of thought to the debate about how we can be the most productive. And all that thought led to, well, confusion. There seemed to be little clear evidence one way or the other. The author of the article (and book) comes down decisively on the side of working less but working more intently and intensely.

In the article, he mentions a number of famous authors who worked about four hours a day. Yet, he also says these four hours were intense, focused work and they did put in other work during the day, but it was of a more ancillary nature. Some of the authors mentioned include Dickens, Thomas Mann, Alice Munro, W. Somerset Maugham, and Hemingway.

Also, the author stresses that the four to five hours were usually broken up into two or three work periods. Drawing on a study of the traits of outstanding violinists versus merely good violinists, Pang says three periods of eighty to ninety minutes with half-hour breaks between them would be ideal.

An interesting article, indeed. I will probably be getting the book.

***