Quote (and word) of the day

I wanted to share with you this great quote I read last night in the novel Fear of Flying by Erica Jong:

There are no atheists on turbulent airplanes.

How true.

I haven't got much else to say really. I just blogged for a chat and because I liked that quote. It's a bit like when you phone a friend for no particular reason but just to hear their voice, say "hi" and have a chat. I don't really do that any more, which is a bit sad really.

Another interesting thing I learnt today is the meaning of the word "nonce". I don't know what I thought it meant but I didn't think it meant any of the definitions I found. I looked it up because it fell into a sentence I was reading at work, about web site authentication. The sentence was thus:

The server sends a nonce to be used in creating a digest of the user's password.

A what? I thought. Now, I think I thought a nonce was a silly person and I did wonder why the server would send a silly person to the browser so I looked it up and this is what I found:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNonce may refer to:

• Cryptographic nonce, a number or bit string used only once in security engineering
• Nonce (slang), a sex offender or child sexual abuser
• Nonce word, a word used to meet a need that is not expected to recur
• The Nonce, a rap duo

Well, I never. Sex offender, indeed. I will never call anyone a nonce again. Not sure I ever did anyway but I certainly won't in future. (Obviously, in terms of the sentence above it means the first definition. I am surprised that it can also mean sex offender but am in no way implying that a web server sends a sex offender to the browser. That would be really, really creepy.)

Dictionary.com also claims it means:

the present, or immediate, occasion or purpose (usually used in the phrase for the nonce).

So there you go. And that's that from this rather random post.

The trouble with blogging

The trouble with blogging is that you can't always say what you want to say, and what you do say you worry about.

This applies in all forms of writing and journalism, and I guess it applies to comedians too. In fact sometimes I wish I was a comedian rather than a writer. Yes, I consider myself a writer. I have a number of writing projects on the go other than this blog, and one day I'd like to do something other than just write my blog on occasion. I'd really like to make a career of it. This is really just practice.

But back to why I'd rather be a comedian. Anything goes in comedy and everyone knows that it's supposed to be funny. Granted, it isn't always; sometimes it's just mean. But people know what to expect from comedians. Friends and family know that anything they say or do can and will be used against them, in the form of comedic art. I suppose, too, that not many people will be present at a comedian's every show. Take, for example, the popular mother-in-law jokes comedians seem to love. Do you suppose that they tell those jokes when said mother-in-law is in the audience? Or perhaps said mother-in-law didn't really do or say the things the comedian claims; it's all artistic license and she couldn't possibly be offended by that. But, you get my drift.

The trouble with writing is that no one really knows whether you're being literal or humourous, and anyone can pretty much read anything you publish into the public arena. You can't publish a blog post and say "oooh... hope the boss isn't in tonight".

My writing is based on real life. Things in my life influence what I write. Sometimes I exaggerate; sometimes I bring a number of different things together with a common theme. Always I worry about whether the people I mention, or even people I don't mention but who may recognise aspects of themselves in my writing, will be offended by what I write. Much of it is tongue-in-cheek and intended to entertain, not offend, but you just never know. So far I've had no complaints but I have had indirect comments (i.e. via Toby, for example) by acquaintances who think certain other acquaintances mentioned in my writing may be offended by what I've said.

Indeed I have left out many an amusing story from this blog because of concern that others involved may be upset. Right now I am busting to tell you a funny story about a conversation regarding cooking breakfast with one saucepan, possibly only funny because of my perception of the conversation. I'm aware that the other participant of the conversation may have a different, un-funny view of it and may think I am making fun of them so I have refrained from telling my side of it. Unless, of course, that person reads this and gives me their permission to tell the story.

To all of you reading now I say writing is my passion. I hope you are entertained by it. Should you one day find yourself, something you have said or done, or perhaps just a caricature of yourself, parodied, or indeed literally represented within this blog, or any other work of mine, please do not be offended. Just know that you are all fair game.

Generous listening

This morning I endured one of the most excruciating one and a half hours of my life in the form of an immensely boring department meeting, during which I was trying my very best to "listen generously".

During the meeting a young colleague, whose wife has recently had a baby, commented that the start of semester had gone very smoothly for IT Services. Eventually, after a lengthy soliloquy, the IT Director replied that she was pleased that this young chap had made such a comment, upon which she mentioned his name. I do not think that her comment warranted a response, yet when he failed to do so she brought it to everyone's attention, asked if he was off in "babyland" and told us all that we must be aware of the difference between "generous listening" and "stingy listening".

An hour and a half later I had decided that those who wish others to "listen generously" should also speak generously, which in fact means the opposite of how it sounds, that is to speak succinctly. Such speakers should remain aware of the time that these generous listeners are investing in their listening, place the appropriate value on that time and respect it accordingly. As such, I have combined my own guide to public speaking, or speaking during meetings.

1. Do not use more words than is necessary to convey your point.
   Most writers understand this one. However, it is a little more difficult to put into practise during speech as you can't really edit your words after you've said them. Perhaps just put a little more thought into what you wish to say before you've said it.
   
   
2. Do not give your listeners more information than they need.
   Be aware of who your listeners are and what their viewpoints and roles are. Keep this in mind when deciding which information to impart to them. Time is precious and they have important jobs to do, and if you happen to be their manager then you really want them to do those jobs. So don't waste their time by telling them little side stories about the politics of your last board meeting. Don't tell them about all the effort you've put in to get a particular result; they expect this from you anyway. They only need to know the facts.
   
   
3. Do give them the opportunity to find out more information if they are interested.
   This might be in the form of questions following your presentation or speech. In a large group, however, this might only interest a small number of your audience. Be respectful of the others, particularly if they are the majority. This is especially pertinent if the meeting is a mandatory one and the attendants are not necessarily there by choice. If you are presenting a document, don't read it to your listeners. Give them the gist (a verbal executive summary) and make the document available to them to read in their own time.
   
   
4. Don't talk about all the things that could have or would have happened; just talk about what has or will happen.
   Whilst I'm aware of the potential irony here, this is really just another way of saying points 1 and 2 above but with a specific example.
   
   
5. Don't use a long word if a short one says the same thing.
   Long words and flowery language do not make you sound clever, just really boring. This makes it much harder for people to listen generously.
   
   
6. Do not interrupt the main speaker, even if you are his superior.
   Interruptions and interjections make the speaker's speech longer, which in turn makes it more difficult for people to listen to. If the speaker makes a mistake with a relevant detail, then correct him in a non-condescending tone. Do not interject just because you like the sound of your own voice and think the listeners might too, and do not continuously argue an irrelevant point with him just because you hate to be wrong and think he should respect his superiors.
   
   
7. Assign approximate portions of time to each of your points before you start speaking.
   Before the meeting decide what it is that you wish to talk about. Then prioritise each item. Take the length of time that you will have to talk, being mindful of possible interruptions and divide it proportionately amongst your items, allowing more time for the higher priority items.
   
   For example, let's say you have four items you wish to discuss during a one hour meeting, one of uber-importance and three of lesser but equal importance. You know the Director will also want to speak for a short while, and each team leader will give an update. Let's assume this leaves you with approximately 35 minutes. Take away between 5 and 10 for interruptions and corrections from the Director, and questions from those of your listeners who are actually listening generously. You have 25-30 minutes. You could speak for 10-15 minutes on your uber-important item and approximately 5 minutes each on of your remaining items.
   
   Do not present your listeners with a document consisting of approximately 18 items (although the exact number is unknown to them) and then proceed to spend 6 minutes on the first item, no matter how uninteresting or irrelevant. This will only serve to fill them with despair and they will stop listening generously in order to plan their escape from the room.
   
   
8. Spreadsheets and Word Documents are not interesting material for display on a projector.
   This applies even if the spreadsheet has coloured lines.
   

If anyone has any further suggestions, please leave a comment.

Movie: Fool's Gold

Last night I went to see Fool's Gold, starring Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson. I haven't been feeling too well lately and Toby was away in Brisbane, so when a friend said she was going to see it and invited me along I decided that rather than stay at home on my own feeling sorry for myself and watching crap TV, I would go. This film has had terrible reviews. Awful. I didn't read any of them before I went but I did watch the trailer. I thought it looked worth the $8.50 on cheap-arse Tuesday.

Seriously though, what do these critics expect? Matthew "shirt-off" McConaughey, Kate "rom-com" Hudson and a movie (clearly in the "chick flick" genre) about treasure hunters. I was expecting nothing but pure unadulterated cheesy entertainment and escapism. And that's exactly what I got. Was it predictable? Yes. Was it believable? Not in the slightest. Were the actors convincing? Not really. Did any of that matter? Absolutely not.

So here's the thing: Dumb-blonde action-man Matthew and bookish-but-outdoorsy Kate are married but about to get divorced because Kate is sick of Matt getting into debt for his obsession with treasure hunting. Turns out though that he's not particularly good at finding treasure without Kate because he's stupid and she's clever. So, when he finds a clue she agrees to have one last look around, using her millionaire employer, Donald Sutherland's equipment. There's a bit more to it than that. Obviously you have to have the obligatory bad-guy and the mentor-turned-rival, token gays and some other bits and pieces not really worth mentioning. The basic gist is there is action, a bit of violence, wonderful scenery (the highlight for me, especially the underwater stuff) and Matthew McConaughey looking hot with no shirt on and being all tough and brave.

• Matthew McConaughy: Hot
• Kate Hudson: Gorgeous
• Alexis whatsherface: Cute and annoying
• Donald Sutherland: Donald Sutherland. 'Nuff said; he's totally wasted in this film. What is he even doing here?
• Ray Winstone: Hmm... I do like Ray but I prefer him as a cheeky east-end likely lad. I didn't find his American accent particularly convincing but who cares?
• Acting: Not great, but who cares?
• Direction: Was there any?
• Script: Pretty bad, a bit cheesy.
• Laughs: a few, mainly of the slap-stick variety rather than the intellectual witty sort.
• Cinematography: lovely.; beautiful underwater scenes which made me want to jump right on a plane to some remote island on the Great Barrier Reef and don a BCD and scuba tank.
• Action: yes. Oh... the best bit which made me hold my breath and feel a bit sick was when Kate was stuck in a blow-hole. That chick has balls.
  

Would I recommend it? As long as you're not expecting anything too deep, yes, go see it. It's fun. Would I see it again? Probably not. Maybe in a few years I'll watch it on DVD. Would I have gone to see it if I'd known what I know now about it? Absolutely. It was perfect for my mind-set. Pure escapism. Is it good? Define good.

Some people think Matthew McConaughey looks like Toby. Well, I don't know about that but he is hot (have I mentioned that?) and obviously I think Toby is a bit of alright. Well, one scene in particular made me laugh as he was wandering around in baggy knee-length shorts, a bad t-shirt and no shoes. That is so Toby. And maybe Kate's character reminds me a bit of myself; quite happy reading books and writing and being all intellectual but can't really say no to a bit of adventure as long as there's a hot, strong and brave man to look after her. So perhaps for me, the escapism was all the better because I could actually imagine Toby and I one day cruising around the Carribean (or Great Barrier Reef) hunting for treasure together. One can dream. Just so long as I don't get stuck in a blow-hole.