The king had two sons — one an optimist, the other a pessimist. The king gave the pessimist everything he desired, and he gave the optimist a room full of horse manure.
The pessimist was despondent because he no longer had anything to look forward to. The optimist was as happy as he could be. ‘With all this manure,’ he said, ‘there must be a pony in here somewhere.’
Author: Dell Deaton
A study at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts, proved that when total strangers hold eye contact for an extended period of time, they start to feel affection for one another even if they haven’t spoken.
— Jennifer Benjamin, “Ways to say ‘I Love You’ Without a Word
- proceed to what follows without pause—used as a direction in music
- perform the music that follows like that which has preceded —used as a direction in music
With a hat tip to the late Sydney J Harris, here’s something that I learned en route to looking up other things — by way of the Central Michigan University “Digital Michigan Newspapers” collection.
Someone apparently thought it important enough to contemporaneously document the time I stepped-up to direct a Saline High School fall drama, “The Night of January 16th,” by Ayn Rand. Here’s a snippet of what Anne Tull Kirvan wrote in her December 24, 1980, article for The Saline Reporter, titled “Murder Trial A Tribute To Students’ Efforts.”
‘The Night of Jan 16’ had faltered and almost died in rehearsal, weeks ago, when the student teacher-director withdrew. But the students — aided by Nancy Fisher — refused to quit. Dell Deaton, a senior SHS student with no previous experience in directing, took over the job of whipping the production into shape ….
For the best look at this article, and certainly accompanying photography, at least one original print edition is maintained as part of the local history section in the Saline District Library.
Materials from the work of Sydney Harris are available elsewhere.
Wise people, even though all laws were abolished, would still lead the same life.
If you don’t like someone, the way he holds his spoon will make you furious; if you do like him, he can turn his plate over into your lap and you won’t mind.
You’ve heard the argument — typically from some vocal zealot short on any other merit to support his position.
We should do this thing even if it only benefits one person in a thousand.
Thus, highway speeds should be lowered to 35 MPH, if justified no more than by saving just one life. Church doors should never be locked, if only to save the soul of just one midnight sinner otherwise lost. No idea should go unheard, in excruciating detail! during a brainstorming session, if only to allow that it may be that one in a thousand which turns out to be a moneymaker.
The problem is that none of these arguments takes consequence into account. For every choice, there is an alternative: A choice not made, an option no longer available.
Refusal to consider consequence does not negate the fact that lowering the speed limit will impact all sorts of lives, in all sorts of ways. It may save one life in a thousand. It may also impede commerce to such a degree that a greater multiple of other lives are lost because food, medical supplies, and disaster relief cannot be delivered timely.
An empty church that is left unlocked is at high risk for vandalism and looting, consequently leaving it unusable for an entire congregation. Hire security? That may come at the expense of missions programs. Or existing staff could simply be assigned “watch” duties — but only if parishioners are open to burning candles at both ends.
If you’ve ever been in a free-for-all “team” meeting sans responsible structuring, I don’t need to tell you how quickly the intellectual and emotional contributions of your real horses will be snuffed by unbridled flights of fancy.
There are some ideas that are bad even before they’ve crossed the speaker’s lips.
Time has value. Things exist as they are at the point of status quo for reasons. All change comes at some cost. It’s not unkind, closed-minded, or greedy to acknowledge this. It’s quite the opposite, in fact.
On the other hand, the “if only for one in a thousand” conversation-stopper seems to me for more interested in getting his way via lazy cliché leveraging, rather than committed sweat-of-the-brow persuasion.
If a solution is truly the best, right way to go, then show all of us the respect of doing the homework, organizing a case for it, and making a logically persuasive argument based on real people, in a real world.
Lay out the sacrifices and consequences that are to be imposed on others. Be accountable, in the fullest sense of cost-to-benefit ratios.
Truly good ideas and needs met must be rise by their own merits, sans hyperbole.