August 21, 2006
More Minor Changes
You may notice that I’ve altered the category pages a little: they’re now proper XHTML 1.0 Strict (or at least the basic structure is: individual posts inside it may not be ... I’ve spent hours already correcting some of my most egregious early habits in HTML). They also have a nice (at least, I think it’s nice) table of contents at the top that quickly shows you what’s on the page. I’ve also brought their style into line with the main site. I’m not quite sure I’m happy with the narrow column in the middle, but I couldn’t think of anything that really belonged in the right-hand column and the text seemed a little too wide otherwise. Right now, it’s set at 70ex, I think, which should be about right in whatever font you’re using.
*WARNING—Technical Rant beginning
Also, if you’ve been using IE to view this page, you may have just noticed some fairly drastic changes. For example, the blog posts are now centered on the screen. You are now seeing what the rest of us using sane browsers like Firefox have been seeing all along.
I’ve known that IE ignored my margin-left:auto, margin-right:auto for quite a while, but until tonight, I just threw up my hands and said “what can you do with a non-compliant browser?!?” Then I read this article, which seemed to imply that there was a way to turn on standards-compliance in IE. I was intruiged, but after reading the article, I was still mystified. My pages should have already been triggering that mode: all of them correctly identify themselves. Then I had a sneaking suspicion that IE’s coders had failed to account for the possibility of someone’s putting an xml declaration (like <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>) before the !DOCTYPE, which is the recommended but not required practice for XHTML. A quick test verified this to be the case. After one or two curses upon the coders of IE, I have removed the offending xml declaration from my pages and used the more standard meta declarations for my file encodings.
I’m still miffed, though. And my blog probably still isn’t rendering properly for users of IE 5. I can’t bring myself to care about that right now. Scholl would be proud of me. :)
Posted by Leatherwood at 08:22 PM
This post has been classified as "
Public Address"
Helen Richardson
Helen Richardson was probably the most influential
teacher I’ve ever had—at least, of the
teachers I’ve met inside the classroom.
When my family first moved to Mongolia in August 1992,
we and a few other missionary families put together a
little “joint homeschool” where all the
children attended together under three or four teachers.
This worked pretty well for the first year, but at the
end of that year, most of the families and teachers moved
away, returning whence they’d come. For the next
few years, my siblings and I were pretty much the only
Western children in our area. My parents brought in a new
team member to serve as our tutor (amongst other
responsibilites). Her name was Helen Richardson. She
arrived in October 1993, if memory serves. I was just
starting the fifth grade.
As I’ve noted before, I’ve suffered from a
perfectionistic streak for my whole life. I only recall
it as far back as third grade, but a few years ago, I
chanced to examine this big fat folder of papers my
parents gave me when I started college, and ran across
this most enlightening note from my teacher in first
grade:
Daniel does well in expressing his thoughts,
feelings, and ideas on paper—it comes very easy
for him. His reading vocabulary is growing nicely. He
enjoys his work. Math comes a little harder for him. He
is currently working on his 5, 6, 7 fact families. He
understands how to do the problem, he just needs more
practice so that he remembers his facts quickly. I am
pleased with his progress. One area that concerns me
however is his overemphasis on grades. He was in tears
one day because he received a 2! [2 being roughly
equivalent to a “B”] I tried to explain to
him that he was only in 1st grade and that we mainly do
a lot of practicing—it’s okay to
make mistakes—we’re still learning! Please
reassure him of my confidence in his abilities and
praise him for the progress he has made. Some things,
like learning to work in a group, take time. He lacks
confidence—I believe we can help him gain
confidence by focusing on his strengths. Thanks for
your support!
The level of prescience in this note and others from
my early school life is rather frightening. :)
Anyway, no matter how far back the evil tendencies
ran, they were very nearly out of control by the fifth
grade. Fourth grade was terrible for me as I shrieked and
howled my way through every mistake. Just in writing
this, I’m beginning to wonder if my parents
didn’t import Helen to have the exact effect on me
she did? I dunno, but God used that woman.
You see, she simply refused to tolerate my tantrums. I
can still remember her talking to me, pleading with me,
arguing with me. She fought with me and for me
against the demons that were threatening my sanity. She
also noted my increasing arrogance (arrogance and
insecurity seem to go hand in hand, more often than not)
and stepped on it hard. In talking with my parents
recently, they recalled a question she asked me once in
the height of one of my rages: “Do you think
you’re God, Daniel?” At the time, I brushed
off the question angrily: of course I didn’t think
I was God! Now, thinking back on it, my demand and
expectation that I be perfect are more than vaguely
reminiscent of Satan’s boast “I will be like
God; I will exalt my throne above the
heaves...”
Helen was more than my sanity preserver: she was my
friend. She read books to us over recess periods at
school: White Fang, Jungle Book
(all of it, not just the common pieces),
Captains Courageous, Huckleberry Finn ...
and others.
She lived near my family in the ger community
called Damtardja on the outskirts of Ulaan Baatar.
(Ger is
the Mongolian word for yurt, which is what the
Russians call them. The noted Wikipedia article has some
pictures of them at the bottom.) There was, of course, no
running water for those gers and pumps were highly
problematic ... particularly in the winter. The
government delivered massive water trucks to central
buildings called hoducks (my own
transliteration); it was an individual family’s
responsibility to acquire the ration tickets for the
water supply and haul a canister up to get it. Ah,
those were the days ... shortly after we moved
to the ger community, my parents in their infinite
wisdom decided to entrust the reponsibility of acquiring
this water to me. I put a stainless steel 40-liter
canister of water onto a two-wheeled contraption (rather
similar to a long wheelbarrow) called a tehrig,
trundled it up to the station, filled it up with water
(after breaking it open because it was frozen shut), and
trundled it back. Since a liter of water weighs about a
kilogram, forty liters of water weighs around
eighty-eight pounds. When I started the job, the canister
was heavier than me; I had to get help to lift it on the
tehrig. The job was especially fun in
the spring time, when the road was all muddy ... but I
digress.
Anyway, when Helen saw what a splendid job I did
carting that water (definitely qualifying as a
“character-building experience” in a
Calvin and Hobbes sense), she hired me on to do
the same for her. Since there was only one of her (well,
two when her room-mate was around), I only had to do it a
couple of times a week (as you can imagine, we
established a very strict water economy quickly), but she
paid me really well ... a little more than a dollar a
week (800 tugriks) if memory serves. I’m not so
sure, but she has always considered that
experience an extremely character-building one for me. I
didn’t notice, but she’s always claimed that
I changed a lot through that work, particularly since she
and her room-mate needed me. Without water, bad
things happen.
As I said before, Helen was a friend. A really good
one. She helped me get through probably the hardest
period of my life, where my self-control was weakest and
my perfectionism most demanding. She introduced me to
some of the greatest classics in all literature. She gave
me a man’s job—or at least a young
man’s job—and I grew into it. She gave me
lemonade when the trek was long and hot in the summer and
hot chocolate when it was less than minus forty in the
winter. She helped keep me sane, and helped me begin to
get a handle on my pride.
She did a lot of other things, as well. Some of them
at the same time she was tutoring us (she tutored us for
three years), some of them afterwards. She helped teach
kindergarten, if memory serves. She was really active in
reaching street children (believe me, living on the
street when it’s forty below and colder is a
very trying experience). I really don’t
know everything she was involved in, nor do I know many
of the details of her past. I’ve seen her twice
since she moved back to the States: she actually came to
my wedding.
That’s Helen at my wedding in August 2004 (the
other extremely good-looking people in that shot are my
siblings, in case the family resemblance isn’t
clear). Good looking as well as awesome, can you beat
that? :D
To Helen:
Thank you. For everything. For teaching me so much
more than was in the textbook. For reading to us. For
loving us. For trusting me with a big job. For
helping me stay sane. For helping me ease my death grip
on perfection. For never giving up on me. A great many
of the good things in my life owe a great part of their
make-up to you, my most important teacher. God bless
you, Helen. You’re welcome in my home any time
... and I’d like to hear from you.
I love you.
Posted by Leatherwood at 08:05 PM
This post has been classified as "
Eulogy"
August 11, 2006
A Chance Observation
I have occasionally heard someone scoff at the idea of God being a person without a beginning; they think that it's impossible for something not to have a beginning. It occurred to me a few days ago that there are only three possibilities:
- Nothing exists at all.
- At some point, something came into existence from absolutely nothing.
- Something (or Someone) has always existed.
Posted by Leatherwood at 08:04 PM
This post has been classified as "
Musings"
Freedom of Choice
Well, here’s a second post in as many days. In the
words of Calvin and Hobbes: “Reward,
please!!” :D Actually, if you take a look at the top
of this page, you’ll notice I’ve added a new
section—posts I’m considering writing. In the
past, I’ve often had ideas for posts and other things
to write about that somehow never got written or I forgot
about them. The new section will hopefully accomplish two
things: remind me of the interesting subjects I’ve
got to write about, and give my loyal readers an incentive
to bug me about writing the ones they’re most
interested in. If not, it will at least be evidence of my
good intentions! :)
Now, on to the post itself.
My father periodically writes and suggests reading
material to me. Most of the time, I do little if anything
about it; those suggestions go on my “good
ideas” pile where they rot along with all the other
good ideas waiting for opportunity and motivation. But, in
this case, he was particularly insistent and the request
stuck in my mind. So that’s how I came to read The
7 Habits of Highly Effective People, by Dr. Stephen R.
Covey.
The 7 Habits is one of those books that most
people have heard of but never read. I,
for one, heard about it, saw it, and dismissed it as
another one of those self-help books. Perhaps a very famous
self-help book, but just a self-help book nonetheless. In
reading it, I have begun to suspect that the titles of the
book and chapters and habits are buzz phrases to wow PR
people into recommending the book to their employers and
suckering them into reading it. Because the book itself is
good. At least, I am finding it so. After all, the first
habit has prompted enough thought on my part that
I’ve talked about it to four people or so (and am
about to write about it).
The first habit is to “Be Proactive.” Did I
mention I dislike nearly all the titles in this book? But
what he means by this is quite simple, yet
fundamental. He recounts the story of Victor Frankl, which
I was familiar with in bits and pieces, but had never heard
the whole. If you don’t mind, I’ll quote from
the book here:
Frankl was a determinist raised in the tradition of
Freudian psychology, which postulates that whatever happens
to you as a child shapes your character and personality and
basically governs your life. The limits and parameters of
your life are set, and, basically, you can’t do much
about it.
Frankl was also a psychiatrist and a Jew. He was
imprisoned in the death camps of Nazi Germany, where he
experienced things that were so repugnant to our sense of
decency that we shudder to even repeat them.
His parents, his brother, and his wife died in the
camps or were sent to the gas ovens. Except for his
sister, his entire family perished. Frankl himself
suffered torture and innumerable indignities, never
knowing from one moment to the next if his path would
lead to the ovens or if he would be among the
“saved” who would remove the bodies or shovel
out the ashes of those so fated.
One day, naked and alone in a small room, he began to
become aware of what he later called “the last of
the human freedoms”—the freedom his Nazi
captors could not take away. They could control his
entire environment, they could do what they wanted to his
body, but Viktor Frankl himself was a self-aware being
who could look as an observer at his very involvement.
His basic identity was intact. He could decide within
himself how all of this was going to affect him.
Between what happened to him, or the stimulus, and his
response to it, was his freedom or power to choose that
response.
p. 69
The first and most fundamental principle of highly
effective people is the conviction that they can choose
their response to what happens to them, and that it is this
choice that makes them free agents, makes them human. To an
enormous degree, this is basic to everything else: if
you’re going to write a self-help book about how
people can change, first has to be the conviction that they
can change. Covey says a little later that
“until a person can say deeply and honestly, ‘I
am what I am today because of the choices I made
yesterday,’ that person cannot say ‘I choose
otherwise.’ ” (p. 72)
This principle of freedom rung a bell with me. I’d
heard things like this before ... actually, I was raised on
them. But I also realize that I’ve steadily drifted
farther and farther from actually believing it. Over the
years, I’ve come to believe that a person is not
defined by their choices, but by their “heart”
in making those choices. And I’ve (foolishly,
perhaps) come to believe that a person’s feelings and
a person’s heart are almost the same thing. You can,
I freely concede, choose your actions and responses, but I
am far from convinced you can choose the heart from which
you act. And I’ve also come to doubt my heart, my
motivations, for everything. This threatens a total
paralysis, as I cannot do
anything without wondering if my
motivation for doing it is good, suspecting it isn’t,
and despairing because I can’t change that motivation
(or, at a deeper level of doubt, that I would if I
could. That, after all, would be saying that my intentions
are good.)
I’m not quite sure why I’m so pessimistic
about my own fundamental nature. Part of it stems from the
Biblical doctrine of the fundamentally deceitful nature of
the heart and the total depravity of mankind. That’s
my intellectual justification, anyway. But on a more
personal level, I note the tendency going back a long time.
I think it’s something I learned from the stories I
read as a child: that you can never relax your guard, never
take anything for granted, never assume the best, never be
sure things are ok ... because as soon as you do, disaster
strikes. Or, so I learned, anyway. I can see this
“wary” tendency in me as I competed: I refuse
to be confident I have won until the game is absolutely
over and I refuse to rejoice much in victory (there’s
always the next test). Indeed, I hated losing much more
than I loved winning for that reason. I am indeed a
competitive person, but I also tend to shy away from
competition.
Earlier, I mentioned that I have come to identify
one’s “heart” with one’s feelings.
I also came to define “hypocrisy” as
“hiding your true feelings.” This has had some
beneficial affects on my character—I am a very
transparent person. I say what I think, I don’t hide
what I feel, and I follow my impulses (mostly). This causes
another block against accepting what Covey says, because
after you realize you can control your responses to what
happens, you then realize that you can subordinate your
impulses to your principles. You can act because of what
you believe instead of what you feel. To
me, this is rank hypocrisy. Yet I encountered it years
before in Mere Christianity.
May I once again start by putting two pictures, or two
stories rather, into your minds? One is the story you all
have read called Beauty and the Beast. The girl, you
remember had to marry a monster for some reason. And she
did. She kissed it as if it were a man. And then, much to
her relief, it really turned into a man and all went well.
The other story is about someone who had to wear a mask; a
mask which made him look much nicer than he really was. He
had to wear it for years. And when he took it off he found
his own face had grown to fit it. He was now really
beautiful. What had begun as disguise had become a
reality.
Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity.
p. 187, at the beginning of chapter 7, “Let’s
Pretend”
Lewis goes on to make the argument that, as Christians,
we all “put on the mask” and try to behave
better than we really are. We attempt to put on the face of
Christ, and find that as we do, our true faces change to
become more like His. It’s a good argument ... and I
disliked it from the first time I saw it (around 13 years
old, if memory serves). Part of me rebelled against having
put to on a nicer face than my own, though a more rational
part of me accepts the necessity. But I was never
comfortable with it.
A few moments’ thought will show that my
conception of “hypocrisy” has a few holes in
it. A rather large hole appears as soon as you consider
that my conception means that self-control is no longer a
virtue. For, if self-control means anything, it means
controlling your behavior in order to act in a way you
don’t wish to. So clearly, a little rethinking needed
to be done. And I started to ... but never really finished
my thought. Or never believed my conclusion, anyway. But in
talking with Miss Tucker a few
days ago, I returned to my conclusion and mused about it.
Wearing a mask is essential, for fallen people. The reality
of my sinful inclinations long ago convinced me of it. So
all of us pretend ... we must. We all wear masks more
beautiful than our real faces (according to our own
definitions of “beautiful”). But who then is
the hypocrite? I think that the hypocrite is the man who
has forgotten he wears a mask, and has come to fancy his
mask is his true face. He is satisfied with his pretty
mask, and no longer feels the grief that his true face
doesn’t match it. The hypocrite is the mask-wearer
without grief.
For we all must wear masks, but it is essential to
remember that it is a mask. That memory keeps us
humble, for we know our pretty appearance isn’t the
full truth ... and that memory keeps us longing for it to
be the full truth.
God’s peace be upon you. Thanks for reading.
Posted by Leatherwood at 07:34 PM
This post has been classified as "
Musings"
August 10, 2006
Long-Belated Update
Umm ... hello, everybody. *Sheepish grin*
It’s, uh, been a long time. Around two and a half
months, actually. Which is terribly sad, and I really ought
to update you all on what’s been going on. So I
will.
My wife got a new job around mid-June (she was working
at a day-care center here in Bellingham before). Now
she’s working for an upscale women’s clothing
store called Christopher and Banks. She’s
bought more clothes since starting there than in our entire
married life up to that point (nearly two years).
Fortunately, Christopher and Banks is a good store, my wife
has good taste (and consults with me), and she gets a 50%
discount as an employee. :) All good things.
I’m still working at the same packaging company that I’ve
worked for since May (and worked at since April).
It’s not the most exciting work in the world, but
it’s not bad either, and I really like the people I
get to work with there. Also, the day goes from
7–3:30, so I get off with a fair bit of time at the
end of the day. It’s been a good place to work.
However, in another bit of news, I’ve been offered
a new job working at a naval research base in
Dahlgren, Virginia. Conditionally offered, that is. First,
I have to pass a security check. So I’ve been having
fun the last few weeks filling out paperwork and tracking
down old friends and seeing if they’d be willing to
reassure the Navy I’m neither a Commie nor insane. :)
At least, that’s the idea. I don’t expect too
many problems from the process, but my parents and little
sister do live in Iraq, so that could make things
a little ... interesting. We’ll see.
I’m really glad to have been offered the job,
though. I’m really looking forward to being able to
work with computers and write code and make things blow up.
:D I’m also really looking forward to being paid
enough that Nikki and I can seriously consider starting a
family in the relatively near future. That’s a ...
shall we say trepidatious thought ... but also an
... exciting one. We’ll have to see how things will
work out. I’ll miss the low humidity and relative
lack of bugs of the Northwest, though. And Nikki and I will
really miss our church. But my former room-mate
and best friend, Daniel Wise, just started work there in a
different department. I’m really looking
forward to being able to work and hang out with him
again.
In other news, Nikki and I celebrated our second wedding
anniversary on Monday. It’s hard to believe
it’s been so long! Yet it has ... and it’s been
wonderful. It’s not every man that gets to marry the
woman of his dreams, and then find out his dreams were a
pale thing next to the reality of the woman he married. :D
I love you, sweetheart. Our second anniversary was a good
time to finally get our rings engraved.
We’ve been planning on doing it since before our
wedding. But it’s finally done, and the message we
chose is the same one I thought of more than two years ago:
semper fi. That’s the shorter version of
semper fidelis, and is the Marine Corps motto
(reading about the Marines was the first place I came
across it). Its meaning is simple: “always
faithful.”
Oh, one more bit of news. My wife and I have finally
acquired cell phones! We chose Verizon, and we’ve
been having scandalous amounts of fun with our new toys in
the last few weeks. If you’d like the number, just
drop me an e-mail. The cell phones sport pretty decent
camera’s: here’s a picture of my wife I snapped
a couple of days ago.
And with that, I close. God’s blessings on you
all.
Posted by Leatherwood at 05:03 PM
This post has been classified as "
Public Address"