MMDCCLXXVI

Today's theme is: Ancient History

Now, if you didn't win the 4th grade "Roman Numeral" contest in Mrs. Riley's class, you may be struggling to figure out the big number that titles this post (of course I am only surmising here, I wouldn't really know about people like you). Anyway, the number is 2776 and it is relevant today.

Indeed, they say that on April 21, 753 BC, an enterprising fellow named "Romulus" decided that being raised by a wolf was a cool background story but it wasn't how he wanted to be remembered, so he founded a city, named it "Rome", and went about his merry way. Now, 2776 years later, the city still stands, and its residents celebrate the date of its founding. 

And speaking of ancient history, the photo of the Fortier clan above, which seems to me like I took a couple of months ago, is actually about nine years old (that's IX years for the rest of you in Mrs. Riley's class). I snapped this along the banks of the Tevere river, right in the heart of Rome, back when the city was only MMDCCLXVII years old.

Small Town Shame

Why do I get mad when the people in my neighborhood don’t stop at the stop signs on the nearly empty streets of our peaceful community? They are not driving dangerously and it really should not matter to me at all. But it does... and I think it is because I grew up in a small town.

You don't see the connection? Let me explain my theory.

We humans are a social species that evolved to thrive through collaboration. This means we are pre-programmed to establish rules that benefit the community, to hold one another accountable to those rules, and to feel shame when caught breaking them. The evolved capacity to "feel shame" is the essential glue that facilitates coordinated action and collective success for a social species. That's part one.

Small towns are the closest thing we have to the rudimentary tribes where almost all of human evolution occurred. Small groups breed familiarity between the members, which is a key ingredient for feeling ashamed when caught acting selfishly. Humans are far less likely to care about how they are judged by strangers compared to how they are judged by people they know. That's part two.

So we all evolved to hold our tribe members (neighbors) accountable to a set of socially agreed rules, but unless you spent your formative years in a tribal (or small town) setting, with reasonable familiarity across the group membership, you may be a city-slicker who never internalized this core value. Remember, identical genomes express themselves differently when nurtured in different environments, so having DNA that predisposes shame for selfish behavior does not mean you will definitely develop that personality trait. Many of my neighbors surely did not.

I grew up in a rural county with a population of about 20 thousand residents scattered across a dozen or so small towns. In that environment, adhesion to agreed behaviors became a deeply ingrained value for me. To this day, I feel a responsibility to obey the rules of my small community (neighborhood), and I often feel offended by those who break them. I see the rule breakers as selfish and, according to my evolved nature, I bear a responsibility to signal my opposition to their uncooperative behavior.  My anger is actually my DNA reacting to behavior that I perceive as "against my community".

The problem is that humans evolved very slowly, over millions of years, to thrive in small groups. However, in a much shorter time frame, thousands of years, we transitioned to living in large cities. Evolution hasn't caught up. 

Small town values don't jive with big cities and dense populations... that makes me mad.  

A Bull and a Pig

So, news from my local newspaper back in Maine can sometimes be a little more "down home" than the news you imaginary readers probably see in your parts. Case in point, this recent story about a bull that gored a jogger on a running trail not far from where I grew up.

Now don't get me wrong; I am sorry that the jogger was mildly injured and I am sure the entire experience was frightening for her, but I am much more interested in the details about the bull. Apparently, he and his best friend, a pig, had recently escaped from a nearby farm and were living like a couple of frat brothers in the proximate woods. A curious image indeed!

I'll bet it was the pig's idea. He was probably tired of the sty-life, rolling in filth and eating slop, so he hatched a plan to go off into the world and be free. He may have realized, when he couldn't reach the gate latch, that he would need help along the way. 

I imagine he might have asked the sheep for help and learned that they were all rule followers who didn't want to cross the farmer. He probably gave no serious consideration to the chickens because they have short attention spans and were unlikely strong enough to unlatch the gate. The horse would have been strong enough to help, but probably too comfortable as a quasi-pet to consider a radical break from his cushy farm life. The goat? Nah, kind of a jerk and his kids are all hyper. I'll bet the pig settled on the bull as the logical choice after no more than a minute of contemplation.

I wonder what he used for a sales pitch: "Hey Bull, I heard the cows mocking you the other day.  The farmer too... he uses the term "bullshit" for everything he dislikes. If I were you, I'd think about breaking out of this place. I wouldn't go alone though, you'll need someone clever to help you survive on the outside."

Next thing you know, the bull and the pig are sneaking out the back gate, way over-confident and self-congratulatory to realize that, within a couple cold and hungry days, they'd be mugging joggers to steal their protein bars. Turns out that domestic, inter-species, farm couples don't thrive naturally in the Maine woods. Who knew...?

Back on the farm, the bull and the pig may have been folk heroes in absentia for a short time, but I wonder what the other animals are saying about them after their local news exposure and shameful return? Maybe they'll get a book or a movie deal out of it...

If I Were an Athlete Whisperer...

I have been annoyed many times in the recent year by journalists grilling professional golfers about their intentions to join the LIV golf tour. For the uninitiated, the LIV golf tour is a new organization, funded by the Saudi Arabian government, that has offered tremendously lucrative incentives for golfers to defect from the PGA and European tours. It has been controversial because many view the LIV tour as a thinly veiled attempt to "sports wash" the Saudi image by distracting attention from their poor record on human rights and associating themselves with a popular sport. 

The annoying part of this development is that many media members have been extremely haughty in their approach to golfers who have joined LIV. Pointed Questions about the morality of supporting Saudi's heinous plot by joining the LIV tour have been all too common. Over and again I have watched golfers on live television squirm and stumble through a response.

If I were an Athlete Whisperer, coaching these golfers on their responses, you might see something like the following exchange on this topic:

Golf Journalist: How do you reconcile your sense of morality with the knowledge that you are helping an evil government "sports wash" their image to cover up a long record of human rights atrocities?

Golfer: That's a great question and I am glad you asked it. I've reflected on this quite deeply and I've come to understand that it's not the playing of golf that will affect the country's image. After all, an imperceptibly small percentage of the world can actually attend one of the tournaments. It occurs to me that the sports washing strategy only works if the LIV tournaments are amplified by the many arms and powerful reach of the media. Perhaps your inquiry is better directed at whoever is paying you to be here covering this story and posing these important questions. Perhaps you might be better served by asking this question of yourself. Please tell us, how do you reconcile your sense of morality with your much larger role in the Saudi sports washing strategy? 

I don't know if it is ignorance, laziness, or hypocrisy, but the average level of competence in the media seems low to me.  We just may be entering the golden age of the Athlete whisperer... 

Imaginary Readers... Meet My Artificial Critic

In the wake of all the recent press about ChatGPT and other large language models of Artificial Intelligence, I thought I would share my evolving perspective. 

For the angst-ridden employees worried about robots taking their job, I share this thought: "You are not going to be replaced by AI. You are going to be replaced by a person who uses AI to outperform you".

For the lazy opportunists who think they no longer need to learn how to write, I say: "You still need to develop a knack for cogent thought and logical expression; those skills come in handy while speaking and interacting."

And for the propagandists trying to shape public opinion in accordance with their own agenda, I admit: "I'm a little worried about how the proficient use of AI might help you influence the masses".

On a lighter note, if you have not experimented with AI technology, you may find this interesting. I asked ChatGPT to evaluate the writing style in the "Too Much Den" blog and it immediately came back with this:

The author of "Too Much Den" has a conversational and witty writing style. They often use humor, sarcasm, and irony to engage the reader and make their point. The blog posts are written in a personal and informal tone, with the author frequently using first-person pronouns and addressing the reader directly.

The author's writing is also characterized by a strong voice and a clear point of view. They express their opinions and beliefs confidently and often challenge conventional wisdom or popular narratives. The author also uses rhetorical devices such as rhetorical questions and repetition to emphasize their arguments.

In terms of structure, the blog posts are often organized into short paragraphs and subheadings, making the content easy to read and navigate. The author also frequently uses bold and italicized text for emphasis.

Overall, the author's writing style is engaging, humorous, and opinionated, making the blog a fun and thought-provoking read.

Imaginary Readers... meet my Artificial Critic.

QB Acting Skills

Well, the patience of my imaginary readership has been impressive while waiting for this highly anticipated post. But today is the day; I am releasing my official review of NFL QB's acting skills. Buckle up!

Payton Manning: King of All Media

I think you are all well-aware of Payton's commercials, his SNL appearances, his body of work as an emcee, and all of his other major media conquests. I won't clutter this post with a ton of links (just one for Sprint), but I will acknowledge that I agree with the general opinion that he is one of the best. His comedic timing is spot on. Grade: A+

Terry Bradshaw: King of the Big Screen

No doubt Terry is a great actor and relatable personality. I like this recent ad for Fox Sports where he gives us a peek into a "world with no football" but the big screen is where he really showed his skills (see "Canon Ball Run" and "Smokey and the Bandit"). In these films, he held his own with Burt Reynolds and Dom Deluise, to name just a couple Hollywood stars. Grade: A  

Baker Mayfield: Better at Acting Than Throwing

I was a big fan of the "At Home With Baker Mayfield" campaign where he showed tremendous range from comical obliviousness to deep-seated earnestness, although I thought he over-acted a bit in the book club episode. If he can stay relevant in the NFL, he could become an all-time commercial MVP. Grade: A-

Patrick Mahomes: Up and Comer

Patrick is new to the game but he seems to be as comfortable in front of the lens as he is in the pocket. I give him high marks for his ability to conjure confused indignation as well as plausible deniability in these two recent spots for State Farm Insurance. Grade: B+

Aaron Rodgers: Solid as a Rock

Aaron has been in several long-running campaigns over the course of his career, from the early days of "discount double check" with Bears fans, to more recent State Farm ads about combining home and auto coverage. He's better than average and has a good shot to get into my "QB Acting Hall of Fame", but not likely on the first ballot. Grade: B

Tony Romo: Undercover Thespian

Tony was a great QB, he's currently a star analyst, and he's also a scratch golfer... but he's bad at acting. At least that is what I thought until a comprehensive review of the facts led me to change my mind. His performance in this spot as "Arts and Craftsy Tony Romo" is Oscar worthy. Damn guy is good at everything! Grade: B-

Joe Montana: Best Lines

Joe Cool is not a great actor; in fact, he's was down right folksy in some of his early roles (like this Schick spot), but it was noteworthy because he met and married his costar from the shoot. Joe's acting career has benefitted greatly from excellent writing like when he spoke humbly on behalf of NFL Network with only a couple lines, or when he spoke knowingly for AT&T with only three words addressing a room full of Heisman Trophy winners.  Of course, in the all-time best Montana commercial for Tide, he speaks no lines and does no acting. Grade: B-

Joe Namath: The OG

The whole QB-acting thing started with a pantyhose ad when Joe Willie established himself as more than just an over-rated signal caller; he made it clear to the world that he was also one heck of a bad actor. Despite the poor acting, I think this iconic Noxema ad from my youth might represent the first time that the old "cast an attractive female" trick worked to interest me in a product. Grade: C+ (more for his historical importance in the ad game than for his emotive skills)

Jared Goffe: Most Surprising

Judging from on-field interviews, I never would have expected such dramatic chops from Goffe, but here he is on this Red Bull prank delivering such a performance that real-live people were fully engrossed. Bravo Goffe! Grade: C (needs a bigger body of work for a better grade)

Tom Brady: Better at Throwing Than Acting

Hate to say it, but it has to be said. His best work is good, as shown here in a Mobil One spot (with Gronk). Other work though, like this DailyMVP spot is mediocre, and this Footlocker spot is just bad. Unfortunately, despite a few shining moments, the bad work is too prevalent to give him a rave review.  Grade: C- (could have been a "C" if he didn't advertise Uggs)

Eli Manning: Nope

Maybe I am judging Eli too harshly because his co-star in this Quaker Oats ad is also very bad, and because his brother Cooper is very bad in all of Eli's Ceasar's commercials. It's just unfortunate...nice guy though. Grade: D

I know, I know... I didn't rate everyone. Perhaps in the future I will comment on Favre (ok), Marino (bad), Staubach (good), Tebow (mixed), Brees (bad), and any other QBs that my imaginary readers will undoubtedly mention. Also happy to hear any contradictory thoughts or reminders of obvious omissions!

Youth Sports

As parents, we all want our kids to lead successful lives. We want them to succeed socially with a strong network of support. We want them to succeed academically and master a foundation of general knowledge that will help them relate to the world around them. And later, we want them to succeed professionally and feel fulfilled as they provide for themselves. 

Such success may be more likely if they cultivate a certain set of character traits and develop some specific skills. Among the most valuable of these traits and skills are managing conflicts, overcoming challenges, and persevering through unfair and unfortunate circumstances. Youth sports participation provides an excellent vehicle for developing these skills in an environment where mistakes are minimally punitive and relatively short lived. However, because the immediate stakes of winning and losing seem tremendously important to our children in real time, lessons learned during youth sports competition can become deeply ingrained.  

As parents, we recognize that the win-loss record of a middle-school soccer team is insignificant in the long term. So, in this relatively trivial environment, our children can learn and grow as they encounter challenges related to teamwork, discipline, confidence, commitment, and sportsmanship. Over the course of an entire season (or an entire childhood), they will encounter recurring challenges and learn to manage and/or triumph over many. They can develop new skills and problem-solving approaches while gaining perspective about the value of one-off results compared to prolonged efforts to improve. Youth sports provide one of those rare circumstances in life with indelible upsides and ephemeral downsides. 

Surely, it is more fun to be the best player on the best team, but in the long run, there are valuable lessons on the other side of that equation. One can only learn to win with grace by winning, but one can only learn to lose with dignity by losing. These are two invaluable pillars of strong character. 

Furthermore, an athlete playing a team sport must learn to navigate between the natural desire to maximize individual performance, and the less evident benefits of playing a small role that contributes meaningfully to a larger team goal. This perspective can shape behavior in a manner that is well aligned with long-term success. Also, discovering subtle but important ways to succeed when your skills are not obviously matched to the task at hand can be one of the most gratifying and confidence-building experiences a child ever enjoys. 

All in all, I can think of no deeper disservice that a parent can do to a child than to send them off into the world having never faced or resolved a meaningful, personal challenge. A bungled play, a lopsided loss, or a winless season is not a fun experience, but it is a valuable experience. Youth sports participation provides a low-risk classroom for effectively learning some of life’s most portable lessons.

What if Everyone Was Honest?

Ever stop to think about how different our lives would be if everyone was honest?

I used to contemplate this when I lived in Italy. To be more precise, I lived in Monza, a fairly posh suburb of Milan. My apartment was on the edge of a massive park that surrounded the palace of a former king. It was an upscale neighborhood with not much evidence of crime or violence. Which is why the security protocol for "going home" always struck me as excessive and got me started thinking about how "dishonesty" impacts our lives.

For perspective, to get into my very own apartment, I needed an electronic key to open a gate at the roadside so that I could advance to the guard shack where a human security officer required me to show identification. Every time. Day after day, week after week... for four years. 

Then I could pull forward into our underground structure to my locked garage. Of course, I needed another key to enter the lobby of my apartment building, a code to activate the elevator, and 3 separate keys for the 3 separate locks on my door. I remember joking to my friends that the greatest criminal masterminds in the world couldn't steal my TV. (Of course, my apartment was ransacked during an overnight ski trip about a month after I moved in, but that's the topic for a whole other blog post).

My point is that remembering, planning, and adhering to all of the "honesty protocols" required to go home each night, summed up to a lot of effort over time. Add that to the protocols for starting and securing my own vehicle, getting into my office, starting my computer, opening my email, boarding a flight, crossing a border, cashing a check or taking money from an ATM (all things I did daily, weekly, or at least monthly in those days), and you realize that we all spend enormous amounts of time and effort to protect ourselves against dishonesty.

But imagine a world where no one took what did not belong to them, and no one accessed information that they didn't have the right to access, and no one misrepresented their identity. No one would need a key for their car, or their house, or any other protected asset. In fact, keys never would have been invented. Nor would have locks. Not even invented!

Ditto for passwords. And for copyright laws. And tamper proof packaging (man, I hate tamper proof packaging!). Scalpers would only sell real tickets, dating site photos would be un-retouched, and that used car you bought would really have passed a 31-point inspection.

What would we all do with so much free time and so little stress? To where would we re-channel all the energy we currently divert to protection against dishonesty? How much more open to policies of public assistance would we all be if we trusted the beneficiaries and knew that none were scamming the system and stealing our tax dollars? 

On the one hand, I understand how getting cheated or robbed can lead to reduced trust and increased vigilance against being wronged. On the other hand, I would like to believe that witnessing conspicuous honesty and integrity might reverse the trend. I am not so naive as to believe that trust can be built as quickly as it can be broken, but I think we would all love to live in a more honest world, and I am exactly naive enough to believe that building one is a goal worth striving for. 

Honesty breeds trust and fuels community. Deception and dishonesty spark defensiveness and self-protection. Let's not overlook all the honesty out there... even if it is not ubiquitously covered in the news, we need to notice it, appreciate it, and let it fill the general coffers of trust.

Bob Ring: One That Got Away

I am pretty lazy and pretty busy. Given that combination of trait and circumstance, you can imagine that there are not many people who could inspire me to do anything (even a fun thing), that I didn't plan and choose myself.

Fewer people still could inspire me to dig a ladder out from behind the clutter in my garage, climb the ladder, precariously shuffle heavy boxes across high shelves in search of a particular heavy box that contained thousands of old photos, and then spend the better part of a day looking for one specific shot. Bob Ring is one of the few. He inspired me.

He married my cousin when I was a kid and I honestly never knew him very well. But I know that I have three indelible memories of him. Given that I only met him about a dozen times in my life, that's a pretty good hit rate for laying down indelible memories. In my book, that makes him special. 

The first memory is of a day when he joined me and my brother for a round of golf during the summer after I graduated high school. My brother and I were beginners at the sport, but like all golfers, we lived for the occasional good shot when you could watch the ball sail high and far toward the target. I remember that Bob was having vision problems at the time and could not see the flight of his ball after striking it. I wondered how he could possibly enjoy golf if he couldn't see his ball.

His solution was that, after striking the ball, he would turn to observe our faces as we watched it sail away. He would interpret the quality of his shot from the vector of our collective gaze and the tone of our facial expressions. I remember being fascinated at how he held onto his love of golf even though his failing vision had presented a seemingly unassailable obstacle in his path. I don't remember any specific golf shot from that day; I only remember that Bob impressed me as a passionate person who simply would not be denied his fill of joy. I knew then that he was an innately positive person.

A more recent memory is depicted in the (hard to find and retrieve) photo above. I'm not sure why I have always remembered this moment, but it perfectly encapsulated Bob's self-deprecating sense of humor and his ability to make people laugh. His triumphant pose after landing this "lunker" (his description) epitomized his well-grounded character. There's an old saying that "people remember how you make them feel" and Bob always made me feel relaxed and happy. That's probably why I vividly remember this otherwise uneventful day.

And my most visceral memory is of the toast he gave at his eldest daughter's wedding. I don't remember the town, or the church, or even with whom I attended, but I clearly remember Bob's short and eloquent speech welcoming his son-in-law into the family. Coming from a man I had only ever known to behave in a light-hearted and jovial manner, the straight-forward sensitivity of his words struck me as exemplary. 

Bob died recently, a great catch that got away too soon; but I know he lives on prominently in the hearts and minds of those he inspired.

Debate Wrangling

 

Not sure how many of you imaginary readers tuned into the recent Presidential debate but, by all accounts, it was a farce. 

Lots of talking, very little information, no order. 

Many have suggested cutting the mic if a candidate disrupts the speaking format or agreed procedural flow, and that could restore some order, but wouldn't do much to elicit accurate or useful information from the debaters. 

If the Commission on Presidential Debates ever asks me to moderate, I've got my game plan ready to go. I'll open by asking each candidate to raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This is a fantastically powerful and well-constructed phrase that deserves a little reflection.

Swearing to tell "the truth", of course, means that the candidates will accurately relay the facts about their past records, their intended policies, and their feelings. "The whole truth" means that they won't cherry pick any misleading statistics from  arcane economic reports or social studies, and present them with an intentional lack of context. And finally, "nothing but the truth" will restrict them from appending their responses with slanderous exaggerations about what will happen if the the other side's policies are enacted.

As it stands now, debate preparation is an exercise in crafting less than truthful representations of how one side is right and the other is wrong. Success is based on how effectively the truth can be bent in two-minute segments of real time. Even worse, other than next day fact checks, that seem not to resonate with any public magnitude, there is no consequence for dishonesty during the debate.  

If a citizen lies to the federal government under oath, it is a felony.  It seems to me that a candidate for a federal position lying to the citizenry is no less egregious. A sworn oath of honesty seems to work in court; I'll give it a try if they ask me to moderate.