Is life too short?

Oh happy days.

We have little influence over the actions of others. Best to look on the bright side and try to forgive.

Cheers

Don

Life. The longest thing I'll ever do. 

I do try to be patient, and every car journey starts with me telling myself to be the nicest guy on the road. But maybe not living in an angry part of the country helps.  Even my job encourages people to take their time, be thorough, and to be open and honest.  

Ive even started talking to people in shops now, so I must be entering middle age, or the next stage of flirting!

Tony

George

It is miserable, selfish, impatientient, self-centered b*****ds who make life too short.

This last sentence makes an interesting juxtaposition against the content and tone of the rest of your post does it not! 

Cheers

Jim

I try as much as possible to be tolerant and forgiving towards others. Everybody has their own agenda, their own concerns and troubles and so what if they don't always behave exactly as I'd like them to? But I must admit I find incompetence extremely annoying. I have had to deal with a number of official bodies over recent months, and time and time again I have met with people who quite obviously have no grasp of how things should be dealt with, and neither do they seem to care.  This is so frustrating and has caused me much stress and inconvenience. I am frequently left wondering how such incompetent individuals managed to obatin employment in responsible positions. I am inclined to believe the reports that education has been "dumbed down" and schools are now churning out people who simply lack the very basic skills of comprehension and communication.

Peter

Philosophically I couldn't agree more - but on a practical level I not infrequently find myself having to do other peoples' jobs for them, or the end result will be that their apathy and/or incompetence costing me money.  This becomes frustrating, and I may get a little short to the offending party if I perceive that they are truly poor at their job (or worse, incompetent and just don't care) and the end result is going to hit my precariously thin wallet.

That said, I also try to make sure that the reason for the perceived snub is not because they are being pushed beyond their limits, which is not uncommon these days with corporations trying to extract every dime from their operation by using under-staffing as a business model.  For those people I try to be very empathetic and counteract the impatient self-importance of many they deal with on a daily basis.

Dear Jim,

Such people exist and if you have bad luck you can bump into them in life all too often!

ATB from George

I did exactly the same last weekend at the fish counter in Sainsbury's. I wanted some nice cod and when I went up to the counter three of them were having a complete moan about something. I politely waited until someone noticed I was there. Unfortunately I don't seem to stand out that well. It was the weekend and I wasn't in a rush and it wasn't a problem for me.

I guess some others would have made an issue out of it.

Regards

PB

Peter wrote: 'I am inclined to believe the reports that education has been "dumbed down" and schools are now churning out people who simply lack the very basic skills of comprehension and communication.' **

This may justifiably cause concern and annoyance, but the opposite in education per se doesn't seem to produce good or laudable behaviour. My partner went for a coffee by one of the lakes here in the Cotswolds this morning and was enjoying the peace alongside a couple of quiet twitchers, when the mood was spoiled by someone she described as a 'typical Cotswolds tosser' - i.e. a public-school educated father of similarly obnoxious child, intent on throwing his weight around, acting impatiently and having a loud public row with his wife. Probably a banker (oh look, there's me jumping to conclusions).

** sorry - this crap forum has now stopped my being able to quote properly.

'I am inclined to believe the reports that education has been "dumbed down" and schools are now churning out people who simply lack the very basic skills of comprehension and communication.'

I think manners and such like are the main responsibility of parents, and failure of people to learn this cannot just  be  put at the door of the teachers, they have other tasks to perform.

In this world people should take responsibility for things and not just blame someone else.

When I worked in Birmingham, I used to go to Gregg's in the Great Western Arcade pretty much every day for a latte and some sort of cake.

The staff were always pleasant and helpful. One day there was a young lady who was a new recruit. When I asked for a latte she replied "Do you want milk with that..."

Isn't that similar but different to going to a MacDonalds Drive-thru, and asking for the meal, "To go!"

ATB from George

A friend of mine owns a particularly fine coffee house. He offers a wide range of fine coffee. He can be a bit pedantic over customers not knowing what they are ordering

i.e. May i have an Americano with milk please.

i.e. Could i have a Latte without milk please.

Could you make it extra hot,                seems water/steam at 100c is not hot enough.

Gives him hours of pleasure when he speaks to his more reasonable customers about the failings of some of his customers.

David

Yes, it is the parents responsibility first and foremost.  Training should start in the home but wouldn't it be nice if these highly paid teachers and service sector employers were at least consistent with what the parents are supposedly supposed to teach the children in their care in regards to common societal expectations and norms?

How is adhering to a certain modicum of behaviour extra work?  The problem is that many parents were never taught anything themselves so how can they contribute now?  The same goes for teachers, employers and the like.   For teachers, the standard now is to distribute multiple guess worksheets and exams and collect a big paycheque.  There are very few teachers that really care and actually teach values in this regard let alone academics.  There are very few employers that train or make simple common sense characteristics a mandatory requirement to keep a job.

I can be a very patient person.  Most of the time I just ignore the obvious concern and let it slide like water off a duck's back as I agree with George on this; life is too short, that is, however, if it is not my own child, for instance.  Then I do care.  I can imagine though if someone kindly pointed out the reason why some behaviour is unacceptable to a younger person, this may in fact be the first time someone cared enough to do so.  Maybe if more people would speak up this may lead to some change in at least a few.

Dear Florestan,

We are at a swing of the pendulum, but I do wonder if it has swung so far that nothing can stop it careering off the pivot, and thence into oblivion ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5tc57Gmfjw&feature=related

ATB from George

Dear Nigel,

For sure one group of workers whose nerves must be severely tried in the course of their work is those who have to make calls - such a BT advisers - to customers about tarrifs and so on. I make a point of being jolly with them, even though it is often a proper nuisance!

Sometimes it takes a real experience of being on the wrong end of the line to understand this. I worked once for a few weeks for Kays Catalogue, making a cold calls, and fielding incoming calls that were all too frequently those of unhappy customers! A horrible job I can assure you ...

ATB from George

I completely agree with much of the sentiment on here about declining standards however I don't think you can argue that teachers are in the main either highly paid or lacking in passion to do their best for the youngsters in their charge.

Basic teacher salaries run from £21000-£35000 and a friend who is now head of dept at a leading comprehensive and aged 43 with 22 years in the profession makes around £42000 gross.  I don't think anyone could argue that compares particularly favourably with the rest of the world.  My wife actually left IT and was a secondary school science teacher for a while and found it the most demanding job she had ever done.  It's demanding because you are essentially 'on stage' managing 32x15 year olds for 5-6 hours contact time a day and then have to go home at night and spend a further couple of hours putting together material and marking stuff.  It wasn't unusual for her to sometimes still be preparing materials at midnight.

The job of a teacher has changed dramatically since most of us were at school.  There's much more emphasis on being creative to engage pupils - video, games, practical exercises, experiments, field trips - it's no longer a case of going in and delivering chalk and talk the same way you have for the past 20 years which is a good thing I think.  The problem however is that standards and norms of acceptable behaviour have declined so severely that teachers face a situation in many schools where some/many pupils are uncontrollable.  Coupled with that teachers now face legislation that prevents them being able to discipline pupils as they once could - I was regularly slapped across the back of the hand with a wooden ruler, shouted at, poked in the chest with a finger, dragged down the corridor by my ear.  As a result I was pretty frightened of my teachers which encouraged me to tow the line.  The current culture in society would regard such methods as barbaric and any teacher using them would find themselves on the wrong end of the law and probably an angry parent's fists!  Once you remove a teacher's ability to exercise sanctions you remove much of their power to control.

Interestingly having taught in the state and private sector my wife felt the teaching methods were often much more interesting and successful in the state system, however because of the discipline issues in most state schools she would prefer us to try and send our Daughter to a private school if we can.  In essence you're paying for the peers she will have and the fact that with less discipline issues the teachers can spend 90% of the lesson teaching rather than crowd control.

I can't help thinking on reflection that the answer in part lies in a return to the grammar school system but perhaps on a less selective basis.  Take the 50% of kids with academic potential and who want to learn and put them in an environment where high standards will be demanded and achieved.  As for the rest I think you'd be better off training them in practical skills where they can maximise their chances of making a worthwhile contribution to society - engineering, gardening, motor repair, carpenter, welder.  I have no idea why we insist as a society on trying to force children down a one size fits all approach.  It's as ludicrous as sending me off to train with David Beckham in the hope I might become a championship footballer.

What is interesting to me is that the Conservative party (the majority of whose voters would favour a return to grammar schools) don't seem to have the guts to implement the policy and the Labour party are completely opposed to such an approach despite the fact that history shows that grammar schools were the biggest opportunity for social advancement the poor were ever given.  The vast majority of Labour ministers in recent years were able to escape the poverty of their background by gaining an education in the Grammar school system.  It was in essence the best chance a coal miners child ever had of joining the professional classes.

I hadn't intended to write so much and for that I apologise, but I must confess the problems in education inspired me to do so!

Jonathan

As an ex-Grammar boy I agree with all of the above. The school selection was based entirely on academic ability and NOT class, money, postcode, etc.

Whilst I sympathise with people who failed the 11+ entry exam lets face up to the fact we are not all equal in educational ability. I remained friends with plenty of my chums from Junior school that went to the local comprehensive schools.

When I left school at 16 to be an apprentice it was considered a bit of a waste of my grammar school time but it stood me in good stead since.

I like the idea of rewarding ability rather than being able to purchase privilege.

Jono

Going back to the life is short theme. I watched a programme on TV today about a nuclear waste facility in Finland that will store waste underground for the next 100,000 years, it will take this long before the rods are no longer radioactive. Life truly is short.

When things are gong well life is too short but when things are going badly life can often seem too long.

Hi Jono

As an ex-Secondary Modern girl I put over a different point of view based from my own experience; The school selection was not based on academic ability because the local Grammar School was already full of kids from the leafy suburbs, they certainly didn’t want us there…

We never knew if anyone in my Primary School class actually failed or passed the 11+, but we were certainly failed by a system that used that peculiar formality as a tool to intellectually cleanse the Grammar Schools from infiltrating working class types.

This may or may not have been the case for everyone, elsewhere in the UK, so I guess it depends upon where one lived and how many pupils the local Grammar school had vacancies for.

There also remains a problem with measuring academic ability, children with lesser intelligence may be very well educated up to their 11 years of age, which would give them a considerable advantage over children with far more intelligence but have suffered much educational neglect. This would very much skew the results of an 11+ if it was sometimes, or ever, indeed based upon academic ability.

btw thanks for the sympathy ; )

Debs

Debs,

Windsor Grammar where I went did get a very broad selection of boys from the social spectrum, but I do agree that it could be an elitist club once in.

We also had a lot of Oxbridge places in my year group, 8 out of 80 boys, which I would suggest was based more on the school's reputation that it's results. This was back in 1981 when the whole further education landscape was very different to today mind.

But the most important thing is that you get the best education for you or your children as possible as life is too short to have too many goes at getting it right. Back on topic at last!!!!!

Jono

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP7vxFMZgQw&feature=related

What is life?

That's beautiful James. Thanks for posting! (CD duly ordered...)

As an aside, I can't help but post from the lyrics of 'Moths' by Ian Anderson (Jethro Tull).

'Life's too long (as the Lemming said)'

http://www.boudnik.org/~cos/music/JethroTull/Albums/HeavyHorses-lyrics.html

There is a very flawed, but thought provoking film about immortality by John Boorman called 'Zardoz' which deals with the idea that immortality would lead to endless boredom. An idea also explored in various songs by Peter Hammill, especially 'Still Life' - http://www.sofasound.com/vdgcds/sllyrics.htm#2

'Take away the threat of death
and all you're left with is a round of make-believe;
marshal every sullen breath
and though you're ultimately bored by endless ecstasy.'

Perhaps though immortality is not the question, but would we all like a few more years, and the answer is very probably 'yes', but then the question of if you have the right to end ones life, or to request that other do so for you if you are incapable must also be asked. Medical science is extending life expectancy, I believe my daughter, born last year, now has an expectancy of over 100, but how morality copes with that may be lagging behind, depending on your viewpoint.

Jamie

Jamie, try Gulliver's Travels - the red spot curse. Swift had great insight.

Cheers

Don