Universal solutions and strange animals

Today Art confessed to me what animal he actually resembles...

Art had been this time to a party, somehow they had put him on the invitation list, and such events are always good for some free drinks and people observations.

This event was organised by a political party, so Art  took a drink, and started observing.  He would slowly get close to groups of people discussing their personal pet peeves, latest discoveries and office gossip. Art observed and used his personal theory to categorise the different people:
- the mice > the insecure people  with large anxiety- these people will suck themselves to someone they know, and only leave that conversation if they see someone else that they know well and like better
- the eagles > the people faking confidence- these will first walk through the crowd, then see someone they know and enthusiastically engage. Or they even see someone else standing alone, and try a small conversation. These are fragile attempts though, because as soon as someone steps in and takes over the conversation one has to start all over again.
- the Labradors > true party-lovers though seem to see the party as a swimming pool, they open the door and you can see the smile on their face, the eyes aimed like bow and arrow to determine the first target. they will seem to know everyone and easily jump in and intervene in conversations.
- the peacocks > there is also the reserved participant, that will define whether someone is worthy of speaking to. Basically these people are not afraid at all of not speaking at all, although mostly this behaviour can only be afforded by well known and arrived people.

Art says that people hardly ever move from one animal-category to another, except when alcohol is consumed, then sometimes people make the strangest transformations...

This time Art Burshy was sneaking up to a peacoks' conversation, and they were having an endless conversation about how problems could be solved. Normally he only observes and tries to understand on a meta-level  what type of discussion people are having and what sort of dynamic is going on. Usually - if he ever intervenes - he will ask an open question: just strange enough to make people puzzled and wondering.
This time somehow he was annoyed - but why was he annoyed:
- just by the fact that they had a different opinion than Art...not really
- annoyed by the brainless way they argued?
- or maybe because Art in general does not like peacocks?

Why were they really annoying him?
Of course it was because their way of discussing went against Art's convictions and values:
- Art does not make statements if not fully supported by thorough analysis, reflection and knowledge
- Art will always consider other people's view and feels it is arrogant not to listen
- Art does not believe in easy solutions for complex problems...
He hates to observe that; when people have a hammer...every problem seems to look like a nail...
And this does not only happen with peacocks, they just have their way of ignoring your ideas of using other tools...telling you that 'of course' this should be solved with a hammer.

I then asked which sor of animal Art Burshy was himself, which sort of animal...
And he answered...
          "I am a mouse that learnt not to give a f*ck..."

Salt is really bad for you

You will have noticed that Art has been on vacation for some time. He was in Greece and enjoyed the traditional Greek dishes. Well, in Athens all meals were fine and he would really enjoy the well-filled spanakopita, the nearly-burnt souvlakis and juicy moussakas. But after arriving on a small island, to be honest he did not so much appreciate the local delicacies, as it seemed that all fish and vegetables were thrown directly from the sea into a greasy and 'ripened' boiling oil. Also he felt that the meat balls and other meat dishes were made from the same very old, very dead and very dry goat.
In general Art is happy to eat a diversity of food, and always discovers special local dishes that are very tasty. In this case however he developed a habit of compensating the dishes with simple fresh vegetables, lots of brilliant olive oil and loads of salt. He would some evenings just love to take some bread and simply use it as a sponge to suck up a mix of oil and salt, and frequently adding garlic.

Now, being back home for some time, he somehow still kept some of the vacation habits. A breakfast with Greek yogurt (but not from Greece as it seems when you read the small letters on the wrapper) with a generous topping of tooth-aching sweet honey. And always some oil and salt to go with lunch and dinner.

Art knows that basically salt is one of the worst things to eat, and also that the honey is a pretty good sugar-booster. But when this evening during dinner, his daughter states "Dad, salt is really bad for your health" he frowns and looks her into her eyes.
Normally Art would be willing to recognise his own failure to control this addiction.
But when his daughter brings it up with a tone like 'I-got-it-all-figured-out-and-know-whats-best-for-you' it triggers some goose bumps and allergy rash in his neck. So, the last thing he feels like is confessing his guilt, and he thinks of how to tackle this 'attack' in an adequate way.

He thought of different ways of replying:
a) counter attack : pointing out to his daughter that she herself has some very unhealthy patterns, and that one should first look at ones own issues before interfering with other peoples habits. But that would sound a bit sour and ruin the atmosphere at the table.
b) plea guilty, and admit she is right; indeed salt is bad. But this would automatically raise the question: "why don't you stop it, if you know it is bad for you". This would easily create issues, as Art is supposed to be some sort of a role model for his children (like any dad I suppose) and they could use this later as an excuse-why-they-do-not-have-to-follow-his-rules. Pretty dangerous therefore, and maybe a discussion Art should avoid.
c) solve it with a bit of humour, enlarging the issue to huge proportions and to its extreme. This would not invite for further discussion and would sort of push the topic away. Sure, it might be coming back later as a boomerang; his kids are pretty clever, and will raise the topic at a later point in time. But for now maybe the best thing to do.

In general Art had discovered that his children are getting more confident; things go well at school, they have nice friends and are pretty popular. And although Art Always wanted his children to be confident, he now sometimes observes that they go the other way; they get a sort of winners' behaviour, they lose connection with the ground and go flying.  They feel they have got life all figured out, and they are happy to tell other people again-and-again how they should live their lives.

Art has seen winners' behaviour many times, also with artists and at businesses. Some of the symptoms are:
- not really listening, mainly waiting for the next moment to share some good advice and insights
- providing you advice when you are not asking for it
- relying on a few simple tools or rules to explain all that is wrong in the world
- seeing every success as a confirmation of their great and unique approach
- a talent to mis-interpret other peoples experiences into what they consider be the wrong approach.
And, not without shame, Art needs to admit that he has had some winners' behaviour at some point in his life too. Probably later than his children, because he came out of his youth with some serious self-confidence-issues, and as such it took him quite some years to come to a point where he could manipulate himself to feel confident based on some successes.

So, in the end it is good if kids feel confident enough to show some winners' behaviour, and probably better not to 'crash' their confidence by heavily attacking their premature ideas and their way of expressing those. At the same time keep asking questions and hoping their experience will provide them with gentle corrections that bring them back with both feet on the ground.

Our Art Burshy sincerely wonders if he is the only one facing this type of issues, and mental struggles, and experimental influencing of children. Well, in the end he just feels that doing his best is the maximum he can do. And he decides to ignore the saying he uses himself so often:
'the way to hell is paved with good intentions', also when raising kids.