The Optimist, The Pessimist, and The Realist

The optimist sees the half-full glass, the pessimist the half-empty. But who is right? Obviously both, says the realist. "I'm not being (optimistic/ pessimistic), just realistic," is often said, for both the optimist and the pessimist would prefer to be thought of as a realist.

I have no quarrel with either optimists or pessimists who own their ism. But I do have a quarrel with so-called realists who believe their rose-colored perceptions against all evidence, and with cynics who refuse to see anything positive in a situation. I think realism is often invoked unrealistically as a mask for cynicism.

Optimism, pessimism, and realism alike are inherently flawed by being only mental constructs, predictions for things that have not yet occurred. But of the three, only realism is not based on hope or fear, but prior experience. Only realism is patient enough to await outcomes and evidence before proclaiming what is true.

But realism isn't always easy to adopt. It often requires a willingness to give up some deep-rooted prejudices and preferred beliefs, and it can make one vulnerable to all kinds of slings and arrows. It's harder, I think, to be realistic than to be either optmistic or pessimistic. The rewards, however, can be greater than the risks, and ultimately it is the stance that will put one on the most solid ground as a general outlook on experience.

The truth is what actually happens, what really is. But it is not always simple or easy to apprehend, and definitely not easy to perceive by everyone the same way. Truth is, as they say, in the eye of the beholder.

Neatness and the Muse

Who was it that said something about a cluttered desk indicating a busy mind? Was it Marx? His desk was always piled high with his papers.

I've always gotten messy when I'm the busiest, working on a project or focused on a task. And I've observed that most people I know to be Oscars are very busy doers. They make new things. Those I know to be Felixes, on the other hand, tend to be dreamers. They don't create many new things but battle to keep the status quo in perfect order.

My normal modus operandus is excessive--probably compulsive--neatness. I hate clutter. I tell myself that it's just a matter of efficiency: when things are out of place or hidden from view, I can't find them easily. My grandfather must have passed this neatness gene to me, because he always said, "There should be a place for everything and everything in its place."

But I recognize that neatness per se doesn't help me think or imagine better. When I clear my desk and put away my projects, I feel a certain sense of control returning but don't have any new ideas; all I've done is restore things as I remember they were. So I've concluded that at least in some cases, things strewn all over means that someone is busy, and whoever made the mess needs the mess in order to do what he or she is trying to do. I guess that when we create, we make a mess.

Ironically, I try to tickle my muse by endless tidying and straightening, and it never works. The more orderly things are, the less I'm inspired. I wonder if this is just me or there's some relationship between neatness and creativity.

Merry Christmas. Now Get Out of My Way.

December days go by faster than any other month; I can't believe it's the fifth already. In South Florida the month from October 24 when Hurricane Wilma struck through Thanksgiving crept along as slow and punchdrunk as the traffic, halting and crawling through lightless intersections like refugees through a minefield.

But the Thanksgiving through Christmas month seems by contrast to be a free-for-all worthy of the Amazing Race, a blur of traffic whizzing around all over the region from dawn through midnight every day. It seems that everyone is out and about at once, and unlike the post-Wilma slowdowns, no one stops. No one can. Once someone leaves the driveway, there's nowhere to park!

Courtesy is the first casualty of the shopping season, with the crush of stressed shoppers pushing, shoving, and grabbing the disappearing merchandise of video games, ipods, perfumes and purses with the same feverish panic they snatched up pre-Wilma food, ice, water, batteries and generators. Perhaps "Peace on Earth, good will to men" is more than just a Christmas ideal; perhaps it is also our feeble attempt to apologize for all the aggravation we created since Black Friday.

Heroes without wands

So this generation's literature has discovered the mythic story and probably feel they invented it. In the Star Wars sagas, the Lord of the Rings, Medieval romances, and even the Harry Potter series that combines coming-of-age petulance and shifting sympathy with heroism, prophecy, wizardry and magic, we have clearly rejected social realism in favor of the epic romance. And those escapist big epics have proved well-matched to quantum leaps in technical innovations and the big screen.

I'm all for it. There's nothing wrong with having heroes, even the fantasy variety. Every generation has its idols. But it's interesting that today's generations seem to need to turn to fantasy to find them. It seems to me they do so only because they do not find them in the societyat large. They are not evident in their entertainers, their political leaders, their religious leaders or their inventors, scientists, sports figures or writers or academics anymore. And curiously, they used to be, and in abundance.

Oh, to be sure, all fields have leading figures. But none, evidently, inspire admiration or a desire for emulation or imitation by the young as many did before. Ask the young whom they admire, whom they would like to grow up to be like, and you will probably get the name of some current singer or actor or athlete, but none of any career length or history.

I have little doubt that the events of the world will eventually inspire a new realism in the culture and the return of real heroes. I don't know from whence they will emerge, but I think they will most likely result from a re-emergence of the family. I think that the stable family is a necessary precondition to molding solid character and values and instilling the kind of knowledge and creative imaigination, strength and endurance that can lead to the kinds of heroic achievements younger generations will want to emulate.

I'm betting Dumbledore's death was faked

I think Underwear Ninja's right: Dumbledore's not dead. Remember, his faith in Snape was unshakeable, he immobilized Harry so the latter couldn't interfere on the tower fight, he didn't stop Malvoy despite the fact that he probably could have, he called for Severus, and especially this: once Snape zapped him point blank, he tumbled over the wall and presumably ended in a crumpled heap on the ground, but we never saw him clearly. Then Hagrid covered him and carried him at the funeral. But we never really saw the confirmation that he was (sniff) truly deceased, never-coming-back gone for. Remember, he was the greatest wizard, and he left many secrets.

I think the Snape-induced "death" of Dumbledore was part of a plan to draw out Lord Voldemort and force his hand, make him reveal his plot prematurely. Surely at the right moment, Albus Dumbledore, or at least his still-potent spirit, will reappear to help Harry foil and destroy the dark lord, and Snape will be shown to have been Dumbledore's most trusted accomplice, justifiably so.