Home
May 26
2023
0
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
What are we doing, colluding with those who insist that we put trigger warnings on everything from books, to films, to theatre and even before a lecture that people may or may not have to go to or listen to? Aren’t we giving people, young people in particular, the message that they are fragile little things that have to be protected from ideas or events that might upset them in some way? Aren’t we giving them the message that they do not have the resilience and resourcefulness required even to attend a lecture should the subject be one with which they disagree? What if Putin did invade or some catastrophe did occur, what then?
Personally I am somewhat fed up with the inevitable “there may be scenes or discussions in this programme that might upset you”. Surely part of personal development is to be upset occasionally and therefore to learn how to manage people or situations if we can’t avoid them? Or open our minds to new perspectives? How else do we build resilience?
In cognitive-behavioural approaches and other therapies exposure theory is used extensively to help someone who has a phobia of lifts, or spiders, or public speaking. It is pretty obvious to most of us that the more we do something the less we worry about it, the more we feel confident that it won’t harm us. But in today’s world the message seems to be that we should never be upset, never harmed, that we should always feel not just physically safe but also emotionally safe. But this isn’t life. In giving the message that the majority of the population require trigger warnings and should not be upset we are not preparing people for life.
For life is tough. We all experience slights, indignities, loss, alienation, jealousy, resentment, fear, anger, sadness and more. Sometimes an event or situation can be traumatic – think of those children growing up in Bakhmut right now with bombs falling around them – but as we know from others in warfare, there are some who will suffer post-traumatic stress and others who will go on to live normal lives relatively unimpeded by their horrific experiences.
I am impressed and moved when I hear of people who have been the innocent victims of an IRA bomb yet talk with acceptance of their wounds. Or Hari Budha Maga, the double amputee who lost his legs in Afghanistan who has just climbed Mount Everest. Or people managing a chronic condition with equanimity and stoicism. Just this week Tina Turner died, having turned her life around from poverty and domestic abuse to become, as they call her, the Queen of Rock. She has been a lesson for many young women and her secret, when asked? “Endurance.”
The Epictetus quotation that I and many have mentioned before gives the lesson we all need to remember “it is not what happens to you but how you react to it that matters”. This gives us the choice of whether we decide to find within us the resource we need to overcome difficulty or whether we forget that we have this choice.
And don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that we always have to be strong. Sometimes it can be strong to be vulnerable, to give way to grief for a period, to ask for help, to go for therapy. There is always a place for this. But I don’t believe it is helpful to treat a whole population as if they are infants who need protection, too fragile to read of unpleasant human behaviour in Jane Austen or William Shakespeare.
After all, at the same time, statistics would show that numerous people are watching horror films, or pornography, or playing horrifically violent video games. Let’s get some perspective on this. Let’s not programme people to be victims for that does them no good and nor does it do the rest of us any good as victims point fingers of blame at everyone else and learn to respond like a helpless child. In fact I fear that there is a trend in this direction as the role of victim is a very powerful one. After all they can sit there looking innocent and make everyone feel guilty about something they may or may not have done. But this is playground stuff, calling people names, blaming others, talking about kindness when they are not necessarily taking responsibility for their own response or, perhaps, for not being kind themselves.
The trouble is the focus is on frailty and not on the extraordinary and wonderful resilience of the human being. The messages given by governments, media, academia surely need to seek to remind young people that humans have, in our history, suffered and yet learnt and survived. And, indeed, thrived. If they are to tackle the major challenges we have in the world today we need to remind them that they have the capacity to do so, not protect them from every little scene in a book or film that might be upsetting. Or make them believe they can’t listen to a lecturer who has a different opinion to them for much of our innovation has derived from different perspectives, from the model of thesis, antithesis then synthesis.
We can get stronger through testing our metal, through exposing ourselves to difficult situations, putting ourselves in the firing line of someone who disagrees with us. Honestly, if we don’t encourage our young, bright and creative people to do this then what would happen if war broke out? Would we all be sunk, or would we discover, as so many people have done through the centuries, that we are far more resilient than some people might imagine? I suspect, and certainly hope, it would be the latter!
Further reading: The Coddling of the American Mind by Jonathan Haidt or Future Directions, a book I wrote with Diane Carrington aimed at helping young people develop confidence and emotional intelligence.
May 07
2023
3 Responses
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
I can’t remember Queen Elizabeth II’s Coronation in 1953, although my older brother and sister tell me that we came back from Portugal and watched it on our grandmother’s tiny black and white television. It was the first time my brother had watched television. I was three. I can’t remember a thing, sadly. So, the Coronation of Charles III was the first time I had witnessed this event and I was struck and moved by the wisdom and gentleness of the words of the service. It was not gifting the King with unlimited power. Instead, it was reminding him, repeatedly, that the authority of the role does not rest in him personally, but in God and his people. Charles I learnt a thing or two about that of course and I would wish that other autocratic leaders around the world would take heed of the whole concept of leader as servant. Putin, can you hear me?
So perhaps I could remind you of some of those words that I found profound as I listened and scribbled them down, sitting with friends watching the service together…
What I heard was that the King is here to serve his people, be the servant of his people, attending to their needs, especially those who are poor or vulnerable, and to bear ‘heavy weights’ for us.
When he is given the spurs, which appear like a symbol of war, the message comes instead that he must hold authority ‘with gentleness … in the paths of peace’, not to wage war but to protect his people. Love in action, as an advocate for those in need. The words stated that he must stand for mercy not might, for justice not judgement. To hold authority with wisdom. Ah, that word wisdom that means something so different from power, or intelligence, or being clever. Being wise is what we need from the leaders of the world, especially now.
And so, can this Coronation bring us back to some of the values that bring us all together as a country, that remind us what we stand for and how lucky we are to have this history of constitutional monarchy, where the Queen or King represent us but have no real political power? That they were put firmly in their place several centuries ago, before other countries had realized the harm that one over-powerful man can do to his people. Yet, these lessons haven’t been learnt elsewhere, as there have been no end of world rulers who have done immense harm to their people in their roles as Presidents or dictators. Indeed, we still witness today plenty of over-powerful leaders causing terrible harm, not only to their own people but to the world around them.
Our politicians have not done a good job recently at helping us value the freedoms and rights that we have in this country as a result of our long history of learning. This learning was demonstrated particularly in this coronation service which incorporated so many different aspects of our diverse country now, through the music and prayer, from the fact that Rishi Sunak, a Hindu, read the Christian Lesson, to the presence of so many leaders of different faiths, reminding us that we may believe in different Gods but we do not have to rage or battle over who is right. We can live in peace with different cultures and beliefs yet can share the values of tolerance and kindness.
I am sure I was not alone in rather envying Charles the ability to create such a moment, something between a wedding and a funeral, where he could choose some, though obviously not all, of the readings and music. And that music was sacred and inspiring, the notes soaring above in the beauty that is Westminster Abbey.
And what about us, the people of the UK. What can we personally do to make this a moment to draw our communities together in a more coherent set of values and appreciate what we have and can enjoy in this country? It has been somehow cool, in recent years, to denigrate everything we stand for, to sweat and apologise over our history, Empire, slavery, intolerance, or whatever. Should we not now look further to remember we were not alone in having empires and colonies, and that other countries had slaves, and continue today to be far less tolerant than we are here, both of religion, race, sexuality and more? That there are important things to consider about our future in a world where people are trafficked daily and others live in fear, repression, poverty and under the impact of climate change?
To crown a King is certainly a moment in history. Let us, as individuals, use it well, and consider our words and actions more carefully to ensure we keep this country stable and integrated in this precarious time. It doesn’t help to moan about everything, it is more profitable, surely, to consider what needs to be done rather than endlessly discussing what is wrong. Division is exactly what Putin and our enemies wish for us, as it weakens us all. Let’s consider less what we can get from our country and more what we can do for it. It has been unfashionable to be proud of England and in that I fear we are in danger of alienating our young, who need to feel they belong to something worthwhile. There are many worse places to live in this world, for sure.
King Charles III has proven to be someone who saw before others that the natural world needed care, that plants feel, that trees communicate. He has done good work in communities with the Prince’s Trust, giving young people confidence and opportunities they would never have had without this organisation, and has had to wait for decades for this moment in history.
For me, born in 1950, this Coronation demonstrates how much this country has changed in my lifetime. We were far more intolerant and less inclusive in my childhood than we are now, and lived a far poorer and more basic life in general. Let’s celebrate, with our new King, what we have achieved as a people and build on it, for there is always more to learn.
Apr 18
2023
1 Responses
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
I wonder if you have these moments too?
It’s dusk. The sky is a cloudless aquamarine blue, the magnolia tree a shadowy silhouette, its branches dark and skeletal against the setting sun. There’s a North Star above next-door’s apple blossom and it seems to be flickering a hello.
In front of me is a plate of pasta with a sauce of garlic leaves, spinach and walnuts. Delicious. A glass of Shiraz and a candle sit side by side on my wooden marquetry table.
These are my liminal moments. Not every night, but several times a week when I sit alone and contemplate the evening and end up somewhere between this world and another. A place where my mind wanders far away, dancing somewhere among the stars and touching all the places and people I have visited in this life of mine, thinking of war and autocracy, democracy and the longing for wise leaders who will bring us peace.
It doesn’t happen without some intention. It would be too easy just to continue to listen to Radio 4 burbling on in the background while I eat supper. I need to make the decision to have this quiet moment of reflection. And, to be honest, I am not sure I could do touch this quiet space without music and a glass of wine. The combination – and I am talking of a glass or two, not a bottle! – whisk the practical problems of the day out and into the dustbin of my thoughts, to be overtaken by something more conceptual, something beyond me, something sort-of out of reach.
Tonight, I listen to a Portuguese guitarist, Ricardo Martins, who I have just been in contact with to come to our villa in the Algarve during the May half term, to play us some Fado and traditional Portuguese music. I want to introduce my grandchildren to the music of my childhood, the music my mother used to sing around the house, the music that touches me in a way I can’t describe, that just goes straight, like an arrow, to my heart, and often brings tears to my eyes or a smile to my lips. It’s not always Portuguese music. It could be Ludovico Einaudi, Deborah Wiseman, or Beethoven. Last night I listened to Keith Urban and country music also moves me in an emotional way other music doesn’t. But the sound of a Portuguese guitar is magical.
I don’t think I could reach this liminal space without the music. It brings everything that matters into focus – my family, friends, the vase of daffodils on the table, the shine on my spoon, the pretty coloured handmade glass I hold in my hand, made by Adam Aaronson, who had a glass studio near my house in Fulham when I lived there. And in these moments I question my decisions, why I moved from this place to another, and also sometimes find the answers to some of the questions that present themselves to me now.
As I did make those decisions, then here I am, and the dark is cloaking the sky with night, and the music is making my foot tap, and all the world, and all its trillions of beings, and the multitude of cells of being, are one.
Mar 31
2023
2 Responses
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
We have a problem with trust. If we’re not careful we will end up trusting almost no one – politicians, the police, the NHS, teachers, business leaders, civil servants, the BBC, the media and more. This is surely a dangerous situation, as trust is an essential ingredient to a healthy democracy.
I believe what we have to remember in this is that there are very few people who go out to break our trust. Most doctors, nurses, teachers, police officers, journalists and yes, even politicians, aim to do a good job. Train drivers don’t intend, necessarily, to make a train late, doctors don’t set out to keep us waiting for hours on end. The system can work against people, and we tend to be happier if we put ourselves in their situation and consider what factors are influencing outcomes, so that we don’t lose faith in the whole system.
But of course when someone does break our trust, do something that deliberately harms us, or tells us a lie, it is very difficult to regain the trust in that person again. This is certainly true of marital infidelity but it is equally true of being involved in a business break-up, or the recipient of ‘little white lies’ where someone, whether an intimate partner or a work colleague, is not careful with the truth. Small deceptions can very quickly lead to a loss of trust through a sense of unreliability. And this is exaggerated when someone in a position of power lies to us or fails to carry through with a promise.
The trouble then can be that if one raises the issue, that person they may either not have noticed what they said or did, or may deny what you have experienced. I think they call the latter gaslighting. If the statement or action was a genuine ‘mis-speak’ or mistake then this is easily remedied by an acknowledgement of what went wrong and an apology. An apology will go a long way to regain trust. But if there is no acknowledgement or mutual understanding of what went wrong it is very hard to build those bridges of trust again.
It seems to me that there has been a relaxing of the standards required of us to speak the truth, especially in relation to those in public office. The term ‘mis-speaking’ is being used lazily and too frequently these days to justify an erroneous statement, even when the reality is that someone has told a bare-faced lie but is denying the fact rather than apologising for it. Trust is broken in such situations as the person who has lied, or mis-spoken, is disrespecting their audience to the extent that they continue to brazenly try to pull the wool over their eyes rather than accept their action. I think the spin-doctors have much to answer for in this.
We are in a tricky place on this now, too, as who are young people to trust when even teachers, lecturers and senior politicians are fudging the facts on gender and denying the biological facts of life? It seems ambiguous if we hurl bricks at a politician who has misspoken, or directly lied about something, but let off those in authority who actually also are not relating facts accurately. That’s not to mention Putin’s lies to his people and the world which are suggestive of a parallel universe. And now we have Trump.
The Brits are known for skepticism and a healthy skepticism has protected us so far from most cults and dictators. We are also known for fair play and a sense of honour of our word, and we have to be careful not to lose this reputation, as it impacts our economy if we are not seen as trustworthy people to do business with.
Where trust is concerned, we can also tap into our intuition. So often we ‘know’ on some gut level whether we can trust someone the very minute we meet them. I remember a business friend of mine who would frequently ask me to meet up with a potential business partner and give them the ‘handshake test’ as we gain clues from the felt sense of someone and how they relate to us. Another time, I remember someone who came for an interview with me who could not provide the right qualifications or references and yet I just ‘knew’ she was someone I could trust. I was right. We worked in harmony together for 44 years. But, on the whole, when we can marry up facts with our intuition we are more likely to make a wiser decision.
Skepticism is one thing and sometimes helpful, but endless negative or pessimistic thinking is another and helps very few of us as it just demoralises and can lead to people imagining no one can be trusted, which is untrue. Being critical and analytical thinkers, on the other hand, is helpful and enables us to ensure we do not generalise or immediately label a group of people as evil or untrustworthy just because one or two of them have proven themselves so.
Ultimately, we all need to trust in others within our communities in order for the world to function well. If we approach people from a perspective of expecting trouble we are immediately building barriers. After all, there are many times when we have to let go and trust and hardly give it two thoughts – for example, trusting our local garage when they service our brakes, our airline pilots when they fly us to distant places, our surgeons when they operate on us, our neighbours when we give them the keys to our house to feed the budgie, etc. Trust is an essential ingredient to life and in order to maintain it, we have to be trustworthy ourselves, which takes self-reflection, and checking with diligence our words and actions. For if we cannot trust ourselves then all is lost. It begins with us and making sure we do not collude in the assumption that no-one is trustworthy but actually check facts before putting up those barriers of disbelief.
Mar 01
2023
1 Responses
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
It’s probably the moment most of us dreaded as we headed towards our teenage years – that moment where a parent looks excruciatingly embarrassed and starts to tell us about the facts of life. I remember my parents giving me a leaflet all about it, with rather horrible pictures and diagrams that I can still recall. I don’t think they added to this information, most of which I couldn’t, aged 10, make head nor tale of, with any real conversation. I think they scuttled out of the room as fast as they could, leaving me to try to make sense of what it was all about. I believe this is an event experienced by both boys and girls of my generation.
One thing is for sure. The leaflet was all about the physical process of making love and where babies came from. But when I say ‘making love’ there was not, in that document, anything about love, nothing about how you move towards building the trust within a relationship to get to the point where one might make love or have babies. It was just pictures of body parts and how they fitted together.
The aspiration that this moment of copulation would come because the boy and girl, man and woman, had come to know one another and love one another was completely missing from this information. And it seems to me that this situation has become even worse in the age of social media. Despite years of discussion of sex education, I gather there is still little emphasis on mutual respect, consideration, caring how the other party feels and experiences these extraordinary intimate moments, on the various dating and hook-up apps available online.
So how are today’s teenagers learning about how to treat one another? The Everyone’s Invited website lists countless terrible experiences to which young girls in schools are being subjected. Ratings on their bodies, put downs, harassment, so the lessons can’t be working very well. At the same time, because of this and the MeToo lobby, young boys can equally be nervous of approaching or touching a girl. For sure it can be difficult for a teenage boy to know how to approach a girl, and potentially will do so clumsily. But the difference today is that many boys now watch porn from an early age and get very warped ideas about what a relationship is all about. This seems to be translating into them expecting girlfriends to enjoy choking, sado-masochism or violence – a recent survey reported that a third of female undergraduates aged 18-24 in America had been choked the last time they had sex. Of that group, 65 per cent said they experienced it during their first-ever sexual encounter. I really doubt that these girls enjoy this practice. And what a muddled situation this seems to place everyone in.
A few years ago, there was an excellent programme about a Danish sex educationalist who taught sixth formers here and discovered that the girls were accepting all kinds of behaviours that they didn’t enjoy, and in fact found repulsive. But the boys seemed to have a sense of entitlement and expect that the girls would like this treatment (which I won’t repeat here as it repulsed me too), and would taunt them for being frigid or boring if they didn’t go along with what the boy wanted. The teacher then taught the girls to speak up for themselves, and the boys to listen and understand that when they learnt to listen and adapt their expectations the experience was better for all concerned.
These are age-old problems but there is no doubt that social media has exacerbated them. Statistics I heard today reveal that only 1 in 50 people looking at porn are female, that 98% of sexual crimes are carried out by men, yet that 9 out of 10 romantic books are bought by women. This does speak of difference, doesn’t it, both in culture but also potentially in hormonal drives, between the sexes. Boys may be confused, yes, but girls are being expected to do all kinds of things that I would have found frightening and horrible.
When I read about Andrew Tate and the culture within the police force, fire brigade, military services, the casual acceptance of vile lyrics in rap, hip-hop and drill music, I become nervous that misogynism is being normalised. Nervous at how these men, insecure, perhaps, in their resentment of the way women now have a greater voice and may be succeeding in careers and in life, are influencing young boys to resort to the humiliation and debasement of women in order to make themselves feel ok. Doesn’t the number of young men following such online monsters put the conversation onto a different scale? Surely it is time to take a long hard look at what is happening, to stop and talk with young boys about how to feel good in themselves without this behaviour?
It must be time for a serious and much needed investigation as to why these online gurus encourage boys and men to frighten women. Men’s physical strength anyway results in girls and women still being fearful of walking down streets at night. Men who care about women take the trouble to walk on the other side of the road so as not to frighten them. Those who get a kick out of frightening women follow them closely, taunt them. I simply don’t believe that most young boys are violent but these cultural and online interventions could certainly be going some way towards making them so. With the horrifying statistic that an average of 1.53 women are killed in the UK per week by a current or previous male partner, we must come to understand why. Otherwise, we can’t possibly put a stop to it.
My point here is that I believe parents, mentors and teachers need to be having far more in-depth conversations, however excruciating that may be, at a reasonably early age about what respect is, what love is, what consideration and care are, and how that translates not only into words but into behaviours. Most men and boys are decent and respectful, so let’s ask questions and try to understand why some boys and men are drawn to gurus such as Andrew Tate. Is it that they feel vulnerable if a girl is clever or successful? If so, how can we help them feel secure enough in themselves to enjoy the success of their girlfriend or wife so that they celebrate this rather than feel diminished by it, or feel the need to diminish others?
I may be wrong, but I don’t get the impression that those awkward early moments of learning about sexual intimacy have developed much beyond that dull and confusing leaflet I was given some 60 years ago. But I fear that things have turned darker, and I am concerned for the young women of the future unless this tide of porn and misogyny is turned back. One charity that is addressing this is Tender – https://tender.org.uk/. They use acting and improvisation exercises to help young children learn empathy and practice the language required to create safe boundaries. Why not take a look at the website, donate, or encourage your child or grandchild’s school to give them a call? We need to take action on this unsavoury trend, don’t we?
Feb 14
2023
2 Responses
Comments
Helen Whitten
Posted In
Tags
But not always necessarily for the better, I think. Yes, it could have saved a few chipped fingernails and tired fingers when I started my life as a secretary at Bodley Head publishers in 1968, aged just 18. The old typewriters were hard work. Punch, punch, punch on those keys from 9 to 5, fiddling with two carbon copies, tippex and erasers. It was messy and stressful when one had to redo letters but the time spent taking dictation from my first boss, Guido Waldman, an editor, was always rewarding and I learnt a great deal from watching him work and talking to him about his role.
The first IBM Golfball came along when I was working for Geoffrey Strachan, the Plays Editor at Methuen, and made the days easier and the pressure on one’s fingertips lighter. This continued when I transferred to work for Caro Hobhouse, an editor at Macmillans. In those days letters would arrive and often not be responded to for a good four weeks. Long lunches and phone calls were the main mode of communication with authors. One still had to book an international call to those abroad. A couple of years on, it was Caro who encouraged me to apply for a role as Picture Researcher, working for Cherriwyn Magill, the Art Director in Macmillan’s jacket department.
I loved that job. I was given a brief – the title and subject matter of the book and the kind of photograph, cartoon or painting that they might require to use as part of the jacket design. Then I would be out and about in London, going to newspaper libraries, the Mary Evans Picture Library, public libraries, art galleries and museums. I met interesting and knowledgeable people who listened to my brief and showed me various examples of paintings or illustrations that would fit the bill. Then I would return with photocopies and details of potential designs.
If I was doing that job now, I would probably just be sitting at my desk Googling suitable images, and visiting websites. Yes, I would have access to the world’s museums and art galleries, which I didn’t have back in 1972, but I wouldn’t have to move away from my desk. I wouldn’t have met half the people I did meet or had half the fun I had.
I moved on from picture research to become historical researcher to the historian Alistair Horne, who was writing the official biography of Harold Macmillan. In this case I would be given facts he needed to clarify, dates, names, events that needed confirmation and I would go out and about in London and beyond – to Churchill’s house, Chartwell, in Kent, or Macmillan’s house, Birch Grove, in Sussex, to find letters or telegrams, to glean more information and ascertain that the facts were correct. I would visit the Beaverbrook Library, go to libraries in Oxford and pull together the details Alistair needed for the chapter he was working on. I met all kinds of interesting people and loved the experience of being in these ancient libraries, of touching in my hands the letters sent home from troops in Chechnya, the feel of parched yellowing paper, the scent of archived pages. If I were doing that work today I probably, again, would just be sitting at my desk, able to get the information I needed from various search engines. It wouldn’t be the same.
Then I came to building my business, Positiveworks, which I founded in 1992. There were no websites at that time so I printed brochures and walked around Richmond sticking them in letterboxes, going to various local businesses and meeting key people on training courses and on conferences. I would frequently sit next to someone at a conference on stress management or some psychological profile and that person would become my next client, or introduce me to someone who would. I am not convinced that I would have solidified those random relationships had the conferences been streamed on Zoom.
Then gradually I got used to my first Amstrad computer, to laptops, emails, websites, mobile phones. Modes of communication began to change for us all. How wrong they were when the said the internet was only for nerds!
And so the benefit of this new technology was that my network of contacts spread and I travelled to run training courses in Africa, Australia, Hong Kong, Hungary, USA, Scandinavia, Europe, Lebanon, the Middle East. It felt a little scary at times, arriving in Nigeria to be escorted by a security guard with a gun, or landing in Beirut and having President Hariri blown up outside one’s hotel, or arriving in Bahrain often in the middle of the night, but I met so many people, can touch and taste the experience of being in those distant places that I would never have seen had I just sat at my desk providing training on Zoom.
Of course, Zoom is amazing. It is just wonderful to be able to keep in touch with clients, colleagues, friends and family on FaceTime or Microsoft Teams etc. It saves the planet perhaps but saving the planet can also be eased through personal contacts, through the friendships and alliances one builds from actually being in a room together, from the understanding that is generated by talking about life as well as business.
So now, as I wait to hear from literary agents as to whether any are interested in my novel, I am aware that their reading list of manuscripts is buried and invisible in the depths of their computer filing systems. Returning to my first days of working in publishing houses, half the pleasure was being surrounded not only by the published books but also by the physical piles of manuscripts that would sit in the corner of an editor’s office, a constant visual reminder saying “read me!” And always, always, there was a polite acknowledgement of its safe arrival and some kind of acceptance or rejection letter sent as the manuscript was returned to the hopeful author. Now everything just seems to disappear into cyberspace.
I wonder how your own working life might have been different had there been no technology, no email, no Google, no mobile phone? Would your days have been different? Would you have met fewer people, seen less of life other than through a screen, I wonder? Or would technology have changed your working life for the better? With every advance there may be a little something that disappears into the ether at the same time. For myself, I am glad that Google and Zoom were not available at earlier times in my career.