He created an Asset Provisioning system that is pretty slick...you can assign any sort of asset to an employee that you want; software access, cell phones, licences, etc
someone who used to live or is living in Iran, Iraq or Afganistan
I've been reading Reading Lolita in Tehran by Azar Nafisi.
Mostly I'm interested in how people continue living in that situation. In this case the author has female relatives who were/are devout Muslims, who went from being important political and social figures to be ghosts, forced to wear the burka, not out of religious devotion but because they risk getting "arested", harassed and or stoned if they don't (in one case, her Grandmother I think, she wore the burka as a symbol of her relationship to God, but the situation turned it into a political issue and took all the joy and devotiong out of it and turned it into a symbol of something else). So how do you reconcile that?
The author eventually lost her job as a University professor because of the issue and then was hired back, but the thing I really find fascinating is that the University was up and running at all. That even in the middle of the anti-West fervor, the student riots, the 'trouble-makers' disappearing in the night; the University was teaching courses on Western literature. Even though books were being banned and bookstores were shutting down, people were still discussing Austen, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Henry James, and Vladimir Nabokov.
Although I certainly recognize that large numbers of students get through college without really opening their minds to what they're learning (I believe its an age thing more than an intelligence thing) it still screws with the whole notion that "these kinds if things" won't happen if the population is educated. hhhmmmm
OK, so previously-mentioned brother has posted a comment in response to my first blog. Am I supposed to 'comment' on his coment now or just keep composing new entries - does this stuff thread or just collect?
And the easiest response to his coment would be 'No'. But I can't imagine that's considered polite in blog-land (blog -world, blog-spheredom?). So..
No, I don't think how you walk/talk/stand is an essential part of your persoal identity, after all one good car accident can change all that. I feel that the decision to change all the small physical manifestatons of ones personality is an act of giving up who you are to be someone else. I can choose to emulate Martha Stewart's corporate success; develope the skills she has, make the decisions she did, etc. or I can choose to emulate Martha Stewart. By choosing to pretend to be Noel Coward; the way he walked an talked and stood, Archie Leach turned his back on who he was.
I'm not necessarily condemning Cary Grant for it, in fact I think all of the things that made him a fun, likable, admirable person already existed in Archie; its just that I don't think I would hold that up a a great 'ideal' of a self-made man. It seems there ought to be abundant examples of people who accepted who they were from the start, but never limited themselves to what they could do. I'll have to do a little digging and see what I can find
PS: Aforementioned brother recommended I post links to books when I mention them. So here is American: Beyond Our Grandest Notions I would have preferred a link to the Tattered Cover Bookstore - a wonderful independent institution here in Colorado, but the book is a couple years old and they don't have it - so here is a link to them anyhow Tattered Cover.
And a link to our website if anyone hasn't got anything better to do www.macmann.org
Ok I told my brother that I would give this a shot because I love him, and I wanted to find out what all the noise is about...so here goes
I was reading Chris Matthews book "American: Beyond Our Grandest Notions" in the light-rail on the way into work today. I have high hopes for this book because I like reading people who are writing about whatever it is they are passionate about, and I think knowing more about what's going on out there is always a good thing. Anyway he starts off addressing the idea the America is a 'self-made' country, that the Founders came over with the idea that there was a better way to manage ones government than to be run by it and they ditched the old way and came up with a new one. Likewise, a person can come up with a new life for themself; and as an example he discusses Cary Grant and Grace Kelly.
Now I like and admire Mr Grant and Ms Kelly an enormous amount, and I understand why Chris used them as examples of self-made, but I think they are examples of self-made maybe gone too far. Both actors changed everything about themselves to become someone else. Now certainly this is something you can do in this country, but I would like to think the aim of self-made might be to see how far you can take yourself. How much can you learn, how much can you do with the things/talents/drive you have. I think there is a difference between learning how to move comfortably through a small party for example, and changing the way you talk/walk/stand
Part of the reason I feel this way right now is I think I'm finally on something that might resemble a 'career path', and one that I can actually picture myself doing well in, without picture myself suddenly acquire a different personality to go along with it. So I wholeheartedly embrace the whole idea that I can choose my path without choosing a new 'me'. (oops, I have to cut this a bit short, since I'm at work and all...)
