Kansas City Freelance Writer Liz Craig

“The aim of life is self-development. To realize one’s nature perfectly—that is what each of us is here for.”
-Oscar Wilde

To realize one’s nature perfectly. What does that mean, really?

If you are active in the business world, you may wonder at times (or many times) whether this is really “you,” or who you had hoped you would be, sitting in the meeting playing Boardroom Bingo to pass the time. Or hanging out with people you really don’t like very much.

What is self-development? Is it achieved by winning awards, climbing the ladder to higher echelons in your company? Coming in first in your Corporate Challenge event? Climbing Mount Everest? Getting a tummy-tuck? Knowing the right people? Driving the cool car?

In my opinion, none of those things is going to help you develop your true self. To me, finding one’s true nature is an inside job. How could it not be?

If you are focused outward, looking for symbols of success or things to make you happy in the world, it seems to me you never will be happy. Isn’t it true that once you get that shiny new thing you had been after, thinking it would make you happy, it quickly loses its luster, and you have to think of something else to go after?

I heard an author the other day say, “The more things you have, the more things you have to take care of, and the more tension it causes.” Having had a house full of stuff for 12 years, which I then pared down to move into an apartment, I can tell you it’s true. The stuff accumulates, and it becomes a burden. This author said, “The things you own, own you.” True, true.

But self-knowledge is something that never piles up and becomes a burden. Instead, it makes you feel lighter and lighter. Because you can let go of all the stuff that really doesn’t serve you and really doesn’t matter.

Why should you devote yourself to doing the real work of self-development? Let me ask you this: Do you think you know yourself? Or are you too busy to notice who you are?

That seems like a strange question, I imagine. A lot of us are extremely busy because we have jobs, families, hobbies, friends, and whatever other things we’re required to spend time on. Who has time for self-development?? But even in an extremely harried life, I contend that if you can’t take five minutes to simply BE, you are short-changing yourself by neglecting to at least form a friendly acquaintance with yourself.

Years ago, I took the Silva Method of Meditation, which is a terrific course. In fact, I took it twice. Once you’ve taken it, as long as you keep your card proving you are a graduate, you can take it as many times as you like. The course teaches you how to enter the alpha state of awareness, then to go one rung deeper, to a place where you find the answers your inner self has to the questions you ask.

In the Silva course, our instructor (a Franciscan monk who was a hoot) reminded us to practice for at least a few minutes daily. “Five minutes is good; ten minutes is very good; fifteen minutes is excellent.” And then, “Once a day is good, twice a day is very good, and three times is excellent.”

I’m afraid I’ve let myself slip a bit since I first took the course. But when things get hairy, or when I’m experiencing negative emotions like worry, anger, or depression, nothing helps calm me like meditating the way I was taught.

You don’t have to take the Silva course to know how to meditate. There are a lot of books out there, and a lot of classes, on how to do it. But you don’t need any of those. All you need is five minutes and a quiet place with dim lighting. Get comfortable, preferably sitting (so you don’t doze off), keep your hands open and relaxed, close your eyes, and either focus on the breath coming in and exiting your nose or focus on a word, like “peace.” Just keep breathing in and out and try to maintain your focus. Your monkey-mind will be jumping all over the place, and when you notice you’re thinking about dinner or a book you’re reading, or an itch on your neck, you gently bring your mind back to your breathing or your word.

Five minutes at work is doable, isn’t it? At home, you may find more time. And for something that’s free and easy, it eventually yields great results: calmness, less being caught up in the crisis of the moment, more insight into who you truly are, and more compassion for others in your world. Honest!

I don’t know if Oscar Wilde meditated, but it’s clear he understood there is a real self we all have, and when we learn who we are and live as we truly are, instead of living up to someone else’s idea of who or what we should be, then we can be truly free.

Try five minutes of simple meditation, and even if it’s hard to keep focused at first, you’ll get better at it, and then you’ll not only feel better, but you’ll know who you are. And you’ll probably like you!

Here I am, a proofreader and editor, as well as a writer, apparently misled by those nice lady English teachers all these years about what proper grammar is. It’s okay to boldly split infinitives? It’s okay to ask where this shipment is to go to? Good grief!

The ground beneath my feet isn’t exactly shifting, but some parts of my brain are; the parts that absorbed what apparently is false information about proper English grammar. Just take a look at this brief article. The Smithsonian is always right, so it must be so!

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/Most-of-What-You-Think-You-Know-About-Grammar-is-Wrong-187940351.html

But boy, sometimes I wish there were!

Have you noticed that these days, everyone from “Fresh Air” host Teri Gross to the third-grader next door is starting sentences with “So…?”

Several years ago, when I first heard a biology grad student do it, I thought it was cute and kind of funny. I mean, it sounded as if she were continuing a conversation, rather than answering a question. The first few times you heard it, it jolted you awake. Wakefulness is always a desirable state to be in, unless you’re an insomniac. But then it became annoying. In my mind, “so” belongs in a sentence where it means one thing is a consequence of another. For instance, “His home blew away, SO he was homeless.”

But as the first word in a conversation? “So…” has gone viral, or become a meme, or *something*, and I tried to figure out why. Perhaps people don’t want to be interrupted or thought dumb, so instead of “Well” or “Uh,” they say, “So…” to alert you that they’re about to say something.

Also, how many times lately have you heard a politician or interviewee on TV or radio say, in non-answer to a question, “That’s a great question?” Every day people at City Council meetings are even using it. Good grief, if all the questions people asked before someone said that actually *were* great, fine. But the phrase, repeated several times during an interview or conversation, is not a reflection of the quality of the question. It’s just a speed bump, a breather, a two-second “think of plausible response” tic. “Let me think a second” would sound as if you didn’t know the answer. “Hmm” or the formerly popular “Y’know…” are out of fashion. It seems everyone’s doing the “great question” dodge these days.

As long as I’m griping about grammar here, the most recent thing that I dislike, even more than anchovies (ugh), is “change up” or “change out,” when “change” alone will do. A person says they’re going to “change up” their workout routine. Or they’re going to “change out” one light bulb for another. My solution: Out with the “out” and the “up.”

Finally of course, there’s the ubiquitous “snuck” instead of the perfectly good “sneaked.” Recently I heard someone use “sneaked” as the past tense of “sneak,” and I wanted to hug that person. But the trend is toward “snuck.” Even the OED people have no problem with “snuck.” I question their standards. Question: If your sneakers are worn out, is it okay to say they are “snuckered?” Oh, well, maybe I’m stuck in the 19th century, but I cannot make myself say “snuck,” especially since it’s an ugly, blunt word. Yes, words do have shapes, and some sound lovelier than others.

What other words annoy me? Say, that’s a great question! So… What words or usages drive you up a wall? Let me know, so I can start using them on people who say “snuck!”

“There is no excellent beauty, that hath not some strangeness in the proportion.”
-Francis Bacon

That’s a tweet I posted this morning. It’s a strange one that I didn’t quite “grok” right away. But when I thought of a project that required screening beautiful women for work as a principal in a TV commercial, I got it.

Casting for a TV commercial usually begins with looking at lots and lots of photo “head shots” of models and actors. Out of those, you choose the ones you think have potential to fit your need, and if they’re local, you invite them in, so you can see them in person. Heck, they might be photoshopped to look beautiful. You’d want to know that before hiring them.

We selected three or four women to come in for personal interviews, all of whom were beautiful in their pictures. But in person, what a surprise! Were these the same women we’d selected?

One model’s face actually looked a bit misshapen. The two sides didn’t match. Another one’s nose seemed a size too large for her face. The third looked just plain homely.

These models didn’t come in without makeup, looking as if they had just fallen out of bed. They were made up to look as pretty as they could — in person. And they certainly didn’t look like candidates for Miss America. But soon, I was to learn something valuable.

When we did video auditions with our candidates, these women revealed their true beauty. In a magical way, it is true that the camera loves some faces. These rather ordinary-looking (or even peculiar-looking) women became lovely and engaging, even fascinating, in the eye of the camera.

So I understand what Bacon meant in that quote. Now I try to look at every person through the eye of a transforming camera. You’d be amazed how much more beautiful they all look!

Do you ever furrow your brow and chew your pencil (What’s a “pencil” these days?) about whether “which” or “that” is the proper word to use in a sentence? You know there must be some rule besides, “That sounds funny.” But you’re still all at sea.

Well, fear not, there is a rule, or rather, a tricky difference between a “restrictive relative clause” and a “non-restrictive relative clause.” I can see your eyes glazing from all the way over here, just as they did in English class. Well, don’t fret. This isn’t a big deal to learn.

Take a look at the following two sentences:
• He returned the book, which was due.
• He returned the book that was due.

Both of these sentences are correct. In both these sentences, the “which” or “that” was introducing a “restrictive relative clause.” That’s a clause that gives you important information about the noun before it. The meaning of the sentence would be different if you left out that clause. Restrictive relative clauses can kick off with the words that, which, whose, who, or whom.

But there’s another type of relative clause, a non-restrictive relative clause. You could think of the “non” as the beginning of “non-essential,” because even if you left out the clause, the meaning of the sentence probably wouldn’t change much. Non-restrictive clauses can begin with which, whose, who, or whom. Using “that” to introduce them is a no-no.

Examples of sentences with proper usage of non-restrictive relative clauses:
• She watered the plants, which made the leaves damp.
• A GPS would have made it easier to navigate through the neighborhood, which had few street signs.

The giveaway that you’re looking at a non-restrictive clause is a comma before the “which.” There is none before a restrictive clause.

Examples:
Non-restrictive: He bought her a ring, which he slipped into his pocket.
Restrictive: He slipped a ring that he bought for her into his pocket.

Examples of incorrect usage:
• Here are the papers which you need to sign. (Use “that.” Or neither “that” nor “which.” It’s clear what the sentence means without either.)
• Here are the people that signed up for the class. (Trick example. Always use “who” for people. This would be a restrictive clause, because what comes after “that” or “who” is essential information.)
• She was defrosting the fish which she wanted to cook for dinner.”
(Should be “that.”)

There may be some sentences that stump you about “which” or “that,” but if you’re really stuck, sometimes the easiest answer is to rewrite the sentence to eliminate the problem. Tricks of the trade, m’dear. (wink)

Recently, I joined a writers’ meetup. It’s fun hearing other people’s writing and offering words of wisdom to newbies.

A newbie writer is like a new puppy, all bounce and go and eagerness. Arf! And like a puppy, the newbie writer doesn’t know any rules yet. He or she is just chasing after every butterfly of an idea, wild with the feeling of being FREE!

I love freedom. I love new ideas. Nothing wrong with being excited about your work, and eager to share it. Most experienced writers are gentle with newbies, as anyone would be with a new puppy. But there comes a time…

Unbounded enthusiasm and rules-free writing can be exciting for a new writer, but the grim truth is, if you’re going to write things people actually want to read, you’ll need to follow some rules.

One thing the aspiring writer must know how to use is contractions. To a sensitive reader, every misplaced apostrophe or misused word is a mild shock. It disturbs, it frustrates, it just plain makes some readers mad. So here are a few contractions any writer worth his or her salt ought to know.

Your/you’re

• “Your” is possessive. Proper usage: “Here is your coat.” The coat belongs to “you.” It’s “yours.” No apostrophes in sight.

• “You’re” is a contraction for “you are.” Think of that apostrophe as a miniscule “a.” “You’re a sweetie.” That means, “You are a sweetie.”

They’re/their/there

Oh boy, these three words trip up a lot of people. But an artist of words must master these. Let’s take the easy one first.

• “They’re” means “they are.” Remember the bit about seeing the tiny “a” in “you’re?” Same thing here. “They are leaving.”

• “Their” means “belongs to them.” Like “our” or “your.” “Their toys were rusted.” “The toys that belong to them were rusted.”

• I don’t know how “there” even got into this mix. It’s a completely different kind of word. Its mate is “here.” Use it to indicate where something is. “It’s over there.” “There is my hat.”

The final one for today is…

It’s and its

• The apostrophe in “it’s” also stands for a tiny letter, but in this case, it’s “i.” So “it’s” means “it is.” “It’s your turn.” “It’s easy to learn this.”

• “Its” is a possessive. Example: “The cat licked its fur.” “The cat licked the fur that belonged to it.” “The Foundation named its 2013 grantees.” Well, the grantees don’t actually belong to the Foundation, but it’s not a he or a she, so when “it” does things, you’d use “its.” I know, a cat is either a he or a she, but sometimes, we don’t know or care which. How did I get into this mire? Lemme out!

There are some non-existent contractions people use, like “her’s,” but of course, you know that “her” is already a possessive (as in “her coat,” “her hair,” and so on), and if you want to refer to something that belongs to her, you would say, “That shoe is hers.” You wouldn’t put an apostrophe in “his,” would you? So don’t do it to “hers.”

All this stuff is easy, right? Right! And yes, you do have to memorize the correct usages if you’re going to write something others will read, whether it’s a Post-It note, an e-mail, or a novel. Okay, then. Go and write it right!

P.S. I know I should have said, “Write it ‘correctly,’ but “right” just sounded, well, right!

He was one of “Twelve Angry Men,” a visitor to “The Twilight Zone,” a slob in “The Odd Couple,” and a doctor in “Quincy, M.E.” And before that, a Broadway star in “Gypsy.” But to me, he’ll always be the guy who couldn’t pronounce “Ak-Sar-Ben” to save his life. I’m talking about Jack Klugman. He died the other day, and when I saw the notice, a shock ran through me, because I knew Jack.

Let me backtrack a little. As a horseman, Jack was a perfect spokesman for Ak-Sar-Ben racetrack, a client of the advertising agency where I worked as a writer/producer at the time. Amazingly, he agreed to do a set of TV spots for us for a reasonable fee. It must have been the horse connection that sealed the deal.

Before Jack arrived, we were instructed that he must have an excellent toupee stylist available on the set at all times. Wow, I thought. Was this guy going to be a handful? I was a little scared to meet him. He was a big star, and I was an Omaha writer/producer charged with keeping him content and doing his best job for what was probably a fraction of his normal fee.

The first day of shooting, I brought bagels to the set. Poor Jack, who had arisen at 6 a.m. (4 a.m. California time), was greeted on Day One by fruit-flavored bagels (the only kind I could find the night before at Albertson’s). “Blueberry! Strawberry! These aren’t bagels!” First the demand for the toupee stylist, now the dissatisfaction with our Midwestern bagels. How difficult was our Hollywood star going to be?

But my fears were quickly dispelled once we started shooting. Jack took direction without a fuss, and he was open and easy to talk to, particularly when a couple of attractive young women from the agency came to visit him on the set. He enjoyed joking and chatting with his star-struck fans until we called him for the next scene.

During the shoot, the one thing that bugged him was something rather important: the name of the client. Take after take, he struggled unsuccessfully to pronounce it. “ARK-si-bin!” “Come on out to As-KIB-In!” “Awk-SER-ban!” Frustrated after a series of blown takes, he turned to me and pleaded, “Aw, honey, we don’t have to keep saying the name, do we?” Unhelpfully, I told him it was “Nebraska” spelled backward. Eventually, he got the name right, and in the finished spots, Jack’s personality and enthusiasm shone through every scene.

One day, while the crew set up for the next scene, Jack decided to bet on a race or two. I thought, “Wow, Jack knows the horses. I’ll bet with him.” So I bet the same horses he did (with one-tenth the money). We both lost, but what the hey. I got to bet with Jack Klugman.

When I read accounts of his death, I learned he had agreed to do “Quincy, M.E.” because he hoped to do stories that focused on issues like preventing child abuse and rape. His social conscience put him at odds with his producer, who didn’t think viewers wanted to see shows about those subjects. But Jack was right. “Quincy, M.E.” was the first of a new genre of popular crime-detection shows focusing on those and other social issues, among them “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit,” and “Law & Order: Criminal Intent.”

In the 1980s, Jack pushed hard to get the Orphan Drug Act passed. In fact, he had his brother, Maurice, write two episodes of “Quincy, M.E.” about the problem that pharmaceutical companies weren’t inclined to spend money developing drugs for rare diseases like ALS and cystic fibrosis. The first episode acquainted the audience with the problem. The second dramatized the real-life battle Jack was having with Washington. A senator was holding up the bill, and after the episode, the bill finally passed. Jack used the power of his own convictions and the power of the media to help people with rare diseases. For more about his crusade, read this.

Most people don’t know about Jack’s dedication to social issues. In fact, many people think Jack was Oscar Madison of “The Odd Couple,” a shambling, sloppy loudmouth with green meat and brown cheese rotting in his fridge. That’s a tribute to his ability to make a bizarre character seem real. Jack was not Oscar. He was smart, talented, dedicated and socially conscious. But okay, he was a little disheveled-looking. Rreferring to Tony Randall, his “Odd Couple” co-star, he told me, “Tony has suits that are 30 years old. He brushes them, hangs them up, and they look like new. Me, I wear a new suit for two minutes, and it looks like it’s 30 years old.” He was funny, self-deprecating, and someone you wished you could keep on being friends with after the shoot was over.

I’ve worked with other well-known actors. But the one I remember most fondly is Jack Klugman. The natural everyman. The socially conscious actor. And the guy who couldn’t pronounce “Ak-Sar-Ben” to save his life.

I’m getting into Pinterest now and finding all kinds of funny, wonderful things other people have pinned, like this:

A fellow writer pinned this. Thanks, Paula!

Only thing is, how do I make it bigger, so it’s readable? Oh, okay. Try this link: AdAlaCarteTackk

If a person or organization spends lots of time currying your favor, and you finally succumb and give to that person or organization, then you hear nothing more, until the next time they need something, don’t you feel burned? Even burned up? It’s as if you asked your friends to help you move your stuff to a new house, then didn’t even offer them a Coke or pizza or call them until the next time you moved.

I wouldn’t call that person a friend. I’d call that person an ungrateful leech.

A couple of weeks ago, in response to a plea from a friend who’s now running an organization that needs money, I wrote a check. Not a big one, but big in comparison to the ones and fives people were throwing into a money jar. My name and address were on the check, and her organization has my e-mail address. So I expected a quick thank-you note or call… or something.

A couple of weeks later, I’m still waiting. Now I’ve received more requests for giving from this friend. And I’ve been feeling a little miffed about it. I’ve tried to convince myself that if I gave out of desire for some kind of honor or thanks, I ought to just get over it. But I gave for two reasons: One, it was a good cause, and two, the person asking was a friend.

Still, the words “Thank you!” would have been nice to hear, on the phone, via e-mail, or by mail. Especially before I heard “I need…” again. Those two words are magical keys. They unlock the giver’s heart and mind and create a good feeling that makes the giver even more likely to give in the future.

If someone contributes time, energy or money to you or your organization, always remember to say the magic words, “Thank you!” Be just as diligent about saying “Thank you!” as you are about asking in the first place. It takes so little energy or time, it’s foolish not to. That is, if you want to be seen in a positive way. Otherwise, hey, fuhgeddaboudit!