Quote of the Week...from Sheryl Crow

Hello, it's me, I'm not at home.  If you'd like to reach me, leave me alone!           ---Sheryl Crow

And so goes talented rock musician Sheryl Crow's wonderful late 90's song A Change Would Do You Good, maybe my favorite one of hers.  Of course, here she's mimicking a telephone answering machine...remember those?  And the message sounds a bit paradoxical, doesn't it?  I mean, how can you convey an intended message without actively engaging with the one who you'd want to receive it?  But that's not really what Sheryl was singing about, I think.  No, it's a blunt statement about someone being overrun by others' unwelcome intrusions on her time and life, no matter how well-intentioned they might be.  Or maybe I'm just imposing my own meaning on these lyrics...yeah, that's probably true.  I truly don't dig being completely immersed in complex social settings where all kinds of subtleties, intrigues and nuanced meanings are being communicated back and forth among various players, some of whom may or may not be trying to involve me in some way with their agendas.  No, give me a one-on-one setting where it's simple, mutually-respectful conversation and I can handle that pretty well.  Otherwise...well, read that above quote again...

Not Too Keen on Retiree Reunions

The other day a colleague of mine informed me of a retiree reunion he attended at a local restaurant...it seems that upwards to forty former coworkers were there, and of the names he mentioned most of them I knew to varying degrees, many having been retired from my facility/organization for a number of years.  At first impulse I thought it might have been interesting to see them all and touch base on how they were doing, but then I thought that after those first few moments I'd most likely be itching to get out of there and on my way.  You see, even when I worked with these folks all those years back then...and I mean nothing derogatory or disrespectful about any of them...my inclination was to simply go to work, do my job, and then go home.  Now I wasn't some unfeeling, unthinking robot about my job, and I would practice learning, reading audiobooks and listening to music and talk shows while performing my assignments there...I still do all that when circumstances permit.  I got along with most of my fellow workers and, hopefully, they generally maintain positive thoughts about me as well.  But I am not into people per se, and being in crowds of them just won't do.  So when I eventually retiree, save the invitations: I'm not going, no matter how good the food is...

From Own Experience, Work Settings Can Affect Social Attitudes

Over the course of my own work experience, I had been in different social situations, by that meaning that my assignments have been structured at times to where co-workers (and myself) work in regular, close proximity to one another to the point where regular conversation is not only available, but seems almost mandatory...if you don't want to appear antisocial to the others, that is.  In other scenarios, employees sometimes work side-by-side but mostly are on their own to perform their assignments, with space between them tending to be the rule rather than the exception.  It is this latter format that I have been enjoying for more than ten years at my workplace, and I have to say that it has been a blessing to me.  I also have noticed over the course of my now-37+ years working there that when people work "too" physically closely together for regular, long stretches that in those areas I pick up on a lot of negativity, dissension, gossiping and generally nasty attitudes coming from a lot of them.  There are some positions that, on the surface, may seem to be attractive were it not for this bunching together of workers, making for pressure to conform to others' negative and manipulative behavior patterns.  Better to be a freer spirit with one's own clear-cut objectives to get through the working day, that is, if you're able to choose that kind of assignment...

Quote of the Week...from Barbara Streisand

People who need people are the luckiest people in the world.    ---Barbara Streisand

Although renowned singer/actress Barbara Streisand sang these words from the sixties' hit Funny Girl musical's song People, it was Bob Merrill who wrote these lyrics.  On the surface, it's all a kind of feel-good statement...yeah, it's good to have a positive opinion of people, I guess.  And I strongly appreciate the presence of certain, specific people in my life...that is irrefutable.  But to sashay around in life relishing being around folks in general not only isn't a need of mine, but the experiences are usually frustrating if not outright distasteful.  All these social gatherings apparently designed with the lucky "people-needers" in mind, to me are just assembling individuals with their own walls and sometimes aggressive agendas toward others.  We just got a little puppy dog a few months ago and it sees us as its pack, with training largely having to do with making it feel secure in its assigned place (at the pack's bottom, of course).  But those people...of which I admit to being one...have the same kind of continually ongoing struggles about who is dominant and who is supposed to be submissive.  This intrigue for status in imaginary hierarchies plagues interpersonal relationships and ruins the social experience for me.  Sometimes I think people want to get together in concerts or mass rallies or similar settings...or even just sit in a coffee shop...just to be around others without the immediate necessity to work out this pecking order crap.  And yet, as we've seen with Covid-19 recently, the desire to just be in crowds isn't always such a hot idea, either.  Besides, when you're in one of them...these running races I occasionally enter come to mind...the people aren't really "together": they're all divided into their little subgroups, engaging in clannish behavior while regarding the strangers around them with guarded formality. When I see other people, I feel a strong sense of empathy toward them as fellow travelers through life, with many of them going through experiences similar to my own. Plus, we all need each other in that we provide important goods and services in our economy and society...my medical issues last year certainly bear that out.  And our close interpersonal relationships like family and close friends are likewise very meaningful.  But the notion that solitude is bad and it's important to seek immersion around others for its own sake has never caught on with me. No, there's got to be a good reason for me to hang out with others...guess I'm just unlucky that way...

Quote of the Week...from M in the Movie Dr. No

Miss Moneypenny, forget the usual repartee.  007's in a hurry.                  ---M, Dr. No

For a long-standing movie series' first installment, the James Bond spy series got a lot of things right from the get-go with Dr. No, from 1962.  Then again, you can see some unworthy, dated stereotypes as well.  But I've always enjoyed the brief interplay from movie to movie between Bond and Miss Moneypenny, M's secretary in the supersecret British spy agency M16.  M, in the early movies played excellently by Bernard Lee, is Agent 007's immediate superior and has a very quick, acerbic wit...he's probably the only character in the series to which Bond displays a respectful subservience.  In an early scene from Dr. No, Bond, played here by Sean Connery, goes to M's office for his assignment and naturally encounters Moneypenny (played by Lois Maxwell), where they engage in their typical light, flirtatious banter.  Then Bond goes in to see his boss.  As he is leaving, M presses his speaker and delivers the above quote to Moneypenny...and 007 promptly leaves, giving her the empty box from his new gun.  I recognized the brilliance and humor of inserting this exchange in the movie, but I see a deeper significance.  I can't begin to count the times of annoyance when I would be watching the news on TV or listening to a radio talk show or podcast and the people on it would waste time just gibbering around with one another on no topic in particular.  This naturally doesn't occur when there's just one person present.  I'm guessing that part of this is to make the audience identify with them as regular folks, and part is to fill in some dead airtime between the actual features that they're really there for.  But sometimes they just go on and on as if they are in on some private joke apart from the audience and even snicker and giggle...that really sets me off: it's one of several reasons I refuse to watch the Greg Gutfeld show.  As for podcasting, I have written regularly about one series I enjoy listening to: Rob Dial's Mindset Mentor, in which he gives some ideas about living better in a conversational but disciplined manner.  I thought that since I like running, I might find a podcast that addresses that activity and found one featuring a couple who seem to feel that doing the old "Sonny and Cher" verge-of-argument routine is a great way to present a show.  After trying them out more than once, I came to the conclusion that although they did get around to eventually addressing the subject for which they had the podcast, it was too frustrating plowing through all that "repartee", as M termed it.  If I'm watching or listening to anything, I can tell you flat-out that this kind of prolonged banter is a big turnoff.  However, real life is different, and I think that light, inconsequential conversation is the stuff that greatly helps to hold us together in families, workplaces, stores, schools, and anywhere else people find themselves to keep from going to war with one another.  A little of that in movies, TV shows, radio, and podcasts...like Bond and Moneypenny in their flicks...adds some welcome flavor to the experience, but as with spices added to a recipe, too much can ruin everything...

Rob Dial Discusses the Greatest Fear People Have

Podcaster Rob Dial, who calls himself a personal development coach, on one of his shows last week discussed what he discovers is one of the biggest fears people have: spending time alone with themselves without outside stimulation.  When he began the program and asked the listening audience what they thought the number one fear was, I was certain he would say "public speaking" since that is the one thing that...while not necessarily terrifying me, does cause a strong negative reaction.  But no, according to Dial's source, it's just sitting by yourself and doing nothing.  He came up with a survey result where 30% of the women respondents and 60% of the men answered that they would prefer to be administered a moderately strong electric shock than to be subjected to only 15 minutes of quiet time.  To me these results are nothing less than bizarre, yet upon further reflection it does make a kind of perverse sense.  Many if not most of us walk around nowadays with a ready-made mental stimulation device, the smartphone, that is ready to instantly fill in any gaps in our busy days and eliminate the need to quietly sit and get in touch with our own feelings.  Dial pointed out that this aversion to doing nothing is probably the main reason so many have trouble with meditation, which gets the reputation for insisting that those doing it eliminate their thoughts when, in truth, the point of it all is to let different thoughts arise in the atmosphere of stillness and non-distraction and deal with them without covering them up...that's probably what causes the biggest fear of being alone and still.  From my experiences it's clear that folks are generally stimulation addicts, which to me skews the kind of relationship they seek in favor of gossip and drama, two areas that I usually find loathsome.  The same people also have a distinct sensitivity to situations they find boring and often vehemently complain whenever they experience boredom: Must! Have! Stimulation! As for me, I am totally cool being quiet and still...and boring...and not just for 15 minutes: doesn't scare me one bit...

Special Events and Drama vs. Daily Routines

A Zen master once wrote that the practice of his philosophy was not based on mountaintop special experiences but rather in practicing and consistently adhering to daily routines.  I'm not Zen...although I did enjoy Robert Pirsig's book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance...but different creeds contain their own truths, and this individual expressed a major one.  One group of people that I studiously avoid is the special event addict...someone who thinks of everyday existence as "boring" and is continually conjuring up ways to spice things up.  That includes drama queen behavior, overt flirting that draws in other people, malicious gossip, demeaning the value of mundane assignments in the workplace ("it's easy so therefore it's worthless"), overreacting to the often-manipulated news they hear...and especially thinking that special events such as parties and social gatherings define their joy and social belonging.  Never do I see some people behaving more seriously than when they are getting the food together at a workplace party...some of these on the floor seem to spend much of their energies spewing out unnaturally loud, forced laughter across the building at something or someone, most likely the target of their ridicule.  But with these special events, they're sacred and serious: don't mess with the food!  I also think a lot of folks are deeply into this career networking trap where they have been coached to believe that their social acquaintances (including, sadly, me) are little more than nodes in their networks to achieve greater prosperity and prestige.  Get-togethers with them aren't fun at all...no, it's more like going to the dentist for a really painful procedure.  I'm realistic to know that we all need breaks from routine every now and then, myself included: nothing like a wonderful weekend on the beach with my sweet wife!  But in order for that to happen, there has to be routine in the first place...I vote for the routine, and you can get your fix with parties and high drama...

People Magnets

Some people are like walking Facebook accounts, attracting "likes" and real-life emojis everywhere they go.  I call them "people magnets" as a general term, although the reasons for their popularity are usually more specific.  It's hard for me to criticize any of them for this alone...it's the people hanging all over them that bother me.  Yet, if for the sake of argument at school or my job I was assigned to tutor or train, say, famous pro basketball jock Kevin Durant or rock legend Mick Jagger, in a subject or my assignment for two or three days while in a public setting, I doubt that I could get very much done because of the clear distraction that their presence would cause with others continually dropping by to chime in with them and pour out their affection.  Yet although I actually like both Durant and Jagger, I would be stuck in a situation where I was yoked with someone open to distraction and still being expected to perform my job duties in the middle of it all while both being thoroughly marginalized and thrown completely out of my normal work routine.  But one doesn't need to be a famous athlete or entertainment celebrity to be a people magnet...people attractive to the opposite sex, as well as certain individuals with underground connections and influence, can fulfill this role and, I imagine, are much more likely to plague my humble existence.  But the result is the same: instead of being able to function at work in a respectable manner I would have to endure the repeated encroachment of other people on what I am being forced to do along with being demeaned throughout the process. The only solace is that the "people magnets" tend eventually to move on to other conquests and leave me alone...

Quote of the Week...from Thurgood Marshall

Each of you, as an individual, must pick your own goals.  Listen to others, but do not become a blind follower.                                                         ---Thurgood Marshall

I don't know where the above quote came from, but it sounds like a school's commencement speech, doesn't it?  Thurgood Marshall, a champion for civil rights in the twentieth century, is best known for his tenure as a U.S. Supreme Court justice from 1967 to 1991 as well as the attorney successfully arguing for the plaintiff in the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education case that the same court ruled to outlaw segregation and overturn the earlier 1896 Plessy vs. Ferguson "separate but equal" ruling.  But before that 1954 case Marshall repeatedly risked life and limb in the segregated Jim Crow south defending blacks against unjust charges, having to contend with lynchings, white-instigated race riots, police mistreatment of prisoners, and a general atmosphere of hostility toward his presence there as a black northern lawyer...of course he had to abide by the discriminatory segregation rules as he went about his business there as well.  I'm learning all this as I am currently reading Gilbert King's excellent historical account of a 1949 central Florida case he was involved in, titled The Devil in the Grove...very, very disturbing.  As for Marshall's quote, I picked it because it is so universal in application.  I'm afraid that more and more people these days are wasting their God-given ability to think for themselves and instead place all their beliefs in the hands of media gurus, celebrities, and politicians who seem to have a queer hold on them.  Also, in deciding how to behave during this pandemic I'm afraid that too many of us are like animals in a herd, knowing the right, publicly responsible thing to do but holding off on doing it for fear of rejection by the rest of the "herd" we interact with...in particular the alpha dog leaders who often espouse questionable tenets.  For me, no longer concerned about herds or alpha dogs, Marshall's quote had a deeper meaning to me.  I will be turning 64 in less than two months, and when it comes around to forming goals...especially those requiring a substantial investment of my time...this more advanced age may imply to some that my doors are closed in some areas.  But I'm not a blind follower of other peoples' dictates or views and instead hold to the notion that no matter where I am in this journey called life, I have the present moment to make my choices in...what the future holds for anyone is always going to be a mystery...

Herd Instinct Trumps Common Sense and Responsibility

People are social creatures, and they tend to pattern their behavior...and even beliefs...on how the groups they are most intimately identified with around them come down on what to do or think.  They can watch the TV and get all the pertinent facts on any issue, form their own initial independent opinions, and then go back to work or their circle of buddies and find out that the group in question is coming down completely differently from they've been informed...yet their social instincts will lead them away from sound judgment in the face of possible rejection from the group.  And groups themselves tend to be dominated and manipulated by aggressive "Alpha" personality types that have achieved what they want the most...to have people around them cowed and fearful of their disapproval and scorn.  I've seen this tendency in many scenarios throughout my life...from kids at high school bus stops pandering to the bullies among them to today's situation in which wearing a mask in public situations to fight the spread of COVID-19 is often regarded as taboo.  Well, I've never been one to strive for others' approval and at this stage in my life I'm not about to start.  But I do understand how most others are wired and pity them for feeling that they are so subject to pressure from peers...especially their aggressive peers...that they fear expressing their own thoughts or acting in a rational, socially responsible way.  I've heard during the past recent months about "herd immunity" regarding the ultimate decline of an invading pathogen.  But what I'm talking about here is "herd instinct"...which seems to be trumping common sense and responsibility...

Quote of the Week...from Max Ehrmann

As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.     Max Ehrmann, Desiderata

The above is the second line in American businessman Max Ehrmann's famous 1920s prose poem Desiderata, nothing less than a guide to living.  Line number one, which I've discussed three years ago on this blog, leads directly into it: "Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence."  In today's stressful and divided era of pandemic, economic crisis, social injustice and fractured electoral politics these opening lines are more relevant than ever.  I'm not here to preach them to others but instead bring them up primarily to remind myself where my priorities need to be.  It's easy for me to watch the news, gather the information and mentally process it all to come up with what I think are the correct solutions and reactions. However, other people behave and speak in ways that I find indicative of denial and false narrative...how could they be so selfish and foolish?!  Yet I stand in community with many of them and should, as Ehrmann stressed, work to maintain...without sacrificing my beliefs and personal responses...their good will in the face of stark differences between us.  I'm finding this increasingly difficult to do...it seems as if a creeping madness is settling over our society and that too many of us have decided to let a select few do our own reasoning for us...

Quote of the Week...from Patricia Highsmith

My imagination functions much better when I don't have to speak to people.    ---Patricia Highsmith

Patricia Highsmith (1921-95) was a renowned novelist whose most famous work was her 1950 Strangers on a Train, which Alfred Hitchcock made into a hit movie.  I haven't yet read any of her works...although I plan to...but the above quote of hers resonated with me.  It's not only my imagination that suffers in torturous social situations in which I'm expected to play an active role, but my entire thought processes as well...I'm tempted to simply shut myself down and passively sink into the background: not because I feel the slightest bit of inferiority among others but rather simply because this is how I'm wired...and always have been.  I'm not a recluse in that I want to avoid other people...this shutdown of social commerce because of COVID-19 has demonstrated that to me as I miss public places like the library and Starbucks.  I've been told recently that extroverts tend to do their thinking aloud, through talking to others...while introverts prefer solitude for theirs.  Highly interactive social situations energize extroverts...they thoroughly deplete me.  All throughout my school years extroverts were held up as the great achievers while introverts were at best ignored and at worst bullied and put down...I haven't seen much improvement with this picture in subsequent years.  If this all sounds like I have a chip of sorts on my shoulder, you're right...I do.  I tend to associate loud, big-talkers with heavy-handed aggression who stupidly assume that I am somehow weak and need to be submissive because I'm not inclined toward that style of behavior.  I took a mandatory public speaking class in the eleventh grade and was browbeaten to get up repeatedly in front of a classroom that contained many people I disliked and who disliked me and with whom I had absolutely nothing I felt like sharing anything with, although I had many diverse interests of my own.  The school's message was that speech is power...and if you're going to be a "successful" person you'd better get adept at the art of running your mouth off, the more aggressively the better.  But you know, if I have something I want to say to somebody, I'll say it...no problem. But being put in situations where I have to speak things that I don't want to speak to people that I don't want to speak to: forget it...

Quote of the Week...from Thornton Wilder

When you're safe at home you wish you were having an adventure; when you're having an adventure you wish you were safe at home.                          ---Thorton Wilder

Thornton Wilder (1897-1975) was an American playwright whose play Our Town was a common English class assignment in high school...we got saddled with it, too.  Maybe some day as a "free" adult I'll voluntarily reread it or watch it performed on YouTube.  For now, though, I've found the above quote of his and thought it pertained very well to the "stay at home" mantra sweeping the country...and much of the rest of the world, for that matter...

When I had free time in elementary school I'd often visit the library and read old stories and fables...I was especially entranced with the adventures of Sinbad, a wealthy citizen of Baghdad during the Caliphate era who would become restless at home in spite of his prosperity and set sail for adventure.  Inevitably he would find himself in dire peril and bemoan his decision to travel, longing to be back home and safe...but he always managed to escape and return home.  And there he'd be happy for a while and then, bored, continue the cycle with another adventure.  I think many of us are like Sinbad, but with a much more limited attention span largely caused by our modern-day expectations of instant gratification.  The introverts among us can find inner peace in solitude and companionship with loved ones: extroverts seem to be in a constant itch to go out and hobnob with others, though...I see a big problem with these open house parties and spontaneous street basketball games I see springing up within my neighborhood during this time of supposed social distancing...

I would have preferred to be one of those employees who could work from home instead of being someone "essential" who had to work in a crowded facility with others while the infection rate here from the COVID-19 virus is climbing exponentially.  Unfortunately, some of my colleagues either do not understand what "exponentially" means or because they can't actually see the virus they deny its existence or that their decisions to forgo physical distancing in the workplace are their own business and nobody else's...but it all comes out looking like foolish bravado.  I think bravery is commendable, but only if it serves a worthwhile purpose...

This pandemic will eventually run its course and we'll all be able then to have our adventures and social life as we see fit...in the meantime can we please just show a little forbearance and maturity in order to save lives, save our economy and give the health care sector the time it needs to staff and equip itself to deal with this crisis?

Quote of the Week...from Clint Eastwood

The older I get, the less I try to tiptoe around other people's feelings.  You either like me or you don't.  Simple as that.                                               ---Clint Eastwood

This quote I picked up from a Facebook friend's posting a few days ago and I'm running with the idea that it's something the great actor/director actually said...it certainly dovetails with what I know about him.  And it's also become pretty certain in my mind that I'm getting older...I'm often reminded of this fact when people automatically give me senior discounts on my purchases.  Aging in itself does not impart wisdom, but one thing I have learned over the years is that it's impossible to please everyone and that even if I do or say everything "right", somebody is going to be offended and a few will even venomously despise me...there's no getting around that.  I like another quote, this one a line from Max Ehrmann's celebrated prose poem Desiderata: "As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons." This means to treat with benevolent consideration even those whom I dislike or think are toxic and/or disruptive influences in my social world...but only up to a point.  So I try...usually successfully...to maintain politeness and goodwill toward those around me.  Yet there are people who are so bullying and manipulative that I have to draw the line and assert my own personal boundaries when they egregiously step over that line...this is where Clint's quote kicks again, and no, those people aren't going to see me tiptoe around their precious little feelings.  For what it's worth, I happen to like Clint Eastwood...two of his "spaghetti" westerns, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and A Fistful of Dollars are right there near the top of my all-time favorite movies list.  And the man is an independent thinker who calls things the way he sees them...if you've followed his politics for the last few years you know what I mean.  I wish him the best and appreciate all of his past contributions...

Quote of the Week...from Mark Twain

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
                                                                                  ---Mark Twain

I just finished reading A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by the great American author Mark Twain (real name Samuel Clemens).  Twain wrote in the late 1800s and early 1900s...he was a philosopher and humorist, but even more so a blunt appraiser of what it is to be an American.  I'll go further about that novel in tomorrow's posting, but for now I want to examine the above quote of his, which rings so true to me and on more than one level...

It seems to be a permanent fixture on the news channels: whatever is being reported, be it issues or politicians, somebody's got to come out with a poll showing how the American people feel about them.  And majority rules here: whichever side "wins" the poll, the moderators tend to treat it as the final, ultimate confirmation or rebuke of what or whom they're asking about.  Lately in the news they've been polling a lot on two issues: Trump's wall and the Mueller investigation.  Right now, Trump is down and Mueller is up, if you go by the public opinion polls.  But what do the masses of questioned Americans really know about either issue?  Most of them probably don't pay much attention to the news or the issues, and even for those who do, their knowledge falls far short of the experts and involved players...so it all comes down to a political popularity contest in the end...

In my younger elementary and high school years I formed my own opinion about being on the "side of the majority".  In the social life back them bullies were preponderant and the prevailing attitude of the "majority" was not to ostracize them like mean ol' Scut Farkas was in the movie A Christmas Story, but rather to suck up to them, befriend them, and even participate in shunning and belittling their chosen victims...even teachers in that time sided with bullies, placing all of the responsibility on the victims having to stand up for themselves.  That kind of majority rule soured me very early on to this concept, and I've subsequently never enjoyed social settings where a leader will whip up mass enthusiasm within a crowd...even less when it is sprinkled with derision expressed at adversaries, real or imagined...sometimes I wonder whether many who have psychologically bonded with Donald Trump did so because he brought back nostalgic feelings of youth when they themselves were bullies, toadies, or suckups…

No, I'm not so keen on the idea that if most of the people in a particular setting agree on something, then that automatically means that they're right.  For many folks are fodder for manipulation, especially for the type that pits them in an adversarial relationship with others...when this happens, reason and common sense...as well as compassion, grace, and mercy...tend to fly out the window...

The Overrated Small Group Circle

I'm not sure that this article is one based on principle as much as it is my feelings about a certain subject: how people are seated when in small groups.  I've noticed over the years in school, church, and the workplace that often the individual in charge of conducting the small group I am attending will insist on drawing up chairs in a circle, with everyone directly facing each other.  This is supposedly meant to engage everyone in the group...but I find it produces the opposite effect with me.  I find myself instinctively looking away from the others in the group while feeling defensive about them watching me...instead of focusing on whatever was the reason for the group in the first place.  If I happen to be a little out of sorts...be it sleepy, anxious, or displaying the numerous symptoms of my seasonal respiratory allergies...it all becomes readily apparent to all...call me self-conscious in that regard.  I also believe that many who insist on conducting small groups in circles do it precisely to make the participants uncomfortable...this enhances their power within the group to manipulate the others.  And also, the circle format creates the impression, accurate or not, that one's own opinions about a particular matter are subservient to those of the group...or should I say, those of the loudest and most dominant of the group...

I say all this because I recently heard someone ridicule the idea of people in a meeting sitting in rows and that they should instead be gathered in a circle.  I don't think folks need to follow either model...as long as we are within a reasonable proximity of each other, we should be able to sit facing whatever direction we want...as long as our backs aren't to everyone else...and in different places that make us feel the most comfortable.  But I'll repeat my earlier sentiment, and you cannot refute me because it is how I deeply feel: small groups in circles are worthless and counterproductive as far as what I get out of them, and they serve to worsen instead of strengthening my connection with the people involved...I consequently tend to avoid situations where they are mandated. There, I said it...