Diminutive Grant Grove features the third largest and one of the oldest of the sequoia trees, the eponymous General Grant Tree, as well as numerous historical relics and sequoia-related curiosities. What this hike lacks in size and scale, it more than makes up for with exceptional sequoias and both local and national historical sites. From…
posted by Unknown @ 8:10 PM
0 Comments
As I’m writing this, the McKay family is about to head off for our annual family vacation.
There’s a surprising number of to-dos that need to be crossed off before heading out for any trip, and prior to every vacation, I generate the same mental checklist of things that need to be taken care of. But every single time, I procrastinate, try to cram too many tasks into the morning of our trip, and end up forgetting things to do and items to pack.
So taking a lesson from the post I wrote on the power of checklists, I finally decided to create a pre-travel checklist to get all my ducks in a row.
I figured others might find it helpful to either copy or remix it for their own travel use. I hope you find it useful and please add your own suggestions in the comments!
Note: If you have a very early flight, some of these things should be done the night before. Just grab a protein bar and head out the door.
Check for items you often use right up until leaving, and end up forgetting:
For more tips on traveling with babies and toddlers, check out this post.
Click here to download a PDF of these checklists.
posted by Unknown @ 9:48 PM
0 Comments
No overview of Viking mythology would be complete without delving a little bit into Loki and the role he plays in the Norse universe. Along with Odin, he’s the most mysterious and perplexing of the gods. Part of the confusion is that his physical being is difficult to nail down. He’s the son of a giant and an unknown figure — perhaps a giantess, a goddess, or something else completely. Loki is at times human-ish (like the other gods), at times a shapeshifter (like Odin), and even one time a mother — he in fact birthed Sleipnir, Odin’s eight-legged flying horse. He was indeed a father as well, but his offspring were terrifying beings like Jormungand (the world-encircling serpent), Fenrir (the great wolf), and Hel (the goddess of the underworld). Before even getting into his character traits, it’s obvious that Loki is capricious and hard to trust.
The children of Loki: Fenrir, Jormungand, and Hel.
In terms of behavior, he’s seemingly either playfully mischievous or downright evil, depending on the story. A reader of Norse mythology is often left perplexed by Loki’s actions, and how those actions are viewed by his fellow gods. He’s cunning, but charismatic to a degree, and it’s a bit of mystery why the other gods in Asgard even keep him around.
Although he’s ever present in the Norse world, he’s never actually worshipped by Viking people like the other gods are. Additionally, while he has a role in many myths — you’ll have noticed his role in nearly all of them throughout this series — he’s never the hero. He’s simply a sideshow — either a foe or a friend, helping or hurting or instigating from the sidelines.
Let’s briefly look at the one story in which he does star, but as you’ll see, is clearly not the hero.
***
Baldur was one of Odin’s sons, known to be generous and courageous. When he started having dreams about a terrible event befalling him, his father — the wise chief — was charged with inspecting the meaning behind these foreshadowings.
So Odin ventured to the underworld, where, after consulting a seeress, he learned that Baldur was indeed doomed and destined to an early death.
Frigg, Baldur’s mother, was obviously distraught by this news. So she obtained oaths from everything in the universe to not harm her son. The gods even tested it by throwing great rocks and sticks his way, only to see the projectiles bounce off him and fall harmlessly to the ground.
Loki, of course, saw an opportunity for trickery. “Did all things swear oaths to spare Baldur from harm?” he asked Frigg. “Oh, yes,” she replied, “everything except the mistletoe. But the mistletoe is so small and innocent a thing that I felt it superfluous to ask it for an oath. What harm could it do to my son?”
Loki then went out and found some mistletoe to bring back to Asgard. He approached the god Hodr, who was blind, and convinced him to take a spear and throw it at Baldur as yet another test of his invincibility. Indeed, the spear was crafted from mistletoe. Hodr threw the shaft, which pierced Baldur and killed him on the spot.
After Baldur was killed, another god, Hermod, rode to the underworld to try to convince the goddess Hel to release Baldur back to Asgard because he was so universally loved. Hel agreed that if every creature in the world wept for Baldur, she would release him. And every living thing did indeed weep for the fallen god — except one. A giantess named Tokk — certainly Loki in disguise — withheld her sorrow, and Baldur remained in the underworld.
***
This tale begs the question of where Loki fits into the Norse pantheon. Why is he there at all? What role does he play, and what can we learn from him?
While it’s an oft-debated question, my own research seems to place him as a devil-like character. It’s not the horned, red-skinned Satan you’re probably imagining, though. Early Christianity saw the devil as more of a trickster, a being who constantly lies and deceives by subtle measures rather than through overt evil. Loki’s most common pranks are small and seemingly innocuous actions, but frequently lead to terrible consequences.
When the Vikings started to convert to Christianity near the end of their reign, they combined their pagan gods with their new religion. The character of Loki made an easy parallel to Satan. In paintings, especially as the myths aged into the centuries of the 1000s, he became a jester-type figure, another image that was also often given to the Christian devil.
In this regard Loki exemplifies the trickster archetype that’s been present in mythology and folklore for thousands of years and around the world. Portrayed as a wise fool, this ubiquitous character is most often male, is usually cunning and sometimes even playful, and generally spreads discord through pranks and deception. Sometimes the trickster is simply used for lighthearted entertainment (like Bugs Bunny), and other times — as in Loki’s case — is more of a malicious being.
His presence is often seen as a way to get people to think and behave differently — to not just flow along with the status quo and accept things at face value. The trickster is proof that deception exists in our world; sometimes it’s playful, oftentimes it’s destructive.
One thing is for sure (and some experts note this is how the Vikings looked at him): Loki embodies all that man should not be. He is unreliable, disloyal, shallow, vain, hedonistic…a laundry list of negative characteristics. He’s also incredibly profane — life was simply a joke to him; there was nothing sacred about the world he lived in. To the gods who were worshipped, and to the people worshipping them, all of life was sacred. Thor was present in the thunderstorms, Odin took flight as a raven and used other creatures as his watchdogs — Norse mythology is full of examples of the blending of the natural world and the world of the gods.
As a modern writer notes, the Viking people felt that “one embodies Loki whenever one lives in a totally profane manner, without any reference to sacred models — hence Loki’s utter lack of any allegiances to the gods, giants, or anyone else.”
Rather than being flat and one-dimensional, life can be imbued with beauty and mystery when viewed through a lens that says everything is sacred. We are loyal to those around us, because they have meaning in the world, just as we do. We are not hedonistic, because there’s more to life than what can be seen on a screen or on a plate in front of us. No matter your religion or lack thereof, you can treat every day with a certain sacredness that gives texture to an otherwise bleak existence.
And perhaps this is why Loki was kept around in the Norse pantheon. Men need examples not only of the good and honorable and moral, but also of the anti-man. It’s why we have lessons in unmanliness on the website — we can learn just as much from anti-examples as we can from the good examples. When you read the myths of the Vikings, you get a sour taste in your mouth from Loki. You learn from him in a via negativa-type way — you look at his characteristics and subtract them from your life. He’s a deceptive liar, so you should be honest and forthcoming in your interactions with people. He’s unreliable, so you should strive to be a bastion of reliability. His character is as moveable as sand, so be sure your moral foundation is as solid as rock.
To some, the word “trickster” denotes something light and playful — like a young boy pulling a prank. Over the course of writing this series, I’ve talked to numerous people about Norse mythology, and Loki is inevitably one of the characters they’re familiar with. Rather than being sinister, however, they view him in that innocent regard — fun, playful, and a prankster no doubt, but causing no real harm.
Yet I would argue that he should in fact be viewed through a more serious lens. His individual acts of mischief may be small at the outset, but reap consequences far greater than what could have been foretold. Loki brought mistletoe to Asgard, and one of the beloved gods died. You sent a single flirty text to a co-worker, and it ultimately led to the end of your marriage. Small and seemingly innocent acts of deception can snowball into ruinous avalanches.
Even the gods eventually got sick of Loki’s trickery and he got what was coming to him. After Baldur’s death, and continued mocking of the other gods, he was bound to a rock with entrails and condemned to have a snake drip poison on his face forever after. He would not be unbound until Raganok — and to that apocalyptic event is where we will turn next time to conclude this series.
Read the rest of the Norse mythology series:
posted by Unknown @ 8:11 PM
0 Comments
“I too am not a bit tamed—I too am untranslatable;
I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.” –Walt Whitman
Throughout cultures and time, shouting and yelling have typically been categorized as masculine acts. It makes sense. Yelling is inherently aggressive and often the prelude to actual physical violence.
Across mammal species, males will frequently engage in posturing that includes roaring, snorting, or screeching. The aim of this pre-fight auditory showdown is actually to avoid having the conflict escalate into a physical altercation. If a male mammal can dominate his opponent into submission with just a roar, he eliminates the risk of getting killed or seriously injured and saves himself precious energy. If the roar doesn’t work to stave off the fight, well, hopefully it was fierce enough to instill some fear into one’s foe, leading him to struggle less fiercely and submit sooner, rather than later.
These roars aren’t limited to the animal kingdom, though. In the great epic poems of cultures in both the East and the West, a manly, fierce yell was a desirable trait for a warrior to have.
In The Iliad, Homer often describes the story’s heroes in terms of their ability to let out a howl that could weaken the knees of their enemies. Diomedes is called “Diomedes of the loud war cry,” and both Menelaus and Odysseus are described as “utter[ing] a piercing shout.”
The mighty warriors that populate the Shahnameh, an epic Persian epic poem from the first century, are all described as arming themselves with a virile war cry: Koshan rumbled “in a voice like a drumbeat”; Rahham “roared out and began to boil like the sea”; and the thick-bodied Rostam thundered “like an elephant enraged.”
Cú Chulainn, a hero from Celtic mythology, used the “hero’s scream” to scare off devils and goblins.
The Georgian hero Tariel was able to drop opposing warriors using only the force of his mighty war cry.
And in Welsh mythology, the hero Culhwch was said to be able to give a battle cry so loud and violent that “all the women in the court that [were] pregnant [would] abort” and those women who were not pregnant would become sterile.
Lone heroes weren’t the only ones known to give battle cries, either. Bands of warriors would often cry out in unison to frighten their enemies and fill themselves with thumos.
Even today, soldiers and fighters continue to yell and shout when engaging with the enemy. You even see battle cries on football and rugby fields.
There’s something very visceral about the aggressive shout that taps into the animal within us. As historian Dean Miller notes in his book The Epic Hero, “If the human voice…carries the proof of intelligence and therefore of a living vitality specific to humanity, the warrior’s shout announces a retrograde act, moving back or down into animality or even into the inanimate (a drumbeat, the sound of the sea).”
Moving back into that raw barbarism via a mighty yell may be a way for us humans to tap into our animal strength. In fact, research backs this idea up: one study showed that athletes who scream when exerting themselves show an 11% increase in power output!
The battle cry has truly played an integral and just plain fascinating role in the history of masculinity. So today we highlight 20 famous and not-so-famous battle cries through the ages and around the world. Maybe it’ll inspire you to come up with your own manly shout.
Sound your barbaric yawp!
Unlike their Greek forebearers who drilled to music, ancient Roman soldiers typically marched in silence. But once they encountered the enemy, the soldiers would let out a unified war cry to intimidate their foes.
Soldiers in the Late Roman army adopted many customs and habits of the Germanic tribes they fought, including a battle cry they called “barritus.” In his work Germania, the historian Tacitus described this martial growl as marked by a “harsh tone and hoarse murmur.” Soldiers would “put their shields before their mouths, in order to make the voice swell fuller and deeper as it echoes back.” According to Tacitus, the goal of the barritus was to kindle courage in the Roman soldiers’ hearts, while striking fear into those of their enemies.
In the 1964 film The Fall of the Roman Empire, there’s a great scene with a Roman legion bellowing an intimidating barritus:
“Oorah!” has been the go-to battle cry for the U.S. Marine Corps since about the Vietnam War. It’s not only used as a battle cry, but also as a way for Marines to greet their fellow leathernecks.
The exact origins of “Oorah!” are hard to pin down. Several possible sources exist. One story has it introduced by the 1st Amphibious Reconnaissance Company in 1953; a drill instructor is said to have incorporated the simulated sound of a submarine dive horn — “Ahuga!” — into a marching cadence. It caught on and other drill instructors used “Ahuga!” as well. Over time it morphed into “Oorah!”
Another likely source of this spirited shout is that it’s simply a derivation of “Hurrah!” — which was in common use by both American and British soldiers centuries before “Oorah!” came on the scene.
Confederate soldiers in the American Civil War developed a uniquely terrifying battle cry to intimidate their enemy and boost their own morale. Called the Rebel Yell, one Union soldier said it would send “a peculiar corkscrew sensation that went up your spine when you heard it” and that “if you claim you heard it and weren’t scared that means you never heard it.”
The Rebel Yell has been described as sounding like a “rabbit’s scream” or “an Indian war cry.” The latter description is probably apt, as many historians believe Southerners were inspired in creating the Rebel Yell by American Indian battle cries they had heard before the war.
While there is no recording of the Rebel Yell in an actual battle, the Library of Congress did record a group of Confederate veterans giving the Rebel Yell in 1930. Take a listen:
The Mongols of the 13th century were reported to have yelled “Uukhai!” as they went into battle. The translation is something like our modern “Hurray!” — but had a more sacred bent and was used like the Christian “Amen.” After petitioning the sky for aid, Mongols would hold both hands out with palms up and move them in a clockwise circle three times saying “hurray, hurray, hurray.” Such prayers were used in official settings and rituals, to scare away evil spirits, and to shore up both supernatural assistance and the warriors’ morale preceding battle. Modern Mongolian archers shout the phrase and raise their hands to the heavens whenever they score a point in competition.
Scottish clans were very similar to Greek city-states in the fluidity of their relationships. Clans often fought each other, but sometimes banded together to fight a common foe, usually the English.
Each clan had their own distinct battle cry, called a slogan in the Lowlands and a flughorn in the Highlands. According to 19th century historian Rev. George Hill, Highland clans typically chose the name of a place or event that had historical significance for the respective clan. Crying out the name seemed to “operate like a charm” on the soldiers, filling them with thumos to fight for their homeland and ancestors.
Scottish slogans also served as a watchword to help identify fellow clansmen in the confusion of battle.
The Mackay slogan (the clan that I descended from) is “Bratach Bhan Chlann Aoidh,” meaning “The White Banner of Mackay.” It’s in reference to the white battle flag that Ian Aberach carried when he led the Mackays at the Battle of DrumnaCoub in 1433.
And sorry to burst your bubble, but Scottish hero William Wallace didn’t yell “Freeeeeeedommmmm!” before being executed. Thanks Mel Gibson.
During the First Crusade, Christian soldiers would shout “Deus Vult!” — “God Wills It!” — as they fought Muslims for control of the Holy Land.
For over 300 years, Russian soldiers have shouted “Urrah!” in battle. Records suggest that soldiers in the Russian Imperial Army were the first to use it. Some historians believe it was inspired by the battle cry “Vur Ha!” used by soldiers in the Ottoman Empire, while others think it was inspired by the Mongolian “hurray!”
“Urrah!” was widely used by soldiers in the Red Army during WWII. It’s still used by the Russian army today, but primarily in military parades and Victory Day celebrations like this one:
Before a battle, the Ancient Greeks would ask for the blessings of Alala — the goddess of the war cry — by shouting out her name as loudly and fiercely as possible. Greek hoplites hoped that Alala would answer their supplication by amplifying their cry and thus scaring the living daylights out of their enemies.
To encourage Japanese soldiers to fight to the death rather than surrender to the enemy, the Japanese government romanticized suicide attacks by harkening to the ancient honor code of the samurai — the Bushido. Samurai warriors believed it was better to choose death over the humiliation of defeat.
Japanese infantrymen were thus trained to make a last-ditch suicide attack when they were all but beaten. As they ran towards enemy fire, they’d scream “Tenno Heika Banzai!” — “Long live the Emperor!” Kamikaze pilots were said to have yelled the same thing as they flew their planes into enemy warships. The battle cry was often shortened to just “Banzai!” Because the battle cry was shouted in conjunction with these suicidal barrages, Allied forces began calling this quintessentially Japanese battle strategy “Banzai attacks.”
American Indian warriors were adept practitioners of the war cry (and no, they didn’t “Whoo! Whoo!” by patting their mouth with their hand). Each tribe had a distinct battle shout. Sometimes they’d yell words that referenced tribe principles. But like most cries men give during battle, an Indian warrior would often just holler and wail as fiercely as he could to intimidate his enemy.
Perhaps the most famous Indian battle cry comes from the Lakota Sioux. During the Great Sioux War of 1876-1877, Lakota war chief Crazy Horse is said to have exhorted his warriors to fight the U.S. Army by exclaiming “Hokahey! Today is a good day to die!”
Many people wrongly translate “Hokahey!” to mean “Today is a good day to die” simply because Crazy Horse said the phrase after shouting “Hokahey!” According to the website Native Languages, however, “Hokahey!” is a Sioux exclamation that translates roughly to “Let’s do it!” or “Let’s roll!” So what Crazy Horse actually said was “Let’s roll, men! Today is a good day to die!”
That’s a pretty badass battle cry.
The samurai were an elite warrior and political class that dominated Japan for hundreds of years. Right before a battle, the daimyo, or warlord, would raise his signaling flag and shout “Ei! Ei!” to which the samurai would respond with “Oh!” Then all hell would be unleashed on the enemy.
In 1879, the British army fought the Zulus in what is now South Africa. Using nothing but spears and long shields made of cowhide, Zulu warriors were able to repulse the first invasion of the heavily armed British troops. The Usuthu were a faction in the Zulu Kingdom, and they took their name from a type of cattle their warrior ancestors used to pillage during wars. To keep alive their memory, and perhaps to summon the power of their brave forebearers, these men would shout out “Usuthu!” during battle. Other factions within the kingdom used this battle cry as well during the Anglo-Zulu War.
Before battle, the Vikings would often invoke their warrior gods to give them the strength and power to defeat their enemies. In fact, Odin, the Norse god of wisdom, inspired one of their commonly used battle cries. According to Norse mythology, in the very first war in the world, Odin flung a spear over the entire host gathered for battle. Viking kings and commanders would thus emulate the Allfather by having one warrior throw a spear over their enemies’ heads, while the rest of the troops yelled: “Odin owns you all!” (A thousand years later, Viking metal band Einherjer would use this battle cry for the title of their 1998 album, Odin Owns Ye All. The spirit of Odin lives on.)
Another common Viking battle cry was simply yelling out “Tyr!” — the name of the god of war.
During battle, the Finnish light cavalrymen would cry out “Hakkaa päälle!” meaning, “Cut them down!” right before they would ride roughshod over their enemy with gleaming swords drawn.
Because of their famous battle cry, these cavalrymen became known as the Hakkapeliitta.
The Bible mentions several war cries, with perhaps the most famous example being found in the 7th chapter of the Book of Judges. Gideon (whose name means “Destroyer” or “Mighty Warrior”) was called by Yahweh to free the people of Israel from the Midianites. By God’s command, Gideon took with him just 300 men whom he chose using a simple test: when the troops stopped to drink from a river, he watched to see who stuck their faces in the water and drank directly from the river (taking their eyes off what was going on around them), and who drank by cupping the water with their hand and lifting it to their mouths (leaving their eyes free to scan the environment). He picked the latter to be his warriors. This doesn’t have anything to do with their battle cry, but it’s an awesome example of situational awareness!
Anyway, when night fell, Gideon led his 300 men into the Midianite camp carrying horns and torches concealed in a clay jar (these were basically Molotov cocktails). At his command, the men blew their horns, threw down their torches, and shouted “The sword of the Lord and of Gideon!”
“Bole So Nihal!…Sat Sri Akal!” is a Sikh slogan, or jaikara (literally shout of victory, triumph, or exultation) popularized by Guru Gobind Singh, the last of the 10 Sikh Gurus. It’s used to express joy and is often used in Sikh liturgy. It was also employed by Sikh warriors as a battle cry.
The jaikara is a two-part, call-and-response cry. One man yells “Bole So Nihal!” — “Whoever utters [the phrase following] shall be happy, shall be fulfilled.” The army would yell in response “Sat Sri Akal!” — “Eternal is the Holy/Great Timeless Lord!”
While the Takbir — the term used for the Arabic phase “Allahu Akbar!” (“God is great!”) — is used by Muslims in a variety of settings including births, deaths, and celebrations, it’s traditionally used as a battle cry. It’s said that the Prophet Muhammad first used the Takbir as a war cry in the Battle of Badr. It was subsequently shouted by Muslim soldiers during the Crusades. Today, of course, the phrase has become infamous in the West for its use in terrorist attacks.
The Gurkha are an elite unit of soldiers from Nepal that have a global reputation for courage and fighting prowess. Stories of a single modern Gurkha warrior stopping a robbery and saving a girl from rape by taking on 40 thieves at the same time have buttressed this reputation; their use of the traditional, badass khukuri knife hasn’t hurt it either.
Going into battle the Gurkhas will yell in unison: “Jaya Mahakali, Ayo Gorkhali!” — “Glory to Great Kali, the Gorkhas approach!”
Leading up to their historic D-Day parachute jump into France, the men of the 101st Airborne Division were whipped into tip-top shape at Camp Toccoa in Georgia. Dominating the camp was 1,740 foot Mount Currahee — a Cherokee word that means “stands alone.” Part of the paratroopers’ conditioning included hikes and runs up and down its slopes. The experience, though exhausting, bonded the men together, and the mountain quickly gained a legendary status amongst the soldiers.
When the men started making practice parachute drops, they would yell “Geronimo!” as they jumped from the plane. There are several explanations as to the origins of this cry — it may have come from a movie or a song from that time that bore the name.
Colonel Robert Sink, commander of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment (within which served Easy Company, aka the Band of Brothers), wanted his unit to stand out from the others in the 101st Division. So instead of shouting “Geronimo!’ as they jumped, he had his paratroopers yell “Currahee!” in homage to the mountain that had helped turn them into men.
The Almogavars were soldiers from Christian Iberia (what is now Spain and Portugal) who fought the Muslims during the Reconquista.
Before and during battle, the Almogavars would shout “Desperta Ferro!” — meaning “Awaken Iron!” — while striking their swords and lances on stones to create a cascade of sparks.
The evocative and virile phrase “Awaken Iron!” coupled with the sword-sparking ritual, makes this my favorite battle cry on the list.
posted by Unknown @ 8:12 PM
0 Comments
What is it about making things with our hands that provides so much satisfaction? Why are we so drawn to the archetype of the craftsman? In his insightful book, Why We Make Things and Why it Matters, furniture builder and woodworking instructor Peter Korn explores the philosophy of craftsmanship. In the podcast today, I talk to Peter about the ethos of craftsmanship, what craft can teach us about living the good life, and why you should get out in the garage and try building something with your own two hands.
Why We Make Things and Why It Matters is a fantastic treatise on the nature and philosophy of craftsmanship. It’s a great addition to the library of books on the topic, including Shopclass As Soulcraft and Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Even if you’re not a craftsman, you’ll get insights on how you can live your life more thoughtfully and creatively.
Listen to the episode on a separate page.
Subscribe via iTunes. (Please give us a review if you enjoy the podcast. It helps others discover us.)
Special thanks to Keelan O’Hara for editing the podcast!
Brett McKay: Brett McKay here and welcome to another edition of The Art of Manliness Podcast. This idea of craftsmanship and the archetype of the craftsman I think is something very attractive. It resonates with us on a visceral level of us. There’s something about building things with our hands from scratch that just is satisfying and there’s something that were drawn to. We’d rather buy something that we know was made by hand by a craftsman than some manufactured mass produced goods. Why is that? Why is that we have that attraction to building things, why is it that we attract this idea of craftsman.
Our guest today has written a book exploring that idea. He’s an actual craftsman, he makes furniture. He also founded this furniture-making school in Maine. His name is Peter Korn, and he wrote a book called Why We Make Things and Why It Matters: The Education of a Craftsman; fascinating book on a fascinating topic. Today on the podcast we’re going to discuss what’s this drive in us that gives us satisfaction to build things with our hands. We’re also going to talk about what craftsmanship, this will be the ethic of craftsmanship, can teach us about living a good life, a fantastic discussion, really fascinating, delve deep into some deep topics. I think you’re going to like this, without further ado Peter Korn on Why We Make Things and Why It Matters.
Peter Korn, welcome to the show.
Peter Korn: Thank you Brett. Thank you very much.
Brett McKay: You are a furniture maker who happens to write, can you tell us how you got started into furniture making because this whole … I think this idea when you started at least there really weren’t a lot of independent furniture makers. How did you get into that?
Peter Korn: I was fortunate enough to go to a Quaker High School in Philadelphia, Germantown Friends School, which I think is a great education and then go to the University of Pennsylvania where I studied history but all that … and I graduated from college in 1972 so I was sort of 60s hippie kind of guy, and all the time I was in school I felt like I was living like second hand and real life must have been somewhere else. When I finished college what I did was I took a job as a carpenter on the Island of Nantucket which at that time was a very quiet forgotten place not the bustling plutocracy that it is today.
I had never worked with my hands, and I came from a background where my father was a lawyer and my mother was a historian, and they didn’t know anyone at least socially who worked with their hands, and then their world working with your hands would really take you down the social ladder, so my father at least was pretty horrified that I took a job as a carpenter. I took that job only because I moved to Nantucket because I wanted to live in this rural beautiful place and that was the first job that came along. Much to my … The life full and pleasant surprise that I found out how rewarding and challenging carpentry was. If I may continue …
Brett McKay: Sure, yes,
Peter Korn: My father was quick to say … He was just worried that with a work like that my mind was going to be undeserved. It was going to really be a truncated, that means short and that’s not the right word.
Brett McKay: Stifled.
Peter Korn: A stifled sort of life, however you want to put it, mentally stifled. I found that carpentry engages your cognitive problem solving skills for example to a huge extent. Your brain is involved as well as your hand and I found that sort of work a wonderful way to grow into adulthood at the age of 20.
Brett McKay: How did you go from carpentry to designing furniture, that sort of a leap?
Peter Korn: It’s a little bit of a leap but wooden tools are involved. After two years as a carpenter … When I was in the carpentry for about two years and was gaining some sort of confidence in my hand, some friends of mine were expecting a child, and this was my first friends who were expecting a child, and I wanted to make a cradle for them. Three days before the baby was due I took some pine and some dolls from the lumberyard, went into this unheated barn at the end of November where I froze my butt off, and built a cradle from a picture I’ve seen in a book.
I went into that barn thinking that I was going to end up designing and building houses for a living and I walked out of the barn just passionate to rediscover what seemed … at that time 1974 like the lost art of furniture making. This was before fine woodworking came out or all the other woodworking journals that have been around now for decades. Then there was almost nowhere where you could formally learn fine woodworking in this country. There were two places you could go to, the North Bennet Street School or the Rochester Institute of Technology but I was completely unaware of them. I’ve never met a craftsperson.
For me it was like trying to learn this craft and rediscover it for myself just from a few books published in England and it turned out there were … I thought I was doing this in isolation and I was but at the same time there were probably thousands or tens of thousands of other people in this country of my generation turning to various crafts in the same ignorant way because we were looking for lifestyles that would be more seamless and fulfilling than what we perceived our parents world presenting to us.
Brett McKay: Let’s go to that question. I think when people hear the word craftsman, this I do this at least and they imagine sort of the sturdy industrious independent man in his workshop with a beard probably leather apron, rolled up sleeves, salt to the earth, and it’s an archetype I think and it’s very attractive to people and it’s also … it has become almost just like platonic ideal of what a craftsman is, but you make the case in your book that this idea of the craftsman that we have sort of romantic idea is a fairly recent creation. Can you tell us about the arts and crafts movement, the 19th Century.
Peter Korn: I’d be happy to. The place to start is to realize that in totally industrial revolution which essentially took place between the late 1700s and late 1800s, everything was made by individual, by an individual by hand what we would today say by hand and nothing was mass produced. There was no assembly line. There was no power-driven machine except for water-driven threshing mills or whatever, grinding mills. There was no need to even have a concept like craft when everything was craft and then what happened as the industrial revolution came along and I’m now speaking about Europe specifically and even more specifically England. Suddenly the trades where you work by hand many of them were displaced by manufacturing and so craftsmanship became redundant.
By the late 1800s that process had gone a long way and there were people in England particularly John Ruskin and William Morris are the two most familiar names who were very concerned as I guess the social philosophers that the conditions of labor in manufacture were really demeaning to the workers themselves, bad for them spiritually and bad for them morally, and that if workers, if the work was bad for the workers and it was deleterious to their character that was bad for society, so they invented the idea of craft as an alternative methods of making things where the worker would be fully engaged in the full process and ink the quality of what they do because that would be more spiritually and morally beneficial to the worker and therefore society. Before they invented craft, before the arts and craft or even invented craft in English the word “craft” did not mean a type of object or a method of fabrication as we think of it today.
The word “craft” was used meant what we now hear in coinages like witchcraft and statecraft which is to say an ability to manipulate people or situations cleverly. They invented this idea of craft and their craftsman was someone’s employee who would build someone else’s design through from start to finish in the healthy environment. That idea there is that is what you just described which has come down to us to the state, this hallmark card like image of the craftsman as a skilled tradesman securing the knowledge of his hand and the strength of his character, come at the workbench hand pursuing a simple peaceful life and idyllic surrounding.
For my generation we’d now liking the craft almost a 100 years after they came up with this idea of craft that idea was there unconsciously because I’d never thought about craft but at the same time there was this whole overlaying of new ideas about craft that those guys, Ruskin and Morris wouldn’t have recognized. Do you want me to go on?
Brett McKay: Yes. What did that new movement bring to the craft?
Peter Korn: For my generation what we very much saw craft as was an opportunity to be self-employed, self-expressive, self-sufficient and self-actualized. The obvious common word there being self, and thinking about this I then came to see that between the end of the 19th Century and the late e part of the 20th Century which is where I was practicing craft for the most part. The normative idea in our society of what an individual is, of what the self is, had changed radically. It had been changing a long time but it really changed quickly and radically in 20th Century, and the difference was that for all of human history the individual had thought of himself or herself as belonging to a larger social entity as sort of conceptualize the self you might say it’s like a finger on the hand.
In the 20th Century we saw the rise of this idea of the individual as being fully autonomous and separate and individual and rational, and able to choose everything was choice, and instead of belonging to a society being shaped by it we started to see ourselves as being to pick and choose where in society we want, what ideas we like, and it was that idea of the fully autonomous individual that changed the way we approached craft so that another way to say this is that if you look at art over the millennia, art just tend to portrait a place where they think truth resides and so you’ve got a Greek Art portrayed this ideal of humanity outside of space and time in other words truth lay outside of humanity.
You’ve got a lot of Christian art in the middle ages and the renaissance that portrayed scenes from the bible essentially, the idea being the truth resided in God’s kingdom, in the bible, as you know it’s expressed in the bible, again, outside of man. And then you’ve got the Hudson River School of Art in the 20th Century which portrayed nature and that went along with all sorts of enlightenment idea about the novel savage and so truth was thought to reside in nature, and then if you come into the 1940s for example our abstract expression as in you’ve got artist who are splattering paint or they’re painting abstract things where the panting take shape because every choice the artist makes is a response to whatever previous mark he or she has made on the canvas. Every choice the artist makes is a response to whatever previous mark he or she has made on the canvas, and so what you get as people painting a portrait of their intuition, of their interior self, so that we were out of place then where truth resides internally and it’s for us to discover as artist or as an individuals and bring forth to share with other people to very different concepts of what the individual is that has shaped my generation and subsequent generations.
Brett McKay: We’re talking about craftsmanship, and this is a topic that sort of is woven throughout your book, that ideally what is craftsmanship, because I think people have rough notions of it, what they imagine what craftsmanship is, but I think if you ask different people you’ll probably get different answers on what craftsmanship is.
How do you define craftsmanship like when does something become … you’re displaying craftsmanship whenever you’re doing something.
Peter Korn: I have to offer two definitions of craftsmanship.
Brett McKay: Okay.
Peter Korn: One is, craftsmanship if you’re talking about within the world of craft themselves where people are fabricating objects out of actual physical materials, and if that’s where we’re looking to define craftsmanship then we’re talking about, if craftsmanship is work or a work process that engages hands kills yet it requires developed skills, it requires an on wavering commitment to quality and also a heightened understanding of one’s materials. Those are the three elements that go into craftsmanship that are common to craftsmanship.
Then you could think about craftsmanship when for example people will talk about a lawyer crafting of a brief well or manufacturers talk about the craftsmanship in their automobiles for example. Now, we don’t have individual agencies involved, that’s been removed. We don’t always have physical materials involved but we still talk about craftsmanship and what remains there is that that implies a commitment to quality and a deep understanding of one’s materials even if one’s materials are worst or something that’s doesn’t have any physical materiality. This is caring about what you do, commitment to quality, deeply understanding one’s material. Those are the elements of craftsmanship in general.
Brett McKay: Why do you think it’s … What is it about building with your hands though that helps you get in touch with that idea of craftsmanship more so than a lawyer crafting a contract., what is it about the materiality of craftsmanship working with your hands that allows you to get in touch with that.
Peter Korn: I think there’s actually several ways to describe that and I’m actually … I think I’ll try three of them.
Brett McKay: Sure.
Peter Korn: One of them is that there’s an experience that create the people having this studio, in this case it could be craft, it could be paintings, sculpture, it can be writing in fact that Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi if that’s the proper way to say his name who wrote a book called, “Flow” and some other books on this topic. He labels that this phenomenon flow where you disappear, your sense of time and self all disappears, yourself fully engaged in the work that that’s all there is and that turns out to be an immensely pleasurable wonderful feeling.
Create a people you could almost say enjoy their creativity or come to it simply for that feeling but there’s a lot more to it but that is one element. What’s wonderful about craft in addition to that is that you can’t … how to say, it anchors your creative work, your ideas and your efforts substantially in the real. For example when I’m writing, writing you can put words together and it can suggest new ideas and you can go off and flight the fancy that are quite seductive but they actually maybe called nonsense.
But when you’re working with wood and chisels for example, there’s no question about whether a joint is tight, there’s no question about whether a chisel is sharp. In fact, there is no question about a chair is comfortable by just apparent to any user. Your ideas, your suppositions, your efforts are checked by the real, and that’s actually quite a healthy thing. That’s one of the pleasures of craft. Another is that at the end of the day you see what you have achieved. It exist in the physical world to be enjoyed, shared with others, it does just disappear off on the computer screen on to the next thing. At least those are some of the things that made craft such a delightful thing to practice.
I’ll have one more.
Brett McKay: Go ahead, yes, it’s fantastic.
Peter Korn: There is this maxim in craft that Bernard Leach, a British Potter is said to have stated back in the last century which is that craft engages head, heart and hands in unison, he said it a little better than that. That is I think one of the things that makes it so fulfilling is that you are somehow when you’re engaged in skilled craft work, and let’s say you’re in the state of flow of not, it doesn’t really matter, you’re employing all of your bodily, all of your human capacities at once. You’re engaging your actual physical capabilities, you’re engaging your imagination, you’re engaging your ability for cognitive problem solving. And you’re engaging your creativity. And you can ask for more than that.
Brett McKay: You’re right, you mentioned how you found when you first started carpentry you found that it not like what your father said, it would sort of dull the mind that it actually engages the mind. I’ve had that experience too when I’ve done sort of projects around the home. It’s amazing how much harder a little project, the DIY project that I’m doing is then saying writing an article for the website is, and how fun it is. There’s a challenge there, and you’re not going to stop until you solve it. You just keep plugging at it even though I should have given up hours ago.
Peter Korn: Right, you see Brett for me the shoe is on the other foot meaning I’m used to solving problems in the woodshop and so that becomes a fairly smooth process for me but when I sat down to write this book all I started with were certain deeply held convictions that were almost more physical, to sort of convictions you hold and this pivot your stomach and your bones then I had ways of expressing them with words. For me working with words was a process of trying to untie knot, one knot after another.
It was a long engaging, deeply engaging struggle that was wonderful and I’ve write before work and then I’d be driving to work and I have to pullover to jot down the next little step front idea that as it unfolded itself that was wonderful.
Brett McKay: Here’s the question I had so right now it seems like we’re having a renaissance in the marketplace where handmade goods, artisanal things are hot. Everyone wants something that’s … They want something that’s build by a craftsman, they want something that they know is not made by a giant corporation or a machine, but the 20s is that you can buy a table that was built in a factory and it’ll be an exact same table built by a single person. But then people will probably pick the one that was built by the person. Why is that?
Peter Korn: You have just so hurt the feelings of that individual person. I just want you to know that.
Brett McKay: I know, but what is it that a person is buying, so I guess this is the way of the third person to taking part in the creative process. What is it that we’re buying when we purchase something built by a craftsman. Is it a story, is it a sense of meaning, what is it?
Peter Korn: Yes, it’s all those things. You’re buying … First of all, I’m going to disagree or rephrase something that you said which is this that if you were engaged and trying to make your living as a furniture maker for example you would find that in fact it’s really hard to find the market for your work that the more skill you put into it the more expensive it get, the smaller your audience becomes. In fact, as my observations that my generation of crafts people … I’m going to say this differently, I belong to … retrospectively is now labeled a movement called studio craft and studio crafts people made one of a kind singular objects that existed as ways for them to develop their individual artistic voice and their individual skills and show them off and I mean that in a positive way. Those end up being fairly expensive gallery pedestal objects.
Young people who were excited about designing and building things today for the most part aren’t interested in making those precious gallery style objects, there’s a whole new movement that is sort of centered in Brooklyn that I called studio design. People are still designing and building wonderful things but these are meant to be things that can be produced by others at more reasonable price points and sold to a wider audience and there are other concerns like sustainability and community that somehow enter their design process as well, so sort of the cultural reasons to which people work have changed and that changes the nature of the object.
I think the object younger crafts people or these product designers that everyone say are making today actually are probably more marketable and have more of a market than those of my generation but they’re best products they’re not the one of a kind thing. Still to answer your question what sells them is the fact that they’re authentic, that they did come from one person’s imagination and one person’s caring about their quality, and that is the story that has to be told otherwise it doesn’t … no one would know that so yes, you could say it was the product of the piece having a story.
Brett McKay: One of the things I love about this book is that you talk about craftsmanship and the drive to build them, why is it so fulfilling, but you also explore how the journey of to becoming a craftsman is also a journey on how life should be lived which is very Aristotelian in a way. Aristotle talked about virtues, the practice of virtues sort of like practicing being a craftsman of some sort.
How can craftsmanship help us or studying craftsmanship help us live a good life?
Peter Korn: That brings the question what is a good life, and I guess that is the largest context within which I’m writing is trying to answer that question, and it seems to me based on my experience and observation that a good life is one that provides the person living it with a sufficiency of meaning and fulfillment, those seem to be the two qualities we’re so hungry for so often seem missing today and I have come to define meaning as having a sense that your thoughts and actions actually make a difference in a larger moral fear.
And I come to define fulfillment at least for myself as the sense that you are using your human capacities for the fullest. Practicing a craft is not the only way to achieve meaning fulfillment but it’s a wonderful way to do it. The fulfillment part comes as we discuss because in craft you really are employing head, heart and hand in unison. All reading form the same page, and in terms of the work giving you a sense of making a difference in a larger moral fear if I can just talk about furniture making for a moment, every piece of furniture describes the life to be lived around it if you think about it. So the work you would see at Riverside is very ornate, uncomfortable chairs, incredibly expensive, they are describing, there is a whole world of how you sat in the chair and how you relate it to other people and all that is described by those chairs, so say a rocking chair describes a whole another attitude towards life. The idea that daily life and work should be lived to sacraments, so when you’re designing furniture in a sense what you’re always doing is you are trying to more closely and ever more closely approximate through the furniture how one as a human being might best live their lives, what ones daily life should feel like that sort of thing.
That’s one example of how being engaged in a specific creative endeavor can be an exploration of how we should live as human beings and really in my mind and I’m not a religious believer so certainly from my point of view the largest moral context that exist is the effort of humanity over all of its existence, the ongoing effort to define what it is to be human and how we should live, and I think that anytime anyone engages in the effort of trying to bring something new into the world that matters not only to themselves but matters to other people they’re actually engaged in exploring the parameters of existing ideas of what it means to be human and how we should live and it’s the fact that in that larger context that gives their life meaning and in fact, I’m not saying anyone in the creative arts for example is ever conscious of that context or thinking about the ideas that I’m discussing, I’m just saying this is what I see as the underlying reality to all creative effort and not just creative effort in the paint or studio or the craftsman’s shop but creative effort in the science lab, creative effort in starting a new business, creative effort in trying, coming up with new recipe in your kitchen. These are all expanding the boundaries of how you think about the world and which means that you’re coming up with new ideas about who you are and how the world around you works.
Brett McKay: It’s fascinating, and you … we could talk more about this but time is limited and so I definitely recommend people to check out the book. Where can we learn more about your work?
Peter Korn: I have a website for the book which is peterkorn.com but really my real work in life has been founding and running a school called The Center for Furniture Craftsmanship, a non-profit school in Rockport Maine and the website for the school is woodschool.org and that’s what I’ve been doing for the last 23 years. I’m much more of … these days an art administrator and a teacher than I am an actual craftsman. I’m one of 40 plus people who teach at the school. That’s where you would really see and learn what I do and what I’m passionate about.
Brett McKay: Is the school open that they’re like, do you have classes for beginners, people who have never done furniture building ever?
Peter Korn: Yes, we have an extensive summer and fall schedule of one and two-week courses that many of which are entry level in furniture making but also in wood churning and in carving and other aspects of wood working and then we, the rest of the year we run a nine-month furniture making course and a bunch of three months long churning and furniture making courses which most people take because they want to become professional at it but that they are also open to and attended by many amateur woodworkers as well.
Brett McKay: Have you noticed as an interest in the school gotten bigger and bigger throughout the years or does it stayed about the same or?
Peter Korn: Well I started the school by teaching six people at that time in my backyard so I run seven to or maybe it was nine to a week workshops that first year and so the school went through a period of rapid and tremendous growth for the first six to eight years and now we have 400 students a year come through. But then in around the recession that happened in the early 2000s the woodworking world saw a cultural interest level of and now we’re seeing it grow again and we’re seeing more younger people come again and more people come again and that’s pretty exciting but again they’re coming in not necessarily from an interest in craft the way I pursued it but something that looks almost the exact same except for its informed by those, the newer world that younger people live in and perceived. As I said there’s great interest not only in fine craftsmanship and work that expresses your voice but there’s also an interest in having you design a wonderful product, a chair that can be made that’s affordable to others.
Brett McKay: Very nice. Peter Korn, thank you so much for your time. It’s been a pleasure.
Peter Korn: Brett, thank you so much. I really appreciate you interviewing me.
Brett McKay: Our guest is Peter Korn, he’s the author of the book “Why We Make Things and Why It Matters: The Education of a Craftsman” You can find that on amazon.com. Go check it out it’s really fascinating to read. You’ll also find more information about Peter’s work at peterkorn.com and that’s Korn with a K and also if you’re interested in checking out the furniture building school that Peter founded and check out one of the classes that they have to offer you can find more information about that at woodschool.org, again that’s woodschool.org.
What wraps up another edition of the Art of Manliness Podcast. For more manly tips and advice make sure to check out the Art of Manliness website at artofmanliness.com. If you enjoy this podcast and you’re getting something out of it I’d really appreciate if you go give us a review on iTunes or Stitcher, whatever it is you used those on the podcast that I hope get the word about the podcast and I really appreciate that, so until next time. This is Brett McKay telling you to stay manly.
posted by Unknown @ 9:18 PM
0 Comments
The English and the Scots. The Serbs and the Croats. The Sunnis and the Shiites.
If you look at some of the fiercest and bloodiest rivalries in history, what’s striking is not how different the opposing groups are, but how similar. Sure, they often hold different beliefs, but they live as neighbors, share ancestry, and hold similar customs.
In his 1930 essay “Civilization and Its Discontents,” Sigmund Freud commented on this dynamic, noting that it is frequently “communities with adjoining territories, and related to each other in other ways as well, who are engaged in constant feuds and in ridiculing each other.” Elsewhere he notes that the phenomenon is not limited to ethnic or religious peoples either: “Every time two families become connected by a marriage, each of them thinks itself superior to or of better birth than the other. Of two neighboring towns each is the other’s most jealous rival; every little canton looks down upon the others with contempt.”
If as a teenage football fan you were caught up in a cross-town rivalry with another high school, you know of which Freud speaks.
So what accounts for the peculiar hostility between groups of people that are in many ways quite alike?
Freud chalked it up to the innate human proclivity for aggression and the desire for distinct identity. To see one’s neighbors reflect and mirror oneself too much threatens a person’s unique sense of self, and superiority. It’s what political scientist Stephen Brooks calls the “uncomfortable truth of resemblance.” To alleviate this injury to one’s ego, one downplays their similarities with others and emphasizes their divergences — which can be amplified into seemingly unbridgeable rifts.
Freud called this phenomenon “the narcissism of minor differences.”
While this idea is interesting to apply to ethnic and religious conflicts, global affairs, and even local peculiarities, it’s also a revealing prism by which to examine the behavior of individuals, including our own.
For tens of thousands of years an individual’s identity was almost entirely subsumed by the tribe to which he belonged. His people — that was who he was. Each tribe felt it was superior to others, and the veracity of this claim was easily and simply determined; one village would clash with another, and whoever was stronger and craftier came out the victor. Until they battled again. A man built up his sense of worth by contributing to the strength and reputation of his people — through the provision of knowledge and meat, martial prowess, and siring children.
Ever since the end of tribal living and the rise of civilization, we have been casting about for pieces with which to assemble our sense of identity. Genealogy is no longer enough; the modern self is composed of personality, career, location, hobbies, and, most predominantly, tastes. Taste in music, in clothes, in politics — what you like and don’t like.
Modern culture and consumerism provides an avenue by which you can tweak a thousand little details of your possessions and lifestyle. You can own a rugged truck or a sports car; go Paleo or vegetarian; live like a swinging bachelor or a settled suburban dad.
Yet really standing out has become increasingly difficult; globalism has ensured that millions around the world are watching the same shows, eating at the same restaurants, and shopping at the same stores. Unique traditions, dialects, and pastimes have evaporated.
If the peoples of old trafficked in the narcissism of minor differences, we might be said to engage in the narcissism of micro differences.
Our egos fear those moments when we look at the people all around us, and catch a glimpse of this truth — the realization that while we’re Apple fans and they’re Windows people, we’re really much the same and aren’t very special after all. To keep this dissonance at bay and protect our sense of self, we must ever buttress and artificially inflate the significance of the minor differences we use to construct our identities.
This phenomenon is particularly heightened in communities that share more in common than the general population. Take the Christian college, for example. Here you’ll invariably find those students who want to make sure others know they’re not like the conservative, hardline, “conformist” Christians that walk around campus advocating for Pharisaical rules. They’re not “Christians” at all but “Christ Followers,” distinguished by their open-mindedness, subscription to Relevant Magazine, and skinny jeans.
Or travel to Utah. With 60% of the population being Latter-Day Saints, it’s hard for the average Mormon to feel unique. Thus if you cruise the highways, you’ll see lots of billboards for plastic surgery — an avenue by which a Mormon gal might make herself just a wee bit prettier than her competition. And then there’s plenty of conspicuous consumption; the Mormon dad hopes the size of his house will help him stand out in a sea of peers that look, talk, and think in very similar ways.
The same dynamic operates in non-religious communities as well, of course. You’ve got to work harder to feel unique, in say, Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood, where hipster style reigns, than you would being an artistic type in Omaha. And being a farm-to-table localvore in Portland won’t make you very special; you may need to take it up a notch, perhaps by personally visiting the farm where your chicken comes from.
While I’ve been a little cheeky in sending up the above groups, there’s really nothing inherently wrong with adopting a lifestyle that jives with your beliefs. People have been seizing on minor differences to set themselves apart since time immemorial; tribes in the Amazon will go on and on about how different they are from a neighboring village, and even war with them over this rivalry — even though they split off from the very same bloodline just a generation prior!
And yet there are two potential problems that grow out of leaning too heavily on the narcissism of minor differences: 1) the tendency to define yourself by what you’re not, and 2) a focus on trivialities over fundamentals:
Humans are naturally drawn to conflict, and latching on to minor differences to bolster our sense of self is really just a submerged form of aggression and hostility. Standing out is essentially a competition for status — one that allows us to feel distinct and superior to others.
The easiest way to achieve this separateness is to concentrate on the ways in which we are not like other people. “My tastes aren’t mainstream.” “I’ll never take a boring 9-5 job.” “I’m not close-minded.” “I’ll never settle for a mediocre life.”
By focusing on what you don’t like and who you don’t want to be, you turn people who you think exhibit those traits into a foil for yourself, a kind of adversary to push against on the road to selfhood. Drawing lines between ourselves and others has always been an effective means of building identity, even amongst those who claim the greatest tolerance; as Freud wryly notes, “It is always possible to bind together a considerable number of people in love, so long as there are other people left over to receive the manifestations of their aggressiveness.”
As Dr. Meg Jay writes in The Defining Decade, comparing yourself to others is an okay starting point in building a sense of self, but an inadequate ending point:
“Distinctiveness is a fundamental part of identity…But different is simple. Like the easiest way to explain black is to call it the opposite of white, often the first thing we know about ourselves is not what we are—but what we aren’t. We mark ourselves as not-this or not-that…But self-definition cannot end there. An identity or a career cannot be built around what you don’t want. We have to shift from a negative identity, or sense of what I’m not, to a positive one, or a sense of what I am. This takes courage.”
“Being against something is easy,” Dr. Jay tells her 20-something clients. “What are you for?”
Creating an affirmative self-definition requires moving beyond talking about the minor ways you do, or want to, differ from others, and towards staking claim to the things you really believe in and working to bring them about. Taking real action to build the life and the world you want is one of the surest ways to actually separate yourself from your peers. It’s the mark of a mature man, after all, to actually create something rather than to simply consume and complain.
One of the dominating labels that nearly every red-blooded American has fought against for at least a century is that of conformist. We pride ourselves on being rugged individualists, and watch ourselves for tendencies to follow the herd. This impulse presupposes the existence of a pure strain of attainable individualism from which we might deviate; if people all walk, talk, think, and dress alike, the thinking goes, they are being compelled to and don’t have the strength to resist the pressures of mainstream culture.
But what if the thing we fear most isn’t actually conformity at all, but uniformity? That the thing we least wish to face is the fact that humans are, at the bottom, pretty much alike? I realize this is anathema to the citizens of modernity, but let’s face facts here: we all do pretty much the same things, all over the world. Nearly everyone “conforms” to a life of relationships, various levels of education, eating, sleeping, fornicating, reproducing, working, etc. Sure, some men are factory workers and some are writers, and some live in cities and some in the country, and some drive cars and some ride bikes, but most of us are doing the same categories of things.
Hanging the hat of our identities on small differences in lifestyle acts as a hedge against having to acknowledge this plainly evident uniformity. As Dr. Sam Vaknin writes in Malignant Self-Love, the narcissist of minor differences ends up attributing “to other people personal traits that he dislikes in himself…In other words, [he] sees in others those parts of himself that he cannot countenance and deny.”
For example, embracing the identity of a “cool” Christian distances oneself from “boring” close-minded Christians, while at the same time obscuring the fact that both types of believers have chosen to conform themselves to the gospel. Are they on different parts of a spectrum? Perhaps, but they’re closer neighbors than they’d like to admit.
The ironic thing about being deathly afraid of conforming is that it actually prevents us from creating a unique self that does significantly differ from that of our peers. In being unable to recognize that we are all conformists to one degree or another, and to countenance the fact that the building blocks of a human life — work, relationships, spirituality, etc. — are common to all, we choose instead to toil at the very edges of our identity and spend our days tending to trivialities.
Instead of worrying about whether we perform the human fundamentals in a slightly different way or style than others, we should simply care about doing them excellently.
Rather than worrying about the hipness of your faith life, concentrate on loving your neighbor.
Instead of caring about whether you’re a cool urban dad or an ordinary suburban one, the question should be: am I an excellent father?
Instead of fixating on whether you have a job that’s more unique than that of your peers, focus on whether you’re adding value to the world in whatever work you’re doing.
Instead of seeking after building a big house, concentrate on the structure of your integrity.
Becoming a man of your word in this day and age? Now that would be a significant difference.
posted by Unknown @ 4:12 AM
0 Comments
Editor’s note: This is a guest post from Jerred Moon.
“How on earth can you break a barbell?”
That was the question I was asking myself standing in my driveway with, well, a broken barbell…
Years ago, when I purchased my first barbell I didn’t put much thought into type or quality. They are just barbells…right? That thinking (or lack thereof) led to my first barbell breaking within 24 hours of purchase.
Well, with broken barbell in hand I decided it was time to uncover some of the basics as to what makes a good, durable barbell. What I found was that they can range from $200 to $2,000, and they are a little more complicated than your average sporting goods store would have you believe. A barbell serves as the foundation of true strength training. You can get by without a lot of things, but you cannot get by without a barbell.
Buying the right bar will help you to avoid big issues — they can warp, bend, rust, and break. The most common bar mishaps are bending from missed lifts, and sleeves popping off from, more or less, cheap manufacturing. Today, I want to make you an informed consumer of the barbell.
Before you can truly make an informed decision you need to know exactly what a barbell consists of — its “anatomy.”
A commonly used barbell has a 28-29 mm diameter shaft for men and 25 mm for women. Barbells come in all shapes and sizes, but the standard length is 7.2 ft for men and ~6.5 ft for women. They weigh ~44 pounds for men (20 kg) and ~33 pounds for women (15kg).
First, you have the bar itself, or shaft. It’s put through a machining process to get it to the right length and diameter. On the shaft, you have what is called knurling. Knurling is simply the rough, cross-hatched pattern you see on a barbell. Knurl is very important and is mainly for grip. It is machine-pressed and can be extremely rough, or smooth, depending on the manufacturer. It is important to feel the bar to get an idea of what you like (unless you buy online — in that case, look at reviews), but most top-end bar manufacturers have a good knurl. Where knurling can differ, even on top-end bars, is where the knurl does and does not exist. Some bars have knurling that extends all the way to the sleeves, and some bars have a gap of no knurling where the bar meets the sleeves. Sometimes bars will have center knurling and sometimes they won’t. You have to decide what you want and what you are most comfortable with.
If, say, you like Olympic lifting and you prefer a wide snatch grip, I suggest getting a bar with knurling that extends to the sleeves (if that sentence made no sense, then don’t worry about knurling going to the sleeves).
If you are often shirtless or do high-rep front squats and presses (CrossFit anyone?), you may want to go with no center knurling. If you regularly squat heavy weights and need the bar to grip the back, get the center knurling.
Furthermore, the markings on the knurl indicate which type of bar you are using. I recommend a dual marked bar for general purpose use. However, the outermost marking indicates an Olympic lifting bar and the inner marking indicates a powerlifting bar, and we’ll talk more about those in a minute.
It comes down to how it meets your needs and style of fitness.
Next, we have the sleeves.
The sleeves are simply where you put the weights. They are created from drawn-overmandrel (DOM) tubing, a machine process that makes the sleeves straight and strong. The biggest thing you are looking for in the sleeves is the rotation, or how the sleeves spin on the shaft. Unless you are extremely picky, or a professional lifter, the difference in bearings or bushings aren’t that important. Bushings are a low friction material placed between the shaft and the sleeve — they are more affordable, and they are what you will find on most bars. Needle bearings spin more smoothly, and are actual bearings between the shaft and the sleeve. Generally, bearings are on the high end bars. Bushings will save you a lot of money, and work perfectly fine, without having to go high-end. But, if you want the premium, then go bearings. Bearings are better — you aren’t paying more without reason — but the difference would only be noticed at the professional and elite levels.
Sleeves are also connected by bolts or snap rings. I will make this one very easy for you. Snap rings only! Stay away from bolts on a bar! Bolts = broken in 24 hours.
Also, know barbells come in many finishes — chrome, zinc, black oxide, unfinished, and even stainless steel — but also know that the finish is primarily an aesthetic preference. Stainless steel does provide an advantage because it is rust and corrosion free, forever.
At this point, you already know more than your average gym-goer, but let’s make you a true barbell connoisseur.
The strength of a barbell is very important. You need to know the terms I am about to go over because when you shop for a barbell, this is the information manufacturers will give you. If you have no idea what the numbers are referring to, how do you know what to buy?
Bar strength is reported in three areas: tensile strength, yield strength, and test.
Tensile strength is the maximum load your bar can support without fracturing or breaking. So high tensile strength = good bar. This will be your primary determining factor.
Yield strength is basically how much weight the bar can handle before it will become deformed — that is, it won’t return to perfect straightness. Breaking and deformation are very different. Unfortunately, you will be hard-pressed to find a manufacturer that provides yield strength information.
There is also test, which means the bar has been loaded and tested with weights at which there was no bending or breaking, so the higher, the better. It’s best if you can find a manufacturer that will give you a tensile strength rating, which is reported in pounds per square inch (PSI).
Now you know the terminology, but what is a “good” rating? Here is a starting point for the most important factor — tensile strength ratings:
A bar in the good range is perfectly acceptable and will last a very long time. Considering cost and quality, most people do not need more than the “good” level bar.
If you are getting into sport weightlifting, there are differences in Olympic lifting bars and powerlifting bars:
Next, you have to think about plates. Unless you plan on competing at the professional level, plate quality is not as vital as the quality of your barbell.
Price can vary greatly with plates. You can get 300 lb. of iron at a garage sale for $30 or you can spend $3,000+ on a couple hundred pounds of certified competition bumper plates.
The most frequently asked question is whether to purchase bumper plates or iron (metal) plates, and that depends on the type of lifting you plan to do. If you like powerlifting (squat, bench press, and deadlift), then you will be just fine with iron plates. If you are dropping the bar frequently during CrossFit workouts or practicing the snatch and clean and jerk in Olympic weightlifting, you’ll need bumpers.
Personally, I prefer a blend of iron and bumper plates in my arsenal, and I’ll explain why and some considerations in just a minute. First, let’s talk bumper plates.
When it comes to bumper plates, what you are paying for is the thickness of the plate and how much they bounce when dropped.
Here is a quick breakdown of their categories:
They all should be 450mm disks with a 50mm opening. Economy black bumper plates are going to be good enough for 95% of people; 4.9% will want/need colored bumpers or Olympic training bumpers, and .1% will need certified Olympic competition bumpers. Colored plates generally follow a color coding, and some companies do follow the color code of the International Weightlifting Federation, but not all do. The official color coding can be found at the IWF website.
I like to have around 300 lb. of cheap iron plates along with another couple hundred pounds of black bumpers. I use the bumpers for when I am going to be dropping the weight, and I use a combination of iron and bumpers if I am doing a heavy back squat.
You’ll be hard pressed to find bumper plates at a garage sale, so you will need to order them online, but iron plates are a completely different story.
For iron, here’s where you use the power of Craigslist to find a lot of weight for pennies on the dollar. People are constantly moving, giving up on at-home fitness, and letting plates sit in their garage and rust. That’s a win for us! The easiest way to shop for plates is to put it on autopilot using a combination of Craigslist and IFTTT; you can read about how that works here. Basically, you set up a program that will notify you when plates come up for sale in your price range.
Most people are looking for a general, high-quality bar, and there are plenty out there that are suitable for all training and that will last for a long time. So, unless you are planning on becoming an Olympian, I would stay away from the “Cadillac” bars. You can get a good barbell that will meet all of your needs for around $250, and the near-perfect bar for around $500.
That can seem like a lot of money for a barbell, but it is the heart of your training, and you will be using it day-in and day-out. Don’t get a bar that will bend or fail while you are using it.
Get a bar that will last a lifetime. It is an investment in your fitness and your health!
And that, gentlemen is all you need know about plates, weights, and barbells.
Now, let’s start your story differently than mine.
“How on earth can this barbell withstand this abuse?”
That will be the question you are asking yourself while standing in your driveway with, well, an amazing barbell.
________________________
Jerred Moon is a strength & conditioning addict, wanna-be adrenaline junkie, loving husband and proud father. He runs a fitness website for the “other guys” called End of Three Fitness and is also the creator of the One Man One Barbell program.
posted by Unknown @ 12:30 PM
0 Comments
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]