Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of Reading

By Maryanne Wolf.

Good book. It covers the history of reading, the developmental stages of reading, and the biology of reading.

Reading is special in that we have to learn how to do it. Our biology can't help but give us the ability to see, to hear, to learn language. On the other hand, reading doesn't come naturally. Parts of your brain must be repurposed to build the necessary skills. Learning how to read deeply changes your brain and how you think. It greatly increases our ability to understand symbols. 

It also increases our ability to see things from someone else's point of view. After all, an important part of reading, is hearing someone else's voice in your head. 

What I want to take away from this book-- read regularly. Not internet-style skimming, but long form, deep engagement and understanding.

There is a large section on dyslexia. Since our brain doesn't have inborn areas meant for reading, the presence of dyslexia means that something deeper is happening. For example, a dyslexic may also be slower at naming colors, or have poor timing in music.

In a dyslexic, the areas of the brain ordinarily used for reading can be involved with another task. This is the realm of the dyslexic who is strong in other areas. Unfortunately, just because you are dyslexic doesn't mean you are strong elsewhere. Frequently, the affected areas of the brain are just weaker than average.

The author has a call to action here. She wants us to find developmentally delayed readers early in life so that the appropriate interventions can happen early.

This came from....
https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/09/parenting-advice-children-stealing-behavior.html

The advice is timeless...

Dear Care and Feeding,

My family belongs to a house of worship. Last year at a gathering at the house of another member, “Andrea,” where I brought my two boys, I made a decision (affecting her children) that Andrea disagreed with, and long story short, she screamed me out of her house. (No child, hers or mine, was in danger; it was a “reasonable parents may disagree about this” situation.)

I believed Andrea’s reaction was over the top, even unhinged, but I also recognized that behind her reaction was a kernel of justifiable annoyance at the call I’d made. So, I wrote a letter of abject unequivocal apology and mailed it to Andrea.

In the year since, Andrea hasn’t said a word to me. Her husband has run into me solo and apologized for his wife’s behavior (I just said “OK” because how are you supposed to react to an adult apologizing for a spouse?), but I haven’t gotten so much as a friendly look from her.
I had decided to just avoid Andrea, but fate intervened: Her eldest and my older son are in Sunday school together, and they’ll likely be together for years to come. I’m seeing her or her husband every week.

This morning my son (who I guess doesn’t remember last year’s incident, though it shook him up at the time) blithely introduced me to their eldest with, “This is ‘Beatrice,’ my friend!”
Barring extraordinary circumstances, I’m stuck with Andrea. I’d like to know what you think I should do at this juncture. It chaps my ass that I made the most gracious apology possible and am still getting frosted out by this crankpot, but I don’t want to spend the next decade waiting for the other shoe to drop. I see three options:

1) Continue to pretend the space she occupies is empty air (and hope my son’s fondness for her daughter ebbs away?);

2) Try to thaw the ice wall gradually with smiles and have a nice day; or

3) Have a come-to-Jesus (ha) moment with her wherein I say something very explicit like “I’d like for us to turn over a new leaf.”

Am I missing an option?
Thanks,
—We Blew Right Past “Love Thy Neighbor”

Dear WBRPLTN,

Proverbs 26:4 says “Answer not a fool according to their folly lest thou also be like them.” The book of Matthew also has the old chestnut about casting pearls before swine. Your letter of apology is the pearl. Your former friend is the swine, metaphorically speaking of course. I have no doubt that you probably behaved in some way that was out of line in your screaming conflict with this person. And I have no doubt that they also probably crossed a line. This is how these things go. Rarely is it just one person who has created a conflict. It’s possible, of course, but not usually likely.

So whenever we have made some kind of error or taken some kind of action that is hurtful to another person, we then have a task ahead of us. The very first move is to put aside, just for a moment, the wrongs we think they have done. Not that those wrongs don’t matter—it’s just that we can never be fully honest about our own shortcomings while we are still steaming over the other person’s issues, valid as that steaming may be. Once we’ve done that, we sit down and look honestly at where we may have behaved poorly. Were we dishonest, selfish, mean, or insecure? Did we make something about us that wasn’t really about us? Did we jump to emotional conclusions because we were worried about protecting our own ego? Did we ignore red flags with the other person, because we were trying to get something we wanted out of the relationship?

Again, this isn’t to blame ourselves, but to try to grow and learn and not make the same mistakes in other encounters. Finally, we take a moment to apologize honestly for what we brought to the conflict, how we helped create it, how we might have been hurtful. Once we have done all these things, the rest is out of our hands. And that’s the way it should be. The point of this work is not to get the response we want from the other person: It’s to free ourselves from the entanglement and to give the other person what they are owed. If you will, the idea is to settle our karmic debt. If you borrow $50 from a person, return it, and they flush it down the toilet, then it’s no longer your problem. You have done your part.

When that’s not enough—when we have done all that and are still not satisfied—it’s usually because of a very specific reason. There is sometimes a part of us that uses an apology as just another combat strategy. We are hoping that if we prostrate ourselves, or present enough epic humility, then the other person will be impressed. The pettier parts of us may even wish that by being super nice, we’ll make them feel bad about themselves and about their own shitty behavior. Maybe if we really nail it, they’ll publicly announce that they’ve treated us terribly and how we didn’t deserve any of it. One can only hope. Lord knows I deserve it. They’ll come crawling back, and I’ll be like yeah thanks a lot but it’s too little too late, pal! Wait, what were we talking about again?

Oh, yes. The problem with this type of thinking is that it keeps us tethered to resentment, only now we are doubly resentful because our craven plan to hide a selfish motive under a good one hasn’t worked either. But staying mad is no good. We want to be free of that for a lot of reasons, but at the very least so that we can have this person stop taking up real estate in our thoughts without even paying rent. Your only job here is to keep your side of the street clean. If you have made your amends, and if you have looked at your part, then you are now free to let it go. A few simple “hi, how are you?” should suffice. If she returns the sentiment in kind, great. If not, move on in acceptance of the fact that whatever problem exists between the two of you belongs entirely to her now.

Art as Therapy

By Alaine de Botton and John Armstrong.

I always enjoy reading de Botton. He is a very well read and well thought writer. His words are clear and precise. Evocative without being dramatic. His sentences are not black and white. He communicates meaning that exists on spectrum. He chooses the precise words to communicate where his meaning is on that spectrum. No more, no less. The emotion without the hyperbole is refreshing.

If I learn nothing else from this book, it's to use "lovely" instead of "love" when I want to convey something positive-- "I love this coffee" v.s. "This coffee is lovely." Love is way overused for situations where we really mean that something is pleasant.

On to the book. de Botton and Armstrong hit on a great theme around art-- that much of art is made for something, To rebel against the system. To convey love. To honor a moment. Yet we catalog art by artist, time period and region.

Why not interact with art, according to the motives that we need, that improve our lives...

Art for the newly in love.
Art for those in pain. How to suffer successfully.
Art for those contemplating lives choices.
Art for politics.
and so on.

I smiled when I read the phrase "How to suffer more successfully?" It communicates that pain is a part of life, yet we can become better people if we engage with it properly.

Through many of these themes, de Botton and Armstrong discuss the 'why' of a particular work of art.

Perhaps through a deeper viewing, art can inspire us to be better people.