I found out tonight from a co-worker that he's not supposed to tell anyone, but he's going to be going up to our Bloomfield office for that position I mentioned four months ago. It's going to be his job to get the office into shape, oversee the other managing editors, and so on.
I'm happy for him, but I'm a little disappointed that they've shafted me like this after leading me to think I was the top contender for that post. Tim, our editor in chief, even went as far as telling in front of one of the owners that he considers me flat-out his best managing editor.
Actually, I'm not just a little disappointed by this arrangement. I'm furious. Nathan -- the guy they are moving -- is among other things, fairly lazy about his job, incredibly arrogant and know-it-all-ish, and the way he speaks about women, he's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
My best bet is that the decision was largely pecuniary. I already make $35K, and said I would need to make at least $40K if they were going to give me added responsibilities. Nathan on the other hand makes about $26K. He'll be making under $30K in Bloomfield office, and the reporter they've moving into his spot will probably make about $26K, while they'll replace her with someone they'll pay their dirt-cheap rate of $20K. If they figure I'll also get pissed off and quit, they can probably save another $15K when they replace me with a college graduate.
I don't want to be motivated just by money, and I don't think I am. But it's hard to feed a family of four on what I make here, the hours are brutal, and the work load keeps increasing. They're about to eliminate the production shop and have the managing editors handle all the pagination duties as well, as a cost-cutting measure. It's not like we don't already have to write four to six stories and four editorials a week, plus edit and lay out two whole papers.
I'm really sick of this. I sent out two resumes before I came to work today, on top of the two I sent out last week. I need another job, and I need it to be one where I can settle in for an extended period. Or I need my wife to find gainful employment so I can stay at home with the girls.
Something has to give. I just can't take this anymore.
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Sunday, September 14, 2003
job references
A co-worker of mine asked me if I would act as a reference for him in the event he needs one. (Like me, he's fighting desparately to leave the newspaper we work at.) Below are some of the references I told him I would be happy to give:
- "As long as he remembers to take his medication and keeps away from sharp objects, Brian is a pleasant enough fellow to work with."
- "I urge you to waste no time in considering Brian for a position with your company."
- "I am moved to tears whenever I read something Brian writes."
- "Brian one day will be remembered in the same breath as other great men like Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Idi Amin."
- "Brian is a great guy to work with. True, he is dim-witted and rude, his table manners leave a lot to be desired, and he has a small, misshapen mind with a body to match, but he ... I'm sorry, I can't remember where I was going."
- "Brian is a simple, down-to-earth sort of fellow, much like you'd expect from someone whose parents met at a family reunion."
- "You might have doubts that Brian will be able to handle the responsibilities of the task he is applying for. I assure you that there's nothing to worry about; from everything I've seen here, he'll soon find someone else whom he get manipulate into doing the job for him."
- "Brian is the only former death-row inmate I know who can handle this job."
- "Well, I don't want to say too much in case he's got my line bugged, but Brian seems to know an awful lot about munitions and ordnance, and he's been interviewed by the FBI an awful lot lately..."
- "My God! Pedersen is applying there? Hire him, you fools! The last three people to turn him down all were found three days later, floating face-down in the Hudson."
Thursday, September 11, 2003
impact made
I had one of those odd, aw-shucks moments yesterday. A co-worker (also named Dave, which is why I call him Vandervecken) who works in the newspaper's production department told me he had read my column and it had changed his life.
I initially couldn't tell if he was serious or not, because we routinely razz each other, but he was dead serious. He's around the same age as me, and he said that reading my column on getting older was like a face full of cold water: refreshing and bringing startling clarity. He commented on how the American dream often drives us to succeed and "make our mark" no matter what the cost, and said my column showed him there's another, better way.
He really seemed to appreciate it, and seemed intent on changing his focus from being career-driven to focusing more on the people in his life.
Kind of humbling, you know?
I initially couldn't tell if he was serious or not, because we routinely razz each other, but he was dead serious. He's around the same age as me, and he said that reading my column on getting older was like a face full of cold water: refreshing and bringing startling clarity. He commented on how the American dream often drives us to succeed and "make our mark" no matter what the cost, and said my column showed him there's another, better way.
He really seemed to appreciate it, and seemed intent on changing his focus from being career-driven to focusing more on the people in his life.
Kind of humbling, you know?
Sunday, September 07, 2003
no more mr. nice guy
The book "No More Mr. Nice Guy" was highly recommended by a friend of mine. Although it does not affect me as much as it did him, I must concede that books that deal with abstract issues such as this one does, with its psychoanalytical subject, often can leave the reader feeling confused and left in the dust. I feel this is particularly true when the books address a need the reader does not personally feel very strongly, as is the case with me and this book.
That is not to see the book is without merit or features that appealed to me. For starters, the publishers of "No More Mr. Nice Guy" wisely chose an aesthetically pleasing bookbinding where the pages are neatly collated and evenly trimmed. The glue also holds the pages together very admirably.
I especially was pleased with their use of a Serifs font. (I believe it was Garamond, a font that revolutionized print media with the facility with which the eye absorbs words printed in it.) The point size also was appropriately chosen; I did not need a magnifying glass to make out the words, nor did I feel like I was reading a "moo-moo" edition of a big with overlarge type.
Although I cannot comment on the book's long-term durability, I will say that the print edition was pleasantly free of the glare that accompanies the electronic edition.
In short, if you are looking for a book to help you understand how to express your emotional, mental and social needs as a male -- and most of all, if you want a book that is pleasing to the eye -- I must recommend "No More Mr. Nice Guy."
That is not to see the book is without merit or features that appealed to me. For starters, the publishers of "No More Mr. Nice Guy" wisely chose an aesthetically pleasing bookbinding where the pages are neatly collated and evenly trimmed. The glue also holds the pages together very admirably.
I especially was pleased with their use of a Serifs font. (I believe it was Garamond, a font that revolutionized print media with the facility with which the eye absorbs words printed in it.) The point size also was appropriately chosen; I did not need a magnifying glass to make out the words, nor did I feel like I was reading a "moo-moo" edition of a big with overlarge type.
Although I cannot comment on the book's long-term durability, I will say that the print edition was pleasantly free of the glare that accompanies the electronic edition.
In short, if you are looking for a book to help you understand how to express your emotional, mental and social needs as a male -- and most of all, if you want a book that is pleasing to the eye -- I must recommend "No More Mr. Nice Guy."
new amazon review
I just added a review of "The Hobbit," addressing Tolkien's party-animal nature and how it helped to shape the book. That review should be up in a few days.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-glance/-/AFFWAUAXJMUON/ref=cm_aya_bc_aya/102-3195399-8899364
In the meantime, there are still reviews of Harry Potter, the Wizard of Oz, the Bible and Jane Eyre. More positive votes are eagerly desired.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-glance/-/AFFWAUAXJMUON/ref=cm_aya_bc_aya/102-3195399-8899364
In the meantime, there are still reviews of Harry Potter, the Wizard of Oz, the Bible and Jane Eyre. More positive votes are eagerly desired.
letter
Dear Byron:
So I'm dying to know ...
If Cats had explained that the 20-ton weight materialized through a hyperspatial conduit that was connected to a warehouse on the other end of the world, stocked with 20-ton weights, and that it had failed to destroy the ship because the HMS Naked Glittery Squirrel is actually made of neutronium (the neutron-star-like gravitational effects of which are effectively neutralized through a fusion-driven gravity field), would you have reacted as negatively as you did to her use of the phrase "magic?"
I ask this because she said "magic," not necromancy, not a Satanic pact, not divination, not kartomancy, not witchcraft, not spiritism, not conjuration, not blood sacrifice, and not any other recognized branch of the occult. Just "magic," a generic fantasy term that shows up in the works of Christian authors like J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Stephen Lawhead, Charles Williams and G.O.K. who else.
The argument I expect you're inclined to use is essentially the slippery slope fallacy used against fantasy works like Harry Potter, that although the books are hopelessly fantastic and not at all realistic, their present the danger of enticing innocents into attempting actual witchcraft and trafficking with the Devil.
I call it a fallacy because that's what it essentially is, based as it is in a faulty assumption that most or many people are incapable of telling the difference between a literary or imaginative vehicle and the real world. (There are a few who can't, it's true, but they're either very young or in some way mentally impaired.)
In reality, you could argue that science fiction is much more dangerous to people than fantasy. While each can fire imagination and offer valuable insights into the human condition, fantasy includes at least a nod in the direction of the supernatural and stirs the heart to consider the existence of a world that ours operates within but often is unaware of. Science fiction on the other hand quite typically envisions an utterly naturlistic viewpoint, suggests that all things can and will be neatly explained once we have attained a sufficient amount of naturalist knowledge, and either ignores God or treats him as a contemtuous idea. Its treatment of God's natural laws of physics also is pretty contemptible, and since it has the same effect (plotwise) as magic, one could argue that it could lead impressionable readers down a parallel path of scientific-seeming witchcraft
So, while I perhaps am being a teensy bit facetious about the whole thing, I do wonder why you feel it's necessary to have yourself rescued by an angel -- I would have just jumped out of the way -- and warn Cats so sternly about the dangers of practicing nondescript magic upon a Christian.
Just curious. :-)
So I'm dying to know ...
If Cats had explained that the 20-ton weight materialized through a hyperspatial conduit that was connected to a warehouse on the other end of the world, stocked with 20-ton weights, and that it had failed to destroy the ship because the HMS Naked Glittery Squirrel is actually made of neutronium (the neutron-star-like gravitational effects of which are effectively neutralized through a fusion-driven gravity field), would you have reacted as negatively as you did to her use of the phrase "magic?"
I ask this because she said "magic," not necromancy, not a Satanic pact, not divination, not kartomancy, not witchcraft, not spiritism, not conjuration, not blood sacrifice, and not any other recognized branch of the occult. Just "magic," a generic fantasy term that shows up in the works of Christian authors like J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Stephen Lawhead, Charles Williams and G.O.K. who else.
The argument I expect you're inclined to use is essentially the slippery slope fallacy used against fantasy works like Harry Potter, that although the books are hopelessly fantastic and not at all realistic, their present the danger of enticing innocents into attempting actual witchcraft and trafficking with the Devil.
I call it a fallacy because that's what it essentially is, based as it is in a faulty assumption that most or many people are incapable of telling the difference between a literary or imaginative vehicle and the real world. (There are a few who can't, it's true, but they're either very young or in some way mentally impaired.)
In reality, you could argue that science fiction is much more dangerous to people than fantasy. While each can fire imagination and offer valuable insights into the human condition, fantasy includes at least a nod in the direction of the supernatural and stirs the heart to consider the existence of a world that ours operates within but often is unaware of. Science fiction on the other hand quite typically envisions an utterly naturlistic viewpoint, suggests that all things can and will be neatly explained once we have attained a sufficient amount of naturalist knowledge, and either ignores God or treats him as a contemtuous idea. Its treatment of God's natural laws of physics also is pretty contemptible, and since it has the same effect (plotwise) as magic, one could argue that it could lead impressionable readers down a parallel path of scientific-seeming witchcraft
So, while I perhaps am being a teensy bit facetious about the whole thing, I do wonder why you feel it's necessary to have yourself rescued by an angel -- I would have just jumped out of the way -- and warn Cats so sternly about the dangers of practicing nondescript magic upon a Christian.
Just curious. :-)
'the hobbit' reviewed
J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Hobbit" is perhaps one of the best-written books about the advantages of having parties. Written relatively early in his days as an Oxford don, "The Hobbit" is a strongly autobiographical novel about Tolkien and his status as a party man. His reputation as a party enthusiast was so secure, in fact, that Tolkien regularly was the host to impromptu parties as other Oxford and even Cambridge professors would appear uninvited at his home with the expectation of a good meal, some beer or wine, and rousing party games.
It is such experiences that form the basis for "The Hobbit." A sedentary fellow, much like Tolkien, Bilbo Baggins finds himself the unassuming host of a party of dwarves (more established professors) and the wizard Gandalf (the president of the university).
Wooed by promises of great wealth, and strongly encouraged by Gandalf, Bilbo joins the dwarves on a quest to regain their lost ancestral gold, an action that represents Tolkien's own quest for tenure, a position that, once secured, would guarantee him employment, a place to live, social status, and ultimately a healthy retirement package.
The story follows Tolkien-as-Bilbo's journey to the heart of the Lonely Mountain, where he must confront the dragon Smaug (the experience of teaching undergraduate and graduate students) and be swept up in the dramatic Battle of Five Armies, a situation not unlike peer review.
And in the course of the story, Bilbo acquires a magical Ring that secures his reputation with the dwarves, much as Tolkien's literary and liguistic prowess, developed through education, secured his position in academia.
A thoroughly fascinating and enchanting book, "The Hobbit" will have you wishing again and again for the opportunity to attend more parties and, even more, to host them yourself.
It is such experiences that form the basis for "The Hobbit." A sedentary fellow, much like Tolkien, Bilbo Baggins finds himself the unassuming host of a party of dwarves (more established professors) and the wizard Gandalf (the president of the university).
Wooed by promises of great wealth, and strongly encouraged by Gandalf, Bilbo joins the dwarves on a quest to regain their lost ancestral gold, an action that represents Tolkien's own quest for tenure, a position that, once secured, would guarantee him employment, a place to live, social status, and ultimately a healthy retirement package.
The story follows Tolkien-as-Bilbo's journey to the heart of the Lonely Mountain, where he must confront the dragon Smaug (the experience of teaching undergraduate and graduate students) and be swept up in the dramatic Battle of Five Armies, a situation not unlike peer review.
And in the course of the story, Bilbo acquires a magical Ring that secures his reputation with the dwarves, much as Tolkien's literary and liguistic prowess, developed through education, secured his position in academia.
A thoroughly fascinating and enchanting book, "The Hobbit" will have you wishing again and again for the opportunity to attend more parties and, even more, to host them yourself.
'no more mr. nice guy'
The book "No More Mr. Nice Guy" was highly recommended by a friend of mine. Although it does not affect me as much as it did him, I must concede that books that deal with abstract issues such as this one does, with its psychoanalytical subject, often can leave the reader feeling confused and left in the dust. I feel this is particularly true when the books address a need the reader does not personally feel very strongly, as is the case with me and this book.
That is not to see the book is without merit or features that appealed to me. For starters, the publishers of "No More Mr. Nice Guy" wisely chose an aesthetically pleasing bookbinding where the pages are neatly collated and evenly trimmed. The glue also holds the pages together very admirably.
I especially was pleased with their use of a Serif font. (I believe it was Garamond, a font that revolutionized print media with the facility with which the eye absorbs words printed in it.) The point size also was appropriately chosen; I did not need a magnifying glass to make out the words, nor did I feel like I was reading a "moo-moo" edition of a big with overlarge type.
Although I cannot comment on the book's long-term durability, I will say that the print edition was pleasantly free of the glare that accompanies the electronic edition.
In short, if you are looking for a book to help you understand how to express your emotional, mental and social needs as a male -- and most of all, if you want a book that is pleasing to the eye -- I must recommend "No More Mr. Nice Guy."
That is not to see the book is without merit or features that appealed to me. For starters, the publishers of "No More Mr. Nice Guy" wisely chose an aesthetically pleasing bookbinding where the pages are neatly collated and evenly trimmed. The glue also holds the pages together very admirably.
I especially was pleased with their use of a Serif font. (I believe it was Garamond, a font that revolutionized print media with the facility with which the eye absorbs words printed in it.) The point size also was appropriately chosen; I did not need a magnifying glass to make out the words, nor did I feel like I was reading a "moo-moo" edition of a big with overlarge type.
Although I cannot comment on the book's long-term durability, I will say that the print edition was pleasantly free of the glare that accompanies the electronic edition.
In short, if you are looking for a book to help you understand how to express your emotional, mental and social needs as a male -- and most of all, if you want a book that is pleasing to the eye -- I must recommend "No More Mr. Nice Guy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
