Photo: Teresa Queirós

As I navigated through the world of academia I felt myself grow slightly downward. At the end of each semester, I was compelled to readjust my mind, analyze what I learned and unlearn the things that kept me from being free and pliable because something in the liberal path to knowledge dismantled me.

I came to some conclusions, but it was not until I studied for my GRE that I stumbled over an observation.  A vital part of GRE preparation consists of studying vocabulary. Which is especially important for the Verbal Reasoning section and study guides provide a mean list of a couple hundred words that are likely to be seen on the test.

I like words and wanted to learn them all. Not just for the test, but for life so I did what I was taught— I made notecards. The pile was toppling tall and to underwhelm the task, I divided the words into manageable sets. Three separate categories formed: positive words, negative words, and neutral words. I meant to divide them evenly, but comparing the stacks, I was bewildered. The neutral stack was dingy, the positive stack was a bit less dingy, the negative stack was like the leaning tower of Pisa hovering over them both— the negative words completely dwarfed all the rest.

By negative words I mean the words that deconstruct rather than construct, for example, the Kaplan GRE study guide offered twenty-seven words meaning “to criticize,” while it provided just nine words “to praise.” To further unbalance the situation, the English language allows for most positive words to be negated, but not vice-versa. Happy can be turned to unhappy, generous can be made ungenerous, and ingenuous can be made disingenuous, while most negative words rarely yield to that kind of superfluity. Unsad, ungreedy or disodious are improper.

I realized that the negative vibe I felt was not pure emotion, but the result of a negative system of learning. Words are the foundation for obtaining knowledge and the foundation assigned to me was focused on deconstruction, giving me more aides to tear apart and criticize rather than to build up, create, and express my thoughts, ideas and emotions in a constructive way. That is perhaps why those who berate, decry and defame sound more sophisticated than those who attempt to point out the good, the true and the beautiful.

Photo: Julie Kifuk  |  Love your work.  Thank you!

Youth is peculiar to look back at. It’s a time when most of us fumble, yet shine. We are daring because we have not learned to fear. We experiment to break down the mysteries around us, and test our boundaries to see how far they will stretch. Such exploration demands energy, and youth is filled with it.

As we mature, the reckless energy lessens as experience and wisdom take its place. Incompetence gets shaved off to make room for insight. The boundaries we cut through reveal new freedoms, and as our minds become sounder, we become more grounded.

Often when people look back at their youth, they forget how inept they were mentally, and reminisce over how vibrant they were physically. They regret that they didn’t accomplish more, forgetting that they did not know then, what they know now.

Life thrives on balance of physical power to mental energy. First you have the one, then you have the other. But if youth is lived out to the max, then the loss of it does not need to be remorsed, because by losing it, you gain something greater. Youthful beauty and energy are what make youthful stupidity charming and forgivable. Likewise, mature sophistication and grace are what conceal the wrinkles and slower movements that come with age. 

Embracing each season of life is what gives life its potency. Quality of life isn’t found in the fountain of youth, but in the fountain of life. To continue drinking from it at every stage will keep us fresh, alive, and invigorated to the end.

Photo | Zhanna Krukovets | Amazing

To not give up is not a one-time decision. We must decide to keep going every time a new struggle rears its head.  

We’ve all heard the never give up speech. The message is typical. It is simple, striking and when channeled with enough enthusiasm the idea is enough to fuse the masses. But what does it mean? What does “giving up” really mean?

Giving up is tricky business. The thing is altogether a mental game, a full-on battle of the mind. We can’t really see it by looking at someone from the outside. We don’t really know if a person has thrown in the towel or not, though they may continue to do something we don’t know if it’s ritual or real forward motion.

Not giving up is an ongoing process rather than a constant state, that’s probably why Churchill thought it necessary to emphasize the word “never” by repeating it nine times in his short “Never Give In” speech. A person doesn’t decide to not give up just once. The decision must get repeated over and over. Once the decision is made, it carries us through a moment or project and then some other struggle comes up and we have to decide again.

Again we move forward till we face the next resistance and the battle begins again. The act of not giving up can get automatized, to flow like an ingrained habit.But that may not be best. Each decision to keep going should be made with fresh eyes and vigor because mere habit may lead us to keep going even in cases when we are heading in the wrong direction. You should never give in a struggle that is on point, but you should always give up the battle that you should not be fighting in the first place.

When the battle is right, the person who keeps going, daunted by neither victory nor defeat, is a wonder to enchant us all. Just look around— every man-made thing of consequence was created by such a person. A person who did not give up.

This man— part investigative phenomenon, part badass journalist, part friendly conversationalist. When asked, “who is your favorite journalist and why?” George Packer swiftly came to mind and stayed there.

He is a playwright, a novelist and a reporter for The New Yorker.  I met him last October after an interview at the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg.  He was intriguing to watch as he thoughtfully listened to the questions posed and responded with clear answers even when the asked was barely decipherable.  His face had something interesting about it when Kelly McBride asked why people open up to him, he smiled saying, “it’s because I have a friendly face, or at least I think so.”  I think so too.

I remember a lot of what he said because it was genuine and grounded, without the circumlocutory verbiage which makes my mind spin in desultory circles.

Though flourishing as a contemporary reporter his roots are deeply set in all those old-school ways and time-tested principles.  He pays homage to history, tracks down old articles, does a lot of digging before beginning a new assignment and reads books. Things like: Mostly Martha, Exiles in Eden, Orwell, Nypal, Normal Wailer, Elison’s, Invisible Man are among his favorites and most importantly he reads poetry every night to keep his mind saturated in beautiful language.

Those nightly poetry readings are perhaps the trick to his redolent opening lines and the bits of feeling found in his reporting.  His tactic: “Move them, change their mind a lot— bring the world to the reader.”