Nothing Ventured: Burned-Out Light Bulbs, Missed Baskets, and a Bombed F Harmonic Minor Scale

Nothing ventured, nothing failed at.

It's true. If you don't try to do anything, you can't fail.

Thomas Edison ventured to make a light bulb and failed thousands of times, right?

Edison, while still in the process of trying to find the right filament, was asked if he felt like a failure and thought he should give up. In reply, he said,

"Why would I feel like a failure? And why would I ever give up? I now know definitively over 9,000 ways that an electric light bulb will not work. Success is almost in my grasp."

And, success he eventually found.

Wait - can you fail and still be successful?

Of his career, Michael Jordan said:

"I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."

He has found success, too. He's a household name in sports.

But what does it take to be accepted to BYU's School of Music?

Miriam Burton (yep, that's me), while still in the process of trying to be accepted, said:

"Bahaha! A miracle...?"

After working specifically toward a 10-minute audition for something like two years and then bombing an F Harmonic Minor scale during said audition, it's VERY easy to feel VERY discouraged. Yes, I'm speaking from personal experience here. But even though that was disappointing, I'm still glad I tried. I learned so much from the process. I don't know if I'll make it, but I'm just glad I went for it.

Certainly this blog is supposed to be about things related to history, but I think this is an important point that has applied all throughout history. Nothing gained throughout history was gained without trying for it. There's a reason that "nothing ventured, nothing gained" is a famous phrase. I would supplement it with a second phrase, however. You aren't promised that by venturing, you will automatically gain what you are trying to get. But there is one thing that you will almost certainly get from venturing, and I would sum it up by saying:

Nothing ventured, nothing learned.

Go. Live your dream. And if you fail, learn from it.

And in case you get discouraged along the way, here's a little lighthearted encouragement:

Cell Phones and Star Trek: 20th Century Reality Inspired by Sci Fi

"Beam me up, Scotty."

Those words have certainly become iconic, but even more iconic than the words being said is what they were spoken into - Captain Kirk's communicator.

This may come as a surprise to you, but I have one of those things Kirk had. You probably have one, too. So do millions of others. It's called a cell phone.

Sure, Kirk didn't call it a cell phone, but Martin Cooper did. He invented the first cell phone, and cited Captain Kirk as his direct inspiration for the handheld wireless communicator.

You can see a bunch of other inventions inspired by Star Trek at http://www.filmjunk.com/2009/01/21/treknobabble-50-top-10-star-trek-inventions-in-use-today/

Star Trek wasn't the only Sci Fi in the 20th century to later inspire inventions. In the early Tom Swift Sci Fi series (which I have never seen, but which my sister is crazy about), Tom had an electric rifle, which inspired a later invention called Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle, affectionately known as the TASER.

The 20th century was a time of innovation and inspiration, and back when Sci Fi shows were huge - before vampires and werewolves took over - those shows were used as an outlet for creative ideas that were often quite sound. Perhaps this was a way for filmmakers to share good ideas that they did not have the skills to bring to life so that those who had the know-how could take the ideas and run with them. Ideas shared on television were certainly subject to some government control, but who would kick at a few futuristic technological ideas? In a way, this was a very open way of sharing ideas and collaborating between very different types of people - the artsy visionaries who could come up with good ideas and the down-to-earth inventors who could make things happen. As they saw this sort of collaboration bear fruit, people came to expect the sort of future that was reflected in the Sci Fi shows they saw on television. And, in many ways, that vision has come true.

Yet people still complain that we aren't completely in the future that 20th century Sci Fi led them to expect. For instance, we don't have HAL from "2001: A Space Odyssey." Yet after watching that chilling movie, I think most people can say HAL is an invention they wouldn't mind having indefinitely postponed. We have a multitude of other great inventions that must have seemed far-fetched and futuristic to people less than a century ago who watched those ideas be born on the silver screen, so who cares that we don't have flying cars?

...Or do we?

http://www.theweeklydriver.com/flying-car-makes-roof-landing-fresno-felon-driver-called-santa/

Cannibalistic Chickens and the Classroom Cage: Think Outside the Coop

You're being held captive in a cramped, dark cage. You've been held there so long that you can't remember what it's like to see the light of day. You rarely see your jailers, and when you do, they come merely to determine whether you do enough work to warrant not killing you outright. If you can provide them with what they want, they'll let you keep living. Your work is thankless - you never see the results of your work, or find out if anyone enjoyed it. Sometimes the jailers bring food, but your stomach turns as you realize that they're feeding you the flesh and bones of others who didn't make the cut. When your hunger is great enough, you finally force yourself to sink your beak into the disgusting fare, trying not to think about what you're eating.

Your beak? Yes, you're a chicken.

No, I'm not putting you in the shoes - ahem, feet - of a chicken to make you hate chicken farms or vow never to eat chicken enchiladas or scrambled eggs again. I'm not trying to get all PETA on you. This is a metaphor.

Now you're sitting in a dark room, in front of the artificial light of a computer screen. You've been there so long, working on a school project. You have little contact with your teachers, except when you turn in assignments to them. If you can provide them with what they want, they'll let you pass the class, and you've got to do well in college, so you can support yourself in later life. You've created good work, which will be turned in and buried in a heap of past assignments. Your work is thankless - you'll never find out if people in the real world might have actually been able to enjoy it. You take others' ideas, and, without really questioning them, churn them out into project after project that will satisfy the requirements, swallowing your ambition and enthusiasm to meet the expectations, trying not to think about your education because your schooling is more important.

Perhaps, in both cases, the most efficient method is being used. But is it really the best? Is it best to continue circulating the same ideas from the same sources that you've always used through the same old system, recycling them over and over again because it's most efficient and easy? Is it best to recycle chickens by feeding the living ones with commercial food made of chopped up chicken feet, beaks, bones, and feathers, sprayed with antibiotics, and having them live their lives in the same old system, because it's most efficient and easy?

Certainly it would be best, if efficiency was all that mattered, but what about products? Papers that cannibalize and summarize the author's past works without throwing in vital new concepts and ideas create a feeling of deja vu and are a trial to read at best. Projects that are based on little new thought and merely fill a requirement and comply with a standard are largely unhelpful to future learning. Eggs that come from factory chickens are less yellow, less healthy, less durable and less delicious than eggs from chickens that have lived in a natural setting.

Even if products are being ignored, what about lifestyle? It is certainly less satisfying to drag your toes through a required course in which you have no interest than to study something you are passionate about, and it is a lot harder to be an enthusiastic socialite when all your time is wrapped up in clearing the schoolwork hurdles inside a scholastic box with scant wiggle room, instead of following more self-directed learning to learn about what you love through collaboration with others, which naturally leads to more socialization with like-minded people in a setting where there is room to grow. And for chickens, I imagine it is much less satisfying to spend time isolated from human affection, eating remnants of other chickens and destined to lay or die inside a cramped cage with no elbow room, rather than enjoying the natural sunlight and fresh produce they would have with a natural life outside, and having caring people play with them and know their names, where there would be room to spread their wings.

Education and work should not just be all about survival. In this society, we should be able to get past that. Maybe the traditional system isn't always the best. Think outside the box - or the coop. Don't box up your potential and get the job done at the expense of your happiness and your chance to enjoy the world around you. Don't be chicken - reach out to the world around you, and find a way to learn without caging yourself in a timid sphere of cannibalized ideas.

Be a free-range student. Spread your wings.

Pinhead Efficiency

After the individualism of the Renaissance, people in the 18th century begin to realize that they needed each other to make things work more efficiently. Adam Smith, often called the father of economics, observed people working in a pin factory, and came to the conclusion that if each person specialized in one part of the process, a lot more pins were made in a much smaller amount of time. Sure, one person could measure the wire, cut the wire, sharpen the wire, make the pinhead, and fasten the pinhead to the wire, pin by pin by pin all by themselves, but they took extra time moving between tasks and picking up and putting things down, and were therefore wasting their time.

This notion of assembly line efficiency took off in the 18th century, contributing to the industrial revolution and sparking off a horde of human "machines" that quickly and efficiently processed clothing, furniture, food, and, of course, pins.

And they all lived happily ever after, right?

So it would seem, since they were getting more results for their effort, but is efficiency always the best way? These industrial factories of people were acting like, were often treated like, and were eventually, in centuries to come, replaced by, machines. In banding together to be more efficient, they essentially lost much of their individual humanity.

Does that mean people must choose between being independent, inefficient individuals and being dependent machines? I certainly hope not! I would argue that banding with others to be more efficient should enable people to have more time for individuality, not less, if time is taken to spend on themselves, and not just used as more fuel for the fires of work to be done.

Sure, depend on others, specialize in making your pinheads and letting others contribute the pins for maximum efficiency. But don't be a pinhead yourself and forget to take some well-earned time off to metaphorically smell the roses. Individualists miss the help of others, and industrialists lose sight of themselves, but if a balance can be found between the two, then more roses in the world can be appreciated.

Greensleeves, Facebook and Humanism

I'm coming out of the closet. There is something you need to know about me.

...I'm a human!

Well, that's no big surprise. There are probably few if any normal adult humans who have not, at some time or another,thought about the fact that they are a human.

Of course, some are more narcissistic than others (avid Facebook users, anyone?) Narcissism usually refers to one individual who is obsessed with examining themselves, and when there are a bunch of individuals who exhibit narcissist-like behaviors about humankind, and are obsessed with examining the achievements of humans in general, we often use the word "humanists." Humanism was a big part of the 16th and 17th centuries - the focus then was on the beauty of humans and their accomplishments. At the time of the Renaissance, humanism was influenced by the study of classical Greek and Roman works, cultures, and art. After the fall of the Byzantine Empire, many Greeks moved to Italy, causing a mixing of cultures and bringing in new ideas. During this time, Leonardo Da Vinci came up with his theory of proportions for beautiful people, reflecting the era’s focus on the beauty and importance of individual humans. Even music changed to reflect humanism, moving from the old, impersonal plainchants like “O Come O Come Emmanuel” to more beautiful, complex songs like “Greensleeves,” which used dynamics and meters and ornamentation to put more focus on individual notes, reflecting the increase in individualism that happened during the Renaissance.

Well, that's cool - people back in the 16th and 17th centuries were obsessed with themselves, too! Hey, though, if it brought us "Greensleeves," I'm happy. Since you are human (as I assume you are), then you have ears shaped like golden spirals (divine proportions are also a legacy of the Renaissance), so have fun using your mathematically proportionate ears to listen to this version of "Greensleeves"! I'm off to check my Facebook...

I don't know anything!

I have become quite convinced that I do not know anything.

First of all, I did not know I was supposed to write my first post about the 19th Century or about Control, for the simple fact that the wiki did not say to do so until after I had written my first post.

Second of all, I do not know a whole lot about the technology of the 19th century yet, or the controls placed on it, but I will share what I do know so far.

While they did not have the same types of media in the 1800s that we do now, the people of the 19th century still had a big boom of inventions in their time, and were still able to be digitally civilized or not depending on how they adapted to those inventions. The first electric battery was created in 1800, and a number of other inventions followed in that century, such as primitive television, electric lighting, telephones, and phonographs.

My family, interested in old as well as new technology, owns an early phonograph that, while probably manufactured shortly after the turn of the century, operates on the same principle as an 1800s phonograph. It is interesting seeing it stand in the kitchen next to our iHome, because while their technological level and functions are different, they both have the same purpose. However, the phonograph is so much simpler - it never needs to be recharged, or synced with a computer, and it did not come with pages of fine print, terms of agreement, or warnings about the legal implications of musical piracy. Back when it was created, the only real control placed upon it was the natural control of whether or not you could afford to buy new needles for it.

As technology has expanded from what was found in the 1800s, the controls placed on it have also grown. While new technology continues to get fancier and more complex, the old technology has not been completely effaced - rather, it has been built upon, and the foundations are still there. I think those who laugh at old, scratchy and primitive technology are forgetting that the technology we have now would not be existent without the antiquated technology of times past.

Well, to conclude this post, I'm going to share a bit of an old black-and-white movie that, while made in the mid-1900s, tells a story from the 1800s and uses technology that would not have been possible without the technological foundations that were laid in the century preceding it. It would also not be possible without YouTube - a marvel from this century that builds on the things of the past to make them still usable for us.

Go to 2:38. Enough said.

How digitally civilized am I?

I'm sitting in the cockpit of a spaceship, tipped back in my chair, surveying the rows of computer screens before me and preparing for takeoff.

Actually, not really. I'm sitting at the computer desk at home.

Still, many friends have commented at the tech-y appearance of my family's computer counter, which runs along the entire length of the wall of our basement. The contents of the counter are always changing. Currently, there are four wide-screen computers stretched along it in an orderly line (three of which are actually TVs acting as laptop stations), surrounded by a printer and an electronic jumble of power cords and Mac and Windows products intertwined. Across the room, our big widescreen TV doubles as a fifth computer. It also acts as a piano sometimes, when we hook up the electronic keyboard. My dad toys with the brand-new sound system on the TV, and sorts through the remotes that control the TV, DVD, VCR and TVG to find the one that controls the big sub-woofers. I slouch lower in my chair and pull out my iPhone to check Facebook. Each member of my family has a smartphone. I feel up-to-date and techno-savvy.

Until I switch on my laptop, that is.

The TV-turned-monitor in front of me displays the unfamiliar layout of a Windows computer. Although I've used a Mac since I could chew on a computer mouse, when I try to do anything on my new HP Pavilion, I'm back to square one.

Where do I start? Oh yes, Windows menu thingy. Lessee... where's Microsoft Word? Whereditgo? Everything's sorted differently! I'll have to ask Dad. Well... in the meantime, I have to touch up that picture I took. Wait, there's no iPhoto. Is there another program that does the same thing on Windows? Maybe I can Google it. Where's my web browser? Wait... what happened to my normal web browser?? I can't even Google anything, because this funky one has a different search engine! EVEN THE CURSOR IS A DIFFERENT COLOR! HELP!!!

Head + desk = bonkbonkbonk!!

As I leave the spaceship cockpit in frustration to go find some chocolate and Dad, I am reminded that the one constant thing about technology is change, and the one constant thing about being digitally civilized is the ability to adapt. While I may think I am digitally civilized one moment, the next I learn about some new thing, and I'm back to the caveman days in that respect. Everything changes as time goes by. The stone wheel, the Apple II, and the iPhone - each have their day, only to someday be replaced by something else.

And who knows - spaceships will probably be obsolete one day, too.