Halloween is on its way. Rather, I should call it The New Halloween.
Few things are exactly as we remember them from childhood. But Halloween may have undergone the most radical change of all.
Halloween was originally for kids. Knowing that it was coming meant it was time to pick a costume and decide what character you wanted to be. Moms were usually involved in the creation, which likely included some discarded clothing, perhaps a sheet with holes cut for eyes and maybe a mask purchased from Woolworth's or Kresge's. On the big day, kids disappeared during the lunch hour and returned to school dressed in costume. Younger kids often paraded around to visit each other's classes in costume, hoping that no one would recognize them.
Halloween was one time that we went to the neighbors' houses to trick or treat. It was simple but fun: we would knock on their door and ask for candy. Everyone would inspect his candy haul and carefully protect the loot. There was rarely an adult to accompany us as we covered the neighborhood in the dark. Occasionally a few of us would go to another neighborhood and perhaps be driven, but that was unusual.
The last time I recall going to any school Halloween event was in 7th grade when the school band had a big party. Many kids attended and there was a spook house where scary stories were told while your hand was immersed in dishes of raw liver. There were other activities including recorded music for dancing. But at 7th grade we already were outgrowing Halloween.
A lot of time has passed.
Today, Halloween is a big deal, especially for the adults. There are saucy, risqué costumes, the use of elaborate make-up techniques -- it's become very complicated. Sure, kids still trick or treat, but I would imagine nationwide the numbers of kids out on Halloween have vastly reduced.
Wonder when this all changed?
Many years ago, while living in a large city in the Southwest, we began to hear rumors of people "putting stuff" into treats handed out at Halloween. News reports indicated there were razor blades and straight pins being inserted into apples and candy bars. Just who the heck was doing such a thing? After all, this is a holiday for the kiddies. Some hospitals even offered to x-ray candy that had been received. Parents warned the kids not to eat anything before it was examined.
Today it's dangerous for small children to go out alone at night. I don't know whether or not there continues to be Halloween fear in all parts of the country. But most of the children who visit our house now at Halloween are in groups of 2 to 5 and always accompanied by at least one parent. Concern by parents is not over done. It's probably a very good idea.
Some towns don't encourage trick or treating at all. Instead, they have a community-wide event at a shopping mall, park or other public area where people congregate and kids can collect candy from local merchants. It's all in good fun and parents probably relax when there is a certain amount of structure. Sometimes these events include a costume contest with prizes given for creativity.
But nearly everywhere -- at stores, in offices, on campuses -- it appears to be the adults who wear the majority of costumes these days. They wear elaborate designs which consume a lot of time and even money to execute. In the 1950s, few -- if any -- adults participated. There might have been private parties at lodges or church groups which adults attended. But seeing someone in costume at the bank or grocery did not occur.
Several years ago, my groceries were checked out by The Hulk, a bulging specimen decked out in green paint wearing a torn shirt. This was the first time I recall seeing someone in the workplace in costume and it was a little awkward. Was I supposed to say, "Like your costume" as I handed him my check? Do workers know how out of place they appear?
Families still decorate for Halloween, carve pumpkins and buy bags of candy, but the spirit of Halloween seems to have changed. Too bad, too, because it's one of the last bastions of something set aside for children.
Perhaps that's why some people seem determined to remain a child for one more year.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
What's Your Opinion?
Every day we are bombarded with questions which require choices: "Paper or plastic?" "Would you like fries with that?" "Can I borrow $5?"
We are also surrounded by loud sound bites, brash advertising, obnoxious emails and constant phone calls. Our minds routinely have to process a lot of information.
As a result, I sometimes find myself indifferent to rather unimportant choices. Recently a friend asked me whether I wanted to have lunch at Restaurant A or Restaurant B.
"I really don't care," I answered.
He frowned. "No, where do you want to go?"
"I like them both," I replied. "And I really don't care." He chose Restaurant B which was fine. If I had really preferred one choice over another, I would have said so.
Everyone should have an opinion about certain issues. An opinion is not the same as simply making a choice. An opinion is defined as the view about a particular issue based on considered facts then concluded by the thinker.
People routinely get asked for their opinions. Currently many are being asked for their political opinions. Most folks often refuse to share their opinions and instead wait to mark their ballots in privacy. Some will write letters to the editor, talk openly (and often about matters of which they know little) and freely share their opinions, often with little encouragement to do so.
Opinions are good things to have. We are not judged by our opinions which are private matters. Among the ideas bantered around and for which many of us likely have our own opinions are such topics as religion, childrearing, job performance and patriotism. There are subjects to be avoided if we hope to retain friendships, such as the proverbial question: "Does this dress make me look fat?" Sometimes it is best to keep your opinions to yourself.
Several years ago a friend and I were visiting his family which lived many miles away. The family was arguing over personal items remaining in the house of their recently-deceased grandmother. She had passed away a week earlier and, unfortunately, the vultures were circling. Each of my friend's siblings had their eyes on certain household furnishings. We were riding in the family car while driving several miles to a family event. My friend, his two brothers and a sister -- along with assorted partners -- were captive in the vehicle. As the conversation turned to which of the household items were the most coveted, tension began to build. One of the sisters-in-law finally asked me to share my opinion of the matter.
I smiled. "I'd rather not say."
"No, come on now," she encouraged. "You're rather impartial. We want to hear what you think."
At that point I shared my opinion which apparently was too blunt for my fellow passengers. Again, sometimes it is best to keep one's opinions private.
For fear of offending others or sharing too much information, many people entirely avoid forming opinions. They think a lot about things -- certain topics more than others -- and let the grains of information enter and leave, but rarely organize what is going through their heads. There is little analysis during which the information is sorted, absorbed or eliminated and a thought created. Thinking about any topic carefully is really quite easy but, unfortunately, is a practice rarely utilized.
It's good to have an opinion, like carrying a spare set of car keys. We never know when it might come in handy and when we might be called upon to reveal how we felt about a certain topic.
Some people are fortunate enough to live in a stimulating environment which welcomes -- even encourages -- interaction among its citizens. Other locations discourage such interaction entirely. What does one do with an opinion that no one else wants to hear?
There are options other than talking to friends about subjects they don't wish to discuss.
Write a letter to the local newspaper.
Review an online article and post a relevant comment -- your opinion!
Find an already-posted comment and show support or disagreement with that comment.
In today's world, it is not necessary to bottle-up your opinions and remain silent. There are plenty of chances to make your opinions known.
Provided, that is, that you have an opinion.
We are also surrounded by loud sound bites, brash advertising, obnoxious emails and constant phone calls. Our minds routinely have to process a lot of information.
As a result, I sometimes find myself indifferent to rather unimportant choices. Recently a friend asked me whether I wanted to have lunch at Restaurant A or Restaurant B.
"I really don't care," I answered.
He frowned. "No, where do you want to go?"
"I like them both," I replied. "And I really don't care." He chose Restaurant B which was fine. If I had really preferred one choice over another, I would have said so.
Everyone should have an opinion about certain issues. An opinion is not the same as simply making a choice. An opinion is defined as the view about a particular issue based on considered facts then concluded by the thinker.
People routinely get asked for their opinions. Currently many are being asked for their political opinions. Most folks often refuse to share their opinions and instead wait to mark their ballots in privacy. Some will write letters to the editor, talk openly (and often about matters of which they know little) and freely share their opinions, often with little encouragement to do so.
Opinions are good things to have. We are not judged by our opinions which are private matters. Among the ideas bantered around and for which many of us likely have our own opinions are such topics as religion, childrearing, job performance and patriotism. There are subjects to be avoided if we hope to retain friendships, such as the proverbial question: "Does this dress make me look fat?" Sometimes it is best to keep your opinions to yourself.
Several years ago a friend and I were visiting his family which lived many miles away. The family was arguing over personal items remaining in the house of their recently-deceased grandmother. She had passed away a week earlier and, unfortunately, the vultures were circling. Each of my friend's siblings had their eyes on certain household furnishings. We were riding in the family car while driving several miles to a family event. My friend, his two brothers and a sister -- along with assorted partners -- were captive in the vehicle. As the conversation turned to which of the household items were the most coveted, tension began to build. One of the sisters-in-law finally asked me to share my opinion of the matter.
I smiled. "I'd rather not say."
"No, come on now," she encouraged. "You're rather impartial. We want to hear what you think."
At that point I shared my opinion which apparently was too blunt for my fellow passengers. Again, sometimes it is best to keep one's opinions private.
For fear of offending others or sharing too much information, many people entirely avoid forming opinions. They think a lot about things -- certain topics more than others -- and let the grains of information enter and leave, but rarely organize what is going through their heads. There is little analysis during which the information is sorted, absorbed or eliminated and a thought created. Thinking about any topic carefully is really quite easy but, unfortunately, is a practice rarely utilized.
It's good to have an opinion, like carrying a spare set of car keys. We never know when it might come in handy and when we might be called upon to reveal how we felt about a certain topic.
Some people are fortunate enough to live in a stimulating environment which welcomes -- even encourages -- interaction among its citizens. Other locations discourage such interaction entirely. What does one do with an opinion that no one else wants to hear?
There are options other than talking to friends about subjects they don't wish to discuss.
Write a letter to the local newspaper.
Review an online article and post a relevant comment -- your opinion!
Find an already-posted comment and show support or disagreement with that comment.
In today's world, it is not necessary to bottle-up your opinions and remain silent. There are plenty of chances to make your opinions known.
Provided, that is, that you have an opinion.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Weather or Not
Some people hate to see the end of warm weather. Personally, I have always liked autumn. It is one of the loveliest seasons with colorful leaves, decorations of pumpkins, gourds and Indian corn. People begin to bundle up a bit, bringing thick sweaters and light jackets from the back of the closet. Air conditioning gives way to electric blankets, furnaces and fireplaces. It's time to settle down a bit from the hectic summer. Crops have been harvested, the kids are back in school. Everyone let out a collective sigh.
What's not to love?
It appears there is something about weather and the change of seasons that causes people to whine. Perhaps it's because weather is something that we cannot control. Perhaps some folks just dislike change because it brings …change. Don't know.
But on any nice, brisk, sunny fall day, someone can invariably be heard complaining about the fact that another season has arrived. "It's too cold." "It's dreary." "Winter is just around the corner." "First we rake leaves, then shovel snow." We've all heard them expounding their opinions in the grocery aisle, standing in line at the post office or anywhere that a familiar face is encountered. Like a broken record, the same sentiment is repeated over and over.
Recently I came across a number of quotes about the weather. Thought they were interesting and wanted to pass them along, beginning with one of the best:
"Don't knock the weather. If it didn't change once in a while, nine out of ten people
couldn't start a conversation." -- Kim Hubbard
"The storm starts when the drops start dropping
When the drops stop dropping then the storm starts stopping." -- Dr. Seuss
"Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it." -- Mark Twain
"When all is said and done, the weather and love are the two elements about which one can never be sure." -- Alice Hoffman
"A lot of people like snow. I find it to be an unnecessary freezing of water." -- Carl Reiner
"There is no weather in malls." -- Charles Baxter
"It's so dry the trees are bribing the dogs." -- Charles Martin
"Not reassuring when weathermen say 'Today will be terrible but don't worry. It won't be as terrible as tomorrow or Friday.'" -- Jonah Goldberg
"After three days men grow weary, of a wench, a guest and rainy weather." -- Benjamin Franklin
"If you don't like the weather in New England now, just wait a few minutes." -- Mark Twain
"What can it be about low temperatures that sharpens the edges of objects?" -- Ian McEwan
"While it's summer people say
Winter is the better season.
Such is human reason." -- Reiko Chiba
"Love is like the weather in Nevada -- you don't know what the freak happens." -- Selina
Since such statements include founding father Benjamin Franklin, whining about the weather must have been with us for a while. Perhaps we all should just sit back, bite into a crispy apple and relax a bit.
Complaining isn't going to make any difference.
What's not to love?
It appears there is something about weather and the change of seasons that causes people to whine. Perhaps it's because weather is something that we cannot control. Perhaps some folks just dislike change because it brings …change. Don't know.
But on any nice, brisk, sunny fall day, someone can invariably be heard complaining about the fact that another season has arrived. "It's too cold." "It's dreary." "Winter is just around the corner." "First we rake leaves, then shovel snow." We've all heard them expounding their opinions in the grocery aisle, standing in line at the post office or anywhere that a familiar face is encountered. Like a broken record, the same sentiment is repeated over and over.
Recently I came across a number of quotes about the weather. Thought they were interesting and wanted to pass them along, beginning with one of the best:
"Don't knock the weather. If it didn't change once in a while, nine out of ten people
couldn't start a conversation." -- Kim Hubbard
"The storm starts when the drops start dropping
When the drops stop dropping then the storm starts stopping." -- Dr. Seuss
"Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it." -- Mark Twain
"When all is said and done, the weather and love are the two elements about which one can never be sure." -- Alice Hoffman
"A lot of people like snow. I find it to be an unnecessary freezing of water." -- Carl Reiner
"There is no weather in malls." -- Charles Baxter
"It's so dry the trees are bribing the dogs." -- Charles Martin
"Not reassuring when weathermen say 'Today will be terrible but don't worry. It won't be as terrible as tomorrow or Friday.'" -- Jonah Goldberg
"After three days men grow weary, of a wench, a guest and rainy weather." -- Benjamin Franklin
"If you don't like the weather in New England now, just wait a few minutes." -- Mark Twain
"What can it be about low temperatures that sharpens the edges of objects?" -- Ian McEwan
"While it's summer people say
Winter is the better season.
Such is human reason." -- Reiko Chiba
"Love is like the weather in Nevada -- you don't know what the freak happens." -- Selina
Since such statements include founding father Benjamin Franklin, whining about the weather must have been with us for a while. Perhaps we all should just sit back, bite into a crispy apple and relax a bit.
Complaining isn't going to make any difference.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Get Out and Vote
This blog entry will not preach the virtues of voting. I will simply say first: casting a vote is a duty that everyone should exercise. Please get out and vote on Election Day. Every vote counts.
There. Enough said.
Now that everyone recognizes the importance of his vote, let's acknowledge that the lengthy and expensive process of running for public office is a bit silly and occupies way too much attention of even the most loyal party supporters.
Elections seem to have changed beginning in 1960 with the advent of the first presidential debate. In that event, everyone began to realize that brains and sincerity could be less impressive than good hair and nice teeth. I was in 8th grade in 1960 and was surprised at how badly Richard Nixon looked during that first debate. He wore no television makeup and sweated profusely under the bright studio lights. He also had a severe "5 o'clock shadow" and appeared nervous, smiling stiffly and sitting awkwardly.
John F. Kennedy, on the other hand, looked as though he were attending some type of society tea, calm and coiffed, his youth and charm apparent and shining forth even through the picture tube.
The world was in trouble in 1960. There were problems in Cuba, in Berlin and soon in Southeast Asia. While viewers might not have had inside information about these various hot spots, we knew things weren't doing too well here at home. The Civil Rights movement was bubbling beneath the surface. And to top it all off, the 1960s were about to arrive, bringing social change and nuclear awareness to every home.
So here we were watching these two candidates and analyzing which one would be best to guide us into the future. We were actually viewing and comparing these two men based on -- what else -- appearance. There might have been smoke-filled rooms at play as alliances were formed. But millions of viewers made up their minds right there that one of the candidates looked more "presidential" than the other. The die was cast.
Prior to the 1960s, information for the public was heavily filtered by the press. For instance, I didn't know that Franklin Roosevelt was a polio victim until I was out of college. There were certain facts that were not openly discussed -- the fact that he could not walk unaided and the fact that his personal life was less than ideal. Such topics weren't the subject of tabloid fodder because, well, there weren't tabloids and talking heads making a living from other people's troubles. But FDR was a heck of a president and got us through The Great Depression and most of World War II without a hitch.
It would seem that decorum in politics is a thing of the past. I recall when President Clinton was being interviewed on MTV that he was famously asked "Boxers or briefs?" After a moment of obvious embarrassment, he smiled and responded, "Usually briefs."
Perhaps that was the moment when the public decided that each and every detail of our presidents or even presidential candidates was fair game.
It's too bad. We don't really need to know personal details about each candidate, whether his/her name appears on the national or local ballot. We need to know if the candidate has sufficient credentials, has good character references and whether he/she will give a hoot about the job and community. We do not need to know if those running for office have expensive haircuts, capped teeth or wear designer clothes.
It's not a fashion show, folks. It's an election.
Most aspects of civilization could use a little more decorum. Decorum is defined as "dignity or correctness that is socially expected." It would be nice if someone could design a new fast food or vitamin supplement to help us rebuild our decorum. It looks as though we are deficient in that area.
Friday, October 5, 2012
The Cutting Room Floor
Today I read that Mel Brooks is being honored by the American Film Institute with a Lifetime Achievement Award. Good for him. Brooks has always been hilarious, a fact many of us take for granted. But he deserves kudos for his work and recognition for his sense of humor, both of which were way ahead of their time.
I recently saw an interview with Brooks and co-conspirator Carl Reiner by Jerry Seinfeld on his web series "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee." (If you have a computer or access to one, you must watch this series.) It is extremely entertaining as Seinfeld dines casually with Alec Baldwin, Ricky Gervais. Larry David and others in show business. The Brooks-Reiner episode is certainly one of the best, guaranteed to make the viewer appreciate what was going through the minds of these creative pioneers.
Mel Brooks talks openly about how some of his movies were not "politically correct" when they were released. No kidding. When his movies were made, people were aware of things which were not polite to say and do, although they may have done them anyway. Brooks' movies pushed that envelope and we laughed -- a lot. But that was then and this is now. We can't judge any movies or entertainment from decades ago by our hyper-sensitivity of today.
Recently I was watching a tribute to silent movies on Turner Classic Movies (TCM). It was vastly entertaining. The films were from comedy director Mack Sennett and some of those contained "bits" that made me uncomfortable. These were from the early 1920s and 1930s when life was far different than today. Sennett's bathing beauties caused scandals by showing their figures in tight-fitting but all-covering swimsuits when most women dressed in long sleeves and full skirts.
We can scarcely fault something that occurred nearly 100 years ago. We can overlook certain things in view of the period when they occurred.
What disturbs me is when a movie that I have seen in the theatre is shown on TV and edited so much that it barely resembles the original. Folks who haven't seen the movie can still follow the plot and most likely will find it entertaining. But it's not the movie that had been originally shown to audiences. It must be very frustrating to directors whose work has been chopped and spliced even after it is completely finished. Sometimes directors are eventually allowed to repair the damage with a so-called "director's cut" and replace scenes that were removed. Sometimes this occurs many years later, but filmmakers must feel vindicated to see their movie as they originally intended.
I wonder why some networks even show films which are so badly edited. For instance, I have always liked the original "Die Hard" starring Bruce Willis. It's shown often and has somehow taken on the overtones of a holiday movie, because, I suppose, the setting is at an office Christmas party. However, the mayhem that arises hardly resembles "It's a Wonderful Life." But the movie has remained fresh, with crisp dialogue and a story that moves right along. It is among the films that has stood the test of time, a stretch in today's society.
The movie has been bleeped and cut nearly to the point of being absurd. Certain words that Bruce Willis speaks are not often spoken in polite society. Despite that, Fox Movie Channel shows "Die Hard" with its entire original dialogue -- no bleeps. It was their movie to start with and I admire that kind of bravado. Heck, people have most likely heard worse words.
If a film can't be shown unedited by a network, it seems that the programmer has other movies from which to choose. There are plenty of them out there. Why show a movie where scenes might be deleted and the dialogue sanitized? It's a little like telling a joke and skipping the punch line.
Just a guess, but I would imagine a large percentage of folks might feel the same way. After all, most of us are grown ups. People might prefer to see a movie which was introduced by some type of disclaimer and realize that the kiddies should not be watching.
Send the kiddies to the family room to watch "Finding Nemo" again.
I recently saw an interview with Brooks and co-conspirator Carl Reiner by Jerry Seinfeld on his web series "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee." (If you have a computer or access to one, you must watch this series.) It is extremely entertaining as Seinfeld dines casually with Alec Baldwin, Ricky Gervais. Larry David and others in show business. The Brooks-Reiner episode is certainly one of the best, guaranteed to make the viewer appreciate what was going through the minds of these creative pioneers.
Mel Brooks talks openly about how some of his movies were not "politically correct" when they were released. No kidding. When his movies were made, people were aware of things which were not polite to say and do, although they may have done them anyway. Brooks' movies pushed that envelope and we laughed -- a lot. But that was then and this is now. We can't judge any movies or entertainment from decades ago by our hyper-sensitivity of today.
Recently I was watching a tribute to silent movies on Turner Classic Movies (TCM). It was vastly entertaining. The films were from comedy director Mack Sennett and some of those contained "bits" that made me uncomfortable. These were from the early 1920s and 1930s when life was far different than today. Sennett's bathing beauties caused scandals by showing their figures in tight-fitting but all-covering swimsuits when most women dressed in long sleeves and full skirts.
We can scarcely fault something that occurred nearly 100 years ago. We can overlook certain things in view of the period when they occurred.
What disturbs me is when a movie that I have seen in the theatre is shown on TV and edited so much that it barely resembles the original. Folks who haven't seen the movie can still follow the plot and most likely will find it entertaining. But it's not the movie that had been originally shown to audiences. It must be very frustrating to directors whose work has been chopped and spliced even after it is completely finished. Sometimes directors are eventually allowed to repair the damage with a so-called "director's cut" and replace scenes that were removed. Sometimes this occurs many years later, but filmmakers must feel vindicated to see their movie as they originally intended.
I wonder why some networks even show films which are so badly edited. For instance, I have always liked the original "Die Hard" starring Bruce Willis. It's shown often and has somehow taken on the overtones of a holiday movie, because, I suppose, the setting is at an office Christmas party. However, the mayhem that arises hardly resembles "It's a Wonderful Life." But the movie has remained fresh, with crisp dialogue and a story that moves right along. It is among the films that has stood the test of time, a stretch in today's society.
The movie has been bleeped and cut nearly to the point of being absurd. Certain words that Bruce Willis speaks are not often spoken in polite society. Despite that, Fox Movie Channel shows "Die Hard" with its entire original dialogue -- no bleeps. It was their movie to start with and I admire that kind of bravado. Heck, people have most likely heard worse words.
If a film can't be shown unedited by a network, it seems that the programmer has other movies from which to choose. There are plenty of them out there. Why show a movie where scenes might be deleted and the dialogue sanitized? It's a little like telling a joke and skipping the punch line.
Just a guess, but I would imagine a large percentage of folks might feel the same way. After all, most of us are grown ups. People might prefer to see a movie which was introduced by some type of disclaimer and realize that the kiddies should not be watching.
Send the kiddies to the family room to watch "Finding Nemo" again.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Further Adventures in Customer Service
I've raved before about the decline of customer service. Back in the day, I recall items such as doormen, floor walkers and restaurant hostesses, people who politely provided assistance to customers. These positions were considered a courtesy to shoppers and diners, to help guests locate a particular item or a seat in an ideal location.
Today you are lucky to find a cash register (aka service desk) randomly placed in a department store so that you can make a purchase. Many restaurants have signs near the entrance encouraging hungry customers to "Seat Yourself."
Calling a bank, credit card company or insurance provider can be a nightmare. Better not be in a hurry; you are bound to be put on hold. Some businesses provide an answering message that actually announces how long you will be waiting before speaking to someone. "Currently customers are experiencing a wait time of XX minutes."
Yesterday I received customer service among the best ever. Perhaps there is still hope.
For many years I have purchased apparel through certain mail order clothing companies, two in particular. When I first moved to the East in 1990, I needed clothing items which I hadn't needed while living in the desert -- long underwear, weather-tough outer shoes -- and the most convenient process was to order them. The design quality was unwaveringly high. The fit was perfect. The material was top notch. Plus I didn't have to go anywhere to get them and the items arrived in a couple of days. I was hooked.
I continue to order from these two companies, one store more than the other now. Products from my preferred provider are traditional and timeless. The second company has begun to appeal to younger shoppers. In either case, I know that if a product is less than expected, customer service can help.
Several years ago, I bought wool trousers which were comfortable, stylish and wore like the dickens. Once while phoning in a new order, I mentioned to the customer service lady that the lining in a pair I previously purchased had not held up and was torn and uncomfortable. "Send them back," she offered. "We will replace them." "But I've worn them a great deal," I said. "Doesn't matter. If you are unhappy with a product, you can always return it." I sent the pants back and received a new, identical pair at no charge.
A few years later, I took a nasty fall on the job and ruined a rather new pair of chinos. The knee was torn and damaged. I called to order a new pair, expecting fully to purchase them myself. When I told the order desk what had happened, I laughed at how badly I felt because I loved the trousers. "Send them back," he offered. "But the pants weren't damaged until I fell," I said. "Doesn't matter. If a product is unsatisfactory, you can always return it. I sent the pants back and received a new, identical pair, again at no charge.
Yesterday, my brother casually remarked about how some jeans he had ordered last winter (from the same company) were too short. "I think they must have shrunk," he said. "I'll put these in the donation bag." He was holding the jeans along with the original paperwork. Looking at the order form, I said, "These were ordered in February 2012. I'll call and see if you can still return them."
I phoned the company and spoke to a soft-spoken customer service rep. He said that he was looking at my brother's order history and identified that particular order. "Can he return these?" I asked. "Of course. If at any time a product is unsatisfactory, we hope you will return it. We want satisfied customers." He then said, "Those jeans are now on sale at $10 less. Would you like another pair in a longer length?" My brother said, "Two pair." "Your order will be there in a few days. If you want to return the old pair, you will be credited with the original price. Is there anything else I can do for you today?"
I was shocked. "I must say your company provides extraordinary customer service. Thank you so much." Suddenly I felt a glimmer of hope for the future of shopping and business in general. To think that someone (1) listened to my story (2) suggested a solution and (3) did so quickly and politely is remarkable.
As long as there are companies such as this who continue to value the customer, I will not give up on civilization as we know it.
Shop on!
Today you are lucky to find a cash register (aka service desk) randomly placed in a department store so that you can make a purchase. Many restaurants have signs near the entrance encouraging hungry customers to "Seat Yourself."
Calling a bank, credit card company or insurance provider can be a nightmare. Better not be in a hurry; you are bound to be put on hold. Some businesses provide an answering message that actually announces how long you will be waiting before speaking to someone. "Currently customers are experiencing a wait time of XX minutes."
Yesterday I received customer service among the best ever. Perhaps there is still hope.
For many years I have purchased apparel through certain mail order clothing companies, two in particular. When I first moved to the East in 1990, I needed clothing items which I hadn't needed while living in the desert -- long underwear, weather-tough outer shoes -- and the most convenient process was to order them. The design quality was unwaveringly high. The fit was perfect. The material was top notch. Plus I didn't have to go anywhere to get them and the items arrived in a couple of days. I was hooked.
I continue to order from these two companies, one store more than the other now. Products from my preferred provider are traditional and timeless. The second company has begun to appeal to younger shoppers. In either case, I know that if a product is less than expected, customer service can help.
Several years ago, I bought wool trousers which were comfortable, stylish and wore like the dickens. Once while phoning in a new order, I mentioned to the customer service lady that the lining in a pair I previously purchased had not held up and was torn and uncomfortable. "Send them back," she offered. "We will replace them." "But I've worn them a great deal," I said. "Doesn't matter. If you are unhappy with a product, you can always return it." I sent the pants back and received a new, identical pair at no charge.
A few years later, I took a nasty fall on the job and ruined a rather new pair of chinos. The knee was torn and damaged. I called to order a new pair, expecting fully to purchase them myself. When I told the order desk what had happened, I laughed at how badly I felt because I loved the trousers. "Send them back," he offered. "But the pants weren't damaged until I fell," I said. "Doesn't matter. If a product is unsatisfactory, you can always return it. I sent the pants back and received a new, identical pair, again at no charge.
Yesterday, my brother casually remarked about how some jeans he had ordered last winter (from the same company) were too short. "I think they must have shrunk," he said. "I'll put these in the donation bag." He was holding the jeans along with the original paperwork. Looking at the order form, I said, "These were ordered in February 2012. I'll call and see if you can still return them."
I phoned the company and spoke to a soft-spoken customer service rep. He said that he was looking at my brother's order history and identified that particular order. "Can he return these?" I asked. "Of course. If at any time a product is unsatisfactory, we hope you will return it. We want satisfied customers." He then said, "Those jeans are now on sale at $10 less. Would you like another pair in a longer length?" My brother said, "Two pair." "Your order will be there in a few days. If you want to return the old pair, you will be credited with the original price. Is there anything else I can do for you today?"
I was shocked. "I must say your company provides extraordinary customer service. Thank you so much." Suddenly I felt a glimmer of hope for the future of shopping and business in general. To think that someone (1) listened to my story (2) suggested a solution and (3) did so quickly and politely is remarkable.
As long as there are companies such as this who continue to value the customer, I will not give up on civilization as we know it.
Shop on!
Friday, September 28, 2012
The Art of Communication
Once upon a time, people referred to "the art of conversation." However, since conversation no longer exists, I've modified the phrase accordingly.
Communication refers to two or more persons interacting with one another. It could be by talking face-to-face, by letter, telephone or email. The key word would seem to be "interacting" meaning that all persons participate.
Communication has grown weak. People share information with others about their lives. They can post this information -- even including photos -- on so-called social media for the world to see. They can send the information electronically. But this endeavor is entirely one-sided.
Talking to a friend recently about the way we interact, I was reminded of the fine art of letter writing, an ancient practice. Along with the manufacture of buggy whips and corset stays, letter writing belonged to a society long ago and far away. People used to WRITE letters. This required that the writer have in his possession several items also now extinct. Among the items was stationery, fine writing paper that had a distinctive appearance, perhaps a monogram. Writers also carefully chose a writing instrument, sometimes a fountain pen which contained liquid ink. Such writing may also have necessitated a blotter. Or the writer may have selected a ball point pen, but that was about as casual as the process allowed.
The writer then had to THINK about what it was that he/she wanted to say. Sometimes great thought went into such a task, deciding the tone of the message and outlining it clearly. When my father passed away in 1975, we found among his possessions a letter written to him in 1924 by his grandmother on his 21st birthday. It was a personal message about how to live his life with pride, a straight-forward, simple message that could not have been shared in any other manner.
Letters written home during wartime were often remarkable. These were designed to reassure those at home that the soldier was doing well. The letters might have been written while he was pinned down in a trench or lingering in a military hospital. Perhaps this effort was to be his last communication. Perhaps the writer merely wanted to comfort his family. Wartime letters were often the last attempt to say what was obvious to the family and perhaps all that would remain.
There are love letters. Letters of praise. Letters of congratulations. Writing is the only method of communication that endures.
I don't mean, of course, that we should abandon our computers. Love them or hate them, these devices are here to stay, at least until evolution takes us further. But even though we utilize technology, we should employ the same skills as writers of the past. Think about what we are going to say. Put the words together in such a way that the other person can recognize that we care and that we want to hear back from them. Carefully execute the document so that, if it is rediscovered in 50 years, we would not be embarrassed by its contents.
We live in a world of sound bytes. We interrupt each other in conversation because we can't wait to say what is on our minds. We leave comments on news articles/stories published online because we feel that our words are somehow important and relevant to the issue. We send text messages to each other like "im at the store" without regard to (1) spelling (2) punctuation or (3) importance, merely because technology permits us to do so. If we telephone and are unable to reach someone, we leave some silly message in voice mail rather than call back and speak in person.
I don't see this deterioration in communication reversing any time soon.
But wouldn't it be nice if we could resume the art of written communication? I do my best to keep in touch with others, even if it's just a note enclosed in my Christmas card. Which brings to mind the scourge of modern living, the "form" Christmas letter, about which I have screamed before and will likely do again. Don't bother sending these. No one cares. If you can't write a line or two on the bottom of the card, don't send a two-page dossier about all that has happened since last Christmas. It's insulting to receive.
Try to think about scribbling a few words instead of sending an email. You might be surprised at the results.
Communication refers to two or more persons interacting with one another. It could be by talking face-to-face, by letter, telephone or email. The key word would seem to be "interacting" meaning that all persons participate.
Communication has grown weak. People share information with others about their lives. They can post this information -- even including photos -- on so-called social media for the world to see. They can send the information electronically. But this endeavor is entirely one-sided.
Talking to a friend recently about the way we interact, I was reminded of the fine art of letter writing, an ancient practice. Along with the manufacture of buggy whips and corset stays, letter writing belonged to a society long ago and far away. People used to WRITE letters. This required that the writer have in his possession several items also now extinct. Among the items was stationery, fine writing paper that had a distinctive appearance, perhaps a monogram. Writers also carefully chose a writing instrument, sometimes a fountain pen which contained liquid ink. Such writing may also have necessitated a blotter. Or the writer may have selected a ball point pen, but that was about as casual as the process allowed.
The writer then had to THINK about what it was that he/she wanted to say. Sometimes great thought went into such a task, deciding the tone of the message and outlining it clearly. When my father passed away in 1975, we found among his possessions a letter written to him in 1924 by his grandmother on his 21st birthday. It was a personal message about how to live his life with pride, a straight-forward, simple message that could not have been shared in any other manner.
Letters written home during wartime were often remarkable. These were designed to reassure those at home that the soldier was doing well. The letters might have been written while he was pinned down in a trench or lingering in a military hospital. Perhaps this effort was to be his last communication. Perhaps the writer merely wanted to comfort his family. Wartime letters were often the last attempt to say what was obvious to the family and perhaps all that would remain.
There are love letters. Letters of praise. Letters of congratulations. Writing is the only method of communication that endures.
I don't mean, of course, that we should abandon our computers. Love them or hate them, these devices are here to stay, at least until evolution takes us further. But even though we utilize technology, we should employ the same skills as writers of the past. Think about what we are going to say. Put the words together in such a way that the other person can recognize that we care and that we want to hear back from them. Carefully execute the document so that, if it is rediscovered in 50 years, we would not be embarrassed by its contents.
We live in a world of sound bytes. We interrupt each other in conversation because we can't wait to say what is on our minds. We leave comments on news articles/stories published online because we feel that our words are somehow important and relevant to the issue. We send text messages to each other like "im at the store" without regard to (1) spelling (2) punctuation or (3) importance, merely because technology permits us to do so. If we telephone and are unable to reach someone, we leave some silly message in voice mail rather than call back and speak in person.
I don't see this deterioration in communication reversing any time soon.
But wouldn't it be nice if we could resume the art of written communication? I do my best to keep in touch with others, even if it's just a note enclosed in my Christmas card. Which brings to mind the scourge of modern living, the "form" Christmas letter, about which I have screamed before and will likely do again. Don't bother sending these. No one cares. If you can't write a line or two on the bottom of the card, don't send a two-page dossier about all that has happened since last Christmas. It's insulting to receive.
Try to think about scribbling a few words instead of sending an email. You might be surprised at the results.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)