Second Thoughts on First Impressions

We all know the cliché, the one that usually goes something like this, “You won’t have a second chance to make a first impression.” There is of course irrefutable logic tied to that notion, but if one digs more deeply into the concept, thought-provoking flags begin to wave, at least they do if someone as accomplished as Amor Towles takes up the challenge.

In one scene in Towles’ novel, A Gentleman in Moscow, the Count (the gentleman of the title) is speaking with a woman who on first meeting little impressed him. But, as she reveals a telling detail of her background, the Count muses on the virtues of withholding judgement on first meetings..

“After all, what can a first impression tell us about someone we’ve just met for a minute in the lobby of the hotel? For that matter, what can a first impression tell us about anyone? Why, no more than a chord can tell us about Beethoven, or a brushstroke about Botticelli. By their very nature, human beings are so capricious, so complex, so delightfully contradictory, that they deserve not only our consideration, but our reconsideration – and our unwavering determination to withhold our opinion until we have engaged with them in every possible setting at every possible hour.”

I think it’s unlikely that many of us will meet someone new while celebrating tomorrow’s feast (with Covid-19 now as our Emperor), but I’ve tucked the Count’s pondering into a safe corner, just in case.

Update: While sorting through images of my 1987 adventures in Finland and turning them into words, I realized that my flight from Helsinki to Kuopio was so unusual, and so perfectly timed, that it deserves a post of its own. I’m nearly finished with that story. I’ll put that part of the story up later today.

Free Travel Addendum, and Note

After writing about my jaunt to Jerusalem, Kuopio, and Oxford, I dug back and discovered I had gone on eleven other trips in 1987, so I soared through more clouds that year than I would have guessed. Each journey brought back wisps of memory, one of which made me cringe. Below are the trips and a single memory from each.

For those interested in statistical trivia, I estimate my travels that year fell near the medial amount of jetting around done by other researchers in my field at the time. Now to the list.

January 14 – 15 to St Louis to lecture at Washington University. (I had fine conversations with the renowned pharmacologist I was collaborating with at the time.)

January 27 – 29 to Buffalo site visit to evaluate a grant application. (I caught up on the life of a friend, a graduate student I’d known at Wisconsin.)

March 23 to Montreal to lecture at University of Montreal. (First trip to the famous hypertension research unit there, and I was most impressed by how vibrant the city below the city was, the tremendous underground shopping centers and more.)

March 30 – April 3 to Washington D.C. to participate in scientific meeting (Presented data my colleagues and I thought strongly supported our points of view).

May 20 – 21 to New York City to participate in conference on hypertension. (I was surprised by the rather clear anatomy and actions shown on the hotel’s regular television channels, probably cable.)

June 8 – 9 to Buffalo to participate in Vasopressin Workshop. (Serious group of participants yet pleasant times throughout.)

June 15 – 30 to Jerusalem, Kuopio, Oxford trip. (Described earlier.)

August 3 – 7 to Smuggler’s Notch, VT to participate vasopressin conference. (I came to love that pleasant town.)

August 17 – 19 to Colorado Springs to participate in collaborative research at the U.S. Olympic Training Center. (Learned from an exercise authority that a single set of weight lifting produces little effect. One must do multiple sets.)

October 13 – 16 to New Orleans to participate in scientific sessions dealing with hypertension research. (Ate my first poor boy  sandwich.)

November 16 – 19 to Anaheim to participate in American Heart Scientific Sessions. (Having been to the convention center for several meetings, all I recall now is the huge acres of exhibits, including a number of women in leotards exercising on treadmills.)

December 15 -17 to Louisville to lecture at University of Louisville. (Exposed how little I know of horse racing and embarrassed myself at a dinner with three of my hosts. “Why does the menu have all these ‘Churchill’ specials,”I asked, before adding, “We’re a long way from England.”)

 

Additional Note:

A team is now working on rebuilding this website. I’ll keep you posted. Also, the Kuopio story will be up soon. Thanks for staying with me.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

 

8 – Free Travel

Two decisions of mine, both made relatively early in life, provided means for me to travel a bit over the years, mostly on somebody else’s dollar. The first was my decision to enlist in the Air Force at age nineteen, a wise commitment that sent me zig-zagging through a number of states before being shipped off to Germany for three engaging years, that interval offering ample opportunity for me to poke around Deutschland from top to bottom, and even to spend months of my furloughs nosing through a dozen other countries, all courtesy of Uncle Sam.

My second path to cost-free travel opened widely when I adopted a physiological laboratory as my second home. When engaging in research, I soon discovered, junkets are part of the process, especially those important trips to national and international meetings, all often paid for by grants, or, in special cases, by those who organize a special meeting. This, of course, is not the only trigger that, in normal times, sends hordes of researchers into the skies. Colleagues at a distance often ignite similar sparks. Those folks, being interested in your work and eager to learn of your most recent findings, frequently send invitations for you to lecture in their department, or to demonstrate a certain technique you’ve developed, or possibly to offer value in other ways. The hosts, of course, almost always pick up your travel tab, and usually add a nice honorarium as well.

Such journeys not infrequently involve multiple stops. It’s fairly common for one to hop about while following an uneven route put together with little advanced planning. Here’s a simple example of my own from years ago. Early in 1987, I marked on my calendar the June days I was to be in Kuopio to examine a doctoral student at the university. This obligation prompted me to follow up on a conversation I’d had with an Oxford professor some time earlier.

That professor had introduced himself at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Dallas. While studying a poster of mine, he expressed interest in my data and urged me to notify him the next time I would be crossing the Atlantic, adding that he would be pleased to arrange for me to lecture at his university, providing I could find time for a stop in England. So, after my Kuopio event had been confirmed, I dutifully alerted the man, and he in turn scheduled my lecture for just a few days after my Kuopio obligation.

Not long after these developments, a third option came out of the blue when I was surprised by an invitation to speak at a symposium on catecholamines in Jerusalem, the dates of that symposium conveniently being only days before my Kuopio commitment.  Now, to be candid, I had done little investigation of catecholamines, and those compounds weren’t really a major interest of mine, but the opportunity appealed to me, for I had never been to Jerusalem, or even to the Middle East, historic grounds to be sure. The timing was good, the location appealing, so I sent my acceptance to the symposium’s organizers with considerable zest.

With all in place at last, my fluctuating flight plan was finalized to include stops in Tel Aviv (with bus to Jerusalem), Helsinki (with private plane to Kuopio), and London (with train to Oxford). It proved to be a eventful journey in many ways, but perhaps the most memorable event turned out to be my joust with the doctoral candidate in Kuopio. I’ll relive that incident next, but in the meantime here’s a hint of what’s to come. The person examining a Finnish doctoral student is called the student’s opponent. From the bulk of evidence, that’s exactly what I turned out to be.

Housekeeping Note

I’m sorry to have been away for a couple of weeks, which in Blog Land apparently is about equivalent to a cosmic year. I’ve been entangled in a string of urgent but not necessary important threads that have kept me away. I did manage to write the ending to the Brandenburg Gate story, but have decided not to post it quite yet. I’ll explain when it appears later. But a substitute is ready to go and will be up in minutes. It also deals with travel.

If all goes well in the next few days, I’ll have up and running a system that will alert to those wishing to be know when I post something new. I’ll let you know when that’s accomplished.

Thanks for your patience.

7 – Berlin and the Brandenburg Gate

Up to the time I enlisted in the Air Force at age nineteen, I had rambled through only two states, both with names ending in Dakota. After my basic training in Texas and a later course in weather observing in Illinois, I was shipped (on a seven-day waterlogged and bumpy cruise) to Germany for my three-year assignment with a weather squadron. I began planting footprints in other countries soon after I arrived.

As I neared the end of my lengthy stay in Germany, still having an itch to travel, I set out to explore unseen targets, namely Berlin, Copenhagen, and Amsterdam. I was reminded of this plan recently when I unearthed my 201 file (a three-quarter inch thick relic that contains all of my military orders) and found evidence that my 20-day trip to visit those three cities began on February 21, 1955.

In the file were the yellowed documents, written in both English and Russian, that had enabled me to travel through East Germany to Berlin, the city at the time lying deep within the Russian-controlled part of post-war Germany. I didn’t have a passport then, didn’t need one as a U. S. airman able to travel freely through most of post-war Europe, but without my bilingual documents I would not have been able to penetrate the Russian zone and get to Berlin.

Other than a number of train stops within the Red zone, where my papers were checked determinedly by grim-faced Russian soldiers, my trip to Berlin was uneventful. I disembarked in West Berlin, the section of the city that had been subdivided after the war into American, British, and French occupation sectors. I found a small hotel in the American sector, dropped off my suitcase, and wandered through the neighborhood. The city had been heavily scarred by bombardment during WWII, and rehabilitation efforts were in full swing throughout the area. Heavy machinery rumbled. Flocks of cranes poked into the sky.

It was dark by the time I found myself in front of the Brandenburg Gate, which stood roughly on the border between West and East Berlin (the latter under Communist control and the grim Wall yet to be built). The Gate had been heavily charred and nicked by bombings so it wasn’t a handsome sight, yet the colossus retained its elemental grandeur. It stretches over 200 feet across a broad avenue and rises up over 60 feet, where it was topped at that time by the tangled remains of four life-sized horses pulling a goddess in a chariot. Five separate passageways lead through the Gate, which is almost 40 feet deep.

As impressive as that huge gate was, the scene around it somehow affected me more. I stood facing the gate from the west. Beyond it to the east stood a clutter of buildings still shattered by the bombings that had ended a decade earlier. Restorative efforts had been minimal. Few lights were visible in that depressing scene, and a gloomy darkness loomed above it all. In contrast, the buildings behind me, a good number rebuilt, were ablaze with light, and the gleaming sky reflected their brilliance.

The difference between East and West Berlin was that stark. No wonder a continual stream of East Germans crossed daily into West Berlin and did not return, a continual one-way flow until the infamous Wall was built in 1961 to stop the bleeding. By that time some three million East Germans had fled to the west through West Berlin, many staying in that city and others making their way through East Germany to freedom.

Why had they fled? For a number of reasons. The Russians had gutted East German factories and lugged the equipment home. Communists naturally had taken over the government. Private property was seized from landowners and redistributed to workers. Industrial and crop production, suddenly under control of the state, plummeted. The economy, with the newly minted Ostmark, was tanking. Meanwhile, the western part of Germany, being reconstructed by the Allies (the United States, Britain, and France), was blooming with Capitalism.

That’s all for now. I have a more personal story to relate from that particular time Berlin, along with other stories from that same journey, but I’ll hold those for a while, because I had another close encounter with the Brandenburg Gate, one that’s scratched deep in my memory and demands to be told next. Stay tuned.

6 – Vanishing Comments and a Sincere Apology

 

I’m pretty good at turning my computer on, and I enjoy tapping the keyboard when the machine behaves, but that’s about the limit of what I can do. A huge expanse of the digital world lies beyond me. Asking me to do anything requiring technical skills, like constructing a website, is like asking a rooster to land a jetliner.

Nevertheless, with some help I did put together this rickety site. It shakes and rattles, making me nervous and frustrated. One of its clever tricks is to destroy, or maybe even simply refuse to recognize, any comments readers attempt to put on it. I know some folks have made comments. They told me so, but my dear dashboard disputes that and insists I’ve received zero comments.

I need to get this fixed, and when I find competent help, I will. I’ll also try to find a way to alert anyone interested when I post something new.

I’m sorry for this mess, which developed despite my best intentions. If you would like to reach me, a good email address is kengoetz4@gmail.com

Thanks!

5 – Donald Trump, Pro and Con

Donald Trump – Pro and Con

A friend and former neighbor of mine, having read my first two blogs, emailed me asking if I was for, or against, Trump. That jolted me because I’d never thought in quite those terms. I’ve been focusing on a larger screen, one with Trump as a single character in a sizeable cast.

So I zeroed in on Trump himself and ended up giving him decidedly mixed scores. He earned credit for surviving Big Media, the powerful constellation that tossed Obama on its shoulders and ran interference for him during his two terms. Now this group tackles The Donald on every play, the same bunch that happily stirred the FBI’s Russian story until it finally collapsed and turned back to bite its perpetrators.

Trump lost points for his injudicious Tweets, for his unbelievable egotism, for his speeches lapsing into trite expressions: “best ever,” “very good,” “amazing,” and so on ad nauseam, whenever talking about his efforts. The man slid even lower when I added in his often un-presidential behavior.

On the other hand, I like what Trump has done with NATO (our allies now pay billions more), with China trade, with North American trade, with the Mideast, with tax cuts, and more.

So, Former Neighbor, it turns out that I’m neither for nor against Trump. Having said that, I now go back to my big screen and spot Joe Biden standing to the left. I check him out and find I’m wasting my time.  I’m not for or against him either. Let me explain.

As I said in my first post, I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who moves into the White House for the next four years is less important than the furniture he brings in with him. So I went to the democrats’ platform and window shopped, checking out the socialistic specials. To be honest, Bernie’s kitchen table, though very expensive, looked wobbly, and Elizabeth’s Native American bed made me shudder, yet there they were in line to be loaded into Joe’s moving van.

I will watch the election returns tomorrow with great interest.

4 – To Leningrad with the Finns (conclusion)

My senses sharpened when we finally arrived in Leningrad. Nearing the center of the city, we saw few cars on the streets. The cars were mostly small, and some veered around in odd ways. Buses were numerous, mostly unwashed, and often with multiple dents.

Our tour included rooms in what had been described as one of the city’s best tourist hotels. Its large front windows were grimy. Its lobby had little charm. Martti and I shared a double room. Assuming it came with listening devices, we made little comments to our supposed KGB listeners.

We had dinner in the hotel’s spacious restaurant that night. A large staff of waiters scurried about taking orders and delivering dinners. But other doings were afoot. Waiters would stop at a table, lift a plate to retrieve something underneath, hustle away, and return moments later to place something else under the same plate. Western currency was being traded for black market rubles openly. Bribes likely had been made to keep the authorities at bay.

After some hesitation, after all this was Russia, Martti nervously placed some markkas under his plate and nodded to a passing waiter. His markkas promptly were replaced with rubles at something like three times the official exchange rate.

Leningrad became a blur of elaborate buildings, pedestrian-filled streets, very few restaurants (we ate only one dinner outside the hotel), the majesty and enormity of the Hermitage Museum, pure awe while standing near the remains of Dostoevsky and Tchaikovsky, and Sunday evening subway rides to and from a fabulous ballet performance (our tickets amazingly inexpensive).

On Monday morning Martti and I boarded our return bus and watched our fellow passengers, bedraggled to a man, come in. Their morning greetings, Hyvää huomenta, were typically lyrical, but grunted painfully and with scratched voices.  As our bus left the city, conversations commenced, softly at first but growing louder as details of the days, or rather the nights, came to light. Martti translated some of the more salacious details for me. A good time had been had by all!

We again stopped in a number of towns to be checked by military types and have the slanted mirror rolled around our bus to make sure no citizen was slipping about unlawfully. Then we stopped at the border for the now familiar routine. The same sturdy guard I’d dealt with earlier was on duty. He again hand checked my pockets and found a ruble bill I had missed. “A souvenir, huh?” he said, giving it to me and patting my shoulder. We crossed the Finnish side in a breeze and returned to Kuopio.

In 1948, E.B. White wrote in The New Yorker, “Socialism holds itself responsible to the people for the use and management of resources, and in so doing is likely to end up (as it has in Russia) by managing everything, including the citizen’s private life, his thoughts, his arts, and his science.” Decades later I saw firsthand the accuracy of his words.

A letter in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal (30 Oct 2020) describes Hungary in the 1950s. “The Communist government claimed 100% employment. Everyone had a job, regardless of qualification, received a paycheck, and survived.  Ultimately the government ran out of money, the system collapsed, the unemployment rate soared, and we all know the rest of the story.”

3 – To Leningrad with the Finns

While I was in Kuopio during the late 1980s, a professor friend of mine suggested we sign up for a long weekend bus tour to Leningrad, as the city then was known. I agreed immediately for I had never been to Russia.

Martti and I sketched an itinerary that included a visit to the Hermitage Museum, a ballet performance, and other options, all of which sounded great to me. Beyond that, I knew a number of my favorite Russians were buried in that city, and I was eager to visit their grave sites, especially those of Dostoevsky and Tchaikovsky.

When we arrived at the bus station, I was surprised to find that most of our fellow passengers were men ranging from perhaps 17 to 40 years of age. The Finnish male crowd puzzled me. They didn’t strike me as a group yearning for culture. Martti, hearing their conversations, explained their goals. Those guys were heading to Leningrad for two reasons: cheap vodka and cheap women.

The southeasterly bus trip was relatively short, less that 250 miles one way, which is about the same distance that Helsinki, the Finnish capital, lies southwest of Kuopio. When we approached the Russian border, Martti prepared  me for what lay ahead as we filled out the required entry forms.

The Russian border guards would be strict, he said. We passengers would be forced to get out while the guards searched the bus. I looked around. There were lots of neat hiding places. Each seat had a little flap of cloth on the headrest. I thought how easy it would be to stow a few Western bills, say U.S. dollars or Finnish markkas, under them and outsmart the Russian Bear. Ditto with the roll-down map above the driver’s head, I thought rather smugly.

Armed guards stood alert as our bus slowed for the border. After quick clearance from the Finnish side, we crossed over the line, the bus stopped, and we all got out. While we were waiting to show our passports and be processed, I watched two guards climb into the bus. One moved to the back, another stayed in front. They began moving slowly toward each other, stopping at each row, looking under the seats, pulling up the little cloth headrests, taking their time. And yes, they even unrolled the map above the driver’s seat.

Another Russian showed up with a low pushcart upon which a large slanted mirror was attached. He rolled it slowly around the base of the bus, the mirror providing him a clear view underneath it. No one could slip into the country by hiding there.

In line for my clearance, I had emptied my pockets as instructed. The stocky guard grinned when he saw my U.S. passport. “Why you come with Finnish group?” he asked. I explained. He bantered a bit, proud of his English, and then without warning stuck his hand deep into one of my front pockets. He then hand checked every one. Welcome to the USSR. Da!

After we all finally were vetted, we boarded our bus and drove on. No passenger entered or left the bus on our final leg, but we were stopped in various towns where a military type came in to check our passports. And at every stop a little cart with mirror atop was pushed slowly around the bus. Martti explained that Russian citizens needed to get permission to travel between towns. Big Brother was making sure none of them sneaked about. That’s enough for this post. I’ll finish this story later.

1 – Stew of the Day

Let’s begin with a question. Is anything troubling you these days? Maybe the upcoming election? Or maybe the COVID-19 crisis? Or civil unrest? As for me, having watched last week’s final debate, I’m stewing about November 3.

I’ve voted in more presidential elections than I care to count. The candidates haven’t always thrilled me, but never have I seen such sour alternatives as our two main choices this year, one being the egotistical, un-presidential man now occupying the Oval Office (“a self-obsessed blowhard” according to a recent column in the Wall Street Journal). His opponent is a fading ancient with signs of cerebral inertia and a spotty political record stretching back almost half a century (a span that fertilized the lush money tree for his family). If this pair doesn’t make you queasy, you have a stronger stomach than I.

I was a Jack Kennedy democrat when I came out of university, and my mind is still comfortable with what the democratic party stood for back then. But the Democrats, especially lately, have shifted far too leftward for me to embrace now. On the other side, most Republicans stumble around with glum faces, wringing their hands and accomplishing little. Sadly, I claim no political home.

Beyond that, neither candidate lights up on my personality scale. Admittedly, Trump can be charming, but that’s hardly his normal state. Although Biden’s demeanor generally is calmer, he too erupts with flashes of anger. As I see it, if the November vote rests on likableness alone (or more precisely unlikableness), Biden will steamroller Trump something like 60 to 40.

My problem this election, and I’m hardly alone, is to decide which candidate to vote against. It’s a tough job to find out what’s really going on in Washington. Deception is now de rigueur in D.C. Politicians seem to have reached a new high, or low, for lying. They stare directly into television cameras and spew utter crap with the straightest of faces. “Analysts” on television spout their own biased dogma 24/7.

I limit my exposure to TV, but I watch enough to cover the spectrum of views by shifting among channels. My sampling is spotty, but I’ve watched the gamut enough to realize that most networks are obviously left of center (MSNBC, and CNN being farthest left, followed by NBC, ABC, CBS, and PBS to lesser degrees). Newspapers are no different. Even major sheets like the New York Times, Washington Post, and most large city dailies, season their “news” stories with democrat-approved salt and pepper. I balance this heavy left load with two sources of right-of-center news, namely the Wall Street Journal and Fox News.

This left-right difference was glaringly apparent to me during the extended Trump/Russian collusion accusations, which I followed closely as it slowly unraveled and the malfeasance gradually shifted from Trump and his associates to the FBI itself, and beyond. In retrospect, this particular saga was reported more accurately by my right-of-center sources.

After evaluating the obvious flaws in each presidential candidate, and other matters, I’ve come to the conclusion that the guy who moves into the White House for the next four years is less important than the furniture he brings in with him. I’ll explain in future blogs.