This is rarely talked about, at least not around me where I look. When you make something, something expressive, you are going to be misinterpreted. It is inevitable. I'm not saying lay down your white-out brush and never attempt clarity. But if you are always breaking and papering over and whitewashing your efforts to make sure they cannot possibly be misread, what you are doing is technical writing, not expressive writing.

Someone's going to misread you. The best you can do is the best you can do. Sometimes you will have to leave in the possibility of an interpretation you don't like, one you see, one that's painful to know is latent in this, because you do not have the skill to recapture what you would lose if you surgically removed this possibility.

There is no perfect creation. The closest creation to perfect is the millionth, not the millionth revision of one.

These days

The claim that there's too much political correctness these days raises my hackles. On the one hand, I'm really not a fan of "correctness" to begin with. True is true. What's correct? Someone's opinion. But my attitude here is nothing new at all. It isn't "these days." It's my permanent attitude, and I'd apply it to every era of human history.

If you're in a minority and you say "political correctness these days," I will fully sympathize, for the reason I just stated. For you, I will not assume that "THESE DAYS" is code for being unwilling to consider yourself prejudiced when you are. To state that differently, if a lot of prejudice gets directed at you, I will not infer that the actual problem is in you. Furthermore, I do agree that there is something going on THESE DAYS that's relatively different from how things were a generation ago: extreme polarization.

If you're a white guy (doesn't mean you aren't in any minorities, but bear with me) and I hear "political correctness THESE DAYS" as a complaint coming from you, I will be seeing Trump's face in my mind, unfortunately.

It's a double standard, I know. It is not strictly applied. But "political correctness THESE DAYS" is automatically suspicious to me, and I'm very willing to sympathize, but, see, I need an actual reason. I need a reason to see those words as something other than prejudice.

To NOT get this response from me, all you need to do, really, is talk about polarization instead. I don't care who you are or what country you live in. Polarization is quickly a sickness. Extreme polarization is ultimately worse than COVID-19.

As for political correctness THESE DAYS, a lot of it is about making sure people who are not like you feel welcome in society. If there are a few verbal misfires, it's well worth it for that larger goal. Most of the change (the "these days"), if we filter out polarization, is absolutely needed, even critical.

We've really gotta watch out for this ready assumption that there are two sides to every coin, and therefore two genres of human, one for each side, and that's that. Come on, fellow beings. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are not a flat surface.

There are not two sides to every story. There are more than two sides to every story. There is not a reason for everything. There are multiple factors behind everything. There is not one causal sequel for an event. There are multiple causal sequelae, probably impossible to list, because there are so many.

That's how reality actually works. Binary numbers are great, but splitting a nation or a world into two parties is an unhelpful fantasy.

So no, I am not worried about people becoming more mindful of others these days. More of that, please! I'm worried about people who stop thinking, who lose curiosity, who are suddenly convinced they have nothing to learn. I worry whenever it's the general belief that to stop thinking is correct and good—versus incorrect and bad, the only other possibility, apparently—which means now we are not mindful enough.

And that is not a kind of person. It is no indication of being on a right side or a wrong side. This mindset, the way it feels to be in it, does not carry a barcode that identifies whether you're mistaken or not. It isn't one kind of person who thinks in black and white. That is what humanity is like. We've all got to watch out for it, and help each other be better, more observant, wiser.

Debatiary

I've noticed there are at least 5 quite different kinds of debate. What they're called isn't that important, so don't mind my names too much.

• Gladiatior
• Procedural
• Feminist
• Academic
• Collaborative

Televised debates are almost always gladiator debates. Representatives of factions duke it out, striving to show each other up and seize prime moments for one-liners. Two things set this debate style apart from others. First, it's done for the spectacle. Everything is pitched, above all, for the wider audience: pitched to persuade, pitched to win favor. Second, no one on stage can ever admit they're wrong or express much doubt. Not only would such an admission seem weak, but the speaker making it would be seen as failing to represent—or even as betraying—their ardent supporters, and they'd be punished.

The debates that go on in courtrooms and houses of deliberation are what I call procedural. They have clear rules that must be followed closely. These are similar to games, with distinct moves. They have a lot in common with gladiator debates, in that, for example, lawyers aren't primarily concerned with sharing the complete truth. Participants want to win for their clients or constituents, and they will use persuasion to do so. But procedural debates can also have an objective focus. A jury's purpose is to select the true story. A good lawmaker wants the law that works best for everyone.

Feminist debates are similar to what's seen in classroom discussions. Everyone has a perspective and this is politely respected. There is not a pressing need to establish fact versus illusion. That would be seen as rude. Another place this style is seen is in group therapy sessions. The emphasis is on sharing, respect, listening, and turn-taking.

Academic debates prioritize theories, interpretations, argumentation, and evidence. They have some of that in common with procedural debates and feminist debates. They are often competitive in the sense that participants will take clear positions and promote those. Ever human, academic debaters can still become offended when someone doesn't agree, which introduces an ironic element of interpersonal squabbling and feuding where, in theory, it ought to have disappeared.

Collaborative debates are what I consider true debates. They take all the best qualities of the others. Participants strive for truth, uncovering it by sharing and listening to and critiquing evidence. They take positions, but they freely change these, and they know that they can play Devil's Advocate and they won't offend their fellow participants. Everyone there knows that they are all there to advance their knowledge together. Winning means learning something new, helping to build a product, or even just imagining in a fresh way.

That last kind is rarely seen, except maybe between two or three close collaborators.

Stuck appearing

I have a recurring dream that there's a class I've been forgetting to go to all semester. However well I do in the others, this one is an F, probably an unavoidable F, come to think of it (how do I keep blotting it out so completely?), and I bet there's a test today or tomorrow. Fear rises. I don't remember how I'd find out when the next test is, or what's on it. Where did I put the syllabus? Don't I have one? It would be so embarrassing to go and see the professor—I probably won't. Sometimes, the dream includes the detail that I never finished high school, so I'm back in high school as an adult to get this out of the way, and I'm the only one like that, which makes me self-conscious. At first, I'm glad to finally get around to this. Then I realize I've somehow completely forgotten that class all quarter, and I'm going to fail it. So I'm back in high school remedially, but I'm failing it.

Considering that I spend so much time teaching high schoolers, and there actually were classes in college just like that, the only thing that's really surprising is that after I wake up, I still fully believe there's that panicky class I haven't been going to, and it takes a few minutes to convince myself it isn't true. On the other hand, I haven't finished my Master's project in 8 years and counting, so there's that.

This time, my mother was driving me to school. We stopped at a supermarket and spent a strange amount of time there, so I prepared mentally to arrive at lunch. She took a photo of the checkout conveyor and put it on Facebook (she's never used social media, and it didn't exist then). Back in the car whirring down the main road to school, I closed my eyes and imagined I was on a yellow bus; and I was, looking out the window. I tried to think about less typical things to photo and post (in the dream apparently my mom's conveyor belt snapshot was a total cliche). I fell asleep. When I woke up, my brother was to my left driving the car, his present age. "What are you doing here? How did you get here?" I asked. He sort of chuckled and said, "Hm. How DID I get here?"