At this point in my life, I write to organize my own thoughts. If I don't write them, my thoughts as I respond to what I read swirl in circles, repeat, and go nowhere. They are usually \odd enough, and complicated enough, to not comport well with casual conversation. So I chew on them, make the same "discoveries" repeatedly, and because the ideas don't build into anything they eventually go away.
Last year, I read Bill McKibben's review of Bill Gates' climate book in the NY Times. I had been looking forward to the book, but the review cooled my enthusiasm and I didn't get to reading Gates' book for half a year. When I did, I found it to be exactly what I had been looking for in climate literature: a "roadmap" for solutions, much like the ones I had worked on in my business career. This raised the question: why was McKibben's review so unfavorable (and why did I let it persuade me)?
I thought I would write a short essay to capture my thoughts. It turned out to be longer than I expected. A year and 26,000 words later, it's in a shape I think may be worth sharing. This site is primarily conceived as a vehicle for making the essay available to read and discuss.
If you're game, please take a look and leave a comment.
My background
I studied Government, then Literature in university, and was pretty sure it would never help me make a living. But if I look back on the various careers that I've had - teaching in Japan, technical writer, "documentation specialist" (?), "business analyst," "management consultant" (??!) - the only skill that has ever helped me is close reading and, possibly, listening. (I'm sure not all of my co-workers will agree.)
I'm now back in northern Japan, in the city of Sendai, teaching English and reading more than I used to when I was working more. The essay on this website is part of my attempt to see if all of my experiences to date might somehow hang together. If I get further in this exploration, I hope to add more works in the future (and deserve the plural in the site's URL).
Comments