Your Sunday Evening Scripture Study


I met my old lover on the street last night. She seemed so glad to see me. I just smiled.

And we talked about some old times, and we drank ourselves some beers. Still crazy after all these years.

Oh, still crazy. After all these years.

I’m not the kind of man who tends to socialize. I seem to lean on old, familiar ways. And I ain’t no fool for love songs that whisper in my ears.

Still crazy after all these years.

Four in the morning. Crapped out. Yawning. Longing my life away.

I’ll never worry. Why should I?

It’s all gonna fade.

Now I sit by my window and I watch the cars. I fear I’ll do some damage one fine day. But I would not be convicted by a jury of my peers. Still crazy after all these years.

Oh, still crazy.

Still crazy…

…still crazy after all these years.

Here today.

Saying Goodbye

I’ve been gone for a while. In a few senses of that word.

Things change. Things end. Cities burn to the ground. Sometimes you look down afterward and find that the match was in your own hand. The comedy and the tragedy end the same way.

And, of course, my attention hasn’t been on this blog. I even forgot to schedule a Friday Musical Interlude for yesterday, meaning the first installment I’ve ever missed came right after “The Music Never Stopped.” Ha ha.

But I’m not done here. I apologize for the delay. More will come, and probably very soon. I’m thinking of reviewing all of the final Breaking Bad episodes if you’re interested…if only because this last batch has the potential to be pretty incredible, and it’ll be nice to chart the endgame of a show that’s glad to go out in its prime.

Yeah.

We’ll see.

I intend to finish my manuscript.

I intend to do a whole lotta work on a project I’ve yet to announce.

I intend to throw myself into my job.

I intend to get my shit together.

I intend, I intend, I intend.

I apologize.

A little patience. I have a lot I’d still like to say.

A little patience.

Anyway, just to end on a high note here, a very good friend of mine has released a game for iOS. It’s called Kid Tripp, and even if it stunk I’d be happy to promote it for him.

But it doesn’t stink. It’s actually really, really good. So good that I can’t stop playing it, even though I’m terrible at it.

It’s less than $1. If you could pick that up and support him — he’s got loads of great material in him to follow, and this one’s getting all manner of ace reviews — I know he’d appreciate it.

And I would too.

I’ll circle back around.

I promise.

Kid Tripp

Review: Earn More Tips on Your Very Next Shift, Steve DiGioia

Earn More Tips On Your Very Next Shift, Steve DiGioiaFTC Disclosure: I received a copy of this book in exchange for review. No money changed hands and all opinions presented here are my own.

Here’s something not many people know about me: I used to wait tables.

It wasn’t something I did for very long, thank goodness, but I was rather good at it, if my tips were any accurate measure of such a thing. I came home from work dead tired and drained, but I was making great money. I had had no training whatsoever, and it wasn’t a job I was interested in keeping, but I was doing very well at it.

Here’s why: waiting is customer service. That’s it. Once you wrap your head around that, it becomes a lot less intimidating. You might think the most important thing is to get the food to your tables quickly, or to make sure you’re refilling drinks before they have to ask, or to make pleasant conversation, and all of those are certainly good things, yes, but ultimately you’re there to, as Simon and Garfunkel once put it, keep the customer satisfied.

When that’s your priority, the job goes a lot more smoothly. Why? Because mistakes happen. That’s inevitable. Plates come out late. Steak is overcooked. Nobody told you you’re out of roasted beets. It happens, no matter how good a waiter you are, so you shouldn’t bank on providing a “perfect” dining experience. You can’t. You bank on providing a “pleasant” one, where mistakes are responded to in a professional and courteous way. As a diner you may not even remember all of the times you went out for a meal and had everything go silently right…but you will remember that one waiter who had to deal with something going wrong, and made it up to you. That sticks. That’s good service.

I had the chance to review Steve DiGioia’s new book, Earn More Tips On Your Very Next Shift, and was interested in doing so with my customer service background. It has a telling subtitle: “Even if you’re a bad waiter!”

What Steve means by this is kind of what I was getting at above: you can’t be Superman.* He’s not calling you a bad waiter because he thinks you show up to work reeking of cigarette smoke and scream profanities at customers you don’t like. He’s calling you a bad waiter because…well, you probably think you are. And if you think you are, you’re never going to get better, because it’s not a question of “being a bad waiter” so much as it is not being aware of how to improve.

Steve’s approach is interesting, because he doesn’t expect you to turn into a champion waiter overnight, or ever. Instead he lays out around twenty brief chapters of small adjustments you can make that will increase customer satisfaction. That’s all. Why? Because you’re in customer service. And that’s the whole point.

I like Steve’s advice, because it’s realistic. In the chapter about wine he doesn’t lay out every type and what it complements and how to describe it and demand that you memorize everything he says…instead, he instructs you to “cheat.” He wants you to instead learn only about a handful of wines that your restaurant offers. Why? Again, because it’s about customer service, and not about retaining a wealth of wine knowledge. If you know enough to suggest a good wine and answer a few basic questions, the customer will have his or her needs met…and that’s, again, the whole point.

A lot of what Steve has to say here applies to customer service in general. That’s a field I’ve found great success in, because I like to make people feel better. I can’t always fix their problem, and sometimes there’s genuinely not a problem to fix. But that’s okay, because what they want is to feel better. Something that small really does make the difference between someone who is good at their job, and someone who should probably move on to something they enjoy more.

His writing style is a big brusque, which can seem a little dismissive or callous, but ultimately he’s hammering home a very simple point: you can do better. There’s always one more thing to learn (whether it’s where the spare sippy cups are kept or how to get to the nearest bookstore) and you can always deploy that knowledge to make your customers happier…and thereby earn higher tips.

It’s a win-win-win: if you get more tips, you’re happier. If you’re getting more tips, that also means your customers are happier. And if your customers are happier, your restaurant benefits both from having those customers and from having a great waiter. It’s an excellent way to realign perspective, regardless of what line of work you’re in.

However the presentation of Earn More Tips is a bit lacking. Steve set out to write a book that you could read before a shift (it’s only around 80 pages long) and immediately put into practice what you’ve read. On that note, he’s succeeded. For someone looking for text that’s a bit more in-depth, citing research or social experiments, exploring the psychology of customer interaction…they might want to keep looking.

The book can sometimes read like a transcript of somebody giving a great PowerPoint presentation; it feels like you’re getting the overview without the details. Steve, I’m sure, would argue that that’s what he set out to do.** That’s totally fair. But, personally, I’d love to see a more in-depth followup designed to sit on a shelf and be referenced by managers building their staffs, to complement the approach of this one which is designed to be read in a car or a break room waiting for a shift to start.

There are also a few annoying spelling and grammatical issues, as well as some formatting choices that work against clarity. For instance, Steve’s major points are given box-outs to help them stand out. This is fine, except that they often rely on what came just before in the text, and sometimes the text that follows responds to it, meaning the eye is drawn to these boxes first, when really everything needs to be read in sequence anyway.

It’s not a major problem, but one worth pointing out. It’s certainly made up for by Steve’s conviction, and also the simple fact that he’s right; you really can do better, whoever you are, and whatever you do. His advice is simple, because it doesn’t take much to give somebody a better night than they would have had otherwise.

If Steve’s book had been out when I was a waiter, I could have learned quite a bit from it. But that’s nothing compared to what it could have taught my fellow servers. Maybe I’ll buy them some copies now. They’re probably still there…

FTC Disclosure: I received a copy of this book in exchange for review. No money changed hands and all opinions presented here are my own.
—–
* In my very first customer service job, a coworker gave me this exact advice. It’s not worth relaying the context; it’s stuck with me ever since, and context has changed a thousand times over.

** He’d also argue that I should be referring to them as “guests” instead of “customers.” He’s right. Old habits die hard.

You Help Nobody When You Surrender Right of Way

Man DrivingHere’s a public service announcement: stop waving people on, asshole.

I know, you don’t think you’re being an asshole. You think you’re helping. I understand where you’re coming from. But it’s really important that somebody tell you you’re being an asshole. So, asshole: you’re being an asshole.

Right of way exists for a reason. Do you want to know the reason? It’s so you can keep driving your car without killing or being killed. Pretty obviously a good thing for all involved. So why do you think it’s polite to surrender that right of way? It’s literally the only thing between you and a car accident.

It’s nice to think that coming to a complete stop in the middle of the road and waving someone past is somehow a nice thing to do. But it’s not. Because you haven’t just surrendered right of way…you’ve surrendered the silent agreement between another person and the traffic around them. You’ve put them in danger. I know you didn’t mean to do this, but you did. And that makes you an asshole.

Don’t surrender right of way. You will kill somebody. If recent history is any example, it’ll probably be me. So fucking stop.

Some reasons not to surrender right of way:

1) Nobody behind you knows what the fuck you’re doing when you suddenly stop your vehicle and sit there waiting. Nobody else can see what’s going on. They are likely to try to get around you, and then the person you were waving on gets hit.

2) The person that you’re waving on doesn’t know what the fuck you’re doing either. In the time it takes you to silently negotiate this temporary alteration to traffic patterns with somebody else via vague hand signal, you could have just driven past and the person waiting would already be on his way.

3) Pedestrians also don’t know what the fuck you’re doing, so they’re not going to know who’s turning where, or when, or at what point it’s going to be safe for them to cross with their groceries, their dog, or their child.

4) The other lane or lanes of traffic can also be added to the long list of people who don’t know what the fuck you’re doing. You may come to a dead stop and wave somebody on, and that’s so very nice of you, but traffic moving in the other direction isn’t privy to your grand gesture and they’re going to keep coming, and they’re going to hit the person you’ve just waved into their path.

5) You don’t know what the fuck you’re doing either. If you did, you’d know that you stop at a stoplight or a stop sign, and that’s it. The roads are designed and traffic patterns are determined on the assumption that vehicles move. The moment you betray that assumption, you’ve cast everything else into doubt as well, and motorists will take steps to keep moving forward themselves. At best, you waste somebody’s time. At worst, you kill somebody or start a pileup.

You’re not doing anybody a favor. When I’m waiting to cross the street, I’m waiting for a reason: I’m supposed to wait. I’m not waiting for some gallant hero to stop his car…I’m waiting for that fucking car to get out of the way so that I can cross.

Why? Because I don’t know…what…the fuck…you’re doing. And once I figure it out, and I try to cross, the guy behind you almost hits me because he had no idea what was going on. Because your dumb ass is in the way, and not going anywhere, and he has somewhere to be.

So don’t wave me on. And definitely don’t get huffy when I wave you right back on in return. Especially since you’d already be long gone and I’d be well on my way if you didn’t put me, yourself, and everyone else on the road in that particular moment in immediate danger.

When you drive, I know what you’re doing.

When you drive, everyone knows what you’re doing. Why? Because the roads have been laid out in such a way that it becomes easy to anticipate what you’re doing, as long as you follow the rules.

When you surrender right of way, nobody knows what your intentions are, why you’re doing it, or what they’re supposed to be doing in return. And you look like an asshole.

Which is fine. Because you’re an asshole.

This has been a public service announcement. Asshole.

Stewie Griffin and the Problem of Cynicism

Family Guy, 12 and a Half Angry MenI don’t like Family Guy. You know that already. But it does, at times, manage to make me laugh. Other times it manages to insult me as a writer. With the episode “12 and a Half Angry Men,” it managed to upset me as a human being.

Now this isn’t a matter of taking offense at an off-color joke. That happens too (seriously, Family Guy, I know you find sexual assault and domestic violence to be inherently hilarious, but is it too much for you to at least try to make a joke about these things instead of just putting them on display and assuming I find them inherently hilarious too?) but in this case it was more an example of problematic cynicism, and one that’s potentially damaging to our cultural mindset.

The episode is about Mayor West being on trial for murder. The jurors all see it as an open and shut case, apart from Brian who holds out for a not guilty verdict. As might be expected he gradually sways the other jurors to his viewpoint and Mayor West goes free. Family Guy certainly wouldn’t be above suggesting that Mayor West actually did commit the crime, but I think it’s safe to say that, within the reality of the episode, he didn’t, and Brian and the others rendered a fair verdict.

However at the end of the episode, the following exchange occurs:

BRIAN: It was a pretty intense experience, but the important thing is that, in the end, justice was served.
STEWIE: All you did was let a guy go. There’s still a murderer out there.
BRIAN: Yeah but we saved an innocent man today. That’s something to feel good about.
STEWIE: Feel good about? They found eight more bodies last night. One of them was on this block. There’s a maniac out there. He’s cutting people’s power off, breaking into their homes, and slitting their throats.

Stewie continues his rant, and the episode illustrates, ultimately, that Stewie is correct. There is a murderer on the loose, and Brian shouldn’t be proud of what he accomplished. And here’s the thing: that mindset of Stewie’s, which is clearly endorsed by the episode, is a vastly destructive one.

It’s important to note the context of this exchange, which is just the latest in a long line of “let us spell out a ridiculous thing about that genre convention…” gags. Family Guy likes to poke fun at form…playing it straight (relatively) for a time, before stepping back and saying, “But wait a minute…why did that happen?”

In this case, “Why did that happen?” refers to the deliberations being seen as a success, when, ultimately, the crime remained unsolved. See what’s wrong with that? Just typing it out gives it away: those are two different things. Related, sure, but separate. The deliberations are not the criminal investigation. The jurors do not and cannot catch the bad guy. That’s not their job. That’s not what they should be doing.

Okay, fine. A mindless gag at the end of the episode that thinks it’s being clever but is actually just irrelevant. Except that I then began to see reviewers being convinced of Stewie’s viewpoint, such as in this example from The A.V. Club:

“And Stewie points out what never seems to get highlighted in all these stories: if Adam West didn’t do it, there’s a murderer still on the loose. There are more bodies. And taking too much pride in swinging a jury takes a lot of credit for what amounts to simply letting a guy go.”

No. No.

Ten trillion times…no.

It’s not “simply letting a guy go.” Conflating the role of a jury with the responsibility of cleaning up the streets is a bad thing. It’s not a clever insight, and it’s not a problem that someone takes pride in preventing an innocent man from going to jail.

In cases like this — both real and fictional — there are two things at play. (I’m assuming here that a crime was actually committed, which isn’t always the case and can therefore complicate things even futher.) One: Someone committed a crime. Two: Someone is on trial for committing that crime.

Those two things cannot be seen as the same thing. If you don’t understand the separation there, then you’re playing the wrong game. And that’s a problem.

The jurors are responsible for item two…and not at all for item one. They don’t go searching for the criminal…they assess the testimony of the defendant. That’s all they do.

Granted, I have some personal feelings on this subject. And maybe that’s why this felt so bothersome to me. But pull those out and you’re still left with a pretty clear logical conclusion: each group of people involved in this case has a job to do, and it’s the jury’s job to do theirs, only theirs, and to do it the right way.

There should be a sense of pride associated with finding someone not guilty when there is not sufficient evidence of their guilt. Because that’s doing the right thing. That’s being human. That’s taking another man’s fate into your hands, and being responsible with it.

Yes, if you find the man not guilty then that means there is still a criminal out there. But that’s not the issue the jury was assembled to address. We have a police force for that. The fact that you found a man not guilty does not mean you’ve let the world down and failed to do something constructive. You’ve prevented a potentially innocent man’s life from being ruined, or ended. Isn’t that about as constructive as one can get?

Take Stewie’s concern to its (tellingly) unspoken conclusion. He harps on Brian because Brian did nothing but “let a guy go.” So it would have been better for Brian to not let him go?

What then? Mayor West still didn’t commit the crime, which means the criminal would still be out there, racking up bodies. But it would somehow be seen as more constructive for a man to be imprisoned than not? Just so we’d have something to show for it?

Stewie often serves as a voice-box for the writing staff. Part of his role as a character now is to point out these logical inconsistencies. But that’s a role that’s far too prone to cynicism, and it’s important to not let that drift too far along, lest you lose your humanity along the way.

This isn’t an “inconsistency.” Brian didn’t “just let a guy go.” And nobody should feel unproductive for doing the right thing…even if that one right thing leaves another wrong thing unaddressed.

I guess it’s easy to play with fate as long as it’s somebody else’s. But something tells me if a member of the show’s writing staff were on trial for a crime he didn’t commit, and he was found not guilty, he wouldn’t see that as a problematic inconsistency. More likely he’d be grateful that somebody did see to it that justice was served, and I truly doubt he’d be saying with his own voice what he already said here with Stewie’s.

Because he’s one man, and the criminal is another. Their fates are not, and should never be, tethered together. If your cynicism is causing you to bind them up…then I think you’re long overdue for some serious soul searching. That’s not the world you live in. And you should be very happy about that.