upworthy
Add Upworthy to your Google News feed.
Google News Button
More

Cheryl Strayed on pain, letting go, and self-help for Donald Trump.

Cheryl Strayed didn’t start out to be a self-help writer.

In 2012, she was poised to be best known as the author of the forthcoming memoir "Wild", a book that sparked the return of Oprah's famed Book Club and would ultimately be turned into an Academy Award nominated film starring Reese Witherspoon.


Cheryl and Reese at the 2014 Golden Globes. Photo by Steve Granitz/Getty Images.

But one month before the book's release, the writer revealed herself to not just be a woman who had traveled the Pacific Crest Trail and written about it but also the anonymous columnist behind the wildly popular online advice column Dear Sugar. She would now forever be known as more than just a talented author. She was the woman who had helped thousands of strangers deal with some of the most intimate problems in their lives with unflinching honesty, humor, and compassion.

“Most things will be okay eventually, but not everything will be. Sometimes you’ll put up a good fight and lose. Sometimes you’ll hold on really hard and realize there is no choice but to let go. Acceptance is a small, quiet room.”

Shortly thereafter, a selection of those columns — her responses to letters about everything from grief, marriage, and incest to addiction, money, and sex — were compiled in the the New York Times best-selling "Tiny Beautiful Things: Advice on Love and Life from Dear Sugar," a book I've read so much the cover is hanging on by a thread. New York magazine called "Tiny Beautiful Things," "the self-help book women can't stop giving to each other" and it's now the basis for an upcoming HBO series of the same name.

Whether she planned to be or not, Cheryl Strayed has become an incisive, literary life advice guru with a cult-like following. And I am a proud member.

When she agreed to an interview, I was eager to talk to her about her new book "Brave Enough," a collection of her most beloved quotes. I had no idea we would somehow end up talking about everything from her relationship with her father and forgiveness, to finding an authentic voice, and even (brace yourself) thinking differently about Donald Trump.

But that's what happens when you talk to a woman whose main job is to study life, think about its lessons, and then share them. And so she did.

"OK, Erica. Do not act like a fan."

This is what I told myself as I prepared to call Cheryl for our interview.

"Don't babble on and on about how much her books have inspired you, and don't tell her how many of her quotes you've memorized."

Once I had sufficiently ticked through the list of don'ts in my head, I cleared my throat, got into professional interviewer mode, and dialed her number.

"Hi, this is Cheryl."

"Hi-Cheryl-it's-Erica-from-Upworthy-thanks-for-talking-to-me-today-I'm-such-a-fangirl."

Welp. So much for keeping it cool.

Thankfully, Strayed was incredibly warm and approachable, radiating humility. I wanted to know how someone so humble felt confident giving life advice to thousands of people.

On what it means to be human:

I asked whether she ever suffered from self-doubt and how she, someone not trained as a therapist or a counselor or a life coach, came to feel "qualified" to teach people important life lessons based on her own experiences.

"We get great and terrible advice from all sources all the time," she answered. "From your best friend who said something really important to you one time that really altered your way of thinking and the next conversation can say something that is idiotic and doesn’t make sense. We get advice from strangers, books, our parents, friends … all sources. I'm simply one source.

I never said that people need to do what I think they should do. I very seldom focus on instruction. I don’t feel that my main role is to say do this or do that. My main role is to help illuminate the question that they’re asking by exploring various avenues of seeking the answer.

It's about asking 'What does it mean to be human?' And in particular “What does it mean to be human in this situation? In this struggle?'"

I almost missed what she said next because I was so stuck on the phrase "What does it mean to be human?" It seemed to encapsulate all of the questions that we humans ask ourselves every day (How should we behave? How should we respond? What should we think? What should we feel?) in seven words.

I feel like she could make anything sound good, meaningful. But it also made me wonder how she, or anyone for that matter, knows what the right takeaway or lesson is. What is the best decision to make at any given moment in a complex situation or in a complex life if anything can be made to sound inspirational or "right"?

She paused and thought on that for awhile.

"Right before you called me, I was on a walk with my husband. I was grappling with a negative interaction I had with an acquaintance and feeling really annoyed and angry. But then there was also this other feeling of compassion for this person because I know [what she did] totally isn’t about me. That what she said is completely about her own sense of need and sorrow and fear. And so I have two experiences of the same interaction.

One of the great struggles of my life is which one do I land on? Do I land on the one that’s like 'F--k you bitch'? Or should I land on the one that’s like 'I understand that you’re suffering so I will let it go.'

Now that seems like a small thing but apply it to a big thing — my father being a terrible father, for example. Do I stay with rage, sorrow, and absence and suffering, or do I land on forgiveness, compassion, acceptance, and moving forward? We always have that choice."

I agreed. But I also believe that we teach people how to treat us. I worry that if we offer nothing but "niceness"in response to mistreatment or cruelty, we're in some ways letting them off the hook. And if we do that, will they ever learn the lesson? Without me even asking, she had an answer for that.

"What other people go through is not up to us. What we're going through is up to us. I'm not talking about denial," she assured me. "You still have to carry the story with you when you choose forgiveness, but the decision you’re making is to carry it with you forward into whatever beauty awaits. The deal of life is that life is always going to be full of suffering and joy. And I think when you focus on the suffering, you forget how much joy there really is. Always. There’s always joy. It’s always available to us, even in the darkest days."

Even in the darkest days.

The darkest days. That phrase stuck out to me because it drew my mind not only to personal life struggles but to all the hatred and violence and oppression and fear that permeates our current social and political landscape. Mass shootings, Islamophobia, police brutality... And really. Is there any other way to describe Donald Trump's candidacy other than the phrase "dark days"?

I asked her if the themes her quotes touch on, which are so often focused on people's personal lives, could apply to those big societal issues too.

"Yes," she said. And she picked our favorite cartoon villain political candidate to illustrate how.

Him. Photo by Ralph Freso/Getty Images.

On Donald Trump and the big things:

"We forget that Donald Trump — the guy saying all that awful stuff — that’s one human and that awful stuff rises from his heart. And the only way to change the world in the grand scale is to change the hearts and minds of individuals.

So what if this guy really took a deep look at his own wounds? He’s an example of someone who has decided to stay in rage, just like I was talking about earlier. So for him, a couple of people of the Muslim faith shoot up a center and [that behavior] now applies to people of that faith. He’s decided to tell a story that is about hate and ugliness and rage.

What if he were the kind of person who could make that tiny switch I was just talking about in my life, where you say 'am I going to stay in rage or am I going to go to that other place?' I don’t think Trump has ever made that leap probably in anything in his life. So it begins as a tiny thing. I don’t know him. I don’t know what happened to him in his life. But I know that probably all along the way he chose to tell an ugly, small, rage-filled story about himself and the people around him. And then it’s like a stone you throw in the water that resonates outward and beyond. And now it's on a massive scale. That’s why it’s so dangerous to give people power, to elect someone who doesn’t have a consciousness that is steeped in compassion and love and light."

I sighed. She was right. I'm not evolved enough yet to think about Donald Trump's wounds, but I made a mental note to revisit the idea post-election.

I was about to move the conversation forward, but something in my question about what some would call the "bigger" social issues had triggered her. She jumped back in.

"Also, I hate this idea that the culturally significant stories are about 'the big things.' Women are always up against that idea — that our stories are small or unimportant.

I think writing the truth about one life is a big thing. For four years there hasn’t been one day that a whole bunch of people haven’t told me 'your book changed my life.' And when you change someone’s life, you change the world. To believe in that change that we can make in our own lives is what leads to the cultural change in our world."

That sentiment echoes the late Detroit activist Grace Lee Boggs who famously said, "To make a revolution, people must not only struggle against existing institutions. They must make a philosophical/spiritual leap and become more 'human' human beings. In order to change/transform the world, they must change/transform themselves." I shared this with Cheryl.

"Yes! Yes!" she said.

Then she thought about it for a second and said that there was a myth she wanted to dispel.

"Transforming the self can easily be construed as this incredibly narcissistic activity."

I knew exactly what she meant. The me, me, me, navel-gazing, optimize-your-life culture around being your "best self" is everywhere. And it can be pretty insufferable.

"This idea that the most important thing is whatever it is YOU need, what YOU want, because you are developing your mind and your body and whatever. That’s bullshit. That’s not what transforming yourself is.

It isn’t about having the perfect ass and a world that never blows your head open and challenges you and transforms you. It's about engagement, questioning your motivations and beliefs, your biases, and it’s about struggle. And this is the kind of self-help that I’m signing up for and that I hope to contribute to.

It’s a grittier, messier way of looking at transformation. Not just sitting in a bathtub with candles burning, but that’s where you end. It’s not the journey. The journey is a lot rougher than that. It’s about being disrupted from your complacency."

On real self-help:

But that grittiness and messiness isn't what most of us think about when we hear the term "self-help." We often think of positive affirmations and "five steps to a better life," quick fixes. As writer who's a bit insecure about the fact that my own first book will likely land on the self-help shelf also, I desperately wanted to know: Is she comfortable being lumped into that category? How does someone who grew up obsessing over "the great writers" and began her career in fiction and literary nonfiction feel about her work being stuck with the label of a genre that is so often mocked?

"Not only did I never intend to be a self-help writer," she said, "I still don’t really think of myself in that way — probably because I have the same recoil that so many people do when we hear 'self-help.'

"I think when we think of self-help negatively we’re thinking of a book that simplifies and glosses over the complexity of the real, gritty problems of life that we all have. And instead of saying 'OK let’s get down in the muck and face these things,' it sort of makes silly metaphors out of things that are deep and important and big."

I nodded in agreement. She hit the nail on the head.

"Have you ever seen that famous SNL skit with the guy who goes 'I’m OK, and you’re OK?'" she asked.

I chuckled and told her that I had but didn't admit that, at my age, I'd only ever seen a 20-second clip of it on YouTube. But I knew what she was getting at.

“That’s what we think self-help is,” she continued. "A kind of anti-intellectualism."

"And I think that’s really unfair to the genre. Because so many books, my own included, that are lumped into that genre are aspiring to do the exact opposite of that glossing over: embrace our intellects and our rational thinking when it comes to figuring out our challenges and struggles, the relationships we have with others, and the complexity of the relationship that we have with our own past, our own selves, our own lives.

So I think that what people see when they are reading my words is somebody who is willing to not turn away from that complexity.”

Ultimately, she believes that [her] readers experience work in the same way, no matter what the publisher-assigned genre: viscerally and emotionally. And they judge it simply on whether it changes their lives.

Photo by Amy Graves/Getty Images.

On authenticity:

She's a writer who isn't afraid to talk about life's complexity. That's important. But the truth is that her popularity and resonance isn't just because of what she says. It's also about how she says it.

With quotes like this...

“But the reality is we often become our kindest, most ethical selves only by seeing what it feels like to be a selfish jackass first.”

...and this...

"You don’t have to get a job that makes others feel comfortable about what they perceive as your success. You don’t have to explain what you plan to do with your life. You don’t have to justify your education by demonstrating its financial rewards. You don’t have to maintain an impeccable credit score. Anyone who expects you to do any of those things has no sense of history or economics or science or the arts. You have to pay your own electric bill. You have to be kind. You have to give it all you got. You have to find people who love you truly and love them back with the same truth. But that’s all."

...and one of her most famous...

"So write. Not like a girl. Not like a boy. Write like a motherfucker."

it's easy to see why Cheryl is known for communicating ideas in a way that is somehow equally compassionate and unmerciful, gentle and brash. And her words are both literary in their beauty but incredibly simple at the same time. It's hard to tell what has mattered matter more in her ability to connect with readers: her writing style or her big personality. So I ask her.

“It’s both,” she replied confidently. "My voice, writing style, and personality are all one and the same."

She explained: "When you’re a young writer you’re always in search of your voice, and for a long time I thought that meant conforming my voice to the great writers I love. 'I’m going to try to sound like Faulkner or Alice Munro or Toni Morrison.' But what I loved in the work of the writers that I love most is that they’re relaxing and actually speaking with their own voice on the page. And the closer I could get to doing that, the better writer I become.

Voice and authority: It’s all about speaking out of your authentic knowledge."

And she wants to make sure that her authentic knowledge is accessible to everyone.

"I’ve always hoped that what complicates my work is the thinking behind it, not the language that I use to convey ideas. I’ve always wanted my work to be accessible to people of all backgrounds, regardless of their education. I love that you don’t have to be hyper-literate to read my books. You can be, but you don't have to be."

As an example of what she called her "approachability in public persona, on the page, and in actual life," she shared a moving memory:

"At one of my readings in Santa Cruz, this woman came up to me. She was a Mexican immigrant; she was a maid at a hotel. She told me that she had been cleaning a room and someone had left a copy behind of 'Wild.' Instead of just turning it in like they usually do, she started reading it and ended up reading the whole book. At my reading, she wept and said that she’d never read a book before.

And I've heard that many times. So I’m not interested in this idea of the writer as the exalted figure who's above any other person in the world."

Photo by Joe Scarnici/Getty Images.

On her favorite quote:

Later on in our conversation, as we discussed "Brave Enough," I realized she probably wouldn't have judged me for knowing so many of them by heart. The attachment that readers have had to her words is exactly what inspired the book in the first place.

"My publisher said 'all the people on the Internet keep posting your quotes everywhere — we should collect them.' The premise wasn’t 'I’m so wise.' It was crowdsourced! I believe that the power of art is connection. It’s people taking a writer's work and making it theirs. And that’s what people have done with these quotes, and so I looked to them for what should be in the book. I love the idea that a sentence I wrote told them something that they needed to know or hold in their heart.”

I wanted to end my discussion with Cheryl by finding out which pithy line from the collection was her personal favorite, the one that she holds closest in her heart.

As it turns out, it's the one that isn't technically hers. It is her late mother's quote. Her mother is a central figure in her work, and her too-sudden, too-soon death at age 45 not only shattered Cheryl's world but also sparked the life-changing journey of "Wild." When she mentioned her now, her words practically beamed, dripping with audibly noticeable adoration.

"Put yourself in the way of beauty."

"That is something that my mother told me to do. It took me years to really understand what that meant and to learn how to do it. My mom would say, 'It doesn’t matter how miserable you are, how hard any particular day is, you can always choose to put yourself in the way of beauty. There’s always a sunrise and there’s always a sunset. And it's up to you whether you want to be there for it or not. When it’s hardest is when you need to do it the most.'

And so I trust that. It's been a guiding light."

kids, school, school days, school week, schedule, 4 day week
Unsplash

Many school districts are moving to a 4-day week, but there are pros and cons to the approach.

American kids have fewer school days than most other major countries as it is, which poses a big challenge for families with two working parents. In a system designed for the "classic" stay-at-home mom model, it's difficult for many modern families to cover childcare and fulfill their work obligations during the many, many holidays and extra days off American children receive in school.

Some school districts, in fact, are ready to take things one step further with even fewer instructional days: for better or for worse.


Whitney Independent School District in Texas recently made news when it decided to enact a four-day week heading into the 2025 school year. That makes it one of dozens of school districts in Texas to make the change and over 900 nationally.

The thought of having the kids home from school EVERY Friday or Monday makes many parents break out in stress hives, but this four-day school week movement isn't designed to give parents a headache. It's meant to lure teachers back to work.

Yes, teachers are leaving the profession in droves and young graduates don't seem eager to replace them. Why? For starters, the pay is bad—but that's just the beginning. Teachers are burnt out, undermined and criticized relentlessly, held hostage by standardized testing, and more. It can be a grueling, demoralizing, and thankless job. The love and passion they have for shaping the youth of tomorrow can only take you so far when you feel like you're constantly getting the short end of the stick.

School districts want to pay their teachers more, in theory, but their hands are often tied. So, they're getting creative to recruit the next generation of teachers into their schools—starting with an extra day off for planning, catch-up, or family time every week.

Teachers in four-day districts often love the new schedule. Kids love it (obviously). It's the parents who, as a whole, aren't super thrilled.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

So far, the data shows that the truncated schedule perk is working. In these districts, job applications for teachers are up, retirements are down, and teachers are reporting better mental well-being. That's great news!

But these positive developments may be coming at the price of the working parents in the communities. Most early adopters of the four-day week have been rural communities with a high prevalence of stay-at-home parents. As the idea starts to take hold in other parts of the country, it's getting more pushback. Discussions on Reddit, Facebook, and other social media platforms are overrun with debate on how this is all going to shake up. Some parents, to be fair, like the idea! If they stay-at-home or have a lot of flexibility, they see it as an opportunity for more family time. But many are feeling anxious. Here's what's got those parents worried:

The effect on students' achievement is still unclear.

The execution of the four-day week varies from district to district. Some schools extend the length of each of the four days, making the total instructional time the same. That makes for a really long day, and some teachers say the students are tired and more unruly by the late afternoon. Some districts are just going with less instruction time overall, which has parents concerned that their kids might fall behind.

A study of schools in Iowa that had reduced instructional days found that five-days-a-week students performed better, on average.

Four-day school weeks put parents in a childcare bind.

Having two working parents is becoming more common and necessary with the high cost of living. Of course—"school isn't daycare!" But it is the safe, reliable, and educational place we send our kids while we we work.

Families with money and resources may be able to enroll their kids in more academics, extracurriculars, sports, or childcare, but a lot of normal families won't be able to afford that cost. Some schools running a four-day week offer a paid childcare option for the day off, but that's an added expense and for families with multiple kids in the school system, it's just not possible.

kids, school, school days, school week, schedule, 4 day week In a 4-day model, kids often (but not always) receive less instructional time. Photo by Ivan Aleksic on Unsplash

This will inevitably end with some kids getting way more screentime.

With most parents still working five-day weeks, and the cost of extra activities or childcare too high, a lot of kids are going to end up sitting around on the couch with their iPad on those days off. Adding another several hours of it to a child's week seems less than ideal according to expert recommendations.

Of course there are other options other than paid childcare and iPads. There are play dates, there's getting help from family and friends. All of these options are an enormous amount of work to arrange for parents who are already at capacity.

Working four days is definitely a win for teachers that makes the job more appealing. But it doesn't address the systemic issues that are driving them to quit, retire early, or give up their dreams of teaching all together.

@5th_with_ms.y

Replying to @emory here are my thoughts on my 4day work week as a teacher✨ #foryou #fyp #fypシ #foryoupage #foryoupageofficiall #teachersoftiktokfyp #teachersoftiktok #teachertok #teachersbelike #teachertiktok #tik #tiktok #viralllllll #teachertoks #teaching #teacher #tok #viralvideo #teacherlife #viral #trendy #teacher #teaching #worklifebalance #worklife #publicschool #publiceducation #school #student

A Commissioner of Education from Missouri calls truncated schedules a "band-aid solution with diminishing returns." Having an extra planning day won't stop teachers from getting scapegoated by politicians or held to impossible curriculum standards, it won't keep them from having to buy their own supplies or deal with ever-worsening student behavior.

Some teachers and other experts have suggested having a modified five-day school week, where one of the days gets set aside as a teacher planning day while students are still on-site participating in clubs, music, art—you know, all the stuff that's been getting cut in recent years. Something like that could work in some places.

In any case, the debate over a shortened school week is not going away any time soon. More districts across the country are doing their research in preparation for potentially making the switch.

Many parents don't theoretically mind the idea of their busy kids having an extra day off to unwind, pursue hobbies, see friends, catch up on projects, or spend time as a family. They're also usually in favor of anything that takes pressure off of overworked teachers. But until we adopt a four-day work week as the standard, the four-day school week is always going to feel a little out of place.

This article originally appeared in February. It has been updated.

gentle parenting, parenting, parenting tips, mommy blogger, instagram moms, emotional regulation, teaching kids discipline
via @kelsewhatelse/Instagram, used with permission

A mom shared a simple mantra she uses to teach her kids that they can do hard things.

Recently, a mom named Kelsey Pomeroy shared what she called a "bit of a controversial parenting take." While it might sound prickly at first, it can be a powerful way to teach kids emotional regulation.

It all comes down to this simple mantra: "You can walk and be sad at the same time."


In a video posted to Instagram, Pomeroy used the example of her son, who had recently said he was "too tired" to go to school. Pomeroy knew he'd gotten enough rest the night before and wasn't sick; it was simply more comfortable to stay in bed. So while she acknowledged and validated her son's feelings, she reiterated that important responsibilities, like school, can still get done, even when emotions aren't optimal.

In her caption, Pomeroy argued that a lot of moms and dads who are Team Gentle Parenting get stuck on validating the feeling part. All that rumination can result in "overload" with no real way forward, especially because kids, and even some teens, have "bummer blindness," meaning that every setback feels like a "BIG important crisis."

"We have to actively TEACH and CALIBRATE their new brains to differentiate between BIG bummers and LITTLE bummers," Pomeroy wrote. The "you can feel x and still y" idea helps with that by teaching kids the difference between genuinely needing to push through and knowing when to pull back, something many Millennials and those who came before them never quite learned.

"Many of us never learned where our actual limits were," Pomeroy said in the comments. "Then we became parents and focused hard on emotional intelligence. But in the process, we sometimes robbed our kids of the opportunity to see their potential by unintentionally robbing them of resilience. That is why teaching both emotional intelligence and advocacy, as well as grit, is so important."

Pomeroy also astutely noted that tone means everything. Rather than dismissing, chastising, or being sarcastic, she explained that "it is a loving and motivating 'you can do it, you can do this' tone."

gentle parenting, parenting, parenting tips, mommy blogger, instagram moms, emotional regulation, teaching kids discipline Therapist applying tape to a boy's leg on a treatment table.Photo credit: Canva

"The key is: We are NOT 'moving on.' We ARE 'moving forward.'"

Adults do things while tired and frustrated all the time, Pomeroy argues, making it a "crucial skill that we have to build up in our children."

In the comments, people seemed to wholeheartedly agree.

"Learning how properly to carry every emotion while still function in society is a huge advantage."

"Wise words. Our job is to model and encourage resilience so our kids can be ready for their adult lives. It's the 'and.' We love them, we see them AND they can do hard things."

gentle parenting, parenting, parenting tips, mommy blogger, instagram moms, emotional regulation, teaching kids discipline Smiling child in a striped shirt, flexing arms in a playful muscle pose.Photo credit: Canva

"As a parent who's been stuck in the validating and wallowing with no forward momentum, this is the most common sense parenting advice on the internet. Thank you for providing us with something actionable!!"

"We absolutely must teach them these skills so that they can grow up to function and thrive in the adult world. 👏"

Parenting is about preparing kids for healthy adulthood. Sometimes that means teaching them that they are, in fact, safe to show up even when the good feelings aren't there.

Follow Pomeroy on Instagram for more helpful (and fun) parenting content.

couple fight, argument, upset woman, woman in sweatshirt, marriage

A woman can't stand what she's hearing.

Some folks in this world just have to be right. All the time. Even when you present them with every fact imaginable that proves they are wrong, they will resort to any rhetorical tactic they can to make it seem as though they are right. If that doesn't work, they turn to personal attacks.

People like this can be infuriating to deal with because talking to them is like screaming at a wall. Fortunately, communication expert Jefferson Fisher recently shared a two-step method on TikTok for dealing with these impossible people.


Fisher, who has become massively popular online, offers tips "to help people argue less and talk more."

@art_for_feeling

How to handle someone who is always right. 3 steps from @ Jefferson Fisher #power #insporation

Here is Fisher's two-step process for dealing with people who will never admit they are wrong:

Step 1. Diffuse the situation

"Know that the harder we work to prove that they're wrong, the more convinced they are that they're right," he says. "So what you're gonna do is diffuse that by just saying something simple as well, 'maybe you're right,' or 'maybe so.' That diffuses the whole situation."

Step 2. Open the conversation up

Fisher says you can encourage the other person to explore your ideas by saying: "'It's helpful for me to know that you're at least considering my thoughts, even if you don't agree with me.' Now you've made a safe space to have a discussion that's not threatening their identity. That's how you talk to somebody who thinks they're always right. So try that."

coffee, women having coffee, serious talk, women on couch, agreement Two woman having a heart-to-heart conversation. via Canva/Photos

Why identity matters

In his video, Fisher notes that people who won't admit when they are wrong have developed an identity based on always being correct. That's why, when they're confronted with the possibility that they may be incorrect, they will do anything to avoid admitting it.

Research shows that when people feel their identity is being attacked, they perceive it as an affront to their authenticity and value as human beings. This can lead to a physical reaction known as the amygdala hijack, where people feel as if they are being physically threatened. That's a big reason some people get enraged when discussing politics or religion. If their views on these issues are closely tied to their identity and those views are challenged, it can invalidate their entire sense of self.

angry, arms folded, angy man, won't listen, sneer A man who has dug in his heels. via Canva/Photos

The 'backfire effect'

Fisher explains that the harder we try to prove someone wrong, the more convinced they become they're right, due to a psychological phenomenon known as the "backfire effect." When people are shown facts that clearly contradict their views, they often cling to those beliefs even more strongly. That's because those beliefs are tied to emotion, not facts. When their views are challenged, it triggers defensiveness, and the brain works to protect their self-image rather than reconsider the belief.

Getting through to stubborn people who always think they're right isn't easy, but Fisher's advice can help break through the wall they erect when their beliefs are challenged. It's good for you and the other person. When you're never wrong, you never learn from your mistakes, and that can quickly lead to problems far worse than admitting you were wrong.

Learning

15 English words that instantly change from nouns to verbs with a simple shift in our voice

English isn't a tonal language, but in this case, it kind of feels like one.

present, presentation, linguistics, words, nouns, verbs

The different stresses on "present" and "present" determine whether it's a noun or a verb.

When native English speakers try to learn tonal languages like Chinese, Thai, or Navajo, it can take a while to get the hang of it. The idea that the same syllables spoken in a different tone can change the meaning of a word is a foreign concept in English, where we shift our tone and pitch in all kinds of ways without any change in actual word definitions.

But that doesn't mean tone or pitch plays no role in English word meanings. Changing our tone and pitch to stress different syllables does change the meaning of a surprising number of words. Interestingly, there's a whole bunch of two-syllable words that follow a rule of sorts, where stressing the first syllable makes the word a noun and stressing the second makes it a verb.


For example, the word "conduct." Stress the first syllable, using a higher tone or pitch at the start, and you get CON-duct, a noun meaning "behavior." Emphasize the second syllable instead, and it becomes con-DUCT, a verb meaning "to carry out" or "to lead."

And there are so many more:

  • PERmit vs. perMIT
  • PREsent vs. preSENT
  • INsult vs. inSULT
  • OBject vs. obJECT
  • REject vs. reJECT
  • SUSpect vs. susPECT
  • CONflict vs. conFLICT
  • CONvict vs. conVICT
  • CONvert vs. conVERT
  • IMport vs. imPORT
  • RECord vs. reCORD
  • PROtest vs. proTEST
  • PROduce vs. proDUCE
  • ADDress vs. addRESS

What kind of rule is this? Why do all of these words change from a noun to a verb simply by changing which syllable we stress?

- YouTube youtu.be

Interestingly, these words function as both nouns and verbs, but there's a bigger picture when it comes to syllable stress and its relationship to word meaning. As Coffee Break Languages shares:

"Research into English word stress has shown that around 90% of two-syllable nouns are stressed on the first syllable. So when we see a two-syllable noun, we can be quite confident the word will be stressed on the first syllable."

We see that pattern in words like APple, LIon, ORange, PERson, TEAcher, and WINdow.

"Research also shows that around 70% of two-syllable verbs are stressed on the second syllable," they add. "We need to be more careful with verbs, but still most of them are stressed on the second syllable so we can make an educated guess here if necessary. For example, the words agREE, colLECT, deFEND, enJOY imPROVE, and perFORM follow that pattern."

These are the kinds of patterns most native English speakers aren't specifically taught, but people learning English as a second language have to learn. And because English doesn't use stress punctuation like accent marks, vocal stress has to be figured out entirely from context.

Again, English isn't a tonal language, but is this really an example of the way tonal languages function?

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Not exactly. Tone, pitch, and stress are distinct linguistic elements, and they overlap in ways that aren't always easy to explain. You can get into the weeds pretty quickly when diving into the role each element plays in different languages. (If you really want to dig in, there's an excellent description of how different categories of languages utilize tone, pitch, and stress on Linguistic Stack Exchange. It's pretty interesting.)

It's not exactly a secret that English has a lot of odd rules, exceptions to rules, and one-off cases that many of us don't even know are rules. Every language has its inconsistencies, but English is famous for them. All the more reason to always be gracious with those who are learning.

Music

The magical 1982 Genesis reunion with Peter Gabriel was actually to save him from crushing debt

Gabriel found himself in an alarming situation, receiving “horrible phone calls and death threats” from his creditors.

Phil Collins, Peter Gabriel, genesis, reunion concert, genesis reunion, musicians, live performances

Genesis reunited with Gabriel in 1982 to help save their former singer from his debt.

On March 26, 2022, as the final seconds ticked away from Genesis’ farewell tour, the crowd at London’s O2 Arena was clearly emotional. The prog-pop band’s most famous lineup—front man Phil Collins, guitarist/bassist Mike Rutherford, and keyboardist Tony Banks—had finally reunited after a 13-year hiatus (and a temporary pandemic delay), and no one wanted this improbable run to end. But there may have been another reason for the sadness: a glaring absence onstage.

Peter Gabriel had co-founded the band in 1967, helping catapult them to rock glory with his golden rasp and surreal stage antics, before leaving in 1975 to launch a solo career. Collins, previously the drummer, got the promotion to lead singer, leading the group through the commercial heights of “Mama” and “Invisible Touch.” Hardcore prog fans pined to hear Gabriel sing Genesis again, but outside of a few powerful one-offs—a tease of their epic “Dancing With the Moonlit Knight” during a 2016 solo tour, a 1999 re-recording of their starry-eyed ballad “The Carpet Crawlers”—that door remained shut.


- YouTube www.youtube.com

Now here he was at the O2, seated among the commoners, with an opportunity to help bring the Genesis story full-circle. Instead, he took the unselfish (if, let’s face it, slightly unsatisfying) route: avoiding the spotlight and letting his former bandmates enjoy the curtain call they’d rightly earned. (“Me going was a rite of passage, really,” the singer told Mojo in 2023. “I’d been part of the creation of Genesis, so I wanted to be there at the end.”)

Here’s the thing, though: A lot of casual fans forget that Gabriel had already reunited with Genesis for an entire show—it just happened 20 years earlier. Oh, and it occurred not because of rosy nostalgia but due to mounting debt and death threats.

The reunion stemmed from the financial disaster of the first WOMAD

Gabriel staged the inaugural WOMAD (World of Music, Arts, and Dance) in July 1982, with the noble vision of sparking genuine cultural fusion. The three-day event featured British post-punk (Echo and the Bunnymen, Pigbag) and art-rock (Peter Hammill, Robert Fripp), traditional Irish folk (The Chieftains), Indian sitar players (Imrat Khan), Afro-Caribbean dance companies (Ekomé)—a legit anything-goes atmosphere that remains novel at music festivals decades later, let alone in the early days of MTV. "I [wanted] to celebrate all these fantastic musicians, art, dance, film from around the world that weren't getting exposure,” Gabriel told filmmaker John Edginton in a raw-footage clip filmed for his 2014 documentary, Genesis: Together and Apart. He had big dreams for WOMAD, and, as he noted in the 2007 book Genesis: Chapter and Verse, the first fest was “magnificent.”

- YouTube www.youtube.com

"We put it on during school time, so there were a lot of schools working on projects about world music; it was very exciting, fresh, passionate,” he said. “But the people just didn’t come. There was a rail strike that weekend, and even though we thought we had enough names to pull in an audience, we were hopelessly under each day, and suddenly realized the financial consequences.”

Gabriel found himself in an alarming situation, receiving “horrible phone calls and death threats” from his creditors. “It was a very oppressive nightmare,” he said. Luckily, his old band stepped in—not that anyone involved would have chosen the reunion without this dire prompt.

By 1982, Gabriel had been enjoying a successful solo career, crafting artful pop songs and studio experiments while tinkering with new recording technology (the Fairlight CMI sampling synthesizer, for one). He had little interest in looking backward—outside of a couple early solo tours where he was forced to play a Genesis song or two due to a lack of material, he’d more or less distanced himself from his old band. (His debut single, “Solsbury Hill,” is about his desire to leave Genesis—and the music business entirely. “I felt like I was just in the machinery,” he told Rolling Stone, citing a lyric. “We knew what we were going to be doing in 18 months or two years ahead. I just did not enjoy that.”) The band, meanwhile, had soldiered on just fine without their original front man, growing into a stadium act with Collins behind the mic.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

"It made sense to us"

When manager Tony Smith reached out to Genesis, seeing if they could help Gabriel escape his dark spiral with a one-off benefit reunion, everyone felt it was the right thing to do. “Whether or not he felt he needed our help to get himself out of trouble, it made sense to us,” Collins wrote in Chapter and Verse, “and it certainly was not a condescending gesture.” Banks added that, beyond the kind act of helping their friend, it made sense as an act of fan service: “People had been asking us to organize some sort of get-together for years and years, and this seemed a very good reason to do it, at the same time as helping Peter pay off this particular debt. We did need a reason because it wasn’t something we were itching to do."

It’s not like they hated each other: Collins had even played on Gabriel’s self-titled 1980 solo album, helping create the distinctive “gated” drum sound that became ubiquitous throughout the decade. But it was a somewhat awkward fit musically, given how far their respective sounds had diverged. "Having tried for seven years to get away from the image of being ex-Genesis, there's obviously a certain amount of stepping back," Gabriel reportedly told NME ahead of the show. "I don't think they would choose at this point to work with me … [but] I’m very grateful and I'm intending to enjoy myself."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

The problem was how to solve their logistical puzzle—Genesis was only still playing a few of their Gabriel-era songs, and their old front man wasn’t up to speed on any of them. They managed to arrange two or three rehearsals at London’s Hammersmith Odeon, where Genesis played a triple-header on September 28th, 29th, and 30th. The quirky set drew from Gabriel’s time in the lineup, sprinkling in one solo cut (“Solsbury Hill,” ironically) and a single '80s-era track (“Turn It on Again,” with Gabriel on second drums). Understandably, the performances were rather loose—not up to anyone’s respective standards—and the massive downpour of rain probably didn’t improve anyone’s mood.

But in the widely shared bootlegs of that show, fans were just happy to see everyone on stage again. They even saw a brief reunion of the full ‘70s quintet lineup: Former guitarist Steve Hackett, who learned about the event while on vacation in Brazil, flew back to the U.K. to play on “I Know What I Like (In Your Wardrobe)” and “The Knife.” "As they’d already rehearsed up their stuff, I was only able to join the encores,” he wrote in his 2020 book, A Genesis in My Bed, “but I was thrilled to be involved with the team once more."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

“It felt like a bit of a dream”

It’s easy to look back on the gig with a what-if feeling. Could they have somehow figured out more rehearsal time? (Probably not.) Should they have professionally recorded the event, no matter how sloppy they expected it to be? (Definitely.) “I regret it now, but I was keen not to record the show,” Rutherford wrote in his 2015 memoir, The Living Years. “I thought it would be a bit rough and ready and that it was better to be there and in the moment.”

Ultimately, what matters is that with Six of the Best, Genesis accomplished their primary goal: rescuing their old friend from a terrifying plight.

“It felt like a bit of a dream,” Banks wrote in Chapter and Verse. “I was very glad when it was over, because I hadn’t particularly enjoyed playing that stuff at the time. I always tended to be into what we were doing either at the time or whatever the next thing was. I was pretty glad to have left some of those old songs behind. But the audience reaction was very good, and I believe that show did go some way to sorting out Peter’s financial problem; now WOMAD is a monster thing.”

Indeed. The festival re-emerged stronger in the mid-’80s and has continued annually—without death threats—ever since.

Gabriel might have been watching the final Genesis show, but he was on stage in spirit. Collins gave him a shout-out during the set, and the band wrapped this historic occasion with their swirling ballad “The Carpet Crawlers,” a track Gabriel helped craft for his Genesis swan song, 1974’s The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway.

Few major rock bands have replaced one iconic singer with another. Even fewer have done it by promoting from within. And while Genesis achieved such longevity because of their songwriting—the imagination, the color, the dynamics—perhaps that familial spirit had something to do with it. They weren’t always on the same page, musically or otherwise—but as Six of the Best proved, they came through for each other when it mattered most.

- YouTube www.youtube.com