>”Once upon a time.” Four words. I don’t need to say anything more, and yet you know at once what it is you’re about to hear. You may not know the precise contents. You may not recognize the specific characters. You may have little notion of the exact action that is about to unfold. But you are ready all the same to take on all of these unknowns, the uncertainties, the ambiguities. You are ready to succumb to the world of the story…
> First, there is that semblance of distance. We are not in the now, but rather in some place in the removed past…
> Distance is a psychologically powerful tool. It can allow us to process things that we would otherwise be unable to deal with—and I mean this in both a literal and a more metaphorical, emotional sense—and it frees up our mind in a way that immediacy does not.
> Second, there is the vagueness, the deliberate lack of specificity…that which scares us in real life—the lack of definitions, rules, clearly defined borders and boundaries—is not only unscary but entirely welcomed in the fairytale…I can indulge in abstraction and play, engage my curiosity and foster my creativity, and remain the whole time protected by that vague veneer of “once”.
[An insightful article and nice tribute to Maurice Sendak](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/2012/05/08/the-power-of-once-upon-a-time-a-story-to-tame-the-wild-things/).
[Some incredible videos of Switzerland](http://www.newlyswissed.com/?p=12467). My favorites are the [realtime HD video *hikes* through Graubunden](http://www.webwandern.ch/etappen/) (St. Moritz, Berninapass, etc).
Amazing how just a click can bring me right back to the country!
[Ken Burns talks about why he loves conflict, villans and complications](http://www.theatlantic.com/video/archive/2012/05/ken-burns-on-story/257165/). A few choice quotes:
> My interest is always in complicating things.
> All story is manipulation.
> The kind of narrative I subscribe [to] trusts in the possibility that people could change.
> We do coalesce around stories that seem transcendent.
[
](http://www.yehudamoon.com/index.php?date=2012-05-14)
> We shall not cease from exploration
> And the end of all our exploring
> Will be to arrive where we started
> And know the place for the first time.
– [T.S. Eliot](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/T._S._Eliot)
[Watching the Giro prologue live](http://sports-livez.com/channel/ch-6.php) and remembering [my own visit to the final Giro TT last year](http://bob.ryskamp.org/brain/?p=4412).
> But six [human skills] will survive, say Messrs Brynjolfsson and McAfee, no matter how fast and smart computers become. Those skills are: statistical insight; managing group dynamics; good writing; framing and solving open-ended problems; persuasion; and human nurturing.
[Sounds like a challenge](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a2c70abc-8d4a-11e1-9798-00144feab49a.html#axzz1tuW6HMJB).
> Is it possible that, we human beings–who are soft-wired for empathic distress–is it possible we could actually extend our empathy to the entire human race as an extended family, and to our fellow creatures as part of our evolutionary family, and to the biosphere as our common community?
> If it’s possible to imagine that, then we may be able to save our species and save our planet. And…if it’s impossible to even imagine that, I don’t see how we’re going to make it.
– [Jeremy Rifkin on “The Empathic Civilization”](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g)
> We can be knowledgeable with other men’s knowledge, but we cannot be wise with other men’s wisdom. – [Michel de Montaigne](http://quotevadis.com/post/20780660637/michel-de-montaigne-we-cannot-be-wise)
> Where do ideas come from?
> From looking at one thing and seeing another.
> From fooling around, and playing with possibilities.
> From speculating. And changing.
> Pushing, pulling.
> Transforming.
> And if you’re lucky, you come up with something worth saving, using, and building on.
> That’s where the game stops, and the work begins.
– [Saul Bass](http://meditativespectrum.com/2011/12/29/why-humans-create/)