Author: Matt

Unofficial saint of the desert

Tour guides, docents, and professional speakers of all sorts love to ask their audiences questions to which the answers are obvious. They do this in order to “encourage participation,” but I always find these exchanges patronizing. “Who can tell me the title of the seminar you’re currently attending? That’s right! Communicating Clearly. Now if we’re not communicating clearly, how are we communicating? Anyone? Yes! Unclearly!” Ugh. So I don’t like to encourage this sort of behavior. If you have facts to relate to someone, then relate the facts. If you can’t ask genuinely useful questions, find some other way of involving your audience.

So there we were in a van in southern Argentina with seven other tourists, a driver, and a chipper guide who was eager to practice both her English and her professional guide skills. We were a captive audience in the only vehicle for many miles on one of the narrow highways that stretch across Patagonia. It was going to be a long ride, and we did pay a lot of money to be there, so we tried to make the best of it. “Who can tell me what meteorological feature this part of Patagonia is best known for?” she asked. Silence. We all knew. She knew we knew. No one wanted to play.

I sighed and decided to throw out the obvious answer just to take the pressure off my fellow tourists, and make the guide feel better about her job. “Wind,” I said. The guide smiled condescendingly with the look that means, in any language or culture, “Not the answer I was looking for.” Dang it. “Well,” she said, trying to reassure me that I hadn’t said something completely boneheaded, “it is indeed very windy here.” And she went on to talk about how many windmills were being installed, what a large portion of the nation’s electrical needs they hoped wind would provide in a few years, and so on. But this was all a diversion. She was looking for a particular answer to her question, and after asking a second time with no response, she filled it in for us. “It’s incredibly dry here.” Well, yes, of course—we knew that. We were confused because it was too obvious. Our guide went on to tell us how very few centimeters of rain the Chubut province received each year, how only the hardiest plants and animals could survive, how heavy pollution in other parts of the world was leading to dramatic climate changes here, and so on. This was all interesting in a vague, academic sense, but not what I really cared to listen to at that time. As I would later discover, however, stories involving thirst figure prominently in this arid region’s popular mythology.

Shrines of the Times

As we drove all over Chubut province—and again in each of the regions we visited—we repeatedly passed small roadside shrines, often in the remotest and unlikeliest locations. We always zipped by too quickly for me to get a good look or take a picture, but something told me there must be a story behind them. Finally someone asked what they were. Our guide said, with a mildly embarrassed tone, “Those are shrines or monuments to Deolinda Correa.” The story she then related is one she clearly did not believe in herself, but equally clearly, a great many other Argentineans did.

As legend has it, in the 1830s, María Antonia Deolinda Correa lived in Argentina’s San Juan province—an area at the foot of the Andes well north of Patagonia. Her husband, Bustos, was taken by force and drafted into the private army of Juan Facundo Quiroga, a regional gaucho warlord. Deolinda was so distraught that she set out on foot, with her newborn son in her arms, to follow her husband. After days of walking through the desert without food or water, she finally collapsed and died. Days later, passing mule drivers found her body; amazingly, her infant son was still alive and nursing at her breast. The men buried her, and having found the name Correa on a pendant she was wearing, labeled her tomb “Difunta Correa,” difunta being a word that literally means “defunct” but is more commonly used to mean “dead.”

Birth of a Saint

Years later, as her story spread, the locals began to think of her as a saint who had given her life for her child. And so, in this predominantly Catholic nation, people in need began to pray to her. When one man’s prayers were miraculously answered, he built a small chapel to honor Deolinda. Shortly thereafter, someone brought an offering of water to this chapel, symbolizing the divine relief from thirst. Soon, small roadside shrines began to appear all over the country, some of them littered with hundreds of bottles of water brought either in supplication or in thanks. Deolinda Correa has become the unofficial regional patron saint of travelers, farmers, and all those whose lives or livelihoods depend on a precarious supply of water. The monument built on the site where Deolinda is said to have died is now a large sanctuary—a hilltop where 17 chapels, and numerous smaller shrines, pay her honor. Over half a million pilgrims visit this site in the small town of Vallecito each year.

Deolinda was never canonized by the Catholic church, which regards the entire tale as nothing more than a superstition. There is little evidence of Deolinda’s existence and even less of the supposed miracle. The legend also does not say what happened to Deolinda’s son. But none of this weakens the beliefs of thousands of people who claim that Difunta Correa’s intervention resulted in miraculously answered prayers.

Travelers do not often cross the deserts and plains of Argentina on foot these days. But I can easily imagine a parched and weary soul, stranded far from food and water, who stumbles upon a shrine to Deolinda Correa and drinks from a water bottle left as an offering. Whether or not this ever happens, I like to think that in death—or even as the figment of someone’s imagination—Difunta Correa now has the power to save countless thirsty travelers.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on January 26, 2005.

Image credit: Piergiorgio Rossi [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Silent night out on the town

On our way home from the theater after seeing an X-Men movie back in the mid-2000s, Morgen and I kept finding ourselves surrounded by unusually noisy people—in the lobby, on the street corner, in the subway station. We were attempting to discuss the film, but we could barely hear each other. Every time this happened, I tried to move away to a quieter spot; noise has its place, but when I’m trying to think or carry on a conversation, I prefer relative silence. As we reviewed some of the fictional mutants and their super powers, I said, “If I were a mutant, they’d call me Silento. My super power would be the ability to create a large bubble of silence all around me.” In my book, that beats being able to throw balls of flame or have metal claws pop out of my hands.

I have always been baffled at the fact that people so frequently go to noisy parties, bars, clubs, and restaurants with the apparent intention of getting to know each other or spend quality time together. How is that supposed to work? How can you have a worthwhile conversation with someone when you must yell over loud music, not to mention all those other people yelling their own conversations at each other? Perhaps my telepathic powers are insufficiently developed, but as an ordinary human, it seems more sensible to me that if you want to talk to someone, you’d go to a place where you can hear and be heard.

Shortly after the episode I recounted above, I found out about a phenomenon that had recently begun to catch on: quiet parties, where the only rule was “no talking.” I wrote about it here, explaining what a delightful idea it sounded like. I’ll tell you about it again, but first a spoiler: that trend pretty much evaporated, and the term “quiet party” now means something very different from what it originally did…though it’s still kind of interesting.

These Go to Zero

The idea for quiet parties (in the original sense) came from two New Yorkers, artist Paul Rebhan and musician Tony Noe, who got frustrated trying to find a bar where they could have a quiet conversation in 2002. (Sounds familiar!) They invented the quiet party partly for practical reasons and partly as a sort of participatory performance art. Despite—or perhaps because of—New York’s reputation for ubiquitous noise, the parties were an instant hit.

Loud music, yelling, and cell phone use were prohibited at quiet parties; sometimes there’d be soft music in the background and sometimes not. Whispering was allowed in designated areas, and occasionally, quiet parties even permitted the exchange of text messages and email. But on the whole, participants relied on written notes, mime, and body language to convey their messages. Once partygoers got over the initial discomfort of writing instead of talking, they often found that passing notes makes was easier and less intimidating to approach strangers. And it was often quite entertaining: there was no rule against giggling or gasping.

You Had Me at “___”

You’ll notice, of course, that I speak of quiet parties in the past tense. At one time, there was a Quiet Party website listing quiet parties that were officially sanctioned and promoted by Rehban and Noe. They took place at venues that had been specially reserved for the evening, with hosts who explained how it works, pass out pens and paper, and enforce the “no talking” rule. These events, which were held around the world, tended to attract mainly singles; those looking for love at a quiet party were said to be practicing silent dating.

But for whatever reason, this meme ran its course, the website went away, and Rehban and Noe went on to do other things. Although there’s nothing stopping anyone from holding a quiet party of that type now, at some point, the term “quiet party” quietly adopted an entirely different meaning. What that term—and others like it, including silent party and silent disco—typically means now is a dance party where DJs play music through wireless headphones worn by each guest, as opposed to through loudspeakers. So a visitor walking into the room without the right headphones would hear very little, while each participant can have the music as soft or loud as they prefer.

I guess the option to turn one’s own music down or even off is nice, as is the opportunity to engage in conversation with someone else if they’re willing to do the same. (If not, then it’s just yelling over both people’s headphones—hardly an improvement!) But new-style “quiet” parties, emphasizing as they do constant audio stimulation and very much deemphasizing actual communication, are very nearly the opposite of what I loved about the original quiet party idea. What a pity.

I think I can safely say that no one has ever had to yell to be heard at one of my parties, but I’d certainly be game to try complete silence—I mean, without the headphones. Perhaps one day in the future, if truly silent parties make a resurgence and become the norm, the world will no longer need Silento. I’ll be only too happy to hang up my cape.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on June 7, 2006.

Image credit: Dashanchia [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Rebuilding history

In 1731 the Swedish East India Company was founded to pursue trade in southeast Asia, exchanging Swedish timber, tar, iron, and copper for silver, tea, porcelain, and silk. Over the course of its 82-year history, it launched 38 ships on 132 expeditions. One of those ships was the Götheborg.

The Götheborg had made three voyages to China when it made its final approach to its home port, Göteborg, on September 12, 1745. After 30 months at sea and within sight of its ultimate destination, for reasons still unknown, the Götheborg ran aground and began to sink. Luckily, the entire crew was rescued by the numerous bystanders who had gathered to watch the ship’s entry into port. However, the ship’s precious cargo—estimated to be worth as much as the national budget—was lost, and the ship sank to the ocean floor.

Shaping the Timbers

The Götheborg was largely forgotten until 1984, when divers began reexamining the wreck and found remnants of the ship under layers of clay. Their discoveries kindled public interest in the ship, and inspired a plan to build a replica ship that would once again sail to China.

In 1993, a new organization called the Swedish East India Company was formed to make this plan a reality. Construction on the ship began in 1995, when the keel was laid, and continued through the ship’s first sea trial in May 2005.

Throughout the process, great care was taken to emulate the shipbuilding techniques that formed the first Götheborg, with a few key exceptions. While the exterior of the ship was built using the classic 18th-century materials of oak, pine, spruce, and elm, the interior of the ship is much more 21st century. Due to modern regulations requiring the inclusion of a propulsion system, the new Götheborg had to be fitted with two engines and two main generators plus an emergency generator, although its default power source is the wind. In addition, the ship has been equipped with five watertight steel bulkheads to comply with international seaworthiness standards.

Slow Boat to China

On October 2, 2005, the East Indiaman Götheborg (as it is officially called) set sail from Sweden, headed toward Shanghai, China by way of Spain, Brazil, South Africa, Australia, and Indonesia. The ship reached Shanghai on August 29, 2006, for a two-month stay before returning to Sweden.

Since that initial trip to China, the Götheborg has made many voyages to other parts of Europe (including Scandinavia, the Baltic Sea, the Netherlands, France, Germany, and the UK), completing nine expeditions in ten years. When it is in port, whether at home in Sweden or while traveling, it welcomes visitors on board for tours, and has hosted more than a million people over the years.

The Götheborg project has given many people a chance to see history first-hand, and to experience what life was like so long ago. But more than that, it has combined the strength of tradition with the innovation of the present—a rare and valuable thing to behold.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on September 13, 2006.

Image credit: Fred J [Public Domain], via Wikimedia Commons

The study of personal space

In 1966 anthropologist Edward T. Hall coined the term proxemics to describe the study of how people perceive the proximity of others. Hall’s work was inspired by an animal study conducted by Swiss zoologist Heini Hediger, who found that animals maintained various boundaries depending on whether they were preparing to escape, to attack, to communicate with members of another species, or relating to a member of their own species.

Based on these insights, and after conducting his own research, Edward Hall developed the idea of a set of expanding circles, called reaction bubbles, that described how humans manage the space around them. The innermost circle he identified as Intimate space, reserved for those we are closest to, and usually measuring 6 to 18 inches (15 to 45cm) in radius. The next level up he dubbed Personal space, the distance we are comfortable maintaining with close friends, about 1.5 to 4 feet (0.5 to 1.2m). He used the term Social space to indicate our preferred proximity to acquaintances, about 5–12 feet (1.5–3.6m), and Public space for the distance we need for public speaking, 12–25 feet or more (3.6–7.6m).

This sounds very specific, but Hall himself acknowledged that these distances vary from culture to culture. While those from less-populated countries, or countries where individualism and privacy are highly valued, are more comfortable with larger spaces between themselves and others, in other cultures maintaining what is considered excessive distance can be perceived as rude or unfriendly.

As this video shows, Hall’s work on proxemics goes beyond reaction bubbles, but it is his idea of how we manage the space around us that has had the most long-lasting effect on popular culture.

Don’t Stand So Close To Me

Because in certain situations it is not always possible to keep our preferred distance from others—for example in crowded subway cars or elevators—we learn coping mechanisms to deal with our discomfort. Psychologists observe that individuals in these circumstances often avoid eye contact as a way to minimize the forced intimacy of close quarters. Another strategy we employ, according to psychologist Robert Sommer, is to dehumanize those around us, imagining them as inanimate objects in our personal space instead of the more anxiety-producing fellow creatures they are.

I think these strategies are in play in most large cities and in other situations where it’s is too threatening to acknowledge the close presence of others. My own discomfort is assuaged by passing others anonymously on a crowded sidewalk, or keeping to myself in a cramped airplane cabin. Of course, the illusion of space is shattered when I’m approached on the street, or when the passenger behind me starts kicking my chair. At these moments I feel my blood pressure rise, my stomach clench, and my temper grow short. While this reaction might be appropriate in truly life-threatening situations, nothing is at stake most of the time. Maybe knowing that I am responding only to a perceived threat to my safety will help me to remain calm the next time this happens. Then again, maybe not.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on February 15, 2007.

Image credit: Jean-Louis Grall [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons

A better way to get your stuff back?

If you go to a coffee shop and leave your glasses, keys, or notebook on the table, chances are some honest citizen will turn the item in at the counter, and as long as you know where you left it, you can return later to claim it. Larger stores, stadiums, concert halls, theme parks and so on typically have central lost-and-found departments that serve the same purpose. But again, you must have at least a general idea of where an item was lost, and you can only hope that whoever found it didn’t decide just to keep it. (Lost-and-found departments are unlikely to have your lost camera, laptop, or wallet—at least not with the money still in it.) Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a general, all-purpose lost-and-found service that didn’t require you to know where your valuables went missing? And wouldn’t it be nice if there were an incentive for the finder to return your lost item rather than just pocketing it? These are precisely the ideas behind several online services.

The Carrot and the Sticker

In general, the programs require you to purchase tags, stickers, or labels of some kind and affix them to the things you want to keep track of. The person who finds your missing item can either call a toll-free number or visit a website and enter the ID number on the label. Depending on the service, the finder may then be informed of a reward for returning the item—and that may be one that you supply, or one that the service provides (paid for by your subscription fees). At this point, some services simply send you a message from the finder—allowing you to make your own arrangements for getting the item back. In other cases, the service arranges for anonymous return of the item (typically at your expense) and delivery of the reward to the finder.

Unfortunately, even the promise of a reward may not result in the return of items that have been stolen rather than simply misplaced. However, if stolen goods are later recovered by the police, the ID tags provide a way for them to get in touch with the rightful owner and arrange for return of the goods. When police confiscate stolen property and can’t determine who owns it, it is often sold at auction.

The idea for online lost-and-found services actually came from a very successful program called the National Bike Registry (NBR) that is endorsed by many police departments (and recently merged with another bike recovery service called 529 Garage. Like more general lost-and-found services, NBR provides you with a tamper-resistant ID label for your bike which includes a URL and a toll-free phone number. Since missing bikes are much more likely to have been stolen than lost, though, it is rare for anyone other than law enforcement officials to use the service.

Fringe Benefits

Though not their main purpose, there is reason to believe ID labels provide a deterrent to theft. Because the labels are tamper-resistant, they cannot be removed cleanly, making resale of stolen goods more difficult. Although these lost-and-found services are still small enough not to have aroused much interest in the insurance industry, the potential certainly exists for reduced premiums for people who use the ID tags, as they decrease the probability that an insurer would have to pay the cost of a missing item.

Lost-and-found services offer labels in a wide variety of shapes, sizes, and materials to be used with almost any imaginable product. For example, ReturnMe sells skinny labels that can fit unobtrusively on eyeglasses and sunglasses, as well as metal key tags, luggage tags, and even pet tags. The presence of the tags on your stuff help to ensure you don’t suffer for forgetting to pick up that umbrella or briefcase when you step off the train or out of the restaurant.

Since I originally wrote about these services back in 2003, there’s been a lot of change in the industry. BoomerangIt, at one time the largest online lost-and-found service, changed ownership in 2016 and currently has only a minimally functional website that claims it’s in the process of being renovated. Meanwhile, competitor StuffBak shut down in 2005, and its former customers are now being served by ReturnMe, which appears to be leading this category at the moment. Although Yellowtag is still operating in the U.K., MicroTrax (a U.S. company) and Trackitback (a Canadian company) are apparently no more. Or…maybe they’re just lost. If you see a lost-and-found company on the sidewalk, be sure to check for a tag. There could be a reward if you return it!

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on May 22, 2003, and again in a slightly revised form on January 9, 2005.

Image credit: Paul Gorbould [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons