In response, many Americans are saying good-bye forever to the corporate world and are making the effort to work for themselves. They are rolling the dice in hopes that a lifetime of knowledge and experience in the workplace offers the skills to work as Independent Contractors. Contract work is for some the last hope for earning the salary they came to depend upon as an employee.

This shift represents a trend in America. Virtual Assistants were practically unheard of five years ago—now there are thousands competing for work in a global marketplace. Contract work commands a larger percentage from corporate budgets every year. More men and women of all ages are trying their hand at working for themselves.

Success as a self-employed business-person requires not only skills and experience, but constant vigilance. It is essential to not only follow trends in the market, but to anticipate them. When a direction becomes apparent, you must evaluate yourself and your business to see if you’re in position to not only survive, but prosper. You must carefully examine your products and services and compare them to the offerings of your competitors. Are your services superior, or can others do what you do better? Are your prices sufficiently competitive to win clients while still earning a living? Can your business survive economic fluctuations? These are all questions which must continually be addressed in order to succeed.

It is essential to look about for indications of market trends and respond accordingly, but we ultimately must look inward if we wish to find success in business. To compete in either a global market or your own neighborhood, you must continually hone your skills to improve the quality of products and service you offer. Your talent, skills and experience will translate into customer satisfaction and success in your chosen field. While it is important to acknowledge economic conditions and the actions of your competitors, you ultimately cannot influence them. You can only influence yourself and your own business.

I would encourage anyone interested in this article to read other articles I have produced about succeeding as an Independent Contractor and assessing one’s place in the market. Please follow these links:

Ten Strategies for Working as an Independent Contractor

Independent Contractors: Assessing Your Value in the Market

1.  Simplification.  A cartoonist simplifies the subject matter while maintaining the viewer’s ability to recognize it.  Eyes become circles or dots, mouths are reduced to curved lines, and noses or feet are triangles.  It is a tribute to the artist’s skill that so much content can be wrung from these simple geometric forms.  We see joy, pain, and fear through the subtle manipulation of lines depicting eyebrows, smiles, or frowns.  It is a fabulous accomplishment in its own way.

Clothing is often difficult to draw and reduced to a series of lines indicating shirts, pants, and shoes by the artist.  Rarely will you see wrinkles in a shirt or pants pockets in a cartoon.  If a series of characters are portrayed, very simple patters are typically used to make each person’s clothes look specific and individual.  In the cartoon Peanuts, Charlie Brown’s unique shirt design is distinctive enough for the character to be recognized in any context it is placed in.  The viewer doesn’t even need to see Charlie Brown’s equally distinctive face to identify Charlie Brown, typified by a story line placing him in a summer camp with a sack over his head.  We went weeks without seeing his face but never doubted we were reading about Charlie Brown.

Beyond the primary subject matter, backgrounds are minimized significantly in most cartoons.  Although there is a tendency with strips such as Doonesbury or Calvin and Hobbes to offer more intricate environments for the comic characters to inhabit, most daily comics in the newspapers are closer in detail to Dilbert or Peanuts.  What do you see in cartoon strips like these?  The horizon line is a single line toward the bottom of a panel.  Houses are simple rectangular shapes.  Trees are barrel-shaped trunks with leaves that collectively resemble cotton balls.  Clouds look like cotton balls, also.  Grass is usually simple repetitive dashes where the ground is supposed to be, if grass is shown at all.

2.  Emphasis.  Emphasis involves making certain aspects of a cartoon stand out from other details.  It might involve drawing facial characteristics that are larger than they should be, or portrayed with more detail than the rest of the figure or scene.  It might mean adding shadow or color.  It could also be determined by placing a specific detail in a prominent location on the page. 

Consider emphasis in terms of other areas in life.  If we wish to make a point with someone in conversation, we might speak louder, slower, or with more feeling.  Or, we might speak in softer tones to capture someone’s attention.  If we own a piece of furniture we are especially proud of, we might put it in a prominent place in our home so it may easily be seen.  Cartoonists do the same with their art.  They select something to stand out so it will catch our attention.  This is not an amazing talent that only creative minds possess.  Emphasis is a life skill everyone utilizes each day.  You might now be thinking, “Okay, but talking louder isn’t the same as cartooning.  How do I emphasize the details of my cartoon that I want people to notice?”  That brings us to the next technique.

3.  Exaggeration.  This technique is especially important to develop when learning cartooning.  Let’s switch from the comics page to the editorial section of our newspaper, and we’ll observe that public figures are made recognizable by the exaggeration of specific physical characteristics.  Barack Obama is drawn with dark eyes, big ears, and an elongated chin.  George W. Bush was depicted with huge ears that stuck out.  Bill Clinton, a large nose and square chin.  My personal favorite presidential caricature was Richard Nixon’s, epitomized by sagging, jowly cheeks, a long nose and receding hair line. 

By exaggerating the proper features, other details inherently diminish in importance.  There are no specific criteria for determining what the “proper” features are, but one can generalize.  A woman is always drawn smaller than a man with fewer muscles, wider hips, and (usually) longer hair.  Men are depicted with larger, more muscular physiques.  An especially intelligent person might be drawn with a larger head relative to the body.  A dull, stupid person would be drawn in the opposite manner with a small head.

How does one know what to exaggerate?  Again, this knowledge is not a gift bestowed upon the creative elite.  Rather, it is a common, ordinary knack for observation.  Anyone can train themselves to be observant.  Look at someone nearby and settle on their most distinctive feature.  Ask yourself, if I emphasize this feature in a drawing through its exaggeration, will it be sufficient for someone who knows this person to recognize who it is?  If not, is there a combination of features that will accomplish this?

(When drawing caricatures of myself, I emphasize my beard, my hair parted down the middle, and my protruding ears.  I now also put bags under my eyes to indicate my age.  Through the use of these exaggerations, it doesn’t matter what other details I include.  People always know it is supposed to be me.)

If one develops their powers of observation, they can know how to exaggerate physical characteristics to make a cartoon or caricature recognizable.  Another means to accomplish this is through the last technique we will discuss.

4.  Repetition.  Go back to your daily newspaper and glance at the comics’ page.  What does each character have in common?  They almost never change clothes!  They are seen day after day wearing the same shirt, dress, or suit.  They never wear anything different!  The cartoonist is using repetition to identify the character.  Political cartoons are similar.  If a cartoonist is satirizing the President or another political figure, they would not arbitrarily put him in jogging clothes or swimming trunks, for example, because we are not accustomed to seeing him in casual clothing or sports attire.  We see the President in a suit every day.  Consequently, cartoonists will place him in a suit to allow for easier identification.  Remember discussing Charlie Brown’s distinctively patterned shirt?  It is through repetition that we know this shirt is his. 

If one were drawing children it would be appropriate to draw them holding a favorite toy or clutching a security blanket, as Linus does in the same Peanuts cartoon strip.  If these details are included each time, the child will be identifiable practically without concern for consistent or accurate facial or physical characteristics.  The artist can’t confuse the reader by drawing Charlie Brown with the blanket, but consistency isn’t mandatory if repetition is successfully utilized.  For the budding cartoonist, it should be easy to use repetition effectively because it is simply drawing something over and over.  What could be more straightforward than that?  It is easier to draw a man wearing the same clothes all the time than design a distinctive outfit for each cartoon or situation, right?  It’s simpler to draw a woman with the same hair style than create something new, isn’t it?  Of course it is!

Let’s summarize to demonstrate how easy it is to utilize these elements successfully.  All that’s required to begin as a cartoonist is become familiar with a few techniques typical of the field.  They are:

The first is simplification, or intentionally omitting details or generalizing them; next is emphasis, or drawing attention to the details of a character, landscape, or situation; third is exaggeration, the practice of drawing a detail or characteristic in an embellished, overstated way that is inconsistent with the rest of the drawing; finally there is repetition, the act of emphasizing the same details or patterns repeatedly.  Mastering these four techniques provides the foundation for an artist’s development as a cartoonist.  Their utilization offers anyone a chance to improve their skills in this fun, enjoyable endeavor.

This informational piece is not intended to diminish the talents of successful caricature or cartoon artists by insinuating following a few simple steps is a substitute for the perfection of one’s craft.  It is meant only to encourage everyone who ever looked at the comics’ page in their daily newspaper and said, “I wish I could do that.”

You can.

I stood on a barren plain.  I was no longer a teenager but an adult with long braided hair and a beard, dressed simply as a warrior with a staff and shield.  I stared in grim determination across the plain’s expanse toward a mountain range which loomed in the distance.  Lightning flashed about me in an eerie display that defied logic.  The bolts were black against a bright sky.  I didn’t fear them for they generated from my own being.  They were my totem—my symbol of power.  Suddenly, to my right appeared a green typewriter, suspended in mid-air.  I smiled, for this bizarre image heralded the coming of my friend and advisor, Greg Taylor.  He appeared and greeted me, addressing me in my spirit name as “Lawgiver”.   I called him “Kakoli”, a spirit name interpreted as “Ram”.  Following a brief clasp of our hands, he solemnly described a growing danger to a city in the clouds we called home and urged me to help him combat it.  I answered his call to battle and summoned another friend, Paul Larson to aid us.  A sharp bolt of lightning confirmed he heard our desperate cry for aid.  Moments later he appeared on the plain to stand with us.  He revealed a small metal disc he carried in a pouch which hung from his shoulder.  We formed a circle and chanted as the disc began to glow.  I felt we were spinning as we were transported to the city in the clouds.

The city stood shiny and new, gleaming in sunshine never obscured by clouds from above.  Despite its beauty and purity, it was beset by lightning that emanated upward from the clouds below in surrealistic fashion.  The bolts flashed in a purplish hue, and I recognized our opponent as the mystery figure that terrorized my people for months.  Our previous efforts were to no avail in halting the reign of fear this madman perpetrated upon our citizens.  I looked intently into the eyes of my friends and vowed this time we would win.

The cacophonous sounds of the typewriter matched the uneven rhythms of lightning and thunder that danced around us.  Greg Taylor used his powers to augment our own tenfold.  A figure shrouded in dark robes appeared and purple lightning bolts violently pierced the sky.  Paul Larson, whom Greg Taylor once referred to as “Berserker”, countered with lightning that cut through the air with equally intensity.  I had never seen such a display of raw power, but I did my best to match it.  The air was charged with energy that surged in waves through my body.  A lesser being would have been incinerated, but I endured.  With fierce determination, Paul Larson and I increased the force of our attack in hopes it was sufficient to destroy our enemy, but the mysterious being countered our every move.  He was at least our equal.

Clouds formed above the city we protected as we struggled, and a fierce storm ensued.  I recognized the storm as the work of another friend and ally, the beautiful Ann Collins, using her might to aid our cause.  The turbulent clouds she created formed a dome of force which prevented our own energies from dispersing.  Our power was focused as never before.  The battle raged on until our opponent faltered.  The purple lightning slightly lessened in intensity.  The bolts suddenly swirled around him in a mad dance of blinding light, and he vanished.

I gathered my friends about me to congratulate them for a victory well earned.  We didn’t destroy our enemy, but for the first time we stayed his hand and prevented him from realizing his evil purpose.  As we formed a circle, Paul Larson again held the disc he carried in the palm of his hand.  We watch it glow and pulse as though it were praising us for our efforts in protecting the city in the clouds.  I was pleased, but knew as well that our victory was not complete.  The enemy was still unknown to us and at large.  There would be other battles in our future.

Ann Collins again summoned a storm, and it carried her back to her sanctuary beyond the mountains on the surface below.  Paul Lehr used the storm to focus his own abilities, and lightning flashed about him as he vanished from view.  I stood with Greg Taylor, who placed his hand upon my shoulder in a gesture of camaraderie.  I smiled.  A large green typewriter suddenly appeared again in the air above him, and he too, vanished.  All that remained was a soft warm breeze that softly caressed my face, a final testament to the power unleashed only moments earlier.

I was alone.

This was the first of many similar dreams I had in the fall of 1971.  The cast of characters expanded over time, but the theme remained the same:  my friends and I were locked in a struggle with a mysterious entity of great power.  We were symbolically represented by elemental forces that signified our character and abilities.  Only Greg Taylor was represented by a different type of symbol in the green typewriter.  The dreams lasted longer and became more specific:  clothing and appearance became standardized, elemental totems were soon catalogued, and the number of enemies grew in proportion to the total cast of characters.  Conversation was minimal, and all movement and actions were bold and dramatic.  They always began with me standing alone on a vast barren plain, and ended with the departure of my friends.  Loneliness despite deep and loyal friendships was an enduring premise of these dreams.

Other themes were equally recognizable.  My friends and I wielded great power and used it to protect an idyllic utopian community.  Forces opposed our efforts as saviors of this group of people and sought relentlessly to destroy our sanctuary.  The task always fell upon my group of friends to act as savior to our people.

After the New Year in 1972, the dreams vanished, never to return again in this form or context.  What did they mean?  Were they more than dreams?  Were they perhaps an omen of strange times to come?  Why did this series of dreams seemingly comprise an ongoing narrative, structurally and thematically consistent unto itself?

What was my life about to become?

1.  Both magazines picked KU to win it all.  This is hardly news since Xavier and C.J. Henry opted to join a loaded KU team.  Deep at every position with stars at center and point guard, this could be a year for KU to dominate their opponents and hopefully bring a fourth NCAA championship to Lawrence, Kansas. 

Lindy’s ranks the Top 10 frontcourts and backcourts, and KU joined Texas and Purdue as the only teams to make both lists, with KU’s front line ranked second and their backcourt fourth.  By position, Lindy’s ranks Cole Aldrich as the number one center nationally, Sherron Collins the number three point guard, and Xavier Henry the sixth best small forward.  Three stars in the lineup indicate good things for the Hawks, but much of their success will depend on whether Xavier Henry or Tyshawn Taylor can emerge as a consistent scoring threat in support of Cole Aldrich and Sherron Collins.  Both have the potential to star in 2010.  Another question concerns whether one of the Morris twins is ready to consistently help in the paint.  Because Aldrich is a force inside they don’t need to dominate, but it’s time (for at least one of them) to step up and be counted as a player.

2.  Athlon rates Kentucky 6^th, while Lindy’s has them at #8 in the country.  This was likely a shock to the Kentucky faithful who pegged them #1 after John Wall joined Eric Bledsoe, DeMarcus Cousins, Daniel Orton and Jon Hood in an elite freshman class.  The return of Patrick Patterson was huge, but losing Jodie Meeks kept them from vying for the top spot in November.  John Calipari will win games at Kentucky, but even he will need time to put the pieces together.  I don’t think they are better than Kansas, but I do believe they will be outstanding by the end of the season and poised to make a run for the NCAA title.  Could we see a repeat of 2008, with Bill Self coaching against John Calipari in the title game?  You bet.

3.  Does North Carolina deserve a #5 ranking with the losses they suffered after capturing the 2009 title?  Jayhawk or Tar Heels fans will tell you never to count out a Roy Williams team, but I wonder if they deserve their lofty preseason perch.  Yes, Carolina is a monster up front with Ed Davis, Tyler Zeller, Deon Thompson, and their 6’10” twin recruits, David and Travis Wear.  The backcourt is suspect, however, with Larry Drew II more of a Quentin Thomas clone than a viable replacement for Ty Lawson.  Marcus Ginyard will be back, but can he be the player he was in 2008 after sitting out the 2009 campaign with an injury?  Is there enough firepower in the backcourt to take pressure off their big men?  Do they have the depth to maintain the pace that Roy Williams prefers?  This is a team that could be pressured, and if opponents can rebound with Carolina they could run on them.           

4.  Texas is rated 2^nd in Lindy’s preseason poll and 3^rd in Avalon’s.  Looks like another duel between the Jayhawks and Longhorns for conference supremacy, with the only scheduled meeting between the two in Texas.  The questions for Rick Barnes’ team include:  is Dexter Pittman ready to play hard for the entire season?  Can transfer Jai Lucas and super-freshman Avery Bradley gel in the backcourt and give Texas the consistency they lacked in 2009?  Damion James will continue to give opponents fits with his hustle and all-around skills.  The pieces are there, and if they can fall into place quickly enough, Texas could make the Final Four.

Questions for this season include:

Which “one-and-done” player will be next to get their college team in trouble, knowing that the NCAA can’t punish them if they’re playing in the NBA?

Will anyone realize that a rule forcing kids to go to college and gain some maturity and life experience isn’t inherently bad?  Will anyone additionally realize that a rule isn’t bad just because someone breaks it?  If someone runs a stoplight, should we decide it isn’t worth the trouble to stop at red lights?

We know from watching Derrick Rose and Greg Oden that a freshman can take a team to the NCAA title game, but can a freshman (with the exception of Carmelo Anthony) lead them to a championship?

Should anyone care that Isiah Thomas is coaching Florida International? 

Can North Carolina make a third consecutive Final Four? 

Can Louisville push aside all the off-season distractions and focus on basketball?

Can Duke regain their place among the best teams in college basketball after several years of early exits from the NCAA Tournament?

Will Arizona keep their streak of consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances alive?

Is there a deeper team than Kansas?  If the newcomers develop, KU should be capable of putting 14 different guys on the court who are able to really play.  Speaking of KU, will C.J. Henry make an impact after so many years away from the game?

How many teams can put twins on the court together?  (KU and North Carolina can…)

How many teams can put brothers on the court together?  (With the Henry brothers and the Morris twins, KU can put two sets of brothers out there…How many other teams can do that?)     

Which newcomer (freshman, transfer or junior college player) will have the greatest impact on their team?

Which team will have the most second-generation players (players whose fathers were in the NBA)?

This blog used player and team rankings from Lindy’s College Basketball 2009-2010 and Athlon Sports College Basketball 2009-2010 Preview.  All opinions and analysis in this blog are my own and are not intended to represent those of anyone associated with these publications.

Center: Cole Aldrich. The junior might be the best pure center to play for KU since Wilt Chamberlain ruled Allen Field House over fifty years ago. (When I say pure center, I am excluding such stellar players as Danny Manning, Dave Robisch and Raef LaFrentz, all whom I consider power forwards.) Aldrich might be the best big man in the country this year, and with more help from his teammates, he will be less apt to wear down. A rebounding and shot-blocking machine with a soft touch, Aldrich will be a nightmare for other players to match up against.

Power forward: Marcus Morris. A year’s experience and another summer in the weight room should help Marcus Morris inch closer to his potential. Morris started 22 games and split time with his twin brother, but sometimes seemed physically outmatched by older and savvier players. That should no longer be an issue, and with more strength and experience he will cut down on fouls and display his considerable abilities.

Small forward: Xavier Henry. Younger son of former Jayhawk Carl Henry, Xavier brings strength, speed and skill to the wing position. The 8th ranked player in this year’s high school class, Henry is expected to start immediately and add a physical presence to the small forward spot. He is quick and powerful, with a good shot and strong drives to the basket. Like Darrell Arthur several years ago, Henry’s addition to an already loaded team could mean the difference between being a good team and a great one.

Point guard: Sherron Collins. Sherron Collins could challenge for the distinction of best point guard to play at Kansas since Darnell Valentine arrived in 1978. Collins is the only guard to match Valentine’s strength, quickness and athleticism, and is also an outstanding shooter. For Collins to achieve his goals, he must keep both his weight and emotions in check. He faltered in 2009 when trying to do too much—usually when he didn’t trust his teammates. Despite the occasional lack of judgment, he proved he could lead a team and displayed a complete game. With more talent and experience joining him in the lineup, his assist to turnover ratio should improve and he’ll be given more rest.

Shooting guard: Tyshawn Taylor. After leading Team USA to the FIBA Under-19 World Championship this summer, Taylor looks to bring a newfound confidence to the court as a sophomore. Taylor’s athleticism rivals that of former Jayhawk Mario Chalmers, but he lacked Chalmers’ confidence and struggled at times to fit into the role of third scorer and secondary ball handler. That should not be a problem this year, and Taylor looks ready to come into his own.

The second team could start as a unit for 90 percent of the Division One teams in the country and compete for a Top 25 ranking. The players include:

Center: Jeff Withey. The 7-foot transfer from Arizona was the eighth rated center coming out of high school and a top 40 recruit. His reputation is as a defensive player and shot blocker, but he is said to possess a nice shot. He will improve by playing against Aldrich in practice, and should offer solid minutes as a backup center. Aldrich has praised the player for his ability, and it will be exciting to watch him take the court when he becomes eligible second semester.

Power forward: Markieff Morris. The other Morris twin demonstrated a complete game in 15 minutes per outing as a freshman, with seven starts. Markieff can score, rebound, block shots, pass, and defend. He tended to be foul-prone like his brother, but also like Marcus, a year’s experience and more time in the weight room will help. Increased strength should allow Morris to demonstrate his considerable skills.

Small forward: Brady Morningstar. One of the Jayhawks’ best shooters and defenders a year ago, Morningstar is expected to yield his starting spot to Xavier Henry. It might not happen as quickly as expected, however; Morningstar can play. Undersized at small forward, Brady showed grit and determination as he became the Hawks’ defensive stopper. He was also the team’s most consistent outside shooter, hitting over 40% of his three-point attempts. Morningstar seemed to wear down throughout the course of the season (he frequently led the team in minutes played), but as a reserve he should be fresher and capable of maintaining his statistics with fewer minutes.

Point guard: Elijah Johnson. Johnson was the 24th ranked player and 5th best point guard coming out of high school. He has great speed and athleticism and also possesses a solid outside shot. With Collins, Taylor, Reid and C.J. Henry on the roster, Johnson might see limited minutes on the court, but his resume is strong enough to guarantee him a long look before relegating him to a practice player. Johnson should be an outstanding replacement at point guard for Sherron Collins as a sophomore.

Shooting guard: C.J. Henry. Xavier’s older brother hasn’t played competitive basketball since 2005, but don’t count him out. He’s spent most of that time as a professional baseball player. A highly recruited high school player and gifted athlete with NBA potential, Henry should be able to compete for minutes at either guard position. He has size, strength, and quickness with a complete game. There might be some rust in the beginning, but that should be offset by the experience and maturity that will come from having already competed as a professional athlete.

The third team will surprise with their ability. While most teams can’t go deeper than seven or eight players, KU can throw out five more good players. Included in the mix are:

Forward: Thomas Robinson. A five-star prospect rated 31st best player overall and 7th best power forward coming out of the high school class of 2009, Robinson is considered an outstanding rebounder. If the Morris brothers aren’t prepared to play every night, Robinson could easily find himself with considerable court time. Noted for his strength and athleticism, Robinson has the ability to take rebounding pressure off Aldrich and establish himself as a solid defender.

Forward: Mario Little. Little came to Kansas in 2008 as the #1 player in Junior College ball. He played sparingly due to nagging injuries all season, but showed both determination and versatility in his limited time on the court. Little creates mismatches with a strong post game for his size and the ability to hit the outside shot, allowing him to post up smaller players and bring taller opponents outside. He challenged for a starting spot despite the injuries and showed the potential to be the Hawk’s 3rd scoring threat last season; he will compete with Xavier Henry and Brady Morningstar for minutes.

Guard: Tyrel Reed. Tyrel Reed was usually the first guard off the bench for the Jayhawks in the 2008/2009 season, and impacted numerous games with his clutch long-range shooting. Reliable as both a point guard and shooting guard, Reed’s presence on the court helped keep opponents from doubling Collins or Aldrich. The Kansas native will not threaten to break the starting lineup, but he will play important minutes off the bench. There are probably 250 Division One teams he could start on, but at Kansas he will bring intelligence, hustle and strong outside shooting to each game.

Guard: Travis Releford. Releford was sometimes compared with former Jayhawk Steve Woodberry in his limited minutes last season. A hustle player, he was tenacious on defense and strong going to the basket. He was usually inserted into the game when the Hawks needed a spark, and contributed to the team with strong defense and mistake-free offense. Has the height to fill in at small forward when the Hawks run a three-guard attack.

Guard: Conner Teahan. A fan favorite as a freshman who hit 60% of his three-point shots in 2008, Teahan is a rare walk-on that can actually compete for minutes and he can be relied on to supply offense whenever he is in the game. Teahan played sparingly as a sophomore but has the athleticism to contribute when needed. He provides one of the strongest outside shots on the team, and can get on a roll and fill the nets. At 6-5, he has the height to play in a three-guard lineup.

KU’s returning players: Every returning player except Teahan contributed meaningful minutes in the 2009 season, and another year on Mt. Oread will only improve their skills, experience, and maturity. Collins and Aldrich are legitimate Player-of-the-Year candidates, while Taylor and the Morris twins could have breakout seasons that make them stars.

KU’s five newcomers: Jeff Withey, Thomas Robinson, Xavier Henry, Elijah Johnson, and C.J. Henry would be a formidable starting five in their own right. Their reputations match those of other recruiting classes of the decade such as the Rush-Wright-Chalmers class and the Gooden-Collison-Hinrich trio. All of those players toiled for teams that reached the Final Four. This year’s class joins a KU club that might have been ranked in the top ten if none of these five players arrived in Lawrence, Kansas.

Two player of the year candidates, a supporting cast ready to blossom, and a highly touted recruiting class leads to this question:  has there EVER been a team this deep in college basketball?  I realize my assertions are based on potential as the 2010 Jayhawks haven’t played a minute of basketball yet, but with ten returning players and five talented newcomers, there is cause for optimism.  My challenge to all who read these words: find a deeper college basketball team. Not necessarily a BETTER team—I will concede the greatness of teams past, but who had the deepest team from top to bottom? You tell me…..

No, don’t watch out–the “One-and-done” folks are actually good for the game.

Because of the rule mandating players be one year removed from high school before applying for the NBA draft, players with reputations built on actually playing in games are now being selected by NBA teams.  While there is still draft night lunacy (such as the Orlando Magic selecting Daniel Orton), players now must prove they have a game before opting to become a millionaire.  This is the way it should be, by the way.  It is nonsense for a high school player to wish to play professional basketball before he has learned to play the game.  I’m going to go against the grain and voice my opinion in favor of sending kids to college. The reasons include:

1. They ARE kids. Just because someone COULD play in the NBA doesn’t mean they SHOULD play in the NBA.  Even Kobe Bryant and LeBron James would have survived college, had they been compelled to attend.  The fact that Derrick Rose and O.J. Mayo were possibly involved in some shady dealings during their brief stays on campus doesn’t mean the rules are bad–it more likely indicates they were immature and not quite ready for the world they couldn’t wait to embrace. To say a rule should be abolished because someone tries to circumvent it is like saying we shouldn’t have traffic signals because somebody ran a red light. Raise the bar and let the high school kids realize the world isn’t just about them. Make emotional maturity a job requirement.

2. No one is entitled to play in the NBA.  America is the land of opportunity, not entitlement.  No one owes any player a shot at the NBA.  In the larger scheme of things, is it really that important for Derrick Rose to get to the NBA as quickly as possible? How is anyone hurt by allowing these guys to mature a little? College didn’t kill Rose, Michael Beasley, Greg Oden–they’re all fine. Why do we even care whether or not they can go pro out of high school? Why not show concern instead for the journeyman player who gets forced out of the league because a teenager demands to sit on the bench for three years while he learns the game and develops physically? Why not lobby for the player who succeeds through his energy and work ethic, sacrificing his body every night just to play in the league? Why should the high school kid be more important? And what should we do about the early-entry players that never get drafted by the NBA? Why is their plight ignored? If forced to attend college, they can either work on their game and get to the NBA or realize they don’t have the skills and forge another career for themselves. The rule helps them, also.

3. The rule mandating a year of college helps both the college and pro game. It gives the NCAA extra star power, and it allows the NBA to make draft decisions based on something other than potential. They have a chance to see if the guys they want can really play. It also gives the NBA a fan base. Kansas State fans will tune in to watch Beasley play—they wouldn’t bother if he went pro out of high school. I don’t care how good Beasley is, Manhattan Kansas couldn’t care less about him if he didn’t play basketball there for a year.

4. The pro game is better when played by collegians because they have learned the nuances of the game. It isn’t just about taking it to the rim or shooting the three-pointer; it’s also about defending on and off the ball, pass, move without the ball, dribble with either hand and develop a mid-range game. It’s about seeing a play develop three passes before it’s there. It’s also about learning how to win and becoming a leader. If anyone thinks Kevin Garnett was the leader of the Boston Celtics team that won the title in 2008, they are mistaken. Paul Pierce led them to victory. Garnett simply helped. Pierce learned how to play the game at the University of Kansas, not Boston. It took Kobe Bryant years to learn to become a leader and a winner—Bryant might disagree, but he learned a lot playing ball with Shaquille O’Neal. Could that be why Shaq was sent to Cleveland to help out LeBron James?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the early-entry problem with the NBA doesn’t have to be a problem. If high school players go pro, make their first NBA contract a seven-year deal. The NBA team that drafts the high school kid and has to pay him for seven years will make certain he can really play. They can’t unload him as quickly, and the players can’t adopt the attitude of wanting to get that first contract “over with” to get to that 110 million-dollar deal. If a player goes pro after his first year of college, give him a six-year deal; two years earns a five-year contract, three years merits a four-year deal, and four years of college gets the standard rookie contract. Everyone’s contract expires at roughly the same age.

Speaking of contracts, the NBA should eliminate guaranteed contracts for rookies drafted in the first round. How many times do player proclaim they are going pro if they will be selected in the first round of the NBA draft—otherwise they’re going back to school? Let any player who wants to go to the NBA be forced to make the team. If a kid is truly good enough to play pro basketball, the elimination of guaranteed contracts shouldn’t worry him at all, should it? How many of these kids trying to get into the NBA recognize they are outmatched as professionals or even collegians, and are hoping to get that guaranteed contract before scouts realize they’re no good? If you think that never happens, well—I’ve got some swamp land in Florida to sell to you.

The one-year rule is there, and it was put in place because the NBA recognized the need to stop drafting kids to play pro ball with men. Early entry hurt the game more than it helped it, and the problem will resurface if the rule goes away. Forget all the “16 out of 24 players in the All-Star game went pro out of high school” talk (or whatever the number really was). The guys will still make the All-Star game if they go to college—if they are good enough. Claiming an injustice has been committed is absurd. If college is so distasteful, the NBA should institute a minimum age. No teenagers admitted. If a high school player doesn’t want to go to college until he turns 20, well—McDonald’s is probably hiring and he can work with the twelve-year old burger-flipping prodigy.

Even a computer loaded with statistical data couldn’t easily answer this question, because imbedded in the answer is subjective qualities.  It is easy to begin with regular season and NCAA Tournament records and simply ask:  which programs are the most successful?  That shouldn’t be the only criteria, however.  Other standards include determining their impact on college basketball.  Who were the great players and coaches?  What players achieved success in the NBA, or as coaches of other teams?  Did their coaches, players and teams change the game, and if so, how?  To some degree these are measurable factors, but in other ways they are not.  Just as naming the best college basketball player or players of all time will always be subject to debate, so will naming the best teams.  I will throw my opinions out there and list, in order, my “vote” for the top college basketball programs in Men’s College Basketball.  In order, they are:

1.  North Carolina.  Roy Williams has achieved unparalleled success at North Carolina, even surpassing the legendary Dean Smith.  Two titles in five years gave them five NCAA Championships, trailing only UCLA and Kentucky while tying Indiana for trophies.  Their Tournament resume also includes six consecutive appearances in the tournament, 18 Final Four appearances (they are tops in this category) and 15 Final Four victories.  They are second to Kentucky in all-time victories and the first program to reach 100 NCAA Tournament wins.  Star athletes from their program include Michael Jordan, James Worthy, Sam Perkins (who all played together), Phil Ford, Bob McAdoo, Charlie Scott, Brad Daugherty, Mitch Kupchak, Walter Davis, Rasheed Wallace, Vince Carter, and too many more to name.  Coach Dean Smith held the record for all-time victories by a coach until recently passed by Bob Knight, and Coach Roy Williams coached at Kansas with great success for 15 years before returning home.  Larry Brown was also a Carolina graduate, and his coaching record included stops at Kansas and UCLA, as well as a plethora of professional teams.    

2.  Kentucky.  They haven’t made a Final Four appearance in ten years, which slips their rankings as one of the top five programs on my list to all of number two.  They own the record for total victories and possess seven NCAA Championships, 13 Final Four victories and 98 Tournament victories.  The list of Kentucky basketball coaches is impressive and includes Adolph Rupp, Rick Pitino, Tubby Smith, Eddie Sutton, and Joe B. Hall.  Star athletes from the Kentucky program include Dan Issel, Sam Bowie, Kyle Macy, Kenny Walker, Kevin Grevey, Tayshaun Prince, Jack Givens, Rick Robey, Ron Mercer, Rajon Rondo, and Mel Turpin.  Pat Riley, one of the greatest coaches in the history of the NBA, came from Kentucky, and newly hired John Calipari is an unsurpassed recruiter who already has Kentucky loaded with talent after only a few months on the job.   

3.  Kansas.  Bill Self followed in the footsteps of coaching legends to bring Kansas a third NCAA championship in 2008, and currently has the highest winning percentage of all Kansas coaches—no small feat since Roy Williams won over 80% of his games there.  First of all schools in conference championships with 51, third in total victories behind Kentucky and North Carolina, and second behind Arizona with 20 consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances, Kansas has perhaps the richest basketball history of any school.  Dr. James Naismith, the inventor of the game, was KU’s first basketball coach.  Coaches including Phog Allen, Dean Smith, Adolph Rupp, Ralph Miller, and Mark Turgeon attended the University of Kansas, and its list of players count Paul Pierce, Wilt Chamberlain, Danny Manning, Jo Jo White, Darnell Valentine, Kirk Hinrich, Raef LaFrentz, Bill Bridges, Walt Wesley, Bud Stallworth, Dave Robisch, Nick Collison and Drew Gooden among their ranks.

4.  UCLA.  The true legends of the game passed through UCLA.  John Wooden was the architect of a program that was unrivaled for over a decade, and his accomplishments will never be duplicated.  Ten national championships in twelve years and 11 titles overall staggers the imagination.  Three consecutive Final Four appearances in 2006-2008 elevates them to first in Final Four Games played and won, with an astonishing 25 wins in 32 games played.  Although “only” seventh in all-time victories, the excellence of this program spans the last fifty years and UCLA’s impact on the game is second to none.  Players that attended UCLA includes Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes, Gail Goodrich, Marques Johnson, Richard Washington, Sidney Wicks, Curtis Rowe, Lucius Allen, Dave Meyers, Steve Patterson, Kevin Love, Kiki Vandeweghe, Henry Bibby, David Greenwood, Russell Westbrook, Walt Hazzard and Swen Nater.  Their success includes an incredible 88 game winning streak, and during that time they dominated college basketball to an extent unparalleled in college basketball history.     

5.  Duke.  Mike Krzyzewski’s accomplishments at Duke are unbelievable.  Duke is fourth in all-time victories, fourth in NCAA Tournament victories, third in Final Four appearances and victories, and tied with Kansas with three NCAA championships.  All three titles were won under Coach K’s guidance, including two consecutive titles in 1991 and 1992.  Duke was seemingly a permanent fixture in the Final Four with five consecutive appearances between 1988 and 1992, and 14 appearances overall.  In the 14 appearances they won 15 times.  Duke has fielded teams with such great players as Johnny Dawkins, Christian Laettner, Danny Ferry, Grant Hill, Bobby Hurly, Gene Banks, Mike Gminski, Shane Battier, Shelden Williams, Jeff Mullins, Elton Brand and Carlos Boozer.  Their coaching lineage includes the great Chuck Daly, Johnny Dawkins, and Tommy Amaker.  They have provided us with Jay Bilas, whose calm and rational analysis perfectly counterbalances Dick Vitale and makes him one of the true greats in sports broadcasting.

Honorable Mention:  Indiana.  Tucked in perfectly between John Wooden’s reign at UCLA and Mike Krzyzewski’s at Duke, Bob Knight’s legacy at Indiana can’t be understated, and he personally lifts the University of Indiana to lofty enough heights to almost make the list.  The last undefeated season in college basketball belongs to Knight, as does three NCAA championships (out of five for the school).  Their 12 Final Four victories in eight appearances are stellar, as are their 35 trips to the NCAA Tournament and 60 victories.  They failed to make my top five primarily because of the hard times fallen upon after Knight left Indiana.  Although they made the NCAA title game the next year under Mike Davis, after Knight’s players left the level of excellence could not be maintained, and they are at their lowest point in decades.

There you have it, my friends.  While Indiana definitely heads the second five, it is more difficult to establish a rank for the rest of the folks, but I will try.  The next five is:

6.   Indiana. 

7.   Louisville. 

8.   Connecticut. 

9.   Arizona.

10. Michigan State.

Comments, anyone?

My interests in art and creating art force me to realize that these are fascinating times for a visual artist to be alive. The advent of the Internet is the greatest gift to artists since the invention of printing. Before that moment, an artist’s work could only be viewed personally. There was no forum for mass production of a single work. An artist lucky enough to be compensated for their work typically was hired by the wealthy, and their work was viewed by whoever The introduction of printing changed all that, allowing art that was once only appreciated by the wealthy to be enjoyed by everyone.

The Internet has had the same effect. Now artwork can be viewed worldwide, limited only be the number of people who visit a particular site. Artwork can be sold online also, allowing creators to benefit financially without having to sell their souls to a printer, publisher, or gallery owner. Now the artist can do sell their work her/himself. Never before in history has it been so possible for people to enjoy another person’s talent, and it has never been easier for artists to benefit from their notoriety.

Everyone is continually creative in the context of their lives, but those who have chosen to dedicate their lives to creative work experience both unique joys and difficulties. So why do we draw? Is it to be recognized? Is it to share our particular talent with the rest of the world? Who benefits–the artist or the viewer, or both? Is to express something inside ourselves, or to act as a catharsis? Is it to add value to the world of art through style, form or content? I draw and paint, but do not make a living at it. I use it when I can to augment a project or goal, but I do not make money through art per se. So, why do I draw?

My answers will not be profound, and I may not reach any conclusions at all. First, I want people to like what I do. Subsequently, I do not draw ONLY for myself, although much of my portfolio has never been seen by anyone else. I guess that means I draw for recognition, even if that recognition is not widespread. Yet, I don’t promote my art in an effort to be further recognized, and neither do many artists. I have certainly sold artwork over the years, but I do not try to make my art “marketable”. Why not? I don’t know. I use art as a tool to teach, whether demonstrating to others how to draw or to use art as an instructional tool in other areas. I’m not really a teacher, though. Many artists are captivated by a narrow expanse of subject matter, such as portraits or landscapes. Not me. I enjoy drawing the human figure, but I don’t have a “specialty”. I often draw for cathartic purposes, but I don’t believe anyone who saves their art can view what they do ONLY as a purging of feelings or emotions. If artwork is only for release, why save art after it has been created? I like to believe the best of my work adds value to the world–that art makes the world a better place, and everyone who contributes in this way helps improve the world we live in. But, I may not be good enough to improve the world with every pen or brush stroke. So, should I stop drawing?

I cannot find a single purpose that guides me through the creative process. Perhaps I am some type of artistic hybrid, not embracing any one reason to draw so fully that it guides or even influences me. Many artists have a clarity I don’t possess which allows them to become architects, graphic artists, educators, illustrators, advertisers, or painters.

Am I an artist because I have to be? Creativity is frequently misunderstood as a talent bestowed on people that flows through the individual to the canvas, paper, or clay. But I had to learn to be an artist. I had to discover and develop the skills I use to create–a painstaking process typified by long hours and hard work with few rewards beyond the joy of creating. There is also a joy to working, however, and human beings are compelled to engage in work (not to be confused with selling our time and energy for money). So perhaps it is a compulsion to work that forces me to create.

Without the clarity to understand my own actions, I can only fall back on one catch-all reason for producing art–it makes me happy to do it. And I guess that is enough. But is it? Should the creative process be larger than the individual? Is it enough that artwork exists only because creating made the creator happy?

My question goes out to professional artists, amateurs, and wanna-be(s). Why do you draw? Do you know why? Can you articulate it? If you are willing to talk about why you draw, please respond to this blog. And thanks for reading.

Mike

I encountered a young blind woman, very pretty and friendly. She looked familiar to me, although I did not know where I knew her from. I asked if she needed help, and she admitted she did. She told me her blindness came upon her very suddenly, and she wasn’t yet accustomed to her loss. Because of this, people took advantage of her frequently. She wished someone could help her until relatives arrived from out-of-state to care for her. She confided she hoped to remain a student at the University of Kansas, but it seemed unlikely now.

I offered whatever assistance I could give, but admitted to constraints in time and opportunity. She thanked me for any help I might provide, and asked if I could drive her to her next class. On the way she told me her name, and I realized she briefly worked for me, years earlier. She didn’t recognize me, of course, because she was blind. Upon remembering her, I resolved to give her all the help I could. I took her home after class and found her friends borrowing or stealing her possessions indiscriminately. My presence curtailed some of this, but not for long. When they saw I didn’t actively prevent them from doing what they wished, they returned to their brazen actions.

I noticed a storm approaching in the distance. It blew in very quickly, and was powerful and relentless. I ushered the young blind woman into her house with her “friends”. They continued to steal from her, taking food and “borrowing” music she spent a lifetime collecting. Nothing was off-limits to these so-called friends. As the storm worsened, I saw a snake had entered the house, presumably to escape the water. It was a small snake, but I feared snakes greatly and it startled me. I mustered the courage to kill it, but quickly saw another one, larger and harder to kill. Soon there were several snakes in the house, and I tried to get the other people there to help me kill them. I finally went outside into the storm because the snakes were too unsettling for me. I saw many more snakes in the yard, all approaching the house.

I went back inside, and saw the woman’s friends preparing to use her car to steal her stereo equipment. At that, I physically stopped them and made them return her possessions. I told the group she was under my protection until her relatives came for her, and she would not be abused. At the moment I said these words, the storm stopped and the snakes crawled away. Her friends left also. I told the blind woman things were okay for the moment, and I would take care of her until her parents arrived.

Suddenly, a young man appeared at the door. He entered the living room, nodded his head in acknowledgement, and congratulated me for my efforts. This man was of medium height, very thin, with long blonde hair and blue eyes. He appeared to be in his early twenties. He wore a black trench coat over a dark turtleneck shirt. He too, was familiar, though I didn’t immediately recognize him. He smiled warmly at me, and said I had done well. My true spirit had shown through on this day.

I thanked him, but reminded him this was not reality. I knew I was dreaming. He agreed, but said that he was in fact real real, and his role within my dream was to bring truth. It was my job to find the one person in each of my dreams that was real and brought truth, and then to discover the nature of the truth offered. He explained that when he appeared in my dreams, he would always be the one to bring the truth offered to me. If he did not appear, it would be someone else, and I had to discover who it was each time.

I asked him if he was who I thought he was. He smiled again and said yes. I asked if he had other truths to share, and he said he did. He said my life would be in turmoil for a few years, but would then be better. I would finally succeed in business, but its emphasis wouldn’t be what I expected. I asked the young man how his life had been since I saw him last, and if he had been happy. He smiled and said there were many truths to tell, but that was one for another time.

He then walked away as the sun broke through what was left of the clouds. A double rainbow could be seen in the sky as he crossed a field behind the house. I looked back toward the door, and the blind woman’s parents had arrived. They were happy to see her, and said they would have a party later that I was invited to in thanks for my assistance. I told them I would try to attend. They soon drove away, feeling restrained happiness for the joy they carried in seeing their daughter again, but tempered by compassion for her suffering. I smiled and turned back toward the young man, but he was already gone.

I was alone.

My friends, I have had this dream several times a year for approximately the last five years, including last night. The only detail that ever changes is the age of the young blonde man, from a young boy to an elderly man. Everything else stays the same. I have in fact had other dreams where individuals told me they had truths for me to learn, and no matter how large or small these truths are, they feel like a revelation when I awaken. This dream frightens me and comforts me all at the same time. I’ve been told the blind woman represented the vulnerable, fragile aspects of my personality; my role in the dream stood for the “male” side attempting to balance out the feminine side; and, the young man represented my ability to make sense of my life. I have no practice at interpreting dreams, but I would invite all comments and opinions that those of you who read this might have.

Sweet dreams.

Two years ago, I lost a lifelong friend. He was in many ways a guide on my spiritual journey, and I have missed him. A friend of mine suggested I post the words I spoke at his funeral service, celebrating his life with his many friends and colleagues. Today I will do so, recording the words I spoke on December 2, 2006. I ask all of you who read these words to indulge me and read them all. It is a last favor to my friend.

My friends,

I stand before you today at G—‘s request. He asked me to do this, decades ago, and I am humbled that he wanted me to honor him in this manner. I will describe some aspects of his life, but my true hope this afternoon is to peek inside his soul one final time and tell you what I saw there from the very beginning.

I knew G— for 43 years. We met as children and became friends in first grade at St. John’s school. He was interesting to me because he was smart. Let me repeat this: G— was smart. He loved reading, and he learned quickly. In grade school, we were given an IQ test. The results of the IQ tests weren’t meant to be made known, so we snuck in during lunch period and looked at them. It was no surprise to me that his IQ was among the highest in our class.

In 3rd grade, he had the idea that we should finish the math book over the weekend. We completed every assignment in the math book and handed them in on Monday. The next Friday, he suggested we finish the science book. We completed every assignment in the science book and handed them in on Monday. The Friday after that, the teacher caught on to us and told us to quit it, and we abandoned the idea of being finished with 3rd grade by New Year’s Day. That didn’t stop G— from convincing me to try the same thing with him again the next year.

As an adult, little escaped his intellectual curiosity. Two months ago, he was standing in my driveway on a clear night, explaining the physics of alternate realities to me. I will make a confession here. I kept up with him on 3rd grade math, but he sometimes lost me with metaphysics and a few of the other interests he held. But I listened, because he was just as fascinating to me now as he was a child, decades earlier.

G— was also caring. He grew quickly, and was very powerful for someone in their early teens. I was unusually safe in school because of his large and imposing presence. He was a gentle soul at heart, but could look menacing enough to intimidate anyone who crossed paths with those he chose to protect. I was fortunate to be in that group.

He embraced my family as if it were his own. He accepted dinner invitations from my parents, went bowling with my brother, and admired my sister and her husband’s music collection. He was interested in my friends, too, and while his circle of acquaintances was different from mine, they frequently overlapped.

G— cared in a special way. If you had a problem, not only would he sympathize, he would try to help. He tried to make your life easier. He called electricians and plumbers for me. He built shelves in my basement and a deck in the front yard of my home in North Lawrence. He answered an emergency call in the middle of the night when I saw really big snakes in my kitchen. He introduced me to most of the professional people I work with. He helped me buy my house and my cars.

All my life, I trusted him with my most confidential secrets. He would give advice if I asked, and offer quiet support if I did not. I asked his advice frequently, and it was usually sound. His help was sometimes bittersweet, however, because he typically refused help in return. He made our lives easier more often than he let us ease his own burdens.

G— was also adventurous. This aspect of his personality is no news to most of his friends and family. As a teenager, he traveled extensively and met many of the people who remained important to him throughout his life. His adventures were rarely scheduled, however, and during this period, he would vanish and reappear in a manner that concerned those who cared about him. He followed his heart, and I came to believe that his travels were something he felt he had to do. His lifestyle contributed to something of a mystique at this time among his peers, and when we weren’t worried for him, we envied his freedom and courage.

When he tired of traveling, he lived in California for a time, but seemed to struggle there and eventually decided to make Lawrence his home. He chose a career first in car sales and later in real estate. He laughed when I labeled those the most adventurous decisions he’d ever made. His way of relating to people served him well, however, and he was liked and respected in both fields.

Even when he was older and more mature, his adventurous spirit guided him. He would take drives, seemingly intent on getting lost, apparently in order to see something new as he found his way home. He wanted to reach the small island in the middle of the Kansas River near the bridge, and in the early 1990’s, we did. One cold winter night, he led me out onto the ice covering the river, guaranteeing we would be okay. He assured me of this in such a matter-of-fact way, I followed him. Years later, he admitted it wasn’t our smartest moment. But, we did survive, and G— continued to seek new adventures.

G— was a dreamer. This was the aspect of his personality I most appreciated. G— dreamed of a time when all the problems would be solved, when everyone he loved was happy and living the life they wanted to live. He sometimes believed it would take a massive effort to realize this dream, but he never abandoned it. The beauty of this dream was that it was never for him—it was always for his family and friends. He wanted to sacrifice and achieve for us.

I would call him a visionary, but I am biased. He desired to see important things happen in his lifetime, and wanted to contribute to them. I mentioned more than once when we were very, very young men that a book might someday be written about his life, and he seemed to enjoy the idea. There was even a name for it: “An American Child”. I tell you this because, even at that young, proud age, it was never ego that caused him to fancy that a book could be written. It was because he really wished to make his small part of the world better. He wanted to contribute to society, if not on a grand scale, then on a personal level—to make the world better for the people he loved.

I shared many of his dreams, and felt my abilities complimented his own. I often hoped our combined talents would help us realize our shared goals, and I regret that I won’t have one more chance to accomplish something with him, whether it is running a basketball team, developing a business plan, or finding a new restaurant to enjoy. The dreamer in G— hoped for the best, and he made me believe with him.

G— was proud. G— loved and cared for his family and friends. He spoke of his parents, his brother, and his sisters with enormous respect. He saved cards and letters sent to him for years afterwards, and he often remembered what you wrote.

He was proud of his past. As recently as last August, G— spoke of organizing a reunion for our grade school class, and was pleased to see ten people from St. John’s at the Lawrence High School reunion.

He was proud of his community, and supported it through participation in neighborhood and city organizations. He was a past president of the Oread Neighborhood Association, Chair of the Historic Resources Commission, and a member of the Executive Committee of the USD #497 Task Force for Technical Training Education. He was sentimental about the neighborhoods he grew up in. He longed to see them remain as he remembered them, and was disappointed when changes were made in the name of “progress”.

G— was so very pleased to be married and proud of his family. He loved his wife and daughters. Whenever he was asked if he were married, he said yes with far more joy in his voice than when he was single. A casual acquaintance might not have noticed the difference, but I noticed. He was equally proud to be a parent. The first weekend after his daughter was born, he asked me to stop by with my camera. I took a few pictures, and they were the first of many to be found in his home or office. His gentle nature was never more in evidence than when he was with his daughters.

It is a cliché to say that G— is now at peace, but I hope he is. He deserves it, for making our lives better. We will rely on G—‘s family and our own memories from now on to keep G—‘s adventurous spirit alive. We will have to re-tell the old stories, because there will be no new stories to tell.

When that book about our friend, The American Child, is finally written, I will wish he could have lived longer, so that a few more chapters could be told. But, those of us who loved him will still see to it that the book has a happy ending.

On this Memorial Day weekend, I am so reminded of the good times I shared with my friend, and I feel compelled to implore each of you to step outside your normal routines for this day and find one new way to remember one specific person you have lost to death. I would not suggest you fail to decorate graves with flowers or balloons, but look for a new way to remember those that have passed away, but I ask you to do something else; play a song, cook a meal, watch a movie–anything that reminds you specifically of the one you are remembering through this gesture. That is what I am doing with this blog, and I feel young and alive. A normally sad holiday is filled with energy and positive feelings. In remembering my friend, I am rejuvenated. I ask you to share this moment with me, and proudly celebrate the life of someone you have lost.