Cinemorphosis

Tag: family

  • Congratulations on Your Retirement. Biology Has Hired You.

    Congratulations on Your Retirement. Biology Has Hired You.

    Steve Lopez has a retirement problem most people would envy: he likes his job.

    As a successful Los Angeles Times columnist, Lopez has spent decades doing work that supplies many of the things retirees are advised to find after they stop working. He meets interesting people. He has adventures. He learns constantly. He moves through one of the world’s great cities looking for stories and then gets paid to write about them. Work gives him stimulation, purpose, human contact, and the narcotic pleasure of seeing his name in print. Why retire from the life you’re hoping retirement will give you?

    Lopez wonders whether retirement makes any sense for someone already living something close to “the perfect life.” Why press the off switch while the machinery is still humming beautifully?

    So he consults his older friend and fellow writer Jim Ricci, who offers some sobering advice. If your finances permit it, Ricci suggests, there is an argument for retiring sooner rather than later. The reason is not that golf courses are filling up or cruise ships are leaving without you. It is that the Golden Years eventually hand you another job.

    The job is managing your decline.

    I call this the Decline-Management Principle: as the body and mind age, maintaining them requires increasing amounts of time, attention, discipline, and administrative labor. You may retire from your employer, but biology has already hired you for another position. You are now Director of Maintenance for an aging facility.

    At thirty, the facility largely ran itself. You could abuse it, neglect routine maintenance, stay up too late, eat garbage, skip exercise, and reasonably expect operations to resume the following morning. The building was new. The plumbing worked. The electrical system could withstand irresponsible loads.

    By sixty-five, the maintenance department has become considerably busier.

    A shoulder stops rotating properly. A prostate begins expanding its territorial ambitions. A foot starts burning for reasons nobody can satisfactorily explain. You walk into the kitchen and briefly forget why you went there. Suddenly the organism that once operated quietly in the background is generating work orders.

    And those work orders require a staff.

    Unfortunately, the staff is you.

    You schedule appointments. You exercise. You stretch. You rehabilitate injuries. You monitor medications. You improve your diet. You investigate sleep. You attend physical therapy. You undergo tests. You remember follow-up appointments for the tests you barely remember undergoing. You spend increasingly large portions of your life maintaining the equipment required to continue having a life.

    This is where the Decline-Management Principle becomes particularly cruel. You may continue working because you are healthy enough to work. Indeed, the Puritan machinery inside your skull may insist that stopping would be decadent. You’re still competent. You’re still productive. People still need you. Why should an able-bodied adult spend Tuesday morning exercising when he could be answering email?

    Because Tuesday morning exercise may now be part of your job.

    The older you become, the more dangerous it may be to treat self-maintenance as something you squeeze into whatever scraps of time remain after your “real work” is finished. Your real work has changed.

    Ignore the shoulder because you’re busy, and the shoulder may deteriorate. Stop exercising because deadlines have accumulated, and strength disappears. Neglect sleep because work demands your attention, and the following day becomes harder. Put off medical appointments because the semester is hectic, and a manageable problem gets another six months to become an interesting problem.

    The irony is exquisite. You keep working because you are healthy, consume the time required to maintain that health, and eventually damage the very condition that allowed you to keep working.

    Then you retire because your health has declined.

    Congratulations. You saved retirement for precisely the moment when you are least equipped to enjoy it.

    This complicates the moral mythology surrounding work. We tend to admire the person who keeps going. He works until seventy, seventy-five, perhaps eighty. Look at him! Still at it! Still productive! Still contributing! Nobody looks at the same man spending ninety minutes every morning walking, lifting weights, preparing decent food, maintaining friendships, and attending medical appointments and says, “There goes a magnificent work ethic.”

    Perhaps we should.

    The Decline-Management Principle does not mean surrendering to deterioration or turning retirement into an eight-hour daily inspection of your blood pressure. Quite the opposite. The purpose of managing decline is to resist it—to preserve strength, mobility, cognition, independence, relationships, and whatever portion of vitality remains available to you.

    Nor does it mean everyone should retire at sixty-five. Lopez’s dilemma is real. Meaningful work can itself protect against decline by supplying purpose, stimulation, structure, and social contact. Walking away from work you love simply because the calendar says you are old enough to retire would be its own kind of stupidity.

    But eventually the allocation of time changes. The question is no longer merely, “Can I still do my job?”

    Of course you can.

    The more useful question is: “What job needs me most now?”

    For forty years, the answer may have been your career.

    Then biology slides a new folder across the desk.

    Inside are your joints, muscles, brain, sleep, friendships, mobility, and remaining healthy years.

    Welcome to your new position.

    There is no pension.

  • The Last Man Requires Four Inches of Extra Cushioning

    The Last Man Requires Four Inches of Extra Cushioning

    Before reading Jon Ronson’s The Castle: Adventures in a World of Unraveling Men, I decided I should conduct an inventory of my own unraveling. I was sixty-four years and ten months old, retirement was approaching, and I had already developed habits suggesting that the institution employing me had been providing more adult supervision than I cared to admit.

    For one thing, I had gone Full Hawaii. Over the previous few years, I had transplanted the dress code of Maui, Kauai, and Oahu into suburban Torrance. Regardless of weather, I wandered around the house and made Costco runs in flip-flops, gray gym shorts, and tank tops advertising Aloha, North Shore, Lahaina, Kona, Kaanapali, Koloa Surf Co., or Maui, usually accompanied by a sunset, surfer, or sea turtle. My wife and daughters mocked my year-round resort wear, but I defended it on physiological grounds. I operated at a higher temperature than ordinary humans, I explained, and my armpits required open air and unrestricted mobility. Confining them inside sleeves could produce claustrophobia, perhaps madness. I was not dressing like a tourist. I was managing a medical condition.

    I had succumbed to what I call the Recreational Domestication Principle: the gradual transplantation of vacation behavior into ordinary domestic life. Habits once reserved for a week at a Hawaiian resort migrate home and establish permanent residency. The flip-flops remain. The tank top remains. The relaxed posture remains. Eventually, Tuesday morning in Torrance begins to resemble day four at the Kaanapali Beach Hotel, except there is no ocean and you are taking out the recycling.

    My daughters had identified another stage of my decline. When watching true-crime documentaries, I sprawled across the living-room couch with my hands clasped behind my head and my legs extended while studying police interrogations with the concentration of a homicide detective. Unfortunately, the couch did not provide sufficient cushioning for my 230-pound, retired-linebacker chassis, so I purchased a four-inch self-inflating sleeping pad and placed it on top. Add stacked pillows and a throw blanket, and I had created a small but highly functional residential compound. My daughters christened it “Dad’s homeless encampment.”

    There I would lie in my Hawaiian tank top, magnificently supported, watching a detective dismantle a murder suspect’s alibi while becoming increasingly convinced that Nietzsche had predicted me.

    I was becoming the Last Man.

    Nietzsche’s Last Man abandons difficult aspirations in favor of comfort, security, consumption, and the avoidance of unpleasantness. I had developed my own household expression for this condition: “This is not a premium experience.” If one of my daughters erupted into shrieking laughter while I was eating my wife’s banana-nut French toast, I would look across the table and say, “Child, please stop that.”

    “Why?”

    “Because your screaming is interfering with my premium experience.”

    The joke was funny because it contained evidence.

    But as I prepared to enter Ronson’s world of unraveling men, I realized that becoming the Last Man was not a binary condition. You did not go to bed as Marcus Aurelius and awaken the next morning demanding lumbar support and climate control. There were stages. There were gradations. There was a Last-Man Gradient.

    You moved along it slowly. First, you preferred comfort. Perfectly reasonable. Then you began arranging your environment to eliminate minor discomforts. Still reasonable. Eventually, however, inconvenience itself started feeling like an affront. The couch required augmentation. The pits required liberation. Breakfast required appropriate noise levels. Life was increasingly evaluated according to the standards of a luxury resort: Was I comfortable? Was I entertained? Was the temperature correct? Was anyone interfering with my experience?

    This was what made Ronson’s book feel less like recreational reading than reconnaissance. I was about to retire from an institution that, for all its meetings, protocols, deadlines, passwords, administrators, and Student Learning Outcomes, had forced me to remain engaged with a world that did not exist for my comfort. I had to get dressed. I had to leave the house. I had to teach people. I had to solve problems. I had to accommodate other human beings.

    Soon, many of those constraints would disappear.

    And there I would be: a free man in a Hawaiian tank top, lying atop four inches of premium inflatable cushioning, remote control in hand, with nobody from Human Resources coming to save me.

    Retirement was not the beginning of the Last-Man Gradient.

    It was the level I was afraid might unlock the rest of the game.

  • Retirement. Now Nobody Can Stop You

    Retirement. Now Nobody Can Stop You

    When you retire, you are not merely leaving a job. You are being released from an institution.

    For decades, the institution surrounded you with structures you probably resented: schedules, protocols, meetings, deadlines, evaluations, committees, supervisors, colleagues, students, dress codes, parking permits, passwords that expired every ninety days, and online forms apparently designed by people who believed human suffering builds character. You dreamed of liberation.

    Then one day you get it.

    The restraints fall away. Nobody cares when you wake up. Nobody expects you anywhere at nine. Nobody notices whether you’ve showered, shaved, or spent the morning slowly merging with your bathrobe. Tuesday afternoon can be devoted to reading Dostoevsky or watching twenty-six consecutive YouTube videos comparing the Accord with the Camry even though you have no intention of buying either car. By video nineteen, you have strong opinions about rear-seat legroom.

    Welcome to freedom.

    Be careful.

    For most of your adult life, you benefited from the Institutional Guardrail Effect: the largely invisible system of expectations, routines, responsibilities, and social pressures that kept you moving down the highway like a reasonably functional adult. You may have believed that your discipline came entirely from within. Perhaps some of it did. But the institution was quietly helping. The alarm went off because you had somewhere to be. You shaved because other people had to look at you. You went to bed because tomorrow mattered.

    Then retirement removes the guardrails.

    You become unanchored.

    You become Disinhibited Man.

    Do not congratulate yourself too quickly.

    Before celebrating your radical freedom, reread Pinocchio. Not the adorable Disney version with the cricket and the catchy songs. Read Carlo Collodi’s considerably more savage story, written by a man who seemed to regard children as small criminals awaiting sufficient opportunity.

    The boys discover a paradise without adult supervision. No school. No responsibilities. No restraints. At first, it seems magnificent.

    Then they grow donkey ears.

    Human speech deteriorates into braying.

    Paradise becomes livestock management.

    Collodi understood something that retirement brochures generally omit: remove enough restraints from human beings and they don’t necessarily become Emerson at Walden Pond. Sometimes they become jackasses.

    This is Post-Institutional Disinhibition: the loosening of psychological and behavioral restraints after a person leaves the structures that previously regulated him. The danger isn’t that retirement gives you too little freedom. The danger is that it gives you enormous freedom without supplying the wisdom necessary to manage it.

    Don’t just reread Pinocchio. Read Jon Ronson’s The Castle: Adventures in a World of Unraveling Men. The book is an anthropological work of nonfiction about men severed from social structures and natural constraints. Their liberation does not produce serene philosophers strolling through gardens discussing Marcus Aurelius. It produces men increasingly beholden to the Raging Id.

    The results are not pretty.

    Freed from inconvenient restraints, these men descend into influencer-fed conspiracy theories, algorithmically amplified adolescent fantasies, white-male grievance monologues, and Ayn Rand-style declarations of heroic self-sufficiency delivered by men who probably cannot remember where they put the charger for their phone.

    Adulthood is not the featured condition.

    Regression is.

    These men don’t merely become eccentric. They begin to warp. Their personalities curl inward like fruit left too long in the sun. Grievances harden. Fantasies become philosophies. Algorithms locate every resentment and feed it weaponized testosterone.

    The results will be terrifying, especially to someone on the verge of becoming Disinhibited Man. But read Ronson’s book you must. Wielding his intellectual machete, he hacks through a thick Amazonian jungle of lost souls afflicted by curdled masculinity and Post-Institutional Disinhibition, clearing a path so the rest of us can see where unchecked freedom can lead. For that, be grateful.

    Consider The Castle required reading for a man approaching retirement. You need sobriety. You need wisdom. You need guardrails. You need to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.

    Preferably before you grow donkey ears.

  • The Walking Companion Principle

    The Walking Companion Principle

    A few weeks before the beginning of what would be my final fall semester teaching college writing, my family spent a week in Carlsbad.

    One morning we ate breakfast at the French Corner. I ordered a savory crepe and drank coffee softened with milk, cinnamon, and honey. The meal achieved that increasingly rare equilibrium in which you leave neither hungry nor incapacitated. I was full but not bloated, caffeinated but not vibrating, satisfied without immediately wondering what I might eat next. For several fleeting minutes, I experienced something approaching perfection. The meal did not merely fill my stomach; it seemed to quiet some hidden chamber of the soul that normally conducts emergency meetings around the clock.

    Then we wandered into downtown Carlsbad.

    My family disappeared into a used record store while I remained outside. I have never understood the romance people attach to the smell of old books, record sleeves, and aging paper. To enthusiasts, the aroma evokes libraries, childhood, discovery, civilization. To me it smells like mildew wearing a tweed jacket.

    So I waited on the sidewalk and did what I often do when temporarily deprived of distraction: I conducted an inventory of my deficiencies.

    Twenty extra pounds.

    Inconsistent discipline.

    A tendency to overthink everything.

    And, increasingly, the suspicion that I required more regular companionship than I had previously been willing to admit.

    Then I saw two men walking toward me.

    They appeared to be in their early seventies, and I assumed they were retired. Both wore safari hats, T-shirts, shorts, and tennis shoes. Their phones rested harmlessly in their back pockets rather than occupying the command center of their consciousness. They walked side by side, talking with the effortless rhythm of men who had probably traveled this route together hundreds of times.

    They laughed.

    They listened.

    Neither seemed compelled to dominate the conversation, check a notification, document the walk, measure engagement, cultivate a personal brand, or inform the world that he was currently walking.

    They were simply two men walking.

    Their calves caught my attention. These were not gym-manufactured calves, inflated through heroic campaigns involving protein powder, compression sleeves, and motivational playlists. They were walking calves: lean, hard, unremarkable, the product of thousands of ordinary miles accumulated without fanfare. Both men looked younger than plenty of men twenty years their junior because their bodies had quietly become advertisements for moderation.

    I envied them immediately.

    Certainly I envied their leanness. I am not spiritually advanced enough to pretend otherwise. But what I really envied was the life their bodies implied.

    These men had apparently solved a problem I had been treating as several different problems. They did not need to schedule exercise and then separately schedule friendship. They had fused the two. Their physical fitness and social fitness occupied the same hour.

    They had discovered what I began to think of as The Walking Companion Principle: one of the most valuable pieces of retirement infrastructure is another human being who reliably walks beside you.

    Consider the efficiency.

    Walking provides cardiovascular exercise, mobility, sunlight, fresh air, routine, and protection against the gradual transformation of the human body into upholstered furniture. A companion provides conversation, laughter, accountability, perspective, and evidence that you still exist outside your own head. Combine the two and you have created a remarkably sophisticated health intervention requiring almost no technology.

    Shoes.

    Friend.

    Walk.

    Repeat tomorrow.

    No bestselling self-help book is required. No wellness retreat in Sedona. No twelve-week optimization protocol administered by a forty-two-year-old podcaster who owns a cryogenic chamber and hasn’t eaten a carbohydrate since the finale of Breaking Bad.

    Just show up.

    What unsettled me was that the principle seemed particularly important for retirement while having almost nothing specifically to do with retirement. It was simply a principle for living well.

    You take care of your body.

    You walk every day.

    You eat reasonably.

    You cultivate friendships.

    You show up.

    You repeat the process tomorrow.

    These truths possess none of the glamour of revelation. Nobody returns from a monastery in Nepal and announces that he has discovered the importance of taking a walk with a friend. Common sense suffers from terrible marketing.

    Yet the older I get, the more suspicious I become that common sense may contain considerably more wisdom than the elaborate intellectual systems I’ve spent decades examining.

    Standing outside that record store, I began wondering whether I had spent much of my life practicing Existential Overfishing—casting my line ever deeper into the waters of ultimate meaning while ignoring perfectly good fish swimming near the surface.

    I had contemplated religion, mortality, consciousness, transcendence, identity, purpose, and the possibility of God. I had read books by people who had spent their entire lives thinking about these subjects, followed them into increasingly deep philosophical waters, and occasionally surfaced gasping for air with another seven books I apparently needed to read.

    Meanwhile, two retired men in safari hats walked past me and accidentally delivered the executive summary.

    Move your body.

    Find someone you like.

    Talk.

    Keep doing it.

    Could it really be that simple?

    Is common sense enough?

    Could common sense sometimes be superior to profound religious contemplation?

    Had I submerged myself beneath an ocean of fascinating but largely irrelevant abstractions?

    Had I mistaken intellectual complexity for spiritual maturity?

    Had I spent years searching for the meaning of life while failing to notice some of its operating instructions?

    Had I, after all these years, simply lost the plot?

    The questions left me strangely melancholy because the Walking Companion Principle contained an obvious problem.

    When I retired, who would walk beside me?

    Employment had supplied more social infrastructure than I had realized. For forty years, people simply appeared. Students entered classrooms. Colleagues materialized in hallways. Someone stopped outside my office. Conversations occurred because hundreds of people had been deposited into the same institution at approximately the same time.

    Retirement would dismantle much of that machinery.

    Free time would increase precisely as automatic human contact decreased.

    I could walk alone, of course. I could listen to podcasts. I could listen to audiobooks. I could march five miles while absorbing fascinating information about theology, politics, artificial intelligence, crime, nutrition, or the collapse of Western civilization.

    But headphones are not companions.

    A podcast host does not notice when you fail to show up.

    An audiobook does not laugh at your joke.

    The men disappearing down the Carlsbad sidewalk possessed something I suddenly wanted very badly: another person who expected them to be there.

    I didn’t know whether I would find such a companion in retirement. I didn’t know what could substitute for one if I couldn’t. I didn’t know whether my melancholy was justified or merely another example of my ability to turn an innocent morning into an existential emergency.

    But I had learned something.

    Perhaps retirement would not require some magnificent new philosophy capable of replacing forty years of professional identity. Perhaps the essential architecture would be embarrassingly ordinary: decent food, regular movement, human companionship, curiosity, and enough discipline to show up again tomorrow.

    I stood outside the record store watching the two men disappear into the distance.

    I still didn’t know what I was going to do with the rest of my life.

    But I knew exactly where I wanted to eat breakfast the next morning.

  • Crossing the Retirement Rubicon Means You Cannot Go Back

    Crossing the Retirement Rubicon Means You Cannot Go Back

    Once I had done my due diligence and concluded that I was emotionally and financially ready to retire, I began telling people: my wife, my children, friends, family, colleagues. This seemed like a straightforward administrative matter. I had made a decision. Now I was informing the relevant parties.

    I was wrong.

    I had stumbled upon what I call the Performative Retirement Principle: announcing your retirement does not merely describe a future event. It begins the event. The word itself changes your status. Before you say it, you are a person thinking about retirement. You can entertain the idea, examine pension statements, run calculations, meet with financial advisers, and imagine leisurely Tuesday mornings without fundamentally altering your identity. Retirement remains hypothetical, one possibility among many.

    Then you say it.

    Retirement.

    The effect is surprisingly close to Billy Batson screaming “SHAZAM!” One moment he is an ordinary boy; the next, lightning strikes and he occupies a different body. Retirement lacks the cape and thunderbolt, unfortunately, but the metaphysical principle is much the same. You utter the word and undergo a transformation.

    You are no longer merely a professor. You are a professor who is retiring.

    This distinction sounds trivial until you experience it. Once the announcement has been made, retirement begins colonizing your consciousness. Meetings acquire a strange archaeological quality. You sit through discussions of assessment procedures and curriculum revisions with the detached fascination of someone touring the ruins of Pompeii. Colleagues complain about problems that once irritated you, and you realize with a small electrical thrill that many of these problems will soon belong entirely to them.

    Someone starts explaining a new administrative initiative scheduled to roll out three years from now, and you experience the exquisite pleasure of realizing that this particular catastrophe will occur without you.

    The Performative Retirement Principle changes your relationship not only to work but to time. The future, once an enormous warehouse into which you casually tossed plans, begins to acquire walls. You have entered the strange territory of countdowns: last fall semester, last spring semester, last opening-day meeting, last committee assignment, last student who submits a 1,700-word essay consisting largely of AI-generated fog and then looks wounded when you suggest that perhaps he should participate in the writing of it.

    But the transformation is not entirely pleasurable.

    I first uttered the word retirement on August 26, 2026, and almost immediately felt older.

    Nothing had physically changed. My cells had not received an email from Human Resources. My knees did not buckle. My hair did not turn white during lunch. Yet something had shifted. By announcing retirement, I had publicly acknowledged a fact that had previously remained pleasantly abstract: my career had an ending.

    More disturbing, so did everything else.

    That is the hidden power of the word. Retirement appears to be about employment, but underneath it lurks mortality. When you are thirty-five, changing jobs suggests expansion. When you are sixty-five, leaving your career carries a different resonance. Nobody has to say anything. The arithmetic is sitting quietly in the room.

    My world suddenly felt smaller.

    The sensation reminded me of a scene from Battlestar Galactica in which a traitor is sealed behind glass before being expelled through an airlock. She pleads. The others watch. The machinery proceeds with terrible calm. Nobody is screaming. Nobody needs to. The transparent barrier has already divided the universe into two populations: those remaining aboard the ship and the person who is leaving it.

    A ritual exile.

    Aging can feel like that.

    The younger people remain inside the warm spacecraft of seemingly endless tomorrows. They discuss five-year plans, career pivots, promotions, new houses, new babies, new projects. Their futures stretch before them like an interstate disappearing into desert sunlight. You remember inhabiting that world. Indeed, some stubborn portion of your consciousness still believes you belong there.

    Then the glass descends.

    Not because anyone dislikes you. Not because society has declared you useless. The barrier is more unsettling precisely because nobody installed it. Time did.

    You tap the glass.

    Hello? I’m still here.

    And you are. You may be healthy, energetic, curious, productive, perhaps more intellectually alive than you were twenty years earlier. Yet you have glimpsed something the younger travelers cannot fully see because youth requires a certain optical illusion. They know intellectually that life is finite, just as they know Saturn has rings. The information is accurate but emotionally remote.

    Retirement brings the horizon closer.

    For a moment, you may want to take the word back. Perhaps you announced it too soon. Perhaps you should have kept retirement locked inside your head for another six months, privately admiring it like contraband. You might imagine stuffing the genie back into the bottle.

    Too late, my friend.

    You said it.

    The word has entered circulation. Your wife knows. Your children know. Your colleagues know. Your friends know. Somewhere, forms are being completed. Social Security has your name, telephone number, address, and enough numerical information to reconstruct you after a plane crash. The bureaucratic machinery has begun to turn.

    More important, you know.

    That is the irreversible part.

    The Performative Retirement Principle therefore contains both liberation and terror. Saying the word frees you from the illusion that your career must continue indefinitely, but it also strips away another illusion: that time itself is indefinitely renewable.

    You have crossed the Retirement Rubicon.

    There is dignity, however, in refusing to spend the rest of the journey clawing at the glass. The shrinking horizon can clarify as much as it frightens. When time appears limitless, it is easy to squander enormous quantities of it accumulating objects, nursing grievances, winning arguments nobody remembers, and worrying about matters that will eventually seem as consequential as the seating arrangement at a faculty meeting in 1997.

    A finite horizon imposes editorial discipline.

    What stays?

    Family. Friendship. Reading. Writing. Teaching what remains worth teaching. Making things. Helping younger people without pretending they particularly want your wisdom. Paying attention. Remaining curious. Being useful.

    Perhaps that is the final stage of the Performative Retirement Principle. At first, saying “I am retiring” feels like announcing your departure from the world. Gradually, however, you realize that you are departing only from one arrangement of the world.

    The cockpit of youth is sealed. No reentry.

    Fine.

    There are other rooms on the ship.

  • The Acquisition Readiness Principle of Certain Watch Enthusiasts

    The Acquisition Readiness Principle of Certain Watch Enthusiasts

    Six months ago, I bought a G-Shock GW-6900 and quickly convinced myself that it wasn’t for me. I already owned two G-Shocks—the Frogman and the Rescue—and two, I decided, were enough. I had achieved that mythical state every watch collector claims to desire and almost none can tolerate: contentment.

    There was also the 6900 strap. It was just a little too short. Once I buckled the watch around my wrist, I had only two holes remaining. The watch fit perfectly well, but in the fevered jurisprudence of watch collecting, two unused holes constituted evidence for the prosecution.

    So I put the 6900 back in its box, requested a return from Amazon, drove to my local UPS Store, and rid myself of the offending object within ten minutes. I felt enormous relief. Order had been restored. I owned exactly two G-Shocks. The collection was disciplined, coherent, complete.

    Naturally, I then bought three more.

    Over the ensuing months, the Mudman GW-9500 arrived, followed by the Mudman G-9300 and the King GXW-56. My austere two-watch collection had swollen to five, and I happily rotated among them while apparently forgetting the solemn principles of restraint that had compelled me to return the 6900.

    Then, about a month ago, the 6900 began haunting me.

    I started looking at photographs. I read discussions. I watched videos. I studied that strange face with its three circular indicators staring back at me like the instrument panel of a tiny Cold War submarine. Enthusiasts call the GW-6900 “The Three-Eyed Monster,” which is a perfectly good nickname. I prefer my own: the Triclops.

    Soon the Triclops was everywhere. I couldn’t get it out of my mind. The watch I had dispatched to UPS with the efficiency of a man returning a defective toaster had somehow acquired an aura in its absence.

    So I bought it again.

    It is now in transit and should arrive in a few days.

    I don’t remember whether the first GW-6900 I owned was the older version with the greenish electroluminescent backlight. I do know that the incoming watch is the newer GW-6900U-1, with its bright white LED. More important, I am strangely confident that this time I am going to connect with it.

    I’ve experienced this phenomenon before: a watch leaves me cold the first time and captivates me later, even though the watch itself has barely changed. Other collectors have experienced it too. It’s tempting to dismiss the whole business as fickleness. We buy something, reject it, romanticize it, and buy it again. From the outside, this resembles the behavior of someone who should have his credit card frozen inside a block of ice.

    But I think something more interesting is going on.

    Collectors like to imagine that our reactions reside entirely in the objects themselves. A watch either speaks to us or it doesn’t. The dimensions are right or wrong. The dial works or it doesn’t. The strap fits or it doesn’t. We behave as if we were laboratory instruments registering objective measurements.

    We’re not.

    Timing matters. Mood matters. The condition of the existing collection matters. Most of all, our willingness to admit another object into that collection matters. Sometimes we encounter the right watch at the wrong time.

    This is what I call the Acquisition Readiness Principle: the psychological state in which a collector becomes genuinely receptive to incorporating a new object into an established collection.

    The first time the GW-6900 arrived, I was defending the sufficiency of my Frogman and Rescue. I wanted a small collection. I was guarding my wrist rotation like a suburban homeowner defending his property line. The 6900 wasn’t merely another watch; it was an intruder. Its slightly short strap gave me the excuse I needed to evict it.

    Six months later, the watch is essentially the same. I am not.

    Now there is a vacancy waiting for the Triclops.

    This raises an obvious question: How can anyone possibly be “not ready” for a wristwatch?

    The question itself exposes the magnificent lunacy of the hobby. We don’t merely buy watches. We audition them. We assign them roles. We decide whether they overlap with existing members of the collection. We worry about whether they will receive enough wrist time. We speak of watches “connecting” with us, as though a 50-millimeter lump of resin containing a quartz module were an emotionally complicated rescue dog.

    A new watch therefore requires a certain receiving mode. We have to lower the drawbridge. We have to stop protecting the existing collection long enough to imagine another member belonging there. The object has not changed. The collector has.

    Does this sound nuts?

    Of course it does.

    The most honest watch enthusiasts have long since abandoned the pretense that this is an entirely rational hobby. But perhaps the watches aren’t making us crazy. We’re doing that perfectly well ourselves. We take harmless little machines designed to tell us the time and burden them with identity, nostalgia, status, memory, personality, tribal affiliation, and elaborate theories of Acquisition Readiness.

    Then we give the hobby a bad name.

    It’s one of the things we’re most proud of.

  • Sovereignty Erosion

    Sovereignty Erosion

    Last night I dreamed I had houseguests when a group of strangers, apparently Russian, simply entered my home. They didn’t knock, sneak in, or offer an explanation. They arrived with the serene entitlement of people checking into an Airbnb for which I had somehow misplaced the reservation.

    Within minutes they had colonized the place. They used the kitchen. They occupied the bathroom. They took showers. One man wandered around completely naked, his body covered with tattoos, apparently having concluded that sufficient quantities of ink constituted clothing.

    I ordered them to leave.

    They regarded this request as mildly inconvenient.

    I had to tell them several times before they finally gathered themselves and departed. Even then, there was no embarrassment, apology, or acknowledgment that commandeering a stranger’s house might represent a minor breach of etiquette. They walked out with the composure of airline passengers who had accidentally taken the wrong seats and moved only after I produced the boarding passes.

    A few hours later, they came back.

    Apparently my eviction had been interpreted not as a permanent revocation of access but as a temporary scheduling conflict. Once again, I had to order them out. Once again, they eventually complied with the weary patience of people humoring an unreasonable homeowner.

    Then another stranger appeared: a woman in her fifties making watch videos in my atrium. She had apparently identified my home as an excellent location for horological content creation. I told her to leave. She ignored me. I told her again. Nothing. By the fifth command, I was yelling. She finally departed reluctantly, as though I were the lunatic disrupting her production schedule.

    At this point, my houseguests told me to call the police.

    I retreated into a dark room and tried to dial the number. But my fingers wouldn’t cooperate. I pressed the wrong numbers. I tried again. Wrong again. The simple act of operating a telephone had become an advanced neurological procedure. I knew exactly what I needed to do, yet the message from my brain seemed to lose voltage somewhere on its journey to my hands.

    My body felt like an electric car limping along with one percent battery: the machinery intact, the destination known, the accelerator pressed, but almost no current left to move the thing.

    Then my hands stopped working altogether.

    That was when irritation gave way to helplessness and finally despair. The strangers were almost beside the point. The true nightmare was discovering that ownership itself had become meaningless. The house was mine. The doors were mine. The rooms were mine. I possessed every legitimate claim to decide who entered and who left, yet my authority seemed to exist only insofar as other people voluntarily recognized it.

    I had entered a state of Sovereignty Erosion: the nightmare sensation of watching authority over one’s own territory gradually dissolve. You own the house. You issue the commands. You possess every legal and moral claim to the space. Yet strangers stroll through your kitchen, shower in your bathroom, film watch videos in your atrium, and behave as though your sovereignty were merely a suggestion awaiting their approval.

    The most frightening intruders, apparently, don’t break down the door.

    They walk through it and wonder why you’re making such a fuss.

  • The Rearview Great White

    The Rearview Great White

    This morning I drove my daughter and her friend from Torrance to Knott’s Berry Farm, a forty-minute journey that included the usual Southern California ritual of surrendering a portion of one’s life to the freeway.

    On the 91 East, I settled into the diamond lane and soon acquired a companion: a pearl-white Toyota Grand Highlander attached to my rear bumper.

    He stayed there for roughly twelve miles.

    I wasn’t crawling. The driver simply wanted to go faster, and apparently the laws of physics required that he communicate this desire by positioning several thousand pounds of Toyota close enough to inspect the stitching on my back seat.

    About five miles before the Beach Boulevard exit, traffic began slowing. I soon saw why. Two lanes to my right was a California Highway Patrol cruiser.

    Everyone underwent the customary freeway conversion.

    Brake lights appeared.

    Speedometers suddenly became objects of intense scholarly interest.

    Drivers who had been doing eighty-five seconds earlier discovered within themselves a deep and previously unsuspected commitment to public safety.

    The Grand Highlander, however, had apparently missed the announcement.

    He illegally crossed out of the diamond lane, accelerated past me, and continued charging ahead.

    I watched with fascination.

    Surely he’ll see the CHP.

    He didn’t.

    Surely he’ll slow down.

    He didn’t.

    Then he passed the patrol car.

    The CHP officer noticed him immediately.

    The cruiser pulled out.

    It moved behind the Highlander.

    And at that moment, the entire psychological structure of the freeway changed.

    The Highlander hit the brakes.

    Too late.

    The lights came on.

    This is what I call The Rearview Great White: that primitive surge of terror you experience when a police cruiser appears behind you with its lights flashing and you realize, after several desperate seconds of denial, that you are the intended meal.

    There is always that brief period of bargaining.

    Maybe he’s after somebody else.

    You change lanes.

    He changes lanes.

    Maybe he needs me to move aside.

    You move farther right.

    He follows.

    The fin is circling.

    Imagine swimming a hundred yards offshore at Redondo Beach and seeing the dorsal fin of a great white shark rise from the water behind you.

    That’s close enough.

    The Highlander driver, who moments earlier had been exercising dominion over the 91 Freeway, was now prey.

    I expected to feel some schadenfreude.

    I didn’t.

    Partly because I’ve driven more aggressively than I should have myself. Moral superiority becomes difficult when the prosecution has access to your own driving record.

    More importantly, I didn’t think his behavior quite deserved the emotional death penalty.

    On my personal Aggression Scale, I’d give him a six.

    Annoying? Absolutely.

    Reckless? Certainly.

    But I’ve seen eights and nines—the true freeway psychopaths who cross four lanes at ninety miles an hour as though auditioning for a role in Grand Theft Auto: Gardena.

    Had the Highlander been an eight, I might have enjoyed watching the CHP cruiser descend upon him like divine judgment.

    At six, I mostly felt sorry for him.

    I told my passengers that the poor guy was probably hyperventilating.

    Because seeing the lights is only the beginning.

    Now you have to pull over.

    This sounds easy until your nervous system has reverted to that of a gazelle being pursued across the Serengeti. You must find a safe location, activate the turn signal, change lanes, slow down, and demonstrate to the officer that you’re a stable citizen rather than someone about to flee the country.

    Then comes the roadside personality transformation.

    The aggressive driver disappears.

    The tailgater disappears.

    The man who fifteen seconds earlier regarded traffic laws as suggestions issued by lesser men is gone.

    In his place appears the most agreeable citizen in California.

    “Yes, Officer.”

    “Absolutely, Officer.”

    “Of course, Officer.”

    Meanwhile, his shirt is soaked through. His back is glued to the seat. His heart is trying to escape through his sternum.

    The Highlander followed the CHP cruiser down the offramp toward Knott’s Berry Farm, and I continued on my way.

    No triumph.

    No fist pump.

    Just sympathy for a man who had spent twelve miles imagining himself the predator.

    Then he looked in his rearview mirror.

    And saw the fin.

  • Why I Need to Craft “Natty” Wring Prompts

    Why I Need to Craft “Natty” Wring Prompts

    About fifteen years ago, one of my students wrote a personal narrative about losing herself. She was in middle school. Her friends persuaded her to dress in extremely suggestive clothing with tons of makeup. In a revealing outfit that would have caused her mother to have a brain hemorrhage, she looked in the mirror and started crying. “I didn’t even recognize the girl staring back at me,” she wrote. “I wiped the makeup off, got back in my regular clothes, ran home, and cried in bed.” 

    I thought about that image as I started working on some writing prompts for the Fall Semester in which my eighteen-year-old college freshmen contrast writing with AI and writing “natty,” to use an expression that describes “natural” bodybuilders who don’t take performance-enhancing drugs. Generative AI can be a great writing tool, but it tends to overdo everything. Our writing becomes that crying overdone girl staring back at herself, or the bloated bodybuilder who is more cartoon than a celebration of the physique. In all of that generative AI, something gets lost. 

    Us. 

    We can hardly be blamed. Generative AI can feel like magic, taking a 300-word idea and blowing it up into a 2,000-word essay with vivid descriptions, highly stylized metaphors and witticisms, and Socratic rhetorical flourish. Eventually, we begin to believe we are the source of that 2,000-word essay. We flatter ourselves to our own detriment. We lose authenticity. We lose ourselves. We are that middle school girl staring into the mirror and not recognizing who’s looking back at us. 

    Using AI tools with my students for the last four years, I can say from personal experience that writing natty feels cleansing, like going off sugar-laden processed foods. Just as too much dessert causes diabetes of the body, too much generative AI causes diabetes of the mind and soul. We need to carve out natural writing spaces where we can connect with who we truly are before it’s too late. 

  • Autobiographical Time Lag

    Autobiographical Time Lag

    I am obsessed with accurate watches. I own radio-controlled G-Shocks that communicate with atomic clocks in the middle of the night, correcting themselves so that I don’t have to endure the indignity of being three seconds late to nowhere. I put them near windows to improve reception, check whether they synchronized overnight, and derive absurd satisfaction from knowing that the watch on my wrist agrees with official time down to the second.

    Yet I’ve recently discovered an embarrassing irony: while my watches keep nearly perfect time, the clock inside my head is hopelessly slow. Ask me how long I’ve been teaching, lifting weights, trying to write books, or engaging in any of my other lifelong enterprises, and I routinely misplace entire decades. My G-Shock may be off by half a second. My autobiographical clock is off by twenty years.

    This discrepancy recently surfaced in a dream about my friend Adam, whom I’ve known since 1998, when he took my college writing class. Adam went on to build a successful career in advertising and branding, married, had a daughter, and now works from home. Perhaps because of his professional expertise, my dreaming mind decided that Adam was precisely the man to stage an intervention.

    With my retirement approaching, he apparently concluded that my malfunctioning internal clock required professional attention. He took me to an office specializing in something I didn’t know existed: the rebranding of human beings.

    I was immediately suspicious.

    “Rebranding” is one of those words that makes me reach instinctively for my wallet. I imagined consultants with expensive eyeglasses explaining that retirement represented an exciting opportunity to “reimagine my personal narrative” while helping me establish an Instagram presence in which I would pose beside cappuccinos and announce that sixty-five was the new forty-five.

    No thanks.

    But the woman assigned to me wasn’t like that.

    She was maternal, down-to-earth, dressed in jeans and a football jersey. No power suit. No TED Talk headset. No laminated diagram explaining My Journey. She had the reassuring manner of someone who might help you change a tire and then send you home with a casserole.

    She explained that retirement required more than leaving my job.

    I had to reinvent myself.

    Worse, I had to rebrand myself.

    I prepared to resist, but something about her practical manner disarmed me. Fine. Ask your questions.

    She began with the basics.

    How old was I?

    How many years had I been teaching?

    How long had I been trying to write novels?

    How many years had I been trying to lose weight?

    How long had I been lifting weights?

    Easy questions.

    Except I got nearly every answer wrong.

    Not slightly wrong.

    I was shaving decades off my life.

    “How long have you been teaching writing?”

    “About twenty years.”

    She looked at her records.

    “Forty.”

    Oh.

    Next question.

    “How long have you been lifting weights?”

    “Forty years.”

    Another glance at the paperwork.

    “Fifty-four.”

    Excuse me?

    Apparently I had begun lifting weights sometime during the Nixon administration and simply neglected to update my internal records.

    The interrogation continued.

    Every number I produced was suspiciously flattering. Years disappeared from my career. Decades vanished from my ambitions. Entire geological periods evaporated from my biography.

    I had apparently been cooking the chronological books.

    That’s when I realized I suffered from Autobiographical Time Lag: the discrepancy between one’s actual age and the age assumed by one’s interior sense of self.

    I know how old I am.

    Of course I do.

    But apparently some deeper part of my brain does not.

    That brain maintains a fraudulent set of books in which everything happened twenty years ago. I’ve been teaching for twenty years. I’ve been lifting for forty. I’ve been struggling with my weight for a while. I’ve been trying to become a writer for a reasonable amount of time.

    Then the auditor from the Department of Time arrives.

    Forty years.

    Fifty-four years.

    Decades.

    Decades.

    More decades.

    The horror of aging is partly numerical. You don’t experience yourself as a stack of calendar pages. Consciousness feels continuous. The thirteen-year-old who picked up his first weights doesn’t seem like some extinct ancestor whose bones were recently discovered beneath a shopping mall.

    He’s me.

    I can still feel him in there.

    So my brain performs an enormous act of biographical compression. It takes fifty-four years of lifting weights and somehow files them under “I’ve been doing this for a long time.”

    But fifty-four years isn’t a long time.

    It’s a civilization.

    I’ve been lifting weights longer than many of the people I work with have been alive. Presidents have come and gone. The Soviet Union collapsed. The Internet appeared. Phones became computers. Artificial intelligence began helping me write essays about how old I am.

    And through all of it, apparently, I’ve been doing curls.

    The same distortion applies to teaching. Forty years sounds preposterous. Surely I haven’t been standing in front of college writing classes for four decades.

    But I have.

    I’ve taught through chalkboards, dry-erase boards, overhead projectors, PowerPoint, Canvas, online instruction, Zoom, and artificial intelligence. At this point I’m less a professor than a sedimentary record of educational technology.

    The woman in the football jersey understood something I didn’t.

    Before I could reinvent myself for retirement, I had to locate myself accurately on the map of chronological time.

    I couldn’t begin the next chapter while pretending I was halfway through the previous one.

    That, I realized, was the purpose of the strange rebranding office. They weren’t going to manufacture some shiny post-retirement identity for me. They weren’t going to turn me into Professor 2.0, complete with a podcast, personal logo, and inspirational LinkedIn posts about embracing change.

    They were performing an intervention.

    The first step wasn’t reinvention.

    It was arithmetic.

    I kept giving the woman the age of the man I felt myself to be.

    She kept giving me the age of the man who actually existed.

    And the numbers refused to negotiate.

    Perhaps that’s the strangest thing about getting older. The calendar ages with perfect accuracy, but my autobiographical clock is running slow.