 I am of an age that thinking about the 1950s brings memories. And certainly one of them, perhaps engrained in my psyche a little more indelibly because of my great uncle Philip Garratt, A.F.C., C.M., being head of the de Haviland Aircraft Company, is about an airplane: the AVRO Arrow.
You know, for some of us, it seemed tough growing up back in the 1950s, next to the mighty U.S.A. But suddenly, we Canucks had the authoritative Avro Arrow to boast about. Omygosh! What an impressive delta-winged interceptor airplane it was! I mean, here we had our symbol of Canada's high-tech future in aircraft manufacturing! But then, that old “fuddy duddy” Prime Minister John Diefenbaker went and scrapped the whole thing! Just like that, it was over. And the rumour mill started flourishing immediately. Many believed Washington didn’t want an interloper such as Canada stealing their grandeur so they deliberately manipulated the intelligence given to Ottawa in order to influence Diefenbaker to give the Arrow the kibosh. There were other hints of “intelligence” too. However, a new research paper reveals the decision to scrap the fabled Avro Arrow was significantly influenced by Canadian information gathering. Seems our bright stars pointed out a reduced need for the Arrow in the evolving Cold War with the USSR because the Soviets was shifting away from manned bombers to long-range ballistic missiles, suggesting that interceptors like the Arrow would increasingly play a smaller role. “The paper makes the case that these strategic intelligence assessments — long the ‘missing dimension’ in the debate over the Arrow's demise — now allow for a fuller understanding of an important episode in Canadian history,” says a media outlet. “It can be concluded that the Canadian intelligence assessment of the changing Soviet bomber threat to North America was an important factor in the fateful decision to cancel the Arrow." So, it wasn’t the U.S. steering us Canucks away from our own high-tech future after all. We did it to ourselves… supported by research, of course. Almost feels like an anti-climax. But I suppose we can be proud that it was Canadian intelligence that cast doubt on the extent of the Soviet threat.
0 Comments
 I just read an alarming stat. It reveals that suicides in the U.S. have reached a new high. Yet, at the same time, a recent study confirms that happy people tend to perceive risks more that the average person might feel. Indeed, happy folks appear to be more open to new experiences, and are more optimistic about this (optimism being associated with living a longer, healthier life).
All of which dovetails with findings from my newest books, “Pushing The Boundaries! How To Get More Out Of Life” (pushingtheboundaries.life) and “Being Happy Matters” (beinghappymatters.life). What I’ve learned is that happiness can be part of well-being. When you’re happy, this adds a sense of satisfaction and control over your life, all of which increases your ability to enjoy relationships. In fact, the study suggests there are certain actions you can take to cultivate this feeling: -Practice gratitude -Recall positive memories -Reach out to loved ones -Seek out novel experiences I’ve written previously in this blog about that first one: Practice gratitude. It’s a lesson I learned from a friend who encouraged me to start each day by offering an appreciation for something positive in my life. I do. It works. The second seems like a no-brainer: recalling positive times just has to kindle happiness. Reaching out to loved ones is something we don’t do enough. Or I don’t, anyway. Seek out novel experiences. Now, that’s not an activity that leapt to mind when I considered ways of sustaining happiness. And yet, as I look back at my life and career, I realize I’ve done just that, many times. And it upped the excitement meter, which added to happiness in my life. So I do see the purpose. We live in very demanding times. With the rise in suicides, seeking ways to latch onto happiness seems to me to be so very timely. It’s something I intend to keep doing. And I hope you do too.  Life has a funny way of catching up on you. For instance, it’s just occurred to me that in moving later this month to a fabulous new property (one that’s in a striking wilderness enclave with a grand home set amid trees, birds, butterflies, bunnies, a pool, a stream and marvelous landscaped flower gardens), it will be the first time in a long while where I won’t be living on the water. And that’s just fine with me.
You see, what I realize now is that the need for having a watery necessity just isn’t there anymore. Back when I toiled in the big smoke, I always had the cottage to retreat to, the water existing as a calming requirement in my life. But that was a life too often built on the pressures and tension of living in a urban community when I didn’t want to, and running an enterprise that fed many mouths, where the pressures that accompanied this could become somewhat overwhelming. Those days and those pressures are long gone. So too is the need to get away from it all. And while I’ve had my fun with boats over the years, I’m ready to put that aside too, in favour of the other neat activities I’m adopting off the water. I’ve never been happier and more relaxed. And I look forward to writing the next exciting chapters in my evolving life.  When Morgan Freeman and Jack Nicholson starred in the movie “The Bucket List” back in 2007, I doubt they realized how their buddy comedy would lead to the title phrase becoming a standard in the English language lexicon. But so it is… and so was touring Alaska a part of my own bucket list: something I truly wanted to do before exiting this life. I’m fortunate that my lovely travelling companion shared this desire, so we recently set off on a magical cruise of the Alaskan ”inner passage”. For the better part of two weeks, politics, climate, war, etc. took a back seat to the marvelous wonders of seeing humpback and killer whales, bald eagles, salmon, porpoises, dolphins, bears and deer in places like Ketchikan, Juneau, Sitka, Skagway, etc. where the native culture abounds. The world could have come to an end elsewhere and we would have been none the wiser.
It all serves to remind me that “getting away” is well worth while!!  When I was writing “Being Happy Matters”, I compiled some key activities that I believe can expand happiness in our lives. One that stood out to me was this:
Hang out with happy people: it's contagious; absorb their habits to become happier. That’s a practice I’ve been taking on for some time now since discovering that negative people in your life can bring you down. And, frankly, life’s too short. An example? Sure. There’s a former friend of mine who turned out to be not a friend at all. I’m a pretty accepting guy but I came to realize this character’s a self-serving, negative, liar and misanthrope. How sad that he decided to throw me under the bus to protect his own reputation, telling bald faced lies about me while complaining to a real friend of mine that I didn’t know how to live life. Well, he’s wrong. Dead wrong. But the point is, I don’t need his silly nonsense in my life. So I haven’t talked to him in a year. And you know what: I don’t miss the schmuck at all. He can live his sad little life on his own, likely believing his own brand of claptrap, while those of us who are smart know what a loser he is. (My friend John, who he complained to, said, “This guy’s full of it! What’s sad is that he’s the only one who doesn’t know it.” And George, my real estate agent and also a friend, said this same clown has tried to pry details out of him about how much I sold my house for: “This guy’s a wing nut! You can tell from the sound of his voice! Why would I give him any information!?”) As they say about lowlifes, it is to laugh. Anyway, at the end of the day, when you consider the value of hanging out with happy people, you may want to recall that it’s important to divorce yourself from unhappy people first. You’ll be better off for it.  As if we don’t have enough to worry about, the hoi polloi are getting all upset about Bradley Cooper’s nose.
Seems Brad, in his new movie “Maestro”, is acting the role of famed musician Leonard Bernstein. Now, Lenny had a big nose, so Brad had the makeup folks assemble a proboscis for him to wear on camera. Some folks think it’s too big. And that’s fine: everyone’s entitled to their opinion. But where I lose patience is when Cooper is branded as being anti-Semitic, sticking a “Jew nose on his face”. C’mon people: we’re talking a makeup issue, not a religious comment! Even Bernstein’s children have laughed this off: “We’re perfectly fine with it. We’re also certain that our dad would have been fine with it as well.” They also refer to “disingenuous attempts to bring a successful person down a notch – a practice we observed perpetrated all too often on our father.” But it doesn’t stop there, because this opens up the question of casting when it comes to certain groups. Specifically, we’re talking about those folks who think that film roles must be played by representatives of the community being portrayed. You know, because we don’t count acting as any kind of talent. Tom Hanks should not have played the lead in “Philadelphia”: some gay actor should have done so. Why is Dame Helen Mirren playing Golda Meir? She’s not Jewish (notwithstanding the fact that Ms. Meir's grandson applauds her acting). And Jeffrey Tambor shouldn’t play a transgendered character: a transgendered actor should. That kind of thing. Hey folks: we’re talking acting! Not showboating. In my opinion, this casting issue is as disingenuous as the argument about Cooper’s anti-Semitic nose. I mean, Sir Laurence Olivier should never have played Hamlet because he was English, not Danish, right? And Judi Dench isn’t Scottish: why the hell did she play Lady McBeth? This world has real issues to deal with, like the climate, war, political unrest, etc. Let’s give this movie nonsense a rest and focus on what really matters.  The Canadian Association for Retired Persons (CARP) has announced a new President. It’s veteran public broadcaster Rudy Buttignol, a member of the Order of Canada.
Here’s a refreshing thought from this guy: “I believe that retirement is not a condition to be endured. Instead, it is a major life’s accomplishment - a milestone to be recognized and respected.” You know, I’m aware of folks who strive for retirement and then, when they get there, don’t know how to handle it. They end up enduring what should be a wonderful time in their lives. Now, believe me, I’m certainly not trying to hold myself out as anyone accomplished, but I will tell you that I retired successfully from my career because I wanted to try some new activities… things my workaday life would not allow time for. So, today, I’m writing my ninth book, I’ve just sold my house, I’m buying an exciting new property and I’m ready to move. Retirement? It’s grand. So, here’s to you Mr. Buttingnol. I agree: retirement should be enjoyed as a major life accomplishment so you can enjoy the rights and rewards you deserve. That’s the way it ought to be. At least, that’s the way I think.  World Indigenous Peoples Day occurred recently, marking a time to recognize the issues that Indigenous people from around the world are facing. This includes lack of access to healthcare, with Indigenous Peoples having to accept a scarcity of health services, particularly in remote communities.
At a previous time in my life, I was Chair of Hope Air, the Canadian charity that helps ensure all citizens have equal access to healthcare, regardless of where they live. With the help of supportive airlines and private pilots, Hope Air provides families, from coast to coast, with free flights, as well as accommodation. Since 1986, we have facilitated 170,000+ travel arrangements for individuals, families and children. I continue to foster the care Hope Air has established and wish to direct you to a unique fundraising initiative that this important charity is establishing: Haul for Hope. This special venture will be hitting the tarmac in Toronto and Vancouver in September and is an opportunity for teams to test their strength and skills as they race against the clock to pull a commercial airplane (Toronto) or firetruck (Vancouver) 100 metres. Where you come in is to make a donation. And you can join me in doing so right here: https://support.hopeair.ca/haul-for-hope/donate On behalf of Hope Air, thank you for your consideration of Indigenous Peoples and of all Canadians who need assistance in getting to the healthcare they deserve.  Actress Sandra Bullock's long-time partner Bryan Randall died last week at age 57. He had endured a 3-year health battle fighting ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) that he kept out of the public eye. “Bryan chose early to keep his journey with ALS private and those of us who cared for him did our best to honor his request," his family said in a note.
Shades of Paul Reubens (Pee-wee Herman), who died recently at age 70 after a 6 year battle with cancer. He too chose to keep his struggle quiet, without crying to the media. (Sadly, he felt required to express regret for this choice at the end, which I don't think was necessary, saying “Please accept my apology for not going public with what I've been facing the last six years. I have always felt a huge amount of love and respect from my friends, fans and supporters. I have loved you all so much and enjoyed making art for you.”) You know, with social media surrounding us, it’s pretty hard to make a move without the world knowing about it. So when celebrated folks like Bryan and Paul choose to be quiet about their conflicts, I, for one, applaud: at the end of the day, we all deserve to live with the acclaim we desire, be that large on the public stage or calm, composed and collected, serene at home. And while Dylan Thomas rages against the dying of the light in his famous poem “Do not go gentle into that good night”, I’ll take Bryan’s and Paul’s approach anytime (not that I’m celebrated, of course), letting those who seek fame find it as they will.  Fast on the heels of Tony Bennett’s death at age 96 comes news this week that Paul Reubens has died at 70. So long Pee-wee Herman.
I certainly respect the man’s suffer-in-silence approach. He fought cancer for six years but chose to do so quietly, without crying to the public. I appreciate that. (Sadly, he felt required to apologize for this choice at the end, which I don't think was necessary.) A unique talent for sure. So long Pee-wee Herman. |
