OU blog

Personal Blogs

Stylised image of a figure dancing

Talk to me

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Martin Cadwell, Tuesday 9 June 2026 at 07:35

All my posts: https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/view.php?u=zw219551

or search for 'martin cadwell -caldwell' Take note of the position of the minus sign to eliminate caldwell returns or search for 'martin cadwell blog' in your browser.

I am not on YouTube or social media

Cadwell NOT Caldwell

silhouette of a female face in profile 

Get out of jail, free

[ 5 minute read ] 

Talk to me

I needed to collect a prescription from the dispensing doctor's surgery in my village, yesterday. There was a woman, perhaps in her fifties or sixties, standing at the pharmacy counter; the customer or patient's side. No-one was on the pharmacists side.

       'Are you waiting to be seen?' I asked. Her body was shielding the bell that alerted the pharmacy staff that someone was waiting and I wanted to press it if she had not. Deciding whether I should need to explain to her that the bell was there, and it should be pressed, or asking her to move so I could press it, suddenly became important to me.

Haughtily she replied, 'Yes, I am being seen, thank you!' I was only asking. Her voice seemed disdainful. I felt she had looked me up and down without even moving her eyes or head. I am tempted to consider that she saw a man and that was enough for her to make a decision as to my internal make-up. It happens; a lot.

Of course, I have to recognise that I might have had a smell about me or my clothes were old or torn or something; but I was wearing expensive trousers and shirt, and I had bathed only an hour before. I admit my boots were a bit muddy, because I had cycled to the surgery, and the roads are a bit grubby sometimes; you know, spray from the front wheel in the rain.

She rather reminded me of the 'witch-nurse' who pretended to attend to the drunk man who had fallen over on the dual carriageway in my local city. She just hated me from the get-go. But, then I was the only male available in that scenario. In the surgery, a man was seated; invariably waiting for his prescription to be prepared. He was quite inconspicuous in his silence and lack of movement.

Someone appeared on the pharmacy side of the counter and asked if I wanted something. 'Are you waiting to be seen?'

       'Yes, please', I replied. I gave my name and she went away to search.

Once again, we three were left alone. Alone that is if I ignore the reception staff and the doctor's patients on the other side of the room. People came and left through the doors behind us, mostly elderly folk with umbrellas and accoutrement. I felt compelled to speak. I just do; it is a thing I have never been able to shake since I was hitch-hiking throughout Europe when I was in my twenties. I am, I suppose, naturally friendly. If I compare myself to many people in England I might consider myself open, confident and interesting. It is just cracking the shell of the nut that is someone else's reticence to engage with others that makes me appear to be desperate to interact. 

I am not desperate. I am merely giving my attention to other people. We might say, if we don't like someone, 'I wouldn't give them the time of day!' I do 'give people the time of day'; my cheap time. I would like to say that I am always mindful that many people don't get to have a conversation for days; they sit at home watching day-time television, and no-one calls them on the phone or visits. I never think that. I just talk to strangers, willy-nilly.

I turned to the waiting woman who was staring at my boots, 'I would happily grant foreigners...' She didn't look up at me. '...that England does have strange weather....' She looked at my face, realising that I was talking to her, to her for goodness sake! '.. It is too hot and then too much rain.' She coldly stared at me. She didn't say anything, just stared. The pharmacy person returned with my prescription.

       'What is the first line of your address?' I told her and ticked the boxes for a repeat prescription. I thanked her, 'Thank you ma'am'. She was quite young though but she didn't seem to react to being addressed as a madam.  When I turned to leave, I turned away from the frosty woman and noticed the seated man cleaning his glasses. I wear glasses, even though I don't need them to see perfectly, outside. On this occasion, I was still wearing the very weak reading glasses I use for computer work. They don't really affect my long distance vision because there are other things at play with my sight, like astigmatism.

       'I find that I have to wear reading glasses to see whether the glasses I am cleaning are actually clean.' I offered. He smiled and said, 'It's the rain spots.' I smiled, nodded and left. He had noted what I had said to the waiting woman and responded on the same subject.

Why did the man freely talk and the woman not? I might offer that I am of no use to the woman, whereas the man has never bothered to consider if any man is useful or not. Harshly, and almost certainly blindly, I might think that being a man, all men before me have marked my card when it comes to the expectations a woman may have of me. That is, many men have made mistakes and have otherwise been cruel, and I fit the mould. Treading on and trampling on someone's emotions is something that any one of us can do, and hope can die an agonising death if we are hurt too often. The thing is, it wasn't me that did it to all women; and it wasn't him who did it, or him, or him. I think I am highlighting the reciprocal of misogyny; I am talking 'misterogyny'. Just saying! (Like saying, 'just saying' absolves anyone of guilt!).

Here is a joke that might be funny: What do you call a female moth? A myth. In the recent context I have written in, it suddenly isn't. Females do exist. Sad isn't it, that the joke is now corrupted?

Anyway, there might be something else that I need to consider. Did the woman think I was trying to engage her in conversation simply because she is a woman? Was she tired of men doing this. I can't help but think if I was a woman she might have been more open to fleeting chat. After all, talking about the weather is still a British thing, right? 

Many people might think, 'Just leave people alone, why don't you?' Perhaps the woman is just miserable and she was waiting for medication to cheer her up. At our dispensing surgery we get text messages to tell us that our prescription is ready for collection. That means that we are not all waiting for them to be assembled out the back. Both the frigid woman and the quiet man were waiting longer than I had to. Inductive reasoning would tell me that they had not received a text (which happens) and they were expecting a re-issue of their on-going prescription. In those circumstances they might be feeling a little miffed, that could easily swell to irked, if they are spoken to. Sometimes, I just don't think in time.

I have a stock of medication that acts as a buffer. If these two people have the same experience as I, they would build up one too. Our dispensing surgery is known for its general incompetence. That is not to say the staff lack competence; it is more a general thing because there is a seriously high staff turnover there. Methinks, there is another issue at hand; a managerial problem? I have a strong idea on that.

Or, maybe the locals are just plain mean to everyone, including the pharmacy staff.

In the game 'Monopoly', players can randomly get a 'Get out of Jail Free' card. Would it be terribly weird if I handed them out to people to let them know that I know they are at fault, but I forgive them? I would, of course, give myself one, a golden one.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
Stylised image of a figure dancing

Talk to me and not about me

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Martin Cadwell, Sunday 22 March 2026 at 07:34

All my posts: https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/view.php?u=zw219551

or search for 'martin cadwell -caldwell' Take note of the position of the minus sign to eliminate caldwell returns or search for 'martin cadwell blog' in your browser.

I am not on YouTube or social media

silhouette of a female face in profile

How does that make you feel?

[ 7 minute read ]

Quick! Grab his avatar

Well, that's new! I am convinced that I did so well at school because I went to school with no emotion. I really couldn't care less if I was there or not; I really had no interest in any of the subjects; and I never took my emotions to school that were only relevant to being outside of school. That is not the new stuff.

I am interested in literary devices. To anyone who does not know what literary devices are I shall tell you this: Neither did I until this past couple of months. It seems that fiction writers use devices in their writing in an attempt to evoke some kind of emotion in the reader. The device that drives me wild with irritation is 'show and don't tell'. In other words, don't write  'It is hot outside' (weather); write instead about empty roads in sun-bleached villages where only a mad dog, too crazy to care, is barking in direct sunlight, while everyone else is snoozing in the shade to get some succour from the hazy, soporific and stupefying air.

The new bit is; I am just beginning to understand that The Open University does not want to educate me by just supplying information; it wants to permanently change me by causing me to let my emotions determine my actions (change the way I write). Apparently, I also have to be able to accept and offer subjective opinion both from, and to, other students, and on other selected writers, in future modules, AND interact with tutors, if I am to continue on my degree path. I fail to see what benefit any of this will have in my life. I have absolutely no intention of writing anything, like a novel, for anyone to read. 

Of course, I shall comply because I am interested in how emotion gets in the way of progress, and how modern schooling is so invested in personalising students. Many people will find my cold interest to be difficult to fathom; that I feel, is because modern schools do not teach students how to control their emotions, and if these people scratching their heads in confusion were recently 'educated' through modern attitudes to schooling, then I propose I have already made my case for why they do not follow my reasoning; they have not been taught to control their emotions and how to reason. At least, I have induced that to be true.

I have never made a secret of being troubled by having an IQ that is far higher than the average IQ. It is difficult to know what to do with it. One of the goals I have is to make sure I can elucidate what I want to say without also sewing in confusion. Apparently, this is far harder to do than I ever anticipated because I cannot circumvent other people's emotions. If I avoid sewing in my emotions, people seek to know what they are so they can understand my reasoning. Just like I need to 'show and not tell'. It is like learning a new language to speak to a different species on the planet. I see no progress being made if we all just run around telling everyone how we feel, or how others make us feel. Someone, somewhere, needs to invent the wheel or a steam engine. In short, we need people who can put aside their feelings and come up with a solution to problems; a solution that ameliorate negative feelings that arise from the problem; Don't we?

I am considering doing something that I have in the past been intensely rattled by when other people have done it; I am considering fabricating an avatar of myself. I am thinking that the chit-chat that degree level study with The Open University demands is interfering with my learning. Yesterday, I spent two hours writing an email just to explain why I was writing an email and why I wrote a previous email. Ridiculous! By writing the email I missed a tutorial. Ridiculous! But the person who needed my email would otherwise implement, who knows what, on my behalf. Anything anyone does on my behalf is never going to help me, which is why I am so adamant that people should talk to me and not about me. We have all heard of Chinese Whispers, haven't we?

Essentially, if a bunch of people talk about someone else, the bunch of people need to agree on a coherent shared view of the 'talked about' person. To do this they have to create an avatar of the 'talked about' person. Unfortunately, the 'talked about' person becomes a lesser being than the avatar, and, because they are not party to the fabrication of the avatar, they will always find that they are misunderstood when they attempt to make themselves clear; quite simply because they do not comply with the expectations others have, who were party to the fabrication of their avatar.

I think that I must create a public persona that is quite separate from my private persona, and consider that managing the public persona is just 'what I need to do'. Wait, What? That is what everyone does? They are deceptive, disloyal and untrustworthy? Good Crikeyness! I finally get it. If I want to feel safe in the modern world, I should pretend to be something I am not. But I already knew that. It is why, so many years ago, I decided to be honest. I think Jack Nicholson in the 1992 film, 'A few Good Men' had it right when his character, Colonel Jessup, shouted, 'You can't handle the truth!' to Lieutenant Kaffee, played by Tom Cruise, in a courtroom. People just don't want to know, they just want to 'feel'.

Even though students are encouraged to make their subjective, highly personal, opinion clear in reviewing other students' efforts at writing; they are not actually allowed to tell the truth. If they don't like the written work they are reviewing, they must instead use reason to determine what words of encouragement they should use to say, 'Your work stinks!' I fail to understand the efficacy of waffling and prevaricating in telling the truth.

In the past, I have assured my tutors that positive reinforcement in feedback has no beneficial effect on me. However, I have been made aware that tutors feel a need to offer positive reinforcement to students. I am pretty sure that their modern schooling makes them feel like that, because it was, to my understanding, an environment wherein everyone held hands and sang 'Kum ba ya' or something to encourage togetherness or teamwork.

What The Open University is actually doing is encouraging teamwork among the students doing the same modules as I. The very idea that I need a team to do a degree, is to consider myself to be inadequate to the task if I work independently. I fail to see why any educational body would try to attack anyone's confidence. Yet, The Open University seems convinced that no single person can achieve anything of any consequence.

     'Hey everyone. Let's form an attitude of togetherness. It is not necessary to grow a thick skin to protect you from the truth, because none of us are ever going to tell you the truth. Instead, we shall all learn devices to encourage you to make the same mistakes.'

If there is any reality in my wild exclamation, and I am not going to strongly advocate for that, then why does The Open University find it difficult to accept that some of us want to learn literary devices in order to be able to NOT manipulate other people's emotions; evoke emotions that were not evident before? I have no wish to manipulate other people. Indeed, as far as I can tell, it is through people's emotions that they can be controlled.

     'Martin, you need to open up the gateway to your emotions.'

This is why I should create an avatar of myself. Let the world have access to the avatar and see if they can control something that is ultimately under my own control. Good luck with that! The difficult part is to be emotionally distinct from the avatar. I wouldn't want to have a conversation with it any time soon.

None of this is new to me. I knew, when I was eighteen, and decided that I would  no longer allow anyone to take photographs of me, that the 'future me' would feel this way. What is new to me is the realisation that everyone already has an avatar for work, and one for friends, and another for family, and never should their avatars meet. To tell the truth I did  know that. When I was about twenty, I recognised that one group of friends I had should never be aware of, and definitely not meet, another group of friends I had. I did act differently in different circumstances and environments. I pretended I was interested when I was not, but back then I was still shaping my 'private me' and I didn't want just any old crap to influence me. I did have a gatekeeper. 

Now, in the modern world, I recognise just how vital it is to have a gatekeeper and an avatar to attend to the gate. I suppose I have The Open University to thank for that.

The most important thing for me to remember is to never give any clues to what I really think or feel that may be added to a profile of me. 

Michael Ayers in his book on the philosopher John Locke (1632–1704), includes a quote by Locke, 'The mind being, as I have declared, furnished with a great number of the simple ideas, conveyed in by the senses, as they are found in exterior things, or by reflection on its operations, takes notice also, that a certain number of these simple ideas go constantly together; which being presumed to belong to one thing, and words being suited to common apprehension, and made use of for quick dispatch, are called so united in one subject, by one name; which by inadvertency we are apt afterward to talk of and consider as one simple idea, which indeed is a complication of many ideas together; because, as I have said, not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves, we accustom ourselves, to suppose some substratum, wherein they do subsist, and from which they do result , which therefore we call substance.' (Ayers 1998).

Locke is talking of substance, ideas and things. Yet, it does not take too much for us to apply much of what he said to the amalgamation of some simple ideas about a person, which could stand as independent from one another, yet are combined to become a simple idea about the person. This could be the fabricated avatar that is created and shared among members of a group to which the original person has no access.

References

Ayers, M., 1998, 'Locke', 'Substance, Accident and Doubts about Essence', 1998, Pheonix (Orion Publishing), p29

Permalink 1 comment (latest comment by Darren Menachem Drapkin, Wednesday 11 March 2026 at 19:26)
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 537735