Review: Bridges out of Poverty Chs. 1-10

I'll start by pointing out that this book is written in a similar vain to 'Paved With Good Intentions' and 'The Myth of The Middle Class.' While I'm fairly certain I could make a decent argument that my father was merchant poor, my mother was farm poor, and I find myself (at times) resource poor, this particular book isn't about how poor I am. Where this book differs from those cited earlier is that it is a resource manual for getting out of poverty. Rather than offering a system to blame, illustrating (or whining) that your children should consider themselves lucky if they're only structurally poor, or discussing the double standard or politics of affirmative action (among other systems attempting to right an unwritable wrong). This book was written on a level that can be easily understood by a fourteen year old. If you're a fledgeling writer, editor, or one of those folks interested in mentoring stories where you can clearly identify a distinct difference between headship and leadership then this book might be something you could pick up and enjoy. Plus, it can accomplish in a weekend what 'Who Moved My Cheese' couldn't accomplish in a few hours.

Those gamers (and game masters) of a judgmental, moralistic, critical, or analytical stat brain might find this book enjoyable as well. Because, the first chapter opens up with an exercise in assessing the assets of several characters and it's your responsibility to fill out their character sheets with the limited information provided you. Unlike the work of Josh McDowell (who ironically enough seems interested in only disclosing the strategies used by satan) or Robert Brezsney (who feels you should embrace your enemy because your friends might be jerks [Romans 12:20]) Bridges Out Of Poverty is concerned with enlightening a generation of mentors (professional or otherwise) in the art of disclosing the hidden rules of the middle class. You know, for that fortunate 10% of individuals who genuinely have a shot at escaping generational poverty. It does this by discussing registers of language and skills that otherwise intelligent individuals, conditioned by circumstances outside their control, are lacking in the sociopolitical arena.

At any rate, once the topic of registers of language pops up within the book it's arranged within a hierarchy. Frozen language at the top, followed closely by formal, consultive, casual, and intimate. Intimate language in my opinion is playful. After all, romance is the basic model of adult play. Frozen language deals with absolutes, so there is nothing a real scientist would ever use unless they were in a court of law. Casual language is organized in a fashion that isn't direct and to the point, it is arranged in a fashion that doesn't immediately address the cause and effect relationship of an event. Whereas Formal language, in my opinion, is a way of treating others with respect in an effort to minimize miscommunication. I never realized that jumping up or down more than two registers in a conversation was considered a social faux pas among the middle class. Not to mention faux pas are supposedly hilarious to the rich... how unfortunate such a sly joke is beyond my comprehension. If I wasn't already stone faced I'd be laughing. Don't worry, I'll blink three times if I need help.

Now, before I graduated from college I was unconsciously aware I was missing consultive or counseling language, which is probably why I took philosophy, persuasion, and every course on communication available to me as an undergraduate. Even in the forced prerequisite career enhancement program courses, which seemed primarily concerned with choice dilemma questions, hypothetical situations, and highlighting the financial, cognitive, and social limits of the working poor (;Not to mention of little help when one faces an interview with a tyrant, industrial psychopath, demented human resource agent, arbitrary inquisitor, or trained Biscuit at cross purposes when negotiating a drumhead.) I suspect, being southern, my language is too formal and devoid of game as I was rarely given more than 5 seconds to answer whenever I used vocabulary above my perceived station (more or less anything containing two or three syllables was off limits). And, even then, I was well aware children are given 12 seconds to answer if it's believed they don't know the answer and a couple of minutes if it's believed they do. Then again, I've gotten used to being Johnny on the spot for reasons I don't care to divulge at this moment.

Miscommunication, I might add, is difficult subject. Especially given the fact there are loaded words featured in the ethical cannon alone with dual meanings. Meanings that cannot be clearly understood unless you can determine the other person's spiritual beliefs with the speed of an unladen swallow. As an example, I like to use the term Chivalric and Chauvinist for the dual meanings of values like gratitude, respect, peace, love, loyalty, honesty and service. When I use gratitude I don't mean worship, my definition is genuine appreciation. When I use a word like respect I don't mean fear or obligation, I mean admiration or tolerance. When I use the word like peace, I don't mean compromise, I mean freedom from poverty, fear, and oppression. Love for me is not lust or covetousness. It is acceptance, desire, passion, and companionship. Loyalty for me isn't about submission and obedience, and I wouldn't feel betrayed if someone withheld their trust or confidence from me, I'd want to know why. I don't feel honesty should be a truth limited only to those who share my beliefs. And, the key difference between aid and service is that you pay one forward if you don't pay it back, or you've agreed to an exchange up front for your mutual cooperation.

Anyway, with only five chapters remaining in 'Bridges out of Poverty,' I now know one of my character flaws is that I lack precision. Who knew? And, more importantly, what difference does that make? Not much I can do about that considering I'm concerned with survival, and developing my personality as opposed to building my character. That is to say, unless I'm in a rocket ship cutting corners makes me more adaptable (in much the same way having an overbite makes my emotional displays more deceptive and reduces the likelihood I'll bite my tongue).