This is the third in an occasional series of poems and micro-stories taken from and inspired by the written private

lives of writers that WordPress links to my work. This one, however, is about me. When did nice get such a bad name? As I arrived home last night it wasnt the only question bouncing around inside wh at passes for my brain and it probably wasnt the most important one...but it was the one that seemed to take precedent. I quickly made myself some food and then fired up the computer ready to spew forth on all the ills of the world...and the n I fell asleep. So, here I am, a day later (and still a dollar short, but thats a different story ) and not quite able to recall all that mystified me yesterday. What I do rememb er is being de facto accused of advocating niceness a recollection bolstered by th e fact it is the second time in my life that I have been accused of such an acti on. Needless to say I spiritedly defended myself from this charge as best I coul d and yet, in doing so, I in effect concurred with the idea that niceness is stu pid and so collaborated with laying waste to the concept (and yes, niceness is a concept although it is rarely seen as such). And it is this supine behaviour of mine that I wish to correct. To quickly set the scene: Beered up in the pub I was forcefully claiming that no thing can fundamentally change politically until we all as individuals start to hold ourselves to account for poor social and political behaviour in the same wa y that we are quick to do with others We find it oh so easy to only blame the po litical parties, and the economic elites, and...The Other. All these things are worthy of blame, no doubt, but these are not the easiest things to change. The e asiest thing to change and a good starting point is our self. We need to be brav e enough to confront our own selfishness. On a roll, I spouted that the first st ep of this was not actually to change, but to be hypocrites. Or rather to admit to being the hypocrites that in various ways we are. I advocated that we should de-stigmatise the acknowledgment of hypocrisy but not hypocrisy itself, and that in so doing we could more readily reveal the problems in society. On a practical level I asserted as an example that we should be rigorous about k nowing where the products we buy come from and how they are produced (all along the line back to the original producer). This would be just one aspect of useful ly revealing our political hypocrisy as displayed by our use of personal economi c power. This was quickly characterised as being an entreaty for fair-trade prod uce, which in actual fact it wasnt. It was more than that, which was lucky for me as the failures of the fair-trade system/industry are known. Unluckily for me I responded to the straw-man rebuke and thus set off a chain of miscommunication extended forth via a clash of egos. Thus I never got around to developing my arg ument and explaining that another practical technique of hypocrisy revelation (u nder the guise of better corporate education) would be for employees of all comp anies above a certain employee size to, by law, be given (non-pejorative) traini ng regarding the role of their industry in the economy, as well as having the jo bs of everyone else in their companies explained to them (but, as before, thats a different story). To cut a long story shorter, before long my attack against un declared selfishness was characterised as support for a simplistic state of nice. Instinctively I bridled against this. My bad. In reality nice is a container concept, or a set of container actions; It is the act ing out of a set of (often undeclared) theories and beliefs that the actor holds to be true...much the same as any action is. Action IS theory. Being nice isnt a s is often believed, just the way some people are, no, its a choice. Within an ac t of niceness is at least one, but usually many, thought-out or absorbed through o smosis theories regarding how society and politics should work...of how the worl d should be. This is not to say that any or all acts of niceness can be taken 100%

at face value, obviously, as without knowing exactly what is in the actors mind it could be that what appears to be one thing is actually something else entirel y yet it still deserves to be read as some sort of article of faith. This is also not to say that we should not question the actor and investigate wh at they believe and why they believe it quite the opposite. We should question t hem; we should seek to find out what beliefs they hold that has led them to act in such a way. Perhaps they are driven by a Marxist ideal, or perhaps they are d riven by some sort of market place ideal that in that moment compelled them to a ct in a way that was beneficial to another. Maybe if asked they would recite the ir understanding of the work of John Stuart Mill, or Buddha, or the trade union movement, or what they have been educated about regarding the ills of layered so cieties. Better still, they may actually set forth their own interpretation and conclusions on what they have been taught having pushed it through the filter of their own mental faculties (a subtly differentiated display of having learned r ather than having been taught, as well as an act of non-industrialised thought). Or maybe they wont refer at all to any academics, religious figures, or other ex perts, but instead straightforwardly outline the theories they have formed via t heir daily experience. It is all valid. After hearing what they have to say we m ay surmise that their niceness is indeed genuine, well-held, and of value. Or we may conclude that even though they are genuine they are misguided that they ess entially misunderstand a variety of concepts and theories. What we should not do is characterise acts of niceness as the manifestation of f eeble-mindedness. For if we do, what are we really saying? Is it really wrong to want society to intellectually progress to the point where acts of niceness are normalised? Should our goal not be to build a progressive society where the wel fare of all is seen as a joint venture? For wouldnt a society such as that easily merit the prefixed sobriquet of nice? With a rush and a push (and guns) a sort of change can come suddenly, but oftent imes real change is slower and incremental. We change society by changing oursel ves. Without ego we need to educate ourselves and each other. We need to communi cate. In my lifetime many people have said many weird things to me, some good, and som e bad. One friend once said words to the effect of you havent slept with an academic woman before, have you? Which means you havent really slept with anyone This geni us is, incredibly enough, now a big-time theatre director in Australia! A woman from my youth (well, two actually) once said you are the most beautiful person Ive ever seen laughably wrong-headed of them but still well received all the same! Another woman, Sara (another Australian) once said I used to fancy you until I go t to know you which I guess more than balances the books regarding the previous c omment! All of these things left an impression of sorts upon me (as evidenced by the fact I remember them and have just recounted them). And yet, the comment th at has stayed with me more and meant more than any other was delivered by a woma n I used to work with. She said youre the nicest person Ive ever met, which in turn was the nicest thing I had ever heard. Being nice aint so bad, I think. (#3 in the series Gravity Loves You) Theres a great big tapestry Of emotions and moments That spreads out over us like a woven sky so you must try to fly upwards before gravity loves you