Blogs

We live in a small house next to a large, empty lot. We own the empty lot, too. there used to be a house there, I've heard, years ago, but it had no foundation, and rotted into the ground. Eventually, it was condemned and demolished and replaced with, well, Kentucky blugrass. Who says that the last crop that ranchers around here grow is 'Houses'?

Marc Twight said this years ago. I know what he means by it; but I don't think he realizes that it doesn't quite mean what he thinks.

What he meant was, if you blather on and on about how rad you can climb, but then don't follow through with action, well, the talk doesn't mean much, does it?

But let's look at this algebraically. Let's 'solve for Talk' in the lingo.

TALK - ACTION = 0

add action to both sides of the equation:

TALK - ACTION + ACTION = 0 + ACTION

I have always been a fan of this saying. Simplify! Less is More!

But, kind of Orwellian, isn't it? Less ISN'T more, how can it be? I can see where less A means more B. Less Ice equals more rock. Less aid equals more free. Less work equals more play. But less A can't be more A, not at the same time.

It's a mathematical quandry, like trying to say A>B , but also A<B.