Have you
ever wondered if the experts who give opinion on things are right about what they tell
you ?
Let me give
an example. There was a risky investment that I made last year and I was
told by experts that it was not a good one. Yet in the end, it turned out to be
good after all. This year I made a similar risky investment. I was
warned again and this time they were right.
I know hindsight is 20-20, but still, if I am listening to someone's advice,
how do I know if they are right or wrong ?
Years ago,
after I had been working for about a year after graduating, I met someone who
worked in my line of work at a friend's house party. He told me that he made
good money, in fact he made the most money in his office, around $39K.
After few months, I happened to talk to another man, who is also an expert in
our line of work and he wouldn’t consider any salary under $100k a good
income.
Who is right?
Or are all these just opinions?
And why am I
talking about this today?
In this
week's reading assignment from the book "Suddenly They Heard
Footsteps" by Dan Yashinsky, there is a part where expert storytellers differ about
what part of a story can or cannot be changed.
Collector
Ethel Phelps writes in the introduction to one of her books, " . . . I have
exercised the traditional storyteller's privilege. I have shaped each tale,
sometimes adding or omitting details”. And Dan Yashinsky is puzzled by
that comment. He writes, "A small alarm bell went off when I read
this: it sounds like a 'privilege' or prerogative no traditional teller would
ever claim . . . they would make the quite different assertion that they are
faithfully passing along the story exactly as it had been given to
them". Now Yashinsky went on to analyze one of Phelps' works and he was
right, Phelps did change the basic skeleton of the tale "Maria
Morevna".
Who is right
? Or are all these just opinions?
Am I the only one who has these questions?
Leave a Reply