The younger Alistair in our family (our son) had an odd but impressive ability when he was just two years old. It involved a ‘shapes ball’.[1] Around its circumference were geometric shaped slots, into which a child was challenged to insert the matching shape.

Here is the game we played with Alistair. We would lay out the shapes in front of him, and name one to put in the ball. For example, we’d say: “Put the parallelogram into the ball”. He’d pick out the parallelogram, find its slot, and in it went. Then we’d ask him to insert the triangle, and after that was inside the ball, we’d ask for the circle, the hexagon, the pentagon, the star, the square, the cross and so on. Ten shapes in total, each placed into the correct slot. We knew that if we named shapes in the same order every time, he would simply learn the sequence. So we made every game different. Alistair was not simply putting the correct shape in the correct hole, he was recognising the name of each shape and then slotting that one into its correct place.

Children like to move on to new things, so after a while we stopped playing that game. About six months later we brought out the shapes ball again, only to find Alistair had forgotten which shape was which. His impressive skill was gone. But perhaps not entirely gone, because Alistair later became remarkably proficient at maths, science and then electronics. I am not suggesting our son owes his later career to a Tupperware toy, only making the point that skills learned early may have their greatest benefit later. I will reinforce that statement shortly.

In the preceding two blog posts I’ve described skills which I’ve found particularly useful. Of course, what’s helped me may be unnecessary for someone else, and they will have skills which I have never needed. We’re all different.

The first post in this short series described the skills of touch typing, spelling, report writing, giving a talk, basic DIY skills, and learning from mistakes. (https://occasionallywise.com/2024/02/23/skills-worth-having/) The second post covered skills related to being an advanced driver or motorcyclist, swimming, and playing a musical instrument. (https://occasionallywise.com/2024/04/06/skills-worth-having-part-two/) This blog post carries the third set of skills which I’ve valued. I have four to share.

Riding a bicycle

Cycling was a skill I learned early on but – like the shapes ball was for our son – perhaps its greatest benefit came later in my life. I’ll explain.

In my youngest years there was no money in our household for me or my brother to have bicycles, but when we were eight or nine my Dad found us second hand bikes. Those first two-wheelers had no gears, which made them hard work up hills. Later bikes we rode were fitted with Sturmey-Archer three speed gears,[2] which helped considerably. Despite passing a Cycling Proficiency Test, I fell off my bike several times, Thankfully these old bikes were nearly indestructible, other than needing the handlebars twisted back into alignment. I am not indestructible, but happily suffered little more than scrapes and bruises from my unexpected and unwelcome impacts with road surfaces.

From the age of eleven I cycled to and from school. During the summer months, my brother, Alan, and I would head off down quiet country lanes to explore whatever we could find. We’d ride for miles, sometimes forgetting a) what the time was, including when we were meant to be home for the evening meal; b) that as many miles as we’d ridden away, we’d have to ride those miles again to get home. We exhausted ourselves, but we loved it.

The skill of cycling and those years of pedalling here, there and everywhere, gave me three main gains.

1. It got me to school and home quickly. I also delivered morning newspapers all over town, a round so spread out that walking wasn’t an option. Cycling was the answer, though it was hard work going uphill with a full bag of newspapers. In general, then, getting places promptly by bike was the initial benefit of cycling.
2. A second benefit – useful at the time and also for later life – was that I learned to read traffic. Cyclists know they won’t win in a collision with a motorised vehicle. You might be in the right, but that’ll do you little good. One of the saddest things I saw at age 11 happened in our town’s main street. A lad of similar age cycled past a slow moving lorry, but he wobbled and fell in front of the lorry. The driver couldn’t stop in time, and the boy died under the vehicle’s wheels. No-one did anything wrong, though the lad would have been wise to have taken a wider route past the lorry, or not to try overtaking it at all. At a young age I learned that and similar road safety lessons, and they stood me in good stead for my own cycling and, for later when I’d moved on to motorised transport. That was an important later benefit.
3. Using my bike constantly also did a lot of good for my long-term health. I rode to school, parks, sports fields, shops, and for miles with my brother and friends around the hilly countryside nearby. That was so valuable for me. I was always overweight, yet relatively fit and strong. Throughout my adult life I have had enviable ‘vitals’ – my heart rate and blood pressure numbers are impressively good. Some of that is because I had so much cycling exercise at a young age. That has to be one of the most important later benefits from my cycling.

My point is that some skills are nice-to-have at an early stage, but their greatest benefit comes later. That’s true even if the initial activity has ceased but lessons were learned, and other advantages laid down giving life-long gains. The skill of riding a bicycle was, for me, multi-beneficial.

Proficiency with software

In the dark ages, long before desktop computers, I worked in a newspaper office where journalists wrote their stories on typewriters. For the uninitiated, a typewriter works in a similar way to a traditional piano – you press a key which moves an arm which strikes its target. In the case of a piano pressing a key causes a string to be struck with a ‘hammer’. With a typewriter, the end of its small arm is a piece of ‘type’ (which, in most cases, is a letter of the alphabet) which hits hard against an inked ribbon leaving an impression on the paper behind it.[3] A typewriter is a remarkable mechanical object.

But, though ribbons move fractionally between each strike, and then reverse their direction to allow several passes, eventually the ink is used and it’s time for a new ribbon. All bar one of the people in that newspaper office were men. And not one of them knew how to change a typewriter ribbon. Rather than learn, those incompetent male journalists would require the one female in the office – a secretary – to leave her work and change their typewriter ribbons. I would not do that. I studied my typewriter, saw how the ribbon was threaded round small posts and between a guiding mechanism in the striking area, and worked out how to change my ribbon. There was an inevitable consequence – I was soon in demand! Different models of typewriter had their own ways of securing their ribbon, but they all worked on similar principles so I could see how the ribbon should be threaded on each one.

Time and technology have moved on, but the inability to understand and use computer software matches the ignorance I once saw about changing typewriter ribbons.

Do a search for ‘How much of Microsoft Word is actually used?’ and you won’t get an answer, other than ‘no-one really knows’. But all the sources of information agree that only a tiny percentage of a word processor’s features are put to work. Some functions exist only for specialist use, but the larger explanation for why certain features are redundant is that many people have no idea they exist, never mind how to use them. That includes relatively basic matters like changing margins, creating columns, inserting and formatting pictures or using function key shortcuts. The same is true with programs like PowerPoint. Just recently, someone setting up a PowerPoint presentation said to me, ‘I don’t know how to make the screen go blank’. I told him, ‘Press B’. He did. ‘Wow,’ he said, ‘it’s gone blank’. I got him to press B again, and back his presentation came. Then I showed him the alternative of pressing W which also blanked the screen but left it white. ‘B’ for black; ‘W’ for white. Not difficult. But he didn’t know, despite having used PowerPoint for years.

I’m not a highly skilled user of software, but from early days I took the time to learn how to do everything I needed, thus producing some relatively sophisticated looking Word documents and relatively complex PowerPoint presentations.

Because I bothered to learn, my work became quicker, easier, better, and I never had to panic because I had no idea what to do next.

What’s true about learning key features of software is equally important for other areas of life. Some feel failures with gardening, but they‘ve never taken the trouble to learn about putting the right plant in the right place. They’re annoyed that they can’t control their dog, but they’ve never gone to a training class. There are golfers who have never read any of the rules of the game, but then are surprised when they’re penalised for doing the wrong thing. We’ve met people who ate out seven days a week, or brought home ‘take away’ food for every meal. Some had convinced themselves they’d no time to prepare meals. Others had never learned even the basics of preparing ingredients.

Getting the skills you need for the tools you use and tasks you face is worth every minute.

Proofreading

Part of my early career in journalism was sub-editing for the Edinburgh Evening News. I liked that work for two reasons: a) there were fixed hours – once all the editions of the paper were on the street, you were done for the day; b) I dealt with a finished product – no-one would rewrite a story after I’d edited it. My work is what appeared in the paper.

But there was another benefit – I became skilled at proofreading. Reporters are all very good at writing. But they aren’t all equally good at reading, especially their own work. They might omit a word, misspell a name, or use the wrong term. They’d notice an error in someone else’s writing but not their own, because they’d see what they expected to see. One journalist meant to write ‘The Royal Family returned to Balmoral’. But what he wrote was ‘The Royal Infirmary returned to Balmoral’. The reporter was familiar with Edinburgh’s largest hospital, and its name sounded similar, so he’d written ‘Infirmary’ instead of ‘Family’, and hadn’t noticed his mistake. But I did, because it was my job to be super careful about such things.

The habit of proofreading[4] has lasted. I read news apps every day, and almost always find mistakes, perhaps because journalists post directly to the website without an editor’s scrutiny, or because the priority is to get a story online as soon as possible. That happens too with ‘ticker’ lines of text below news stories during live broadcasts. I also see errors on road signs, and, one of my favourites, a drain cover with a misspelling cast into the metal.

Small mistakes rarely matter, but becoming good at proofreading is a great skill to have. People do make negative judgments about misspellings and grammatical errors, so spotting and eliminating those helps a lot.

Coping with people I didn’t like

For 15 months during my twenties, I worked in the education department of a local authority. Counties in the UK don’t own their own school buses, but officials decide the transportation routes needed to get pupils to schools, and then grant contracts to private operators. My work was to define the routes and invite tenders from coach companies.

The people who worked near me in a large open-plan office had very different tasks, such as administering teacher appointments, handling applications for college bursaries, or dealing with school financial issues. My colleagues were a remarkable miscellany of characters. Some were great – very friendly and super helpful. Others were not great – they were grumpy, critical, and not at all open to offering support or advice.

But, nice or nasty, these were my colleagues. I’d never have chosen some of them, and they’d never have chosen me. Yet for eight hours every workday we had to sit in close proximity. Every conversation was overheard, so I’d get the daily instalment of someone’s family drama. There was endless gossip about romances or hoped-for romances. The less-than-polite way some responded to callers was disturbing, as was the snail-like pace at which they did their work. Others left their desks for 30 minutes for their 10 minute tea break, and then exited the office a quarter of an hour before their finishing time. They were not all like that, but more than a few were. And I found that difficult. During my years at school and university I’d chosen who I spent time with – mainly people I liked, people with whom I felt comfortable. In that office I couldn’t do that. My job put me alongside people who annoyed me and gave me no encouragement.

But there they were, and there I was. After a few months I made a choice. I could loathe them, which would make me miserable and probably them too. Or I could love them, which would benefit all of us. I might never know what lay behind their quirks and shortcomings. Perhaps a dysfunctional upbringing had damaged them. Maybe they were going through tough times in a relationship. Possibly someone they loved was desperately ill. Or, they’d never wanted the jobs they had, hated their work and were frustrated at not being promoted. So their dissatisfaction spilled over onto whoever was around, which included me.

I lacked any power to solve the causes of their unhappiness and awkwardness. But I did have power to determine my own behaviour. I decided I would be friendly and helpful no matter what. It is possible to love someone through gritted teeth. I wish I could report that my positive attitude turned those colleagues into great friends. It didn’t. They were still disagreeable. But there’s the test: are we willing to keep being kind and pleasant with difficult people even if they never change?

Perhaps this last skill – coping with those you can’t easily like – is one of the most important of all the skills I’ve listed. It’s fun and satisfying to ride a bicycle, drive well, go swimming, play music, touch type, give a presentation, repair something with DIY skills, and so on. But it’s hard to love those who give nothing good back, people embedded in their own sadness, bitterness, or lostness. To love them is a God-like attribute, one for which we will be remembered above any other skill or ability we’ve ever had.

[1] It was manufactured by Tupperware, and officially called the Shape-O. You can see images of the toy on Ebay, Etsy and similar sites, though not all adverts for the product seem to have the whole collection of shapes. Buyer beware!

[2] You can still buy Sturmey-Archer gears from many outlets. Here’s the manufacturer’s website: https://www.sturmey-archer.com/

[3] For a fuller and better explanation of how a typewriter works, here’s a helpful article: https://www.explainthatstuff.com/typewriter.html#gsc.tab=0

[4] If you’re proofreading this, and think proofreading should be two words or hyphenated, you’ll find Oxford dictionaries list it as one word, but some ‘experts’ divide it into two.