Candidate for a Pullet Surprise
NOTE: After having this posted for awhile, I was informed by Robert Merrells from NZ that the poem's author is Jerrold H. Zar. Here's a website that has the ORIGINAL poem with it's original title. I like the comments at the bottom of this version and have left it here to show those comments and to show how much the Internet affects things that get sent over and over. Our thanks to Jerrold for authoring the poem and Robert for setting the record straight. Trying to read this poem on the first go is like trying to decipher how to play chess after having just one look at a chess set and no previous knowledge of the game!
Since most of you will be getting my devotions by e-mail, I suspect you know a thing or two about computers, and will be able to appreciate the humor in the following (anonymous) poem sent to me by a friend some years ago:
"I have a spelling checker
I disk covered four my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.
Eye ran this poem threw it.
Your sure real glad two no.
Its very polished in its weigh,
My checker tolled me sew.
A checker is a blessing.
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.
Each frays come posed up on my screen
Eye trussed too bee a joule.
The checker pours o'er every word
To cheque sum spelling rule.
Bee fore wee rote with checkers,
Hour spelling was inn deck line,
Butt now when wee dew have a laps,
Wee are not maid too wine.
And now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
There are know faults in awl this peace,
Of nun eye am a wear.
To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should be proud,
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.
That's why eye brake in two averse
Cuz Eye dew sew want too please.
Sow glad eye yam that aye did bye
This soft wear four pea seas."
Challenging, isn't it? I had to read it several times just to "decipher" and make sense of it! Now that I've thought about it for a while, however, I've come to read and understand it at a whole new level. And there are a number of possible lessons. I'll give you my three; you can probably identify a few more: (1) ignorance of one's flaws does not equate to perfection; (2) knowing the words doesn't mean we know how to use them; and (3) Technical accuracy may make us smart, but proper application defines our competence, and judgment determines whether or not we could be described as "wise." I think the difference is what an ancient proverb was getting at when it advised, "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom. And in all your getting, get understanding." (Proverbs 4:7)
Take, for the example, the principle of "telling the truth." I suspect most of us recognize that there are times in our personal and professional lives when a word or a comment - though perhaps accurate - is best kept to ourselves. In the words of former President George Bush, "It wouldn't be prudent." And, as some one else has said, "Just because an action is legally permissible, doesn't mean that it's right; things like timing, tact, attitude, impact and unintended consequences are just as important." I'm reminded of the description I once heard of a Naval officer who failed to understand that principle -- "Tactically proficient, but strategically a disaster."
I appreciate my spell checker. It does save me from many a mistake. But with all the technical jargon and acronyms we use in the Navy, there are many times when its technical advice just doesn't fit the situation. And no matter what we face today, judgment will make a crucial difference. May we be "wise" as well as technically correct. Blessings.
-- Brother Dave
Back To Inspiration Lane
Copyright © 2000-2013 Steve Pierce. All Rights Reserved.
Last modified: 2/7/2013