| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Editor's Notes |
As one who has never been terribly fond of New Year's Eve, I have always found the joviality to be a bit forced. You can imagine my glee at the thought of people who feel that, as the century and millennium change, we must break records for ethanol consumption, boisterous behavior, and (presumably) morning-after regrets. To make matters worse, this year the attempts to place the New Year into some meaningful, historical context are almost embarrassing, indications of a myopia and parochialism rarely seen outside of a cloistered environment. Apparently, the past 1,000 years existed solely for the purpose of justifying parties—and lists.
We have been busily making lists of the "top 10" or "top 100" events, people, and inventions of both the century and the millennium. Notice that the "really" important stuff on these lists has happened only recently. Of course, humans have always focused on their own times without regard to the bigger picture. Within the first decade of this century, for instance, "the trial of the century" took place when Harry K Thaw shot architect Stanford Lloyd White in an attempt to, as they said at the time, "redeem the virtue of a woman" (who, by all accounts, seemed more concerned with losing her virtue than finding it). How many crimes of the century have there been? And how about crimes of the millennium? The example reminds us of how easy it is to make claims when we can be assured that no one will hold us accountable over the long haul.
If we mark the passing of time by recalling crimes, we cannot forget genocide, which emerges time and time again like a malignancy that we send into remission only with the certainty that it will recur. If we are to argue about criminality and crimes of the century, however, I nominate those who stood idly by while others imposed final solutions and ethnic cleansings, those who considered human bondage to be a necessary component of the economic system. The timelessness of evil and indifference is an observation that I hope will seem foreign to the people who welcome the third millennium.
Slavery, oppression, and mass murder were not invented in our millennium or our century, of course. But with 20th century technology, their effectiveness was enhanced, which should give us all pause as we look to the future.
I mourn the passing of meaningful recall. This year should have been a time for reflection about who we are and what this world is all about and what it may yet be. Sometimes it seems as though the only people who are putting the millennium change into a greater context are those who adhere to apocalyptic visions. Frankly, I would like to see an alternative view prevail! Rather than fall under the spell of lists generated with the historical insight and depth of a USA Today article, it would have been nice to take the time to actually think about what has occurred in this remarkable millennium. How can we make simplistic lists when, for instance, the invention of moveable type (first by the Chinese and then 400 years later by a European) and the transistor (in the 1950s)—each, in their time—changed the entire nature of communications?
The artistic gifts of the past century and of the entire millennium should be cause for celebration because the harvest has been rich and diverse. We might even choose to remember that, not unlike a certain New York City mayor, famous Italian patrons of art withdrew funding from artists because they did not find their work acceptable! The past may be prelude to the future, but sometimes the present is nothing but a rerun with a different cast.
The end of the century, the end of the millennium, and the associated Y2K fears have been good for the economy but have provided little more than thin gruel for the intellectual appetite. We have been so busy rushing to the party and fearing the millennium bug that we as a nation, and the world in general, have not spent enough time in thoughtful contemplation. How many families have taken the time to consider how their ancestors passed along the time line of the past century, let alone to consider their more common roots when this millennium began? Businesses riding the crest of expansion seem immune to thoughts that go beyond immediate stock values and profit margins.
Our profession has seen massive changes in the past year, and perhaps that is why our members are focused on the immediate rather than on the long term. And that's alright—as long as we take advantage of our second chance.
Second chance? Yes, we do have one. And, unlike the second chances portrayed in certain movies and plays—such as It's a Wonderful Life, in which an angel helps George Bailey understand his importance, or Carousel, in which an angel helps Billy Bigelow find his way—our second chance requires neither angelic intervention nor excessive mental gymnastics.
Despite the repeated protestations of my wife, and even those of the managing editor of the Journal, I retain my purist view of the millennium change. To make my case, I cite the following statement from an authoritative source:
The sequence of years going from BC to AD does not include the year 0. The sequence of years runs 3 BC, 2 BC, 1 BC, AD 1, AD 2, AD 3, etc. This means that the first year of the first millennium was AD 1. The one thousandth year was AD 1000 and the first year of the second millennium was AD 1001. It is thus clear that that the start of the new millennium will be January 1, 2001. Year AD 2000 will certainly be celebrated, as is natural for a year with such a round number, but accurately speaking we will be celebrating the last year of the millennium, not the start of the new millennium.1
This Journal therefore welcomes the last year of this millennium with a special feature. In 2000, let's all think about the physical therapy profession and its place in the world. Let's reflect scholarly on our past and bring our own special knowledge, hopes, and fears into formulations about our future. Perhaps we can even engage in discussion groups. Although leaders often talk about the future, they cannot, and should not, shape a new course by themselves. With that in mind, the Journal invites anyone and everyone to write down their ideas about our profession and its tomorrow. Whether you agree with me or with APTA positions is irrelevant. Even if you are not a member of our profession, your views are welcome.
Send us essays about our future. The Editor and Editorial Board will use the following criteria to determine which essays are published: (1) clarity of thought and effectiveness of communication, (2) relevance, and (3) the strength of the argument (including, if necessary, support in the literature) made on behalf of ideas and suggestions.
Your essays should be of a length similar to that of this Editor's Note (about 1,000 words). We will publish all those that our space allows. No comments will accompany these essays, only a request for readers to respond and engage in dialogue. When the new millennium really begins in the year 2001, our collective words will provide a record of who we are, what we want to do, and how we plan to participate in our future.
References
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
