Uncomfortable parallels deserve consideration

There is a basic rule of life I heard long ago. From where I cannot remember, but over the years I’ve found it to ring true.

It is this: You are who you spend time with.

Put another way, your circle of friends and confidants will have a profound effect on the person you turn out to be.

If you want to be toned and fit and healthy, spending time with folks who frequently exercise and watch what they eat will naturally predispose you to achieving those goals.

On the other hand, spending time with friends in a diner eating fried foods and sugary desserts may be entertaining and enjoyable, but that lifestyle diverges from the objective you set for yourself.

I can’t think of a better example of this phenomenon than the book and movie, “Being There.” The book was published in 1971, the movie came out in 1979. The premise is simple, but the message the story conveys is profound.

Chance the gardener is an unfailingly polite, thoroughly benign middle-aged man who has lived an unimaginably sheltered life. He has worked as a gardener since childhood — a task he truly loves and one that stretches his intellectual capacity to its limit. He is a simpleton. He makes no effort to present himself as anything beyond what he actually is, a gardener in search of a meal and a place to sleep.

Through a series of random events Chance finds himself living in the rarified suburbs of Washington D.C., where he rubs shoulders with the rich and powerful. His quiet demeanor is mistaken for depth of thought. His single-minded commitment to fostering plant life is misconstrued to be astute metaphorical advice on the nation’s economy.

Wise men of great power assume Chance is far more than he really is and so their own assumptions reaffirm their beliefs. Ultimately Chance’s name is seriously considered for a run at the presidency. A goal the gardener never sought, but one that is manufactured and reenforced by the circle of new friends he has been exposed to.

As a theatrical piece, “Being There” is thoroughly entertaining. It elicits both a sense of humor and pathos in spades. It’s ridiculous, of course. Except that it’s not.

Perhaps that’s what gives the story the ability to resonate so well. We know this unbelievable set of circumstances and the events that result could and do happen in real life.

Influence is a powerful thing. As children we’re influenced by our elders, for good or ill. As teenagers we’re molded by our classmates and close friends, as well as by the celebrities we connect with through media. Our spouses can alter us to become something new and different, as can our co-workers, teachers, religious leaders, and such.

Knowing this to be true, as it most certainly is, we are all aware on some level that we change over time. Our values shift. Our intensity waxes and wanes. Over the course of time, we become very different people. Hopefully kinder, more capable, more worthwhile people. But we are different than we were. And that presents a potential problem.

As we age and hopefully gain respect from our peers and subordinates, it is incumbent upon each of us to check ourselves from time to time. To be sure we are sharing advice and insight that is true and verifiable.

We have all heard the story of a financial advisor who lost their client’s investment portfolio. The advisor meant well. They intended to grow the investment to spectacular sums. Yet, a combination of greed, tunnel vision, the desire to be admired for their particular skill, and an ability to discard caution in a quest to win big all conspired to ruin their client.

Yes, it happens.

In aviation we have this same issue to contend with, although many of us would prefer not to see the obvious parallels.

For many, the last real flight instruction we received was decades ago. As aircraft owners or renters with a long-standing relationship with a provider, we’ve allowed our flight reviews to become perfunctory experiences that don’t challenge us or introduce new skills.

We seek affirmation rather than discipline.

Be honest. When was the last time you intentionally sought out a flight instructor who would demand a high level of performance from you?

Do any of us really believe we are so talented that we can sail through all our educational experiences without ever being told by our CFI, “That was a little rough. I’d like to get in one more flight to work on some of those problem areas.”

If we seek an easy path to a sign-off we’ll find one. The odds are in our favor.

If we try to find a designated pilot examiner with a reputation for going easy on applicants, we may find that individual. Should we take this to the extreme, we might even search out an examiner who, in exchange for a fee, will guarantee we successfully complete our flight checks.

Yes, those options are on the table and have been pursued by individuals in the past. It may be shocking, but this is real life, not a theatrical production where we have the ability to go again should the outcome not be to our liking.

The question each of us must ask ourselves is this: Do I really want to be minimally qualified? Would my friends and family be comfortable flying with me if they knew I was actively avoiding situations where I would have to prove my worth as a pilot?

The CFI corps is not disqualified from this line of reasoning either. Any CFI worth his or her salt should be working with a mentor who can provide guidance and insight.

None of us is effortlessly flawless in our execution or infallible by nature. Ignorance plagues us.

However, if we commit ourselves to real self-improvement rather than a meaningless rubber stamp, life gets better.