Washington Post article on personal cargo

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Joe Ganley

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 7:38:31 AM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
It's not particularly deep, but I thought the group might be interested
in an article in today's Washington Post about the increasing amount of
stuff people carry around these days:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/07/AR2006020702030.html?sub=AR

(Annoying free registration probably required.)

Joe

Ben Wilson

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 8:24:29 AM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
Interesting article. I would offer one of the reasons why our
forebearers did not schlep as much stuff was because very little was
really portable. There were no plastics or special alloys to make
things light weight. People did not have as many *things* to schlep
around, either. And, they did not have quite the same convenience of
transportation. I'll bet if she did not have a car, the "suburban
sherpa" would not be hauling all that material home. Then again,
education was different back then. Okay, that's four reasons.

I wonder if the story looked at life just 20 or 30 years ago if the
contrast would remain?

Joe Ganley

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 10:37:32 AM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
I had the same thought. The article was quick to point out that in
pictures from the 19th century, people are carrying nothing, but even
50 years ago (think "Leave it to Beaver") most businessmen were
carrying briefcases to and from work. Let's face it, before the
industrial revolution there weren't many (any?) jobs that involved
anything that could productively be worked on away from the job site.

Robert Lynch

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 10:55:13 AM2/8/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
On 2/8/06, Joe Ganley <gan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's face it, before the
> industrial revolution there weren't many (any?) jobs that involved
> anything that could productively be worked on away from the job site.

And before the typewriter, we didn't have as much paper to haul
around. We've only made it worse with copiers and computer printers.
Back in the olden days, people wrote by hand all day.

This is a fine example of David Allen's (and others', I'm sure)
observation that there are no edges to work anymore -- so we feel some
need to carry loads of stuff with us at all times, to be prepared.

(I actually went home from work yesterday with nothing, and it felt
really strange this morning to go to work with no stuff.)

--
Robert Lynch
robert...@gmail.com
Do you procrastinate? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheNowHabit/

stevecooper

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 11:37:30 AM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
One thing I got from that article was that lots of people have objects
of distraction - books, iPods, notebooks, mobile phones, etc. People
carry stuff with them because they expect a higher level of
entertainment than they used to. I know I have my iPod with me at all
times, and it's crammed with audiobooks, so I never have to take a ten
minute walk without getting into a book. At the same time, people carry
stuff to be more effective; laptop, pda, phone, papers from work.

The solution might be, if you want to carry less stuff, accept less
entertainment and more limits on work. I don't think this is such a bad
thing - for me, constant access is like constant overload, and I tend
to feel grateful when I get time to think. But I do love to be plugged
into the ole' white box.

Another thing - are we talking here about (a) people carrying stuff
from their car into the office/shop/home, or (b) people spending the
whole day on foot, bike, or public transport? Seems to me the car is a
big carrying vessel; just because you have a big bag to move everything
from the car park to the door doesn't mean you're burdened.

Me, I'm a walker, and I find that having just a couple of kilos of
stuff is a real drain over the course of a day, so I try to keep things
light. (Right now my bag contains cards, money, keys, baseball cap,
pen, ipod, scraps of paper, mobile, palm. Lots of little bits, but all
light.)

Eugene Liedel

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 12:14:38 PM2/8/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
Didn''t Phineous Fog carry a large carpet bagger type case with him ?
--
lie...@gmail.com
deepthoughts.liedel.org

Vicki Brown

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 1:33:47 PM2/8/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
At 12:14 -0500 02/08/2006, Eugene Liedel wrote:
> Didn''t Phineous Fog carry a large carpet bagger type case with him ?

Yes, but he was traveling around the world.
That's not a lot of luggage for an around-the-world trip :)

I recall, as a child, realizing how the "I might want this" phenomenon could
get in the way. We had SNOW when I was a little kid. Three feet at a time.
I'd trek off to play in the snow carrying all of the buckets and shovels and
stuff I _might_ want. Generally didn't use it all and had to carry it all
back when I got tired. I learned early the difference between "might want
that" and "will need this".

My Mom was better at this. When we packed for a day at the beach, we brought
what we needed. never seemed to have too much. Never seemed to be missing
anything we needed.

Spouse has a theory for out-of-town trips by plane. Pack what you expect to
take. Then shlep that stuff around the block. Then rethink your packing
strategy.

We never carried backpacks when I was in elementary school. I don't think I
had a backpack in High School. Then again, where I went to school we had
desks that held books and papers and we had lockers. The elementary schools
where I live now seem to have neither. School children are turtles, carrying
their environment with them.

I carry a small softsided briefcase to work; I keep a PDA/cellphone on my
belt. I carry a wallet in one pocket and car keys in the other. I never bring
a purse or beltpack into the workplace (not since the day we had a 4-hour
bomb threat at work and I just so happened to have my purse with me when we
were evacuated). Everything I _need_ is with me. A few things I might want
are handy.
--
- Vicki

ZZZ
zzZ San Francisco Bay Area, CA
z |\ _,,,---,,_ Books, Cats, Tech
zz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://cfcl.com/vlb
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' http://heatercats.com
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) http://cfcl.com/vlb/weblog

JC

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 3:00:41 PM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
For some reason this reminds me of the horror of schlugging two pieces
of luggage around the train stations in Tokyo to get to the airport. So
frustrating...

graeme.lyall

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 3:15:52 PM2/8/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com

Referring back to the bags thread, my experience is that the bigger the bag
the more you carry.

Ben Wilson

unread,
Feb 8, 2006, 5:50:47 PM2/8/06
to 43 Folders
"Spouse has a theory for out-of-town trips by plane. Pack what you
expect to take. Then shlep that stuff around the block. Then rethink
your packing strategy. "

I have a similar theory: if you can't get it through the security team
and to the gate, then you are carrying too much. Then again, I can
manage a week long trip easily with a carry on. My brother could go a
month off a carry on. My wife and 18 month-old seem to need quite a bit
more. So, I let her pack, then I stuff my kit into their bags. :-)

Ben

stevecooper

unread,
Feb 9, 2006, 4:23:31 AM2/9/06
to 43 Folders
> Didn''t Phineous Fog carry a large carpet bagger type case with him ?

I believe his valet did. That's a whole other thing. If I had a valet,
I'd probably get him to carry a bigger bag with more stuff ;)

> Referring back to the bags thread, my experience is that the bigger the bag
the more you carry.

Absolutely so. It's like a parkinson's law of luggage: Stuff expands to
fill the space available to it.

Joe Ganley

unread,
Feb 9, 2006, 8:18:35 AM2/9/06
to 43 Folders
The expansion of stuff to fit its container is so true! A few months
ago I switched from a 'compact' planner to the 5.5x8.5 kind, so of
course I had to get a bigger bag to accommodate it. Now the bag is so
full that it takes a few minutes to jam my planner in there. It's
about time for bag housecleaning...

Also, I think stevecooper touched on a very important point: We've
become accustomed to an always-on, constant-input lifestyle. I think
that's probably unhealthy overall, though I'm just as addicted as
anyone.

David Douthitt

unread,
Feb 9, 2006, 7:38:01 PM2/9/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
graeme.lyall wrote:
> Referring back to the bags thread, my experience is that the bigger the
> bag the more you carry.

That's why I like to have a smaller bag. I've a laptop bag that could
work as an overnight bag (and has!) - but then I bought a much smaller
bag that is just right for a laptop and a few belongings. Note, too,
that these are $15-30 bags from Wal-Mart - not $150 bags.

I bought the bag in order to prevent the idea that comes with the larger
bag: I've got room, so I'll bring this - just in case.... until "just in
case" becomes 20-30 lbs. of unnecessary stuff....

stevecooper

unread,
Feb 10, 2006, 6:12:58 AM2/10/06
to 43 Folders
On the problem of big bags getting stuffed with more and more stuff;

Although it varies from person to person, each of us has a list of
things we could carry if we had the capacity and inclination. For me,
the only vital things I need when I leave the house are my keys (so I
can get back in), and a bank card. Everything else is, really, an
optional extra. But some of them are useful (eg, mobile) and some of
them are fun (eg, iPod).

So, trying to tie this into GTD - carrying more and more stuff is a way
to give you constant access to different contexts. If you've got a wifi
laptop and a mobile and a couple of books, you've got access to your
@WEB, @PC, @PHONE, and @READ contexts all the time. And backache.

Now, the question is, are you really going to be able to make good use
of this? And actually, doesn't that make GTD less and less helpful?
With more and more available contexts, you have to choose more and more
between all the things you could be doing right now. Your options
expand, to your confusion. The filtering effect of contexts, which
helps you feel less overwhelmed, is lost. And you lose the valuable
gains you get when you block similar activities together.

Put it this way; if you had enough gadgets that you had access to all
your contexts at the same time, how would you then choose what to do?

maryann

unread,
Feb 10, 2006, 4:10:17 PM2/10/06
to 43 Folders
I just don't see it as a problem. When I'm on public transportation, I
have the option of reading a book or magazine, listening to my ipod,
checking my calendar, making voicenotes on stuff that has come up in my
head that I don't want to forget -- or just thinking. Having certain
stuff with me gives me options that I can exercise or not. Even if I
didn't carry the book, etc. with me, my job is such that I need to
bring dress shoes to change into, makeup, etc. Plus my lunch if I want
to be thrifty. So jettisoning the ipod and phone is not really going to
lighten my load anyway. I would need to change careers for that.

Maryann

Vicki Brown

unread,
Feb 10, 2006, 4:34:54 PM2/10/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
At 13:10 -0800 02/10/2006, maryann wrote:
> So jettisoning the ipod and phone is not really going to
> lighten my load anyway. I would need to change careers for that.

So maybe the real question is... do you find this "load" to be a problem?
if so, identify the problem areas and figure out how to solve them.
if not, settle back with your iPod, your book, and your mocha and chortle
softly to yourself as you read that article in the Washington Post...

Norm

unread,
Feb 13, 2006, 12:46:35 AM2/13/06
to 43Fo...@googlegroups.com
I do like the bit at the end, about carrying the tennis racket so she could hit a ball against the wall a few times when need be.

I might have to add my baseball glove and a tennis ball for the same sort of thing.



On 2/8/06, Joe Ganley <gan...@gmail.com> wrote:

JC

unread,
Feb 13, 2006, 1:43:17 AM2/13/06
to 43 Folders
I think that carrying all of these things around fits right into The
David's notion of taking advatage of random interstitial periods of
time.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages