firecat's amazing dysspatialrotatia
26 Dec 2004 08:28 amMy dad has a mild case of dyslexia. I don't, but I do share with him a "talent" whereby if I try to put something together, and there is anything the slightest bit unclear about any instructions I'm using, I put it together every single wrong way before I get to the right way.
I really mean that - it doesn't just seem like that because I stop once I get to a right way. I bet I would make a great user-testing subject for Ikea instructions.
I've never seen a name put to this talent, so I made up my own.
This talent also applies to my attempts at crafts. I crocheted wrong for months before I figured out how to do it right. It wasn't wrong enough to fail to produce a fabric, but it wasn't an ordinary single-crochet fabric. It was a "single-crochet into the back loop" stitch, as I later found out.
So a couple of days ago I was waiting in an ice-cream shop for my sweetie
kyubi and I was reading a book that
kightp recommended, Barbara Walker's Learn to Knit Afghan Book. I was reading the basics about how to start knitting because I've never been happy with how I hold the yarn.
And I discovered, and subsequently confirmed by looking at how-to-knit instructions in my other knitting books, that through all the hundreds of yards of fabric I've knit so far, I've been knitting backwards.
Explanation for those who are geeky enough to care: All the books say that once you have loops of yarn on your left needle, you begin to knit by putting the right needle through the yarn from the front left to the back right of the loop. But I was putting the needle through from the back right to the back left.
They also say that you loop the yarn around the needle from left to right. I was looping from right to left.
The fabric produced by this is almost identical to correct knitting; there is a small difference in how the loops lie against each other. And this is, I've learned, an actual stitch. I think it's called "knitting through the back of the stitch." It's just not the standard knit stitch.
The benefit from figuring all this out is that doing it the correct way makes it a bit easier to handle the yarn so the knitting goes slightly faster. I'm now knitting almost as fast as I crochet.
I really mean that - it doesn't just seem like that because I stop once I get to a right way. I bet I would make a great user-testing subject for Ikea instructions.
I've never seen a name put to this talent, so I made up my own.
This talent also applies to my attempts at crafts. I crocheted wrong for months before I figured out how to do it right. It wasn't wrong enough to fail to produce a fabric, but it wasn't an ordinary single-crochet fabric. It was a "single-crochet into the back loop" stitch, as I later found out.
So a couple of days ago I was waiting in an ice-cream shop for my sweetie
And I discovered, and subsequently confirmed by looking at how-to-knit instructions in my other knitting books, that through all the hundreds of yards of fabric I've knit so far, I've been knitting backwards.
Explanation for those who are geeky enough to care: All the books say that once you have loops of yarn on your left needle, you begin to knit by putting the right needle through the yarn from the front left to the back right of the loop. But I was putting the needle through from the back right to the back left.
They also say that you loop the yarn around the needle from left to right. I was looping from right to left.
The fabric produced by this is almost identical to correct knitting; there is a small difference in how the loops lie against each other. And this is, I've learned, an actual stitch. I think it's called "knitting through the back of the stitch." It's just not the standard knit stitch.
The benefit from figuring all this out is that doing it the correct way makes it a bit easier to handle the yarn so the knitting goes slightly faster. I'm now knitting almost as fast as I crochet.
no subject
Date: 26 Dec 2004 05:29 pm (UTC)Oh, my god. Either of those things would have me immediately in tears. You're a better man than I, Gunga Din.
I guess I'd still rather work very hard at the things I have at least a modicum of talent for, so that I can get *even better* at them, rather than working equally hard at the things I completely suck at and never doing very well anyway. But I can see your point of view, too. Maybe I'll feel differently someday.
Is there a name for your learning disability?
Dyscalculia.
-J
P.S. Your writhing kitty icon is really, really disturbing!
no subject
Date: 26 Dec 2004 05:52 pm (UTC)Working at things I have natural talent for (editing and explaining stuff) is how I make my living and also something I do in my spare time.
I'm only partially talented in everything else that appeals to me as an activity. I'm musical, but somewhat clumsy so playing an instrument well doesn't come easy. I can write nonfiction well, but I'm not confident about my fiction because it's hard for me to imagine how people who are different from me think. I am good at finding colors and shapes that look good together, but clumsy about putting them together in any of the standard ways (collage, quilting, sewing, etc.) So if I want to do any of these things I end up encountering a lack of talent at some point.
Knitting and crochet probably give me fewer problems in the clumsiness/spatial rotation areas because they are flat fabrics and once I've learned a stitch I can remember it.
I used to have trouble with math insofar as I need it to be taught in a certain way or I don't get it, but I did manage eventually to learn arithmetic. So I don't know if dyscalculia is what I have.
PS: To me he looks exuberant. He was awfully glad to get out of his cage that day, at any rate.
no subject
Date: 26 Dec 2004 06:05 pm (UTC)Well, I don't have a "full" talent in anything but language-learning -- I too encounter some aspect of difficulty in everything else I try to do. That's why I said "modicum" of talent above. As long as I have that modicum of talent, I feel comfortable working hard to overcome the aspects of the thing that don't come naturally to me. But working hard at things I have *no* talent for, and in fact am just plain lousy at (in most cases, this is usually something related to the dyscalculia), is just frustrating to me. Unlike with you, it doesn't feel good to do them because I can only focus on how long it took and how mediocre the results were after that much work.
There are degrees of dyscalculia. Lots of people with it eventually learn arithmetic -- I even probably could if I worked with the right tutors. Have you ever undergone learning disability testing?
-J
P.S. He looks exuberant for about the first three flips, but because he never stops, it ends up looking like he's having some kind of seizure. I always want to rush him to the vet immediately!
no subject
Date: 26 Dec 2004 08:08 pm (UTC)Put that way, it's true for me too. I think I have some talents that relate to knitting/crochet. But you'd never catch me trying to learn acting, because I am terrible at it. Although I appreciate good acting.
I haven't had learning disability testing.
Yeah, in real life, he only flipped once. I had to go turn it into a looping icon...
no subject
Date: 26 Dec 2004 07:57 pm (UTC)I'd like you to write more about this, if you don't mind.