Who Would You Most Like to Meet?

AN UNCONVENTIONAL CONVENTION — EDITION #200

Welcome to the 200th edition of A.U.C. Just, wow!

Three years after we began, that’s now a couple of hundred different topics we’ve covered. On music. On movies. On history. On sports. On ourselves. We’ve shared. We’ve laughed. We’ve learned. I hope this series has meant something to you.

[Note:  We’ll see if this series continues — that’s yet to be determined]

Today’s Question:  You are given exactly 30 minutes. You can meet and spend that time with ANY living person in the world whom you wish. They must be living (not deceased). What person would you choose?

Bonus Question #1:  Why would you choose that person?

Bonus Question #2:  What would you say to that person, or hope to gain from the meeting and conversation?

This topic came to me upon reflection of writer and friend James McManus, who years ago was able to spend a half hour in the White House Oval Office with President Barack Obama. Whatever your political opinions, let’s agree — that’s a really cool invitation and opportunity.

But I also realized the folly of this spectacle. If we spent a half-hour with someone powerful and/or famous, is anything meaningful accomplished other than a few smiles and a photo op? I’m not diminishing McManus’ story (or don’t mean to). I simply wish to point out that meeting a president or a pope or a prime minister isn’t necessarily a global game changer. Think carefully about WHO you want to meet and why this would be such an opportunity.

I’ll go one step further. Meeting a really famous person whom you admire shouldn’t be the knee-jerk response here (it can be, I just think that’s a bit shallow). Fans of Paul McCartney or Mick Jaggar or Bob Dylan might think spending 30-minutes with one of those music icons would be a thrill. But I hold a different view– I think it would probably be a bore and a waste of time. After all, what are you going to say to McCartney, Jaggar, or Dylan that they haven’t heard 1000 times already? I think those guys would be somewhat polite, but also utterly disinterested. Besides, what’s there to learn in a conversation that we don’t know already?

You get the point, I hope.

This question(s) is more challenging than it seems. I hope you give the hypothetical some consideration and share with us WHO you would choose, and WHY, and WHAT you would talk about.

This is the TWO-HUNDREDTH edition of A.U.C., a FB series I created in 2019 intended to encourage civil discussion and debate.

Thanks for participating.

FOLLOW THE DISCUSSION ON FACEBOOK HERE: