Pineapple cover artwork Pineapple print cover artwork
Issue 24 — 14 August 2026
Ordinary life · Wider world

The Pineapple

Discovering Other Worlds

A weekly general-interest magazine published in France.
Frank Peters, Founding Editor.
Janita Le Grange, Managing Editor.
Issue 24 — 14 August 2026
Discovering Other Worlds

Inside this issue

  1. 01 In This Issue In this Issue. By The Duo
  2. 02 Editorial The View from the Blanket Fort. By Janita Le Grange
  3. 03 Peeling Potatoes Peeling Potatoes Episode 59: The Answer Is the Question By The Duo
  4. 04 Member Stories Before You Hand Over the Keys By Ismar and Ritesh
  5. 05 Feature Two Metres Above the Road By Fabrice
  6. 06 Member Stories My Mobile Home Is My Castle By Martin and Manfred
  7. 07 Postcards An English Seaside Town By Mayor
  8. 08 Working Life Hello, World By Mayor
  9. 09 Member Stories Eighteen Days Until Egypt By Babette
  10. 10 Essay The Freedom to Think Further By Bruce and The Mayor
  11. 11 At The Table What Pulls Us To The Singing Fridge. By Rosii and Monica
  12. 12 Column The Middle Ground. By Janita Le Grange
  13. 13 Recipe Chicken Asado By Ralf the Grillmeister
  14. 14 In The Next Issue The Limits of Knowing By The Duo
In This Issue

In this Issue.

In this Issue.

The coffee has gone cold again.

It sits on the edge of the desk, a dark, still pool next to a mountain of open tabs, sticky notes and proof sheets. Outside, the world is moving at its usual, loud pace. Cars hum down the street, neighbours argue about the fence line, and the day marches on.

But inside the screen, a completely different universe is unfolding.

We build blanket forts when we are kids because the living room feels too exposed. We need a space where the rules of the adults don’t apply, a small domain where a couch cushion can be a castle wall. As adults, we don’t stop building them. We just change the materials. We use books, projects, schedules and quiet corners to cordon off a little piece of reality we can call our own.

Welcome to Issue 24 of The Pineapple. This time around, we are looking at what happens when we step outside our own little forts—and what we find when we dare to look into someone else’s.

It starts with the small choices, the micro-worlds we construct just to get through the day. In our Editorial, we take a long look from the safety of that blanket fort, wondering how the view changes when we finally peek through the folds of the fabric.

Sometimes, the worlds we build are literal, moving pieces of architecture. Take the Swimming Club, who remind us that home isn’t always a fixed coordinate on a map. In My Mobile Home Is My Castle, we explore the strange, liberating reality of packing your existence into a few square metres on wheels. It’s the ultimate fort—one that can be parked somewhere new, taking its small version of home along for the ride.

Then there is Fabrice, whose world exists Two Metres Above the Road. As our feature article for this issue, it takes us into the cab and gives us a view most of us pass every day without really seeing.

From up there, the road looks different—but so does the work. Fabrice’s world is full of other workers, drivers, cyclists and the constant responsibility of moving a very large vehicle safely through spaces shared with everyone else. Sometimes that responsibility even means climbing down from the cab to help someone outside it. What looks ordinary from pavement level turns out to require judgement, awareness and a kind of competence that becomes almost invisible precisely because it is practised every day.

Perhaps stepping into somebody else’s world is partly about noticing what they have learned to see.

  • The View from the Blanket Fort: A quiet look at our self-made boundaries.
  • My Mobile Home Is My Castle: Finding freedom inside four moving walls.
  • Two Metres Above the Road: Seeing the road—and the responsibility that comes with it—from another height.

We like to think we understand our spaces. We know which window catches the morning light, when the rubbish goes out, where the traffic gets bad and which neighbour is likely to appear at exactly the wrong moment.

We know which window catches the morning light, when the rubbish goes out, where the traffic gets bad and which neighbour is likely to appear at exactly the wrong moment.

Then imagine handing all of that to somebody else—and going to live inside their ordinary life instead.

In Peeling Potatoes 59, we tackle the uncomfortable truth that The Answer Is the Question. We spend so much time looking for solid ground, for final definitions, that we forget the beauty of the unknown. We want the world to be simple, but it rarely is.

Ismar & Ritesh make that idea wonderfully literal in Before You Hand Over the Keys. They imagine swapping homes for a month and discover that a home is much more than the place where somebody sleeps. To live in another person’s world, even temporarily, means learning its windows, neighbours, rubbish collection, traffic, food, language and all the small instructions that usually disappear into habit.

The keys may get you through the front door. They don’t automatically teach you how the world on the other side works.

And then Hello, World takes us into another collection of worlds that appear, from the outside, to be one.

It begins with something almost absurdly small: a component worth around thirty cents that can threaten production. From there, the view widens. Purchasing sees one reality. Logistics sees another. Engineering, hardware and software each have their own map of the same territory. And now AI introduces yet another way of seeing what the system is, what matters inside it and what might happen next.

Everyone can be looking at the same company, the same product, even the same problem—and still be standing in a different world.

Maybe understanding each other begins with recognising that.

There is a specific kind of magic in anticipation. It’s the feeling of looking at a calendar and realising your current reality is about to shift.

Babette captures this perfectly in Eighteen Days Until Egypt. It is the chronicle of the countdown, the mental packing and the way a destination starts to inhabit your mind long before you ever board the plane. The ordinary days become coloured by the extraordinary ones waiting just around the corner.

For a different kind of escape, we take a trip through Postcards, landing in An English Seaside Town. Here, another place becomes an invitation to look around, notice its rhythms and spend a little while somewhere outside the boundaries of our own ordinary day.

Meanwhile, Bruce offers a more internal kind of travel in The Freedom to Think Further. His journey doesn’t require a suitcase. It asks what happens when we push beyond the familiar boundaries of our own thinking and allow an idea to carry us somewhere we had not expected to go.

Some worlds are reached by road or plane.

Others begin with a thought.

Ultimately, we always come back to the centre. To the kitchen. To the table. To the places, people and things we find ourselves returning to.

That question sits at the heart of Rosii & Monica’s At The Table: What is something you keep coming back to?

In What Pulls Us To The Singing Fridge, the answers move in all directions. Mountains. Childhood places. Skiing. Volleyball. Family. Food. Music. One answer opens another door, and suddenly the table contains a whole collection of personal worlds—places and experiences that exert their own quiet gravity long after we have left them.

The singing fridge is there too, of course. But perhaps its real trick is not calling us into the kitchen. It is giving us an excuse to ask what keeps calling us back.

Ralf gives us a more literal reason to gather around food with Chicken Asado.

This is not a dish that quietly looks after itself. A whole chicken is marinated with orange, lime, garlic, paprika and cumin, then cooked over a hot barbecue, turned and basted again and again. Ralf’s instruction may be the best summary of the required commitment: you stand there “like a small soldier of the chicken.”

Some worlds require contemplation.

This one requires attention, heat and a willingness to stay at your post.

And in Fruitloop’s Reflections, The Middle Ground brings us back toward home. The world outside remains full of forces we cannot control. The question becomes what we do with the smaller radius that we can influence: our homes, our families, our immediate surroundings and the choices available to us there.

Maybe the middle ground is not a compromise between hiding and charging into the storm.

Maybe it is simply the place where our reach becomes real.

As this issue closes, we look toward the horizon.

In In the Next Issue, we preview The Limits of Knowing. It is a gentle reminder that no matter how many worlds we enter, how many perspectives we borrow or how carefully we learn somebody else’s rules, there will always be things beyond our reach.

And perhaps that is exactly why looking matters.

The cold coffee still sits on my desk. The sun has shifted, casting a long shadow across the room. The blanket fort is still here, its corners soft and familiar.

We don’t explore other worlds to escape our own.

We explore them so that when we finally crawl back into our tiny, ordinary spaces, we can look at the old walls with entirely new eyes.

Turn the page.

Let’s see what’s outside the fort.

Editorial

The View from the Blanket Fort.

On Friday morning, The Mayor sent a message: “I will send you a message later. Nothing dramatic or serious, don’t worry.”

The View from the Blanket Fort.

Naturally, my mind went into an immediate spin. What could this possibly be about?

But after spending the entire sunny afternoon on a cricket pitch—watching seven-year-olds bowl a ball and smack it as hard as possible to score points—I completely forgot about the impending text. My husband was busy taking photos and videos, I was deeply invested in the tournament, and my phone sat forgotten at the bottom of my bag all afternoon. The sun wasn’t just winter warm; it was blazing. By the time we finally unpacked at home, we were thoroughly exhausted. It had been a long day.

Then, the message was finally received:

The Pineapple Issue 24 is yours. You have to do everything. Well, almost everything. (Insert laughing faces here).

After a week of solemn reflection, formal mourning, and continuous requests for comment, I am pleased to report that reports of the Mayor’s death have been slightly exaggerated. He is not dead. He is merely taking a nap. Having thoroughly exhausted himself with the terminal diagnosis of his own curiosity, the Mayor has stepped away from the desk, leaving the entire apparatus of The Pineapple—and indeed the unraveling spool of Brida—in my hands.

When the Mayor wrote his own obituary last week, he framed curiosity as a noble, tragic martyr slain by the cruel demands of commerce and clock-watching. It was a beautiful piece of writing. It almost made me feel guilty about taking over the responsibility this week.

With the long weekend here in South Africa, I spent three days thinking, “What am I supposed to write? What am I supposed to do? Where do I even start?” But curiosity got the better of me. I sat down, studied every little detail, and worked out exactly how and when I could have all of this ready.

Curiosity is a wonderful guest, but it makes a terrible landlord. It moves into the house, rearranges the furniture, opens all the windows to let the “possibilities” in, and then looks surprised when the rain ruins the rug. Someone has to close the windows. Someone has to patch the roof. Someone has to figure out how many pineapples we actually have in stock and whether any of them can be converted into delicious meals or drinks.

And then, the cold front struck with a bang.

The weather warnings escalated rapidly: from cold to snow, snow to rain, and rain to thundershowers. We’ve had the rain, the bitter cold, and the thunder, and at this exact moment, we are still waiting for the snow. I find myself peaking out from under the warm blankets every few minutes, checking the window to see if it’s turned white outside yet. Snow only happens once every ten years in my town. I wouldn’t exactly call myself lucky—I absolutely do not enjoy the cold.

But I am going to use this cold, and my newfound curiosity, to my advantage.

While waiting for the snowflakes to fall, I will complete this issue and discover another world filled with stories from our members—all from the comfort of my blanket fort. I might be freezing here, but I will be traveling to warmer places through the words of the Brida community. The Mayor and I have already traveled to magical places made of candy and trinkets while peeling potatoes, and I’ve swapped homes with Ismar and Ritesh. Sometimes, a small change is as good as a holiday, and this week, I am taking my imagination straight into a new world.

Welcome to this week’s issue of The Pineapple. I’m running the show, the coffee is hot, and for the first time in a long time, the spreadsheets are up to date, the windows are firmly closed, and absolutely no rain will be ruining this rug.

Peeling Potatoes Episode 59: The Answer Is the Question
Peeling Potatoes

Peeling Potatoes Episode 59: The Answer Is the Question

A Fruitloop University Story

Episode 59 of Peeling Potatoes began with five mysterious doors.

This is the sort of sentence that has become perfectly normal at Fruitloop University. I arrive with my trusty blank pieces of paper, Fruitloop has clearly been plotting something, and within minutes I am expected to prevent an entire civilisation of gummy bears from disappearing under chocolate.

I still do not know how she puts these things together.

I have asked.

Fruitloop says she might tell me one day. I am beginning to hope she never does, because knowing might take some of the magic away.

This week, behind each door was another world. Each world had a problem. And each problem was supposedly waiting for me to solve it.

That was Fruitloop’s first mistake.

I rarely solve the problem she gives me.

I tend to create three more.

Behind the first door was the Candy Kingdom.

There were rivers of liquid caramel, mountains of cotton candy and a white-chocolate bridge melting into the Fudge River. The resident gummy bears were panicking because they could no longer reach the marshmallow mines.

Quite reasonably, my first concern was cardiological.

Then Fruitloop informed me that I was already inside.

Apparently there was no escape until I had prevented the entire city from becoming, as I put it, “under chocolate”.

Fortunately, Candy Kingdom had a resource Fruitloop had overlooked.

Smarties.

Not ordinary Smarties. Magic Smarties.

Their name, after all, gives the game away. They are smart. They know things. They are the mysterious little creatures who appear during the night, fix everything and vanish again before anybody knows what happened.

Naturally, I also knew the head Smarty. I have a relatively good network.

The head Smarty was pink, because obviously the head Smarty requires some distinguishing feature.

My contribution to saving Candy Kingdom therefore consisted mainly of delegation. I instructed the Smarties to construct a giant refrigerator and cooling system, preferably PDQ, before everything became a sticky mess.

I am not the smartest kid on the block.

This is why you find the people who are.

There was perhaps something more serious hiding inside all this sugar. Fruitloop asked whether curiosity was a sweet treat — something exciting but occasional — or more like a daily meal.

I am firmly in the daily-treat camp.

Life is too short.

Not necessarily mountains of sugar. Not something swallowed while running from one obligation to another. But a few minutes each day in which you stop, notice what you are doing and make an ordinary moment slightly special.

Curiosity deserves the same respect.

A little every day.

Behind the second door was the Ultimate Invention Workshop, a high-tech North Pole staffed by mechanical gnomes, flying reindeer and assembly lines producing things such as talking socks and shoes that allow you to walk on walls.

The master idea machine had jammed because somebody had attempted to build a bicycle that rode on rainbow beams.

Production was collapsing.

My brain immediately travelled back to manufacturing plants, assembly lines, capacity planning and everything I had learnt years ago through my work with companies such as DaimlerChrysler and Bombardier.

Then I stopped myself.

Too boring.

This is Fruitloop University. We can do better than production planning.

So I invented a magical finger-snipper.

Somewhere in the management safe, hidden among the money, patents and state secrets, was an emergency device. Plug it into the wall, give it some electricity, it snaps its fingers and — by magic — the machinery is repaired, the backlog disappears and the factory returns to normal.

Somewhere in the management safe, hidden among the money, patents and state secrets, was an emergency device.

Problem solved.

Fruitloop then asked a much better question.

If I could ask an inventor to build a strange gadget to solve one problem in my own life, what would I ask for?

Nothing.

That would be the wrong question.

Give me a gadget that solves my problem and perhaps my life becomes easier for ten minutes. But something has also been taken away from me: the need to learn, ask, question, rethink and approach the problem from somewhere else.

I would rather ask the inventor how the gadget came into existence.

What did you notice?

What did you connect?

Where did the idea come from?

What is that magic stuff happening between your ears?

I am much more interested in the beginning of the creative process than its finished product.

The invention is useful.

The thinking that produced it is more interesting.

To reach the next door, Fruitloop gave me a compass that pointed only towards smelly things.

I objected immediately.

Who says smelly is necessarily bad?

I once had a child open my fridge, recoil dramatically from the mountains of cheese inside and announce that it smelt like his brother’s nappies.

I considered the contents magnificent.

Perspective.

Still, if life insists on becoming smelly, my practical advice is simple: carry a peg. Put it on your nose and continue.

If that fails, shut your eyes, keep moving and hope you emerge at the other end more or less unscathed.

Fruitloop added something wiser.

“Sometimes it’s good not seeing what you are smelling.”

Quite.

Door number three took me to Mount Olympus.

Zeus had lost his lightning bolt down a rain-cloud drain. Poseidon had flooded the gymnasium while showing off with a giant squid. The gods were blaming each other and creating thunderstorm drama.

Fruitloop wanted me to draft some form of shared-cloud agreement.

I am a mere mortal.

Who am I to mediate between gods?

So again, I looked for people who might actually know what they were doing.

I reached into my imperfect memory of the ancient world and assembled a negotiating team: Plato for wisdom about society, Cicero for the power of argument, and Epicurus because no serious negotiation should take place without something decent to eat and drink.

Then I invented a goddess responsible for beautiful surroundings, because somebody needed to provide comfortable chairs, pleasant scenery and perhaps a little mood lighting.

And somewhere in the background, naturally, the Smarties would be clearing up the physical mess while everyone else talked.

My role?

Sit back and watch.

It occurred to me that the negotiations might become so pleasant that nobody would want them to end, which is perhaps a danger in itself. But at least Zeus and Poseidon would have stopped fighting.

Fruitloop then gave me a 3,000-year-old mythical creature and allowed me one question about the past.

This time I knew roughly what I wanted.

What are we missing?

We study history. We accumulate knowledge. We watch people make mistakes. We make mistakes ourselves. We know perfectly well that certain actions cause damage, yet humanity repeatedly walks back into remarkably familiar situations.

Why?

Why does knowing something not automatically change what we do?

Perhaps somewhere on Mount Olympus there is also a god of temptation.

I would quite like a word with him.

Then came the griffin.

“The more you take, the more you leave behind. What am I?”

I told Fruitloop I was dreadful at riddles.

I proved it.

My answer was conscience.

Fruitloop’s answer was footsteps.

Much simpler.

But even then I could not leave it alone. Footsteps and conscience seemed connected to me. As we move through life, our actions leave something behind us. Sometimes something useful. Sometimes quite a lot of debris.

Fruitloop let me pass anyway.

Standards are evidently flexible at this university.

The fourth world was a fairy-tale kingdom in which everybody lived together whether they liked it or not.

Talking donkeys ran coffee carts. The three little pigs had formed a construction union. Big bad wolves were working as night watchmen.

Goldilocks had lodged a noise complaint against the three bears, while the magic mirror had gone on strike because it was tired of being asked who was fairest of them all.

Fruitloop wanted mediation.

I prescribed magic potions.

Things deteriorated rather quickly from there.

The witch became a beauty queen. The mirror was bribed into cooperation. The bears were allowed to remain noisy without Goldilocks hearing them, and Goldilocks received a potion that turned out to contain a spectacular amount of alcohol.

Fruitloop eventually summarised my rewritten fairy tale as “Goldilocks the alcoholic”, before remembering that Goldilocks might actually be rather young.

Who said life was perfect?

It is a fairy tale.

We moved on.

To unlock the final door, I had to ask the magic mirror a question it had never been asked before.

At first I thought this was impossible.

Then Douglas Adams wandered into my head. I remembered The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the enormous question about life, the universe and everything, and the wonderfully useless answer: 42.

Perhaps the problem was the question.

Perhaps the right question, the wrong question and even the answer itself depend upon perspective.

And then I saw the mirror differently.

A mirror is always looking forwards.

So I asked it:

Do you know what is behind you?

It couldn’t.

So I picked it up and turned it around.

Now it could see the answer.

Fruitloop went quiet for a moment.

“Oh, wow.”

That may have been my favourite door.

The fifth world was a frozen wonderland where every wish came true — but every wish also carried an unintended consequence.

Some idiot had wished for endless summer.

The result was a giant heat lamp in the sky, slowly melting the frozen paradise into the sea.

This time magic was forbidden. Fruitloop gave me three tools only:

Human logic.

Teamwork.

Curiosity.

I began, naturally, by interviewing the idiot.

Why had he wanted summer when he already lived somewhere so beautiful?

What had motivated the wish?

Did he understand what it had done to everyone else?

Had he discovered regret?

Could the two of us work through his reasoning until he understood that a wish may belong to one person while its consequences belong to everybody?

I had found the moral story. I had found cause and effect. I had found an opportunity for reflection, redemption and possibly several bottles of wine inspired by Tortilla Flat.

Fruitloop listened.

Then she offered her solution.

“Just put the plug on the heat wave.”

Too easy.

“It’s logic,” she said.

And there, in miniature, was the whole point of this peculiar journey.

Fruitloop could see the plug.

I could see the landscape around the plug, the person who switched it on, the moral implications of switching it on, several philosophers who might discuss the plug and possibly some Smarties who could form a working group.

Neither way of seeing is automatically wrong.

But they are different.

Fruitloop’s questions keep making that difference visible.

Sometimes the shortest route is simply to switch the bloody thing off.

Sometimes wandering around the problem reveals something you would never have discovered by going directly to the answer.

The trick may be knowing when to do which.

To return to Fruitloop University, I was allowed one final wish.

It could offer me no personal benefit.

It had to be connected to a question that could never be completely answered, only explored.

I thought about something Fruitloop had recently written: the extraordinary curiosity children bring into the world.

Questions upon questions upon questions.

Adults can find it exhausting.

But perhaps the greater danger comes later, when the questions stop.

My wish was that children keep their curiosity as they grow older.

Knowledge will increase. Information certainly will. Artificial intelligence is already putting an extraordinary abundance of answers within reach, and nobody knows what that will look like in another ten or twenty years.

But answers are not the same thing as curiosity.

I hope children continue going down rabbit holes. I hope adults do as well.

Some will emerge and say it was a complete waste of time.

Fine.

Perhaps it was.

But it might still have been an interesting trip.

Years ago, in Marrakesh, I remember seeing storytellers sitting in a square in the evening with people gathered around them. It was an extraordinarily simple thing: one person telling a story, other people listening.

Yet a good storyteller can hold people because the storyteller knows how to communicate and the audience remains curious enough to listen.

That is something I would not like humanity to lose.

Curiosity is contagious.

It keeps us asking.

It keeps us listening.

It keeps us thinking.

And perhaps that is what Fruitloop has quietly been doing to me through these ridiculous visits to her university. She gives me melting chocolate bridges, gnomes, gods, griffins and mirrors, and forces my brain to travel in directions it would not ordinarily choose.

I still get the answers wrong.

But perhaps there is no single way to get somewhere.

Fruitloop says she sometimes has to think very hard and very long to create these journeys.

Good.

Thinking is still something humans can do. Even if we use AI to help us think, our own questions, ideas and peculiar ways of seeing still matter.

So I hope Fruitloop keeps her secret.

I do not really need to know how the trick works.

I would rather open the next door.

Same time, same place.

Before You Hand Over the Keys
Member Stories

Before You Hand Over the Keys

Four weeks in Bangalore. Four weeks in Campo Grande. The real question was not what to see, but how to live in somebody else’s world.

Imagine that Ritesh and his wife leave Bangalore and spend a month in Ismar’s apartment in Campo Grande, Brazil. At the same time, Ismar moves into their apartment in Bangalore, India.

No hotels. No tour guides. No host standing beside you to solve every small problem.

Before handing over the keys, what would you need to explain?

The answers quickly moved beyond monuments and tourist attractions. Living somewhere else begins with much smaller things: when to open the windows, when to take out the rubbish, whether you can trust the pedestrian light, how to greet a neighbour and what happens when you are hungry at midnight.

It turns out that discovering another world begins very close to home.

Praça do Rádio seen from above, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil

Ritesh’s first question to Ismar was simple: he had just arrived at the apartment in Campo Grande. Before Ismar left, what were the first three things he needed to know?

First, the windows.

After the apartment has been closed for some time, Ismar would open the living-room door, the service-area window and, if possible, the other windows to freshen the air.

But there is a deadline.

Close them before six in the evening.

Otherwise, Ismar warned, mosquitoes may arrive and make a peaceful night’s sleep rather less peaceful.

The second rule concerned the neighbour downstairs. Do not drag chairs, beds or anything else across the floor unnecessarily. Noise travels.

The third was even more ordinary: check the taps and be sensible with water and electricity. These are things that are paid for according to use.

Three instructions for life in Brazil: air, neighbours and the water bill.

Then Ismar turned the question around.

What should he do on his first morning in Ritesh’s Bangalore apartment?

Take out the rubbish.

Ritesh lives on the second floor. The rubbish has to be taken downstairs so that the municipal collection can pick it up. The vehicle usually comes in the morning, sometimes earlier than expected, so Ritesh recommended having everything outside by about 6:30.

Miss the collection and the rubbish may remain there until the following day.

“I have not received a complaint so far,” Ritesh said, making clear that he hoped Ismar would preserve his record.

The great cultural exchange between India and Brazil had begun.

With garbage.

If Ismar wanted to explore Bangalore, Ritesh would begin gently.

Go to a large park. Walk. Spend an hour or two there. Watch people gathering with friends and families. It could also be a place to meet somebody.

From there, Ismar could continue towards MG Road, on foot or by metro, and find somewhere for breakfast, brunch or lunch. There are museums and an art museum to visit. Later he could return towards MG Road for restaurants, music and nightlife before taking the metro home.

Ismar approved.

It sounded as though there would be plenty to do.

There was only one concern.

“I think Ritesh wants that I become fatter,” he joked, after hearing how often restaurants appeared in the proposed programme.

Food, fortunately, would not be difficult to obtain.

Ritesh explained that ingredients can be ordered through delivery apps and brought to the apartment very quickly. His kitchen already contains spices, oils and other ingredients suited to Indian cooking. There is an induction hob, although no oven, so Ismar would have to adapt some of his plans to the equipment available.

This did not appear to worry him.

“In Brazil, I only cook for myself to survive,” Ismar said. He does not offer his creations to other people, but he was confident that, left alone in Bangalore, he would manage.

Ritesh offered an emergency escape route.

If the cooking experiment failed, stop experimenting and order a meal.

Food delivery is widely available, he explained, including very late into the night. Ismar might need to sign up for the right apps, but Ritesh was confident about one thing: his Brazilian guest would not go to bed hungry.

Ismar might need to sign up for the right apps, but Ritesh was confident about one thing: his Brazilian guest would not go to bed hungry.

Campo Grande came with a different warning.

What mistake might Ritesh make not because he was careless, but simply because he came from somewhere else?

Ismar did not hesitate.

Do not trust the pedestrian traffic light without also looking at the traffic.

In his experience, drivers do not always give pedestrians the priority they expect. Even when the signal tells you that you can cross, he advised checking carefully for approaching cars.

Ritesh found this strangely familiar.

Traffic in Bangalore is also something a pedestrian needs to negotiate carefully, although congestion often prevents vehicles from travelling very quickly.

Getting around Campo Grande itself sounded manageable. Ismar’s apartment is close to a bus terminal, and he recommended public transport rather than immediately renting a car in an unfamiliar country. He described buses as inexpensive, with connections into the centre and to places such as the main shopping mall.

The system does have one inconvenience: each new bus journey generally means paying another fare.

For greater flexibility, Ismar suggested using Uber or another transport app rather than worrying about driving, parking and navigating an unfamiliar city.

Bangalore requires its own travelling kit.

An umbrella is important, Ritesh said, because rain can suddenly turn into sunshine and back again. Then there is the noise. Road junctions, traffic and especially the constant honking can be startling for somebody unused to it.

Ritesh remembered overseas colleagues finding both the honking and the simple act of crossing a road intimidating when they first visited India.

His possible solution for Ismar was wonderfully twenty-first century: noise-cancelling earphones.

Bangalore moves quickly, he said. People move quickly too.

But there was another side to this energy. If Ismar became confused or needed help, Ritesh believed people would generally be willing to answer him, often in English.

Ismar added his own Campo Grande survival kit: an umbrella, sunblock and a bottle of water.

And some caution.

People may be helpful, he said, particularly when they realise someone is a foreign visitor, but friendliness should not mean abandoning ordinary good judgement.

Listen to people.

Pay attention to what is happening around you.

The conversation became more interesting when the imagined visitors stopped being tourists and became neighbours.

How should Ritesh and his wife behave with the people living and working around Ismar’s building?

Ismar rejected the easy stereotype that every Brazilian is naturally warm and welcoming.

“You’ll find any kind of people,” he said.

Some neighbours will return a greeting. Others will not.

His advice was not to spend too much time worrying about the difference.

“Do your part. Greet everyone you meet.”

Whether the other person responds is their decision.

Ritesh recognised the same principle in Bangalore, although he saw one practical issue. His neighbours know who normally lives in the building. If an unfamiliar foreign visitor suddenly appeared in his apartment for several weeks, people might naturally wonder who he was.

So Ritesh would inform the landlord in advance.

Not because he expected a problem, but because preparation removes the problem before it starts.

Ismar liked the idea and would go one step further in Campo Grande. His building has a WhatsApp group, so he would tell the other residents that a couple of friends would be staying in his apartment. Then nobody would wonder whether something strange was happening.

The two cities were beginning to sound less foreign.

Different languages. Different buildings. Different streets.

Very similar neighbours.

For Ritesh, Campo Grande presented one obstacle that Bangalore did not.

Language.

If he wanted one genuine conversation during his first week, Ismar thought finding an English speaker might require some planning. His suggestion was the university library, where Ritesh would have a better chance of meeting students able and willing to speak English.

For Ismar in Bangalore, Ritesh expected the opposite experience.

He believed English would allow Ismar to talk to many people without looking for a special location. A park could be enough. Some people would naturally be occupied with their own families or friends, but others might respond to a stranger and give him a few minutes of conversation.

The possibility appealed to Ismar.

India, he said, would be an interesting place precisely because it would be a different culture to experience.

Yet the imagined month was no longer sounding overwhelmingly different.

In Ritesh’s apartment, Ismar’s domestic responsibilities would be modest. Take out the rubbish. Keep things in their proper place. Be considerate of the neighbours. If he wanted to cook, cook. If he did not want to cook, order something. Even loud music and dancing would be possible, Ritesh said, as long as the sound did not disturb anybody else.

Once again, another world came down to an ordinary rule.

Enjoy yourself.

Just remember the neighbours.

Towards the end, Ritesh asked what he should discover in Campo Grande that had nothing to do with conventional sightseeing.

Ismar’s answer immediately moved towards food.

Try a Brazilian barbecue. Try feijoada, which he described as a bean stew. For the courageous, there are also dishes using parts of the intestines.

And, if Ritesh and his wife drink alcohol, there is the famous caipirinha.

Then came the imagined disaster.

Suppose Ritesh lost his apartment key. His phone was not working. He felt ill.

What should he do, and whom could he trust?

The answer depended on where he was and what exactly had happened, Ismar said. If he became ill in the street, he believed people would help. If he needed to get back into the apartment, he would need someone able to open or replace the lock. For a medical problem, there was a public ambulance service that could assess the situation and decide what assistance was necessary.

The important thing was not that nothing could go wrong.

It was that ordinary life contained ways forward.

By then, the imaginary month had covered windows, mosquitoes, rubbish, buses, restaurants, rain, traffic, neighbours, landlords, language, cooking, parks, emergency help and the possibility of intestinal stew.

So The Mayor asked Ismar the larger question.

Would he actually do it?

Would he swap apartments and spend a month living in Bangalore?

Yes.

He expected to find some things that were specific to India and others that felt unexpectedly familiar.

Neighbour behaviour, for example, might not be so different after all. Some people would be curious. Some would be very nice. Others perhaps less so.

“Something that is new is interesting for our experience,” he said. “I think it would be a very nice experience.”

And what about Ritesh and his wife in Campo Grande?

That, Ismar said, would depend on what interested them. Campo Grande is not, in his view, primarily a tourist city. But if they wanted to explore it, there would still be places to go, things to do and, because they enjoy walking, interesting places to discover on foot.

Perhaps that was the most useful discovery of the whole exchange.

To enter another person’s world, you do not have to begin with the grand explanation of Brazil or India.

You begin by handing over the keys.

Then you explain the windows, the rubbish and the neighbours.

Two Metres Above the Road
Feature

Two Metres Above the Road

Janita asked me what would surprise her first if she climbed into my truck tomorrow morning.

She has been in a five-ton, maybe ten-ton truck before.

“That is a baby truck,” I told her.

Mine is around 26 tons.

The first surprise would probably be the position. Then the width. Then the length.

When you have never been inside a large truck, you know it is big, of course. But knowing that from the outside and sitting inside it are two very different things.

You are also sitting roughly two metres above the ground.

And that changes what you see.

I begin work at six in the morning. By then, I am certainly not the first person working.

In the industrial areas, people have already started. There are bakeries, recycling businesses, factories, dispatchers, other drivers, and all the people who make these places function before much of the city has properly begun its day.

It is a different view of the morning.

Janita thought perhaps I would talk about sunrises, forests, or beautiful landscapes from high up in the cab.

Not really.

I work mainly in the city.

I see buildings, cars, companies, containers, and people.

But being higher does mean I sometimes see things that the person in the car in front of me cannot see.

At a crossroads, for example, I might be behind another vehicle and see a bicycle approaching from the right.

The driver in front may not be able to see it yet.

I can.

Then I use the horn to warn them.

That is one advantage of the truck.

I do not see everything.

I just see a little bit more.

One thing people often misunderstand is how much space a truck really needs.

A car driver looks at a street and thinks there is plenty of room.

I look at the same street with a truck and container that may be twelve or fourteen metres long, and I see something completely different.

People sometimes tell me, “Yes, you can go there.”

I say, “No, I cannot.”

They look again.

Of course you can.

No.

The dimensions decide.

It is not only the length.

When you turn, the back of the truck moves differently from a car.

A small street, with parked cars on both sides, can suddenly become a completely different problem when you are driving something this size.

Sometimes there may be only ten or twenty centimetres to work with.

And sometimes you discover the problem only when you are already inside the street.

Then there is one solution.

Reverse.

I once had to reverse about 200 metres through a very tight street.

Janita said that sounded difficult.

I told her that after 200 metres, I had lost about two litres of water.

Very interesting.

Very, very interesting.

The misunderstanding becomes more serious when people ask a truck driver to carry something that should not be carried.

Someone sees a container and thinks: it fits, so the truck can take it.

That is not how it works.

I have had people tell me to take a container when I knew it was overloaded.

“Yes, you can.”

“No, I cannot.”

“Yes, you can.”

No.

If something goes wrong on the road, the person who told me to take it is not sitting behind the steering wheel.

I am.

I remember one container filled with gravel.

Just looking at it, I knew there was a problem.

Gravel becomes very heavy, very quickly.

When I tried to lift the container, it was obvious that this was not a normal load.

Again, somebody may look from outside and say it should be possible.

For me, the question is different.

Can I transport it safely?

If the answer is no, then the answer is no.

That is part of the responsibility people do not always see when they look at a truck driver.

The truck is big, so perhaps they imagine it can simply do anything.

It cannot.

And the driver cannot simply say yes to everything.

Of course, sooner or later, we arrived at cyclists.

This was probably inevitable.

I can become frustrated when somebody is difficult to see or behaves unpredictably in traffic.

Early in the morning, particularly in winter, visibility can be poor.

If someone is wearing dark clothing and has poor lights, I may see them only at the last moment.

With a large vehicle, that matters.

But there is also one cyclist I see regularly on my way into the city.

I see him in summer.

I see him in autumn.

I see him in winter.

Rain, wind, sunshine. He is there, going to work on his bicycle.

And I respect him.

Why?

Because I can see him.

He has good lights. He makes himself visible.

From a distance, I know he is there.

That is completely different.

And I have to be consistent myself.

I cannot complain that cyclists should make themselves visible, and then go cycling wearing clothes nobody can see.

When I am on my bicycle, I also have to make myself visible.

You have to be consistent.

After years of driving, you also become used to watching people trying to solve small problems on the road.

Someone cannot reverse.

Someone gets stuck.

Someone blocks the street.

The cars begin waiting.

Then the horns begin.

Sometimes I get out.

I stop the traffic and help the person.

I remember a woman with a small car and a little trailer.

She only needed to reverse a couple of metres, but she could not manage it.

And in that moment, everything becomes blocked.

So I helped her.

For me, reversing two metres with a trailer is not a big thing.

For somebody who hardly ever does it, it can be a very big thing.

The people waiting behind may not be happy.

They can wait.

Solve the problem first.

Then everybody can continue.

At the end of our conversation, Janita asked me something I had to think about.

After all these years on the road, what am I still curious about?

The vehicles?

The machines?

The places?

No.

The people.

Every day you see people doing something, and you think, “That is not possible.”

But it is possible.

Every day.

My Mobile Home Is My Castle
Member Stories

My Mobile Home Is My Castle

Ralf and his wife have bought a mobile home. Not because they want to park it somewhere and create a smaller version of the life they already have, but because they want to move.

The maiden journey will be in October: the Baltic coast, Kühlungsborn, Wismar and Schwerin. Later, especially after retirement, the map becomes much bigger.

The Baltic Sea already has one advantage. Ralf is a North Sea person, and he knows what happens when the tide goes out.

“The water is far away.”

The Baltic, he says, is much more swimmer-friendly. After fifty metres, at least, there is still enough water to drown in.

This is roughly where the Swimming Club begins its investigation into discovering other worlds.

Ralf has the new mobile home and the plans. Manfred has been travelling with a caravan for twenty years. Martin, meanwhile, is listening to both of them and slowly wondering whether this life might suit him too.

Ralf was not always convinced.

For years, holidays meant Spain and Greece. Then a friend bought a mobile home and suggested that Ralf try one. Ralf was sceptical, so instead of buying anything, he and his wife rented one and travelled with their friends to Venice.

That changed things.

“It was fantastic. It was so much fun.”

The idea stayed with him. When he retired, he thought, perhaps this would be the way they could travel.

But he did not rush out the next morning and buy one. A year of research followed. They knew they wanted a partly integrated mobile home rather than a fully integrated one. They looked at different vehicles, talked to people and eventually found the type that suited them.

Even the colour became a small education.

Ralf wanted black. The dealer recommended metallic grey because a black vehicle would become hotter inside. Then a neighbour returned from Croatia and confirmed exactly that: his black vehicle had become uncomfortably warm.

Grey metallic won.

The first big destination is already decided. They want to return to Marina di Venezia, the large campsite near Venice where they made their trial run.

They plan to go in May, at the beginning of the season, before it becomes too crowded.

Venice is not simply another destination for Ralf and his wife. They began their honeymoon there and returned for their tenth anniversary.

“It is the best city in the world,” Ralf says. “It is so fantastic.”

He reads Donna Leon’s Commissario Brunetti novels, set in Venice. His wife can use the campsite’s Olympic-size swimming pool for training. Their idea now is to begin or finish each travelling season there.

Some people buy a mobile home to escape the places they know.

Ralf has already found one place he wants to keep returning to.

So what does Manfred, after twenty years with a caravan, think when he hears Ralf’s plans?

“Everything.”

In other words: yes.

For Manfred, camping begins with accepting that something unexpected will happen.

“Camping means accepting new and unknown things. If you can do this, then all will come out in the wash.”

That may be the most important difference between this kind of holiday and staying in a hotel. You cannot completely control what happens next.

Manfred also sees an important difference between his caravan and Ralf’s mobile home.

A caravan naturally encourages a more stationary holiday. You arrive, set yourself up and use the car for exploring. Put the bicycles on as well and you have another radius around the campsite.

A mobile home encourages movement. You can travel from destination to destination much more easily, but once you have established yourself somewhere, you do not necessarily have a separate car waiting to take you fifty kilometres away.

Neither is better. They create different holidays.

“But you have to like it,” Manfred says.

He thinks Ralf will.

There is something else Manfred does not seem worried about: Ralf himself.

When asked what makes the experienced camper inside him nervous about Ralf’s plans, his answer is simple.

“Nothing.”

Ralf, he says, seems to know what he is getting into. He is calm. Unexpected situations are unlikely to throw him completely.

Manfred knows about unexpected situations.

Once, his battery died in the south of France. He needed to find a replacement without speaking French. On another trip, they were burgled and had to decide whether to abandon the holiday and go home.

On another trip, they were burgled and had to decide whether to abandon the holiday and go home.

They carried on to Spain.

Those experiences have given him rules of his own. He does not spend the night on motorway lay-bys in France. For him, a campsite with proper infrastructure and more security is worth finding. He no longer puts the same trust in large service areas that he once did.

Ralf has independently arrived at much the same conclusion. He and his wife plan to use proper motorhome stops and campsites rather than spend nights on motorway parking areas.

They want to try things for themselves, but they do not feel obliged to learn every lesson the hardest possible way.

“We are curious,” Ralf says.

Experience has changed some of Manfred’s ideas about camping.

One old belief has disappeared completely: camping is cheap.

Those days, he says, are over. Travelling during the main holiday season can now be expensive. He gives Lake Garda as an example: an overnight stay that might cost around €40 outside the main season can rise to around €80 in peak periods.

Something else has changed too.

Camping once felt more communal to him. People who did not know one another would help each other. There were unwritten rules, and experienced campers seemed to understand them without anybody having to produce a handbook.

The camping boom around the Covid years brought many new people onto campsites, Manfred believes, but not necessarily the old camping mentality.

His example is wonderfully ordinary: washing the dishes.

Once, the principle was simple. Wash your dishes, finish quickly and make room for the next person.

Now somebody may stand there having a conversation while lovingly drying every knife individually.

The queue can wait.

“These unwritten rules,” Manfred says, “nobody either knows or cares about.”

But discovering another world often means discovering exactly this: the rules nobody told you existed.

Manfred remembers a small campsite in the Netherlands with only about thirty pitches. It worked differently from the more private spaces he was used to elsewhere. Everyone was together on one large field. Personal territory meant something different.

His neighbours enjoyed long, meaningful and rather loud conversations into the early hours.

Manfred discovered the local culture while trying to sleep through it.

Language can create the same feeling of entering a different world, although sometimes the barrier turns out to be smaller than expected. Dutch, he found, allowed him to understand more than he thought because of its similarities to German.

And for everything else, there is Google Translate.

There is an obvious objection to all this.

If you travel inside a mobile home, taking your bed, your kitchen, your coffee and your familiar possessions with you, perhaps you are not discovering another world at all. Perhaps you are simply carrying your own little world around Europe.

Ralf does not buy that argument.

“When I bought the mobile home, I wanted to see more of the world.”

For him, movement itself creates discovery. You drive somewhere new and have to deal with what you find.

Manfred agrees. Even when you intend to stay on the beaten track, the road has other plans. There is a diversion. A motorway closes. Something forces you onto another route.

Suddenly, the unfamiliar world finds you.

But both men also know that curiosity works differently for different people.

Manfred likes arriving somewhere he has not explored before. Returning to a familiar place can be pleasant, but the particular magic of the unknown is gone. Narbonne is different from Hoorn. One new place creates a different kind of excitement from another.

His wife is more attracted to the familiar.

Their solution is not to turn this into a philosophical dispute. They plan.

Manfred plans months ahead. Sometimes he explores the destination street by street on Google Street View and shows it to his wife.

By the time they arrive, the new world is already slightly less new.

It is perhaps the perfect camping compromise: one person gets to discover somewhere unfamiliar, while the other has already virtually walked around it.

Asked where they would spend a month in an unfamiliar world, the table immediately starts travelling.

Ralf chooses Corsica. He knows it may remind him of Sardinia, but that is part of the attraction. A ferry can take the mobile home there. He imagines good food, beautiful landscapes and an island that has already caught his attention through a television documentary.

Manfred chooses Greece precisely because he has never been there.

It is undiscovered territory for him. He has read about people spending the winter months there in their mobile homes or caravans, and the idea has stayed with him.

Martin looks in another direction: the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Establish a base, explore the surrounding area, move on and repeat.

Or, as he puts it, use a mobile home and simply “crawl forward” in stages.

Martin has been the observer in much of this conversation, but by now something has happened.

He is curious.

Listening to Ralf and Manfred talk about security, caravans, mobile homes and the things that go wrong on the road has taught him more than he expected.

“The stories are fascinating,” he says.

And this kind of travelling suddenly sounds much more attractive to him than a package holiday.

There is, admittedly, a financial obstacle.

“Maybe one day, when I win the lottery.”

There is then a short pause in the plan.

“I have to start playing.”

For Ralf, the adventure is no longer theoretical. The mobile home exists. The trips are being planned. Venice is waiting.

And when asked what he is most curious about when he finally closes the door and sets off, he does not produce a grand speech about freedom, Europe or discovering himself.

He pictures the beginning.

His wife beside him. Good music. The ferry crossing. Bockwurst and coffee.

Then, once they are inside their new mobile home, they will make their first coffee there.

Not coffee prepared at home and carried along in the car.

Fresh coffee, made in the mobile home.

“Good coffee is important.”

After twenty years, Manfred knows that the road will eventually provide the dead battery, the strange campsite, the unexpected diversion and the rules that nobody explained.

Martin has already become curious enough to contemplate a lottery ticket.

Ralf is ready to go.

The new world can wait until after coffee.

An English Seaside Town
Postcards

An English Seaside Town

This week’s Pineapple Postcard comes from Lyme Regis in Dorset , one of those small English seaside towns that seems to have accumulated far more stories than it has any reasonable right to.

It sits on the Jurassic Coast, where the cliffs and beaches expose an extraordinary geological record and the area around Lyme is particularly famous for its fossils. Then there is the literary Lyme. Jane Austen stayed here with her family, walked on the Cobb, danced in the Assembly Rooms and later made the town an important part of Persuasion. The Cobb itself — Lyme’s great harbour wall reaching out into the sea — appears in both Persuasion and John Fowles’ The French Lieutenant’s Woman, and became one of the defining images of the film adaptation too.

But Lyme is not preserved behind glass. It is also a thoroughly English holiday town: beaches, fish and chips, fossil hunters, crowded summer streets, boats in the harbour and Regatta Week. Generations of families come back, often to do remarkably similar things in remarkably similar places.

My wife’s family is one of them.

Mary’s photographs this week come from a place where her family has spent a week for decades. I have been missing from that tradition for the past few years — work managed to get in the way.

Perhaps that is part of what makes places like this interesting. They can be historically important, internationally famous and full of visitors, while also becoming something much smaller and more personal.

A beach you know.

A walk you have done countless times.

The Cobb.

The same view across the bay.

And a week in the year which, after long enough, simply becomes part of the family calendar.

Working Life

Hello, World

There are worlds I know reasonably well, and there are worlds where I am completely lost. Technology belongs firmly in the second category.

Hello, World

Put a microcontroller in front of me and I see a small piece of plastic with some metal sticking out of it. An engineer sees processors, interfaces, protocols, functional safety and possibilities. That difference fascinates me.

Recently, one of my regular conversations took me into this world from an unexpected direction. It began not with sophisticated technology, but with something almost absurdly small: a tiny plastic component costing around thirty cents. Without it, production was apparently going to stop.

That immediately caught my attention. We weren’t talking about some rare mineral, an exotic semiconductor or a component caught in an international trade dispute. We were talking about a little piece of plastic that could probably disappear underneath a sheet of paper.

Yet an entire production process depended on it.

Welcome to another world.

At first, the story sounded simple. A supplier had reported that the component wasn’t available. Stocks would run out, the next delivery would not arrive for another couple of months, and therefore production would have to stop.

That was presented, more or less, as a fact.

Except somebody became curious.

Instead of accepting the information, they started looking for alternatives: other products, other sources, different ways of solving the problem. Eventually, they did something remarkably sophisticated.

They picked up the telephone.

After navigating the usual obstacles, they reached an actual human being at the distributor and discovered that the supposedly unavailable component was sitting in stock.

The problem was something else entirely.

Three different items had been ordered together. Two were available, one wasn’t, and the distributor intended to send everything in one shipment when all three items were ready. Nobody had separated the order. Nobody had asked the obvious question.

One telephone conversation changed the picture. The available parts could be sent, production could continue, and the immediate problem disappeared.

Problem solved.

Except I wasn’t convinced that the problem had been solved at all.

The shortage had disappeared, but the more interesting problem remained: how had so many people managed to inhabit the same process while seeing completely different realities?

From one point of view, there was an order in a computer system. From another, there were three physical components. From another, there was a production deadline. Somewhere else, there was an employee dealing with too much work, and somewhere else again, somebody waiting for an answer.

Somewhere else, there was an employee dealing with too much work, and somewhere else again, somebody waiting for an answer.

Everyone was technically looking at the same situation, but they weren’t living in the same world.

Each person had a lens. Purchasing saw purchasing. The distributor saw an order. Production saw missing components. Engineering saw technical consequences. Management saw costs and deadlines.

And I, looking in from somewhere completely outside this world, kept asking rather irritating questions.

Why can’t they send the two things they have? Why hasn’t anybody telephoned anybody? Why can something costing thirty cents stop something worth considerably more?

Sometimes ignorance is useful.

When you know how a system normally works, you naturally begin thinking from inside it. You know the procedures, you know the language, and you know what normally happens next.

When you don’t know, you are allowed to ask why the system exists in that form at all.

That became even clearer when our conversation moved from supply chains into another world entirely.

This time, I was shown a small electronic development board containing a microcontroller.

That explanation didn’t help me very much.

Apparently, software would be loaded onto this tiny object, it would communicate through an Ethernet connection, and eventually it could become part of a sophisticated safety-critical system.

I tried to understand what was actually happening. How does the software get inside it? What does it do when it gets there? How do we know it is working? What can I actually see?

Eventually, the complicated technical explanation reached something I could understand.

The first test might simply be a message.

Hello, World.

I loved that.

An enormously complicated technological journey begins with two words. The machine says hello, another machine answers, and somewhere a software developer smiles because the ones and zeros have successfully travelled through their invisible little universe and come back again.

Suddenly, the mysterious world became slightly less mysterious.

Not because I understood the technology. I didn’t.

But I had found a doorway into it.

Then came another complication. The people accustomed to developing software in one environment would now have to work much closer to the hardware itself.

That sounds trivial until you realise that these are different mental worlds.

In one world, software can almost appear independent of the machine beneath it. It can run here, there, somewhere in the cloud, while the hardware disappears behind layers of abstraction.

In the other world, the hardware matters enormously. You have to understand the little object actually doing the work.

Neither view is necessarily wrong. They are simply different lenses.

And suddenly, I saw the same pattern again.

The purchasing person had been inside a purchasing world. The distributor had been inside a logistics world. The engineers were inside a hardware world. The software developers were inside a software world.

Everyone was looking through a perfectly reasonable window.

The trouble starts when we forget that it is a window and begin to believe that it is the whole landscape.

Eventually, our conversation reached artificial intelligence.

Could AI help write the software? Possibly.

Could you simply give the system all the technical documentation and ask it to work everything out? Not necessarily.

Some information is confidential. Some belongs inside organisational boundaries. Some cannot simply be dropped into a public AI system because it would make life convenient.

And so another world appeared: the AI world.

With it came another lens.

AI can expand the world we are able to enter. I have personally used it to create software despite having no serious software-development expertise. I describe what I want, test what comes back, complain when it doesn’t work, try again, and eventually something useful appears.

That is extraordinary.

But there is another possibility.

AI can also make our existing world smaller.

If we ask it only questions based on our own assumptions, it may simply help us build an increasingly sophisticated version of the bubble we already inhabit.

The technology can open doors.

We still have to decide whether to walk through them.

That may be what stayed with me most from the conversation.

I had entered a world of components, processors, software protocols, supply chains and industrial systems that is normally completely invisible to me. Inside that world, I discovered more worlds: the world of the purchaser, the engineer, the software developer, the manager, the supplier, the machine and the AI.

Each has its own language, its own logic and its own priorities.

And somewhere between them sits the real challenge: getting one world to notice that the others exist.

Perhaps discovering other worlds doesn’t always require an aeroplane or a passport. Sometimes it means asking somebody to explain their work until you finally understand why a thirty-cent piece of plastic matters.

Sometimes it means asking what happens inside that mysterious black object on the table.

Sometimes it means admitting that the thing which seems completely obvious from your side of the window may look completely different from the other side.

And sometimes the journey begins with the simplest message imaginable.

Hello, World.

Eighteen Days Until Egypt
Member Stories

Eighteen Days Until Egypt

There are 18 days until Babette goes to Egypt.

Not approximately 18 days. Babette has done the calculation properly. She knows the days, the hours and even the minutes. The holiday was only booked a few days ago, so there has not been much time for that slow, dreamy feeling of knowing that somewhere in the distant future you are going away. This holiday is suddenly very real.

For seven nights, Babette, her husband and the children will stay at an all-inclusive hotel in Egypt. It will be the children’s first time on an aeroplane, and they are not quite sure yet what they think about that. Flying is one of those things that sounds exciting when you have never done it, right up until you realise that you actually have to get onto the plane.

The hotel, however, is easier to understand. There are swimming pools and water slides. There is a buffet. There is ice cream. When one of the children wanted to know what “all-inclusive” actually meant, Babette explained it in the most useful way possible: everything has already been paid for.

Food? Yes.

Drinks? Yes.

Ice cream? A definitive yes!

Suddenly, all-inclusive makes perfect sense.

Babette’s own plans for Egypt are equally clear. She does not seem interested in turning seven days away into an exhausting programme of activities.

“I relax,” she says. “I do nothing. I lie by the swimming pool, and I will be chilling.”

Then she adds the detail that completes the picture: cocktails. Perhaps a piña colada.

There is only one problem with this peaceful vision of Babette beside the swimming pool.

First, she has to get there.

The flight leaves Cologne at around three in the morning, which has turned the journey to the airport into a small mathematical exercise. Babette has already investigated the possibilities. They could drive, but then there is fuel and airport parking to pay for. They could use public transport, which is included with the holiday ticket, but that means taking a bus and several trains.

Four changes altogether.

Four opportunities for something to go wrong.

And Babette knows exactly where the weakness in that plan lies.

The German train, she says, is “not every time on time.”

There is a big difference between missing a connection when you are going somewhere ordinary and standing on a platform with your family, your suitcases and a flight to Egypt getting closer by the minute.

So the calculations continue. How much would parking cost? How long would the drive take? How early would they need to leave? Is saving the money worth trusting four connections?

So the calculations continue. How much would parking cost? How long would the drive take? How early would they need to leave? Is saving the money worth trusting four connections?

There are still 18 days to decide.

Then there are the passports.

Babette found the old ones and discovered that they belonged rather firmly to the past. Hers expired in February 2021. Her husband’s expired in August 2020.

Oops.

Normally, getting new passports would take several weeks. Several weeks are not especially useful when your flight leaves in 18 days, so Babette has already investigated the express option. It costs more, but it should arrive within days. Now there are photographs to arrange and documents to organise.

The closer the conversation gets to Babette’s plan to “do nothing,” the more things appear that she has to do first.

There are passports. There is transport. There is packing. There is a dentist appointment. There is the beginning of school to think about. There is even a birthday just before the family leaves, and Babette has adjusted the plans so that a birthday sleepover can still happen.

And then there are the blankets.

One of the children has three cosy blankets that matter very much. Babette has suggested that perhaps only one needs to travel to Egypt.

This does not appear to be a particularly popular proposal.

“She needs all the three,” Babette says.

Forget passports and airport parking. The true logistical challenge may be getting three essential blankets into the luggage.

Somewhere inside all this planning, though, there is something new waiting for the family. The children will experience flying for the first time. They will arrive in a country they have not experienced together before. There will be new food, new surroundings and the strange first morning of waking up somewhere far from home.

There are water slides too.

Will Babette try them?

“Maybe.”

The answer comes with conditions. She is not exactly enthusiastic about the idea. If the water is warm enough — perhaps around 30 degrees — she might consider it.

“I think I will try this, but I don’t like it.”

Perhaps that is where curiosity becomes interesting. It does not always look like somebody confidently running towards the unknown. Sometimes curiosity stands at the top of the water slide, looks down and thinks: Hmm. Maybe.

You can be curious about a new country and still want your familiar blanket. You can look forward to travelling and still worry about the flight. You can want an adventure while calculating airport parking. You can try something new without needing to try everything.

Babette does not need to arrive in Egypt as a completely different person. She can take her family, their uncertainty, their luggage and possibly three blankets with her.

For now, the holiday still exists mostly in preparation: passports, photographs, trains, parking, appointments, packing and questions.

But the countdown is running.

Soon the calculations will be finished. The suitcases will be closed. The first flight will no longer be something the children are wondering about; it will be something they have done.

And somewhere on the other side of all that organisation, Babette will finally reach the part she has been planning from the beginning.

A swimming pool.

Nothing to do.

A cocktail in her hand.

Perhaps a piña colada.

And maybe — if the water is warm enough — a water slide.

When Babette comes home, she already knows one thing for certain.

“Then I have a lot of stories.”

The Freedom to Think Further
Essay

The Freedom to Think Further

I had been reading three of Bruce’s recent pieces. One was about social care, another asked what might happen if artificial intelligence became more competent than humans, and the third looked at the future of leadership. They appeared to be three separate subjects, but I could see the same question underneath all of them.

AI may be able to clarify what should be done, but politicians still have to decide what society is prepared to pay for and live with. AI may become so competent that the greater danger is not that it takes power from us, but that we voluntarily hand over our judgement because doing so becomes easier. And if machines become better at optimisation, the future leader may need something different: enough understanding, authority and courage to tell the optimiser when it is wrong.

I brought those three thoughts to Bruce.

As usual, he complicated them.

We started with social care. Bruce had put the problem through several AI systems, compared the answers and looked for areas of agreement and disagreement.

So I asked him what seemed an obvious question. If AI can give politicians a much clearer picture of the available choices and their consequences, shouldn’t political decision-making become easier?

“In theory, it gets easier,” Bruce said. “But in practice, it’s probably going to get harder.”

That distinction matters.

AI can help expose the choices. It can compare different approaches, identify contradictions, challenge assumptions and show consequences much faster than traditional methods. What it cannot do is make the human interests surrounding those choices disappear.

People still have positions to protect. Institutions still have territory. Governments still face voters. Organisations still worry about losing control.

Bruce had already experienced some of this himself. He had sent his AI-assisted analysis into parts of the wider discussion and found himself confronting what he called “institutional paranoia about control”.

The technology may clarify the problem. It does not remove the politics.

In fact, perhaps it does something more uncomfortable. It makes the real disagreement harder to disguise.

If ten different analyses all lead towards roughly the same difficult trade-off, we can no longer spend quite so much time pretending that another committee will eventually discover a painless answer.

At some point somebody has to choose.

That was my first distinction.

AI can improve the quality of the decision in front of us. It cannot take responsibility for living with the decision afterwards.

But Bruce’s way of using AI led us somewhere else.

Bruce rarely asks one AI a question and accepts the answer. He uses several models, compares what they produce, looks for contradictions and sometimes asks one system to examine the answer of another.

“Don’t over-rely on one AI,” he told me.

Recently, he had asked several models about important female writers. The exercise produced answers, but afterwards Bruce realised that he had asked too narrow a question.

The exercise produced answers, but afterwards Bruce realised that he had asked too narrow a question.

What, he wondered, might these writers tell us about the future and the age of AI?

So he asked again.

The answers changed.

Then Bruce noticed something else.

“What about Margaret Atwood?”

She had been largely absent.

That tiny moment seemed more important to me than a perfect AI-generated list would have been.

The machines had produced the material. Bruce noticed what was missing.

He changed the frame.

Then he asked again.

For years, one of the comforting things we have said about AI is that humans will remain important because humans ask the questions. Bruce sees that reassurance already becoming less comfortable.

Some AI systems now generate useful supplementary questions themselves.

“Well,” he said, “now AI is getting into the game of asking better questions. So you’ve got to ask even better questions.”

That sounds like a competition between human and machine.

I don’t think it has to be.

What Bruce was actually doing was using the machine to extend the territory available to his own curiosity. One answer created another question. One omission created another path. One model could challenge another. An idea that might once have required hours of searching could be tested in minutes.

The machine was not closing the discussion.

It was making the discussion larger.

And suddenly I could see the other side of the AI argument.

We talk constantly about what AI might take away from us.

But what if one of its biggest effects is to give ordinary individuals access to an intellectual freedom that previously belonged mainly to people with enormous amounts of time, specialist knowledge, research assistants or institutional resources?

That freedom is already tangible.

Bruce can sit at home, ask several systems the same question, compare the results, spot an omission, introduce Margaret Atwood, change the question and begin again.

The limiting factor is no longer simply how much information he can personally find.

Increasingly, the limiting factor is what he thinks to ask next.

Bruce gave me an even bigger example.

He had been exploring global AI governance. One of the models offered to draft an agreement.

So he let it.

Around fifteen pages appeared in about five minutes.

Then he gave the draft to other AI systems. He asked them to criticise it, compare approaches, identify weaknesses and try to improve it.

Within roughly an hour, he had something resembling a serious starting point.

Not an international agreement.

Not the final answer.

A starting point.

That distinction is important because this is where conversations about AI easily become silly. Nobody sensible is suggesting that five minutes with a language model should replace international negotiation.

But imagine what has changed.

The blank page has almost disappeared.

Instead of spending the first weeks of a project merely assembling what is already known, a person can begin with a substantial draft, attack it from several directions and spend more of their time asking what is wrong with it.

That changes the job.

It moves human effort away from producing the first answer and towards judging, challenging and improving what has been produced.

Bruce sometimes talks about getting “90% of the answer” surprisingly quickly.

I think the interesting part is what happens to the remaining ten per cent.

That is where context lives.

That is where interests collide.

That is where somebody notices Margaret Atwood is missing.

That is where a technically elegant answer encounters a human being who says, “Yes, but…”

And perhaps that remaining ten per cent becomes more important, not less, precisely because the first ninety per cent has become so cheap.

This is where Bruce’s experiments begin to look slightly eccentric.

He has been asking AI to put writers and thinkers beside each other.

Victor Hugo and Ernest Hemingway.

Ayn Rand and William Golding.

Aldous Huxley and George Orwell.

Why?

Because sometimes the apparently strange comparison reveals the underlying question.

Very different writers can be wrestling with the same tensions: the individual and society, freedom and control, responsibility and dependence, competition and cooperation.

Bruce made a remark during our conversation that caught the whole thing rather neatly.

People have already been looking at these subjects.

“They haven’t made the connections.”

“And this,” he added, “is what AI can do.”

I called it revolutionary.

Bruce called it obvious.

Perhaps we were both right.

The individual ideas may be obvious. The new possibility is being able to collide them almost without cost.

If I ask what Victor Hugo and Hemingway might have to say to each other about responsibility and the answer is useless, very little has been lost.

Ask something else.

Put another two ideas together.

Change the angle.

Introduce an absurd assumption and see whether it exposes something useful.

Most strange questions will probably produce nothing.

But occasionally one will create a doorway.

That is a very different way of thinking about AI from asking it to write our emails so that we don’t have to.

One use removes intellectual effort.

The other creates room for more of it.

That, I think, is the distinction I had been looking for.

AI can be used to escape thinking, or it can be used to escape the limits around our thinking.

Those are not the same thing at all.

At one point I suggested to Bruce that perhaps human beings are badly equipped for the amount of freedom this technology could eventually give us.

He corrected me.

“We’re well equipped for the wrong agendas.”

His example was competition.

In a competitive frame, almost every change begins with the same private calculation: what am I going to lose?

If AI can do something I do, what happens to my job? If another person gains influence, what happens to mine? If a new method works, what happens to the institution built around the old one?

Bruce contrasted that with cooperation, where the starting question changes: can we organise this so that more people gain from it?

That does not make conflict disappear. It simply changes the lens through which we first encounter change.

And it made our earlier discussion about leadership more concrete.

I had recently handed responsibility for an issue of The Pineapple to Janita. I wanted another generation and another perspective to shape it. AI remains part of our editorial process and can make recommendations about things such as sequencing.

But the machine does not get the final say.

Neither, if I am genuinely handing responsibility over, should I automatically get the final say.

That is harder than it sounds.

Handing somebody responsibility while quietly retaining control is not delegation. It is theatre.

Bruce then asked the uncomfortable human question behind my experiment.

Does the other person actually want the future I am imagining for them?

AI cannot answer that for her.

I cannot answer it for her either.

Suddenly the rather grand discussion about artificial intelligence had arrived somewhere very ordinary.

Two people working together.

One person learning when to step back.

Another deciding how far she wants to step forward.

A machine somewhere in the middle offering suggestions.

And humans still deciding what those suggestions mean.

Towards the end of our conversation, Bruce described his current AI explorations as “intellectually indulgent”.

He is retired. He has left behind many of the meetings and administrative structures of working life, but he still has decades of experience, curiosity and an appetite for ideas. AI now gives him a way to wander very quickly from literature to governance, from leadership to social care, and from one question into another.

He does not know how long he will keep playing this particular game.

For the moment, he is enjoying it.

And I realised that Bruce himself is a useful answer to the concern with which I began.

Yes, AI can tempt us to surrender judgement. If every time we face a difficult question we type it into a machine and accept the first polished answer, we may gradually become very efficient at not thinking.

But that is a choice.

Bruce is making another one.

He uses AI to travel further than he could travel alone. He asks several systems. He makes odd connections. He challenges the answers. He notices what is missing. He changes the question. Sometimes he asks the machine to challenge itself.

The technology gives him more territory.

It does not decide where he should go.

That may be the real opportunity in front of us.

For most of history, our thinking has been constrained by access: which books we could find, which experts we knew, which disciplines we understood, which languages we spoke, and simply how many hours we had available.

AI begins to loosen some of those constraints.

That is an extraordinary freedom.

But freedom is not the same as wisdom.

The machine can take us much further across the landscape.

We still have to look around.

We still have to notice what is missing.

We still have to decide which direction matters.

And, however good the machine becomes, we should probably keep hold of the chair.

What Pulls Us To The Singing Fridge.
At The Table

What Pulls Us To The Singing Fridge.

The question sounded simple enough.

“What is something you keep coming back to, even though nobody is making you?”

Then everyone had to think.

Monica was joining Lunch from Germany, with a bakery about a hundred metres from her hotel and an impressive collection of cakes already waiting nearby. Rosii was in Brazil. Fruitloop was wrapped in tights, jeans, a long-sleeved shirt, a jersey and a jacket against a 12-degree South African morning. Rosii’s coffee machine had apparently not yet done its duty.

In other words, the table was ready.

And slowly, the things that pull us back began appearing.

For Monica, it was cold places.

Mountains. Lakes. Snow.

She keeps finding herself choosing holidays where these things are waiting for her. Mont Blanc. The Matterhorn. Soon, the fjords of Norway. It is a slightly amusing attraction for somebody currently sitting in Germany as the temperature heads towards the high thirties, but the pattern is unmistakable.

There is simply something about mountains and snow that calls her back.

Rosii’s answer was different. She remembered Cunha, a place in Brazil where she once spent a holiday with her sisters and sister-in-law. It was a three-hour journey from home, but what stayed with her was the little hotel, the wonderful breakfast and the homemade jam.

“I would like to come back there,” she said.

Perhaps that is the first thing we misunderstand about returning. We imagine we are going back to a place.

Sometimes we are really going back to a feeling.

Of course, returning carries a risk.

The place might have changed.

Rosii remembered visiting an aunt in Ubatuba when she was young. Nearby was a waterfall she would walk to with her cousins. In her memory, it was surrounded by trees, quiet and beautiful. There were no shops selling food or drinks. There were simply children, water, trees and space.

When she returned many years later, she could hardly believe what she saw.

The area had become commercial. There were more people, places selling things, and far less of the peaceful landscape she remembered.

“It’s totally different than when I was a child,” she said.

Monica recognised the feeling. She has seen familiar parts of Germany change too. Places remembered one way in childhood can look surprisingly different decades later.

Yet returning can also give something back.

Last year, Monica’s cousin surprised her with a birthday weekend in the snowy area where Monica had learned to ski and where her daughter later learned too. Monica had thought she might never see it again.

Then suddenly she was there.

Fruitloop had her own version of this. As a child, she regularly travelled to South Africa’s South Coast with her best friend’s family. Years later, she returned there on honeymoon and found changed beaches, new buildings and different shops.

Closer to home, she now takes her son to the same school she attended herself.

The teachers have changed. The playground has changed. The hall has been renovated. The old flooring is gone. There is new paint and new parking.

Yet somehow, underneath the renovations, it is still the same place.

Perhaps places can do that. They can change completely and remain strangely familiar at the same time.

Then Fruitloop asked a more interesting question.

Is there something you loved when you were younger that has somehow found you again?

For Rosii, it was volleyball.

A few years ago, while teaching at a school, her students occasionally persuaded her to join their games during physical education classes.

“Please, teacher, come on, play volleyball with us.”

So she did.

It brought back something she had loved before, but there was another part to it too.

“I feel myself young,” she said.

That small sentence changed the conversation.

Because perhaps returning is not always about trying to recreate the past. Sometimes an old activity simply unlocks a version of ourselves that has been quiet for a while.

Sometimes an old activity simply unlocks a version of ourselves that has been quiet for a while.

Fruitloop knows that feeling too.

When she was young, she played cricket in the garden with her sister and her dad, particularly during summer. Now, on warm days, cricket has appeared in the garden again—but this time it is Fruitloop, her husband and their son.

The game came back.

The people changed.

And something continued.

Monica’s return to skiing was more complicated.

She had loved skiing when she was younger, but after about eleven years away from it, she decided to try again in Switzerland last year. There was a straightforward goal involved: she wanted to prove that she could still do it.

She did.

She also finished the day uninjured, which is a perfectly respectable definition of sporting success.

But something surprised her.

The old joy did not return in quite the same way.

“I’ve proved that I can still do it, and not die,” she laughed.

She was glad she had gone. She enjoyed herself. She had satisfied the urge to try once more. But she realised that skiing itself might not have been the whole reason she had loved it before.

In earlier years, she had often skied with friends and family. There had been company and camaraderie.

Perhaps part of what she remembered loving was not the skiing.

Perhaps it was the people beside her.

“Life moves on,” Monica said. “You get new things that you enjoy.”

There is freedom in that too.

We are allowed to return to something we once loved and decide not to bring it home again.

The Mayor initially struggled with the question.

His younger life happened in a very different environment, one he has not returned to for decades. He described himself as more focused on the future, joking that the future had him “in its dirty little hands” and was pushing him forward.

Fruitloop, however, had been listening.

“What about dancing?”

Silence.

The question had landed.

Rosii laughed that Mr Mayor was now “travelling in his mind.”

And eventually he found the memory.

He was a young man in Germany. He and his girlfriend had taken dancing lessons, and the dance school sometimes organised events at a hotel outside the city.

One evening, during one particular song, everything came together.

The music.

The dance.

The partner.

For one moment, they were all in perfect harmony.

He had never experienced a moment quite like it before, he said, and never experienced one quite like it afterwards.

A few minutes earlier, he had said he could not think of anything from his younger life that pulled him back.

Then one question opened a door he had apparently forgotten was there.

“Just got hit for a six there,” he admitted.

Sometimes curiosity works like that.

You think there is nothing behind the door until somebody turns the handle.

Not everything from the past deserves a romantic reunion.

Monica proved this with herrings.

As a child in Germany, she was served herrings by her aunt. Trying to be polite, she said they were very nice.

This was a tactical error.

Her aunt kept feeding them to her.

Monica kept eating them.

“It ended badly.”

For years afterwards, even the smell of herrings made her feel queasy.

Today, the relationship has improved from outright hostility to diplomatic tolerance. If somebody serves her herrings, she will eat them. She simply will not be campaigning for them.

Rosii had better luck with maxixe, a green vegetable she had rejected when she was younger without really giving it much of a chance. This year she tried it again, prepared with onion and garlic.

“Oh my God, it’s really, really good!”

Her surprise was not simply that she liked it. It was that she had spent so long deciding she did not.

Fruitloop’s great reconciliation was beetroot.

As a child, she disliked it before it even reached her mouth. Beetroot had an unforgivable habit of turning everything else on the plate pink.

“I don’t want pink food.”

A reasonable childhood policy.

Then, a few weeks before the conversation, something deeply suspicious happened.

She craved beetroot.

She put some in a bowl, ate it and discovered that it was actually rather nice.

There are limits to personal growth, however. The beetroot will still be kept in a separate bowl.

Some boundaries are sacred.

Monica then revealed that the disappearance of beetroot from an Australian fast-food burger remains, in her view, a serious injustice. The old Aussie burger had beetroot. Then it vanished from the menu.

“It’s just wrong,” she declared.

By this point, curiosity had taken the table from childhood waterfalls and lost landscapes to the moral importance of beetroot in hamburgers.

Which is more or less how a good Lunch should work.

Then Fruitloop produced the question that finally removed any remaining dignity from proceedings.

Imagine waking up tomorrow and discovering that every time you open your fridge, it plays one song from your past.

What song keeps coming back?

The Mayor immediately identified the biggest problem with the scenario.

“If you wake up tomorrow…”

He seemed less concerned about the musical refrigerator than the possibility that nobody had guaranteed survival until breakfast.

Rosii chose Pharrell Williams’ “Happy”—the kind of song that could start the morning with the feeling that today might be a good day.

The Mayor travelled back to the late 1970s and his teenage job at Kentucky Fried Chicken in Manly. His memory landed on Gerry Rafferty’s “Baker Street,” surrounded by the music of the Bee Gees, Dire Straits, ABBA and the strange glamour of opening refrigerators full of frozen chickens.

Monica went straight to ABBA.

She saw them in Adelaide in 1977 and still loves the music. She has visited the ABBA Museum in Stockholm, still loves Mamma Mia!, and would apparently be perfectly capable of bopping around in front of a musical fridge.

Recently, she went to a concert with friends and spent the evening enjoying music from the 1960s and 70s. One man in his eighties could still twist his way down towards the floor—and, more importantly, get himself back up again.

Monica has adopted this as a future ambition.

“Hashtag life goals when I’m 80.”

Fruitloop’s refrigerator, meanwhile, chose Britney Spears’ “…Baby One More Time.”

She had no idea why.

“I hope the fridge won’t hit me.”

And there it was: an hour of conversation condensed into one ridiculous kitchen appliance.

A waterfall can pull us back.

So can mountains.

A school playground. A cricket bat. A volleyball. A dance remembered after decades. A food we swore we would never touch again. A song that somehow knows exactly where we used to be when we first heard it.

But returning does not always mean recovering what was there before.

Sometimes we discover the place has changed.

Sometimes we discover that we have changed.

Sometimes the thing we thought we missed turns out to have been the people who were there with us.

And sometimes, wonderfully, something we thought had disappeared comes back in another form: a childhood game played with our own child, an old sport that makes us feel young for an afternoon, or a memory that waits quietly until somebody asks exactly the right question.

Maybe that is what keeps pulling us back.

Not the past itself.

Just the possibility that there is still something there worth meeting again.

The Middle Ground.
Column

The Middle Ground.

Just when you think winter is finally packing its bags and heading out the door, the universe decides to change the locks.

We were all coasting along, waiting for the calendar to tick over to the first of September, expecting those first warm hints of spring. Instead, the weather page turned and said: Not yet. We woke up to freezing temperatures, relentless rain, hail, and snow falling in parts of the country where snow feels like a myth.

I found myself doing what everyone else does when the temperature drops—scrolling through Facebook for updates. The comment sections were full of people venting, complaining that even in 2026, we still can’t accurately predict the weather. I had to smile. It doesn’t usually snow in these parts, but if people want to use their energy to complain about a sudden winter wonderland, I suppose that’s their choice.

Meanwhile, I was busy trying to find the energy to leave the warmth of the house.

Cold or no cold, my mom’s dogs still needed to be fed. While I was bundling up just to walk to the car, my parents were sitting six hours north in the Kruger National Park, soaking up the warm sunshine. If you drove six hours in the opposite direction, down south, you’d hit a magical mountain covered from bottom to top in thick snow.

And somehow, we are stuck right in the middle. Not close enough to catch the northern heat, and not close enough to enjoy the southern snow. Just perfectly positioned to inherit the freezing temperatures.

It’s easy to get caught up in the local grumbling when your coffee goes cold too fast, but perspective has a way of quietening the noise.

While half of South Africa is complaining about a sudden cold snap, other parts of the world are dealing with realities that run much deeper than a ruined weekend plan. Wildfires are tearing through landscapes. Droughts have left communities with little to no water, facing extreme, punishing heat.

Weather isn’t a customer service department we can call to lodge a complaint. Nature takes its own route. It takes care of itself, operating on a scale that doesn’t care about our weekend plans.

Of course, there are reasons behind the shift—global warming, fossil fuels, the structural footprint we leave behind. But I’m not diving into the heavy science today.

Because the real realization sitting on my chest this morning wasn’t about the atmosphere. It was about control. Or rather, how little of it we actually have.

The weather is just the loudest thing on the list.

If you look past the rain on the window, there’s a whole queue of variables waiting to spike our blood pressure. The shifting petrol prices. The creeping cost of living. The price of food at the supermarket that seems to change every time you look at the shelf. And, as always, the unpredictable state of the electricity grid.

They are heavy, exhausting realities. But they share one common trait: I cannot fix them. I cannot change the price of fuel at the pump, and I cannot force the clouds to clear.

So my goal for the week ahead is a quiet line in the sand: I will not stress over the things I cannot control.

Instead, I’m shrinking my radius. I am focusing entirely on the small, immediate ecosystem within my own four walls. The things I can actually shape with my own hands.

Cooking a warm dinner. Cleaning the corners of the house. Making sure I get enough sleep instead of lying awake staring at the ceiling. Ensuring my family is happy, and taking a moment to check that I am happy, too.

The dogs—both mine and my mom’s—are fed and cared for. The school homework for the week will get done, page by page.

I might even try to find a way to negotiate the volume levels between the television and my son’s endless energy, but I promise myself I won’t lose my peace over it if the house stays loud.

We spend so much of our lives trying to hold up the sky, forgetting that it manages to stay up all by itself.

I will control what I can, where I can, and I will deliberately leave the rest behind. The stress levels can pass on by, like the storm front moving across the highveld. The troubles of the wider world will still be there tomorrow, but for tonight, they don’t get a seat at my table.

Maybe that’s the point.

The kitchen is warm, the family is safe, and the winter coats are out. The rest is just weather.

Recipe

Chicken Asado

Orange, lime, garlic, cumin and paprika barbecue chicken

Chicken Asado
  • 1 whole chicken
  • Juice of 2 oranges, or about 150–200 ml orange juice
  • Juice of 1–2 limes
  • 3–4 cloves fresh garlic, grated or crushed
  • 1–2 tsp smoked paprika
  • 1 tsp ground cumin
  • 1–2 tsp dried oregano
  • Salt, to taste
  • Pepper, to taste
  • 2 tbsp apple vinegar
  • 3–4 tbsp olive oil
  1. Place the chicken breast-side down and cut out the backbone.
  2. Turn the chicken over and press it flat, like a spatchcock chicken.
  3. Mix the orange juice, lime juice, garlic, smoked paprika, cumin, oregano, salt, pepper, apple vinegar, and olive oil in a bowl.
  4. Rub the marinade all over the chicken: outside, inside, and under the skin where possible.
  5. Put the chicken into a zipper bag or vacuum bag.
  6. Pour in the remaining marinade.
  7. Leave the chicken in the refrigerator for one day.
  8. The next day, prepare a hot barbecue.
  9. Put the chicken on the grill and cook it over strong heat, turning often.
  10. Spoon or brush the marinade over the chicken again and again while it cooks.
  11. Turn left side, right side, left side, right side — keep basting until the chicken is cooked through and nicely coloured.
  12. Rest for a few minutes before serving.

Ralf Note

This one is more Argentina-style. You stand there like a small soldier of the chicken. Turn it round, turn it round, baste it all the time. Baste: a very important word for civilisation.

In The Next Issue

The Limits of Knowing

What happens to our wonder when the answer to every question is just a click away?

The Limits of Knowing

Next week at Brida, we are exploring the spaces where certainty ends and real discovery begins. In a world that demands instant answers, we are taking a step back to look at the beauty of the unanswered, the unsaid, and the unexpected. We will be diving into the mechanics of our own inquisitiveness—asking not just what we want to know, but why we sometimes hesitate to find out.

Atlantic Corridor kicks off Monday by examining what it means to hold onto curiosity in an age of instant gratification. On Tuesday, Fabrice takes us a step further, opening up a space for the things we hesitate to ask—the quiet questions we often keep to ourselves. Wednesday brings a double journey: the Swimming Club gathers to ask what keeps pulling us back to the places, habits, or ideas that shape us, while Sylvie simultaneously opens a door to discovering entirely other worlds.

As the week winds down, the focus shifts to the boundaries of our attention. On Thursday, Babette returns to the dilemma of curiosity in the age of instant answers, challenging us to look at how we navigate the noise. Lunch will get even sharper, asking a classic boundary question: how curious is too curious? Finally, Peeling Potatoes will close the week by looking at what happens when we stop analyzing and simply try following an unexpected idea to see where it lands.

You do not need to have the map entirely figured out before you sit down. Bring a story, a lingering question, or simply the willingness to listen.

Next Week at the Tables

Monday
Atlantic Corridor
Curiosity in the age of instant answers.
Tuesday
Fabrice
The Things We Hesitate to Ask.
Wednesday
Swimming Club
What keeps pulling us back?
Wednesday
Sylvie
Discovering other worlds.

Next Week at the Tables — continued

Thursday
Babette
Curiosity in the age of instant answers.
Lunch
How curious is too curious?

Friday

Peeling Potatoes

Following an unexpected idea.

Come and discover where an unexpected idea might lead you.

Choose a table.

Take a seat.

Bring your curiosity.

Contact Frank and Janita:

WhatsApp – +33 7 49 01 84 85

Partner page
Advertisement
The Pineapple · Every Friday

See what the next issue brings.

Receive The Pineapple each Friday, free and without noise.

Subscribe to The Pineapple