not to say "this chalk is not chalk," but just trying to raise the possibility of another perspective:

i am finding that there's often a reason at the bottom of things i would initially deem to be ridiculous. i am finding that what i used to bank on as my intuition and discernment and wise judgment fail more often than not, and that i am continually having to go back and reevaluate my first impressions.

i had a roommate my freshman year who told us she had entertained this notion: to be a real trouble-maker/rebel her first semester and then come back 2nd semester and be herself (seeming all reformed and angelic in comparison), thereby giving everyone an occasion to be thankful for a positive outcome to their fervent prayers for her to change.

true growth in sanctification is great to mark and a privilege to watch and something to be rejoiced over -- i'm not trying to diminish that. but i wonder how much of the change we mark in each other isn't really indicative of change in ourselves. i know you kind of said that up there, already, but i'm just thinking out loud here.

maybe things that really bug us (or things we term jerky, proud or bad-tempered) are misinterpreted or mis-attributed in the first place. and maybe they bug us or strike us as jerky more or less, depending on our own focus.

sometimes the person on the other end of the scope is changing.

sometimes it's that the perception was marred or warped or filtered or skewed initially and has since had some corrective adjustments.

sometimes it's that the viewer himself/herself/myself is changing.