[lit-ideas] Re: Irene's experiment...

  • From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:05:18 -0400

Andy: I also stated that society straightjackets
everyone with a very very narrow definition of success in only one form: money.

You talk about "society" the way Omar Khayyam talks about fate. That's what gets me, this introjected "society" in your discourse, like some white noise taken for messages from the spirit world. "Society" is this faceless other, an undefined dictator, a free-floating fog of authority.

By "society," do you mean TV or other media? If you substitute "TV" for "Society," and give people some credit for being able to resist crass seductions, I wouldn't have much truck with your comments.

Jobs: they are meant to be simple so that everyone can do them. That's why money is narrowly defined as success; it's a tangible kind of success *simple* enough so that everyone can appreciate it and strive for it.

It's the lowest common denominator, not the amorphous fog with the straightjacket. Anyone with half a brain knows enough to resist prefab success or any prefab value. Anyone with imagination will try to improve what they are given, instead of merely accepting it.

To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: