A jealous day?

Mondays remind me the tension between people who hate what they do and people who love what they do.

Mondays make me think about envy.

Monday is a day when violations of the Tenth Commandment are the rule and not the exception. In extreme cases, envy can take the form of hating people who simply don't have to do what others do. Traffic is at its rudest on Monday mornings. Monday mornings are my least favorite morning to do my running, as the cars are more menacing. Little patience for runners, who are considered "in the way." (So it seems, at least.)

The funny thing about the work ethic is that it imposes a feeling of obligation on people to do what they hate (and accept the hatred), even though we are all told that we should find work we like. One of the tragedies of life is that many people never find work they like. Also, tragically, achieving real success is usually impossible unless one likes one's work.

A man's work is that which is not work at all, said Twain. And that is tragically true. People who do what they want are, tragically, often hated by people who are doing what they hate. Whether they achieve success does not do much to alleviate this hatred; a starving artist is about as contemptible as a successful one to those who hate their jobs. I have long believed that one of Howard Stern's dirty secrets of success is that he loves his work but claims to hate it so passionately that his work-hating listeners love him for it. (Perhaps he does have a love/hate relationship with it, but the hate-work part is very endearing to the hate-work crowd.)

It has long fascinated me how an unsuccessful, typical "starving artist" type can be so hated when he is so obviously unsuccessful. If the hatred is grounded in jealousy, though, I would think that hating the successful makes more sense. But I think the reason for the hatred of starving artists (homosexuals often get a similar flavor of hatred), is that the people who hate their lives cannot stand to see unsuccessful people who seem to be having a good time at being unsuccessful, while they toil away never really achieving the success they desire. It's as if the misery of the latter is being ridiculed by the former; whether the artists and homos know it or not, that's what they're doing. The fact that this may be wholly unintentional, if anything, only adds fuel to the fire.

This ties in with what I have noticed about hatred of the casual, "recreational" drug user as opposed to the pity so frequently allowed the addict. We have only to contrast this with feelings commonly evoked by the casual ("social") drinker as opposed to the alcoholic; the hatreds are curiously reversed, and the alcoholic is hated more.

I am not saying all people think this way; but the feelings are there. To ignore them is to ignore stuff that goes to the heart of the Culture War.

Ditto abortion. While late-term abortion is considered more heinous both in a logical and moral sense, the outcry against the morning-after pill takes on near-hysterical proportions among the activists who spearhead anti-abortion ideology, and elaborate arguments are constructed to prove that this pill is the precise moral equivalent of the Holocaust. Why? I think it's because of this feeling that women who take that pill are getting away with something, and avoiding consequences which would become self-apparent if they waited longer.

Gay marriage, similarly, by granting homosexuals a way to escape the stereotypical loneliness, debauchery and despair (which might engender at least a grudging feelings of pity), is seen as offering an "escape" to people who, in a "just" world should bear the full brunt of "consequences" for a poorly "chosen" lifestyle.

The problem is, this stuff is not logical. My attempt to analyze it forces me to engage in stereotyping I'd rather not engage in. But I'd rather think about it at the risk of indulging in stereotyping myself than dismissing the angry moral conservatives as "illogical." To call them illogical, regardless of how true that may or may not be true, misses the tragedy of misplaced envy.

An envy which dare not speak its name?

I think that's the worst kind.

posted by Eric on 04.05.04 at 11:52 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/913






Comments

I am missing a point, somewhere, in this post. Or maybe you need to provide a little more background.

I hate artists because they SUCK! They produce crap and expect admiration. Phooey on them.

& why shouldn't gays come up with another name for gay marriage besides 'marriage?' It is not the same thing. Actually, I'm kind of surprised lesbians and male homosexuals wouldn't want or need some differences in their legal arrangements.

But I don't really care about the morning after pill.

Where does envy come into this?


Persnickety   ·  April 6, 2004 04:11 PM

There are some good artists, but I share your view of sanctimious crap which passes for art (if that's what you mean). You may be complaining also about artists who think the government should fund them (which destroys art). Not sure.

For reasons involving privacy, I've never favored the stampede towards same sex marriage. But I think many of its foes don't like the idea of stable gay relationships (whether married or otherwise) because it threatens their ideological thinking.

The point here is that people hate others simply for doing what they want when they do what they hate. It's a visceral hatred of all things bohemia, and while I try to understand it, I do think there is natural jealousy involved which goes unrecognized.

Anyone who expects admiration, however, is very foolish, and this includes all who want their lifestyles endorsed by those whose views should not matter. I suspect that such people are as unhappy as those who hate them (and may hate their "work" too.)

There are people who'd rather live in a tent than commute to work, who'd rather throw paint on canvas (or put words on paper even if no one ever appreciates them) than work for others. There is tension between those who (as Twain says) do the work of other men, and those who'd rather live close to the edge, even if that means failure. I had a rather brilliant friend who bought and sold junk and made a living at it who was smart enough to get a "straight" job and make lots of money. He felt sorry for people who toiled away for years in dead-end jobs getting nowhere, and once remarked, "They've tried, and they've failed. I've failed -- but at least I never tried -- not THAT way!" These two philosophies are incompatible. But why should they be?

Not saying you're jealous, and I don't think I am. But I perceive it a lot, so I wrote about it.

Eric Scheie   ·  April 6, 2004 04:50 PM

oh - busybodies!!

Thank you for the explanation. Yes, there can certainly be some resentment on the part of the 'duty' types towards the 'just do it' types.

Persnickety   ·  April 6, 2004 05:23 PM


March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits