Or the blog that could be called: things that go bump in the night or the mysterious or the hidden or all those forgotten sharks circling wild beneath the surface.
I am fired up today so that makes it as good a time as any to finally start this blog. I reserved the room two months ago, so it's about time, right?
The other day at work a still-new supervisor stopped by my desk and asked me why I was a fan of Freud. (I have a Freud action figure coyly decorating my cube.) I almost answered, "Well, Mr. Supervisor, isn't it obvious--sometimes a cigar really isn't a cigar!" Of course, I didn't say that since we were in the office and he is a supervisor and the truth of the matter was that all I really wanted was for him to leave since staring up into his nostrils while he hung his head over the top of my cube was in itself becoming an all-too-ripe-for-Freudian-analysis moment. So I quickly muttered some kind of limp explanation and he finally walked away.
But I thought about it for the rest of the afternoon. What is it about Freud that appeals to me? Above all else it's his willingness to clue into the muck beneath the surface. The fact that saying "I want a cigar" might just mean something very different. And Freud is a nice reminder. Don't always believe what you here. And what people tell you is the truth could just as easily be double-speak or something shitty.
Kundera is right: kitsch most definitely is the denial of shit.
What has me going today is social denial. Related to two specific things that do dovetail at some point, even if at first blush they seem like they might not: First, responses to Michael Moore's SICKO coming from the "right" side of the political spectrum; and second, the strange term bandied about in an office party today that nagged at me all afternoon--namely, the euphemism otherwise known as a good "work ethic."
About SICKO: I read yet another critique of the movie today that claimed Moore was offering a health system such as the ones Canadians are privy to as a panacea. Well, I watched the movie. I even watched it twice. Though Moore does offer examples of places (Canada, France, Cuba) where healthcare is universal, at no time in the movie does he say "This is exactly what we need and these systems have no problems and if we had these we would no longer have any problems either." Yes, he may paint a rosy picture of these places in some parts of the film (think Moore strolling through Paris to the beat of J'taime.). And no, he doesn't explore the problems that happen in these countries' healthcare systems, but that is not what the film is about! I have to say it again: That is not what the film is about!!
In my mind the biggest questions Moore raises and the one he closes the film with are: what does it mean that we (in the U.S.) have the healthcare system we do and can't we do better than this?
Is it denial that leads so many of the critics of the film to not even touch this question? I guess you could call it: An instance when pre-packaged soundbites and predetermined politicized speech is most definitely the denial of shit. I guess the woman wandering around on skid row after being pushed out of the emergency room really wasn't that important.
And now about the work ethic thing. At the office today (In a pristine office park that is itself the denial of shit) we had a going away party for the now-ex president of the company. His parting words included talk of our work ethic--the one of all of us at the office who toil away to such a stupendous degree that is "almost insane" seem to have. He meant it as a compliment but I kept wondering at the muck beneath those words. We are underpaid, overworked and there is no such thing as overtime pay. Forget the prospect of just compensation: it's corporate life. The big guys make the bucks and the rest of us have a great "work ethic." Sure, I am a conscientious employee (whatever that means) but I also need the job. My "work ethic" isn't really a choice.
So that is a case of: When someone says work ethic and your stomach start to churn while you stand there nodding: Yes, oh yes, what a nice thing to say!
I am fired up today so that makes it as good a time as any to finally start this blog. I reserved the room two months ago, so it's about time, right?
The other day at work a still-new supervisor stopped by my desk and asked me why I was a fan of Freud. (I have a Freud action figure coyly decorating my cube.) I almost answered, "Well, Mr. Supervisor, isn't it obvious--sometimes a cigar really isn't a cigar!" Of course, I didn't say that since we were in the office and he is a supervisor and the truth of the matter was that all I really wanted was for him to leave since staring up into his nostrils while he hung his head over the top of my cube was in itself becoming an all-too-ripe-for-Freudian-analysis moment. So I quickly muttered some kind of limp explanation and he finally walked away.
But I thought about it for the rest of the afternoon. What is it about Freud that appeals to me? Above all else it's his willingness to clue into the muck beneath the surface. The fact that saying "I want a cigar" might just mean something very different. And Freud is a nice reminder. Don't always believe what you here. And what people tell you is the truth could just as easily be double-speak or something shitty.
Kundera is right: kitsch most definitely is the denial of shit.
What has me going today is social denial. Related to two specific things that do dovetail at some point, even if at first blush they seem like they might not: First, responses to Michael Moore's SICKO coming from the "right" side of the political spectrum; and second, the strange term bandied about in an office party today that nagged at me all afternoon--namely, the euphemism otherwise known as a good "work ethic."
About SICKO: I read yet another critique of the movie today that claimed Moore was offering a health system such as the ones Canadians are privy to as a panacea. Well, I watched the movie. I even watched it twice. Though Moore does offer examples of places (Canada, France, Cuba) where healthcare is universal, at no time in the movie does he say "This is exactly what we need and these systems have no problems and if we had these we would no longer have any problems either." Yes, he may paint a rosy picture of these places in some parts of the film (think Moore strolling through Paris to the beat of J'taime.). And no, he doesn't explore the problems that happen in these countries' healthcare systems, but that is not what the film is about! I have to say it again: That is not what the film is about!!
In my mind the biggest questions Moore raises and the one he closes the film with are: what does it mean that we (in the U.S.) have the healthcare system we do and can't we do better than this?
Is it denial that leads so many of the critics of the film to not even touch this question? I guess you could call it: An instance when pre-packaged soundbites and predetermined politicized speech is most definitely the denial of shit. I guess the woman wandering around on skid row after being pushed out of the emergency room really wasn't that important.
And now about the work ethic thing. At the office today (In a pristine office park that is itself the denial of shit) we had a going away party for the now-ex president of the company. His parting words included talk of our work ethic--the one of all of us at the office who toil away to such a stupendous degree that is "almost insane" seem to have. He meant it as a compliment but I kept wondering at the muck beneath those words. We are underpaid, overworked and there is no such thing as overtime pay. Forget the prospect of just compensation: it's corporate life. The big guys make the bucks and the rest of us have a great "work ethic." Sure, I am a conscientious employee (whatever that means) but I also need the job. My "work ethic" isn't really a choice.
So that is a case of: When someone says work ethic and your stomach start to churn while you stand there nodding: Yes, oh yes, what a nice thing to say!
