Skip to main content

Reply to Barbara Ehrenreich

My reply to Barbara Ehrenreich’s essay on Salon:

Helping the stupid Depression story be told

Re: To my own amazement, "Nickel and Dimed" quickly ascended to the bestseller list and began winning awards. Criticisms, too, have accumulated over the years. But for the most part, the book has been far better received than I could have imagined it would be, with an impact extending well into the more comfortable classes.

Associating oneself in anyway with you gives one working class-sympathies cred, as well as appreciative-of-one-of-America's-foremost-essaysists cred (I mean, who dislikes you?). In addition, your extended sojourn amongst the untouchables didn't leave you exempted from where you'd been previously -- back once again to being one of America's NYRB foremost. In addition, your book was warzone adventure, from someone who lived, breathed, and even ate it, all its ghastliness. You really counted flinching from the frighteningly permanently destitute such that it'd leave you ignored this time around? You're not just one of those who, no matter their success, for some reason always finds some reason to define themselves as not immoderately empowered/influential? I'm hearing even the President -- eternally hopeful, but always hamstrung -- defines himself this way, and I'm guessing it’s what people do when they want to communicate they're not at all responsible for the widespread muck they mostly actually want, or at least get some kind of weird kick from.

Look at how Laurel here debases herself to you: she's pretty much do as much to none other -- even her expecting God might be in for worse than just a few minor correctives. You're none other than one of our collectively-agreed-upon few gods, you fool. Average Middle American, indeed!

Re: A Florida woman wrote to tell me that, before reading it, she'd always been annoyed at the poor for what she saw as their self-inflicted obesity. Now she understood that a healthy diet wasn't always an option. And if I had a quarter for every person who's told me he or she now tipped more generously, I would be able to start my own foundation.

Too bad Laurel didn't chime in on this one, for she'd have said the perfectly fair and in fact just plain necessary in reminding you and this earnestly self-deluding fool that the poor don't eat healthy owing to lack of options, but because they like fatty foods to the point that in some moods they'd choose a follow-up burger over peace-neverending, but with only an apple as chaser.

Re: Even more gratifying to me, the book has been widely read among low-wage workers. In the last few years, hundreds of people have written to tell me their stories: the mother of a newborn infant whose electricity had just been turned off, the woman who had just been given a diagnosis of cancer and has no health insurance, the newly homeless man who writes from a library computer.

At what point did you pass up concluding that this aggressive flow suggested people kind of enjoyed this opportunity to showcase their suffering, and wonder if your efforts for a better America for the working class would be shortchanged owing to most of them being broadly aware that a better America would make it incrementally harder to show how nobly unspoiled and self-denying they'd become? Their wounds are real and ruinous; how every accuser's accusation is sundered by this stark, undeniable corporeal fact.

Re: In 2000, I had been able to walk into a number of jobs pretty much off the street. Less than a decade later, many of these jobs had disappeared and there was stiff competition for those that remained. It would have been impossible to repeat my "Nickel and Dimed" "experiment," had I had been so inclined, because I would probably never have found a job.

Now it's even easier to credit to yourself that those who believe you're lazy, not only don't know what they're talking about but are probably to be counted amongst those who'll burn in hell for prospering at a time when it surely means living it at the-public-at-large's expense. You'll live the rest of your life relatively prosperous and always lauded. They’ll, however, live it that much greater, truer heroes -- even if it means a 30-year shortchanged life, and most of this with some sort of missing limb or malfunctioning organ, plus a further list of afflictions not even an evil Santa could bear to count without at some point pleaing for mercy.

Re: But at least we should decide, as a bare minimum principle, to stop kicking people when they're down.

Good news! This is what they can expect to receive in plenty. During the last Depression at some point everyone was for the noble, suffering poor, which is fortuitous because it's the one sort of not-entirely-inversed plentitude they can handle. They need yet more years of jaw-dropping sacrifice and self-wasting before they'll believe they've shown inner persecutors they're clearly not what they're accused of being: indulgent, greedy, self-centred -- selfish! Then, they'll be all for the next Roosevelt, who'll permit some growth -- but not that much! -- before ensuring the inacting of some giant war that'll waste away many of them as well as their kids for good, and prove beyond doubt that liberals may have a point in thinking we now might deserve better and in doing what they can to finally actually enact it. We're in for such good times, people -- we always get what we want. The rich are but toys we wind up again and again to undue the good things we've become highly anxious over possessing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...