Mythical scene in a real world.
Somehow, probably because I sense the new year as having begun the day of the solstice, but the official year starts on Jan. 1, the week in between has long been a sort time out of time. A pause, a hiatus I might say. Nothing much happens (well, I guess that’s not true of Ms. Bhutto). No school, not much work. What happens is that I get to ruminating, cogitating, and generally casting my eye around looking for the real world. I say the “real” world because it seems we live in one of myths, legends, and ghost stories. An easy target for my laser-like vision is, naturally, “Christmas,” which my faithful reader or two will already know I have decided to call “$mas.”
So, as usual, while channel surfing for anything at all worth watching on television–a fool’s errand, I’ll grant–I ran across snippets of the various productions based on Dickens’s story “A Christmas Carol.” I’ll begin by saying I’m a big fan of Charles Dickens. I have read every one of his novels, and consider Bleak House to be at or near the pinnacle of English literature. Some critic (or other person of note and letters) has this book in his top five, and said something about it ranking so high because he simply didn’t know how any person could write it. The first several paragraphs are, to me, the best writing I’ve ever had the pleasure of encountering–sez I, not the aforementioned critic. But I digress.
“A Christmas Carol” appears to me to offer certain messages not ordinarily discussed but appropriate to our current economic climate (and instructive on our society). The gist of the story: Mr. Scrooge is a misanthropic businessman. He makes loans to those needing money. He expects to be repaid. Those borrowers (who presumably managed to qualify for the loans, although a number of them appear to be substandard risks) are universally shown as being reluctant (and, indeed perhaps unable) to comply with the terms of their contracts with Mr. Scrooge. Mr. Scrooge honors his commitments to his employee, who has produced a family beyond his limited means. What the story is about is: individualism is bad; expecting others to honor their commitments is bad; being a businessman is bad; the commercial holiday which encourages rampant commercialism is good; living beyond one’s means is heartwarming; ghosts exist; failure to do family planning is okay. I could go on, but I suppose I’ve made my point.
Now, I suppose, the above view of the story appears to be pretty hard-hearted. Believe it or not, I don’t mean it that way. My intent is to, if nothing else, focus my thinking about our societal/cultural myths. Are those myths useful? Do they promote “the pursuit of happiness?” As I was pondering this stuff, I remembered a famous editorial, perhaps the most famous editorial of all time: “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.” The part of it which resonates with me is the author’s statement that if one is not going to believe in Santa Claus, well, then, just as well not believe in fairies, and the fact that you have never seen either is not proof of their non-existence. What!? Then I may as well believe in genies, pooka horses, banshees, and “ghosties and ghoulies and long legged beasties and things that go bump in the night.” The statement appears to be that if someone can fabricate a supernatural explanation for something (or invent a bogyman to get kids to toe the mark), it is unwise for those who become aware of these constructs to deny that they are true just because they have no absolute proof of a negative. What?!
Is there something wrong with reality? How about comforting our children (and ourselves) with the beautiful things which do exist? How about this message to the little ones–”I love you beyond all measure for no other reason than you exist. It makes me so happy when I think of you I get choked up. I’ll do my utmost to make sure you have everything you need. I’ll go without to provide for you. I’ll do anything I can to make you happy, to provide you with joy aside from simple need. I’ll take any risk to myself to protect you from harm, even the risk you’ll be mad at me.” I guess if I have a point I’ve made it.
Back to current economic reality. There is some thought floating about that because someone will make you a loan beyond your ability to repay, it is their fault if you fail to repay it. They are bad people if they expect you to repay it. Owning a home has been imbued with such mythical significance (remember those heart-rending FHA ads–or one of those alphabet outfits–with the child longing for a home?), that rational thought has been pushed aside. Don’t millions of people live perfectly acceptable lives in apartments? What percentage of people living in Manhattan, for example, have an individual house? (Let’s not confuse the issue with co-ops and condos–they are apartments, as opposed to free-standing homes). One of my younger brothers got angry with me for even suggesting that there is a side to the story other than that favoring borrowers in trouble. For the record, I do not think all the fault is on one side.
Ah, you might think, there’s the true heart of Scrooge, Jr. Not so. Not so. I just wonder, during this fermata between $Mas and Jan. 1, if we all wouldn’t be served better by reality than myth.
No, Virginia, there is no Santa Claus, daddy/mommy spent 2.6 hours down at the factory/office/field/salt mine to get the money to buy this toy for you, and was happy to do so, and will spend countless hours over many years doing the same to make sure you are safe and happy. Someone said (smarter than me, maybe some pop psychology sort, I don’t know or care) “work is love made visible.”
So, have a nice week in limbo.
