To both agree and disagree with
you, Madame! :) While Hedges can seem a
sort of dour chap (in that he doesn’t see a lot of tremendous hope), and
perhaps he does dwell in the soul-sucking shadows a bit long, I am going to
give him the benefit of the doubt. That
is, I am going to presume that his objective is to wake people up to reality,
and get them to move in the direction of a non-illusional future. I would think that in itself would be
hopeful: legions of the newly awakened squaring their jaws, looking reality in
the eye, and getting busy doing what they can to make a better one.
My erstwhile blog-colleague, why
are you so “naturally resistant,” to the diatribe against positive psychology?
Were you raised on a stream of Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller, Napoleon Hill, Zig Ziglar,
and other positively motivational speakers (none of whom, to my limited
knowledge, set out to use positive psychology for strictly selfish or twisted
purposes, and many of whom to the contrary apparently had much good effect)?
“Oh yeah, all this positivity is
bad for us.” I guess I don’t follow you,
Mad M (permit me my tongue-in-cheek play on words!) Did Hedges-san imply that to your reading
eyes? Did he, does he, seek to “arouse
the people with glaring messages of hopelessness”? I thought his message is that the PRESENT
SYSTEM is hopeless (and thinking it can be changed is in his view a hopeless
wish as well), and the newly aroused will have to fashion a different one. But I see some of your point (gained in
watching interviews and talks by him) that he is not overly concerned with
efficacy in efforts, and indeed sees little chance of effecting much in the
short to intermediate term, but only in registering protest and ripples that
will implant the seeds for long-term change.
Your comments about depression
prompt me to wonder if some of that is by design. That is, does the system seem so rotten and
unchangeable, so complex and soul-numbing, as to breed depression by partial
design? Because depression enfeebles or
prevents ACTION. And the masters of the system don’t want
action by the overwhelming majority—at whatever percentage that majority
defines itself! ;)
You speak sense when you say that positive
psychology can be beneficial, harmless, or malicious. It is thus a tool, yes. I think Hedges’ point is that it is a tool
that has been too often manipulated by the powerful, and used to divert,
enfeeble, and control people. In that,
we have, in too many instances, given ourselves over to the manipulations of
the system—a system all too happy to use prescription drugs, unhealthy food and
drink, and other “accepted” things—to the point where we do hear many people
say they’re not sure what they’re feeling, or why. That they can’t sort their lives out. And all
along the way, the illusional siren calls of the culture are telling them to
not worry, it’s mind over matter, or mind over situation, or following your
favorite sports team will give your life meaning and get you back on track, or
any of a number of things which aren’t the reality of people’s lives. Dave Marsh is fond of saying that he doesn’t
put faith in political figures, because they aren’t his reality, aren’t that
important to him personally, that he is much more interested in the people he
directly knows, and the changes he and they can effect. Interesting view that I’m not sure I entirely
agree with, but at least he is consciously divorcing himself from the celebrity/politician/sports
figure culture—and the obsession thereof.
As for the illusion of happiness
and positive thinking being hard to pull off, I don’t disagree, but I do
disagree with you that the author’s concern is excessive. We have at least a large minority, and
probably a majority, in this culture who believe that what happens to people, and
how their lives turn out, is almost entirely “their own fault” (read the
arrogant dismissiveness in that sentiment). I do
believe in personal responsibility (and I think it’s the right societal belief), yet I
also understand all too well the interconnectedness of so many things about
this system (which is, as you’ve pointed out, stacked against the average person
in many/most respects). This system
uses up the individual Boxers (“I will work harder”; remember your Animal Farm?)
among us in droves. And we know what happened
to him!
Well, pooh, twitter-twatter, and
bother, Madame! I’ve used up (and then some) my five
paragraphs I’m trying to hold my postings to, and I haven’t proceeded beyond responding
to yours, lol. Will try again next week,
P&H fans! :)
No comments:
Post a Comment