I grew up hating work. My father placed a very high
value on work, but I grew up absolutely despising it. This had nothing to do
with rebelling against my father because that’s what children, adolescents
especially, are somehow required to do. My loathing of work had nothing to do
with rebellion. I simply hated it. But here’s the other peculiar side to the
equation: I’m not lazy. Quite the contrary. Given an activity I enjoy, I will
immerse myself in it utterly and go until I drop from fatigue. Then get up and
look forward to more immersion. For me, this activity is writing. But is
writing work, or a form of play?
Writing is work, and play. There is no reason why it
can’t be both.
I’ve long suspected myself of being a spoiled,
sybaritic aesthete with a contrary set of aristocratic tastes and attitudes. I
don’t deny this. How such a mindset developed in a middle class household is a
mystery to me. I sometimes wonder if we aren’t invested with the personas of
former people rather than a genetic expression of our ancestry.
Work I tend to despise is usually of the dreary,
monotonous variety. Mainly the kind of work I had to do in order to make a
living, pay rent and buy food and clothing. It was entirely menial, janitorial,
bussing tables, mowing lawns, and finally sorting and running mail for a
university mailing service. The reason I got stuck with this menial grind is
due to the fact I never rose academically beyond a bachelor’s degree in
English. A friend tells me the employees for the Boeing employment service used
to laugh whenever they received applications from English majors. I was advised
by more than one friend to omit my degree from job applications.
Had I continued academically and achieved a master’s
degree I may well have been able to secure a position teaching at a community
college, at least, if not at the fully fledged university level. This has been
a lifelong regret.
But I also need to remind myself of the dangers to a
writer in securing a higher academic degree. A certain language must be learned,
a certain framework and terminology, a brittleness, a mindset deleterious to
creativity is very much to be feared. I’ve seen the best minds of my generation
destroyed by dullness, by academic pomposity and stuffiness. The jargon they
had to learn, the social posturing that had to be maintained, sucked the blood
right out of their creative noggins and left a bone-dry skull with two hungry
eyeballs staring out as if in a stupor.
For many years I entertained the ambition of
becoming a writer whose books sold sufficiently to provide an income, if not
outright wealth. I saw it happen to writers whose work was eccentric and wild
and full of life and humor. Jack Kerouac, William Burroughs, Tom Robbins,
Richard Brautigan all wrote wildly original material and their books sold
robustly, into the millions. It was a credible ambition. That is, until the
early 80s, when the book publishing industry in the United States became
obsessed with profit at the expense of quality. The old style editors who took
the time and made the risks to put vital, original writing into the public
sphere no matter the cost, disappeared. The newer editors merely wanted to
publish celebrities and teenage romance novels. Anything for a buck. Quality
writing was for the small presses.
There is also the social aspect of work, the
humiliation, submission, bullying and injuries to one’s self-esteem that occur
in a competitive workplace. Thrust a number of individuals together in a
confined area and make them work as a team is a recipe for a high degree of
toxicity. Some people are better equipped to adapt to social environments than
others. Levels of competency differ. Levels of work intensity differ.
Efficiency, motivation and amiability are subjective, and consequently cannot
be manufactured or quantified. Some personalities are very easy to be around,
others are thorny and problematical, thin-skinned, adversarial, combative.
You can get a boss who’s a total sadist, a bully who
likes exerting his or her power. We often don’t have a choice over these
things. Psychotherapists glibly tell us that while we can’t control our
environment, we can choose how to adapt to it. Problem solved.
Bullshit.
Work is not pleasant. Genesis in the Old Testament
tells us it was Adam’s fault. It’s thanks to his transgression and eating the
apple he was told not to eat that got us all into trouble.
Because you have
listened to your wife
and have eaten from
the tree which I forbade you,
accursed shall be the
ground on your account.
With labour you shall
win your food from it
all the days of your
life.
It will grow thorns
and thistles for you,
none but wild plants
for you to eat.
You shall gain your
bread by the sweat of your brow
until you return to
the ground;
for from it you were
taken.
Dust you are, to dust
you shall return.
No
more free lunches. As soon as God booted Adam and Eve out of the garden, they
should have got busy and formed a union.
There
is a marvelous stoicism that is fully evident among the Lutherans and
Presbyterians of the Midwestern plains, and it is there that my father learned
his attitude toward work, an attitude that was partly resignation and partly
celebration. My father’s parents, my grandmother, grandfather (who died when I
was only seven and really didn’t get to know) and my granduncle worked a farm
in North Dakota. You can’t take a vacation from cows. They had to get up at
four in the morning seven days a week to milk the cows in often subzero
temperatures in an old wooden barn full of drafts and straw. I respect this.
But I do not share it.
I
can’t say exactly when the fever of poetry struck, but whenever or however it
happened, my relationship to the Protestant Work Ethic changed radically. I
devoted myself to the more hedonistic work ethic of the French symbolists,
which insisted on liberal amounts of leisure in an endeavor to coax inspiration
into the room, to awaken the muse from her slumber and ingratiate her charms
with the wine of idleness. Pulling on a quadruped’s teats in subzero
temperatures do not necessarily induce supernatural agencies to make one’s
fingers nimble with genius. Although it does help considerably to put food on
the table.
I
mock my frivolous impulses, but it’s true when I say that I am not lazy. I
enjoy losing myself in work. But it must be work I enjoy, and the work I enjoy
does not, alas, result in products that the public wants. The public does not
want poetry. Even poets do not want poetry. Poets want the poetry of dead
poets. This is poetry that they can learn from. It is not poetry that they have
to compete with. The dead do not require
- nor receive -
awards and grants. Their reward is in the heavens. Their fellowship is
in the afterlife. Poets are not hungry for the work of their living friends and
colleagues. This is competition. There is little offered at the Table of
Poetry. Everyone has to grub aggressively for their meal at that table. If a
colleague gets shoved from the bench and tumbles to the floor, so much the
better: that potato’s mine!
There
are other forms of work aside from employment, chores at home, laundry,
cooking, dishes to wash, cat litter box that needs cleaning, repairs made,
walls painted, molding caulked in the windows. This is tedious work, but
pleasures can be found in it. It can become a form of meditation. It can be an
occasion to let your mind drift, or an occasion to make discoveries about
everyday objects, their symmetries and shapes, powers and functions. The
texture of a towel, the polish of a plate, the tines of a fork, the curvature
of a spoon, can all be objects of fascination while performing a mundane task. It’s
possible to fall in love with a hammer. It’s possible to have a romance with a
feather duster. It’s possible to enjoy a conversation with a mop, or tango with
a broom. We see how water works to dissolve goop, how a sander can make a piece
of wood smooth as glass, how a pair of pliers can sheath and crimp wires or
extract a bent nail.
I’ve
installed sinks and built fences and once even changed the starter on a car.
But I never worked at anything long enough to develop what you could call a
skill, a marketable skill. I’ve always envied people who had skills to bring to
the marketplace. That’s where it’s at. Office work is deadening. I would hate
to sit in a cubicle all day à la Dilbert. That’s hellish. But to be a lawyer,
to argue a case in a courtroom, or be a doctor and heal someone of a crippling
disease must be one of the greatest feelings there is to be had in life. I’d be
glad just to be able to get somebody’s car up and running. As it is, I have to
be content with the one skill I have, which (apart from avoiding work I don’t
like), is to invent devices with words that do nothing but spit fire, throw
sparks, and dazzle the intellect with clouds of reverie.
No comments:
Post a Comment