When tenure at a job was 20+ years, and a house could be paid off in 10 years, it made a ton of sense.
The fact that such an idea is absurd now is not because the idea itself is absurd, but because how we have structured our economy is absurd.
People shouldn't be wasting their lives commuting.
In older books they have kids and the dad coming back home to eat lunch together! Heck I have friends who grew up in countries where 20-30 years ago that was still the norm.
indeed. But in the short term, we gotta do what we gotta do. Despite the RTO mandates, no one in power seems interested in making walkable communities to make the commute easier, nor anything else involving semi-efficient public transportation. I am already fortunate enough to live in a house, I'm not multiplying my rent by 2x+ and reducing my QoL by 3x+ just to satisfy some real estate owners (not that I have an in-office job right now).
So he's playing both sides, like a true philosopher. The simple fact is, work for survival sake is often mind-numbing and soul destroying. Finding work you have a passion for that creates a positive impact in the world is something everyone should strive for, even the wealthy trust fund kids that don't need to lift a finger.
>> The simple fact is, work for survival sake is often mind-numbing and soul destroying.
This would be the government work. It isnt there to satisfy, it's there to keep a roof over your head. IF it was fun they would not PAY you would they?
>> In place of the old pleasures demanding intelligence and personal initiative, we have vast organizations that provide us with ready-made distractions - distractions which demand from pleasure-seekers no personal participation and no intellectual effort of any sort. To the interminable democracies of the world a million cinemas bring the same stale balderdash. There have always been fourth-rate writers and dramatists; but their works, in the past, quickly died without getting beyond the boundaries of the city or the country in which they appeared. To-day, the inventions of the scenario-writer go out from Los Angeles across the whole world.
The point he's making is to find that passion elsewhere, make music, play sports ... DO rather than CONSUME. And that everyone should do this in all things. These are the "pleasures" and they should be enriching you via your participation not your passivity.
>> Finding work you have a passion for that creates a positive impact in the world is something everyone should strive for
No one wants to work at the DMV, no one dreamed that in their child hood. But we need people to do it... he's speaking out against them going home and sucking down film, tv, tiktok rather than DOING things that enrich their minds and bodies.
>> So he's playing both sides, like a true philosopher.
> No one wants to work at the DMV, no one dreamed that in their child hood. But we need people to do it... he's speaking out against them going home and sucking down film, tv, tiktok rather than DOING things that enrich their minds and bodies.
That same DMV work + household chores + family would not give time and energy enough for someone to participate actively in whatever kind of activity by the end of the day. I agree mostly that doing things is better than just consuming, but unfortunately the bigger part of the population just aren't able to do it.
>>> That same DMV work + household chores + family would not give time and energy enough for someone to participate actively in whatever kind of activity by the end of the day.
Does no one read any more?
This is the very nonsense his essay rages against.
You leave work and:
Buy yogurt on the way home, make sure your kid does piano practice and watch soccer on TV.
-- OR --
You buy milk on the way home, make yogurt with your kid, play soccer in the back yard and then amuse yourself by playing music in the evening.
Same time investment, less money spent better engagement and an enriched life.
Is it just me, or do all these photos have some odd sexual tension in them? Perhaps its societal conditioning, but I don't seem to have the same response from modern days ads (even though objectively modern ads are more sexualized).
A related question to ask is what takes more effort? Adding that tension? Or removing it? What is the baseline state of the fictional people in these ads, assuming they were like real people?
Many seem forced and weird, like the couple having a romantic evening playing Atari 2600 Combat. Maybe it's the forced closeness so they can fit in the picture while doing pogfaces?
