A Wilderness of Mirrors


These with a thousand small deliberations
Protract the profit of their chilled delirium,
Excite the membrane, when the sense has cooled,
With pungent sauces, multiply variety
In a wilderness of mirrors. What will the spider do,
Suspend its operations, will the weevil
Delay? De Bailhache, Fresca, Mrs. Cammel, whirled
Beyond the circuit of the shuddering Bear
In fractured atoms. Gull against the wind, in the windy straits
Of Belle Isle, or running on the Horn,
White feathers in the snow, the Gulf claims,
And an old man driven by the Trades
To a sleepy corner.

Tenants of the house,
Thoughts of a dry brain in a dry season.

T.S. Eliot, from Gerontion

I work out out a local gym every other day or so and I am always amazed at what I see around me each time I go. There are mirrors everywhere, as if the point were vanity instead of health. This is why so many people I know avoid these places. Who wants to compete against all of these young bodies?

The narcissism is only the start, though. Or, rather, the narcissism is, uh, only a reflection of a more profound self-absorption. I’m not talking about the usual complaints of isolation: everyone alone on their “equipment” listening to their MP3 players. Actually, I wish more people would use MP3 players.

The problem, rather, is that people seem to not have a clue about how to be social. The gym itself is quite small but it has plenty of windows and it’s rarely crowded. So I often work out alone with the lights out. It’s not dark at all, especially on a sunny day.

I like the idea of saving energy, for one thing, and the natural light is much more pleasant than the fluorescents, which I swear I can see flickering. Any time another person comes in, however, they inevitably flip on the light, without acknowledging me in the slightest way.

I was raised to believe that this was a pretty rude thing to do, but it’s only the start of it. There’s one women who comes several times a week to work out and then shower and get dressed, apparently for work. She uses a small, brightly lit bathroom off of a medium-sized room that people use for warm ups and stretches.

The other day, after pretzeling away on the Swiss Ball for ten minutes or so I bunced up to hit the elliptical and flipped the light off on the way out. Five minutes later she marched out to the main room to demand, angrily, that I not turn out the light when she was in the bathroom.

Now, I might be able to sympathize with a women suspicious of darkness in a gym. Still, it did seem odd that she took such affront, as if no logic but hers could make sense. She wasn’t showering in the dark or anything. She’s not the worst of the bunch, though, by any means. That honor goes to Macho Man.

The worst Macho Man experience is when he has shown up before you. First, every light in the gym, ffrom front to back and often including the bathroom, is turned on. I suspect that he warms up with light switches. Second, the television is blaring CMT and the stereo is blasting some awful classic rock station.

Meanwhile, Macho Man is on the treadmill, huffing and puffing loudly, running with heavey clumping strides, sometimes giving off sharp, dramatic grunts. He has the TV turned up loud because he can’t hear it over his own noise. Then, after about ten minutes, he hops off– that’s no metaphor– and trots off to the weight room.

He has the stereo turned up because he has to hear it from across the gym. Next, after another ten minutes, he comes bounding back into the room and hops on the stationary bike for another ten or fifteen minute round of thump, huff, puff, and grunt. Sometimes he brings his friend and they do this routine together.

It reminds me of how certain people drive so recklessly in bad weather, seemingly unaware that they are risking the lives of other people. Luckily, all that is at risk here is irritation. Well, Macho Man might be causing some sort of unpredictable havoc on his body. He’s pretty young though, so I suppose the clichés about invunerability apply.

The owner of the gym is very differant. I often see her on Saturday mornings, when she comes in to clean. She always says hello and wants to start a conversation even if I am clearly listening to my MP3 player and straining away at the end of a long work out. To her, though, it’s a scoial situation and she at least wants to make the effort.

And there”s the older couple who come in whatever clothes they happen to be wearing at the time… They certainly didn’t buy any special shoes. There’s something refreshing in the fact that they don’t know the proper costume. But it is also very odd to watch them take truns struggleing on the stationary bike, both in ill fitting jeans and flannel shirts.

Pviledge (Me)me

So after skimming scores of these things this week, I’m left wondering: How is it that so many people can simultaneously disdain the poor and working class while also pretending to live in solidarity with “real” people who had to work for everything that they have? To argue that while they simultaneously enjoyed a great deal of material privilege growing up, they are not “privileged” people because their parents worked hard for what they had?

How, in this age of multi-media and instantaneous communication, have so many people grown up oblivious to the circumstances of other people’s lives?

And in the end, how do we explain all of this defensiveness among those who clearly have attained the Great American Dream?

Why has this struck such a collective nerve?

Jane Van Galen, Education and Class, January 4, 2008

A few days ago, I lamented the absence of more diverse voices among the gigabites of text generated by the Privilege Meme.

I stand humbly corrected by the The Paper Chase and My Private Casbah bloggers, who enrich the discourse with complex dimensions of gender, race, rurality, and geography.

Jane Van Galen, Education and Class, January 9, 2008

I am always a little hesitant to discuss things like this– memes, in all honesty, often just look like short term fads to me. Still, I think Van Galen’s posts are worth reading, and the links are worth following as well. Her first post is a somewhat anguished summary of the initial conversation (via comments) on the Social Class and Quakers blog. Her second post offers a small reprieve from the bleakness.

The original idea is a simple list of things that illustrate a certain kind of material privilege, such as books in the home, mom or dad with a college degree, a relative who’s a professional, and so on. Much of the talk on the SCQ blog seems to reflect the great American myth of the self-made man, now updated to include women, I guess. Everyone wants to claim that because they or their family worked hard, they were not well off, etc.

Oddly, I think this list makes my family seems much less privileged than we were! My father had a college degree, but not my mom. We had only a few books in the home, but none of my relatives were educated professionals. We had original art on the wall because my Uncle Elbert painted when he was young. In fact, there are very few other items on the list I could claim.

I think I feel privileged now and look back on my childhood as relatively affluent for several reasons. In some senses my father, despite working as an accountant, never became middle class culturally, in the negative sense. We were never really involved in the consumer rat race of the 60s in this sense. So, for example, when he gave me his 1964 Dodge Dart I thought it was the coolest thing in the world. I thought the kids with the new cars had it all wrong.

I also think that when I look back now I have a wider set of reference points. I lived in the Philippines, so I have a good idea of what poverty is like. I lived in a neighborhood with good roads; I got all of my vaccines when I needed them to go to school; I had my own room. (That was mostly because of gender: my three sisters had to share.) I also know a lot more about the kind of poverty my father faced as the son of tenant farmer in Mississippi in the 1920s and 30s.

I also know the poverty of my mother’s family, living in Louisiana. This too, gets complicated, though. We were immersed, as kids, by Cajun culture, which is all about being very smart about not having much at all. We ate all of the foods that the rich folks disdained, as the cliché goes; well, until the 1970s or so when our culture got commercialized. We all lived in one giant extended family, again, at least until we older. Our real privilege was a pride in who we were, utterly separate from what we owned.

Iowa: Edwards Takes on Corporate Greed

“Everything about America is threatened today … this is an epic struggle for the future of America,” Edwards told the cheering crowd. “Corporate greed and the very powerful use their money to control Washington and this corrupting influence is destroying the middle class.”

Marc Cooper, HuffingtonPost.com. Posted December 29, 2007.

As Paul Krugman recently confirmed in his column for the New York Times, Obama is attempting to compare labor unions and progressive interests with groups that advocate for corporations as he criticizes Edwards, those recent Iowa ads and tries to link Edwards to Washington lobbyists.

But by doing just this, Obama glaringly leaves the door wide open on his own involvement with big business lobbyists and more importantly his denial of what’s at stake in this era of rampant corporate greed.

Christine Escobar, HuffingtonPost.com, Posted December 30, 2007

I am not sure who I will vote for, either in the upcoming Illinois primary or in the election next November. In all honesty, the Democratic slate seems to be an embarrassment of riches and the Republican gang simply embarrassing. According to Glassbooth, Dennis Kucinich is closest to my views.

I often vote impractically, so to speak, rather than pragmatically, so I may go with the statistical match in the end. If I were in Iowa this week, though, I would be voting for John Edwards. Senator Clinton may the toughest dog in the pack, and Senator O’Bama the most symbolically interesting, but they are both too rooted in the old corporate Democratic system.

If Edwards is nominated and then elected, he will have to face these same pressures to conform, and the same need to organize anti-corporate coalitions in Congress, but he at least has a professional history of fighting corporate greed and power. He seems to be the only one that knows that, say, Greenpeace and the AFL-CIO are not ‘special interests’ in the same way as, say, GM or Ford. He has the best chance to end the war quickly, and the least likely to fight to preserve the for-profit health care system.