The Cheese, The Cow and The Oak

You've probably been subjected to them. You know them, I'm sure you do. Probably you even have a soft, foam stressball with a cow painted on it, or one with the shape of a cheese (I used to have one of those, loved it and lost it somewhere), courtesy of some "Managing with Efficiency" seminar or a program put up by the HHRR people. Yeah, those who can't update your information, fuck up your vacations, piss on your salary category but are more than happy organizing kindergarden activities for a bunch of lazy suits. They are the modern tales, bound up in paperback with plenty of drawings and loads of empty space on the pages, chapters "subchaptered" in 2-3 paragraph bits to ease the reading, because lets be honest, most of the people reaching out for these wouldn't survive a Marcel Proust kind of composition, nor the writer of these "best sellers" could actually manage to develop its thoughts any further (and if he or she could, that would be saved for the seminars, where said writer would appear under the generic title of Guru).

Yesterday I've got online to watch the live stream of a twit-friend of mine. The guy was there on time, pouring Héroes del Silencio upon his viewers, which was cool, and then dedicated his show to talk about a book called "The Cow". At first I thought it would be some sort of modern literature piece, but it turned out to be a self-help book, a modern tale with a modern lesson embedded. This lesson was on the lines of kicking out of your life those things that make it comfortable, and don't let you evolve, but keep you in mediocrity. The message didn't sit well with me.

This similar line of thinking is being nowadays pushed through many stories of the sort, basically pushing people towards "change" while working quite hard in diminishing old values. In "The Cow" a poor family's cow, its one means of subsistence, is exterminated by a wiseman, and a year later the family leaves in prosperity. Why? Because when being left with nothing they are forced to find their way and improve themselves. In another story the Oak tree is broken because, unlike the bamboo canes, which bend at the slightest breeze, placing the value of flexibility upon firmness. Bound in colors, filled with simple stories that attempt at being "compelling" and "catching", with fairytales of call center bosses realizing how much better change sits with its employees, where proverbial napkins become the start of a multimillion company that will make all its change oriented, determinated, and flexible "thinking outside the box" partners very happy. The call bids readers and peers to jump into the void, accept change happily, cut strings and become small enterpreneurs, because that's where happiness is.

But what's behind it? Why such a drive behind forcing change upon people? "Be proactive, not reactive", many of the slogans say. "Bring solutions, not problems", others say. Perhaps someone would care to explain to me why is so bad to check the landscape before taking actions? Because that's what many "reactive" people do. And why should you bring solutions? You apply solutions and bring problems when you've got to the point of not finding solutions. Unless, of course, the point is to send the people into the mined fields under the "proactive" banner to defuse them, so that those sending them can "reactively" walk the safe path, or cover up the inneficiente of the boss by making the workers bring in solutions, and so make the boss' job aside from their own. First of all, people must understand that just because something is in a book, it doesn't mean it's true, or right at all. It doesn't stop amazing me how people today can be shepparded around through tales, just like in the old age, and yet it seems to be the most effective way to introduce ideas into people's minds.

Second of all, when reading or receiving an advice, such shouldn't be taken at face value, but be analized, valued, balanced and put in perspective regarding one's values, principles and circumstances.

Truth is that "change" doesn't guarantee any land of milk and honey, but actually can put you in a worse position than that were you are now, so before you change, you should take in consideration as many factors as you can, both negative and positive from your current situation and what could happen in the event of change, and weight them, decide whether the change is worth the cost of it or not.

In my experience, often these tales are used to keep people obedient, keep them from rebelling. For instance, in our company we were all showered with "change" speeches before a truly disasterous structural change was performed that left us far more inoperating than what we already were. Often these "change" and "find your own path, Grasshopper" tales are the prequel of a series of lay offs. I mean, lets not go so far: at the begining of this year IBM was enticing its workers to move to India, talking about the entiching experience it would be. New environment full of possibilities, an exotic culture, rich and ancient,exotic foods and scents... and it conveniently neglected to mention that wages would be significantly reduced because it was all a scheme to cut costs. The company decides to shed off some costs, which usually means letting go people, because oddly no other costs can be reduced as well as people (not to mention the tricky maneuver of laying off people and rehire some with a much lower wage, less vacation days and less benefits), and so they put up this "You can be your own boss and become successful" sales line, pay them some money and send them on their merry way.

Out of curiosity, how many "successful people" have these tales produced? Because I have not encountered many of them. I have had the chance to meet some of those who have "taken the chance" and after many years of looking over the shoulder at employed fellows, and the way the frown their noses at those who have stayed with the same company for years, and yet them, still chasing these "dreams" jump from unfinished project to pipe-dream-project in a wild goose chase of a happiness that eludes them with every step. The reasons of those settled comfortably in a position anywhere lower than that of Donald Trump are "mediocre conformists" who will never get nowhere, who are unable to evolve, while their stubborn chase for something that simply remains out of reach is "drive". Never reaching actual peace and happiness becomes something of a "value" as it feeds ambitions and the constant moving and improving to be better and better and better. But then, aren't these newly forged values something of an excuse as well? Like "it's okay if I'm not completely (happy) satisfied now, because I'm improving"?

Indeed there's conformist people who rather bitch than do something fix the things that keep them in misery, but there are actually people who are happy and don't want to change that. If you are already happy, why do you need to be "happier"? Isn't that like discarding the small joys of life because there are bigger ones to chase?

I consider myself a happy person, and I believe I have everything I need. Have also met with people who irradiate happiness while living with great simplicity. People from communes, who posses only a few things, have little online contact but greater spitirual and intellectual lives. Through the trip to Venado Island also met artists who have admitted to live constantly struggling with the financial part of their lives, and yet they can find joy in the most simple and beautiful things in life. When they think about using up orange peels to make jewelry, it is not for sales, but for giving away, for themselves, or to teach for free, for amusement, for the joy of helping those who are in need.

Money has a part in their lives, but not a predominant part. Social and financial success has no appeal and no meaning to them. That's for the "corporative spirits".

In all honesty, I've never seen any ambition-driven person be as happy as the free-spirits I've met. Elitist as I am, I've rather seen ambition-driven folks piecing up the big shells of the life they want to have, they want to fill, while carrying the chipped, battered signs of the humble origins they wish to leave behind even if dressing them up with banners of their glory. The words of Hitler come to my mind now, as he mentions in Mein Kampf how the bourgeoise class looks down in repulsion to the lower class even if they recognize them as their origin, as a way o make a point about where ambition can take people, and yet never embracing them. (My Hyne, I'm quoting Adolf Hitler. Priceless. Really.)

But then, is happiness only in the free-spirit life? No.


Happiness is not in a way of life, in a bank account, in sacrifice, in a religion, in a political party, in power, in a car, in a house, a modern fairytale, a best seller or a spouse. Happiness is within you, so be true. Change if you believe that would help, but change what really needs to be change, and don't change for changing. But above all, be aware of your own happiness, and when you have it, enjoy it.

Happiness comes in all sizes and shapes, so take also the smaller and weirder ones too. They are like chocolate: all awesome!