Jacob Grier on the Many Faces of "Intellectual" Work; Or, Living the Life You Love

Jacob Grier just posted a lovely essay (that I bet he wrote off the top of his head, damn it. Why can't I do that??) on the pleasures of the "working" life. "Working" as in what used to be called "manual labor."

His jumping off point is this essay in last Sunday's New York Times magazine. It hit home with me, as does Jacob's essay. I've had what can only be described as an, ahem, diverse work history. I endured a mercifully short-lived career doing clerical work. Quel nightmare: I can't stand the 8 to 5 bit; hated, and I mean HATED, the office politics crapola. (This was waaay back in early 1970s, when men ruled the office and women, working their menial jobs, clawed at each other and hoped the men would whisk them away.) (For more on this, see "Mad Men.")

But I spent far more years in "manual" work. Blue collar work. (Or, as the sociologists call it when said work is being performed by a woman, "pink collar" work. Ugh. What a phrase.) I waited tables for years (about fifteen total). Worked for a city street department, mostly running a jack hammer (at which I was quite good).

Worked as a union carpenter for four years. I was (and to a certain extent still am) fabulously strong. Need someone to haul two sheets of plywood up two flights of stairs? No problem! All that waitressing also came in handy: I had far better organizational skills than the men I worked with.

But, I discovered, I had zero spatial skills and was a lousy carpenter. What learned from all those years was this:  I was bored. I had nothing against the work, and absolutely nothing against the people I worked with. Indeed, to this day, I miss hanging out with busboys and dishwashers.

I had to face facts: I was slowly, but surely, dying. The work was not me. I don't function well in "groups." (And still don't.) I am bored by work that requires using my hands (unless it's cooking). Have no patience for fixing stuff, yard work, etc. I mean, if I have to do it, no problem. I can do it. Hand me a screwdriver and I'll figure out what needs to be done.) (The tool, I mean, not the drink, which is icky beyond words.

So I went off to college, thinking I'd find my true calling. And, after a few fits and starts, did. (See the bio and "My Life As A Loser")

The point, such as it is, is this: I admire and appreciate "work" in all its forms, but understand that many people indavertently end up doing work they hate. The most painful part of teaching at university was dealing with 19-year-olds who'd been shoved into college by well-meaing adults, when what those kids wanted to do was cook, or repair engines, or make things, or paint walls, or whatever.

What they wanted to do, in short, was the kind of work that modern American society too often scorns, but which is, for many people, satisfying and engaging and creative.

The good news is that some people figure it out. They strike their own path, regardless of what others expect. They figure out what makes their brains --- and their souls --- happy.

So to Jacob I say: Here's to you. If I were in Portland, I'd raise a well-made drink, preferabably one created by you, in your honor.

Spending Less on Alcohol = Evidence of Smarter People?

This from Jeremiah McWilliams at Lager Heads on the ways in which economic woes are changing consumer spending on alcohol.

The short version is that people are spending less --- ie, hunting for "value --- and that they don't plan to revert to old habits once the recession ends.

I've got another take on it: maybe people are simply coming to their senses. (No pun intended.) Let's face it: in the past decade or so, alcohol makers have come up with zillions of ways to part fool from their money. "Premium" vodkas. Appletinis. Nauseating "mixers." Other wierd shit-in-a-bottle-that-tastes-horrible-but-costs-lots-and-therefore-must-be-good.

And of course the alcohol makers came up with the stuff because, ya know, there were plenty of fools (armed with credit cards) ready to be parted from said money.

The report also notes that people are spending less on alcohol when they go out. But again: perhaps people are simply wising up. I mean, did anyone NEED to visit bars with a $300 cover charge?

Answer: No. (*1) So --- perhaps "reduced spending" on alcohol is simply evidence of increased wisdom.

_____

*1: I'm reminded of a scene in a Sopranos episode when AJ complains that he's always broke because he goes out every night and the Big Name champagne he's expected to buy every at nightclubs sets him back a few hundred bucks.

A Guy After My Own (Fat) Heart

"Fat" is so unhip. So so so unhip. Just like me. That's not why I like fat. (After all, what's the point of trying to be unhip? The minute you try, you're not, if you know what I mean.)

I like fat because fat is good. Good for you; good to eat. Sounds weird, eh? Especially in these don't-eat-that-it'll-kill-you days. But the human body wants and needs fat. Just like it wants and needs cholesterol.

Of course what it wants/needs is REAL fat and cholesterol, not the fake shit that'll kill you. And which does not taste good.

So I'm delighted to find a kindred spirit in the form of Zachary Cohen, who urges us all to eat more fat. Plus, his blog is one of those only-in-the-age-of-the-internet things: a blog devoted to the "emerging American meal."

Although to be precise, the blog is itself a spinoff of a television program Zachary is producing, "Farm to Table." Good stuff all around (especially for me, who am spending much of my time thinking about American food, albeit in a historical perspective). Give it a look.

Media Meltdown = Chaos = Innovation?

This is one of those follow-the-thread things: interesting commentary/reporting about newspapers from Dr. Denny at Scholars and Rogues, who quotes from a post written by Dan Conover, who engages in some fascinating future-casting. Dr. Denny quotes one of Conover's main points, and so will I:

A client looking to invest in media asked me earlier this month for advice on what might replace failing newspapers. My response? There are plenty of interesting ideas in play, but the first meaningful test won't come until a major American city loses its only metro daily. So wait.

Methinks he has a point. Indeed, his point is so obvious that I suspect all of us have overlooked it. Anyway, take a look at his entire post if you have time. He's gone waaaaaaaaaaaay beyond the "how we gonna charge for online content" debate and into some serious thinking about the actual technologies (intellectual and otherwise) that might be used to create new models of "journalism." As Conover says

Journalists tend to think of the future in terms of their jobs, and from that perspective "What's next?" is another round of layoffs. Sorry, folks. Do the math. But take a slightly longer view and "What's next?" is a decade of experimentation, opportunity and chaos

Make sure to hang on to the end of his essay for his cartoon cartoon rendition of the Media Meltdown of 2008. And when you're finished with all of that, check out the excellent comments posted in response to Conover. So --- whaddya waiting for? Get on over to Scholar and Rogues and Xark and get reading!

In Defense Of . . .

Twitter. Best one I've read yet. Money quote:

Kafka would have had a Twitter feed! And so would have Hemingway, and so would have Virgil, and so would have Sappho. It's a tool for writing. Heraclitus would have had a f***ing Twitter feed.

Tip o' the mug to Alexis Madrigal, who tweeted a link that took me to this, but I ended up there instead. (If that makes sense.) (Makes sense in the e-world, right?) (Which is another way of saying that Twitter is also good to read.)

Craft Brewing: All Numbers, All the Time

I'm way late with this, but last week the Washington Post ran an article about the numbers game/turmoil roiling the waters of craft brewers these days. Tip o' the mug to Andy Crouch for the pointer.