Posted by Rachel on: 09.24.2007 /
I am currently reading Brian McLaren’s new book Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope (stay tuned for a book review) and I was struck by this passage:
Catholic philosopher Josef Pieper remarks that happiness is indeed to be had from things, but only things that are contemplated or appreciated. The pursuit of more things - to the point of “gaining the world” - distracts one from contemplating what one already has, and therefore guarantees that one lacks happiness…
So in this regard, gratitude becomes an act of defiant contemplation, expressing rebellion against the thousands of advertisements a year that tell you to want what you don’t have, and not appreciate what you already have. Instead, gratitude becomes a celebration of what you do have, an exercise in contentment. It turns possession-without-appreciation into possession-with-appreciation, which produces happiness.
Leave a Reply
Comment by: joe
1 09/24/07 8:05 AM | Comment Link |Dunno. Gratitude is unusual, but I’m not entirely sure it is subversive. Yes, gratitude is certainly better than woeful ignorance, but surely better still is not wanting things in the first place - but then that might be what he means. Sometimes (but not very often) I wish I was American so I could understand better what Americans mean.
To be honest, I probably don’t appreciate all I have. But then I’m always looking for something new, so maybe they’re not mutually exclusive categories.
I don’t really understand the third question so can’t really answer it.
Comment by: gooditsraining
2 09/24/07 11:19 AM | Comment Link |Nice post. I do think that gratitude is a subversive act within the United States social context of entitlement. More than that though, I think that every time someone participates in an exchange of things and doesn’t assign a monetary value or expectation to whatever is exchanged, that is also a subversive act, perhaps as subversive, if not more subversive, than gratitude.
For example, say, giving away food to people without expecting anything in return. By not selling the food, or attaching value to the food, by just giving it away because it is the right thing to do, well, by doing that you are engaging in what I think is an even more important act of “defiance”.
I am not talking about “charity” here. I am just talking about giving freely in defiance of capitalist logic. Maybe this comes from an attitude of gratitude?
personally, yeah, i don’t appreciate everything i have either….. what i am trying to do is.. i am trying….i am trying to participate in pragmatic acts of “defiance” as Mclaren calls it, that I genuinely believe are productively anti-capitalist. in other words, i want my “direct action” to be feeding people, giving to people or something else that is both positive and anti-capitalist. peace to you.
Comment by: gooditsraining
3 09/24/07 11:23 AM | Comment Link |clarification: when i say “without attaching value to the food” or thing being given, I mean monetary value. The point is we ought to take care of people. bye!
Comment by: joe
4 09/24/07 11:58 AM | Comment Link |I’m sorry, I meant to say that I’m not always looking for something new (in the context of buying stuff). Which kinda changes the context of my last couple of sentances.
Comment by: Rachel
5 09/24/07 5:55 PM | Comment Link |I do think that gratitude is subversive here in our US consumerist culture because our economy is built on the idea of continual growth. And the only way to sustain that economic growth is for consumers to purchase ever more goods and services. The vast majority of Americans live way above the level of basic needs so the economic system must continually create new wants and “needs.” We are continually be shown through advertising items that we previously didn’t even know existed and told why we should want them and how they will make our lives happier. And in the case of items we already possess there is always a new, improved, bigger, better version that we need to upgrade to.
So if we make the conscious decision to be grateful for and content with what we have, then that is an act of defiance against the economic system. If too many people adopted this radical attitude, our continual economic growth would be in serious jeopardy!
Comment by: Eliza
6 09/24/07 9:35 PM | Comment Link |Ah, yes. Rachel, I do agree with you and McLaren.
I experience (or at least aim for) possession-with-contentment. (Maybe I need to work on the “appreciation” part. Interesting idea. Sounds more positive than just “contentment”.)
I try to avoid ads as much as possible - also other “see, you could have more” enticements like those shows where they make over a deserving family’s house into a mouth-watering example of excess. Not that I really want all that - but it’s hard not to feel the green monster of envy when all that shiny new stuff is dangled in front of you.
The excess in ads and shows like that is also off-putting - think how much money goes into grabbing your attention & making you want this stuff. In commercial television, radio, & print, the consumer’s attention is the real commodity, being bought and sold for big, big bucks. Another ramification of capitalism, another place where you can “stick it to the man” by not playing into their game.
Anyone know anything about Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping? I’ve seen his/their book “What Would Jesus Buy?” for sale at my local chain grocery store, which seems ironic…
Comment by: Martin Gugino
7 09/25/07 10:11 AM | Comment Link |I will get started on it immediately.
Comment by: Rachel
8 09/25/07 6:26 PM | Comment Link |Eliza, I’d never heard of him before, but I found his website. It’s delightful!
Comment by: benjamin ady
9 09/26/07 6:44 PM | Comment Link |Rachel, this last week I read Field Notes from a catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert, just to get my head further around the global warming “debate”. It’s reasonably well written, and some of the stories and facts made me a bit crazy.
You really nailed it when you talked about how our economy is based on the idea of continual growth. Did you know that after pulling out of Kyoto and basically telling the rest of the world “Screw you–yeah, maybe we produce 25% of the greenhouse gases, even though we only represent 4% of the world’s population, but we don’t care–we don’t believe in global warming”, Bush and co proceeded to push a new measure for carbon emission. Instead of volume of carbon emission, which the rest of the world uses and which tells us the important thing, they created a measurement called carbon emission intensity, which is a ratio of carbon emission volume to economic activity. In other words, as long as we are producing more *stuff* per unit of greenhouse gas emission, we should be fine. As if our production of more stuff was somehow going to increase the total volume of atmosphere on the planet or something. completely outrageous, and so astoundingly american.
Comment by: April Terry
10 09/28/07 10:38 AM | Comment Link |I really love my iPod. Really. I love my iPod. I’m grateful for it, and I tell people that all the time. There are a lot of other things that I don’t need, though. I am not sure I need all those plastic bowls that I have in one of my cupboards, and I am pretty sure that I have some canned foods in the back of my pantry that I haven’t seen in ten years. I have stopped buying movies, but I like owning books. I even like to own books I haven’t read, and I can’t figure out why.
However, this year, since we bought our new home, we can’t afford to go shopping for pleasure anymore. Now, I am wondering why we ever did that…I think it was for lack of something to do.
What would happen if we all bought one less plastic bowl this year?
This post is just me laughing at myself for a moment because I am an agregious consumer and I sometimes don’t know if I have it in me to change. It’s not because I don’t want to, though…
Comment by: Rachel
11 09/28/07 1:25 PM | Comment Link |he-he! April, a friend of mine told me that “classics” are books that nobody wants to read and everybody wishes they had read.
Comment by: Janice
12 10/5/07 8:59 AM | Comment Link |I look forward to reading this book and appreciate the discussion.
One noteworthy comment - after 9/11, when Bush was making speeches, one thing he said was “America is still open for business”
THAT says a lot right there. In the face of death and global relations etc - THAT was the comment - open for business. Consumerism must go on!
:(