The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Kelly:

As I was reading it, I knew the epilogue would be a sticking point for many. But here's the way I saw it: Harry has had the crummiest, hardest life possible for sixteen years. Fair enough that we get to see he has nineteen years of normal in reward. It matters that Hogwarts continues on as it did when Harry first went there -- that's really what he was saving with all his Voldemort-bashing (it was quite revelatory when he recognizes that Dumbledore, Riddle, Snape and Harry found their first true homes at Hogwarts).

Xopher said "Kelly, that was TNH's point. You won't find a guy who thinks he needs to be controlled; instead, he thinks everyone ELSE needs to be controlled."

I think she was making a larger point, that those who crave power always look for the control angle (church, laws, ethics) and dictate...or propagandize...in an effort to control group behavior, ala 1984. And I was (clumsily) observing that few will admit they feel they need to be controlled, although clearly a large majority of the population feels more comfortable with nice sounding propaganda and black and white rules that can be shredded with one or two applications of logic (Thou Shalt Not Kill...except...except...). The goal of a leader is to "drug" the masses into near blind obedience, because anything else seems chaos: a hundred voices are *loud*, never mind millions of voices).

Painini said: "It isn't about not wanting a voice. It's about finishing the day with enough energy to do something so abstract and stressful as speaking truth to power. And then being heard, of course... well, let us say it's a very uncertain way to expend your limited individual power if you really want, you know, any certainty of accomplishing something."

Is it? I agree everyone can't care about everything, the world is too big. But when you care about something, and you think you have insight, you want a chance to share it (under the theory that the world benefits from your being able to speak up). I am, perhaps, overly influenced by what was accomplished by people taking back their voice during the Civil Rights Movement because I grew up during those times. It took tremendous courage to use our voices back then. Many people couldn't speak up because they were so used to not using their voice, that found they had none.

I observed this phenomena at a job I had a decade ago--I, a lowly part time secretary, always used my voice, while others, who were more vital to the mission of the organization, didn't dare make a public peep (instead, they came to me and let me channel their voices). I urged them to speak up (being socially clueless, I asked specifically, "Why don't you just say that at staff meeting."). They couldn't even articulate why not (and these were smart women, who could articulate a *lot*, with a boss who actually listened and had long since proved she wanted to hear the voices--she promoted me, after all :-). After a while, I clued in to the fact that many people will expend more energy to convince someone else to speak what they could have spoken with less time and effort involved, overall.

I can't say which is more frustrating, though--speaking up and being ignored, or just giving up your voice altogether--because I lack the social grace to keep quiet :-)

Kelly

TNH says: "Here's a simple test: Raise your hand if you agree that you're one of those people who need to be cozened and controlled and manipulated for the good of society.

Anybody raised their hand yet? No? Funny, they never do."

Wrong question to ask. See the hands wave in the air when you ask who agrees that *other* people need to be cozened and controlled and manipulated for the good of society :-\

RE: Unions. What they get for their members nowadays is often invisible (it usually involves not sliding backwards), therefore hard to appreciate. I've had reason of late to think about what unions offer to white collar employees (specifically faculty...talk about herding cats...). A voice (faint, and often disdained even by the members who don't bother to exercise their right to vote for the people who lead the unions, or to be informed as to what is in their union contract, and how the people at the table through the years have won...or lost...them rights they take for granted).

University hierarchy resembles business hierarchy, and over the years the lean business machines where the president/CEO knew most of the layers of employees personally has disappeared (Ben & Jerry were my heroes for a good business model...but they couldn't make it work when they left). This has one devastating effect: those employees the CEO/president is shielded from knowing personally become liabilities (picture hungry open mouth birdies in a nest). Rather than being appreciated for the work they do, they are denigrated for not doing it faster, smarter, and cheaper (while, conversely, the CEO and those he/she knows get bigger bucks, less accountability, and several layers of high wage assistants to help shield them even further from the people who actually do the work of the business).

I think it may be an inevitable cycle, judging by the historic cycles of the past. Perhaps it's genetic? Because most people don't seem to want a voice--it's way too dangerous. Easier to blame those in power, as if our silence hasn't given them carte blanche.

I always wonder what the human race would need to evolve into a race that would simply say "No." when people like Attila, Hitler, or any of the petty dictators past and present suggest a nice little round of genocide.

Comment statistics for Kelly on the Making Light blog

Total: 3 comments. View all these comments on a single page.