Lesley Oldaker's "The Non-Conformist"
It’s evident anywhere you look, it surrounds you, binds you, suffocates you. Doesn’t it feel weird that every song sounds the same? That every movie follows the same structure? That there is no innovation?
Let’s take Netflix’s recent adaptation of the renowned manga Death Note. Instead of a true adaptation, with respect for the source material and its characters, Netflix decided to push out a bland movie about some wimpy edgy kid with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, with the same motivations every other wimpy kid in mainstream entertainment has. It’s difficult to find quality content among all the rabble being thrown at our faces. Rehashes and terrible remakes are abundant while the truly good has to be dug out or found among indie titles not controlled by mainstream media corporations and “The Academy”. If they’re going to pick what you watch, read or listen to for you; why do they always choose the worst?
This, my friends, it the Cult of the Mediocre, the cancer destroying our society, and what prompted Ayn Rand to write one of her greatest works: The Fountainhead.
There's a pretty decent movie adaptation. Source: IMDb
In the novel, Howard Roark, an architecture student who was just expelled for not wanting to conform to the norm and not surrendering his artistic vision, must face a world that rejects him like the human body rejects bacteria. While a fellow student with no other talent whatsoever than copying and pleasing graduates with honors and is offered scholarships and jobs at important firms, Roark must fight his way through poverty and rejection to perfect his craft, to develop his vision. While famous socialist leader Ellsworth Toohey spreads ideas of conformity and subjugation to society, of abandoning progress and innovation for stability and humility; Roark must defend himself from those who would put him down and continue erecting revolutionary structures that challenge society’s mediocre wishes of following norms and canons. While society decides to grind to a halt, Roark must push through the mass of people to reach the future on the other side of the self-imposed limits of society. It’s the eternal struggle of the followers, those that shape their lives in direct relation to what society wants, against the truly independent, answering only to themselves and their objectives.
What I thought
I can clearly remember the day when I finished reading The Fountainhead. I got up from my sofa, walked to my window and, as I looked over the city, I had an Eureka! moment. It was like a key had turned in my brain and thoughts were flowing in without stopping. I had always known there was something terribly wrong with society, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Now I knew: They were followers. Both the conformist and the nonconformist in my society were completely dependent on what media told them. Not only in my small corner of the world, but in the world at large. Mediocrity was being promoted to never before seen heights, and media had full control over what everyone around the world was thinking, in real time, thanks to the Internet and social media. I realized that what I’d seen slowly happening in my country for years was also happening around the world, and I knew how that story would end.
What I've seen
Like Rand, who saw mediocrity take over Russia during Stalin’s rise to power, I’ve seen my own country, Venezuela, fall to the same disease. After Hugo Chavez Frias came into the presidency on the shoulders of a working class who felt abandoned by politicians and society at large, he immediately began implementing policies that on a surface level sought to preserve our culture and our values, but in reality just exalted the poor and the mediocre. It wasn’t about protecting the poor from the rich, but protecting the poor from becoming rich. Chavez fanned the flames of resentment and hate against “the oppressors”, understood as the wealthy, the enterprises and the U.S.A. at large, while at the same time establishing his own form of oppression. He chose the most mediocre people he could find and started putting them in positions of power, with only absolute loyalty as a requirement. He took farms and gave it to his associates, now there’s no wheat and no corn. He took factories and gave it to his croons, now there’s close to zero national production and we import everything. He took building projects in all mayor cities and gave it to his subordinates, and there they sit, not only unfinished but repurposed by “the people” as miserable living spaces controlled by criminal organizations.
"Actual quote from notorious regime headhoncho Hector Rodriguez"
Yes, there is two ways to see the Cult of the Mediocre in action. One, mainstream media. The second? Communist countries.
What I think
When the mediocre rule and the talented and hard-working are kept from developing their abilities and projects, societies begin collapsing, they crumble, they rot from within. Like water, societies must flow in order to avoid becoming stale and stagnated.
There’s a quote by Irish author Edmund Burke that’s become quite popular in my country: “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing”. Everywhere around the world, there are battles being fought against mediocrity. From activists like Malala to actors like Mads Mikkelsen, everyone who is giving something their all, everyone who seeks to be the best they can be and build the best world they can think of: They’re all the fountainheads of the world, from which innovation and progress stem despite the efforts of the mediocre to not face their own shortcomings by bringing everyone else down with them. It comes down to seeing ourselves as something great, full of potential, and assuming the responsibilities that come with such greatness.
We can fight back, in our lives, in our societies, in Steemit.
Afterword
Hello steemers! Here’s the first part of a series of articles I plan on writing. “Living Philosophy” seeks to present philosophical proposals or questions and relate them to my own life, therefore making them more real, more tangible and especially more entertaining.
This first article is a bit convoluted, I know, but I was quite excited and had a lot to say so everything kind of crashed together to create this.
If you liked it, subscribe for more! If you didn’t, comment and tell me why! In any case, thanks for reading! Read you soon.
I am replying because I am interested in the topic, but I think it is important to address a point you didn't mention about this idea of communism and patronage creating and perpetuating mediocrity.
This is the definition of patronage (in a political context) on Wikipedia, which is not a source I always use, but their definition in this case is on point.
'Political patronage is the dispensation of favours or rewards such as public office, jobs, contracts, subsidies, prestige or other valued benefits by a patron (who controls their dispensation) to a client.'
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/patronage defines it in a political context as:
The power to control appointments to office or the right to privileges.
‘recruits are selected on merit, not through political patronage’
Synonyms
power of appointment, right of appointment, favouritism, nepotism, partisanship, partiality, preferential treatment
With the above definitions in mind, consider that part of what wins favors from others is the ability to relate, communicate, compromise, and to be innovative, not just at a craft, skill, or in a field of study and practice, but as a human being interacting with others, is what wins favors for some people. I'd argue that if you think skill and vision should be rewarded, those who are good at getting what they want and need from others with their words, their solidarity with others, their community involvement, deserve their rewards more often than you may at first perceive.
Now, I am not a fan of mediocrity, or of the fear of change. But if you look deeper, you may find it isn't mediocrity you are battling. It could, in fact, be the perception of insiders vs. outsiders. Why? Because as you pointed out, appointments were made in Venzuela that did not seem to be given to those who could do the best work in that position, who did not create the greatest good for the greatest number of Venezuelan citizens. But wait...isn't the greatest good for the greatest number a pretty communist leaning principle? and wouldn't the actions taken by those in power that benefited the economy at large (the largest common denominator, the populace, those who make up the country) be communist in principle, even if carried out through capitalism, or some other system? The definition of doing a good job in government that makes the most sense is contributing to a flourishing economy, good disaster response, savvy weighing of contingencies...basically, when most of the country is prospering and improving in a peaceful way, the government is praiseworthy. In a cut and dried view of a for profit market, the highest dollar is the measure of excellence. In a situation where equality does not grant access to the likelihood of being named to office on merit, it becomes every applicant for themselves to gain attention however they can devise. Those who do it on personal relationships have a special genius that is all their own. I do however agree with you that the most competent applicant should get the job, not the one whose aunt knows your brother's uncle, etc. Here's the thing though--someone else got the credibility, as a person, not as a _______(whatever the position was), to be given the position. Unless money or favors changed hands, directly or indirectly, we can assume that they or someone they are associated with lent them considerable chutzpah in the application process, vouched for them, or they endeared themselves to the person in power to such a degree that they were rewarded for it with that person's confidence (however misplaced it may end up being). Networking and inspiring confidence are worthwhile skills. If you don't argue for economic equality, so that everyone's talents and skills have an equal chance to get noticed, aren't you just supporting the system that allows geniuses in poverty to go unnoticed? And if they are geniuses, why can't they figure out a way to get themselves noticed by those in power? Because...money, race, class, gender are all in the way sometimes, or any combination thereof. Huh. But if they already had money, and could buy an audience with the "throne", so to speak, would they have worked half as diligently on their skills and innovations? they wouldn't need to...see how that works? Maybe they would still strive earnestly. I'd like to think so. But chances are, they would have lived a very different life.
I think what I mean is, more bright and innovative thinkers can be discovered if they are granted equal access to education and opportunities--especially for those existing in poverty, this is true. But in a society that smacks of elitism, will they ever be seen? Perhaps the geniuses of art, science, and political planning need to learn a few new tricks, if they are so opposite of mediocre. People skills, EQ, and the ability to reach out energetically and relate with another human being, the ability to listen, and to be fully present, are all worthy talents and skills as well. I think if modern higher education focuses more on the full spectrum of being (a Renaissance type of approach) where communication and architecture are equally embraced, this would change without having to choose a side...I think that diversity, equality, equity, and encouragement of all forms of learning makes up an essential paradigm much needed in government, and social organization. In sum, let's emphasize relating as an important skill at universities and trade schools--such that when someone of great skill arises, they can buy an audience with charisma and relatability instead of money and name dropping. Those geniuses just might be mediocre at something important--communicating with those who will benefit from their expertise, their passion, their vision.
This was along reply! Whew! Thanks for reading it, and thank you for your post. I like this topic and am going to up vote your post, even though we disagree, because:
'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.' --Aristotle
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for the long reply! It was quite interesting reading it. You've got several points, one being that the ability to surround yourself with the right people is useful and important, as well as the ability to turn people to your cause. People skills, as you say. I agree wholeheartedly, and I actually advocate for a (more or less) Renaissance-like approach to both education and the raising of individuals in general. It's useless to be a great storyteller if you have no stories to tell, and it's unfortunate to have great skill but no way to make others appreciate it.
In terms of government, however, there are a few things I'd like to point out. While it's true that in a situation without equality it's an every-man-for-himself race to get noticed by those chosen to dole out privilege and support, and that's something I don't really mind, when the ruling body's ONLY motivation is to benefit their own tribe, it becomes necessary to sell your soul to them for the slightest chance. When they clearly just want to fill their pockets and have not the slightest interest in progress, what's there left to do?
I believe in a sort of free privilege market , but I also believe that one should better the environment through seeking one's own progress and developing one's own objectives. You could say I believe in sustainable development. If your objectives lead to your environment (which can be a country, a society, or simply an island if you happen to be like Ben Gunn in Treasure Island).
I'm a bit short on time so I'll try to encompass my thoughts: Equality and a minimum opportunity for development should be encouraged, as it will naturally lead to diminishing the effects of tribalism in our society. Equality is not mediocrity, and it does not lead to mediocrity. And some communist ideas are not at all bad, what's terrible is trying to implement such idealistic values through policy rather than a slow cultural change. Even worse when it becomes a mere campaign for acquiring power and wealth for your group.
I hope to see you around for more discussions, and excuse any contradictions, I'm aware that some exist in my mind and heart. I'm a romantic deep down. Great comment!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Let me guess... majority of the upvotes you've received are from people who live or lived in communist countries. So have one from me :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hahaha, highly likely! It leaves a mark on all of us, I think. Thanks for the upvote!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I landed here following a resteem from @bucho. I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis of the crap coming from Hollywood. It's bewildering how they keep selling the same written-by committee crap and people keep buying it.
I was a big Ayn Rand fan back in High School and still feel that her message is an important one to keep in mind. And I love hearing your perspective of living in Venezuela from inside. (This was a surprise - your English is flawless.)
Following for more.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'll have to thank @bucho for the resteem, then!
Art suffers when its content is constrained by market studies and the desire to appeal to the masses. There's nothing wrong with having some direction and taking into account your target audience, but Hollywood has taken it to an unhealthy extreme. These stories about movies being rewritten to the point of being unrecognizable just because of reactions to a trailer or what movie made the studios the most money in recent history... It's a shame, given the potential some writers have.
I'm very glad my perspective was able to reach you and hopefully most of the other people who read this post. I believe that in this day and age, personal experience is key to understanding what's going on around the world. The news is a good way to find out about what's going on around the world, but given how often they're following their own agendas, it's difficult to know what to believe.
Thanks for the follow, I'll be posting some philosophy and some literary analysis, along with some lighter stuff in-between. Glad to have you aboard!
P.D.: Thanks for the compliment about my English. It's far from flawless, but I take some pride in it!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes! I call this "culture by spreadsheet." It's ruined movies, music, television, radio... Any time the cultural gatekeeper is a corporation responsible for answering to shareholders, because by definition a corporation is legally responsible for maximizing profits for those shareholders. If they have this sort of spreadsheet driven, focus-grouped analysis available to them, they're obligated to use it.
This is where my support for Ayn Rand's "anything goes" libertarianism starts to fall apart. I'm all for a free market of individuals, and certainly we should be able to invest in and profit from the companies we choose. Still, some of the consequences are pernicious. Can you see a way around this conflict?
I'd highly recommend checking out The Song Machine by John Seabrook. It's a fascinating look at the way big-hit music is made today, essentially on a cultural assembly line.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit