Sunday 4 July 2010

An Inconvenient Phobia.

I have a theory. (Gosh, Jeffrey’s got a theory!)

It was Emily Bronte who put me onto it. When I was researching the family, I discovered something about her that has led to a difference of opinion among commentators and biographers. She went to school three times during her teen years, twice as a pupil and once as a teacher, and each time she became so depressed that she had to be sent home again. On one occasion, her older sister Charlotte seriously feared for her health.

It has become usual to see Emily’s objection to school simply as a case of homesickness. In my opinion, however, one biographer got it right when she said it was nothing of the sort, for Emily demonstrated several times that she could go away from home without becoming homesick. She said that Emily simply couldn’t stand to be controlled. Something in her nature made it impossible for her to function in an environment where she had to comply with somebody else’s rules, requirements, methods and timetables. It drove her into a pit of despair verging on insanity. Neither should we consider the possibility that she was lazy. All accounts indicate that she was virtually a workaholic when it came to doing the things she wanted to do. But while Charlotte and Ann held several positions as teachers and governesses, Emily stayed at home as housekeeper for the rest of her short life.

I see the same thing in my daughter. After she left school at sixteen, she tried several jobs but couldn’t keep hold of any of them. She became depressed and rebellious. And then she founded and ran an inner city charity because she believed in doing something constructive for the disadvantaged people of poor communities. She did it for thirteen years, whilst at the same time having children and bringing them up diligently. She refused to buy processed food; all meals were properly cooked using fresh ingredients. This meant that the time available to spend on the charity was limited, and she would often work well into the early hours of the morning dealing with funding applications and the like, only to be up again at six for the kids. She worked unbelievably hard for those thirteen years. She was anything but lazy, and yet many saw her as just that because she wasn’t doing a ‘proper job.’

And I’ve seen the same thing in myself. I was successful at school, and yet I absolutely hated going. I used to get very depressed every time a new term was looming. I’ve done a string of jobs and was moderately good at several of them, but I hated them nonetheless. I swear that if I hadn’t managed to become self employed when I was thirty five I would have gone mad. It was becoming that serious. And yet when I started to do what I wanted to do, I worked well. I would sometimes work twelve hour days as a photographer. I went actively looking for work, and was very happy when I got it. I have no problem with working, but I have a deep and abiding loathing of working for an employer.

So, since we’re not looking at laziness here, should we be considering the possibility that there is an inconvenient but definable condition lurking in the minds of some people; and, if so, should we be honest enough to face the fact and recognise it? Could there really be such a thing as employment phobia? Or perhaps we should call it ‘control phobia.’

I do realise that this would be a hard pill for governments and the public to swallow, since they do so like to dismiss as ‘work shy welfare scroungers’ all those who find working for an employer difficult.

And some of them are, of course. But maybe not all.

8 comments:

KMcCafferty said...

I'm the same way myself. It's not that I don't enjoy the work I do in school; I love art, I love drawing, painting, I love looking at others' work and talking about it, it's the obligation and rules that get to me and make me want to shy out of it. I've noticed that once I am "obligated" to do something, especially when I'm obligated to do it a very specific way, it loses it's meaning and enjoyment. And indeed, my brother does see me as lazy because of this. But when you give me the free will to do what I'd like, I'm most productive (in the sense of working, not leisure) and far from indolent!

Emily said...

this describes me too. i like to do what i want to do when i want to do it, which isn't super conducive to a successful work or school career. and i'm alternately perceived as ultra-lazy or ultra-productive, depending on the perceiver.

JJ said...

Interesting. I see you both as very active, productive people. And is it just coincidental that a connection suggests itself here?

McCafferty, Ryan, Emily Bronte was half Irish, and there's evidence that my male line came from Ireland. Maybe there's something that crops up more frequently in the Gaelic gene. Maybe it isn't so much a phobia as a deep seated loathing of being controlled and walking somebody else's treadmill. I wonder whether that might explain an emotional conflict that occurs in some people in a world that's all about walking treadmills. I'll think on.

Thank you for commenting, ladies. Most instructive.

Anthropomorphica said...

Hi Jeff, what a really interesting post. I didn't know that of Emily Bronte. I'm with you on the Gaelic gene as I am absolutely the same and often known as Contrary Mary ;)
Your daughter sounds like an amazingly determined and capable woman, you must be really very proud of her.

JJ said...

Melanie!!! You came to see me. Now I can go to bed happy.

Don't tell me you have Irish blood too. That explains a lot!

Contrary Mary. Sounds good.

lucy said...

Wow, Jeff, I didn't know you had a daughter! That's awesome, how old is she? And how are your grandkids doing? :)

I never realised this, but I think it's true. I know some friends who really dislike school, because they don't like the "controlled"/conditioned environment they're in. Personally, though, I don't mind work. It keeps my mind preoccupied- provided, of course, that I like what I'm doing. If you force me to science camp, for example, I would hate every minute of it and would most certainly go mad. I think the thing with me is that, as long as I enjoy what I do and have an avid interest in it, no matter how mundane or repetitive the task is, I'd still enjoy it.

Anonymous said...

So nice to hear about your family Jeff. Your daughter sounds like a powerhouse! Wonderful. You make a very good point about Emily Bronte, I also think it wasn't about leaving home but more about living by the (idiotic) rules of others which irked her. Is it especially Celtic? Don't know.

The problem for working for an employer for many of us is that they often demand a loyalty or adherence to values which extends far beyond the call of the job at hand.

I worked for a large, well known company in a good position for ten years and my biggest problem was my lack of loyalty. Oh, I was responsible, honest and hard-working yes, but inside, I couldn't feel any attachment to what I was doing. It wasn't "mine".

I think people generally need to feel connected to their work, that it's their personal touch that makes the difference and that their values are as respected as their manager's or the values set forth by the corporation (which is often an amoral entity anyway, let's face it). But employers and especially big corporations want allegiance first and tend to forget it's a two-way relationship with their employees.

JJ said...

Lucy: Yours is the more normal, balanced view. And I think you should be glad it is – It’s likely to save you a lot of hassle in the years to come. We ‘unbalanced minority’ get the collywobbles when we have to do anything to somebody else’s requirements – even if it’s something we like doing. We’re only properly functional when we’re doing what we want to do, how we want to do it, and when we want to do it. It can be a bit of a problem! As for my daughter, I’m not quite sure where she is or what she’s doing at the moment. Haven’t seen or heard from her since Christmas.

Della: This reminds me of a job interview I attended a few years ago. It turned out that the company was in the business of financing and controlling smaller companies, purely to make profit off them. The interviewer asked how he could be sure I would do a good job for them. I gave him three good reasons why I always try to do a good job, whatever it is. He asked ‘but what about loyalty and commitment?’ I just COULD NOT resist it. I told him that I was loyal and committed to various things like principles and ideals, but I saw no reason to be loyal and committed to somebody else’s money making machine. You should have seen his face when I asked ‘So, you’ll be in touch then, will you?’ I didn’t even get a refusal letter. Phew!