The question came up in class of whether or not we as individuals owe it to society to make ourselves useful and I've been thinking about it a lot.
I feel like we do owe it to society to be useful because from birth to death everyone is constantly consuming things. Every life creates numerous burdens, environmental or otherwise, and as a result I think people should at least make an effort to make a positive difference on the world. By that I don't really mean becoming the world's biggest humanitarian and donating millions to charity or devoting life to volunteer work, sometimes just living can make a positive difference. By living transiently it subverts the whole process of equalizing and for everything they consume it becomes more of a burden for others. Maybe this perspective is only from the fact that I'm a product of society. In that sense, I am the angry boat man paranoid about my belongings and being angry at people whose lifestyles are different.
Which way does the pity go?
For me, the transient lifestyle doesn't seem super great because I've grown accustomed to the basic comforts of indoor life, but pity only comes from projecting one's own values on someone else I suppose. Everyone becomes a unique character and if it happens to be one that is more suited to a different lifestyle then it's no fault of theirs. Maybe that contradicts my original point.
The coming of age aspect of Housekeeping was definitely more of a finding of a social niche to fill for Ruth. She never felt comfortable in her own skin or her own society, and Sylvie provided an alternate lifestyle for her. When presented with another option Ruth realized she had other options for a direction in life. Over time she learned enough about herself to make the decision. I used to think coming of age was more of a ritualistic thing, like going into the woods and killing a bear armed with nothing but a toothpick and a pebble, but the novels that we've read have made me realize it's much more of a subtle, gradual difference, and definitely a more personal change than anything else.
I ended up enjoying Housekeeping much more than I thought I would when I first started reading. It started out slow and the characters for me were not relatable. I think it's the questions that the novel posed that prompted a lot of thought that made me enjoy the book a lot more.
I also enjoyed this book quite a bit. I actually related a lot to Ruth and Sylvie, but I think I liked it because of the questions it raised. First it got me to empathize and admire Sylvie and Ruth, and then it made me question that admiration. Back to your original point, I think that you don't owe anything to society. You didn't choose to be born (a point that Ruth makes at the end of the novel) and society shouldn't be able to say that since you are born and were raised by society without choice, you must give something back. I don't think it is my obligation to buy lots of iPods to keep our consumerist economy afloat, and Ruth and Sylvie just seem to be taking this idea to what is to me an appealing extreme.
ReplyDeleteI am in no way bold enough to suggest I want to live -- let alone that I would be able to survive -- as a transient, but I also would not go as far as to say that there is no place for them in society. Do you have to be an "active member of society" in order to live among it? Maybe from our perspective transients and hobos are just nameless, faceless, nondescript folks we sometimes avoid eye contact with, but their different way of life does not disrupt our own unless we believe they reflect badly on our reputation, which is precisely the problem with Fingerbone. Perhaps if it were a larger town it would be more excusable for one to not “contribute” to society and still be afforded the decency of being left alone.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it's probably best to contribute to society to some extent, but I would like to defend Ruth and Sylvie by pointing out that they do take jobs and stuff, just not for very long periods of time. Also, they take so little from society that it seems unfair to ask them to give much back. I think they probably pull their (minimal) weight.
ReplyDeleteReading this novel has been extremely interesting for me specifically because I never really gave the idea of a transient lifestyle a hard thought. It seems in possible in passing, but as I read this novel I came to realize that perhaps it is more possible and attainable than I had originally thought. It seems difficult for me to live such a lifestyle since I am so accustomed to my day-by-day planned lifestyle, but I can definitely see the appeal.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it started out slow, and I also enjoyed it more than I thought it would, but I think for Ruth, she knew that the niche she needed was there the whole time, the problem was that she didn't know how to get there, until she met Sylvie. On top of that, for Lucille though, this was a recognition of the lifestyle that she would never want to have.
ReplyDelete