It's been ages since I posted on my blog, but I think I've found something worthy of discussion for once. Ironically as a professional web designer I know that failing to update is bad and loses audience at a rapid rate, but this isn't my job; it's my blog and I've hopefully got a good 60-70 years to go yet! So I believe in Quality over Quantity, at least for this site.
First of all please note that this has
nothing to do with Depression, which is an illness. The article I'm about to discuss also addressed this point. It's about the happy/unhappy general state of mind. So without further ado...
I picked up the Daily Mail (I know I know, a tabloid) in the pub and there was an article by Helen Kirwan-Taylor, which is also located online at this address:
Click here to read Helen Kirwan-Taylor's Happiness article at the Daily Mail websiteThe author essentially seems to be complaining about people trying to be happy. Not only that but she dislikes what she sees as a taboo on being unhappy (she's never visited Xanga or Myspace then? Being unhappy is *very* trendy right now amongst younger folk) and is quite, well 'happy' being unhappy thank you very much.
Her view initially seems to be that, basically, humans are all a bunch of miserable beggars and the sooner we can accept that the better. Initially it was a depressing article which I think undermines a very impoartant fact of life - that for the most part, the only person who can truly decide your outcome, or at the very least your outlook on life, is yourself.
Then towards the end of the article, I realised where her possible ignorance stems from - she completely misunderstands the meaning of "happiness". (Or to be really profound, perhaps she does understand it perfectly, but I digress. You'll see what I mean as I waffle on further.)
In her last few paragraphs things start to come together - she thinks that those who seek happiness are seeking the glitzy definition - namely: money, fame, possessions. And she'd be damn right - hell it's even a saying "money doesn't buy you happiness". What really got up my nose, to be honest, is how she denounces things like self-help material, therapists etc... people and resources who are there to help people feel "proper" happiness, not this stupid material-happiness that she is (rightly but inaccurately) moaning about.
Despite what I thought was quite a damaging article to anyone who's on the edge of positive thinking, I think that deep down she has the right idea and has just not expressed it effectively. It's not about accepting the fact that you're miserable, which is what she seems to be suggesting, but the underlying theory is the same - being happy with what you have. Making the most of what's available to you rather than living life with the "grass is always greener" approach. In my own opinion, it is important to have ambitions, but it is also imporant to try and be happy with what you have in the here and now. Think about how less fortunate we could be.... we could be starving and dying in a third world somewhere.
And, ironically, I bet a lot of the people in third worlds are how they're sometimes protrayed in the more balanced documentaries (yeah I know, I've not been there, but anyway - not the news where they're only ever seen dying) - actually quite carefree in relation to their situation, relative to ours. Even if this only applies to a minority, it just shows that happiness is a state of mind and nothing to do with environment, riches, anything like that.
In a world where we're all encouraged to Buy Stuff, and brainwashed by the retail industry to believe that Buying Stuff = Happiness, I think this lady's article is a very worrying reflection on how well it's worked. She has sortof understood deep down I think, but has been so well brainwashed that she can't express what it is she understands. The message being protrayed seems to be that "to be content you must accept being unhappy" (not an actual quote, just the gist)
Deep down I think she understands - and is indeed trying to say - that being truly happy means loving what you've got and how you are now, rather than being what she calls "happy" - owning possessions, being rich and famous etc. Because, as she rightly states (in a round-about way), if you chase after the materialistic definition and forget the real one, you will always be miserable. There will always be someone better off than you, someone richer, someone more famous, someone with more Stuff. Yet if you follow the state of mind, it's possible to be completely happy no matter what your situation - because it's *you* defining your own happiness, rather than other people.
Indeed I've seen these types saying "soandso is unhappy" around their own personal definitions without actually asking the person in question how they feel, and if anyone tried that with me (say because of my lack of history in some areas of life) I would hurt them. Severely. Nobody tries to brainwash me into their definition of why I should or shouldn't be happy.
And oddly enough I think that despite my initial reaction, I agree with her underlying views. Always have ambitions, and if you're the type who needs to (professional sportsmen etc) then strive to be the best of the best. But also remember that for every person who's "better off" in this life, there are probably at least 10 who are "worse off" and an infinite number who were never even born. So, nuts to it - enjoy what you have. It's better'n' nowt at the very least!
Update: Funny enough, as I re-read the article, I don't think I disagree with the author quite so much. She is generally saying the same thing as I am, but in a different way. There are certain things she says that I disagree with (such as the misleading headline, suggesting that the pursuit of happiness is *futile* rather than something that merely needs to be correctly defined), but the general idea is the same. However I thought it very thought provoking and worth sharing my own angle on it.
