"If each retained possession of only what he needed, no one would be in want, and all would live in contentment."
-Gandhi
Life is complicated; it always has been, and it always will be. However, one way that we can make it a little less so is by taking stock of what we possess, and conversely what possesses us. The fact that at the end of Gandhi's life all of his worldly possessions could fit in a small cardboard box is oddly inspiring; it illustrates that Gandhi had freed himself from the bonds and burdens of possessions, and was living the simple life.
Now, while I have no intention of trying to whittle my possessions down so that I can carry them around in a cardboard box, I do want to downsize. For me, the main purpose of this experiment is to force me to consider what are the items that I truly value and need, and what are just taking up space.
A sad, but true reality, is that forty plus years has led me to collecting more possessions then can fit in a small two-bedroom apartment. The solution to this space problem was to rent a storage unit where my stuff (important enough not to discard, but not essential enough to have a place in the apartment) lives. This seemed like a logical place to begin, after all, it should be easy for me to get rid of something that I don't see or use on a regular basis. Boy, was I wrong.
Assessing something's worth is not as easy as I thought it would be. One problem that I discovered was that often the "saved" items had a memory connected with them, and the thought of getting rid of the item was a betrayal of that memory. The internal debates made the process slow going, and I often found myself unable (or unwilling) to make a final decision. Another problem was that I have accumulated a lot of teaching materials in 16 years of teaching. Going through this material also proved a challenge, and I found myself constantly questioning if I wouldn't find a need for the item once it was gone.
Ultimately, I came to the decision that if I hadn't used it in the last three years, there was a good chance that I wasn't going to be using it again, so I hauled it away to Goodwill. On one trip, the West 11th Goodwill received around 85 old high school English textbooks that I have been hauling around for the past ten years. While the experience was painful at times, in the end I feel good that I have started the process of unburdening myself of unnecessary possessions. I await contentment.
I would have to say that I agree and disagree with the first sentence of the first paragraph. Most people view life as the most complicated thing ever, as I myself do. Although, I believe that there are probably a few people out there who view life as something that isn't complicated at all; no matter what happens to them.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Davis on this, but I think a lot of people think that it can be the easiest thing too. Unlike your argument, Scott, I believe that people that think they live an easy and uncomplicated life are the ones with the most stuff. They think that they have everything in the world and that they are content, until something new comes out. Although I do agree that living simply is the best way to reach a true form of uncomplicated living, some people take the easy way out and hoard whatever they have.
ReplyDeleteAndrea's comment has left me with no responses to write except for one in agreement. I do believe that humans are generally lazy creatures. In the last few centuries, we've invented new ways of traveling, communicating, being entertained, even EATING, just so we won't have to work as hard doing so. As I sit at my desk, writing my response on my computer, I can't help but to think that this is a perfect example. While I enjoy the convenience and simplicity of a computer, I feel as if I'm doing something "the easy way" when I do. Instead of typing that paper, I could write it and spend some time working on my (terrible) penmanship. Instead of skyping, it would be nice to actually sit down with that person and talk to them. While revolutions and new inventions are making like easier than ever, they're also making us more lazy than ever. Therefore, the more of these commodities someone has, the less they have to work to do something. The less they have to work at something, the less frustrated they'll be by it. This creates pure joy and happiness with the world and it's seemingly perfect existence. On the other hand, a person who has never touched a computer, doesn't know the meaning of the word "email", or has never heard of flying on an airplane might also be happy. Because their way of life is the norm. For them, it works, and they have no complaints or motivation to change. meanwhile, the person with all of the material possessions is getting angrier by the second because an item broke, or is suddenly outdated again. Time and again, simplicity has shown to be the answer to happiness. Not simplicity in terms of your new gadget and what it does, but simplicity in terms of whether or not it works, and won't leave you craving the next greatest way to do the exact same thing.
ReplyDeleteJonathon makes a great point. I got this great image when I was reading his post; Walle. What he's talking about, in the extreme, is how our technology and innovations will lead us to be a society like the one that Walle is in. One that sits in moving chairs and drinks their food because they are too lazy to chew it. They all seem perfectly happy until Walle comes in and shows them the true meaning of happiness.
ReplyDeleteI love Andrea's example of WallE because it does show the all too often display of people searching for a sense of happiness and contentment in their possessions but never finding it. Sometimes all it takes a small, over-looked, old robot like WallE; or a small, quiet old man like Gandhi, to make others questions the ways of their own living and if they are truly content with it.
ReplyDeleteThough Andrea has a good reason to back up her argument, "...that people that think they live an easy and uncomplicated life are the ones with the most stuff," I think otherwise.
ReplyDeleteI, for example, believe that I have way too much stuff. Much of which I should part with, but struggle to. I am not saying I am a "hoarder" or anything of the sort, but I do tend to hold on to things with only little significant value. Why? I am not quite sure, but I have a theory and I do think it relates to having a complicated and uneasy life.
It's not just myself in my family that holds on to meaningless items, but it appears my mother does, too. I think that we both do so because (and I say this at the risk of sounding like a typical teenager)we've had a very difficult past seven yearsin our life. As a result we have lost many of our possessions, including a lot of my childhood stuff ( things I consider to be important).
It may seem as though I have gone off on a little tangent, but my point is that I believe that the people who fill their lives full of meaningless stuff do so because of their difficult lives, not just because they feel the need to have everything, but because they feel the need to have something.
Well, here's something funny... I think I disagree with Ghandi. Just a little bit. In the world we live in, I think it would be very difficult to be successful without gidgets and gadgets. I know that they aren't essential to life itself, but in some situations, they are, in an odd way, something you need because it's the norm to have things like a computer. People in businesses expect you to spend money on things like that. It's odd if you don't stay in touch with your new phone. So, if you aren't able to "be one of them" how will people in your field of work accept you? People are biased. Very biased. If you seem out of place, people will stay away from you. They question whether you're capable or not. If that happens and you can't get a job that you really want because it's what you love to do, then I think it is a necessity. The phone-or whatever-is not the necessity, but being comfortable and happy with your life probably is. If a phone is something that can open a doorway for you, I think you should go for it. I'm not saying to change who you are, I just mean that technology offers many opportunities. And just 'cause you buy something doesn't mean you have to be attatched to it. There are very few objects that I care about. Just because I have a phone doesn't mean I can't imagine living without it. If nobody would mind, I'd have a lot of fun shootin' it up with my dad's gun. And I like having a camera, but not for the feeling of possesion. I like it because of what I can do with it. That's what matters to me. To me, because I'm an artist, that's a need and not a want. I'd be a terrible grumpy person if I couldn't make art. And I doubt it would be as fun (or appreciated) if all I could do was scratch things out in the dirt.
ReplyDeleteI hope this made sense...because honestly, reading this over made me cringe a bit. It sounds kinda close-minded. I guess, with the phone thing, if nobody had a phone, people without phones would fit in. But if the majority of everbody has a phone, people without phones don't fit in. So, what're you gonna do in a world like that? Just sit back and say,"Fuck you!" How long do you think you're gonna survive when the people with the bigger and better machines want to expand their territory? They'll want to force it on you.
Ugh. God, that's so shallow. Makes me think of the Borg or religious "join us!" crap. So, I guess I mean that I don't think people should just jump on the bandwagon, but if it is something meaningful to their life (and in a disillusioned sense), then it is important to have.
But, if the new "thing" next year is brain implants and everybody is suddenly really happy and thinks that nothing's wrong with the world, I'm going to be one of the people who's going to run away and live out at sea or something and yell,"Fuck you!" out towards land every once in a while.
And there will always be greedy people. Because people are jerks. And even if you lived with the bare necessities, that doesn't gaurantee that you're gonna eat something that night.
Damn. I keep going back and forth between "bandwagon" and "survival". I don't know, Scott. Can I just say that I tried and walk away from this one?
-C. Bergman
Anne makes an interesting point when she states "...the people who fill their lives full of meaningless stuff do so because of their difficult lives, not just because they feel the need to have everything, but because they feel the need to have something." But I tend to disagree that this "meaningless stuff" is so meaningless after all. Going back to the point of the post, living simply, doesn't always mean living with bare essentials. I believe, living simply is an analogy for living happily. The meaning of the term "living happily", of course, varies from person to person. But as long as you're happy with what you have, and you're neighbor is happy with what he has, why do we as a society continue to try and ruin that?
ReplyDeleteIn one of Scott's earlier posts, he writes about his favorite Gandhi quote, "Be the change you want to see in the world." We, in fact, share this favoritism. This could very well be square one for making the world a more pleasant place for everyone. Once we're happy with our lives, the least we could do is encourage and help another to be happy with theirs. If the world had that outlook, "living simply" would be no problem at all.
Yet, this seems to be a painfully optimistic point of view. Christina makes a very valid point in stating, "there will always be greedy people. Because people are jerks." I couldn't agree with this more. A somewhat nerdy, but accurate, picture came to mind while reading this opinion. The Joker, saying, "some people just want to watch the world burn." Meaning, there is a part of all humans with a never-ending hunger. So I guess, my conclusory question would be, how can we direct that hunger to something positive, like our friend Gandhi seems to have done?