The One Hour Essay Project

Prompts for October

Dr. Proctor — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:59:23 +0000

Due at midnight on October 15:
Many slang terms have bigoted histories of which their contemporary users are sometimes unaware. Most of us are sensitive to the harmful potential of words such as “gay,” “fag,” “pussy,” or “bitch,” and “nigger” has become such a dirty word in our culture that it is widely considered completely unutterable in any context. Using it as an example here, in fact, will probably raise quite a few eyebrows. Nevertheless, we have almost certainly all encountered situations wherein some of these words have been thrown around with arguably innocent intentions, and the knowledge that “gyp” (to cheat or swindle) is an abbreviation for “gypsy,” or that “lunatic” derives from the stereotype that women are driven crazy during menstruation (which is on a luna-r cycle), has basically become cocktail trivia, with the new meanings far outweighing the old in vernacular use. How do we balance a committment to tolerance and respectful language with an appreciation for the way language evolves over time? Is there a statute of limitations on linguistic bigotry? Do we have a responsibility to research the history of every word that we use? Is there a point past which the early roots are completely lost? Even if we only focus on words that still have hateful connotations today, does doing so have an impact? Basically, how does changing the way we talk change the way we think and act, and how much energy should be spent on taking stands against abusive language?

Due at midnight on October 31: TBA

First in Line for the Lifeboats

myrrh — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 23:47:38 +0000

What do I want from my job? What do I want from my job? I want money! That’s why it’s called a goddamn job! If it were fun, it’d be called a “gig.” No, I get my ass out of bed at the ass-crack of dawn and drive through godawful traffic so I can sit at my desk and try (with less success as the week progresses) not to fall asleep, and degrade myself for the next ten hours because if I didn’t, I’d be stone broke and I’d have to live out of my car like that crazy guy I saw driving around the other day. Don’t get me wrong, he looked incredibly cool and I bet if I’d had the chance to talk to him and not just honk because the light turned green and he didn’t care because HE didn’t have anywhere to go, unlike the rest of us who are trying not to get fired, I probably would have found him the most interesting person I’d met, but I didn’t get a chance to talk to him, so I can really only judge on looks. He sure looked happier than I felt.
(more…)

The Myth of the Gold Watch

goldenseal — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:43:37 +0000

Click on the image for a larger version.

The Official List of Reasons Why People Work

primrose — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:39:31 +0000

Quite an auspicious prompt for me this month, in the sense that I’ve been meaning to discuss this topic with myself at some point soon anyway. Potentially, by the end of this essay I’ll more deeply understand my feelings about my job, and whether or not I should stick with it for the longer term. Let’s see how it turns out.

Anyway, let’s start at the back, and move forward, shall we?

Why do we work at all?

(more…)

Whatever works

ginseng — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:00:57 +0000

This is a fitting topic for me at the moment, as I am looking for a job, and in so doing, I am constantly faced with the question of where to draw the line between dangerous compromise and wise practical decision. As I mull this over, I think a lot about the idea of work in our culture. There seem to be a few rather distinct perspectives on the matter, but by and large I think that people see “work” as a rather narrow band of activity that is basically defined as the labor that is given in exchange for income. This income may take the form of direct necessities, such as room, board, or health care, or it may take the form of currency that can then be used to procure such necessities, as well as luxuries like nice clothes and japanese eggplant and home theater systems with surround sound. In any case, I think most people see “work” as what they do to make money, and I am beginning to realize that I define the word a bit differently, which leads to some complications when discussing the matter at parties.
(more…)

Decoupling From Esther

verbena — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 08:00:34 +0000

I can’t really answer the question as it’s written. I have had two classes of job in my career: those I loathed and those I loved. Right now I’m fortuitously lodged in one of the latter; to the question “What do we want from our jobs, anyway?” I’d answer: delight, challenge, pride, achievement, comfort, money, and good people to drink with. I have all of that—although more money is always better—and I’ll stay here until the next ridiculously fun opportunity comes along, at which point I’ll jump ship.

This is not terribly appropriate to the shades-of-gray nature of this prompt, however. And so I’m going to more or less ignore the prompt and replace it with a discussion of the moral equivalent in my life right now: my flatmate.

(more…)

Medium-Rare

bergamot — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:10:36 +0000

JK Rowling is NOT the most important literary figure of our age. That
said, Rowling’s “Harry Potter” series is entertaining and
well-executed. Rowling creates a fantastical world with compelling
characters, inventive storylines, and important philosophical themes.
Despite these virtues, Rowling’s writing remains bounded by the status
quo of her medium: the printed word. JK Rowling might be one of the
most POPULAR literary figures our age, but she is certainly not the
most important.
(more…)

The Xenophobic Marketeer

Dr. Proctor — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:09:59 +0000

Here’s my problem with J. K. Rowling: her names. Place names, people names, names of things, it doesn’t matter. For ever Nicholas de Mimsy Porpington, there are about five Ron Weasleys, for every Ottery St. Catchpole seven Knockturn Alleys. I don’t think she set out with the intention of making a multimedia franchise, but it does seem like her names often would come from a second-rate advertising firm. You know, the kind that makes Chevy ads and convinced themselves naming Nintendo’s new system the Wii was a good idea. I can just imagine J. K. Rowling the PR rep sitting across the table from J. K. Rowling the executive: “No, no, trust me, no one will think it’s over the top!” And the executive, after musing for a while, throws up her hands and says, “Sure, why not? Sirius Black it is!”
(more…)

Lumos

Dr. Proctor — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:08:18 +0000

Though there is supposed to be some level of anonymity associated with this, I have to make one potentially identifying admission. I am a lawyer. Going to law school isn’t the important thing here. On some level my brain has always operated this way. The reason for this admission is that I cannot read the topic without asking a litany of questions. What is a “literary figure” anyway? What “age” is it that we’re discussing? My brain wants to dissolve this question to its essence so it can be thoroughly answered and analyzed. But I don’t think that’s the real purpose here.
(more…)

The Very Best of the Very Present

Dr. Proctor — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:07:59 +0000

Virtually all tragedians, one might say, use these formal elements; for in fact every drama alike has spectacle, character, plot, diction, song, and reasoning. But the most important of them is the structure of the events: [t]ragedy is not an imitation of persons, but of actions and of life….[T]he plot is the source and (as it were) the soul of tragedy; character is second.

–Aristotle, The Poetics

Boy meets girl.
Boy meets girl.
Boy meets girl.
Boy meets girl.
Boy meets girl.
Boy meets girl.

–William Faulkner, drunk and alone in Hollywood at the end of his career

The premise of this paper is that Aristotle has it more or less correct. (more…)