Letters to the Editor
Older and Wiser
Published Letters: 56 Editor's Choice: 19
-
Noblesse Oblige vs. Authenticity
[Read the article: I feed the poor but eat with the rich]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I understand where LW is coming from, but I think her (I’m going with female; I could be wrong) concerns are misplaced. She might want to consider the following:
There have been administrations and eras with leaders whose sense of a strong, healthy society may have come across as “noblesse oblige” to some, but whose actions, in reality, saved many lives or lifted people out of poverty. The list of leaders includes presidents, charity leaders, union leaders, civil rights leaders, and others. It was not expected of these leaders to live or dine like those in poverty. But it was within their power to make a difference, and many of them did.
I heard something once that made sense to me: In the U.S., the poor don’t necessarily resent the middle-class or rich or want to take anything away from them—on the contrary, they’d prefer to be like them, and have what they have. This isn’t in the way of greed, but just creature comforts and being able to live and eat decently and provide for their families. They’d like to be in positions to be able to work honorably and earn what they get (I’m here omitting the mentally and very physically ill who wouldn’t be able to do so).
People of means who do charitable work have to come to terms with their own level of comfort and contribution. On the one hand, yes, one may feel hypocritical. On the other hand, look at the celebutants who make a gazillion dollars simply for inhaling and exhaling and living a completely self-absorbed and useless life. So perhaps, LW, you can consider yourself as somewhere in the middle.
You may do less than some, but more than others. If you’re not satisfied with how much you’re doing, do more. And, IMO, don’t leave politics out of it. Vote for people who you believe share at least some of your vision and believe in a stronger society for all.
But don’t assume you’d be welcome at the table with those you’re serving. They don’t necessarily want that kind of attention; there’s likely an element of shame that they’d rather not address by another’s presence.
If it troubles you to go to a fancy brunch after the volunteer work, you can simply excuse yourself and either go back to the church or go home, or wherever you’d like, to reflect on the work you’ve done and whether you’ve done enough (chances are you have). Your co-workers have probably worked hard for what they have, and if they choose to go to brunch, it doesn’t make them bad people. But you have to find your own comfort level and seek out a way to make you feel not just good, but right and authentic about who you are and how you choose to help.
If it makes any difference, I personally admire your efforts. We do what we can.
-
Sink Before You Thpeak
[Read the article: I sent a nasty text about my boss ... to my boss!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There’s an admonition implied in this situation that has been addressed, so far, only by the poster who suggested using a notebook (good suggestion).
E-mail, texting, and the like have become swift and convenient technological tools. But, just as anyone should consider the import of his or her words in conversation, one should consider even more so impulsively putting such words in writing. Spoken criticism, face to face, can at least half the time be ameliorated by an apology or explanation. But written criticism has a more lasting effect, as it implies forethought and deliberation in getting the message across.
There is no point in LW continuing to apologize. No doubt the other woman has decided how she feels about this. Whether or not she’s harboring anger or hurt feelings will become apparent during the in-person meeting the woman suggested. The LW can tell her, unapologetically, that she found a certain situation unacceptable, and the reasons, in professional terms. It’s either understood, accepted, or not. It may just be time to move on.
I disagree with Cary that this is a classic situation to be enjoyed. Rather, I think it’s a classic opportunity to regard this situation as a caveat, i.e., “User Beware.” Thinking before e-mailing or writing (to another person) is several degrees more compelling than speaking. Rather than being embroiled with the issue of apology, the LW should review and revamp her professional procedures in order to curtail impulsiveness and enhance her own reputation.