Certain topics are best left alone in polite company. Politics and religion top the list, but have you ever thought about social class? Ouch, even saying that word, “class,” sounds painful.
A new TV show called, “The Unusuals” features a character of mixed “class.” She works as a police officer, going to great lengths to hide the wealth of her family from co-workers. In one scene, she is attending a family event at which the guests are in expensive evening wear. Black-suited waiters carry silver trays of hors d’oeuvres. She seems under-dressed and uncomfortable. It’s not long before she makes an excuse to leave.
We as viewers understand immediately what’s going on. She’d be in big trouble if she exposed her wealth to her co-workers. Reveal her lack of materialism to her family’s friends? Also trouble. We know it instinctively. But why? What would really happen if she was found out? Would she lose her job? Be ostracized? Why ISN’T it okay for a wealthy young woman to do police work if she chooses?
We’ve seen female police characters in TV shows before; we expect to see women in these roles now. The issue here is that the character’s wealth contrasts so sharply with that of her co-workers. It’s hard to believe that anyone would take such a dangerous, relatively low paying job (compared to the wealth of her character) if they had other options.
Instinctively, we also know that she is breaking a taboo. Like mingle with like. When the wealthy mingle with the middle class, it’s uncomfortable. If we feel we belong in the middle class, might we feel a bit invaded if a wealthy person tried to fit in? Would it seem as if something was wrong with them? Would we wonder if they’d been cast out from their “tribe?” It seems counter-intuitive to put anything above the status that wealth brings.
We like to think that there’s no such thing as “social class” in America. But isn’t “The Unusuals” character based on the premise that class exists AND is important? This is a prime time TV show on a major network. This is a time slot that needs to offer viewers an intriguing storyline, with characters that stand out. The wealthy female policewoman’s character stands out from the many shows that have come before. How is it that we have not seen this type of scenario in pop-culture until now?
Classic English literature wraps itself around class wars. “Know your place,” is an oft-used phrase. It’s not danced around. Rather, it’s a part of everyday language. In contrast, “Class consciousness is alien to America,” says David Brooks of the New York Times, in a column posted April 21, 2008.
I agree. “Class” differences exist in America, yet consciousness of “class” is difficult to find. Having worked hard to find ways to travel overseas, or get paid to travel, I realized upon my return to the U.S. that I had become more aware of “class” warfare than I had been before.
I found that I noticed reactions to class differences everywhere, yet felt a distinct underlying pressure to look the other way. For me, it’s not one’s “class” or income that matters. It’s the REACTION to the perceived “class” or income that I find disturbing.
Reactions to class, in my observation, often manifest as a swift reflex. So swift, that I wonder if the reactor is even aware that they’ve reacted. Just as we squint if the sun is in our eyes, or slap ourselves if bitten by a mosquito, we respond without even thinking. A sneer, a mental note to keep the other person at a distance, a stiffening or sudden attempt to be more formal; all of these are reactions I witness daily. But shouldn’t something like how we respond to others, based on their income, social standing or anything that constitutes “class,” be done with care? Awareness? Mindfulness?
I’ve met people who never went to college, who inspired me by their zest for life. I’ve met people who have all sorts of academic accomplishments who seemed unable to see beyond my own accomplishments to the heart of who I am and why I do what I do.
At times, I’ve felt pressured to jump through hoops for no other reason than to keep up with my “class.” As a middle class teen, I was expected to go to college, and pursue professional success above all other interests. It seemed not to matter whether my work was fulfilling. Prestige was the goal and members of my “class” were keeping score.
Likewise, I’ve felt the resentment of people who felt they’d never had a fair opportunity to go to college. Much as I would try to be authentic and respectful, there was a rift between us that could not be crossed. In an office in which I had a certain measure of responsibility, which could be defined as “power,” I needed the help of staff who did not have the same level of responsibility/power. I had to work hard to gain their trust. Nevertheless, it was common to witness expressions of resentment toward others with power. Why is “power” so important? Is it because it is so easily abused? So easily denied to those without?
Personally, I’ve learned that neither money, power, nor prestige, in and of themselves, are nourishing enough to keep me going. I draw my energy from relationships, creative outlets, and most luxurious of all – a balanced schedule that allows me to both work AND take time for interests outside of work.
I don’t need to be in a certain income bracket. I don’t need to have a certain car. Those who matter to me appreciate me whether I have those things or not. But I had to work HARD to find those people!
At the same time, I am always sizing up new acquaintances to determine how they might react if they find I have a wealthy relative. Will I be resented? Or will I be looked upon as “lesser than” if I DON”T disclose my connection? I am always wondering, and more so, wondering why it has to be so important. Why not just accept individuals as they are? Let status go. At the end of the day, we all have value to offer to others, and we all need each other.
In many countries, the majority shares a certain standard of living. In the U.S., there is a wide range. Where you fall in that range, in large part, dictates who your friends will be, and the type of job you will get. We like to think that this is the land of opportunity, but in many ways, no matter how well we do in school, we may never have access to certain ways of life that the very wealthiest experience. Wealth begets wealth. We go to great lengths to pretend that it doesn’t. Some people DO break barriers, whether through entrepreneurial savvy, or extraordinary talent. But many do not, and many believe they cannot. And if a peer began to reach for success in the next highest level, would you support them? Or resent them?
I see a lot of tension and resentment over ideas of class and wealth, whether their limitations are real or imagined. Wouldn’t it be better to acknowledge that disparities exist? That these disparities DO influence our lives? Why keep sweeping it under the rug? Let’s talk about it. What is it that really bothers us about it? Do we have to continue living with such extreme disparities? What if we didn’t? Would you embrace change?
For more points of view: Although I wrote this posting over a month ago, I see that Oprah is covering this topic on her show today, Friday, May 22, 2009.
I agree that it’s time for a shift. If we could build our dream agency structure, what would it look like? Agencies resist using freelance talent, but I worked in one place that seemed to have stumbled onto a beautifully smooth, efficient, effective structure that led to good work AND, DARE I SAY IT? Happy employees.
THE STRUCTURE:
Core, bare bones staff:
An account person, creative director, finance, business affairs, production manager, and traffic.
THE DREAM TEAM
The truth is that each project, especially as media mashes up today, requires unique talent. What if you could hand pick your talent for every single campaign? By using freelancers, you have the flexibility you need to shore up strengths as you go.
The way it works now, agencies are tied to the staff they have. Sure, we know how expendable that staff is, but what if, instead of keeping all those people on staff all the time, you could get a stronger creative when you need one? Or what if you love your intern’s creative, but you need an exceptional producer to make it happen? As it stands now, agency staff are frequently stretched. They’re asked to juggle and the result is that individual projects get fleeting attention. But if you assigned freelance talent to handle a project exclusively (or nearly exclusively), then each project would get more quality attention.
I know, I know – “Freelancers are too expensive.”
Really?
- Wouldn’t it come down to how it was all negotiated w/ clients and freelancers?
- Some agencies’ clients want more ads later in the year, which means that January thru May can be slow, June thru August can be busy, and September thru December is intensely busy. ‘Can’t help but wonder if an agency would save money by not having staff on during the slow times.
- By using freelancers, relationships are maintained – the agency can hire them over and over again.
- Wouldn’t it be possible to match the freelancer’s rate to the project? For high budget, complex projects, use senior talent. For low budget, simpler projects, use less experienced, lower cost talent.
- I’ve always heard that employee turnover and recruiter costs eat a lot of money. With a pool of freelancers, wouldn’t those costs go down?
- A core, skeleton staff could provide continuity. Experienced staff, of course, help when/if junior talent is used.
- Campaigns could be built “a la carte” style. Want to try something new in social media? Bring in a social media expert and have them work in sync with your favorite creatives and producer. Want to push the limits on an interactive piece? Bring in a top tier interactive guru until the project is done.
- Freelancing allows for fluid, flexible talent that meets client needs, without pulling agencies into a cycle of constant layoffs.
I realize that I’m likely oversimplifying. This is just the beginning of brainstorming. But I love to solve problems and find this one very interesting. Thoughts?