Rectifications (28) – “…and more”

Rectifications (28) – "…and more"
Torrey Orton
January 17, 2013

After enough comes more

 

"…and more" the Subaru sales advert promised full stop after a series of small value adds which dear buyer prospect can get with your model year 2012 demonstrator currently on clearance – a Forester I think it was. You know, "leather" with an asterisk to a footnote so small and finely printed anyone who could afford to would have trouble reading it. Actually, it's leather trim sort of. After three more such gifts, all of which are standard issue "features", we are offered "and more". A clear case where more is not a lot.


This offer, which I've seen in so many places for so many products, makes me feel confident it's a reliable indicator the phrase has entered normal usage. So, what is "…and more"? Another receptacle for the unrequited phantasies of the potentially buying public…? A teaser, like prices ending in $.95 used to be, stopping which could allow us to retire the 5 cent piece? …but I egress to the productivity door rear left. It is what they (merchants) say when they've run out of things to say and can't admit it to themselves. My butcher doesn't say things like that, perhaps because a steak is a steak unless wagyu or grass-fed, in which cases it's still steak and there's nothing more. Imagine "two rib eyes, and more"? The least they can be is one (two ribs uncut).


Another thing the "…more" is: an afterword when the speaker / writer doesn't think they've offered enough of whatever (not whateva, which is already too much to think about); when they think unconsciously that everything is quantifiable and quantity is what every buyer is looking for (have a look at guided tour adverts in the fast emptying local broadsheets' weekend special sections for another take on this view); or, what happens when your favourite gustatory indulgence runs out after two rounds. More!!


And, there's the Nissan "MORE" I saw last nite (15/01/2013) on the tube as the adjunct to the new model's name and the maker. Just MORE. A culmination of a trajectory I had just barely noticed, carrying an implication of (much MORE) in its slipstream as Nissan struggles to sell the new Leaf which is supposed to produce less, not more.


Then there's the grammatical status of 'more' – started as an adjective, accepted as an adverb, now morphed to a noun and soon to transform into a verb? Like 'impact', 'grow'? What would it be to more something or someone? Perhaps, an undifferentiated swamping? A colourless overwhelm? A tasteless effluent?


Actually, anything would do that adds to the featureless expostulations of spin city, an all-purpose excess for the descriptively incompetent. It's, at the end of the day, another let out word: intends something and specifies nothing…like outcomes, put in place, going forward and so on ever after. Ever so moreish.

Rectifications (27) – “An education evolution”

Rectifications (27) – "An education evolution"
Torrey Orton
August 17, 2011

"From the Vice-Chancellor" it was headed,

and titled "An Education Evolution"

in a 10 page advert with TheAGE of 15/08/2011.

I thought the days of rectifications were over until this one reached out and grabbed me by my righteous spinraker cojones. How could an educated man spruiking an educational (?) institution speak of "an education evolution". Well, mainly because his audience does use the word in that flaccid, pandering way – they, too, not knowing that an evolution is something arrived at in hindsight, not foresight. Foresight (and its assistant, intention) produce actions which, if they are lucky, may become evolutions, but not in our lifetimes – unless you are of the meme = gene brigade, and even that requires some years for memal maturity.


If you are leader of an institution (Melbourne University) which mostly talks about the training and skills it is selling, it may not be a wonder that such simplicities are ignored because no longer known. I guess they are just examples of unknown knowns. (I've often wondered what they were for the man (Donald Rumsfeld) who made them a part of public discourse in 2003 at no personal expense, but a great deal for the people of Iraq).


So I guess the VC is seeking, if he intends it, to coat his training in glimmering cloth. If he'd said, for example, ' An Educational Emerging' (or the weaker, Emergence) this would have been more than acceptable, since novelty of potential substance has to come out of somewhere, otherwise it's a known known already!


The appearance of 'changing' and 'transformative' in his discourse of 'evolution' is also a known known because they are part of the suite of spinisms which pass for social, political and educational analysis in our times. Even banks do it – transform, change and evolve that is. Just watch their self-promotions. Not surprisingly individuals describe themselves in this language, too.


For an alternative discourse, see the article by Raymond Gaita in the 17/08/11 Australian
Higher Education – "Loving the truth is not enough." Gaita notes that the public discussion of educational meaning and purposes has been subverted by the discourse of consumer corporate speak, as has our world. The concepts which underlie an education have not been available to common use for decades. Woe is us. Of such are futile rants made.

Rectifications (22) – Minister for the “respect agenda”?

Rectifications (22) – Minister for the "respect agenda"?
Torrey Orton– March 29, 2010


How did I miss the Maddening one? Guess I was concerned about learning to act ethically that day. The grounds of my amazement today are summarised well here. Meanwhile, trolling the net for a few minutes failed to reveal a definition of that agenda's prime term – respect. Then I found John Brumby, Dec. 2008 on respect, noteworthy for its negative simplicity. His three defining propositions are things not to do. Presumably these are items of disrespect. So we can't learn much about what to do or how to be respectful or ourselves, others and our community.

 

"Our government understands that many Victorians are concerned about anti-social behaviour in the community," he said on Wednesday, after announcing Mr Madden's new role. "We have got some challenges in our community, particularly based around what I call respect. If you respect yourself, you don't go out and binge drink; if you respect your community, you don't go out and vandalise it; if you respect people around you, you don't go out and beat them up."

I suspect some spin'ster (contraction of spinmeister) told him that positive propositions would open the government up to empirical review of its respect performance. Not that this should trouble them since no manner of empirical review touches their disrespect for the public…but I digress.


A year later the minister responsible, Madden, provided this conversion of Brumby's don'ts into do's in a ministerial epsitle. I have added some glosses for his key terms. These suggest the inappropriateness of the glib generalities on offer.

"The Victorian Government's Respect Agenda is based on three simple ideas. We respect ourselves by accepting and valuing who we are (does this include motor head hoons, financial fraudsters and internet scammers, child abusers and bullies, religious kooks and …? Aren't they are quite likely to accept and value themselves). We respect others by listening, treating people fairly and appreciating different circumstances and views (Listening, appreciating and fairness require shared social practices and values; they can't be grabbed across gulfs of language culture and value differences on demand, but the Minister did try to demand others listen to him in a meeting he wasn't invited to!). We respect our community by welcoming newcomers and lending a hand to each other (Well, it sounds good, but fairly small town to me, having come from on. What does welcoming look like on the streets of a city where smiling at strangers on the street is an invitation to a 'who ya lookin at?' from the passing others)."

And, the principle engine for increasing respect? The schools, actually. Think of the disrespect messages they are competing with!


Respect yourself and others will respect you ~ Confucius
For example, our cat Poppy has injured self-respect. He attempts basic cat respect behaviour - head butting anything of own catty family (watch your local lion pride anytime when they're not eating or sleeping) or anyone having to do with food or pre-heated sleeping spaces (us). But he won't get closer to us than a hand's length away; not a true head butt. It's long been evident that he had a deprived or depraved kittenhood before arriving in our lands. His self-respect is damaged and his respect for others is similarly slightly depleted.


He gets a slight disrespect from me in turn, even though it's not his fault. He's just not entirely there for real respect like a ride on my chest/shoulder almost face-to-face. He can't stand the closeness, and now 14 years later resists my conflicted effort to hold him up for a view and a smoodge. People can be certainly more difficult to respect than he is, though in principle they warrant it anyway as he does.


Observation #1 – Respect is a two way function in a two-way event – a relationship. Respect has to occur with almost perfect timing to prevent it's opposite – disrespect – from rushing in. Feeling respected provides a container of engagement and commitment which allows relationships of all kinds to weather storms of others' making. These others include the gods, other people and sometimes the relationship members themselves (where one is an other for the other, as husbands and wives, the ethnically different and the differently abled always are to some extent!).


Observation #2 – Disrespect, expressed in the now well known verb 'dis', can be the underlying assumption of all relationships for some people. The 'dis' sensibility presumes a likelihood of always being dissed, and probably is fed by feeling largely dissed by life. At the public political level this seems to be what's been happening in the US for the last 5-10 years (or more?) – a culture of disrespect on a grand scale. See the most recent responses of Right pundits to the US health bill.


Lack of respect vs. active disrespect
Observation #3 – Lack of respect, or active disrespect, is one of the most common complaints of couples in trouble (sometimes both members; sometimes just one). While active disrespect provokes more virulent reactions than lack of respect, it also sharpens the perception of the provocative behaviour and attitude(s). Because they are clear, they then become accessible to reworking, or not. The more passive lack of respect carries the flag for disengagement. Those needing a respect injection are usually looking for things like:

Being consulted about what's happening; being listened to, heard and acknowledged when they are contributing to discussion; being given space to speak for themselves; being treated as a person not just a role (husband, wife, caretaker, provider, etc.); being 'just me'- having a life apart from this relationship.

It's not love but probably you can't get love without respect. Or, you can kill love by withholding respect. Disrespect over long time periods for deep needs elicits powerful feelings which, once freed, make recovery of a workably respectful flavour very hard to do.


Observation #4 - Having a "respect agenda" is to misrepresent respect. The problem where respect is absent is how to have a shared agenda of any kind. This cannot be mandated – though power can be used to encourage rather than discourage sharing. Efforts to legislate respect are often dull and indiscriminate. Politically correct behaviours trap as much as they liberate. Readiness is required. See respect attitudes, assumptions and behaviours below


Responsibility and respect
Observation #5 – Appropriately admitting ones responsibility for a perceived error or misstep in a relationship is a good step towards rehabilitating respect in relationships. Doing so demonstrates respect for self and other(s) by setting boundaries and standards for the relationship. As a result, we know what actions will be respectful to members and who may be accountable for making the effort.



Observation #6 – Being self-respecting and other-respecting can be very difficult when we are injured, sick, overloaded, under attack (direct or indirect), etc. Like Poppy, I find it hard under such difficult conditions to respect others (or myself!) when certain levels or styles of self-disrespect are present. For instance, when someone has indulged beyond their personal capabilities in any kind of consumption which threatens others' viability – alcohol, gambling, drugs, food, palliative purchasing (the world of nothing's enough consumerism)…


Definitions…
Observation #7 – One definition of respect has 8 variations with an example phrase for each. There are larger numbers of variations (try the O.E.D. for instance) but 8 are enough to suggest the range of mistakes one could make in trying to be respectful. That's within Anglo cultures!


…and differences
Observation #8 – Within cultures, the entry level behaviours of respect are politeness formulas. These are acts like acknowledging another's presence with actual contact like a handshake or virtual ones like a nod or wave, and then a query about their current state (How's it going, How's your day been, G'day, etc.). Between cultures the same rules apply, but through often unguessable or unrecognisable forms of action. It is easy to bow the wrong amount to the wrong person and insult a monarch, or earn the ire of local morality mavens. Try getting the length of a handshake right without threatening sexual identities.


Back to the agenda
The Maddening Brumby respect agenda adjusted for realities looks like this:

1. 
   
   "We respect ourselves by accepting and valuing who we are".
   Adjusted version: The boundaries of respect in our culture are …, and differences about them can be engaged in this way…but some clearly not negotiable at the moment elicit spontaneous gut rejections from others.…and it is important to acknowledge that before anything else is done.
2. "We respect others by listening, treating people fairly and appreciating different circumstances and views." Adjusted version: Fair treatment (being heard and understood in our differences) for the less powerful in any situation require the more powerful to provide safety, especially on the debatable boundaries, and beyond them, of the respectful. Real differences cannot be simply appreciated because they shock and offend in some cases (your first sniff of black bean sauce may not of course!).
3. "We respect our community by welcoming newcomers and lending a hand to each other."Adjusted version: make way for new respects by informing the present residents of any space that new arrivals may inadvertently challenge and inform new arrivals what areas of respect will be challenged for them buy their new home. These are notably obvious: intimate relationship expectations and obligations, food choices, public behaviours in gender relations, hierarchy protocols, hygiene, the nature of security services,…etc. Try the DFAT and immigration websites to see what's available to immigrants and refugees as local knowledge.
   

The third level of respect – community – is the government's main area of responsibility. Only they can do it effectively. Effective means doing it before arrival here. Or at least soon after. In the absence of the fact, sing a little song:
either Otis's or Aretha's RESPECT

..or two, the Staples'
Respect yourself

Rectifications (21) – Nefarious NAB – “Sign up to fight unfair banking”!!

Rectifications (21) – Nefarious NAB – "Sign up to fight unfair banking"!!
Torrey Orton– February 16, 2010

"Sign up to fight unfair banking"!!

… sighted on Burnley train platform, 11 Feb '10

I shouldn't have been but I was astounded by the above. Then I was mildly outraged that the bank which always takes and never gives but for a take elsewhere in the shadows at least the size of the give...the people with no people to talk to, the people who you can't even get their computer generated customer service voices without myriad seldom used numbers…all the garbage of postmodern productivity..the people I know I cannot escape by going to the competitors who also use the same spin to gain slivers of edge on each other…Arrgh! By writing this my mildness is overtaken with teeth gritting anger.


This is not dog-whistle. It's Orwellian distortion of natural orders.


"When you sign up for our everyday account there are no monthly account fees ever with no strings attached. It's just one of the ways we give our customers more." (NAB website) Plus you get NAB Visa Debit Card (and in four colours!!) at no extra cost and access to expanded range of ATMs. So where is the money made in this? In the transactions, of course. Do they say that in the adverts? No.


So, who are these banalitists ? Who pays for and who executes, apparently shamelessly (since the right to speak is on their side legally – but not morally!), the spinning of the bank's reputation for sneaky, self-interested, obscure profit-making by turning it on its head to suggest the bank is an institution committed to social and personal justice??


And when will they release the report(s) which led them to make this move towards social justice? Will these reports show that they have been scamming us in various ways for days, weeks, months, years, decades (choose your preferred standard )? Will they specify the means of scamming and the profits made from them? Will they show that the profit increments achieved by scamming are a slight proportion of total profits? No, none of these will occur because it's all commercial in confidence of course. And, if they did, their shareholders of institutional size will have a rather shady look, too. Especially the Board level ones.


Maybe it's just a counter-offensive to Westpac's bringing back the branch managers ploy? Who's the greater fake customer servicer? Anyway, they have no shame about substantive things like their dependence on public support (even our wonderfully regulated banks benefitted from such considerations last year). This isn't mentioned here as elsewhere in the international community of finance. Where the king is naked and no one sees, there's little lost by disregarding the facts.


And so, good night.

The Rectifications…of names and things (1) – ‘Send a message…’
Torrey Orton
Feb. 20, 2009
One tool for obscuring reality is inappropriate or incorrect generalisations. Another is incorrect conceptualising of the world. Contemporary spinspeak is alive with them both. Following the suggestion of Confucius, I will undertake some rectification of names in our times, though perhaps without the same finesse of distinction and definition. However, my aim is to show the way to the concrete, to palpable truths, by way of agreed significations for our signs. This requires demystification and deconstruction. The first of these follows.

Instrumental relationships (see my 2 blogs on “Dances with Difference” for details of relationship types), increasingly dominate civic processes and discourses, and uproot /swamp the intimate ones. One way this is repeatedly imposed on us is this: the prominence of expressions like ‘send a message’ or ‘the message is…’ in contexts where the audience or subject of the message is not present (and often not discoverable in any concrete sense). This is a source of endless wonder – almost an acknowledgement that no communication can occur. The presumed audience is usually the ‘community’, or occasionally a stereotypical sub-community within the ‘community’ – e.g., bikers, bankers, bogans, beachbums, barbies, ….

We know that communication is not a unidirectional encoding-packaging-sending-unpackaging-decoding process of the sender –receiver type typical of communication training. The main reason this construct fails (the sender-receiver one) is that the ‘message’, whatever it is, is truly in the eye of the beholder in the first place and so cannot be seriously claimed to have been sent until ‘reception’ is proven by a ‘receiver’ response – which is mostly undoable in the contexts where ‘send a message’ is the name for the act of attempted communication.

The claim a message is sent implies it must be heard and so settles the need of senders to fulfil their perception of their obligations to others (and implicitly to themselves). Yet, ‘send a message’ is often a plea for an effect which cannot be attained by sending alone. Maybe the speaker knows it. The intended effect therefore is the appearance of caring about the espoused ‘message’. In Australia, examples of this abound in matters like: reducing binge drinking, athletic drug taking, excess non-evidence-based executive remuneration, and on and on. And we haven’t even looked at really serious stuff like climate, GFC, fluids. Foods..… the stuff of question time where it often seems the messages are mostly to themselves, and select audiences in the political apparatus (persons and organisations – the various players).

Where the message is for a clear audience, its intent is often to show that they needn’t worry; they are understood, etc. These tend to be marginal groupings of various sorts with high marginal political potential. (See forthcoming blog called “Political Default” for disproportionate influence achieved by marginal groups). Somebody’s whistling. While we are at it, we should notice that ‘stay on message’ is the supporting cast for the main acting of sending one. Its virtue is persistence in the face of increasingly insurmountable odds that no one’s listening - except other message issuers.