OPINION

The Trouble With Normal

Written by Richard Marcus
Published May 19, 2006

This past weekend, on Mother's Day in fact, my wife was walking downtown when she saw a cardboard sign that had been affixed to someone's front porch. Roughly, the sign read as follows: "To the person who stole the flowers I had planted in memory of my grandmother, was it because you forgot it was Mother's Day?"

What worried my wife wasn't so much the sign, but the severity of her reaction to it. She said she felt sad for the people who had their memorial stolen, angry at the bastards who did the stealing, and proud of the people for putting the sign up and not just sitting back and taking the abuse. The fact that the sign had almost reduced her to tears of both anger and sorrow made her feel like there was something wrong with her.

As a little background, you should know that my wife has been diagnosed with an acute anxiety disorder and a persistent panic condition. Because of this, she is continually worried about her emotional reactions. She continually wonders what a "normal" person's reactions would be in similar circumstances whenever she has strong feelings about any incident.

Looking at that paragraph as I've just written it, I can't help but be reminded of a song from the early eighties by Canadian singer/songwriter Bruce Cockburn (pronounced co-burn) called "The Trouble With Normal." One line in particular sticks in my head: "The trouble with normal is it always gets worse."

I've always interpreted that as meaning the way in which society becomes inured to events, how we, while not necessarily deeming it acceptable behaviour, take it for granted that things like someone digging up flowers from another person's garden, are going to happen. Our desensitization is such that, in general, we require stronger and stronger stimuli to elicit any sort of reaction.

If we can read in the papers about millions of people infected with the AIDS virus, or starving to death, or dying in a civil war, all without turning a hair, there's probably no reason to expect anyone to get upset because someone has had their flowers stolen. It probably seems pretty trivial to most people; it's just some plants that can be replaced.

We used to have an asshole crack dealer/fence living across the street from us. What made it worse was how so many people on the block would actually buy stuff from the guy even though they knew it was stolen. A couple of summers ago, a whole bunch of plants, shrubs, and even a small tree showed up outside their apartment.

page 1 | 2 | 3
Copy02-11-Richard portrait-72-4x4.jpgRichard Marcus is a long-haired Canadian iconoclast who writes reviews and opines on the world as he sees it at Leap In The Dark and Epic India Magazine.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
The Trouble With Normal
Published: May 19, 2006
Type: Opinion
Section: Culture
Filed Under: Politics: Law and Rights, Culture: Society, Culture: Family and Relationships, Culture: Crime and Court
Writer: Richard Marcus
Richard Marcus's BC Writer page
Richard Marcus's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Richard Marcus
Politics: Law and Rights
Culture: Society
Culture: Family and Relationships
Culture: Crime and Court
All Culture Articles
Richard Marcus's personal weblog
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — May 19, 2006 @ 08:05AM — Ruvy from Jerusalem

Kol hakvód! All honor to you, Richard. You did what was right in the face of the convention of closing one's eyes to evil, all too common in the world. And you took a risk doing it.

Another article that needs translating into Hebrew for the many many Israelis who merely shrug their shoulders in the face of evil.

#2 — May 19, 2006 @ 10:45AM — chantal stone [URL]

Richard!

This article is wonderful, and only reiterates something I've been feeling for a while!

Here's a brief example....
I work part-time at a restaurant. The other day I was having a conversation with another employee, we were talking about how slow business was going to be on this particular day and she asked me if it's always this way. I said yes, usually, she replied with "That's gay"...I'm assuming, meaning its a bad that the restaurant is slow, but using the term "gay" in a negative fashion. I was deeply offended by this comment. Now, I'm normally a very outspoken person, and I usually have no problem telling someone exactly how I feel, but I was so startled and shocked at this comment, and upset by it, I couldn't say anything. When I shared this with someone else, they told me I was being overly sensitive.

On another occasion, another employee at my job was making border-line racial slurs about some of the Mexicans that work with us. Again, those of us who reacted to this were told we were being overly sensitive.

But my response to that is this: what's wrong with people who are NOT sensitive to these issues? Whats wrong with the ones who can say negative things about another with no feelings of remorse? Wheres your reaction?

There's nothing wrong with me for being sensitive to the rights and feelings of others. The problem is with those who have no reaction at all.

Thank you for writing this Richard....it reminds me that not all of us have become out of touch with our humanity.

#3 — May 19, 2006 @ 17:13PM — John Spivey [URL]

Everyone is medicated. In the material culture, all our things are just so much drugs. We can make a lot of rationalizations, but in the end most of us are just junkies. Even the guys with the loud stereos are just getting a buzz on to hide from their demons. It's no easy task to be alert while everyone else is getting juiced.

#4 — May 19, 2006 @ 20:00PM — Joey

I have a said story to tell.

It was rush hour, I'm in D.C. bookin' for the train to Manassas. I'm down by the HUD building about a block from the rail station at L'enfant plaza. There's a homeless dude laid out by a bench, it wasn't an uncommon sight, but I passed and thought about how many drunks there were around the area since St. Elizabeths let them go, under orders from Mayor Marion Berry. The homeless and unwashed were on virtually every corner, with the cup out lookin for the next bottle.... anyway I'm in a hurry, a few comments cross my lips.

I make to the rail station and am standing with the crowd. I look over towards HUD and there's an ambulance there. A few minutes later someone comes up the ramp and exclaims that the ambulance in zipping up a stiff in a body bag down at the HUD building....

That's "livin in the city." I will never forget that day. I inhuman because of it. But how many people passed that dead man before someone (or a cop) checked? Who was going to check a dead drunk in DC? Who had latex gloves? The cop. There I go again. I'm hopeless.

#5 — May 20, 2006 @ 01:14AM — Richard Marcus [URL]

Thanks all for your comments, Ruvy I think it needs translating into English, Chantel isn't it amazing how sensitive has become derogatory when it used to mean heightened awareness.

John I think there's a difference between deliberatly desensitizing yourself, or blocking your awareness so you don't feel anything and having to be medicated for feeling. The first people are making a conciouse decision to turn their backs, while the second have to be helped cope with what they refuse to turn away from. If there were less of the first there would be less of the second.

Joey, how many people would feel upset enough after the fact, like you, to question themselves. To me that's just as abnormal as anybody else. At least you bore witness and remembered. Will anybody else

Richard

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/47996)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments