One attribute you quickly acquire as a writer is thick skin. As an undergraduate columnist in San Diego, I once shadowed syndicated columnist Ruben Navarrette for the day. After a brief introduction, he asked me to follow him upstairs. He led me to his office and asked if I’d hold on just a minute. After a few moments he waved me over, pointed to his desktop and I peered over his shoulder.
I was stunned. The first words I read were: YOU (RHYMES WITH BUCKING) (INSERT RACIST SLUR HERE). He smirked and clicked on the next one. To the biggest idiot in San Diego! He shrugged. Then held the cursor on the scroll bar for approximately 10 seconds and said wryly, “Not bad for 12:00 p.m., eh?”
“That’s enough insults to last a lifetime,” I replied. “Just wait till the east coast wakes up,” I stupidly muttered under my breath.
The barrage of vitriolic e-mails was not an aberration. See for yourself. Many articles or op-eds posted online elicit disparaging ad hominem attacks. At times, they’re warranted (see the tasteless Alex Knepper column last semester), and sometimes they’re not (see columns I compose). I, for example, have been referred to as a dolt (fairly accurate), and criticized for being too smart (way off base) by using too many polysyllabic words for the same column. Even the Negative Nancy’s disagree over their disappointment.
It begs a larger question, why are we more motivated to act when we’re angry or upset than when we’re happy? Why does it take a recession before people start saving? Why does a girl have to threaten to dump her boyfriend before he starts paying attention? Why do we slander a professor for an unreasonable exam and flippantly ignore the bonus points gifted the week prior? I could go on and on.
Are we simply irascible and yearning to be ticked off? Or is our reluctance to show equivalent approbation under positive circumstances, a societal failing in need of repair? Either way, we’ve got one giant unattractive chip on our shoulders.
Last week I watched our volleyball team dismantle Holy Cross and encore that performance by escaping a tough Navy team. The second match was exhilarating, with the second set going to a nail-biting 34-32 before the Eagles prevailed. Yet aside from both basketball teams and a few friends/parents of the team, attendance was sparse. I’ve seen more vegetarians at Burger King.
However, I presume if AU administrators were considering axing the volleyball program (they’re not thankfully), there’d be a campaign of letters and exponentially more fans overnight. The outrage would spread instantly and suddenly we’d all be cheering as loud as Blake Jolivette (you’d know if you were there) at home games.
Perhaps we’re all wound up so tightly in our jobs, internships, homework and personal lives, it’s a chore to take a deep breath, acknowledge the good, and go out of our way to demonstrate our satisfaction like we do when we’re incensed. Perhaps it’s an aggregation of these stresses that make us aggressive drivers or induced the need for Eagle Rants (which I wholeheartedly endorse). It’s great to have a forum to blow off steam, but too frequently that venue encroaches on our typical behavior.
Let’s face it — we take the positives for granted.
How often do we pull a professor aside and say thanks after an inspiring lecture? How often do we tip 30 percent instead of 20 percent for excellent service? How often do we deride our employers behind close doors, while rarely appreciating them signing our checks?
Not as often as we should. And while AU students are admirably provoked by national and international injustices — we’re widely seen as the most (politically) active in the nation — inspiration to act should come from positive circumstances too.
Conor Shapiro is a graduate student in the School of International Service and a liberal columnist for The Eagle.
edpage@theeagleonline.com
