Measures of personal success and failure: a self-assessment, applying the sociological imagination.
Zheng, Minxing
I sometimes look back and ask myself a series of questions:
"How am I doing? Am I having a successful life so far or have I had
more failure than success? How do I measure my personal success and
failure? Was my success or failure based upon my own standards or other
people's determinations? How do I decide my standards? Are they
influenced by other people's perception? What is considered to be a
success and what is considered to be a failure? Was my success really
successful or were they considered successful only according to other
people's considerations? Did I really fail in my failure or was I
just locking myself behind another set of bars created by other people?
Am I the only one who has been living in such a life pursuing this kind
of success and avoiding that kind of failure or am I just one of many
others whose eyes are blindfolded by the society's
perception?"
As I am trying to search for the answers, I find one question
leading into another one. The deeper I get into these questions, the
more I find that some common senses aren't so common anymore,
because I cannot tell whether my common senses represent the principles
of how things are and why things are; maybe my common senses are just
"Islands of Meaning" (Zerubavel 18-23) in Eviatar
Zerubavel's words, I have "sorted my personal experiences into
distinct categories" (Zerubavel 18-23). Or maybe I was "born
into a world already interpreted and organized by others"
(Zerubavel 18-23). Perhaps I should use the " Sociological
imagination" (Mills 1) described by C. Wright Mills, to do a
self-research by linking my personal experiences with society and
history.
I was born in a small town in China, grew up in an ordinary family,
somehow managed to cross the ocean and come to the United States. Thirty
one years old today, I have a respectable job with decent salary; thirty
one years old, I have just had my American Dream come true, owning my
first house. To a lot of people, they think I am having quite a
successful life so far; but then I look even closely at myself: thirty
one years old, I am still working on my first undergraduate degree;
thirty one years old, I haven't done anything that is really
meaningful other than just working and working to make money; thirty one
years old, I still don't have a clear picture of what I will be in
the next thirty years. To some people, to me at least, it is a failure.
Ever since China opened itself up to the world, although the
thousand years long of traditions still root in most Chinese, western
cultures have always been the exceptional ones in the perspectives of
many Chinese. As China is blooming in economic and many other areas,
western cultures have become even more dominant, American culture is the
most prevailing one among them. Walking down the streets in China today,
you find you are surrounded by American cultural symbols--Nike, Adidas,
one store after another; McDonald, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut,
from corner to corner. You can see people are lining up in every one of
them. They all believe what they get are much better products, because
they all believe USA is better than China when it comes to anything
other than the national pride.
I was, or maybe I am still, one of them. I came to the United
States because I believed I would make a better living. Stories heard
from parents or seen from TV about people who migrated to America are
always wonderful; those people always come back with money and prestige
and they all seem very successful. People envy them. I envied them. That
was the reason I did not hesitate to make the decision to come here when
I got the opportunity to participate in a student exchange program
between US and China. My parents were very supportive too even though
the application fee and other expenses were quite costly. My parents
didn't have enough money to support me but they managed to borrow
money from friends and family knowing that they would have to work twice
harder and I would have to work just as hard as they did in the next few
years; however we all believed it would be worth it at the end. The
result was, I didn't see my parent and family until 10 years later,
and they didn't see me until 10 years later. Yes. I bring back
money, which seems to be much more than I actually make because of the
currency exchange difference, but I realize I can no longer buy back the
birthdays, holidays, and every other days that I could have spent with
my parents and my brothers. I wasn't there when my brother was
getting married; I wasn't there either when my grandpa passed away.
Why? Because I had to work hard to make money and I couldn't go
back until I could show others that I was successful, just like the
people in those stories; otherwise it would have been a failure. So I
finally did go back after 10 years; and yes I was cherished by other
people because I bought them many fancy gifts and paid them a fancy meal
in a fancy restaurant. However, I was lost when I saw my parents'
grey hair; I was speechless when I saw all my stuff in my room was kept
the same way as they were 10 years ago. All of a sudden I realized I had
failed as a son.
Friends laughed it off when I expressed my mixed feeling. They said
people wouldn't see the other side of this; they would only envy
your success and cherished your money and prestige; 10 out of 10 people
would have made the same decision if they had the same opportunity. They
were right. I look around and I find people are after nothing but
monetary or possession because they represent the success in our society
and it is a failure if you don't own them. You can see this in what
Jeff Taylor, a successful businessman who is the founder of Monster.com,
encouraged people to do: "to live the biggest life possible"
(Yankee 1). It was the motivation behind Taylor's success and it
has become the motivations to encourage other people pursuing the same
success.
I thought I had detached myself from this "Glorified Self" (Adler 129-138) after I started being critical to this kind
of success and failure but I found I am still being trapped in this kind
of "socially constructed reality" (Berger 2-10), in a
different place, in the US.
Everything today has a price. You need to have money to pay for
every possession you own or desire to own. The more possessions you wish
or have to have, the more money you need to have. Money rules and United
States is no different than any other places in the world. It is so
common in the US that people are working full-time during the day also
go to school or classes at night for higher education degrees or
professional certifications. I am one of them. So often I find myself
"running out of time" (De Graaf 1994) just like the people in
the documentary "Running out of Time" and coffee has become my
best friend. Every day I am dragging my body in the one and a half hours
of traffic to work, a few cups of extra bold coffee is the only thing
keeps me functional to get through the date and still have the energy
for the night classes. By the time I get home and finish eating, the day
has passed by and in the next 6 hours in the next morning, the circle
starts again. When there are deadlines needed to meet for job or school,
24 hours a day is just not enough. Why do I work so hard? Because I know
I have to extend my resume to get better pay so that I can afford the
new gadgets coming out every day after paying the monthly automobile and
housing expenses; because I know if I don't, I might be in danger
of losing my job, not having enough money to pay for the mortgage, and
losing everything that I own. High School diploma was a career guarantee
years ago, an undergraduate degree nowadays is no longer enough to
guarantee you to be extraordinary, not to mention I am still working on
my first degree. The pressure from my job competitors makes me feel very
insecure. The expensive living expense is even more frightening. Could I
have chosen to not buy the new gadgets, the nice car, and big house?
Maybe I could but then I will be "framed" as a loser or
failure because in this society, they represent the success.
So why do we care so much about being successful and not being a
failure? Why do we always have to be the number one? As Morrie Schwartz
used to say, "What is wrong with being number two" (Tuesday
2003)? Gregory R. Copley once said, "Victory is the goal of life
and therefore ultimately of the whole range of human emotions and
skills" (A.D. 1). We constantly compare ourselves with one another
to make sure we win every "personal battles" against others to
proclaim our successes. Is it a human nature or a result of human
experiences? This " nature versus nurture" (Handel 11-17)
debate is so controversial that even biological and social scientists
can't be one hundred percent sure what factors motivate human being
to pursue these kind of successes. Perhaps it is the "human
socialization" (Handel 11-17), "an ongoing process of social
interaction" (Kasper 2008) between the human born-biological nature
and human experiences; so that human being learns to be successful and
learn not to be a failure. Being successful is a very important
"self-images" (Goffman 110-118) for people to have in this
society and present themselves to other during social interaction. This
"presentation of self" (Goffman 110-118) of every individual
reflects the expectations of others; it also "influences as much
how others view and respond to her or him" (Cooley 26-30). In other
words, I am just one of the million others who are trapped in this
"being successful" self-image. At the same time, I am also one
of the reasons that many other people who interacted with me have
followed my steps. I came to the US because I envied those were before
me, but I also set an example for those who are "behind" me. I
work hard around the clock because I see people who work harder own
bigger houses, nicer cars, and more gadgets; so I work even harder to
not be framed as a loser or failure. In the process I have become one of
those people who set the example for me at the first place.
Ironically, by writing this self-exploratory paper, I begin to
understand what Louise DeSalvo means in Writing as a Way of Healing
(Desalvo 2000). As she mentioned, "Through writing, we develop
self-mastery" (Desalvo 2000). By writing these down, I look deep
into my " looking glass self" (Cooley 26-30) and I become
self-critical and therefore begin to understand what my role is in
today's "Socially Constructed Reality" (Berger 2-10). By
understanding my looking glass self formation, I gain a better insight
into how my feelings toward myself has been shaped by how I imagine
being perceived and judged by others, even though they may not actually
perceive and judge me as such.
Should we change the standards of how we measure our personal
success and failure? The common sense is: Don't fix it unless it is
broken. Is how we are measuring our success and failure right or wrong?
If it is wrong how come so many of us are sharing the same perceptions
of success and failure and everything we do seems to be just
"Face-Work" (Goffman 154) to "maintain faces"
(Goffman 155), regardless of the differences of genders, ages, and
nationalities? If it is right, then why are we never satisfied with our
success and so reluctant to acknowledge our failure? Most of the people
will argue that there is nothing wrong with our measures of success and
failure and there is nothing wrong with how our society is constructed
in that regard. They would say, "Cars are running, ships are
cruising, and planes are flying. People are working, schools are
teaching, businesses are running, and the world is moving forward. What
is wrong with that?" The answer to that question is that they are
right; there is nothing wrong with that. There is no absolute right or
wrong about how we measure our success and failure. What is wrong about
that is that we are taking everything in this society for granted. We
think there is nothing wrong with anything that has been labeled right
and we think there is nothing right about anything labeled wrong. We
pursue the success defined by the society without questioning and we
avoid the failure set by the society with no hesitation. That is what is
wrong with our measures of personal success and failure. A wise man once
said, "In order for a person to be freed from jail, the person must
first know he or she is actually in jail." We are living in a jail
of "Social Structures" (Adler 252) without even knowing it.
Take the measures of personal success and failure for example. From
the minute we are born into this world we have started competing with
each other. Parents have prayed for our success long before our first
cries in this world. They wish we are healthier, stronger, taller,
prettier, smarter, or happier because at some point in their lives they
had experienced unpleasantness due to the disadvantages they had in
health, appearances, or intellects. Humans are not perfect, therefore we
carry this or that "deficiency" into the world. If we somehow
couldn't overcome any of these "deficiencies" as we grow
up, we will be labeled as failures or losers by others in society. Some
of the "deficiencies" can be overcome more easily than the
others; but many of them are almost impossible to be overcome because
nothing in our society would give them a chance to succeed. For
instances, if you were not as attractive as others you may still succeed
in your life or career with your intellectual abilities that you learn
as you grow up; it is also true vice versa. However, if a person was
born with physical or mental disabilities, he or she will have great
difficulties to be accepted and succeed in this society even after they
managed to survive at the first place. The same happens to people being
stereotyped. If a person was being stereotyped and put into a certain
group, he or she will be assumed to have all characteristics the group
is defined. The Adlers' research on preadolescents showed that it
would also affect his or her self-concepts and self-esteems if a child
was stratified as the "Isolates" (Adlers 252) in the
"Status Hierarchy" (Adlers 254) based on his or her
popularity. That would then sentence them as losers in the
"Identity Hierarchy" (Adlers 267). It is a completely
different story if the child was in "the Popular Group" (Adler
252). You can also tell this when looking at the "parent-child
relationships" (Best 202) in the modern history. The constant
"Negotiations Between Parents and Teens" (Best 203) over cars
indicate that cars symbolize success to the children. So it gets to a
point that the measures of a person's success or failure in our
society are completely determined by either the person's material
processions or social recognitions. People think there is nothing wrong
with it because they think that is just the way things are or they think
it is so inevitable that there is nothing they can do to change it. It
is a sign of compromise and if we "get in a habit of comprising ...
we are always compromised" (Yates 2005). We have got to do
something to change that.
It is always easier said than done. In many ways, making such a
change seems to be a very complicated and challenging task but sometimes
it could be just as simple as an "awakening" (Awakenings 1997)
call from someone or something. If you look at this from a broader
sociological perspective, personal success and failure are just tinny corners of the "social structure" of our society. To change
the perceptions of personal success and failure, we need to change our
perceptions of the social reality.
There are many ways to accomplish it. Although the methods are
different, they all share some common characteristics in the processes
of working toward it. Louise DeSalvo's Writing as a Way of Healing
offers a step-by-step approach to accomplish the goal by writing. In her
book, DeSalvo thinks that people suffer because of their past
experiences and interactions with other people in the society. She
thinks of writing as a method that goes through seven different stages
that can heal one's pains and suffers. In the process of going
through these writing stages, you discover your true self and understand
what your relationships with the society are; ultimately, not only you
could heal yourself, but also you will succeed in gradually
"awakening" yourself from ignorance. We don't necessary
have to write in order to heal. There are many forms of healing ways
that will have the same results as long as you follow the same approach
going through the seven stages of healing processes: the Preparing
Stage, the Germination Stage, the Working Stage, the Deepening Stage,
the Shaping Stage, the Completing Stage, and the Going-Public Stage
(DeSalvo 108-150). In many ways, the way I worked on conducting this
self-exploration and writing this paper followed DeSalvo's proposed
stages.
There is no clear boundary between the two stages of preparation
and germination. DeSalvo describes the Preparing Stage as a stage when
you will be "Formulating a Writing Plan," "Considering
Our Intentions," "Reading," and "Finding Models and
Mentors" (DeSalvo 108-150); and she says that after the preparation
and planning, you begin to have a sense of the directions of your
writings in the Germination Stage based on your planning, readings, and
examining what you can learn from mentors although you might still be
confused and unclear about the details. That is a very typical
experience for writing but you can also see the meaning behind these
stages for a broader purpose, that is, to change our perceptions on
personal success and failure. Basically, to make such as change, you
have to realize there is a need to do so at the first place. In the
Preparing Stage, you make initiatives to observe things and people; you
then begin to digest the information you observed with some kind of
planning. As a result you begin to notice there are more in the every
day life experience that may meet your eye at first. This is like an
eye-opening process during which you prepare your mindset and determine
to pursue such a change or, in other words, as I experienced when
writing this paper, you may begin to discover that you are "in
jail" without knowing it. This gives you a motivation to continue
your exploration and writing your paper.
Then you begin to work on your writings in the Working and
Deepening stages. According to DeSalvo, you begin to really sit down and
make a commitment to follow the agendas you set in the preparing stage.
You deal with all the difficulties and distractions and at the same
time, you deepen your writings by "revising what you have
written" and re-examine your ideas and thoughts. To apply this
approach to my "getting out of jail" exploration, you perform
a "Self-Disclosure" (Cameron 1) by using a more critical
perspective to analyze your observations and your thoughts; more
importantly you don't let yourself be distracted by difficulties
and distractions by using "Emotion Management Strategies"
(Arluke 339). You don't take anything for granted. You question
everything including yourself. As a result, you discover not only your
successes but also your failures. You also begin to understand that the
real success requires you to "balance strengths and
weaknesses" (McDonnell 1).
DeSalvo also emphasizes the Going-Public Stage. In writing, the
Going-Public stage involves making your writing public for other people
so that you can share your ideas and thoughts. In changing the measure
of personal success and failure, the ultimate goal is not only to change
your own perceptions, but also the society's perceptions. The only
way to do that is to share your perspective with others and prove to
them with the evidences you have collect during the previous stages; as
a result, more and more people will learn what you have learned, and be
gradually awakened to the situation they have lived in before. When
there are enough people awakened, the society can be awakened as well.
Then come the Shaping and Completing Stages. After you become clear
about what your writing is all about, you start putting everything you
have learned in order and shaping them into certain form that you can
present them. The ideas and thoughts in your mind don't necessary
translate in your writings. You need to carefully work on your
presentation of the writings so that you write what you mean and the
readers understand what you mean in your writing. This is also as
important as it is making the change in one's perceptions of
success and failure. After you critically analyze your observations and
discoveries, you organize your thoughts and put things in order so that
you can clearly understand the rights and wrongs behind the existing
measures of personal success and failure, and understand what kind of
standards the measures should really be. At the end one will, as I have
tried to do, seriously change one's perspective of how things
should be in terms of personal success and failure.
I have tried in this paper to look at myself and the world in which
I live with a more critical eye, using my "sociological
imagination." The key is to realize that the difficulties we face
in our inner and broader social lives arise from realities and social
structures that have been socially constructed through prior human
inter/actions and behavior. Therefore, even though what constitutes
personal success and failure is also shaped largely by these social
structures, as human actors we can participate in reshaping these social
structures and cultural values that are attached to them. As Gubrium and
Holstein argue, "No single discursive environment determines who
and what we are" (Cahill 426).
Bibliography
A.D. "The Art of Victory: Strategies for Personal Success and
Global Survival." National Review 59.2 (12 Feb. 2007): 48-48.
Adler, Patricia and Peter Adler. "The Gloried Self." Pp.
129-138 in Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los
Angels: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
Adler, Patricia, Peter Adler. "Preadolescent Cliques,
Friendships, and Identity." Pp. 252-272 in Inside Social Life. Ed.
Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company,
2007.
Awakenings. Dir. Penny Marshall. Perf. Robert De Niro, Robin
Williams. 1990. DVD. Sony Pictures, 1997.
Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. "The Social Foundations of
Human Experience." Pp. 1-10 in Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E.
Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
Best, Amy. "Parent, Kids, and Cars." Pp. 202214 in Inside
Social Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury
Publishing Company, 2007.
Cahill, Spencer E., Robin Eggleston. "Wheelchair Users'
Interpersonal Management of Emotions." Pp. 176-187 in Inside Social
Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury
Publishing Company, 2007.
Cahill, Spencer E. Ed. Inside Social Life. Los Angeles: Roxbury
Publishing Company, 2007.
Cameron, Jessica J., John G. Holmes, and Jacquie D. Vorauer.
"When self-disclosure goes awry: Negative consequences of revealing
personal failures for lower self-esteem individuals." Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology 45.1 (Jan. 2009): 217222.
Cooley, Charles Horton. "The Self as Sentiment and
Reflection." Pp. 26-30 in Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E.
Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
De Graaf, John. Running Out of Time. 1994.
DeSalvo, louise. Writing as a Way of Healing. Boston: Beacon Press,
2000.
Goffman, Erving. "Face-Work and Interaction Rituals." Pp.
154-164 in Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los
Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
Goffman, Erving. "The Presentation of Self." Pp. 110-118
in Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles:
Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
Handel, Gerald, Spencer E. Cahill and Frederick Elkin. "Human
Neural Plasticity and Socialization." Pp. 11-17 in Inside Social
Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles: Roxbury
Publishing Company, 2007.
Kasper, Loretta F. Socialization and Culture. 2008. <
http://kccesl.tripod.com/hypertextstudy/printtext.html>.
McDonnell, Peter J. "One-trick ponies: Professional, personal
success hinges on balancing strengths, weaknesses." Ophthalmology Times May 2008: 4+.
Mills, C. Wright. The Sociological Imagination. Oxford University
Press, 1958.
The Girl in the Cafe. Dir. David Yates. Perf. Bill Nighy, Kelly
MacDonald. 2005. DVD. HBO Home Video, 2005.
Tuesday with Morrie. Dir. Mick Jackson. Perf. Jack Lemmon, Hank
Azaria. 1999. DVD. Buena vista Home Entertainment, 2003.
Yankee. "To Live the Biggest Life Possible." Yankee 70.10
(Dec. 2006): 14-14.
Zerubavel, Eviatar. "Islands of Meaning." Pp. 18-23 in
Inside Social Life. Ed. Spencer E. Cahill. 5th Edition. Los Angeles:
Roxbury Publishing Company, 2007.
Minxing Zheng
University ofMassachusetts Boston
minxing.zheng001@umb.edu
Minxing Zheng is an undergraduate student at UMass Boston, majoring
in Computer Science (BS). He wrote this paper as a freshman while
enrolled in the course Sociology 110G-02 "Insiders/Outsiders"
instructed by Mohammad Tamdgidi (Associate Professor of Sociology at
UMass Boston) during the Fall 2008 semester.