雙面人的生活哲學

畢業在即， 筆者於剛這去的暑假大膽地探索了自己在藥劑、表演藝術兩極的價值及將來雙重生活的可能性。人生最後一個悠長暑假，奉獻了一個月給黃大仙醫院藥房，一個半月給音樂劇，及三個月的週日給現代舞演出。與此同時，同期進行的還有不定期的觀劇及演後評論寫作。這樣的暑假，對任何人來說都的確充實得很。但心靈卻是難以形容的空虛，甚至覺得是在倚靠各式的事件繼續乏力地生存著，已經不是生活了。因為只顧專注於眼前排山倒海的任務，漸漸進入行屍走肉的精神狀態，失去了基本生活的行動力。當每一項計劃逐一結束時，在該場合結交、建立的友誼亦隨之被冰封，失落感亦隨之而來。

這個可能是一個很平常的事。相信不少人都曾幾何時在一個特定場合中結識了話題投機的朋友，在該場合可謂無所不談，暢快非常。但場外則毫無聯絡，各自回到 一獨立的世界。這樣的友誼多數都不持久。可有想過這個其實是一個有意識的決定？可能在大家的僭意識當中，都很想保護自己的內心世界，不讓外人對自己的其他身份有任何評論。因此，角色與角色之間都盡量保持距離，盡可能把不同的社交圈子維持在獨立的狀態。

浸淫於三個不同的年齡層、背景不同的社交圈子裡，默然驚覺工作的本質不止工作能力，更重要的是如何巧妙地處理人際關係。因為工作支配生命，而生命的意義往往從成就及人事中建立，兩者缺一不可。活出豐盛人生不是單靠外在的事件(business)，更需要內在的滋潤。學習與人相處是人生最大的一項功課。當中以現代舞排演班的社交模式最教筆者好奇，社交氣氛熱情中帶拘謹，表面無所不談，但關於正職卻半句不談。整班學員的年齡層較集中， 大部分都是中年在職人士，背景亦是範圍甚廣，由紀律部隊到醫療界，要算最年輕的就是筆者。大家的緣份是源於大家對舞蹈的熱誠，好奇問及工作，得到的答案也不過是很籠統的「文職」。那麼文職到底是什麼，這個根本沒有一個清晰的定義。直到表演當天， 因為一次藥物討論才發現原來身旁的拍擋，化名Kitty，竟然是同行的配藥員！這教筆者意外非常！而當中亦有同樣來自醫療界的護士、甚至同門師姐﹣藥劑師。這個發現讓筆者沉思她當初那「文職」的說法。

「文職」這盔甲
其實文職這個名詞泛指所有從事非勞力為主的職業，在現代社會中，文職所包含的工種多不勝數，這個答案實在虛無得很。很明顯，就不過是一個掩飾，是一種自我保護的行為。值得深究的是，當筆者詢問她有否邀請工作上的朋友前來觀賞自己的演出時， 她立即剎有芥蒂地說同事們不知道她在舞蹈世界的種種。甚至在特意在熱門的社交網站﹣Facebook 上開設兩個獨立的戶口，一個用來聯絡感情，一個用來應酬同事。圈子之間可謂乾脆梸落。為什有這樣的安排？

她的故事一直在筆者腦海揮之不去，因為大家的背景及所面對的社交處境甚為相似。同樣游離兩極筆者不停在思考應如何處理自身身份的問題，應如何對外交待云云。學生與舞者，兩個身份都對筆者同樣重要。但每當在一個陌生的社交場合都會為要自我介紹而感到壓力，不是因為其中一個身份讓筆者感到羞恥、或有意隱藏任個一個身份，而是大多人對「舞蹈」不理解，甚至有誤解。有時不交待，反對自已有好處。 現在的她似乎回應了一直困擾著筆者的迷思。

她其中一個身份﹣「舞者」，外界對其誤解更深。 一個不知情的人只會認為舞蹈只是一項放鬆身體、減肥的娛樂而已。 不少前輩都不認同它的專業性，更遑論其藝術性。因為傳統思想一直認為舞者的生涯短暫，成功例極少。沉迷下去，只會「玩物喪志」，是一個無底深潭。更有保守的一輩認為舞蹈不過是一種賣弄身體的行為，把對舞蹈的理解建基於古時「藝妓」的形象上。要解釋亦不容易，那就乾脆不說，總比換來貶義的評語好。再者，對身份的攻擊事小，只怕不是每個人都只「對事不對人」。筆者亦聽過不少直接人身攻擊的例子， 如參與政治或社會運動等於「搞破壞」的人，同性戀者等於性濫交等等。由這些例子可以更理解為何當事人不願意透露身份，為的就是減低別人對自己歧視、攻擊、侮辱的可能，更能減低被他別人利用的風險。

「陳規化」（Stereotype) 可以是一種傷人的思想，不單對當事人不公平， 在極端例子中， 更是一種侮辱、人身攻擊。特別是當代舞蹈這項藝術，對當代藝術沒有基本概念的人真在很難理解它是什麼的一回事。一般人對舞蹈的切入點建立於對通俗的街頭舞蹈或傳統舞蹈的片面美學理解。筆者不是在否定當中的藝術性，但就它們的本質、特性而言， 娛樂成分較重， 這兩個舞種未有發展成一種作深入交流的肢體語言。因此它們給予外人的印象不過是以技巧取悅人的表演而已，跳得再好也不過是一項娛樂。然而，普遍人對娛樂不會有太高層次的追求。相反， 後現代舞蹈是一種成熟的溝通語言，非但打破傳統以來只對美學的追求，更在符號學這大行其道的思潮衝擊下建構出更多元化的詞彙，並醞釀成一項別具意義的專業，而這項專業正是當代舞者的存在價值及身份意義。可悲的是，基於香港缺乏這方面的教育，普羅大眾確實難以與當代藝術接軌，他們唯有從故有的概念﹣那表面的切入點去理解現代舞蹈。情況猶如用英吋的尺去量度厘米性質的物件，這樣的理解犯了根本性的毛病。不但對現代舞者不公平，更間接否定舞者的存在價值。

此外，社會對不同工種亦存在不同的程度的期許，形成所謂的階級觀念。單是配藥員這行專業，其實需要一定的專業知識，不僅是一位普通「執藥」的技術人員，除了準確配藥，更需要懂得分辨某些潛在的藥物危險，較有經驗的配藥員亦需要指導病人正確服用藥物的方法及相關注意事項。一位資深的配藥員在醫院的角色可謂舉足輕重，不單要管理藥房內的大小事項，上至人手調配，下至採購藥物，一位成功的配藥員更可減輕香港的醫療負擔。但外在對其角色的認識相對淺薄，從「執藥妹」這個稱號更可見大眾對其尊重亦低。這也解釋了為何Kitty不願意對外介紹這項職業，無謂因為外界的曲解可能帶來不必要的不尊重。

這個處理高明在能保護自己的身份、名聲，更減少自已在社交群中過份抽離，亦保護了該社交群的人際氣氛。當帶著多種身份工作時，除了可能影響專心程度，及其工作表現。自身亦會因為其他身份所帶來的榮辱就影響言行及其形象，當中以自卑及驕傲這兩個心理素質最能顛覆社交氣氛。過份自卑的人不敢發言，驕傲的人亦看不起其他人。任何一個特性都會深化人與人之間的隔閡，甚至破壞人際關係，繼而影響工作氣氛，最後更可能影響工作效率。簡單來說， 事情愈簡單，問題愈少。同樣，人與人之間的分歧愈少，發生磨擦的機會亦較少。獨立社交群不但免卻交待的麻煩，更能簡化社交群的雜質，有利於提升工作效率。

盔甲背後
活在後現代社會裡，追求專業，不少人都擁有多重身份。當中有人的主、副身份屬同一圈子，亦有人的身份來自兩個截然不同的世界，甚至特性逆向、互相矛盾。以筆者的個人故事為例，從小就過著雙面人的生活，鼎盛時期，身兼六任。當中有角色重疊、亦有不同的路線。可能因為路線的發展仍相當幼嫩，未至於喧賓奪主。但隨著年歲增長，經驗沉澱，內在慾望的呼聲愈來愈大。同時，壓在肩上的擔子愈趨沉重。本來不明文的規定開始變得明文，已經沒有逃避的藉口。這個就時候才驚覺原來那可任意犯錯的青春已經不再，長輩、社會對我們的期許來勢洶洶，好像沒有商量的餘地。這個就是剛進入成年階段時所面對的壓力， 一方面不容許犯錯的餘地、同時一大堆各式各樣的規條嘩啦嘩啦地衝過來。一旦涉及利益衝突、責任等的問題，身份們開始出現角力問題，自身的定位突然變得模糊。明明一開始就是帶著這麼複雜的責任，但在青春階段時，我們在長輩們不斷的鼓勵、保護下成長，當我們踏入社會，一切的鋼筋就突然拆除，堆得高高的平台一下子懸空了。要站得穩，就得重新建立屬於自己的定腳點。

剛才提及，兩個角色的特性愈大差異， 當局者很容易陷入角色困惑。到底自己是什麼？那一個身份才是真正代表自己？當中的主、次到底是自己確立自己的價值，還是大眾普遍認同的價值觀？自我的身份認同是我們在社會定位的關鍵，繼而影響我們的言行。

具體例子：我們很多時候有些訊息只願意與某些朋友分享，有些則想隱藏。 日積月累，這個選擇性的訊息發放就在無形間形成特有的循環，漸漸我們在不同的社交群裡樹立了不同的形象，建立不同的身份。 這個暑假看見的種種迫使筆者重新觀曕後現代殖民理論的可能局限，有必要從日以繼夜夜以繼日的年齡穿梭中所親身接觸的社會交際中再次拆解，繼而狠剖歷史遺留的思考框架。 從現象學的角度切入，每個面對訊息發佈的選擇都是我們潛意識的決定，而這個種僭意識則是源於自我保護的機制。那麼潛意識的構成就是這些決擇的關鍵了，筆者認為當中以性別包袱最為決定性。

港式「第二性」
香港這個國際都會看似開放，但骨子裡仍帶有中國傳統觀念，受傳統儒家思想甚深。雖然重男輕女概念經過西方的教育及基督教的洗禮，已經逐漸淡化。但「男主外，女主內」這個規律仍然根深蒂固，社會上仍然有共識地期望女性應懂得處理家務及照顧家庭。同時，女性亦被期望對社會有貢獻。換言之，女性一開始就被逼負上兩個身份。主內，是理所當然。但主外， 是否可任意發揮？

女性的社會地位在這去的數載起伏不定。在殖民時代時，女性的社會地位開始在混沌的英國女王主義漸漸成形。曾經於七十年代紅極一時的無線電視的電視劇集《家變》中由汪明荃飾演的洛琳一角，奠下「女強人」的形象。劇中的她受到觀眾追棒，這股熱潮為當時的意識形態注入新氣息。性格剛強，有事業的女性開始得到社會的認同。「女強人」一詞在那個年代時，本質上是帶褒義的。然而，語言是一門有趣的學問。字的定義是會隨時代背景，累積的集體回憶而轉變。到了二千年時，「男親女愛」在當時社會引起廣泛的討論。不單是因為劇情及其「到位」的幽默情節。更重要的是，劇中女主角毛小慧（鄭裕玲飾）亦是女強人，但這回卻是一個截然不同的類型。她是一個感情空白，唯有寄情於工作而導致精神恍惚的可憐人。再者， 在劇中的毛小慧是一個喜劇角色，觀眾對之喜愛不而。同樣也是女強人，但不同年代的觀眾反應也不同。要再深入解析這個現象，先要明白喜劇是一回什麼的東西，以及戲劇人物與現實之間的關係。

既然「做戲」這回事是離不開「人性」這本體，那麼本來中性的事件在舞台上經這放大、縮小及各種力度的處理後，觀眾對之的反應其實對假想人物的評價。我們對戲劇中的人物產生共鳴，是基於我們對之的認同。相反，喜劇人物是不被認同的。伏爾泰(Voltaire, 1694-1778)曾對喜劇人物作如此的定義:「喜劇人物不應 該想要具有靈性,他應該能不經意地逗趣,但自己卻不認為是如此的人。」_[1] 如一個人突然滑倒，或是生活潦倒不堪都會令觀眾發笑。但此舉明顯不是一種認同的表現，相反，是基於否定的態度。因為我們覺得這樣的事件是可笑的、荒謬的。

因此，毛小慧這個喜劇女強人在廣受歡迎之際，同時亦反映出社會開始對「職業女性」抱有質疑、否定，是具諷刺意味的。簡單來說，在該特定時空下，「女強人」的揭後語是情場失意及事業得意的女性。這裡涉及兩個被否定的概念：一、女人應該有愛情，有家庭；二、女性不被主張有太遠大的事業發展。然而，毛小慧一角隱喻了當時社會對「女性」的思想框架，而「女強人」一詞似乎淪為一個情場失意的白領女性的糖果衣。這個延伸義在今天進一步極化，同一個意思已經換上「剩／盛女」、「敗犬」這個充滿諷刺意味的黑衣，叫人卻畏不恭。這兩個詞語不但對女性不尊敬，更深化父權思想下女性的「附屬性格」_[2]，再次回到以男性為中心的思想。想不到十年後的今天，男女平等的革命未曾成功，就已經回到起點。最惹人反感的是這些字眼不但負面，更否定了女性在事業上的成就，「覓得如意郎君」才是女人應該定位的地方。這個新思潮不過是後現代的「第二性」，感嘆社會保守了。

港式「第二性」的來臨可能是港人對身份認同缺乏安全感其中一個表現而已， 重新擁抱「女主內」、「三從四德」的傳統思想，是間接對我國大中華文化的呼喚。自從九七回歸時，殖民關係就此劃上句號。港人終於要從殖民夢中醒來，得開始重新思索自己的身份。一直浸淫自己的西洋海水終於要徹退，打算重歸血脈相連的中華文化之際卻發現已經變質得模糊難辨。港人的身份頓時迷失於回歸形成的文化斷層，遊離於黑色真空之中。經過相當時間的沉澱、經驗的累積，我們的身份開始在共同創造的歷史形態與味道中成形。港人今天的中國思想特色，很大程度上，是彷照冰封於共產時代前的中華文化而復興的。這個亦是人迷失時的天性﹣在沿用已久的傳統裡尋找安全感，這也是「重回保守」的部分原因。可悲的是，就女權革命而言，這個並不是最理想的文化揚棄。也許就是因為這個歷史包袱，社會傾向鼓吹婦女以家為中心， 讓今天的女性都不太勇於承認在社會上擔當的所有身份。

人創造了語言 語言創造了人
筆者之所以提出語言與潛意識之間關係， 皆因兩者的關係與「雞與蛋」一樣糾纏不清。但必須承認文字是深化潛意識的工具。以上探討的「第二性」不過是構成社交隔閡的其中一個因素，還有其他心理因素，如社會對工種的刻板印象及期許。表面看見那些左右決定的因素，推至最後還是源於語言。俗語有云：人言可畏，當一個人多次被語言傷害過後，都會學會慎言，甚至變得沉默。經歷過人生風雨的Kitty也許就是深明這個道理，慬得沉默及守密永遠都對自己有好處。披露太多等同開了防護網，別人的誤解與成見就是尖銳的武器。 換句話說，角色分裂是一種保護內心深處的天性。「為方便起見， 起個字眼表示一下是很好的， 但一僵化起來，便成不可磨滅的實體。」李安宅先生所說的就是語言本身的殺傷力。[3]上文提及一些現代流行的通俗俚語，經過媒體不停渲染，潛移默化，將會造成無法估計深遠的影響。

說穿了，還是語言在作怪。能夠抵擋語言這殺人於無形的凶器，只有聰明的沉默這個盾牌。

活在當下
能在生命中遇上她讓筆者茅塞頓開，她好比若干年後的自己，人生的迷思亦開始有些眉目。她活演出雙面人的美學，憑著「活在當下」的態度重組、梳理肢離破碎的身份。平日排練時，她永遠都在旁默默練習，上至學習舞步下至與學員共事，處處彰顯其謙卑的處世態度。從不驕傲亦不分神，只專注於眼前的任務，給眼前的身份最好的交待，就「當下」的自己確立最大的價值。還記得有人問一位名指揮家：「請問您這一生做過最重大的事是什麼？」指揮家說：「每一件在『當下』完成的事都很重大。對我來說，指揮一個龐大的交響樂團，和削一顆蘋果，一樣重大。重點是那個『當下』，而不是事情。」他們都切切實實地實淺了佛家追求的「禪」，摒除雜念地盡自己最大的誠意和努力對待每一刻。

現實中的確存在無數掣肘，無形中侵略我們的內在的僭意識，繼而影響外在行為。上文探討了一些社會意識形態潛在的不公平，但無論這些問題會改善或惡化，都不應這些讓外圍因素影響自己的人生觀。人生在世永遠不能事事如意，決定我們的幸福快樂不應是社會的意識形態，而應建築於我們根本的處事態度及價值觀，不要輕易讓世俗蒙騙。就如街舞青年常在公眾場所跳舞，間中受到路人的責罵。但事實上，路人不會從「責罵」得到什麼，反之這群舞者卻會繼續進步。太在意世俗眼光只會拖垮我們，只要心底裡知道自己一直在正面地進步就去做好了。

說到底，思想框架不過是過眼雲煙，要突破現實的無形框框只有讓自己完全浸淫於現在這一刻。因為過去與未來遠不及現在這一刻真實，全神貫注地完全使用眼前的這一刻是活出豐盛人生的祕訣。相信，「活在當下」就是 “Work and Productive Life” 的鑰匙。

「你所擁有的，就是『現在』。即使你打算活上三千年、數萬年，也必須牢牢記住：你失去的不是別的事，而是『現在』。」沉思錄 第二卷[5]


文／火靈

參考書目:

[1]朱鴻洲，（2012），《戲劇研究第九期》。台北：國立臺灣大學戲劇學系

[2] 呂秀蓮，(1974)，《新女性主義》。台北：幼獅。

[3] 李安宅，（1951），《意義學》。上海及各埠：商務印書局。

[4]鄭令，（2011），《沉思錄。一念之間改變人生》。台北：人類智庫數位科技股份有限公司。

The game between social identity and collective context

Self introduction can be a difficult task to some people, no joke, it can be even more challenging than delivering a prepared speech in public to some. Recalling your last self introduction experience, how did you present yourself to the fresh faces? Name, occupation and hobby? Were you feeling embarrassed about speaking any of these? Could it be any possibility you were revealing something you’re intrinsically committed but appeared to be not well-laccepted among the audience in that occasion? Does it matter if people view and value you by your occupation? 

Interesting yet bothering is the social identity. Although we are not yet immersed in the real adult world, our limited past experiences tell us people often value one, in terms of personality and ability, simply by one’s occupation and educational background. Whenever I am asked to briefly introduce myself, I do feel anxious about (maybe I am just overreacting) which of my social characters I should acquaint the audience with, ranging from pharmacy student to brunches of amateur. With no special hierarchy, three identities indispensably complete my soul. It may be confusing if unveiling all. It is, however, conflicting with my conscience if only register one, which is clearly not enough to represent my whole. 

I once had an unpleasant experience of self-introduction. Instead of boringly presenting what I am in simple defined terms, I told them what exactly I am with many descriptive words along with usual leisure activities as examples. I thought I made myself fairly clear enough to fulfill such task, strangely most of them appeared to be unsatisfied with my round-round introduction. One just could not resist asking about, or interrogating, my major. Surprising enough, the word ‘pharmacy‘ amazingly eased the tension on their faces right away.  That stroke my head up thinking why that matter so much? Could it be said that ‘pharmacy’ is way superior in explaining my personality than whole brunch of concrete daily examples? This drew me to reconsider the social substantiality of work, which seems to be the golden gateway to one’s profile. 

As a matter of fact, this embarrassing experience indeed brought my puzzle of social identity to light. Strange but true, so-called concrete examples can somehow be more abstract than the defined terms. Stereotype offers a ladder to understanding and bricks as social symbols of certain activities. Regardless the accuracy of the customs or stereotype, they are the fundamentals for further access. As in the reading materials we have in our course, we learned to appreciate their social significance by equipping us with basic foundation for more in-depth sophisticated discussion among individuals. Stereotype, derived from well-known features, forms a base that allows social interactions in the context of collective culture established. 

Pharmacists versus contemporary artists, I believe the majority are much more familiar with the former professional than with the latter. Although people are not educated in any sort of pharmaceutical sciences, they do have some idea about what it is. With no conscious awareness, in Hong Kong at least, we are constantly exposed to the information about pharmacists through various ways, mainly from mass media and commercials, or even personal experiences. Most Hong Kong people are accustomed to the nature of pharmacist, instinctively, intellectually or emotionally. 

On the other hand, no surprise, very little ever had previous exposure to contemporary art thorough their lifetime. The size of the circle is almost neglectable. For those who are interested in contemporary performing art (excluding the deeply engaged ones), you may have some rough ideas about it. But did you know this: 

“Most Butoh exercises use image work to varying degrees: from the razorblades and insects of Ankoku Butoh, to Dairakudakan’s threads and water jets, to Seiryukai’s rod in the body....Looked at from completely scientific standpoint, this is rarely possible unless under great duress or pain but, as Kurihara points out, pain, starvation, sleep deprivation were all part of life under Hijikata’s method, which may have helped the dancers access a movement space where the movement cues had terrific power.”

This short paragraph briefly highlighted the substantial nature of the Butoh. Happening to know such ugly, awkward and inhuman moves as one of the top three major dance genres can be shocking to most people. Yet, it is merely a common sense among performing art lovers. 

Nothing is inborn, though your innate talents may nourish you a faster, deeper and wider development in certain tracks. We must appreciate everything can indeed be acquired, to various degree. In other words, social value is quantified by how much and deeply one field is rooted in one society. 

Having known social value grows in the context of shared experiences, it may answer why concerns or worries appear upon revealing your identities. Confession to identity is just a minor thing. More importantly, the implication is, in extreme case, one can share joys and sorrows with no one if such context is only adopted by little or none. Similarly, the mad ones are feeling helpless is because their thoughts can no way be accessed by anyone. Now the question is: is there any sign showing our collective culture is shrinking?

Communication gap seems to be an inevitable growing trend along human revolution. By the time passes, differentiation and diversity exponentially increase as the result of natural development. Take job as an example. Rewinding the development of the job over past few decades, we must admit that there have been so many new job positions being generated since then. No matter those new born positions are supernovas or simply sub-tracks broken from one old bulk, surely the gaps get more widely stretched as the further they go. In such case, differentiations arisen between jobs make occupation no longer a concrete platform for communication in a conventional way. It is sensible to say that collective context is sacrificed at the expense of differentiation. However, does that really mean work is losing its social meaning? 

Social meaning does not undyingly stick to the same parameter. My observation is, we conventionally interacted with peers by exchanging opinions on the same object, in which collective context played a pivotal role. However, people nowadays tend to communicate by exchanging experiences/adventures or emotional responses. This transformation in social pattern could be attributed to the influence of technology, or Third Wave in Toffler’s words

. People seems to be fairly used to handling fresh new information without context as a base. Having been bombarded by multifarious information every second, the new age counterparts seem to have come up with a new solution in dealing with their unexplored areas. Background information is now substantiated by the third party - Google, which just answers almost everything. ‘Googling’ is now a common practice among most gadget users. Worth noting is that, such practice may slowly internalizes and transforms one’s social habit, presuming people may be more willing to ‘google’ each other when unfamiliar terms come to sight. Google, undeniably, has fostered a new social attitude of ‘I will know it somehow’ towards unfamiliar things. This even further encouraged the ‘presenting type’ of social mode.  

My theory is that, social meaning is evaluated by how people socialize. If the ‘presenting style’ ever becomes the new form of human communication, the social meaning of work will be, in contrast, more favorable to those are more deviated from collective context. 

To a considerable extent, social identity is shaped by the importance of collective context, just a matter of time and space. 

___________________

Flare

Why do we care what job we hold?

During our discussion, the whole atmosphere went dull and blue at the instant when the fear of hunting a job came on the scene. Shaky job market was not what pulled our faces long, but rather what we exactly want and where we could fit in. Yes, we do care what we are working for.

Why do we bother what kind of job we hold? As the civilization goes on, a remarkably growing awareness of selecting a right job drifts in. Message behind this interesting change is that people nowadays appreciate ‘job’ in a more sophisticated sense. Dating back to old days, people were, to a great extent, merely working for the sake of making a living. Choices of occupation were not complicated then, yet, they did not pay too much attention to what they do either. As long as they could survive with that, any kind would do them favor. In contrast, people in the modern days do hold preferences in seeking a job. The implication is they are expecting something beyond simply fulfilling basic needs - the pursuit of other desires, qualities of je ne sais quoi. As modern human beings, we anticipate intrinsic comforts, namely pleasure, from ‘job’, rather than viewing it as a tool for soothing fleshy needs only. 

So what is work?

Generally speaking, paid jobs are definitely considered as ‘works’, in which you put energy and effort in. Alike idea as Physics, the concept of work is interpreted as the displacement you make with the amount of energy input. Similarly, energy input in jobs will then become contribution, switching from mechanical energy, or whatever form of energy, to objective property, which is commonly seen as money. Regardless the substantiality of money, yet we know our ‘done work’ will continue its life in a new form. This golden rule, very much applied to all, is conceptualized as the idea of contracts in Economics. According to businessdictionary.com, it has a clear definition on ‘work’ in this regard - the entire scope of a project encompassing all people, equipment, material, and other goods and services required to fulfill the contractor’s obligations under a contract. 

In other words, work is basically an established agreement made among two or more parties oriented goods and services exchange. Recalling the birth of currency, the start of quantifying one’s effort in a physical means, we should appreciate this is an ancient notion been deeply rooted from the start of human history.

However, what about those unpaid yet productive activities, such as volunteer work and housework? Under the concept of contract, it seems like they do not get any concrete reward at the end. Isn’t it just a one-sided devotion, a blunt end contract? Standing from employer’s point of view, be more liberal with the meaning of contract, employment is about using money in exchange for ‘work’, which can be something intangible. Seeing this way, employers do receive emotional comfort. Applying to volunteers, abstract satisfaction is what they get in the end, at the expense of their effort and time. With no argue, as a human being, you must feel something when you time is occupied. Volunteers devote and pleasure is the reward. Same as housewives, satisfaction from settling things with their own hands is their ‘wage’. Same with us, students, feeling a big relief upon submission by deadlines is arguably a contenting salary. People use the word ‘work’ for any activity involving energy and time expenditure. No matter voluntarily or involuntarily, people do get something in return, either tangible or intangible or both. Our whole life is work and, work is just a way of living. 

Why do we bother to ‘work’ anyway? 

Or the question should be: why do we ‘need’ reward from work? The most obvious reason is that we need to fulfill our basic needs simply for survival. Yes, we do need money for bread. The end of the day, with limited time and resources, all tasks cannot be simply managed by oneself. Surely it is possible to sew, grow, build and transport your own, but why don’t you do that? Because we should appreciate different people are gifted in different ways. This is why people need interaction. We are cooperating, still under the idea of contract, for better quality of life. Don’t forget, humankind are born with complex functions and thoughts. Solely fulfilling basic needs, even to its most luxurious extent, is not sufficient for us to feel satisfied. Our souls need to be fed with spiritual bread too. This may better justify the fear of hunting a right job, in which is utterly driven by our intrinsic eager to pursue abstract satisfaction. Working is about living and living is about surviving with well-fed souls. 

Bearing this substantiality of work in mind, switch to our trivial reality, treating your job more than a money-making tool could potentially bring your surprises in your career path apart from making sense to your own. 

‘The person who will make the greatest contribution to a company is the mature person - and you cannot have maturity if you have no life or interest outside the job.’

This quote, which I agree on very much, reveals the subtle link between maturity and work. In a logical sense, people who make great and impressive contribution to the company are more likely to have a brighter career path. This would be an uplifting motivation for us to engage in our occupation and build intimacy with our ultimate aspiration, in parallel with our personal life attitude. 

Another appreciative point the author made here is the importance of keeping an interest or life outside job, which is echoing to my belief, namely the importance of feeding your spirits. The author also points out the need to nourish our souls from something we enjoy doing. After all, eating physical bread alone could merely keep us surviving. Maturity is more than about growing old. The key is wisdom, which has no direct correlation with age. To be exact, the word wisdom is not superficially about intelligence, but also the ability to manage one’s emotion. In that sense, maturity is about sophistication in managing both technical and psychological issues.

In my own interpretation, the underlying meaning of that statement is the essence of developing as a whole before daring to talk about maturity. What’s more, do not mistake quantity alone can compose ‘great’ contribution, quality shall not be forgotten here. If one is mentally starved, such creature is no better than a programmed robotic flesh handling manageable tasks. No matter how well the duties are managed, such contribution, even at its best of the best, is very much restricted in quantitative respect. Missing is the organic chemistry from the ‘mature’ mind, the mental library created from time to time through daily experiences and exposures. Such abstract treasures can no way be quantified but rather qualified. Organic wittiness, as a result of maturity, would be the essence in making qualitative contribution. 

How to make a great contribution is not the scope to be discussed here, but how and where to pursue maturity matter much more. After knowing the value of making qualitative contribution in a company as well as importance of harvesting spiritual nutrients from non-technical interactions (more from enjoyable activities), so why don’t you find a job you could ‘live’ with it at the first place? Why not pick a job that can be blended in as a part of your life and take it as a way of living? 

By now, you should have a better idea why you feel so frustrated in job hunting. It is purely about the ‘calling’, lusting from inside for something is physically and mentally (and financially) beneficial to ourselves, something we feel comfortable and satisfied with our own touch. We should eye on a job that we can engage and build an intimacy with. We should eye on a job that is purposeful in our own sense. If you happen to take a job that you cannot connect yourself with, you are about  to fall into the bottomless pit of being a dead-alive. 

Work is a just a way of living, take everything as a whole

‘Consistent purpose is not enough to make life happy, but it is an almost indispensable condition of a happy life.’ In my own visualization, consistent purpose is about connecting everything to my own backbone, my soul. Picture our life as a fish backbone, the branches of it are vital in supporting other body parts, different specialized parts of the whole. It is the same in us, we only grow as a whole with everything connected to our master mind. However, the so-called development in various aspects of our lives are merely the fleshes. Without genuine sensible connection to our master mind, solid branches to our backbone, such piece of flesh is no better than a tumor which can be potentially harmful to us. 

The implication of having a whole intact backbone with no dispensable part of one’s life is that: every moment of one’s life belongs to oneself and is connected to one’s ultimate intention in life. Most importantly, the feeling of having all the time reasonably personal is pleasant and enjoyable, simply because we can enjoy more control over personal precious moment. Having the power to shape one’s own time, to a considerable degree, composes one’s happiness. As suggested, consistency plays a big, yet, not an absolute role in leading a happy life, though the opposite is may be true. Unhappiness emanates from something unintentionally bumped into one’s life that is not enjoyable to the counterpart. In that case, it is less likely for oneself to commit, let alone establishing intimacy. This is to say it does not match with one’s personality and expectation, not to mention one’s ultimate purpose. If that activity is unfortunate enough to be your job, which takes up two third of one’s time, then happiness will be fairly distant from that being. 

All in all, hunting the right job, in which you could possibly bond yourself to, is a fundamental staircase to happiness. To step up the ladder of happiness, you should work with your job, as well as other miscellaneous things in your life, cohering every single element with your attitude and intention of life. 

_______________________

Flare