on small-c capitalism
Somehow or other, probably at Monochrom's urging and Bryony Gomez-Palacio's writing, it occurred to me that in the American school system we are groomed basically from elementary school onward that we will someday have a career, meaning get a job, and we had best learn the rituals of that starting roughly in sixth grade.
There is no discussion of self-employment anywhere in this whole trajectory. There is no contemplation that a person might have something to offer on their own terms. We talk about entrepreneurship in the abstract, almost as a quaint old notion -- a social studies vocab word along with laissez-faire and the Invisible Hand -- but all the career guidance counseling that people [at wealthy high schools] receive is focused on searching for jobs, constructing a resume and sitting for a job interview. This is necessary but not enough by half.
This is not a criticism of those of us who work for some company or other, or who, for whatever reason, do not have a personal income right now. Companies are effective at work distribution; employees are a natural product there. Companies also happen to be the only means to affordable health insurance in our wounded and hopefully dying system. That's all fine. This is me wondering why we only learn how to offer ourselves to someone else's employ, and do not learn that we could do it, too. I said the same to E earlier and she pointed out that the public school system, since the 1900s at least, has proudly emphasized creating a docile working class.
This is a realization of (part of) why I find the idea of sole practice so terrifying. I'm reading Women of Design (Gomez-Palacio and Vit), which is a collection of interviews of influential female graphic designers, and noticing that about half sought their own practice in order to choose their projects and focuses, and wondering why I was 23 before I knew a single person so engaged. Thoughts, please.
There is no discussion of self-employment anywhere in this whole trajectory. There is no contemplation that a person might have something to offer on their own terms. We talk about entrepreneurship in the abstract, almost as a quaint old notion -- a social studies vocab word along with laissez-faire and the Invisible Hand -- but all the career guidance counseling that people [at wealthy high schools] receive is focused on searching for jobs, constructing a resume and sitting for a job interview. This is necessary but not enough by half.
This is not a criticism of those of us who work for some company or other, or who, for whatever reason, do not have a personal income right now. Companies are effective at work distribution; employees are a natural product there. Companies also happen to be the only means to affordable health insurance in our wounded and hopefully dying system. That's all fine. This is me wondering why we only learn how to offer ourselves to someone else's employ, and do not learn that we could do it, too. I said the same to E earlier and she pointed out that the public school system, since the 1900s at least, has proudly emphasized creating a docile working class.
This is a realization of (part of) why I find the idea of sole practice so terrifying. I'm reading Women of Design (Gomez-Palacio and Vit), which is a collection of interviews of influential female graphic designers, and noticing that about half sought their own practice in order to choose their projects and focuses, and wondering why I was 23 before I knew a single person so engaged. Thoughts, please.