Mia Fernandez
B/E Donnell/Stogdill
City of Angels
November 20th, 2015
This past week we have talked a lot about power and background through What Makes Sammy Run?, Davis, new projects, and through our urban labs. As we brought up these immense topics I watched how people discussed the meaning of power, where it comes from, and how we all had different opinions of its true meaning. When you think of power you usually think of money, hierarchy, wealth, strength, force, and influence among other things. As we had various dialogues throughout the week I began to see different sides of power, where it can come from, and how sometimes, we don't even know we have it, even when it is there the most.
As we talked about our new project and collaboration with The Awesome Foundation, we were introduced to a new form of power that was given directly to us as a class. Suddenly the ball was in our hands, and we could throw it any direction we wanted. Some of us didn't know what to do with it, and were surprised that we were given this great opportunity. As we expressed our ideas about power in Sammy, we began to talk about a new kind of power, a less innocent one. This kind of power stemmed from Sammy's past and helped him all throughout his career. It was the one thing that kept him going and even though he didn't ask for it, it was there. This kind of power, as we saw and read, was not a blessing but more of a burden. Through both of these scenarios power played, and will play, a key role in the outcome of future situations. It could benefit L.A. with a unique contribution from one of our very own, and help build our city, but as we read in Sammy, it could also be the very thing that adds to the destruction within.
Towards the end of the week I began to think to myself, "How much good does all this power really do?" If we have the opportunity to make the best of our city, then how could people like Sammy add such disgust to it? Some people are born into power, and some people just come across it every now and then. Do we really know what to do with it, and what's best? Or is there a serious problem within L.A., past and present, that needs some fixing? It's hard to tell what's best for a city when you're the one right in the middle of it, but I think that these two examples, even though What Makes Sammy Run? is fictional, can give us some real insight into what changes need to, or don't need to, be made.
A big thing with power is having the morality to overcome the short sighted gains that power can bring an individual corporation or person. Sammy chose his path, while pushed along by his past and upbringing, everything he did was ultimately his choice, just like the thousand dollars is ours to give out as we please. I honestly could not be less worried at this point about the money being used well, given the amount of voices and different moral complexes that we have running the foundation for a month. I agree that power can corrupt and destroy good people and things, but there is always a big reason behind said transitions and it almost always goes back to ones morality and ability to look past oneself to the greater good. To answer some of your questions, without power their would be no leaders, and without leaders we as a country and a people would have no direction. This project we find ourselves in charge of would not have been possible if the person in power (Dr. Stogdill) didn't use some of his power and influence to convince a group of people to try something new. For every bad idea there is a good one, and without power, morality, and good leaders we would be in a much worse place than we are now if power was essentially an equal thing among all people and didn't even exist.
ReplyDeleteImagine living in an agrarian world, the sort of agrarian world that has historically dominated human existence. You live miles away from your nearest neighbor, you own a massive piece of land, and your existence revolves around this land, its future, and how you can shape that future. You know that there is some semblance of government, you know that you live in a country and you know that country's name. But the authority of that government is as authoritative as you choose to make it. In other words, you live in an autocracy--an autocracy that is autonomous and alone. You have absolute power over your life, and this, today, is what people are constantly begging for. And this makes plenty of sense to me because we are a people built to be autonomous. We are too intelligent, too introspective, too thoughtful of our surroundings to be governed by someone else. Agrarian democracy, therefore, represents an idyllic model of power. Autonomy until the extreme. But as we grow closer together, the less we can rely on this, and as we have seen, the less large cities have ever been able to rely on this. Power over others is necessary because of proximity, and this is when people begin to crumble. Our society ends up faced with a dilemma: give people autonomy and face the consequences, or make people unhappy and establish a system whereby power is conserved but is exchanged--meaning that at any given time people can have more than, less than, or exactly autonomy. (Think of it as a conservation of energy problem, just simpler: for every person there is an available P (power) of 1, and based on the number of existing people in the system there will be that much available power, exchangeable). This is the only system that has ever been proven to work for governing nearby people. Sammy loves to collect P, and he does it mercilessly, knowing that he can bring himself what he translates to be happiness. Should we pursue Ps?
ReplyDeleteIt seems like Schulberg defines power as the ability to change one's environment. True, Sammy climbs the corporate ladder and has the ability to hire and fire people, but he does not really have much power. Once he is on top, the only way to stay there is to keep everything the same. Otherwise, he might make a mistake, and someone else might take charge. In this sense, the "power" he gets from his advanced standing actually renders him powerless. Meanwhile, Kit has real power because she focuses her energy on changing the world around her, and to some degree does so. Sammy seems to have much less power over Al than Kit, symbolic of their relative influences on their environments. Schulberg seems to argue that this true power is not evil, but it is the fake power (power to exploit people not power to empower people) that undermines our progress as a nation toward a more moral state. LA, it seems, is an ideal home for the seekers of this fake power, because the movie industry is rooted in profit pretending to be art. People who are equally as disingenuous as their product are shoe-ins for success here. We should not pursue Ps, we should pursue unity and, through unity, change. Power can do a lot of real, tangible good. "Power" can do a lot of harm and very little good.
ReplyDeleteI'm engaged by Jake's comment. We have coincidentally left LA's city government out of our curriculum thus far. Last year, I sat through a day of lectures all about the intricacies of our local government... I still have absolutely no idea how it works. The city council seems to be supremely powerful, yet the mayor is painted as the single leader? That's what I gathered from the mess of web-diagrams that tried to explain this convoluted system. Ultimately, none of it really mattered because I walked out of the lecture mainly struck by the lack of voter turnout in our city. 3/4 of the kids in my class didn't know who the mayor was. I only knew my city councilman because my neighbor had worked for him. So Jake, from my personal (very confused) perspective, it seems as though there is a semi-autonomous governing body presiding over us. This concerns me, especially after learning about the corrupt tendencies and traditions of this city. But to be completely honest, when I'm through writing this post, I will likely move on to my calc homework, not to the city website to do more research about when the next local elections are. Which is even scarier.
ReplyDeleteI think that power is an dense and hard topic to discuss because power can be defined in so many different ways. Like you were saying that we usually associated power with wealth, influence, hierarchy (etc.) I think it is up to the individual to decided what is power to them. For example, Sammy's power was his past he used that his experience from his childhood to push him to be the best of the best, even if it meant stealing and cheating others. However, for Kit and Al their power came from something more realistic. They were able to find power in themselves, and they did not have to cheat the system. They were able to achieve their level of power genuinely, unlike sammy. I think in LA there are defiantly quite a bit of Sammy Glick, who are always trying to get what they want at, no matter the price. Yet there are still a ton of Kit and Al as well. I think that power is defined based on the life that person is leading.
ReplyDeleteI, too, am engaged by Jake's comment. I have to disagree in some sense though. Just because in this idyllic agrarian world individuals wouldn't realistically be governed by the law, power would still exist. Historically in these types of communities or systems, power would be held by the patriarch or matriarch. And just because the government can't tell one what to say doesn't mean that power is nonexistent. If you are in desperate need of medical supplies and only one neighbor within 100 miles can supply you with these, they have power over you. Power will always exist in our world as long as more than one person is alive.
ReplyDeleteThe distinction in Sammy is how well he can convert his lack of talent and skill into power. Of course the definitions of power have varied throughout this class immensely, with Sean bringing up good points.
Lucas' commet got me thinking about this one question: what is the point of power? I know that the question is very broad but thats the best way that I can describe what is going through my head. It seems like the people we have examined, Cross and Sammy for example, are on this quest for power but in a certain fashion. There can be an argument made that both Sammy and Cross are characters that fit the antagonist frame. Both characters do what they have to do to attain this power and have no sympathy for others. Why do they feel like they have to be intimidating and scary to attain this power? I feel like the same could be achieved if they gained the respect of others. There has to be a reason why these characters choose to attain their power this way. What is the point of this power if you are intimidating and scary? Someone is then likely to challenge your power and claim it from you.
ReplyDeleteI feel like power can never really be attained. Power is merely a finish line that people try and cross but never can. It's a rat race to nowhere.
I was struck by what Mia said as how people come to power, “Some people are born into power, and some people just come across it every now and then.” I do agree some people are born into money and a high position can be their birthright, however, when I think of power I imagine the respect along with it. As we see in “What Makes Sammy Run?” Sammy is so quick to access fame, fortune, and status that he neglects to try and gain people’s respect. As a result, Sammy is left in a large estate in a loveless marriage without a wife that truly respects him.
ReplyDeleteTo me this is the message Schulberg is trying to convey. One can be a Sammy and race to the top of the ladder and take the fast track to fame and success. But after reading the novel we know how great that turns out. He saying being a Sammy in life will technically get you somewhere, but not where you want to be. This story almost reminds me of “ The Tortoise and the Hare” where Sammy is the Hare and Al is the Tortoise. Sammy like the Hare is dangling his talent in front of Al’s face. Always bragging about how he’s better stronger faster. However, we see in this children story and in the novel that being able to run faster than everyone else doesn’t mean you will win. Slow and steady wins the race. In the end, although Al didn’t make it big in Hollywood or win the perfect “dame”, Al was completely content and satisfied with starting a future with Kit. Sammy on the other hand, was left empty and alone with out a girl like Kit.
I agree with Sean; I don't think we should collect P's. To answer Mia's question about whether we know what to do with power or not, I don't think that any one person alone knows what's best. I feel like it's impossible to rise up to power alone unless you did it by stepping on everyone's toes and and/or faking your way up there like Sammy did. This is why an individual collecting P's would only result in disaster.
ReplyDeleteI don't think there is a specific problem that in LA that needs fixing, because the problem is really the corruption and secrecy. It's hard to come up with a solution for that, though, because like we said in class, it's a societal thing. This corruption has already been established in society, and the powerful people are just playing according to the rules of the game. Power is such an attractive thing, so as long as there is power in the world, there will always be corruption because people will continue to be desperate to obtain it.
Sammy seems to feel that power is held in titles and positions themselves. He accepts and climbs what he sees as the existing system/hierarchy of power, never questioning. Sammy would never doubt that the belief that the ends justifies the means. To me, I think one way that power is able to be measured, is in the means, or rather, in the potential some person or thing is capable of producing, rather than the ends itself. I highly doubt Sammy would agree. The power of potential is clear in that it is so crucial in determining how well/ ethically that power is used. (Gentrification!!)
ReplyDeletePower is a disease, a virus. For some strange biological reason, once a person comes to power, they become consumed by it. It courses through the vains of its host, running up nerves sparking actions here and there. Power is almost like a whole other being. It is something that we have yet to truly understand. Most of us aren't capable of controlling this persuasive energy once it becomes a part of us. So when it's asked what actions are right and what are wrong under power, the answer is undefinable. Sure, for us maybe it's easy to determine what we think it right and wrong for the city, but that's our opinion. Just a few small fish in a sea of sharks. Power surges through LA, controlling our every motion. So powerless students have no idea what it's like to feel such a unique surge of energy infiltrate their body, and have thousands of people rely on your action.
ReplyDeleteThe definition of the word power involves the ability to do or act in a particular way. Ability is a key word here that can be analyzed to lead to a distinct conclusion. Power is capability. Lionel Messi has the power to outplay his opponents, while President Obama has the power to influence the world around greater than others. He has worked hard to gain capability; as Sammy viciously ascended the social ladder to be capable. Money, another symbol of power in modern life, allows you the capability to buy what you want. According to these analogies, power should equate to freedom. By literal definition this is fairly accurate, but in the real world is this how power plays out? Are the richest the most free? I'd argue not.
ReplyDeleteSean's comment intrigues me. I agree with Sean that are these two facets of power. Power to create change and "power" with money. Both can be used to do good but "power" is easily corruptible while power is harder. People can attain "power" become corrupted and then gain power ie the Sammys of the world, but vice versa can also be accomplished. Here when power is attained before "power" and without corruption is when greatness happens. I do not agree however that LA is a breading ground for "power". LA is also home to people who are the latter who obtain both senses of power, Elon Musk, one I have an incredible amount of respect for. I think so far we have just looked at LA through this lens of "oh LA is the worst" rather than seeing the potential or the other side of the mirror. Sure LA has a huge wage gap and problems with chronic homelessness but every major city in the world has these problems. LA is fixing these problems or on its way to fixing them. I would hope LA isn't the worst as we have sometimes said.
ReplyDeleteWhen we talked about power. I immediately wanted to define it because it was one of the words– those broad words like bravery or honesty– that everyone takes its meaning superficially when in reality there are infinite different types of power or bravery or honesty. Coming from physics class, I wrote down Power= Work/Time... alright but what is work... Work= Force x Distance... oh, okay... I think I'm getting somewhere. Power is just how much energy you put in changing your position of where you are over a period of time. If that is true, then Sammy has a hell of a lot of power. In a short time, he changed his position from Rivington st. to Vine, from 10 cents (we don't have a cent letter on the keyboard.. damn inflation..) to $2,500, from tenement house to nouveau riche mansion. Although, the moment he had no more distance to run, no more change in position, he had no real work to do, therefore he had no real power anymore. As Sean said, his energy was now spent in keeping others down as apposed to pushing himself upwards. Ironically. he spent so much time pushing other down that he didn't realize he was being played by his own wife, the one you should trust and care for the most intimately, and it crushed him.
ReplyDeleteI think Mia, what you are asking is how do we change what power means in a more positive light so that we don't undermine our city. It has to start by teaching morals so that when it is said, "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," we can mark it incorrect in modern society. I think a lot of the lone–wolf–me me–me attitude of climbing the ladder can all be traced back to family bonds. Shullburg said that at the start of the 70's people began to love Sammy and his rise from rags to riches, even though he stabbed a few backs to get there. But this is a new phenomena, therefore, there must be some major change that happened around that time to make America go from hating Sammy to loving him. And I think it was the destruction of family. Forget about dinner in the living room with mother cooking chicken, I'm going to Starbucks to work on my computer instead. Forget about going on a family hike, I'm going to go to a party instead. It is this destruction of family values that create a monster of individualism. So my answer to how to fix how we view the power of the Sammy Clicks is to glue back together to shards of family that have broken over the years.
I feel like this is kind of long to read... sorry... hope it was worth it.