I was reading the footnotes to a really good essay about a woman who waged a mighty fight to get the state to give her custody of her grandkids but who ultimately lost. She deserved the kids, and was denied them on a technicality. The unfairness of the situation was totally representative of all the ways in which the American justice system is fundamentally unjust.
But that's not the real point. The penulti-point is that I was being very OCD and reading all the footnotes to all the essays after finishing the whole book so that I would remember more about the essays as a result. It's a sickness.
But the real point is that, in explaining that this grandmother lost the fight for her grandkids, Eula Biss, the author of Notes from No Man's Land (2009) explained that this woman's willingness to enter the fray against a system designed to keep her grandchildren from her was infinite, but that her resources were extremely limited. "She was a woman whose mission was much greater than her resources. A woman of ambition" (Biss 2009:209). When I read this, I agreed with Biss. That grandmother was ambitious, and the definition of ambition is being willing to push beyond the limits a lack of resources places on you. Being ambitious is being willing to live outside of your means. Being ambitious is being willing to fight for something that is good or right regardless of whether that fight will drain, ruin, or destroy you. But in addition to agreeing with the characterization of this woman in the context of her struggle, I also laughed out loud when I realized that I have been right about myself all along. I am not ambitious.
I'm not saying I won't fight for things, people, or causes. And I'm not saying that I accept the structural limits that are imposed on me by others or by larger systems through which we categorize ourselves and others. I'm not unaware that fighting against injustice is possible and is the responsibility of people who see it because so many do not. This is especially true of white, middle-class, people like myself. What made me laugh about Eula Biss' understanding of ambition was recognizing that I'm willing to go pretty far and sacrifice certain personal comforts or challenge specific norms or reject the easier path in pursuit of fairness and justice for other people, but when it comes to defending myself or seeking opportunity, fairness, or justice for myself, I live fastidiously within my means.
When people asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up, I always said whatever I thought they would like to hear. I was in ballet classes from the time I was four, so sometimes I would say I wanted to be a ballerina. When that looked less likely, I said I wanted to be whatever they seemed to think I should be. Teacher? Firefighter? Yes. Whatever.
The low expectations I have for my future, or maybe low isn't the word, maybe "realistic" is more accurate, are predictable. I feel like I'm part of a generation of people who won't have careers, who won't be able to send their kids to college, who won't have retirement savings let alone pensions. As average salaries remain stagnant, as the extremely wealthy continue to keep their growing profits to themselves, as the poor remain poor and many of us in the "middle class" join them in that, perhaps living within one's means is practical. Maybe ambition is misplaced expectations.
Recent Comments