The author asserts that identities distance us from achieving a true "self", the "I am", and therefore, our potential may be restricted. In fact, by joining groups, we promote conflicts and narrow any scope of experience we may otherwide have enjoyed. In "I am", the author succinctly expresses these ideas in only 42 pages.
The author asserts that identities distance us from achieving a true "self", the "I am", and therefore, our potential may be restricted. In fact, by joining groups, we promote conflicts and narrow any scope of experience we may otherwide have enjoyed. In "I am", the author succinctly expresses these ideas in only 42 pages.
Introduction
The author was born in Lancashire, England in the late 1960s, over a decade before Margaret Thatcher closed the pits. His generation knew of the writer Barry Hines, and how Hinesâ Jud Casper replied to his younger brother, Billy, after Billy said he would not work in the local mine. Jud said they would not want him anyway, as the job required literacy skills, but cuttingly, and in a more stylistically accurate tone, he added, âthey wouldnât have a weedy little twat like thee.â
D.H. Lawrence wrote his classic, âSons and Lovers,â before Hinesâ time. It paralleled âA kestrel for a knave,â quoted from above, by also powerfully covering mining. Mr Morel was one of its main characters: hard working, a man of few words, and head of his family. He appeared resigned to his endless cycle of toil, domesticity, and an absence of recreation.
The author was aware of such historic lifestyles, not least because his high school sat on coal, and the National Coal Board (NCB) was a major local employer in that parochial setting. Younger people are unaffected by these past realities. Unfortunately, the passage of time, pacifies the power of such messages. Therefore (especially in developed countries) the young find that a life without choices, is an unacceptable reality. It is a nonreal existence, in equal but opposite magnitude, to the reality of their all-powerful entanglement, with the Internet.
An interesting parallel would be to ask, whether Second World War soldiers felt not having to climb out of trenches, was something to feel lucky or entitled about?
The profusion of modern global media sources, has allowed the monster that is personality, to have decimated the value of having character, whilst increasing peopleâs feelings of entitlement, not least in their âGod givenâ rights, to display Hollywood originated characteristics, whilst the figurative miner, who did not want to be a miner, is further buried in the irrelevance of the past.
Beyond not wanting to mine, miners did not necessarily want to marry. But without social security, that meant cooking, washing, cleaning, etc., too, and without the modern help of things like electric washing machines. Also, who would be looking out for the aging retired miners if they had no family?
In England, formal adoption procedures began in 1926. Couple that with the taboo that illegitimate children created, then the likes of Mr Morel had to marry to produce offspring. Even family sizes were not a choice, because contraception in those days, meant monasterial life or practising a âwithdrawalâ method. Fertile couples were likely to have children, whilst not having complete control over how many.
Celebrities, personalities, reality show contestants, Twitter influencers, etc., all help build a picture suggesting choices are increasing. Even the photonegative of the picture, presents more decisions, for example, dislikes, and things to find disgusting. After all, so much is so topical, it draws people in.
Some of these choices automatically define us. You could stop eating meat and be a vegetarian. Even without any action at all, choosing your gender identity these days, is a potentially instantaneous label creator. Of course, that was an unavailable choice to people in Mr Morelâs day.
Within modern cultures, societies, politics, and religions, you can have many picks. Maybe the film âForrest Gumpâ is out of date. His mother said, âlife is like a box of chocolates, you never know what youâre gonna get.â There are a lot of people now, who would reject this metaphor, because they would want the description card, AND a Google search on possible allergens, AND the working conditions of the chocolate factory employees to be of sufficiently acceptable standards, before considering eating any of them.
It is the authorâs purpose to show that these many choices lead to strong attachments, and ultimately a dangerous tack, because they become weaknesses, or âAchilles heels.â He thinks Jesus warned against this, as recorded by St Matthew.
Matthew 7:24-27 âThe wise and foolish builders.â
In this passage, Jesus spoke about the risk of building your house on sand, because internal, intrinsic, or supernatural based identities, i.e. the more solid and independent ones, are less vulnerable to losses, whereas, strongly world-based ones that might be susceptible to external influences, are the houses on sand.
It was also said in the New Testament, that the Kingdom of Heaven is in your midst (or âwithin,â in other translations.) See Luke 17:21. What is intrinsically yours, or you, and not external, is better to build that house upon.
Although the author is technically a Catholic, it is important to note that he is not a Christian. He maintains that Jesus Christ was real, and existed, but he thinks connections made between Christ and God, were well meaning ideas aimed at drawing people to the religion. In fact, the author does not want to promote any religions. He talks about Jesus, because Christianity is by far the most prominent religion amongst the members of social groups and communities, that have been a part of his life.
I am. Two words that should not need any claims to back them up, yet sadly, they do. Because to stand out in today's world is considered unconventional, and being a part of something larger than us is easy and desirable. The author, however, refuses to be drawn into what seems the way out, and through clear points, precise thoughts and references from popular texts, shows us what it means to be an individual.
The book starts off strong, throwing some light on the surprisingly increasing choices around us, and how these choices sometimes lead to strong attachments that become a liability. The citation of Matthew 7:24-27 and the subtle way through which the necessity of internal beliefs in portrayed is impeccable. As the book progresses, the author makes strong points about identities and also uses numerous example from various points in his life to get his point through. Combining these with the real life events such as The Manchester Arena Bomb tragedy and the NHS fund raiser of 2020, the author drives the point home very well.
Towards the latter half of the book, the differences between the individuality and group membership are highlighted, starting from their nature to the behavior of people in both these ideas. The false sense of being something because we chose to be around such people and its consequence is conveyed quite well.
As the book nears the end, the author talks about ego and pride and whether or not one can exist without the other. That pride is the root of all evils in the world is an understatement and is something to think about. Lastly, how people avoid negative identities or groups is discussed by the author by citing real examples from his own past.
A book that is short to read, yet has long lasting impacts through its ideas. I certainly recommend it to everyone who is looking for individuality instead of being part of a herd.