Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


No wacky, no worky

posted at 2:09 pm on September 10, 2007 by see-dubya
Send to a Friend | Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Heavy stuff today, and you need a fun break. NOW! DO IT! Matt Labash’s tragicomic Weekly Standard cover story on Mandatory Corporate Fun is utterly hilarious, but it’s subscribers only (although it’s easily worth the cover price of this week’s issue.)

It’s a long article so you get a long excerpt. This isn’t even nearly the funniest part, which is so carefully set up that I wouldn’t dare spoil it. But this bit is a good survey of the institutional infantilization of the American worker:

There is, of course, a consultant for everything these days. Professional consultant-basher Martin Kihn, who is himself a consultant, and who wrote House of Lies: How Management Consultants Steal Your Watch and Then Tell You the Time, writes of everything from flag consultants to compost consultants to Satanic consultants who don’t actually worship Lucifer (consultants tend not to believe in anything). So it stands to reason that with the new core value of fun on the ascent, there would be fun consultants. They don’t have a trade association yet, and they go by all sorts of different names, usually with “fun” as a prefix (funsultants, funcilitators, etc). But if you had to distill what they do in one word, “fun” would be your best bet.

A considerable corpus of literature on their discipline is amassing. I use the word “literature” loosely, to mean a series of often ungrammatical double-spaced sentences put on paper, slapped between festively colored covers, and sold to mouth-readers with too much discretionary income. While most business books, according to Kihn, are written on about a 7th-grade level (there are exceptions like Who Moved My Cheese? for Teens that are written on a 5th-grade level), the funsultant literature regresses all the way back to primary school. Since we all forget to play as adults, as funsultants repeatedly tell us, they seem intent on speaking to us as though we’re children.


Here’s an abbreviated list of the jollity that will ensue at your place of business if you follow their advice: “joy lists,” koosh balls, office-chair relay races, marshmallow fights, funny caption contests, job interviews conducted in Groucho glasses or pajamas, wacky Olympics, memos by Frisbee, voicemails in cartoon-character voices, rap songs to convey what’s learned at leadership institutes, “breakathons,” bunny teeth, and asking job prospects to bring show and tell items such as “a stuffed Tigger doll symbolizing the interviewee’s energetic and upbeat attitude” or perhaps a “neon-pink mask and snorkel worn to demonstrate a sense of humor, self-deprecating nature, and sense of adventure.”

So you might hire someone like Ronald Culberson, who heads FUNsulting, Etc., “injecting humor into healthcare” (the u’s in his logo are shaped like a smile). Not only does Ron understand the “intrinsic power of combining EXCELLENCE with humor,” he’s even set up a “humor injections” blog, giving cyberslackers a way to have good, clean, nonsarcastic fun.

Or you could hire “Energy Expert” Gail Hahn of Funcilitators, who can help you practice “Fun Shui,” conduct some “Out of the Box Olympics” for teambuilding, and who is “authorized to lead laughter sessions sanctioned by the World Laughter Tour.” Or perhaps Buford P. Fudd-whacker would be more to your liking. He dresses like a “backwoods, country nerd in red suspenders and polyester pants” and promises your employees some “high-octane country sunshine” with his “wacky inventions and crazy stories about kinfolk and farm animals. But there’s always a point to be made, and he weaves valuable insights, motivational messages, and powerful teaching into his tall tales.” Pass the ’shine, Buford!

A book that’s getting a lot of buzz these days is Diana West’s book called The Death of the Grown-Up, about exactly this phenomenon writ large—how not just in the office but in all aspects of American life, seriousness and adulthood is being devalued. C.S. Lewis hit on the same point a long time ago when he wrote about “The Abolition of Man“:

And all the time—such is the tragi-comedy of our situation—we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more ‘drive’, or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or ‘creativity’. In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.

I’d be curious to hear Ms. West and Mr. Labash’s take on the chicken-and-the-egg of the Office Fun Fascists: does wacky corporate culture subvert grownup ideals, or does our infantilized culture lead to the rubber chickens and Groucho Glasses in job interviews?

Related: most of you have probably seen the Nixon Peabody law firm’s “we’re so cool” theme song, but if not…


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays.

Bad Candy on September 10, 2007 at 2:17 PM

As a costume, the ‘woopie cushion’ leaves much to be desired…if you find someone big enough to sit on it, the noise you make is probably going to be quite different than would be indicated by the concept of a flatus apparatus.

James on September 10, 2007 at 2:19 PM

I never saw/heard that. Thanks for the laugh.

Meryl Yourish on September 10, 2007 at 2:20 PM

James, you are a party pooper. :>

mimi1220 on September 10, 2007 at 2:22 PM

mimi1220 on September 10, 2007 at 2:22 PM

Thbbbbbbpt!

James on September 10, 2007 at 2:24 PM

And I thought this was a picture of a Code Pinko at the Petraeus Report.

profitsbeard on September 10, 2007 at 2:36 PM

I saw the pic of the guy in the whoopie cushion suit and figured this was about the Code Pinko protest.

trubble on September 10, 2007 at 2:38 PM

beat me by 2 minutes profitsbeard, you win!

trubble on September 10, 2007 at 2:39 PM

Sounds like someone has a case of the Mondays.

“I believe you’d get your ass kicked sayin’ something like that, man.”

;-)

CurtZHP on September 10, 2007 at 2:50 PM

trubble-

(with tribbles?)

It’s that secret delay (caused by covert, Soros-funded leftist computer hacker’s in your region) that caused your comment to come in later than mine. (They’re still sparse in my rural region.)

I vote that they adopt this outfit for all of their future PINK protests.

Whoopee!

profitsbeard on September 10, 2007 at 2:51 PM

Is it still PC to say WHOOPIE?

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 2:54 PM

Is it still PC to say WHOOPIE?

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 2:54 PM

With that context I think you’d be talking about a different kind of cushion…a pushin’ cuhsion.

James on September 10, 2007 at 3:01 PM

What no Buck Buck? It’s a yankee thing that started in the inner cities. I know of it being played in school yards as far back as the fifties. The object is to pile on the other team and knock them to the ground. With the schoolyards of the day being segregated boy/girl it was a great was to let off steam and avoid fist fights.

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 3:16 PM

With that context I think you’d be talking about a different kind of cushion…a pushin’ cuhsion.

James on September 10, 2007 at 3:01 PM

Oh Uh well no the Goldberg cushion. Heh My guess is the name is a trade mark, on one hand it could cause outrage as a slur on the other an infringment of copy rights.

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 3:24 PM

Uh, no…thankfully, I wasn’t talking about Goldberg, but a ‘marital aid.’

James on September 10, 2007 at 3:46 PM

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 3:16 PM

You’re giving me a Fat Albert flashback.

James on September 10, 2007 at 3:46 PM

You’re giving me a Fat Albert flashback.

James on September 10, 2007 at 3:46 PM

Fat Albert OK Chubby Albert not OK. Heh Heh
Yeah the COS is from Philly too.

sonnyspats1 on September 10, 2007 at 3:57 PM

I died a little inside reading about all that super terrific happy corporate fun.

Kensington on September 10, 2007 at 4:18 PM

You know, Geico is right. There are better ways to spend 10 minutes on the Internet, and that doesn’t include looney stuff like this.

pilamaye on September 10, 2007 at 6:44 PM

The whoopie cushion costume would make a good Code Pink mascot for Sheehan.

ricelchew on September 11, 2007 at 6:19 AM

Shick, I’m not a RC and don’t believe in purgatory, works of supererogation, etc. I’m trying to show that Christians can disagree and not condemn one another for believing in them or not believing in them.
Akzed on May 13, 2008 at 4:19 PM

If you claim to be a Christian, what denomination, statement of faith, confession, etc, do you hold to? Or are you a relativist? I’ll lay my cards on the table. I’m a reformed Southern Baptist that holds to the New Hampshire Baptist Confession (1833).
It is true that Christians can disagree on some issue. However, it is neither true that there is room to include Rome’s sacraments and dogmas in the gospel or that Christians can’t condemn false beliefs.

Your view of RC’s is a caricature.

My view of Roman Catholic teaching is accurate since I was raised one and have privately studied church history for about ten years now. Your view, however, seems limited to what Rome claims today it has always believed.

Go to http://www.newadvent.com for instance, and look up indulgences. They do not believe what you say they believe about them. You might be referring the their abuse during the Middle Ages, but you should allow them to define their own terms.

That’s one of my favorite sources. I use it often so as not to misstate their beliefs.
Tell me, did this part bother you?

What an indulgence is not
It is not an exemption from any law or duty, and much less from the obligation consequent on certain kinds of sin, e.g., restitution; on the contrary, it means a more complete payment of the debt which the sinner owes to God.

More complete payment? Can an indulgence add to the work of Christ so that it is more complete? This doesn’t bother you? It should, and I fear for your soul if it doesn’t.
What Rome does believe is bad enough. This didn’t bother you either?

What an indulgence is
An indulgence is the extra-sacramental remission of the temporal punishment due, in God’s justice, to sin that has been forgiven, which remission is granted by the Church in the exercise of the power of the keys, through the application of the superabundant merits of Christ and of the saints, and for some just and reasonable motive.

Didn’t Christ himself take all the punishment that was God’s wrath? Is a Christian allowed to think that he can drink from the cup that is God’s wrath in purgatory?
Christ’s merits are not enough and need to be supplemented by those of the saints? Please show me where in scripture this is allowed.

shick on May 13, 2008 at 8:10 PM


You must be logged in to post a comment.