‘Your image isn’t your character. Character is what you are as a person’ – Derek Jeter – former US pro baseball player
I’ve been past various building sites in recent months, two of which sported this rather curious notice in large letters and nailed to the surrounding hoardings: ‘Improving the image of construction’. I thought it was rather an odd strap-line. Surely, I reasoned naively, it would be better to actually improve construction itself rather than simply tweaking the image of the occupation…?
In true compulsive fashion, I have since checked it out on google – it’s a ‘thing’; really. And honestly, for any woman (or man – let’s be inclusive here) who’s ever been subjected to the stereo-typical wolf-whistles, inappropriate comments, filthy language, uncomfortable ‘oggling’, objectifying, disrobing stares and/or presentation of classic ‘builders bum’, accompanied by brain-throbbing radio onslaught, we can all be thankful that somebody, somewhere realised that maybe this wasn’t the best or most winsome way to interface with the general public. But, then again, if it’s only the ‘image’ of construction that’s being improved then what’s really going on? Has anything actually changed. Is this all smoke and mirrors?
Image is about perception, presentation or impression; it’s a shallow, insubstantial unreality. It’s putting on an act, wearing a mask, manufacturing a cover-up. At the end of the day – and excuse the pun – has anything concrete changed? That construction notice triggered a whole raft of other instances in my mind where this kind of tag-line is being used and, quite honestly, it makes me nervous.
Hollywood is still reeling from the whole #MeToo campaign which started to reveal the sordid details of hundreds of unsavoury encounters between powerful men and far less powerful individuals – both men and women – within the industry. Let’s face it, we’ve all known about the ‘casting couch’ for years; it wasn’t a fiction. I could never understand why it always seemed to be shrugged off as an inevitable part of an aspirational career in media. I came across it myself in the 80’s during my own brief foray into the world of television. Trust me, it’s not the kind of dirt you can simply wash off in the shower, but there was no available rubric for a young, rookie TV presenter to navigate it. But now, famous, respected actors and actresses are coming forward and speaking out. While I’m sure there may be a few false accusations thrown in for peculiar, unfathomable reasons, there are hundreds who are finding a voice after years of silence. And what bothers me is that Hollywood may go the way of the construction industry in its impotent slogans. How long before we see the vacuous information rolling through on film credits: ‘Improving the image of Hollywood’?
In a similar way, I don’t think any of those gymnasts in the recent Dr Larry Nassar abuse case, (former US osteopathic physician to the national team) want to see the image of coaches and support staff simply ‘improved’. They are going to want some serious accountability and far-reaching changes in the way adults and children are relating in coaching and training sessions, and an overhaul of the systems in place for recruiting and employing candidates for those positions.
Alarming disclosures are coming to light from NGOs, kicking off with Oxfam’s alleged sexual exploitation of nationals in Haiti. The Guardian, UK reported that 7000 donors have withdrawn support for the charity since then despite the remarkable and sustained work it has done since it was founded in 1942. What in the world was going on there? Basic humanity surely decrees that you help the people you are sent to help. Is there a higher level of trust and firm moral standing required of people working for charities? I think so. I would like everyone to be held to such standards, but there is no doubt that an exemplary level of clean living and clear conscious should be demanded of anyone engaging on a public platform. And if that integrity is not there, individuals need to be called to account don’t they?
Another seismic blow to public life came on Valentine’s Day when Nikolas Cruz took a rifle to his old school, Stoneman Douglas High School, in Parklands, Florida and went on a bloody spree. With seventeen dead and a ground swell of students demanding that antiquated rules on firearms are changed, politicians are ducking and diving while trying to keep the portals of funding open with the NRA (National Rifle Association). Is it just me or does their priority seem to be ‘Improving the image of firearms’?
Perhaps we should be glad that all this has not only come to light, but that it has engendered a ground-up movement of outrage which has a voice and a presence in the public arena. Rather than wringing our hands over ‘the youth of today’ (another clumsy cliche), these instances have provided opportunities for young people to step up to the plate of leadership with passionate conviction and a bare-faced courage which has been sadly lacking in many of the adults around them. It has forced things into the open and has demanded, not just a hearing, but some form of justice. I can only hope that such a shift continues to hold people to account in any public or private position. What happens ‘off-stage’ is just as important as what happens on it. Private lives are not and cannot be separate from public ones however inconvenient that might be. The former influences, impinges, impacts and often explains the other. Someone who is selfish and demanding behind their front door will feel no qualms about being selfish and demanding in their office, their van, their gym, their studio, their classroom, their museum or their ward. Someone who is immune to the feelings of others under their own roof will not be unduly concerned with them in the factory, the depot, the court, the canteen, the dockyard or the church.
It would be remiss of me not to mention in this context the recently departed legend who was Billy Graham; not a perfect man, but a giant in the world of conviction and clarity. He advised Presidents, mixed with Royalty and spoke personally to 215 million people about the thing which mattered most to him – his faith. Whether you agree with him or not on the subjects of salvation and faith in Jesus Christ, Mr Graham was by all accounts the same man whether on a stage in a stadium, or in his own sitting room. His ‘image’ didn’t need to be improved because he didn’t have one.
So, what is it that we want to see happen as a result of these revelations and tragedies? I don’t believe that we want to just ‘tidy it up a bit’; we don’t want to rearrange the furniture, give it all a lick of paint or a bit of strategically placed polish, and pretend it’s a whole new situation. Any doctor, plumber, social worker, teacher, electrician, engineer… anyone with an ounce of life-experience can tell you that unless you deal with the source of a problem, you haven’t dealt with it. Not properly and not long-term. You may be able to alleviate the symptoms – which has a degree of merit – but you haven’t solved it. Gardners know that cutting the nettles or dandelions is second-cousin to useless. Sure as Bob, they will reappear unless the roots are dug out. So, no, personally, I don’t want to improve the ‘image’ of anything: construction, politics, sports coaching, firearms, middle management, mining, health care, baking, the church, on-line dating or archeology. Do you?
Surely we need to improve the people who are involved in those things; we need to improve at source. And, it’s frustrating, but no surprise, that in reality you can’t ‘improve’ anyone, apart from yourself. Cliche or not, the heart of the problem remains the human heart. There is nothing new under the sun, and selfishness, greed, jealousy, personal gratification, moral standing and ambition cannot be legislated against or imposed. There is no legal document on earth which can alter anyone from the inside out. Such a change of heart can only be effected by our own individual desire and decision plus a good dose of divine intervention. I find that very challenging.
dancingthroughchaos 