is the word 'diary' better than the word 'blog'? probably not.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bureaucrazy.

The other day I was lunching with my Dad at his local diner, where the food is diner food but the people there all know him so he can make insanely specialized orders without anyone getting mad, so it all balances out. I don�t mind eating there because there is nothing at all wrong with grilled cheese, fries, and a coke. It is close to being the perfect meal, especially once you get all grown up and realize that you can�t eat like that all the time so you only allow yourself to do so on occasion.

For other occasions the diner also has a salad with grilled salmon.

Anyway, on this day in question when I was lunching with my Dad at his local diner, it was Turkey Day. And on turkey day my dad wants a plate of turkey, mixed light meat and dark meat, no potatoes, no gravy, a bowl of corn, and a side of dry rye toast. Also a salad with balsamic vinaigrette. Basically he wants a turkey sandwich but he wants to make it himself so that it has only the elements that he desires (these elements being mainly turkey, held between bread, both of which help him get as much mustard as possible into his mouth).

Why am I telling you this? Because there is a wrinkle in the story that is related to a wrinkle in the human relationship to rules and policy. It is a wrinkle we might label: administrative totalitarianism. Ha. Sure, that�s a great label. When I make labels I like to make sure they have as many syllables as possible.

The waitress who is normally at the diner, and who knows my dad, and thus my dad doesn�t even have to describe the rigmarole of turkey day because she just knows, wasn�t there on this day in question. So the waitress took detailed notes, and then brought everything as requested, but the toast had butter on it. My dad wasn�t going to complain, because he�s not crazy or anything. But she put the toast down and said something like: it has butter on it because that�s the only kind we have.

The toast comes with butter on it! That is the only kind there is. I said: �At least they didn�t butter it on the wrong side.� (My nod to theatre of the absurd, etc., the kind of joke that oftentimes only I find hilarious but for some reason I still have to say it out loud.) Anyway, I also couldn�t stop myself, right after she put it down, from saying, quietly, to my Dad, �they only kind they have?!� He told me to shush because, though he likes to make special orders, he�s not a �problem customer.�

Anyway, apparently the slices come straight to the diner from the toast factory already buttered.

Also, it would have been less strange if she had just delivered the buttered toast without saying anything. But the declaration about how the only toast they have has butter on it? Insane.

And, of course, the truth is probably something like: I, the waitress, cannot compel the line cook to not-butter toasted bread. But still.

My point: there�s NOTHING you can do about that. It�s not a mistake, it�s a mindset. You can be my Dad, and make your special order so that you put the sandwich together yourself. But when you�re dealing with someone who can�t conceive a world in which toast does not come with butter, it doesn�t matter how special you make your order. I call that administrative totalitarianism not because the waitress in question is a dictator but because she is under the sway of �how things are.� There is a way things are done, and it simply is not thinkable that there could be another way, even though the other way is so freaking simple that it would actually be less work.

There is a Stalin somewhere changing all the history books so that there has never been a slice of dry toast, anywhere at any time.

Another case. Marco and I were discussing laptop-carrying bags. I recently embarked on that epic journey that is the search for the perfect bag to carry my new MacBook Pro. I have the one with the 15.4 inch widescreen, so it doesn�t fit in the PERFECT bag I already have. That PERFECT bag is made even more perfect by the fact that it cost only $17 at Walgreen�s. That�s right, it�s sturdy (I�ve had it for THREE YEARS and carried it almost constantly), has all the right pocket and fastening and strap features, and it only cost $17.

But it is too small for my MacBook Pro. Ah, sadness. I found a cute bag at Brooklyn Industries that, on sale, was still $70, and that is NORMAL for laptop bags, and that is also CRAZY, but I didn�t have much of a choice because I was about to leave town for a month and needed some way to carry my computer!

Anyway, so Marco and I were discussing the endless quest for good bags. He brought out three of his. One of them is too small for his computer (the same model as mine), but is much cuter and a better bag in general. He got it at Timbuk2, which is a place that lets you special order your bag so it has only the colors and features that you want. So he got to have a handle on the top in addition to the shoulder strap (a good feature) and it is made of teal and brown colors, and has a see-through pocket under the front flap. But. Marco wanted to get it without Velcro closure. It already has the plastic buckle-type things, so why also Velcro, when Velcro just makes that terrible noise all the time, and then gets fuzz and cat fur stuck to it? You know?

My perfect too-small bag has no Velcro. My new bag has way too much Velcro, and some problems as well, but let�s leave that to the side.

Marco encountered administrative totalitarianism. (Again, there has to be a better name for this, but so far my neologism-generator has not come up with one. �Bureaucracy� approaches what I mean. Maybe: bureaucrazy? But still, it�s not only about rules or policies, but about the people who follow them unthinkingly.)

Marco says to the guy: Can I get this without Velcro? The guy says: Oh. No, they come already sewn like that. Marco: Oh! I thought you sewed the special orders here. Guy: We do. Marco: Oh. So the pieces that you sew together come with the Velcro on them already? Guy: Well, no. Marco: So can I get that without Velcro? Guy: The bags come with Velcro on them already.

And so on, like a film loop.

Now, I would call this policy-head if the guy said that it is the rules that the Velcro comes on there, so we can�t sell you one without the Velcro. That would be rule-fetishism, and I could do my little rant about how rules become tyranny when the people who apply them don�t think about what the rules are supposed to be for. Rules are supposed to help us live together, not hinder our cooperative efforts. Also: not all rules have to apply universally. That is not a difficult point! But we all encounter the frustration of rule-fetishism all the time, I�m guessing.

But that�s not what THIS is. THIS is rule-fetishism sent all the way back to the origin of time, so that the rule is rendered a biblical-type commandment that orders your existence such that you never have to question why things might ever be thought otherwise.

Sure, commandments are useful. It�s a good idea to think that you shouldn�t kill people and you shouldn�t covet your neighbor�s things, and not really question those as guidelines. (You�ll notice that I�m not commenting on some of the other commandments. Some may not need to be so universal. And if we were in any class of mine right now some intrepid student would be bringing up the wrinkle of murder in self-defense, etc.)

But rules are meant to help us live together. And rule-fetishism is an overblown attachment to rules that turns around and makes it harder to live together.

In other words: rules helps us know what we, as a group, have decided works and doesn�t work. But establishing rules will never rid of us of the need to think about what works, and to negotiate with each other about what we value and what results we want the rules to achieve for us.

Toast only comes with butter. Bags only come with Velcro. Bureaucrazy!

You know what this is? It's a paralysis of the capacity for judgment. And so.... Stay tuned for: Celebrity Deathmatch between Immanuel Kant and J.S. Mill

10:21 a.m. - December 24, 2007

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

previous - next

the latest

older than the latest

random entry

get your own

write to me