In February 2020, a book titled The quiet desperation of daily life. User guide. This book, published by Debolsillo, was signed by the group ‘Un pie en el estribo’ and was apparently one of those self-help guides that tell the reader that they can do whatever they want, because the solution to their problems lies within themselves. to them. But there is nothing else. This book was a Trojan horse, an invitation to destruction, and a bold editorial experiment by the novelist. Belen GopeguiA year after defending his doctoral thesis, in which he analyzed the genre of personal development by applying the codes of narrative fiction, the one who published this text asked those comfort and motivation guides what they said, who said it and to whom they said it. .
Both texts (thesis and guide) were published in the same volume with the following title: Murmur. Self-help as a novel, a case of conspiracythis afternoon (19:00) at The Debate publishing house Ramon Alonso Luzzy Cultural Center, in Cartagena. In this book, the author offers a critical look at the often misleading arguments on which the genre is based, asking what the origins of the shortcomings they seek to cover up are, and challenging the individual and isolated nature of this suffering associated with an oppressive system. and drowns. But Gopegui not only analyzes and questions, he also proposes alternatives that include socio-aid, joint and collective action, replacing the self with the we.
“As Nacho Vegas says, “It’s not that we’re very good,” and there are people who can pay for a psychologist’s consultation or ease their pain by sharing it with those around them, but when we look at self-sufficiency from a superior perspective…, Do we forget who doesn’t have a care network?
Actually. If there is an environment where I argue, where I deceive myself, there comes a time when someone says to me: “Look, no, no matter how much you close your eyes, the harmful will still be there.” But care networks are in many cases a want or greatly threatened. What has been done is largely the commodification of care, its transformation into global chains of women and men in Europe, and the exploitation of Latin American women, for example. Private housing is added to this false confinement, and in this case we face mercantilism or open exploitation, even remaining hidden when someone is forced into care, even if that person chooses to share the task. What we understand by ‘shared care’ is that it barely has oxygen due to the fear you mentioned.
What do you discover when you apply the codes of fiction and ask personal development what to tell and to whom?
Just like in a novel, form is content (and vice versa). In the chapter on ‘what’ we see that what almost always unites these books is the fantasy of merit. Although meritocracy is questioned more today, I believe that the essence of the issue has not been reached yet. It has been criticized that he who has more merit has more power, but the idea of merit itself should be questioned: it is enough to do well any of the things necessary for life, when you can do it. And if this cannot be done, slowly, without rushing, without stopping, create the conditions so that it can be done. And by the way, don’t muddy life with the arrogance of the lucky ones.
Self-help is part of a system that wants us to be able to compete, to “compete,” not to become what drives us to exhaustion, what you call “the quiet helplessness of daily life.”
Yep, to be productive or not to bother. There is a politician who criticizes self-help books and says that we should organize, but it seems as if this is just a matter of whim: Either I choose self-improvement or I choose organization, and he forgets the difference between both actions. It is true that self-help contributes to the creation of a false social peace, a social peace in which everyone can take care of himself. If everyone focuses on pulling their own chest out of the fire, they will not be able to focus on the fight for the public’s health. But you have to ask yourself why this is happening. Of course, most would prefer good public health care; The thing is, there is no guarantee that you will win this war if you fight for it. Sometimes you have to fight without guarantee, you have to fight to the death, but to do that you often have to free yourself even for a moment from short-term pressures or have an environment that helps you recover. stop them. On the other hand, learning a few tricks to present a better image in a job interview can be done on your own; It may or may not work for you, but fighting so that everyone who wants to work can work… Things get complicated there. Let’s make these battles less difficult and more efficient, and the need for self-deception will decrease.
Why does he choose an anonymous chorus of old people who deny hope as a collective voice filling the gaps and neglects of self-sufficiency in the “quiet desperation of daily life”?
“The truly radical thing is to make hope possible, not despair believable,” says Raymond Williams. When hope is possible, when it is not just an illusion, it becomes closer to trust and moves away from Günther Anders’ other quote: “Call this hope cowardice.” Today, with the discussion of ‘collapse’, it seems we need to talk about hope to avoid falling into apathy and inaction. Now we must also be wary of illusions that are deceptions. We’ve been through a lot of exciting marketing, and we already know where this is going… That’s why I’m choosing a chorus of old people, who can’t be blamed if they say there’s no hope; He doesn’t have it, they will die soon, he doesn’t need it and he knows he can live without it. Instead, he trusts. Hope is still loaded with religious or superstitious connotations, while trust is trust in those who are with you in a common mission.
In El murmurlo he advocates the pursuit of a collective action, which he calls the “reinforcement assumption.” Supplement for what?
To engage in an action that interferes with history and history in small print, because capitalism is constantly changing history without anyone finding it totalitarian, so why not intervene? Moreover, we are in a very critical period. All decisions belong to us.
The book is interspersed with the destruction suggested by the chorus and dialogue with the stories of two characters, Alfonso and Elda, who discover the value of conspiring and sharing bonds in a common space.
I don’t even know if the term exists or if I invented it, but I always insist on ‘procedural politics’, not results politics. My request to you is that if you enter politics, you abandon procedures such as places for people to meet, such as the one that welcomes Elda, because this is more permanent and effective than temporary measures that will disappear when you leave. . These places are a real support point. The other one is, you say you need to be organized, but where is it, how far is it from my home, what time will I return, who will I hang out with… This is what needs to be made easier. You may want much more citizen participation, but when? And without organized participation, where can the politician get the power to impose his decisions on corporations, banks, even other States, those who have more power than what is given by just a few votes, without an organization that clearly expresses them every day? day? ?
However, the government was never interested in creating spaces that would facilitate confrontation.
It should attract a lot of attention from one power and not the other. There is a theory that talks about the commercialization of democracy because democracy is also being privatized. Just as teachers in many fields no longer teach because it is something important to know, they have clients to satisfy instead of students, and they can set aside the necessary concepts to do so, so the same thing begins to happen in democracy: I no longer teach a program because I have a policy for the public good. , I design because I have to please my constituents. However, elections are held every four years and policies are long-term. Participation is necessary to implement a policy. Because otherwise, those who prefer their privileges not to change will destroy you.
In this book and also in his recent articles, he calls for collective action, which in recent months has meant taking to the streets with white waves.
Going out is very important but also not enough. You have to push the boundaries, because that’s what a consensual show is: it shows the numbers, gives warmth and mutual support, but then goes home and those responsible for the disaster to come, if they continue in their own lane, forget about it. I’m not saying do something illegal, I’m saying do something that pushes the boundaries.
Can these boundaries be expanded without resorting to violence?
We will have to find a balance: neither violence that will end in the enemy’s favor, which I believe should not be done, nor docility. I think that middle ground is being strong, “I’m not leaving here” and I’m not moving from here because I want you to guarantee that when I ask for an appointment at my health center, they will take care. I said that I and the medical staff would be there under reasonable conditions.