I've noticed that the culture in America (perhaps elsewhere as well), is that if anything goes wrong, there must be individuals or a groups of individuals who can be solely blamed. That is what is being determined now about the Minnesota bridge collapse...they're investigating the reason 'why?', not just so that they can ensure something like this doesn't happen again, but for most people the overriding reason is who can we sue? Who can I direct my anger towards for the loss of my truck? Or my loved one.
The blame game is played in everyday small events too...and I see it everyday as a waiter at Friendly's...a customer is frustrated that her fries aren't hot enough, a table is pissed off their food is taking too long, and if venting upon their server doesn't satisfy their anger, they want to see the manager. What they want seems to be a validation that they are right. They are right to blame us for doing something wrong. But life is never a smooth road, and I've noticed that those customers who take the bumps in stride are so much happier. I noticed that the impatient table complained because they weren't talking or socializing with each other, while another table I had was having a grand old time even though their food took even longer. Food takes too long only if you look at it in that way.
Yesterday night I had an especially difficult table of two. They ordered a sandwich each, and a cup of chowder each. When I went back to the kitchen, the chowder was out, a new batch was thawing. I went to tell them that if they wanted chowder, they'd have to wait a while, maybe ten minutes. As soon as I said that to them, they complained, so I said we'd rush them some chowders. We managed to get chowder out to them quicker, but it was "too white," and they didn't want it, even though they didn't even taste it. What they were actually adverse to wasn't the chowder, but that I said "rush"...from that word even if it was the best chowder in the world they would have thought it looked disgusting because it turned them off. At this moment, one of them says she changes her mind and wants mozzarella sticks instead of the sandwich. But a few minutes later, the other woman's sandwich is done, which we leave on a heated surface waiting for the mozzarella sticks. A few minutes later they complain their food is taking too long, at which point I ask if she wants her sandwich first, and then she says "so you mean it's been sitting back there getting cold all this time?"
I say "no, it's only been a minute or two, not long, we're just waiting for her mozzarella sticks". So I bring the sandwich out which, surprise surprise, looks disgusting to her based on the expression on her face, but looks absolutely normal to me. While they sit, complain, and frustrate themselves a fly buzzes around them and an uncleaned table in the other row pisses them off even more.
I've discovered that adults aren't much different from children. We all expect and want certain things and when we don't get them, we blame others. But what we should look at is ourselves, our society. The fact that a bridge fell even though it passed inspections either means it was an unavoidable accident, or our society fails at instilling discipline and responsibility into our citizens, as the inspectors are a product of ourselves. Sometimes it's baffling to see somebody's day ruined by a cup of chowder when there are others who lose loved ones. But in either case, no amount of complaining, no amount of demanding a free meal, and no amount of suing can fix your day, or bring your loved one back.
It may sound messed up that I'm implying victim's families to not get angry about their loved one's death, I do in fact think they should be angry, and should be compensated as a symbolic apology. But if you hold the anger in your heart for all your life, it's only eating up at yourself.
2) In other news, a family's year without 'Made in China':
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/07/19/my_year_without_made_in_china/
7 comments:
well... what about accountability? which is connected to blame i guess.
accountability is needed to ensure safety and quality, and I think should be pursued on those motivations, but not to take one's anger or frustrations out on others.
I thought the bridge failed inspections in 2005 since they scored below 50 indicating that the bridge needed to be replaced. Yet the governor made a public statement saying the bridge had no structural deficiencies. Construction in the weeks prior to the collapse was minor and cosmetic. Now you have to wonder why the governor publicly announced that there were no identifiable structural deficiencies when in fact the inspection conducted in 2005 indicated that it did.
Would that fact leave me angry at the governor and his staff if one of the family died in this incident? You're damn right it would.
Ok, I just read that it didn't fail but met the bare minimum at that time. Still, I wouldn't appreciate being lied to and yes, I would still direct my anger towards the state government.
wait. I only now see what you're trying to say. nevermind.
according to an NPR broadcast I heard the other day, there are 84,000 bridges in the nation that rate at a structural deficiency level similar to the Minnesota bridge. I think the governor isn't lying, my feeling is that nobody had any idea that it could happen...a few rusts and cracks don't warrant a replacement according to those 84,000 cases...either that one bridge was an unlucky case, or we got 84,000 bridges that are ticking time bombs.
Post a Comment