Theatre of Lost Ambitions

I've learned most of my life lessons from watching films.  No, really.  They've given me far better guidance on the major issues which have confronted me than I ever got from any of the supposed 'role models' that were meant to be my behavioural examples. I've just recently watched Theatre of Blood (1973) again, for instance, a film which, over the years has taught me much.  Not how to take bloody revenge upon my critics, obviously.  But rather of the value of kindness.  Sure, Vincent Price's Edward Lionheart is a terrible old ham actor, but ultimately it is the cruelty of the critics he eventually takes his revenge on that drove him first to attempt suicide, then then into homicidal madness.  Would it have been too much to ask for them to have moderated their criticism and used kinder words?  It has been my experience that kindness will always get you further than cruelty and the absolutely worst thing you can do to an individual is to humiliate them.  It's a curious thing, but no matter how much I might despise someone and disapprove of the actions that brought them to the point of defeat and humiliation, I can never really find it in myself to take any pleasure from their downfall.  Now, of course, I know what it is to be brought low by events, to be at the point of losing everything, so I have personal experience of how lousy it feels and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.  I'd like to think, though, that even before my personal experience, having seen the terrible consequences of Lionheart's humiliation in Theatre of Blood when young, the foundations for this refusal to revel in the misfortune of others were laid.

Of course, poor old Lionheart had fallen into the trap of believing that awards and critical acclaim actually mean something when, in reality, they don't.  They are purely subjective measures of worth, yet we have all ,at some time in our lives, allowed ourselves to believe that we are somehow defined by these things - that our 'success' and 'talent' are measured in terms of such things.  Hey, it's the capitalist way, after all: happiness, success, identity, are all to be quantified in purely material terms.  I remember that when I first entered into the world of work, more years ago than I care to recall, I bought into a lot of this - I believed that the pursuit of a 'career', which meant chasing promotions, was the way ahead.  It's what you had to do in order to be considered successful.  But to get those promotions, you have to 'play the game', to conform, to not speak up when you know something or someone higher up the line is wrong, to turn a blind eye to their transgressions.  I eventually realised that doing this was actually making me deeply unhappy as I was having to go against my own nature.  Moreover, I quickly realised that things like promotions could effectively be 'weaponised' by management and their pursuit used to 'punish' you if you didn't tow their line.  You could, by any objective criteria, be on course for promotion to the next grade up, or at the very least an opportunity to sit a promotion board, but suddenly, without warning, you'd find that, on your latest staff report, you were 'not fitted' for promotion, despite your previous managers having consistently said you were 'fitted', (as I recall, you needed three 'fitted' in a row for that board).  The difference being that this manager was borderline incompetent and you'd had to intervene several times to avoid disaster, which they resented, even though you'd done your best to keep it all from their managers.  Not getting to the board made you look as if you were incompetent - you had to watch other people, some junior to you, get promoted over you.

Once I'd decided that I didn't care any more, that I no longer valued these things or wanted to chase them, then that particular weapon was neutralised.  Eventually, of course, they'd find other ways to get at you if you were seen as some kind of non-conformist.  I learned that no matter how well you do your job, in the modern workplace, that simply isn't enough.  Indeed, actual competence no longer seems to matter - it is all about how well you can self promote and 'network'.  In the last few years of my last, horrendous, job, I saw so many people who I (and everyone else other than management) knew to be incompetent in lower positions promoted and promoted again to higher management positions, mainly on the basis that they 'played the game' and towed the party line.  Ambition was considered more important than ability.  Guess what? They were even more incompetent in their new jobs but, of course, the blame was always put on those working under them, (despite the fact that they invariably had more experience and were better qualified in the job).  Even when one of them got their comeuppance (and were moved sideways rather than being demoted, as is the modern way), I could find no pleasure in their humiliation.  After all, it wasn't their fault that they been over-promoted to a job they didn't have the ability to do - that was down to their managers.  Obviously, what we should have done was take bloody Shakespeare-inspired revenge upon these incompetents. Instead, I found it easier to walk away.  Despite being the senior, most experienced, man in my particular section, I'd found myself effectively sidelined for being a 'trouble maker', (I'd called the union in on a few issues), so just leaving seemed the only thing to do.  Not as spectacular (or poignant) as the climax of Theater of Blood, with Price's Lionheart, carrying his daughter's body, does the death of Cordelia from 'King Lear' atop a blazing theatre, I know, but a lot easier and less fatal.