08 Jul Beware the Tyranny of Size!
In 1999, Ken Gergen wrote about the tyranny of the normal—“the pattern of expectations, obligations and swift sanctions within the core of most disciplines.”
In 2019, Jerry Z. Muller, zeroed in on how one dominant feature of the normal —metrics—tyrannizes us. His book is aptly titled The Tyranny of Metrics.
Lately, I’ve been thinking about another tyranny of the normal that’s a preoccupation in our culture. I’ve been pondering the tyranny of size. The tyranny of metrics and the tyranny of size go hand-in-hand. You can’t measure unless what you’re measuring has size and, vice versa, size rests upon measurement.
Is there any thing or any body or any activity that isn’t subject to measurement and assessment based physical magnitude, dimensions or capacities? I can’t think of any. Size is king!
You may be wondering, “So, do we have a problem, Lois?” Yes! Many, actually.
First, Measurement is dehumanizing.
Second, size measures one thing and one thing only: SIZE (dimensions and/or quantity, usually relative to other similar things). This means that assessing something based upon its size alone will lead us astray. But we all do it unknowingly. We are constantly being “sized up” when it comes to our identities, our worth, indeed, our very meaning as a unique human.
The Ideal Size
Bodies. The “tyranny of body size” is all around us and, sadly, lives in us. The societal pressure to be a certain size, the untold amounts of money and time spent on trying to achieve it, the discrimination against those who don’t “fit” and the emotional pain of not having the perfectly-sized body—well, all that put together just isn’t measurable! When it comes to human bodies, the ideal of the supposedly “right size” oppresses us.
The Bigger the Better—Followers, Votes, Profits.
Followers. How many Facebook friends do you have? How many Likes did your latest post get? How many followers do you have on LinkedIn? Instagram? TikTok? How do you compare? Are you obsessed with these numbers? Uncountable people are. Friends, Likes, Reactions, Comments, Reposts—these are taken to be measures of a person’s value to friends and strangers. Metrics tells you how much you matter in the world, or so (too many) people believe.
Votes. The candidates and referenda with the most votes win. Yes. But are the results a reflection of what people want? That’s impossible to tell, although my guess is “not usually.” The majority of political outcomes have more to do with money, corruption, coercion, manipulation, and illegal legalities.
Profits. Hugely profitable multinationals have enormous influence on how the world works. While they appear to rule politics and industry, they are equally beholden to those who feed off them. Their value may slip even as their profits grow.
In the examples just given, attributing value/success/impact to size misleads us. It leads us away from the complexities of all that’s going on, from the beliefs and values and history and culture and politics that are shaping how people are living their lives. It obscures.
Hopefully, I’ve helped you see this.
Now let’s explore some “sizings” that are not so easily seen as problematic. They actually seem perfectly natural.
If something is big, it’s good. It’s important. It’s influential. It’s a trend. (Exceptions are certain body parts.)
If it’s small. It’s not good. (Exceptions are certain body parts.)
If something is bigger than expected, it’s great.
If it’s smaller than expected, it’s terrible.
Say you hold an event and expect 100 people to come and only 50 show up. Most likely you and others will view this as a failure and, what’s worse, you’ll spend your time thinking of who’s not there rather than attending fully to the folks who do show up.
Or like when you hold an event expecting 50 people and 100 come! “Wow! What a success! We should definitely do it again!”
Political and cultural movements are understandably concerned with size and can be prone to measuring their impact by how big or small they are. Black Lives Matter was the largest protest movement in US history, involving an estimated 26 million Americans in over two months of sustained activity in 2020. The first Earth Day in 1970 saw participation of 20 million across the US.
What role did their size play in their immediate impact and what role does it play today? How can that be measured? Can that be measured? Should that be measured? Or should these movements be continuously becoming? Is it possible that focusing on their size might hinder their becoming?
Size is a seduction when it’s equated with success, impact and significance, when it’s interpreted as a meaningful barometer. We think we know the meaning from something’s size. We think we know, but we cannot know.
Because we can only glimpse something’s meaning from its becoming. Again and again and again.
Size is one thing. Meaning is not a thing. Meaning is continuous relational process. Equating the two is a part of the tyranny of the normal.
No Comments