Wednesday, November 29, 2006

The Phonograph and My Existential Crisis

Today, November 29th, 2006 (the 333rd day of 2006) is the 119th anniversary of the day that Thomas Edison first demonstrated his invention for recording and replaying sound, the phonograph ("sound writer"). This first phonograph recorded on tinfoil cylinders that had low sound quality and destroyed the track during replay so that one could listen to it only a few times. A few uses for the phonograph that Edison proposed include: recording books for blind people to hear, preserving the last words of dying people, announcing the time, and teaching spelling. The reproduction of music was not very high on Edison's list. A few years past without the phonograph really catching on, and eventually Edison proclaimed that the phonograph had no commercial value. After a few more years, Edison changed his mind and began selling phonographs as office dictating machines. However, other inventors wanted to take the phonograph in a different direction and they created jukeboxes by arranging phonographs to play popular music at the drop of a coin. Edison saw this as a debasement of his serious invention. Eventually, after 20 years, Edison conceded that the phonograph's purpose is to record and play music. I do not claim to be an expert on Edison's life, but it seems to me that he began inventing because he enjoyed inventing. It seems to me that he made money in order to continue what he loved to do; invent. He survived to continue inventing. As the years went on, however, his love seemed to change. With his improvement of the incandescent light bulb, Edison was a promoter of DC (direct current) for electric distribution. He went to extremes to put his new adversary, George Westinghouse, out of business. Westinghouse was a promoter of AC (alternating current). Edison went so far as to electracute animals, including an elephant, to show the "danger" of AC. He even went so far as promoting the electric chair and the death penalty to delegitimate AC. I don't want to go into the details, but it seems that Edison's focus shifted here, from making money in order to continue inventing to continue inventing in order to make money. (I don't really care if this isn't exactly true. This story about Edison is merely a means to an end, and I feel that the end justifies the means, at least in this blog post.)And this is the point that my existential crisis arises. What do I want to do? What do I want to survive in order to keep doing? Instead of keep doing in order to survive? What do I want to do that I will make money to continue doing and not continue doing in order to make money? This is where I am stuck. Especially since I have become rather disenchanted with graduate school (apparently reading Habermas will do that to you). So here I am crossing the threshold into the yet-to-be determined future, and as I do, I am trying to find my passion in life. Because right now, I am growing evermore passionate about apathy.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm with you here. It's looking like I'm going to have to do things I don't want to do in order to do the things I do want to do. And not just in a time-allocation way, but in a way that means the things I'm gonna have to do conflict morally (for want of a better word) with the things I want to do.

But maybe together something can be worked out? Want to drink to that? :)

Chris said...

It's like we have to be superheros. We have to have our alter-ego doing something we don't want to do, and that may conflict "morally" with what we do want to do, just so we can do what we went to do.
I'll be Batman.

Chris said...

That is meant to read "what we want to do". Sorry.

Anonymous said...

Dang it. I wanted to be Batman. I'll have to think of some really pretentious and obscure superhero to be now.

sara without an 'h' said...

It was reading Langer that did it to me.

Chris said...

Maybe, for me, it was the admixture of Langer and Habermas. A dangerous combination.