The world needs to wake up. To see things from a new perspective and not allow “doctrines of precedents” to rule our visions for tomorrow. To be the remarkable, knowledgeable and worthy denizens of mighty earth we should be. To not only congratulate the winners and celebrate elitism, but open our minds to the losers of yesterday’s conscience.
We all know how humanity carefully selects, congratulate and celebrate the best of the best, the crème de la crème, the essence of the best, the cream of the crop…and it goes on. I mean, the tedious selection processes, the millions spent yearly simply to tell someone he is better than his contemporaries, the effort spent marketing the entire fiasco and the industry churned out from such a lucrative business is astounding.
From the realm of sports, films, books, fashion .etc, humanity has been eyeing only the best, to sieve out the top of the crop and to encourage betterment each time. There is some truth in that. See the Oscars, the Turner Prize, the MTV awards, The NBA Championships, the Olympics, the Heisman Trophy, the Naismith Award, just to name a few.
My contention is that we, as an intelligent sodality, should focus and reinforce the encouragement of the worst. That is not to say we neglect the best though, we should be prudent enough to know that encouraging the best won’t make them better, in relative terms! Conversely, encouraging and motivating the weak or the worst in this case, will have a higher chance in pushing them to succeed for better results, creating more competitions and advancing the entire industry as a whole. It works both ways and naysayers, however staunch their stand may be, cannot contend with this point raised. Funds, hype, attention, efforts and opportunities should be given to the worst, to grow, to encourage diversity; to sow the seeds of what could be, tomorrow’s beautiful forest!
Kudos to John Wilson and the Golden Raspberry Award, the Golden Turkey Awards, Ig Nobel Prize, who dared to see things differently and followed their gut. Haters may call it the remnants of dignity distilled to the “loser”, while I see it as the remnants of hype and stardom shared by the “winner”.
I can already hear the discontentment creeping out to me and I do not deny that simply awarding the worst each time may not promote betterment, I am simply saying this: today’s worst could be tomorrow’s best, because criteria, people and even times are ever-changing and protean – we have to be open and admit to these rapid changes or risk suffocating true talents and misjudged hopes.
We, as sentient beings, the sole species that has dominated all other species on earth, should not put on blinkers like race-horses do in a prime-time race. We should be open to new changes, accept and understand new concepts that could re-engineer our very perception of the world itself.
The best, being the best, will only be the best if there the worst, and the reverse is axiomatic. We should commemorate the efforts, not all, of the worst for what their worth, at least to a considerable extent that will make the worst feel appreciated.
Then again, it’s just a thought, nothing more.
=)
Durwin
Hi Durwin, really thought-provoking. Your post anticipates the next question: how do we define the best? Perhaps our values are problematic if we place too much emphasis on the tangible (beauty, speed, good voice) and not enough on compassion, sweetness and loving behaviour. Our society celebrates ambition and glamour and strong-willed behaviour. We scoff at those who do not conform to a certain image. Maybe in some cases "the worst" exhibit qualities that would in a different society be appreciated.
ReplyDeleteI really like this article because it is such an easy read and yet it stimulates and sheds light on the "other side of things". I agree with you because there must be a loser for every winner.
ReplyDeleteMs Coleen you also questions the definition of "best".. it is not always the case where there is a clear cut winner. In some cases, the runner-up is just a hair's breath away. For example the Subaru Challenge. Did the winner win because he is the best? I would see him winning because his competitor gave up. Or in artistic competitions like rhythmic gymnastics and dance where the judgement of art is subjective.
back to the broader picture, i would like to bring up a point that it is difficult to qualify what kind of respect that society gives to the "runner-ups". The greatest respect one can receive in a competition would be from fellow competitors. This applies to competitions such as sports/dance/music/arts.
Maybe the Golden Raspberry Awards and the like were created by people who do not agree with the winners of the more mainstream awards. Do they always award the worst? I don't think so. There is a fine line between the worst and the runner-up.
Hi Ms Coleen, Thanks for the nice words. I do see your point and though we may not conveniently admit it, the society we live in today is goal-oriented and success-driven.
ReplyDeleteBest will get you there, average, mediocre, okay is simply not good enough. =)
Allow me to indulge, but may I ask, which "best" is more important: to you, or the world as a whole?
Yo Elliot, thanks and yes, you make a good case on the definition of what we considered "best" may in fact be second best, or third for that matter. It is an insurmountable task to profile what makes something most ideal, but the questions remains, should we still try?
=)