From a fascinating collection of emails from former Google employees:
In one TGIF in Kirkland, an employee informed Eric Schmidt that Microsoft’s benefits package was richer. He announced himself
genuinely surprised, which genuinely surprised me. Schmidt, in the presence of witnesses, promised to bring the benefits to a par. He consulted HR, and HR informed him that it’d cost Google 22 million a year to do that. So he abandoned the promise and fell back on his tired, familiar standby (”People don’t work at Google for the money. They work at Google because they want to change the world!”). A statement that always seemed to me a little Louis XIV coming from a billionaire.
A company that generates several billions of dollars a year in profit — that reported revenues of $5.54 billion during the third quarter of 2008 — is, from the perspective of CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt, a man who earns a $1 annual salary but who owns more than 10.7 million shares of Google, considered a place where people work simply because they “want to change the world.”
From Emerson’s “Compensation”:
Every excess causes a defect; every defect an excess. Every sweet hath its sour; every evil its good. Every faculty which is a receiver of pleasure has an equal penalty put on its abuse. It is to answer for its moderation with its life. For every grain of wit there is a grain of folly. For every thing you have missed, you have gained something else; and for every thing you gain, you lose something. If riches increase, they are increased that use them. If the gatherer gathers too much, nature takes out of the man what she puts into his chest; swells the estate, but kills the owner. Nature hates monopolies and exceptions. The waves of the sea do not more speedily seek a level from their loftiest tossing, than the varieties of condition tend to equalize themselves. There is always some levelling circumstance that puts down the overbearing, the strong, the rich, the fortunate, substantially on the same ground with all others.
The Call by Yannick Murphy: The always interesting author of Here They Come and Signed, Mata Hari returns with a novel that whips up a worldview from a rather quirky set of limitations: namely, the call logs that a veterinarian maintains as his son is unexpectedly put into a coma and an unforgiving economy denies him work. What emerges is a surprisingly optimistic, often funny, and very moving account on how one family uses acceptance and forgiveness as a way to atone for hard knocks. (
Birds of Paradise by Diana Abu-Jaber: Forget Franzen and Eugenides. If you're looking for a social novel that counts, Diana Abu-Jaber is the author you're looking for. Building from the free-form exploration of consciousness and identity in Crescent and the gripping procedural structure of Origin, Abu-Jaber's latest novel is her finest, equally fluent with gutterpunk culture and smarmy real estate men. It has been suggested by The Washington Post's Ron Charles that you will likely gain some pounds while reading this novel. This is certainly true. Abu-Jaber's description of food is so precise that it often made me want to do more cooking. But I very much admired the way in which Abu-Jaber presents all her characters as unwitting victims of rough capitalism, which permits them some dignity even as they perform terrible acts.
The Last of the Live Nude Girls by Sheila McClear: This memoir isn't so much about the decline of the Times Square peepshow, as it is about one young woman's efforts to pull herself up by by her bootstraps when presented with few economic options. Filled with self-introspective candor and a quiet dignity, McClear's story is one that might befall any of us in these volatile times. While McClear does get back on her feet, her book leads one contemplating the terrible fates of other young women now moving to New York and falling into deadlier vocations. (
This is just the second post I’ve read from you, and all I can ask is, “Huh?”
It boils down to one word in the headline: Job. ‘Nuff said. Because one should be so lucky as to be able to whine about a job…with benefits no less. Many folks don’t have that “luck”.
Keep up your observations though. I did enjoy your defense of David Denby; probably because I agree. LOL
Happy MLK Jr Day (and this year I don’t have a job so I can’t b*tch about them making me work it).
Cheers!
Dear Colleagues,
I’m writing to share my admission that I have once again been caught passing off the ideas and words of other writers as my own. In my January 15th posting, “Nigel Beale’s Comprehensive Literary Criticism Reading List” http://nigelbeale.com/2009/01/nigel-beales-comprehensive-literary-criticism-reading-list/, I have presented a large selection of critical titles, of which I must admit I have read very few. The selection was drawn from sources that I have failed to acknowledge and I’m afraid I cannot pretend that it is really “Nigel Beale’s” list at all. I am embarrassed to have once again committed an act of plagiarism. I have modified the post so it now contains a link to the websites from which I cribbed my list, but I wish to apologize nonetheless. I also wish to apologize to Dan Green for the unintended implication that his reading of literary criticism is less than adequate. I will try to avoid this kind of action in the future. To the well-known troll who has once again been harassing me – I hope this will satisfy you.
Sincerely
Nigel Beale
Derek, is that you…?
Please note that the above IP address does not match Nigel’s IP address.
Emerson’s “Compensation” is worth reading in full (also try “Circles,” similar in theme and also rewarding).