October 29, 2010
By ANAND GIRIDHARADAS
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS — From the first years of the American republic, a quiet battle has simmered over the words that denote the nation’s soul. And now a count can declare the victors: “achievement” and “fun.”
From the 1810s to the 2000s, the frequency of “achievement” in written American English grew elevenfold, according to a search of the Corpus of Historical American English, a database of 107,000 newspapers, magazines, novels, plays and film scripts. In the same period, the frequency of “fun” multiplied by more than eight times.
Meanwhile, another pair of words met an opposite fate. As talk of “achievement” soared over two centuries, the term “excellence” dropped out of favor, also elevenfold. As “fun” gained influence, mentions of “pleasure” fell by a factor of four.
In the history of language, words rise and fall. We make and remake them; they make and remake us.
The story of a word is as complex as a hurricane. It is difficult to know for sure how it catches on, meets new needs, acquires new valences. It is impossible to blame the decline of one word on the rise of another.
But in the destinies of these two pairs of words is a suggestion of a turning in American culture, and one that has influenced the world. It is a turning away from an arguably aristocratic idea of the intrinsic worth of things: from pleasure, with its sense of an internal condition of mind, to fun, so closely affiliated with outward activities; from excellence, an inner trait whose attainment is its own reward, to achievement, which comes through slogging and recognition.
Merriam-Webster defines “pleasure” as “a state of gratification,” while fun is “what provides amusement or enjoyment; specifically, playful, often boisterous, speech or action.” It defines “excellence” as “the quality of being excellent,” which in turn means “very good of its kind: eminently good.” “Achievement,” meanwhile, is “a result gained by effort.”
The arc of American usage from “pleasure” to “fun” can be traced in the corpus’s database. In an 1812 play, John Blake White wrote, “Wherefore wealth, if not to purchase pleasure? Wherefore health, if not to taste, when pleasure holds the cup and bids us drink.” By 2009, this line from the novelist Hyatt Bass was more typical: “Come on. Don’t you think it’s fun to have a bottle of wine that was released the same month you got engaged?”
“Pleasure” carries a hint of the sublime; it speaks of a state of mind that comes organically, that need not be artificially induced.
“Fun,” though almost synonymous with “pleasure” for contemporary speakers, often involves artificial inducement. You don’t feel fun; you do a fun thing. And fun has no hint of elitism, whereas pleasure vaguely does.
Gushing waterfalls provide pleasure; games of paintball, in which friends playfully (and sometimes painfully) shoot one another with pellets of paint, provide fun. A long, gabby dinner party may well be a “pleasure”; a crowded, sweat-laced night at the six-deep bar is more likely to be termed “fun.”
If “pleasure” comes from being and from talking through ideas, “fun” comes from doing and, often, switching off the brain. The change perhaps partly accounts for the American insistence on activities for all occasions, rather than trusting pleasure to develop on its own.
Rare is the American corporate retreat or after-Thanksgiving party that does not involve a skit or contest or session of Nintendo Wii. Where others might eat, drink and talk, Americans often create themes and talent shows.
In “Eat, Pray, Love,” the best-selling memoir by Elizabeth Gilbert, she describes discovering the Italian idea of pleasure as if it were a buried city: “During my first few weeks in Italy, all my Protestant synapses were zinging in distress, looking for a task. I wanted to take on pleasure like a homework assignment.” She concludes that “Americans have an inability to relax into sheer pleasure. Ours is an entertainment-seeking nation, but not necessarily a pleasure-seeking one.”
Italians, on the other hand, have mastered “bel far niente,” the beauty of doing nothing, Ms. Gilbert writes.
Then there is the arc from “excellence” to “achievement.” Consider this sentence, from an 1813 poem: “would she thus a moral teach; / That man should see, but never reach, / The height of excellence, and show / The vanity of works below?”
And this one, from a 2005 biography: “the young man pursues his dream while others scoff, he undertakes a lonely journey from the country to the city in search of fulfillment, overcomes obstacles with a combination of pluck, determination, and talent, and finally rises to heights of achievement and prosperity.”
“Excellence” evokes Aristotle with its overtones of virtue. Anyone can achieve, in garbage collection or neurosurgery, but how many can truly be excellent?
“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence,” President John F. Kennedy once said.
“Achievement” is a word more likely to come from American leaders today, and, like “fun,” it is outward in nature. It comes in doing specific things. It is more about checking boxes than fulfilling inner potentialities.
The achievement culture permeates life today. From elementary-school testing to the incessant pressure to overschedule as a university student, educational culture emphasizes the racking up of achievements over intellectual crackle. Wall Street stumbled in part because so many chased achiever bonuses while neglecting the pursuit of excellence in their vocation. An American culture of instantaneous celebrity teaches young people that fame is an end in itself rather than an incidental symptom of excellence in craft.
The world in which “pleasure” and “excellence” roared was less equitable than our world today. It shut out vast categories of humankind. In the intervening years, those exclusions dwindled; the world opened up for so many, not least in the United States. But with that change has come another: what would seem to be a growing intolerance for merely being, and an anguished insistence on doing, doing, doing.
You point out a very true cultural norm. And I wonder how we differ from other regions and the implications of those differences. I spent the summer in France this summer and came back ready to live more consciously, to have pleasure in many aspects of life. In India, where family and leisurely connections matter but also compete with the the status of one’s role… I am curious your thoughts…what is the implication to the economy when one is doing fun vs. pleasure?
Reflecting on your last paragraph, cannot everyone achieve “pleasure” and “excellence,” equally? I am interested in learning more about the relationship between social inequality and the cultural preference for “pleasure” and “excellence” versus social equality and the cultural preference for “fun” and “achievement.” Can you speak on this point? I am discouraged to think that equality is only achievable through the sacrifice of greater personal depth and satisfaction.
Thank you.
A stimulating piece. As a writer, choosing the right word is important and the times influence what “right” word to use. 40 years ago I was the high school editor for our high school year book. I used the theme Excellence and the foreword defined it as you did along with its privileged implications. Now, that word may be considered “old school.”
As a docent at the National Museum, I engage visitors to contemplate on the artifacts and artworks, to gain knowledge and pleasure. I would never suggest to have “fun” at the museum. It may come down to writing age.
“Fun” usage really took off as it was coupled with consumer products, such as the Kodak camera, early in the 20th century and accelerated after WWII. It reached a crescendo in the 1990s decade of American affluence and hyperconsumerism. In the post-911 decade, “fun” lives on, but recent years have seen its use in advertising eclipsed by words emphasizing a positive emotional relationship like “happy” and “love” with products instead of the action-oriented implications of “fun.”
very well articulated – and although I detect a hint of wistfulness, I appreciate the truly journalistic approach – any good news, by the way?
Thanks for the article. I especially enjoyed the sentence about how American culture teaches young people that fame is an end in itself. As a performer who’s been trying to “make it” for more than two decades, I know exactly what you mean. And I’ve “made it” many times over but not quite…it’s crazy, but that’s how I’ve seen it for so long. Nevertheless, it’s something I’m currently investigating within myself and digesting mentally and philosophically, on a personal level. It’s very interesting. I am actually performing six nights/week at the “Lost in Translation” hotel in Tokyo, which I believe is a testament to my excellence of craft – but does it mean that I’ve “made it?” Dunno. Being in Japan is amazing because excellence of craft is such a core aspect of the culture – so is achievement, albeit as a nation, as a people, as a whole – not just on a personal level. As an expat friend here told me, “Japan is a ‘we’ culture, not a ‘me’ culture.” Just as “Lost in Translation” depicted, I have plenty of ‘me’ time here; time to myself – to think and do. But as Deepak Chopra said (and probably many before him) “We are human beings, not doings.”
Great essay, a pleasure to read, excellent. Was it fun to read it, too? I might consider saying yes, especially to someone younger – and expect an intrigued look back: “can reading stuff like that be fun?” But would I call this essay an “achievement”? It probably is, but it is much more. Was it just an achievement, frankIy, I would not want to spend my time reading it unless I needed it for my job.
I’m old enough to feel nostalgia when I hear words like excellence, pleasure, and even “honor” or “courage”.
You have a big point in your last sentence. This shift in vocabulary may be a trade-off between more “equality” and less “true values”. On the other hand – as you point out: excellence and pleasure are inward and not measurable. These words were dead and meaningless, used too often where they did not apply at all. They were part of the big machine of bigotry. Maybe, just maybe, we have become more honest. Which would be an achievement in itself.
The article was provocative. Thank you for it. I think it relates closely to an idea put forward by Blaise Pascal in the 17 century. “Most of the troubles man gets into result from his inability to sit alone in a room for any length of time and simply think.” Certainly pleasure can occur with others. But it tends to be in a lower key–as well as more sustaining–than fun.
Your essay about the cultural movement from “excellence” to “achievement” twigged for me the notion that I have about my reasons for being in China. I have lived for the past 11 years in British Columbia. In the beginning I loved it. I had lots to do, the scenery was great and I had a fair share of good friends.
Then I met Emma, who is from Dalian, China and I visited her home town. Now I am living, with Emma, and working in Dalian. You see I had run out of things to do in Vancouver. I was mostly playing bridge, touring on my bike, blogging the rest of the time. Now I barely have time to blog because here in Dalian I have lots to do and sometimes I even get paid for what I do here.
So your ending thought about doing, doing, doing struck a chord for me. I’d rather be doing than not! So I guess my mind has bent in the direction of “achievement”. But I ain’t young anymore! I’m 75 now and I enjoy my doing time!
Hello,
a pleasurable piece of writing. I am not American, but have noticed a similar change in my country. I am currently doing my MBA, and instead of going clubbing on Halloween night, i’m home watching the rally to restore sanity. It’s not that i don’t have fun, in fact a lot of people would say i’m hyperactive, but while fun is out there, pleasure also within ordinary things. We don’t have to expend so much energy all the time to enjoy ourselves.
Anyhow, good article
The Ambassadors (Henry James), Age of Innocence (Edith Wharton), Dodsworth (Sinclair Lewis) — the tension you discuss is not really a new one, as evidenced by the fact that others were exploring it at the turn of the century (~1890-~1920).
When I turned fifty, I made a list of things I wanted to accomplished or “do” during that year. I also decided to record the events as a check list so that one day I could look back on that list and remember that milestone year. Along the way the “list” fell by the side and the record became a journal of experiences that far exceeded a pragmatic serial listing of actions to complete. I became devoted to writing every day of that year, on sometimes the simplest of events to deep, meaningful thoughts and reflections of what it meant to live for fifty years and hopefully for another. What I learned was that life is so rich and full that it is difficult to record it all, both the good and the bad. Today I have a journal, no a reflection, of my adventure during my 50th year, something of greater value than my original intent. I think I graduated from “achievement and fun” to “excellence and pleasure.” Thank you for the great article.
the transformation from excellence of a task to achievement came about as the excellence commanded not just respect but started getting the rewards in material terms. This is a natural progression in any society; which is apparent in Indian society in the last 3-4 dacades. The bigger mass movement in society,affluance and influance of other cultures have a simple effect anywhere in the world – the lowest dinominator spreads quickest. hence the excellence is measued in monatory terms rather than quality as it is much more easily appiciated by the masses.
same about fun – any physical activity creates visual impact, the pleasure does not necessarily have that context- a debate can have many in the group switch off where as in playing a game in a group if one does not take part it just ends the fun in the game.
The elitist activites certainly created more pleasure and made people thrive for excellence, and hence the words were more frequently used in that era. In the new world of visual media and instant communication even the politics and the financial affairs have reduced to sound bites and fast bucks, so it’s no surprise that the words also have less meaning and the subtlty of language is lost.
Very thought-provoking. You are a writer to follow.
Hi, Anand, Really enjoyed this article when published. Just replying now. I’m interested and work with similar language and cross-cultural challenges. In the early 80′s, I named my homemade canoe ‘Fun.’ We friends would take ‘Fun’ out on the lakes of central or southern Illinois. If someone saw us, they’d say they saw a canoe named: Fun. We would say we were having a good time with Fun. I agree with you that Fun now often sadly involves ‘switching off the brain.’ However, in some families, games persist – and perhaps that is a function of age: to realize one simply MUST learn Bridge, or play Bananagrams every day, in order to hold onto one’s mental flexibility. In Norway, dinner parties would never involve retiring to a television or movie: the fun is in watching and listening to each individual’s stories, songs, conversations, until usually around midnight at the table – a good way to stay sharp for life’s everday challenges, those of a more mundane nature.
The pleasure aspect is also worth examining more closely from an intercultural perspective: The U.S. is one of the most masculine business cultures (ref: Hofstede), a live to work culture, where Norway is the world’s most feminine business culture – family separated from career, and a priority; a work-to-live culture. The Hofstede analysis is fun and available online in a click-through comparison format. I also enjoy Edward Hall and Fons Trompennars’ contributions in these areas.
-an American in Norway, reading you in the weekend edition of the Int’l Herald Tribune