Mirror, Mirror - does it matter who saves the kingdom?

 A few days ago, there was a premiere of a movie called Mirror, Mirror which - as the name implies - is a movie about Snow White and her story we are all so familiar with thanks to the old good Disney studios. Well, almost about that.

This version of Snow White not only continues in the quite recent trend started in movies such as the Pirates of the Caribbean where the filmmakers take a genre we - the audience - know very well and in many of the scenes they surprise us with just the opposite outcome of what we would normally expect; but Mirror, Mirror is also (or, in particular) strong at changing the overall story line in a way that makes the princess (Snow White) be an active player in the movie. So, for instance, in this movie, Snow White is actually the one who saves the prince by her kiss; she does not only cook for the seven dwarves, but she is also trained in fighting by the dwarves and fights with them for the prince, the kingdom, and her life; and the Queen orders to have Snow White killed because the princess threatens to overthrow her, and not just because she would be the "fairest of them all." 

I am pretty sure that by now a reader might be thinking that the movie must have been a complete mess and 'why the hell should we overwrite such a nice story that makes up our traditions?'

Well, let me tell you that - first of all - the movie was still a very fairy tale like. You still got all the magic, the evil Queen, the prince and the princess falling in love, nice dresses and a castle, and, of course, the happy ending. Not the best movie of the year, but, for sure, a nice movie to go to see either on your own, or to take kids to. To answer the 'why bother changing the traditional prince - princess scheme?', let me drift away for a minute from the context of Mirror, Mirror.

Nowadays, we live in a society where women have the voting rights, they can become a president or a CEO if they want to, so why should we - really - care about who saves the kingdom? 

Take me as an example. I grew up with quite the traditional take on fairy tales, and still, I consider myself to be quite an emancipated independent woman. I have my ambitions; I require others to treat me as an equal partner; and, I connect my qualifications to my knowledge, experience, and personality, and not to my gender. So, why should an active princess make a difference? Well, I thought about it and what I have discovered was that when I was little, the two movies I would watch the most were Red Sonja (the typical 80s Conan the Barbarian like movie where, however, the main protagonist and warrior is a woman called Red Sonja) and Feds (a movie about two female FBI agents). Both movies admittedly are of a questionable quality, but both are also a very clear demonstration of active female protagonists, story-movers. As a kid, I was never excited about James Bond - how could I? I could not identify with a male hero who gets every girl he wants. And should I have identified with one of his bondgirls? Definitely not! What would be the message I would take away? Be beautiful and you will get to sleep with a charismatic dangerous man? If I identified with the traditional take on Snow White, there would be a certain symbolism I would take away as well, and not quite the feminist one. One needs symbols and someone to look up to, but in a way one can relate to. Men are surrounded by examples of successful men, active players wherever they look; the same situation does not apply to women. 

Therefore, if somebody makes a movie where Snow White is the one who actually succeeds in more than making a man fall in love with her thanks to her beauty, this is not something we should ridicule, but cheer to. 

More on this topic later.

The Art of Visibility

The regular thing, especially in large companies - something I call practicing the art of visibility. Every person in a team - that is everybody who is at least a little ambitious - tries to get as much visibility as possible. Sending emails about what he or she has achieved, tools he or she has discovered, the things he or she has helped to happen. The receivers, then, in large quantities send Thank Yous, Well Dones, and Amazings.

And, we are bothered by this.

Why??

If the person has really achieved something or wants to share something important he or she has discovered, why do we sometimes feel so alienated by these efforts?

As Max Weber described, there are different types of rationality - the main ones being the instrumental (or purposive) one and the value (belief) one. Instrumental rationality is the one reflected in pursuing ends in a calculated and rational (rational as what we would normally understand under the word rational) way; the value rationality, on the other hand, is the rationality reflected in actions we take out of reasons intrinsic to ourselves, reasons which do not have as ends quantifiable success.

Now, neither of those kinds of rationality is a "bad" rationality. Both are important in the life of a human being. However, the problem arises when one of the rationalities is being constantly overemhasized over the other. The increasing institutionalization and rationalization of our life has made the instrumental rationality far more important than the value rationality. But our human nature is still very much based on both nad that is where our alienation comes from.

Therefore, when there are too many efforts clearly perceived as based on instrumental rationality and lacking in the value rationality, we become annoyed.

And this is more and more so, the more time we spend at work and the more the workplace is rationalized (in the Weberian sense).