Is âloveâ an equal trade?
By Angela Espinoza, Arts Editor
Love or hate her, Amanda Palmerâs TED Talk premiered on March 1, entitled The Art of Asking. Much of Palmerâs 14-minute video is spent talking about her career as a musician, and how working on the street as a living statueâand having to ask for moneyâtaught her what she now believes was everything she needed going into the music industry. Although she is speaking of the industry, a lot of what she says applies to a broader concept she uses several times in the video: community.
Community used to be more than just an amazing comedy series and a term people use in psych, philosophy, and sociology papers (ironically, usually as test subjects); âcommunityâ used to be a something else. Palmer speaks of times where fans have graciously offered her band food, a place to sleep, and instruments to practice onâall implied that they only asked for her music in return. But is giving a person something physical, like a bed, the same as giving someone an abstraction, like friendship (or, to quote Palmer, âloveâ)?
People need both to get by. After all, whatâs more wonderful than sharing a bed with someone you love? The flaw with that though is that sheâs making her own music, which people are either going to either love or hate. There is still asking and giving, but who is actually going to say ânoâ to having their favourite artist, someone theyâve never actually met before, sleeping on their bed? Would that person honestly do the same for a homeless person?
Community isnât about picking and choosing who youâll share things with. Community is about being there for each other, for everyone. The fact is that there isnât enough love, and it doesnât matter if âloveâ or âfriendshipâ are abstractionsâif you feel it, thatâs all that really matters. Palmer repeatedly asks in the video, âis this fair?â By which she means, is the trading of something physical (bed) for an abstraction (friendship) a fair trade? Honestly, if both parties feel theyâre getting something out of such a trade, then yes, it is. But such a trade can only work on the whole if everybody is on board with the idea, and thatâs assuming everyone has something to offer.
Go back to that homeless person for a moment. Youâll be offering him or her a bed, and itâs assumed that in return, that person will always love you a little bit for lending them that bed. Do you think thatâs a fair trade? And that isnât a question meant to condescend; itâs an honest question of morality. Do you feel justified by the idea of knowing that at some point, you bettered someoneâs life, if even for only a moment, and you now meant the world to them?
Realistically, most people in any kind of town or city setting are neither in the mentality nor the mood to have a community. Even those of you who live in apartment buildings, how often do you chat with your neighbours from whom you are separated by a mere piece of drywall?
Thereâs nothing wrong with keeping to yourself, or saying ânoâ every once in a while. Where you need to question what youâre doing is when you sincerely donât give a damn about the person who asks anything of you, whether it be some change or a cup of sugar.
Palmer has managed to make this love-based barter system work for her and her own âInternet community,â and thatâs great. But if you took Amanda Palmer out of that equation, and asked those same people who give her everything to give you something, I can assure you, only a handful of them would say âyes.â
As people, citizens, neighbours, and classmates all have to learn to care a little more. No, we donât have to revert back to some crazy barter system, but we do need to hold more doors open, and apologize less for not holding those doors open. We have to learn to give and not expect something in returnâor at least not something physical.
