Essay discussing the version of reality presented in Mitch Albom's autobiography "Tuesdays with Morrie" as coloured by the authors values.
... less important, as to inevitably postpone them. Mitch however held them in highest priority, due to his values, and connected his freedom with the ability (which we all posses, but he fails to allude to) and states that a life without the freedom to explore such things “was not a very good life at all”. In order to create the desired summation that freedom equals happiness, Albom constructed the link between freedom and happiness by depicting effectively the period of freedom in his college years as euphoric and comparatively blissful to the responsibility that followed in later life through figurative language and other such elements. The social obligation to work and provide is viewed as in direct violation of Mitch’s intense yearning for freedom, and thus are powerfully condemned in the text, constructed as evil, and soul sapping. Prison is a place for those who have committed great atrocity, harsh and brutal in its connotations, yet formal attire, worn to weddings, balls and office are likened to “gaol” in the metaphor “A shirt and tie were prison clothes” in the text. This acts to degrade the office as an environment, relating it to entrapment, misery, and a harsh and brutal life sentence. It is in this way that the social obligation and responsibility to work, and support oneself is degraded and portrayed as dehumanising, and those who chose to conform are reduced to little more than animals in cages. The reality is little to do with prison but it is this strong connection that assists in condemning society. Further instance of obligation being overwhelming and leaving its ‘captives’ powerless are repetitive descriptions and lists of work related scenario, being that those caught in the office ‘cage’ are “tied to computers and modems and cell phones”, tied carrying connotations of constraint, similar to that of a prison, where each form of communication in the list compounds as shackle after shackle, binding them to certain doom. In reality this may not be the case, but it is the authors value of freedom, which is not synonymous with work, that results in the necessity of creating a negative office environment and thus blame it on the lack of freedom it encumbers. Money is also depicted as synonymous with greed and working for money, dishonourable, as in order to achieve wealth one must dedicate themselves wholeheartedly, which is in opposition to Mitch’s high regard for the importance of freedom. When a misdemeanour has occurred many children are told to “Go to your room and think about what you have done”, such ponderings and rhetorical question being reserved for value judgement on error. It such a rhetorical question “What happened to me?” repeated amid regretful statements about money, which reinforces “trading dreams for a bigger pay check” is immoral and incorrect, despite money often being considered a means for living dreams of a new home, more enjoyable family vacation or more creature comforts. Connotations of “trading” also come to mind, with the black trade and trafficking being ‘under the counter’, an irreversible swap, in this case dreams, aspirations and the driving forces of hope many live for being irreversibly swapped for money or “a bigger pay check” similar to selling your soul, to spend eternity in unholy damnation. It is this presentation of all that is monetary as evil and greedy that such apparent greed is condemned along with the lack of freedom it carries with it, purely as a result of the authors love affair with freedom and attitude of despise towards and obligation and responsibility that pose a threat to such freedom. The overall regime and routine of life is also in conflict with Albom’s value for freedom as it is more difficult to just get up and leave a pattern of ...