3 ms·

At the time of The Office release here (UK) it was a perfect satire. Many of us (not just in my bubble but according to lots of popular media outlets) very much

by Jenk 4y ago

At the time of The Office release here (UK) it was a perfect satire. Many of us (not just in my bubble but according to lots of popular media outlets) very much had a socially-desperate David Brent for a boss, try-hard Gareth and drifter Keith as peers and we very much associated with Tim and/or Dawn who felt trapped in a world surrounded by the above metaphorically spinning our wheels in the mud of (then) modern office life with no prospects or hope in life.

anyfoo 4y ago
Obviously it appeals to a lot of people, it wouldn't be so successful otherwise, and I'm not here to bash people's taste. It's just that for me personally I probably would not want to be reminded/wallowing in that in my entertainment if I was in the same situation, and as someone who not in that situation it just feels like looking at a train wreck. But I can totally understand how people feel differently and it allows them to relate and laugh about it.
- Jenk 4y ago
  What I was trying to say is that I don't think it would have as much success as it did then, if it were released today. The number of "lifer" employees with no aspirations is vanishingly small compared to 20+ years ago.
  - q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 4y ago
    > The number of "lifer" employees with no aspirations is vanishingly small compared to 20+ years ago. I'm curious: Do you have data you could share around this assertion? Intuitively, I'd be inclined to bet the opposite. The population of the world has grown significantly; even if the number of "interesting" ambition-satisfying jobs grew at the same rate, there would still be tons more people in an absolute sense who end up stuck in a dead-end job. (Admittedly, I conflated aspiration with achievement just then, but I'm not sure if there is an empirical difference? If an ambitious person is stuck in a dead-end job for years, then, by definition, they must not be ambitious enough.)

by Jenk 4y ago

anyfoo 4y ago

Obviously it appeals to a lot of people, it wouldn't be so successful otherwise, and I'm not here to bash people's taste. It's just that for me personally I probably would not want to be reminded/wallowing in that in my entertainment if I was in the same situation, and as someone who not in that situation it just feels like looking at a train wreck. But I can totally understand how people feel differently and it allows them to relate and laugh about it.

Jenk 4y ago
What I was trying to say is that I don't think it would have as much success as it did then, if it were released today. The number of "lifer" employees with no aspirations is vanishingly small compared to 20+ years ago.
- q7xvh97o2pDhNrh 4y ago
  > The number of "lifer" employees with no aspirations is vanishingly small compared to 20+ years ago. I'm curious: Do you have data you could share around this assertion? Intuitively, I'd be inclined to bet the opposite. The population of the world has grown significantly; even if the number of "interesting" ambition-satisfying jobs grew at the same rate, there would still be tons more people in an absolute sense who end up stuck in a dead-end job. (Admittedly, I conflated aspiration with achievement just then, but I'm not sure if there is an empirical difference? If an ambitious person is stuck in a dead-end job for years, then, by definition, they must not be ambitious enough.)