Misery of misers


One derives a peculiarsome satisfaction from the invoking of such notions of life that do not adhere to their own in all the dubious eccentricity of them. Perhaps that is an exploration of the sadistic gene that we as a species seem to bear in all universality or rather more simply, and less alarmingly, it might be an attribute emergent from our universal again desire to amuse ourselves, however trivially, at the expense of others. What makes it tricky as well though to condone such behavior of worldly indeed reputation is that they are partaken of by the majority of the world and therefore ‘approved’ of in all their aptness, if not along the even more established quotient of righteousness.

It’s tough though to articulate this certain fascination harboured by almost the entirety of our population for an expression of sorts that is condoned in its doing yet sought out in the scope of ridicule it offers. It’s like denouncing the tainted realms of gossip while indulging in this very vile pleasure- or let’s us rather call it the more tacky cheap thrills- of evoking juicy details out of other’s life and happenings. Because despite all we know, and in fact in our knowledge of it as well, gossiping is the power we entitle ourselves to validate our own ‘normal’ existences while laughing at the rumoured curiosities adhering to others.

And yet, diving into the murky waters of the gossiping ocean isn’t the only harmless pleasure we allow ourselves full fledged access to. The favor is equally bestowed on certain other assertions of what characterise the human being in all universality. And perhaps among the most amusing of them all is a behavior, or the mindset alluding to some of us that makes us ‘limited’ in a certain very tricky premise of working of practicality. Harbouring no any iota of the positive feels whatsoever in its considerable expanse of encounter is the attribute of what the miserly description makes fathomable, in its disputed still range of assertion for some as a boon and for the many as a bane, utterly ridiculous as well in its glaring indeed prominence. As a trait of human nature entailing to a few and by which capacity these folks making up the significant still minority end up being mocked by their self believing less cheap opposites, miserliness is a curious disposition that few would like to take pride in their identification of themselves in this ironic position of scarcity in aplenty.

Source: Reddit

In all their common abundance in society, it is not any difficult for any one of us to encounter a miser at some point of time in life. Or even gravitate ourselves in certain aspects to take upon that very personality in indignity. Also commanding uniformity in definition of this distinctive trait of their person are the miserly folks of the world commonly believed to be such people who is almost averse to the very idea of spending money. In hoarding instead the moolah or even other materialistic possessions to such points that make them even compromise with basic almost necessities of life, not to mention more luxurious privileges for sure, misers turn out to be extremely uncompromising with the value of the physical wealth they own. The popular deriding of misers though involve another charting of what appears to always accompanying their aversion to spending- that of doing all that emphatic dodgering in an utter, very evident realisation of pleasure. It perhaps is this guilty pleasure of sorts perpetrated by the defining characteristic of what makes miser out of men (and women) that is what has forever inspired fascination for society to seek them out very conveniently in mass curiousness.

The interest that misers incite is itself curious a notion in contrast. Shunned on one hand for diverting from what is considered the ‘normal’ human urge to spend, whether in optimum or in extravagance, and yet invoked too very often across fictional realms of the arts while being largely the subject of (undesirable) attention as well, misers find themselves treading the dual confines of a world seeking to elicit a few laughs out of what comes across as an aberration to the human mode of life. Eternally laughed at, forever joked upon and perennially ‘exploited’ to such extents that has made them the caricatures of society, whether in prose or in reality, are these human still individuals from amongst our own who have been subject to the stigma of being unacceptable enough renditions of the many a proclivities that make up the collective human psyche. Somewhat unfairly though, the jeering and mocking of misers and miserliness tends to be an exercise a bit too stretched in the assertion of what makes up the normal of the world of humans considering that this one trait in difference can in fact be one part of a larger expression indicative of a personality disorder.

The despicability of misers as they are subject to in numerous references of them across the fore of literature and popular culture and even along such holy pages of the Bible and the Quran have further helped to strengthen their case as one destined to be doomed under the universal human consideration. In its classification though as being marker of an obsessive compulsive personality disorder, miserliness however is a behavioral issue that needs to be dealt with in way more sensitivity. Even studies of the psychological kind identify misers as selfish people addicted to all assets physical, most remarkably money, referring therefore to an oddity in behavior and action that is archetypical of their person. That indeed is very realistic a way of looking at misers to arrive at a notion of them in all universalness that enables their state of mind to be deliberated and acted upon if possible. But despite harbouring the best intentions and stemming from the most genuine of concerns, even this tendency to perhaps only reverse this condition considered offensive in general might end up furthering the disgrace of it.

At the crux of what governs this inclination to the contrary of what constitutes acceptable human behavior can be such factors that might come across as quite a revelation. Unattributed to much of its extent even when such underlying considerations too is often draw into the mocking narrative miserliness is subjected to, in not as much awareness as it is in amusing referrals, can be such characteristics that reside in a basis of the genetics. That though is only part of the bigger picture, with other dictates of miserliness finding more proficient expression in such behavior acquired instead from the surrounding environment. Life experiences and learned behavior therefore contribute far more to miserly working of individuals across aspects of their existence, not exclusively confined to money as well. That itself is startling, for the miserly connotation is almost always adhering to such spheres of leanings as strictly materialistic as could be. The whole mindset in miserliness tends to be pervading of the entire individuality instead, trickling down to aspects wholly psychological and emotional, seriously inhibiting even the many very essential feels in which the perceptive existence of all animals dwell. Misers tend to be as phlegmatic as well in the rationing of their emotions, expanding their tight enough hold over resources to such measures that has them constraining the ‘giving’ of their time as well. Wastefulness or unnecessariness are concepts so strongly characterising the working of a miser mind that they end up extending this notion to every facet of what makes up their person.

And just as miserliness might be a hereditary mode of continuation, this particularly eccentric way of life of the miser impacts their family as well. Even affecting such relations as their spouse with whom the gene sharing factor stands invalid, the miserly behavior thus branches out into even diversely accruing expressions of it. But most devastating can be such dawning of the trait in miserliness that is a draw from such appalling situations of the past that has seen the bearer of this behavior deal with very pressing money concerns. It is the miserable experience they might have lived at one point of time that is what drives their money related anxiety to such unsettling manifestations that they cannot help but remain forever overly cautious of having to even face the prospect of a starved existence. And reversing therefore a behavior so intricately tied to one of the most vulnerable of their standpoints in life is no less exerting than a dive into anxiety for the miser. No any less bearing of course is the larger world view of widespread ridicule they are subjected to in gay abandon, as being lesser lives by virtue of a single strand of their whole human behavior. Calling a miser a miser should indeed be as fair as calling a spade a spade but calling out miserly behavior as the characteristic trait of a lesser human sure should come to call for a lot more generous accountability.