Coffee, Cup, Marketing, Competing Narratives of Ego and Soul

This morning I received a video from my friend Prof JK Mitra titled ‘God’s Coffee’.The following is the transcription of the same:

A group of alumni, highly established in their careers, got together to visit their old university professor.

Conversation soon turned into complaints about stress in work and life.

Offering his guests coffee, the professor went to the kitchen and returned with a large pot of coffee and an assortment of cups.

Porcelain, plastic, glass, crystal, some plain looking, some expensive, some exquisite

Telling them to help themselves to coffee

When all the students had a cup of coffee in hand, the professor said:

“If you noticed, all the nice looking expensive cups were taken up, leaving the plain and cheap ones. While it is normal for you to want only the best for yourselves, that is the source of your problems and stress.

Be assured that the cup itself adds no quality to the coffee. In most cases it is just more expensive and in some cases even hides what we drink.

What all of you really wanted was coffee not the cup. But you consciously went for the best cups…And then you began eyeing each other’s cups.

“Now consider this, he continued. Life is the coffee. The jobs, money and position in society are the cups.”

I see this story sitting at an intersection of competing narratives,

They are just tools to hold and contain life, and the type of cup we have does not define, nor change the quality of life we live.

Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee God has provided us.

God brews the coffee, not the cups…Enjoy your coffee.

The happiest people don’t have the best of everything.

Live simply, live generously, care deeply, and speak kindly

And leave the rest to God.

This, it seems to me, is sitting at an intersection of two competing narratives: that of capital, market and consumer on one hand and  happiness, joy and  inner self on the other. It is about contestation between two ideas, the one propagated by the marketing forces and the other that belongs to religion and spirituality. The two opposite forces are in the form of:

• Image and substance
• Container and content
• Letter and envelope
• Use value and exchange value
• Journey and destination
• Body and soul

The resolution of the dialectic between coffee and cup is not as simple as it appears. The choice here rests on an intersection of world view and self- view.

World view: World view shapes the perception of reality including personal, social, physical reality and attends to deeper questions like what is life and where we are headed. This is determined by beliefs and assumption of an individual. Essentially thoughts are the bedrock on which our world view is constructed.  In the Buddhist tradition it is observed that:  We are what we think and with thoughts we make our world (Byrom 1976). In Critique of Pure Reason Kant seems to use the term ‘Weltanschauung’ in this context. The view of reality is not direct, rather it is mediated by world view and hence makes it subjective. It acts like a lens through which reality is viewed which colors the perception of what we see. But how does our world view get formed? It is through cultural imprints, through stories, rituals, songs, and interactions. World view is not entirely about bigger questions, even smallest of experiences are influenced by it including the mundane cup and coffee.

 It is not unfair to suppose  that Western and Eastern worldviews are unlikely to be similar. These differences may impinge upon choices that are made. For instance, a house could mean place of individual indulgences or institution of togetherness. A piece of apparel could be about modesty or attraction. Food could be benign gift and godly or pleasure and market transaction. A mountain could be high rock to be climbed and conquered or house of God and grace.

The question is what is the lens through which a cup of coffee is perceived. Which space does it dwell in:  internal or external, personal or social, consumption or exchange?

Self- view: It is how one views oneself or totality of perception on different aspects. The idea of self is in terms of physical, social, psychological, geographic, nationality and religion. The question of self- view is likely to differ based on whether the lens is superficial and based on attachment or deeper understanding based on attachment less perspective. At the heart of self- view is the question: ‘Who am I’. In the Hindu philosophy the ‘I’ has two layers: soul (jiva or spirit) and body (dwelling). The body is physical manifestation of consciousness and it belongs to the physical world and is subjectto lifecycle. The soul however is eternal beyond the cycle of birth and death. It is beyond measure. The Buddhist idea of self is that of ‘no self’, something un-definable. The attachments on ‘no self’ are meaningless. The self is reason of suffering and attachments are the roots and therefore we must let go. It is illusion.

The Western notions are  different. The self is construed as things or attachments connected to body (hence mind). The mind creates connections with objects, beings, land, property, etc. These create the notion ‘I am what I have’. For instance, Peter, the CEO of XYX company, owner of an island and ten luxury cars married to a gorgeous miss something. All this is very comforting because they are measurables and put Peter on a scale of relativity with respect to others.  Happiness is sought through these attachments. A sense of superiority, the ego, assumes the driving position. Greed becomes the fuel and destination sought is envy of others. The Gita, the Indian notion however is opposite. It propagates renunciation which is gateway to joy or ultimate bliss. The ego or body consciousness (with all its attachments) are obstacles to true happiness.

Coming back to the question of coffee and cups is that choice is both easy and difficult. It sits at an intersection of individual’s world view and self- view. The situation (friends, coffee, cups and teacher) for someone could be pure play, an egoless moment of joy filled with love, generosity, empathy, selflessness and sense of unity. Here the choice would be to reach out for the least attractive cup, giving precedence to others as an act in nourishment of soul. It is a kind of relinquishment, surrender, detachment and renunciation, for the cup does not matter.

On the other hand, for another person this situation (friends, coffee, cups and teacher) is an avenue of contestation governed by greed, self- aggrandizement, gain, power, positioning. For him or her the choice is likely to be for the cup for it would play same role as a Lamborghini or a mansion plays. The axis here shifts from absolutism to relativism,from measure-less to measurement.  Here the cup is seen as an instrument and raw material for self- construction and signification to build superiority. The content in this perspective is rendered useless but cup assumes value  not for the coffee but the meaning that it contains. Body is the playground with all its attachments rather than the soul. The extension of the self is sought by reaching out for the best cup (leaving the inferior ones for others) to secure momentary superiority in service of the ego- greed, grabbing, gain, selfishness and superiority instead of joy of togetherness, connection and conversation. The pleasure is not coffee but cup for it creates differences (inferior and superior, higher and lower, rich and poor) and reinforces notions of and ‘me’ and ‘others’ (envy, jealousy) .

Choices are critical. In marketing choice and choice heuristics sit at the center. The ideology is that markets are places through which path to happiness goes. The self has to be identified with the body and it is playground of happiness through senses and attachments.  The promoted narrative is you are what you have. You are the cup, you are the body, you are the ego.

As a result, the seeker is killed by the sought! It is a complete reversal. Take a pause and reflect: are you the empowered chooser of products and brands? It may be the reverse. The products and brands choose you. A famous apparel brand exhibited a young woman in contemplative pose looking at a dress and the headline went as follows:

‘I can’t fit in this dress’

Apology, Satisfaction, Recovery Mangement and Marketing Services

In services zero defects is difficult to achieve. Uncertainty is inherent to service creation and delivery. To a great extent customer-provider interface in the service factory is responsible for deviations to happen. Two days back I had to go without dinner because a local restaurant failed to execute my delivery order and I was left waiting into midnight. The restaurant did not bother to apologize for this failure. I have written off the service outlet in question for all times to come. Feeling of hurt comes naturally in any incident of violation. But it is also natural for violations to happen in social or business conduct. One of the most powerful strategies to recover from failures is to tender apology and say ‘sorry’. It is makes both great spiritual and business sense.

Geetika Jain in one of the Speaking Tree columns wrote an interesting piece on the importance of apology.  We express an apology by saying sorry. But a sincere apology is to be distinguished from superficial one.  A superficial apology may reflect how well groomed and polite a person is but it is not same as a true meaningful apology. Apologizing for our wrongdoings operate superficial and deeper levels. When an act of apologizing is diminished to only uttering a word ‘sorry’ without accompanying a  deeper sense of  realization,  it becomes superfluous. The pretence may help the harmed/violated but harm the pretender. A heartfelt apology is real, and it works wonders for both parties involved.

An apology, on the surface is an opportunity to get out of a difficult situation but it should not be seen in this way. A mere utterance of the word minus sincerity, repentance and atonement render it hollow and futile. ‘To err is human, to admit one’s error is super human’. Facing the victim and apologizing is an act of courage. People in harmony with their life say ‘sorry’ with an ease.  The positive and conscientious achieve peace with themselves only after making amends.

Saying ‘sorry’ does not involve monetary cost but gives back in a number of ways. The mistakes are diluted, tepid and estranged relations come back life. ‘Sorry’ can dissolve animosity, bitterness and resentment. This dissolution of rancor sets stage for resolution and achievement of harmony. ‘Sorry’ is a powerful mechanism not only to appear the victim but ourselves as well. Harming or offending someone deliberately or by mistake makes us guilty whether we admit it or not. This guilt can sit deep into our subconscious unleash misery by robbing peace and harmony.  We can become prisoners of guilt. ‘Sorry’ is therefore liberating and cathartic. Deep seated guilt can cause psychosomatic maladies. Saying sorry and admission of mistakes is sign of evolved human being.

Going down the path to admitting mistakes and apologizing is not easy. Only evolved people are able to do so. The true pristine self rushes to say ‘sorry’ but it is ego which obstructs. It is the ‘I’ rooted in age, social hierarchy, money and status that prevent us to be in our true sublime self. ‘Age and social status can also thwart this sublime act’. It is then no surprise that prayers in most religions comprise of apology for transgressions and repentance for mistakes.

Rape, Sigmund Freud and Class Marker

The reported series of rapes in one of the Indian states leaves one wondering as to what is wrong with our society. Assaults on women take many forms and the worst is rape. It is an ugly manifestation of a rotten mindset. And this rot is seeded, nourished and coded in the mind by the process of enculturation. It is entirely a matter of what prism is used to see a woman.  “What is woman” is  entirely a matter of cultural construction: a means or an end in herself!

The response to rapes came in many sanity defying forms like reduction of marriage age and consumption of western food.  These logic defying solutions leave one wondering as to what really is the connection between rapes and age and food.  Do married men not violate the dignity of women?  Do we have a higher incidence of rapes in western societies where people eat only western food?

Is the cause psychological or physiological? In the ‘animal’ society there may not be any concept of rape. Animals are driven by ‘raw’ desires. In Freud’s conceptualization a person could be  possessed by ‘chaotic cauldron of seething excitations’.  The instinctual possession seeks immediate gratification (animalism). But every society develops its own morality or superego. The pull of the untamed passion needs to be regimented and controlled. Superego imposes moralistic prohibitions to regulate behavior. It is expressed in moral and ethical code of conduct of a society. Superego tames and restrains the urges and impulses triggered by the ‘id’.

Every society evolves its own codes of morality. The violations are checked by prohibitions. The first code of behavior is governed by evocations of emotions of shame and guilt. Guilt checks behavior by a self imposed feeling that one should not harm the other (one feels bad about one’s actions). Shame is perception of our diminished stature as a result of an act. What one feels guilty or ashamed of is passed on in the early stage of development. These represent mechanisms of self policing and self punishment.  Do these rapes suggest reversal of value system in our society? Guiltlessness is detrimental to collective existence.

When the self imposed and socially enforced norms fail, a stern hand of State is required. The guiltlessness and tolerance of culprits of rape indicates failure of consciousness in controlling obnoxious behavior.  The culprits should be ruthlessly treated both legally and socially. The frequently occurring phenomenon of rape reveals  the rot and malaise that plague our legal system.   Easy and convenient attributions made about the causes of rape mask a grotesque mindset. Why does the legal system fail the rape victims? It has to do with the composition and attitude of law makers and enforcers. These professions are male dominated.

How civilized a society is, is reflected in the treatment it metes out to women and  not just by the material gains or economic indicators. Economics must translate into culture. As people get economically homogenized what one owns ceases to be a true class marker.

The new class marker should be how fair we are to the fair sex personally, legally and socially as a whole.