Poor People is William T. Vollmann’s first-hand account of his interactions with individuals from around the globe. What these individuals have in common is their classification as “Poor.” Through interviews and escapades, Vollmann enters into a dialogue with both poor individuals and with thinkers who wrote about Poverty, and more importantly, an appropriate response to “The Poor.” Vollmann concludes that materialism, an economic-centric definition of normality, is destructive to community because it undermines one’s sense of responsibility toward others. Vollman struggles to escape from the pressures of materialism, to see those living in poverty for who they are. He invites the reader to struggle with him.
This series will summarize Vollmann’s views (parts 1-3) and conclude with a response (part 4).
NUMBING OURSELVES
Vollmann encountered a fatalism in many poor individuals. Often the poor attributed their fate to various sources, including the station in society into which one was born, acts committed in a previous existence, or even the unrighteous acts of parentage (p. 31). Vollmann discovered that many who claimed that destiny was the source of their poverty, such as the hotel maid, when pressed, would admit the role of individual responsibility:
Why are some people doomed?
I got the eternal answer from a broken-toothed, quarter-demented hotel maid and laundress: destiny! (but she promptly amended this to: half destiny and half character). (p. 22)
Many individuals, however, would never admit a role. Ultimately, Vollman concludes that those who continue to maintain that destiny (by gender, in Suee’s case, or by Allah, as in the old-beggar-lady Annah’s case) was the cause of their poverty and misery are operating under a false consciousness (p.31). Vollmann is unsure how he should respond to such individuals; are they shirking responsibility or are they responding the only way they can to reality as they perceive it? Sunee had a job, but the work is taxing. She grows weary of her circumstance but feels powerless to change it. What money she does earn she spends on alcohol. She is an alcoholic. What money Vollmann might give her she would spend not on improving her circumstances or that of her daughter, Vimonrat, but on numbing herself from her situation. Is that something Vollmann should deny her or enable her to do? Vollmann’s translator tells him not to give too much money to Vimonrat, as it would be to much a temptation to Sunee, who would the rob her. Vollmann also fears Sunnee might drink herself to death. Thus Vollmann finds himself confounded. How can he respond to Sunee, if she herself is unwilling to respond? Vollmann writes, “I couldn’t help Sunee since she was drunk – not wouldn’t but truly couldn’t.” (p. 22)
Yet Vollmann struggles with the conclusion that he does not have the ability to help some. Is this a true conclusion, meaning that at some point he is released from responsibility to the poor? Or is this conclusion evidence of his own false consciousness, his method of numbing himself from his responsibility? (p. 32)
Seeing the Poor
Vollmann, Poor People
Poor People is William T. Vollmann’s first-hand account of his interactions with individuals from around the globe. What these individuals have in common is their classification as “Poor.” Through interviews and escapades, Vollmann enters into a dialogue with both poor individuals and with thinkers who wrote about Poverty, and more importantly, an appropriate response to “The Poor.” Vollmann concludes that materialism, an economic-centric definition of normality, is destructive to community because it undermines one’s sense of responsibility toward others. Vollman struggles to escape from the pressures of materialism, to see those living in poverty for who they are. He invites the reader to struggle with him.
This series will summarize Vollmann’s views (parts 1-3) and conclude with a response (part 4).
NUMBING OURSELVES
Vollmann encountered a fatalism in many poor individuals. Often the poor attributed their fate to various sources, including the station in society into which one was born, acts committed in a previous existence, or even the unrighteous acts of parentage (p. 31). Vollmann discovered that many who claimed that destiny was the source of their poverty, such as the hotel maid, when pressed, would admit the role of individual responsibility:
Many individuals, however, would never admit a role. Ultimately, Vollman concludes that those who continue to maintain that destiny (by gender, in Suee’s case, or by Allah, as in the old-beggar-lady Annah’s case) was the cause of their poverty and misery are operating under a false consciousness (p.31). Vollmann is unsure how he should respond to such individuals; are they shirking responsibility or are they responding the only way they can to reality as they perceive it? Sunee had a job, but the work is taxing. She grows weary of her circumstance but feels powerless to change it. What money she does earn she spends on alcohol. She is an alcoholic. What money Vollmann might give her she would spend not on improving her circumstances or that of her daughter, Vimonrat, but on numbing herself from her situation. Is that something Vollmann should deny her or enable her to do? Vollmann’s translator tells him not to give too much money to Vimonrat, as it would be to much a temptation to Sunee, who would the rob her. Vollmann also fears Sunnee might drink herself to death. Thus Vollmann finds himself confounded. How can he respond to Sunee, if she herself is unwilling to respond? Vollmann writes, “I couldn’t help Sunee since she was drunk – not wouldn’t but truly couldn’t.” (p. 22)
Yet Vollmann struggles with the conclusion that he does not have the ability to help some. Is this a true conclusion, meaning that at some point he is released from responsibility to the poor? Or is this conclusion evidence of his own false consciousness, his method of numbing himself from his responsibility? (p. 32)