I have always been asked about my dream occupation since age four. My answer has always been to be a painter. The reason is simply that painting makes me happy, consolidates my faith, and encourages me to live positively, no matter whether such life is wealthy or poor. However, my parents and teacher kept telling me how little money a painter could make and how little influence a painter could endow on the society. Is it wrong to work for faith and happiness? Is it sensible to work solely for money and power?

Marian Wright Edelman once said, “Never work just for money or for power. They won’t save your soul or help you sleep at night”. More specifically, his statement should be interpreted as that people should not work merely for money or for power, but rather for something else. Although some people argue that money and power are necessary to meet the current, higher living standard, from my perspective, such statement stands firmly because working just for money or power results in immorality, and working for happiness is a better alternative.
To begin with, working solely for money or power is prone to make an individual immoral. Morality is defined as a set of standards or principles regarding how people should properly react in certain circumstances, which disjoints between right and wrong. Since working only for power or money aggregates an individual’s material desire, he or she is likely to try to achieve maximum self interest by hook or by crook, regardless of what it costs, which ultimately leads to immorality, that is, the absence of ethnical principles. On one hand, in “Serving in Florida,” Barbara Ehrenreich illustrates the numb life of the working class, most of whom, like herself as experienced, worked laboriously only to get money without any faith for life. The result of losing moral principles, in the case of Ehrenreich, could be “regaining my crusading spirit” and “turning into a different person altogether—say, the kind of person who would have turned George in”(401), in other words, the type of people without sympathy and sense of justice. Therefore, working just for money cannot save but deprive one’s soul due to the resulting immorality, thus proving Marian’s statement to be true. On the other hand, working solely for power also contributes to the emergence of immorality. For instance, Wang, one of my dad’s colleagues, had been working in a big company under the government’s administration for over thirty years. Originally, he worked as a minor staff sitting at the back of the office, but, after several promotions, his desire to gain power aggregated. Thirsting for more power, he even bribed many people to be the chief executive officer, not only losing his ethical values but also breaking the law. Inevitably, he was put into prison because of bribery, and more importantly, because of his immorality, which originated from his desire for more power. Both literally and metaphorically, he cannot sleep well, since he is behind bars and must spend the rest of his life in regrets. Again, Marian’s statement is proven valid. 

Additionally, one should work for internal happiness in order to live positively, instead of just for money or power. Happiness internally comes from doing something that an individual like or is interested in. Consequently, one can enjoy working, and have positive attitudes towards life even when life is hard, regardless of external changes. In my case, as I mentioned in the introduction, my happiness can be gained from painting. On the contrary, money and power can only be acquired from other people: money is given by other people, while power comes from other people’s obedience. Accordingly, when external elements like the amount of money given or the extent of power authorized change, one’s mood will fluctuate correspondingly, resulting in an unstable and moody spirit. Lars Eighner, in his article “On Dumpster Diving,” illustrates his optimistic mind towards his life as “a scavenger.” Such positive attitude existed because he regarded scavengers as “a sound and honorable niche”(424) and found happiness in dumpster diving. Even though technically speaking, being a scavenger was not even a formal job, and little money could be earned in doing so, Lars still dived on dumpsters and had “a healthy state of mind”(430), indicating that the purpose of working should be achieving internal happiness instead of pursuing money or power. Another example is Matthew B. Crawford, who once devoted himself into repairing motorcycle. In “The Case for Working with Your Hands,” he says, “Seeing a motorcycle about to leave my shop under its own power, several days after arriving in the back of a pickup truck, I don’t feel tired even though I’ve been standing on a concrete floor all day”(452), implying that as long as the motivation for work originates from interest and happiness, even when work load is heavy, one can still enjoy working, and have positive feelings. Adversely, back to Wang’s example mentioned in the previous paragraph, although Wang was a chief executive officer, he used to worry a lot about his company’s profits that might affect his reputation as well as his power over other people, making himself moody at all times. Hence, in order to live positively, one should not work just for money or power, but rather for happiness.    

  Admittedly, it is reasonable for people to work for money and power in order to meet the current, higher standard of living. As a matter of fact, money and power have played an increasingly important role in life. In “The New Consumerism,” Juliet Schor demonstrates “an upscaling of lifestyle norms,” “the pervasiveness of conspicuous, status goods”(487), and ultimately the growing amount of money spent, inferring that people pay more attention to money and the symbol of power in the current society. Thus, working for money or power can undeniably be one of the many purposes of work. At the very least, it is always understandable to work for money in order to meet the basic need for survival, since money is the medium used to buy daily commodities, such as food, drinks, electricity, apartment, etc. Yet Marian’s statement does not disapprove such purpose, which is shown by the qualifier “just,” meaning solely or only. To be more specific, her statement means that never work only for money or for power, but it is acceptable to work for something else, along with minor fulfillment for money or power. Thus, Marian Wright Edelman still holds a correct standpoint on this issue.  In conclusion, one should work for internal happiness rather than just for money or power; otherwise, that person is very likely to be immoral. Therefore, Marian Wright Edelman is right—“Never work just for money or for power. They won’t save your soul or help you sleep at night.” Everyone should fight for their dreams and never give up, no matter what obstacles get in the way. For me, I will insist on my dream occupation to be a painter, and fight for it.


Works Cited
Crawford, Matthew B. “The Case for Working with Your Hands.” The Language of Composition.
2nd ed. Robin D. Aufses, Lawrence Scanlon, and Renee H. Shea. Boston: Redford/St. Martin’s. 2013. 450-459. Print.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. “Serving in Florida.” The Language of Composition. 2nd ed. Robin D.
Aufses, Lawrence Scanlon, and Renee H. Shea. Boston: Redford/St. Martin’s. 2013. 394-401. Print.
Eighner, Lars. “On Dumpster Diving.” The Language of Composition. 2nd ed. Robin D. Aufses,
Lawrence Scanlon, and Renee H. Shea. Boston: Redford/St. Martin’s. 2013. 421-430. Print.
Schor, Juliet. “The New Consumerism.” The Language of Composition. 2nd ed. Robin D. Aufses,
Lawrence Scanlon, and Renee H. Shea. Boston: Redford/St. Martin’s. 2013. 487-489. Print.