Posted by Jonathan Labaree on February 28, 2003 at 20:38:31 from 207.5.234.19 user JLabaree.
In Reply to: Re: Ellen MacArthur 'trite' - Guardian posted by Peter H on February 28, 2003 at 15:55:38:
I just read the article, and I rather agree with Peter. I thought the tone unfortunate and the link between Ellen’s philosophy and the dispossessed tenuous. I certainly agree with the author that it is naïve to say or think that the poor would be better off if only they had a better attitude. Clearly that’s ridiculous, but I think the author misses the point of Ellen’s “anyone can do this” approach to life.
Those of us lucky enough to be born with opportunity may never really know the challenge faced by others less fortunate - I certainly don't pretend to. But the people I know who have survived cancer or overcome economic hardship all have a determined attitude and a tremendous spirit. That’s not a guarantee to “get out” or to beat cancer, but those without that attitude are virtually guaranteed to fail.
Fostering optimism in environments dominated by resignation is a tremendous challenge. Sowing the seeds of hope is no small task. Certainly, no one person, event, or government program is going to reach everyone. But Ellen’s accomplishments and attitude might capture the imagination of some. If her successes inspire a few people, that’s wonderful.
Surely, the author misses the point of the dismasting, too. Ellen’s accomplishments would not be so impressive if failure wasn’t such a part of her sport. Plus, she may have failed at this attempt, but I’m willing to bet she’ll be back to try again. Not a bad role model for anyone to have.
By the way, I am not familiar with the term “cod philosophy”. Could someone explain what it means and its origin. Around here, codliness is close to godliness.