Inside Minimum Wage: Reading Jenny Odell Reading Ehrenreich

We live in a society based on economic performance. A world that only rewards the people who work the hardest or perform with optimal productivity. And if you do not perform, well you will pay the consequences and fall behind. Odell refers to this as “grind or die” in her book. This capitalistic approach is rigid and does not reward all of its followers. It fails to consider a vital and neglected population of America: low-wage workers. Despite its improvement in recent years, there is still major work to be done to outlaw the economic inequality existing within our society. This is what Barbara Ehrenreich realizes in her book Nickel and Dimed: On Getting By in America. The book is based on the author: Barbara Ehrenreich’s 3-month experience living in different states simulating a minimum-wage based lifestyle. Ehrenreich ultimately goes undercover to discover the reality of this neglected population and the chaos regarding welfare reform. In her experiences as a low-wage worker, she comes to the stark conclusion of how disrespected and mistreated these people truly are and addresses the misconceptions people tend to believe regarding this type of labor. Her experience strikes Jenny Odell enough to prompt a reference of Ehrenreich in her book How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy.

In Jenny Odell’s How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy, the idea of optimal productivity is frequently questioned. Odell shows disinterest in her capitalist society and disowns the ideas of productivity and efficiency. She strongly suggests a resistance from this idea of productivity in our society and believes that productivity is more dangerous than it is beneficial. Her disinterest in productivity seems to be a driving factor in her interest in Ehrenreich’s book. In Ehrenreich’s journey living as a low-wage worker, it seems that her only intent is to be as productive as possible. She busts her ass 7 long days a week, works 2 lousy jobs, and battles aching physical pain. Her back-breaking, dedicated work doesn’t even get it done. Ehrenreich can barely pay for her cheap, run-down trailer home and can only afford fast-food as a result of her low wages. Ehrenreich comments, “Something is wrong, very wrong, when a single person in good health, a person who in addition possesses a working car, can barely support herself by the sweat of her brow. You don’t need a degree in economics to see that wages are too low and rents too high” (Ehrenreich). This becomes an everyday game of trying to be optimally productive by working all day every day but not even being able to form an adequate and respectable lifestyle. This is what I believe sparks Odell’s interest in Nickel and Dimed. The book highlights the lack of benefit and the insufficient gain low-wage workers receive in their deteriorating pursuit of productivity. Their pursuit of productivity also leads these workers to live and breathe labor that their bodies can not physically handle. Odell preaches in her writings that attempts for productivity are more dangerous than beneficial. Nickel and Dimed clearly illustrate this concept through its alarming portrayal of low-wage workers demanding but an insufficient lifestyle.

An underlying theme in many of the concepts Odell introduces revolves around tactics of self-care. Whether it be forms of refusal, retreat, or resistance these ideas suggest ways people can essentially better themselves and promote the quality of their wellbeing. In Odell’s book, we better know this as “doing nothing.” Odell undoubtedly addresses the benefits of doing nothing throughout the entirety of her book. However, she makes it clear that it is not as easy as it sounds for everyone. This idea is what initially prompts Odell to mention Nickel and Dimed. Odell explains, “It’s hard for me to imagine, for example, suggesting ‘doing nothing’ to anyone who Barbara Ehrenreich meets while working at low-wage jobs for her book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. Ehrenreich and her coworkers are too busy with the impossible puzzle of making ends (money, time, and the limits of the human body) meet” (Odell). These low-wage workers do not have time to practice the tactics of self-improvement that Odell suggests as they are too busy trying to improve the quality of life for wealthy, apathetic people.

Ehrenreich adds, “The ‘working poor,’ as they are appropriately termed, are in fact the major philanthropists of our society. They neglect their own children so that the children of others will be cared for; they live in substandard housing so that other homes will be shiny and perfect; they endure privation so that inflation will be low and stock prices high. To be a member of the working poor is to be an anonymous donor, a nameless benefactor, to everyone else” (Ehrenreich). The culmination of these two excerpts persuades me to acknowledge the genuine selflessness of these low-wage workers. They are too busy doing demoralizing labor to satisfy people who are untroubled by their struggles. The sacrifice they make does not come with a reward, support, or even sufficient pay. The struggle they endure makes you feel pity and puts you at unease. Furthermore, Ehrenreich ensures the inability these people have to experience retreat or forms of enjoyment when she takes the night off to venture entertainment. With the limited funds she possesses, Ehrenreich is struck by a tent revival event at the church downtown. Ehrenreich quickly sees the peculiarity of the church after seeing it mostly populated with “hillbilly” types. The people running the event also fail to recognize important topics Ehrenreich introduces about economic inequality which ultimately prompts her to leave. She is upset that she wasted her time and knows she could have been making money in this lost time. She also grows sympathetic for low-wage workers’ inability to experience real fun and stress-relieving time off. The best she was able to do with her income was to find a seemingly illegitimate church event that was not amusing.

Diving deeper into Ehrenreich’s text and getting a better understanding of this reference was extremely informative. My newfound understanding however made me reconsider Odell’s words differently. Yes, as I addressed before her reference to low-wage workers not being able to practice her tactics of self-improvement makes you pity low-wage workers. And we can understand why low-wage workers can not do “nothing.” However, Odell is being negligent and ignorant of these low-wage workers. There is a problem with her reference to Ehreinrich. Many of the ideas and concepts in her book revolve around self-improvement and in her quote, she ultimately says that these low-wage workers can not enjoy the benefits of her ideas. I am not inferring that she does not care about these people because that is not true. She dedicates nearly a chapter talking about her sympathy for the inequalities and challenges low-wage workers have faced for a while. But, what I am saying is that she is not addressing all people when talking about “doing nothing” or self-improvement. Her words practically imply that her book only applies to middle and upper-class workers and not low-wage workers. With this implication on the table, it now seems that Odell used her reference of Ehreinrich to cover her tracks. She adds a reference line of sympathy to show her intentions are pure despite what seems to be a neglect of low-wage workers. It is almost hypocritical to promote tactics that low-wage workers can not even use then go on to sympathize for their inability to practice those same tactics. To make myself clear, I feel that Odell is being ignorant to the low-class in terms of “doing nothing” which appears to be a central idea in her book despite her sympathy for them not being able to actually “do nothing.” Additionally, Odell’s negligence potentially could make low-wage workers feel even more hopeless and ignored. Their everyday struggle feels inevitable and disregarded.

Despite my critique of Odell seemingly neglecting low-wage workers, her exposure to Nickel and Dimed led me to an enlightened and enhanced view of the low-wage lifestyle as a whole. Odell designates a significant portion of the 3rd chapter to a discussion regarding the problems in America affecting impoverished people. She mentions that many Americans walk an “economic tightrope, without an adequate safety net” (Odell) which results in economic fear. In other words, if these low-wage workers were to lose their footing, they suffer much more than the average worker with little ability to recover. When Ehrenreich takes on Maine as a part of a cleaning service, many of the women can only perform certain tasks due to severe injuries. One instance when Ehrenreich’s crew was cleaning a house, a crew member named Holly seemed visibly ill and later fainted over the homeowners counter. Despite Ehrenreich’s efforts to give Holly a break and let her rest, Holly insists she continues working as she does not want to sacrifice time that could make her lose her job. This is where Odell’s comments on low-wage workers not being able to afford hiccups due to lack of support settled with me. In Ehrenreich’s text, we see workers laboring to points beyond human limits to keep hold of their minimum wage gig at a cleaning service. Not only was this disturbing to visualize, but it was enlightening considering the comments Odell makes. These low-wage workers live in economic fear to the extent where they no longer care for the wellbeing themselves. They push their physical boundaries to avoid losing their jobs which they simply can not afford. They know that losing their jobs will put them out of pay for weeks and will force them to take on the gruesome process of finding another lousy minimum-wage job. Ehrenreich’s portrayal of the low-wage lifestyle educates me and exposes injustices beyond what Odell could mention in her briefer discussion of the low-wage lifestyle. Ugly truths and real-life experiences lead to an enhanced understanding of low-wage lifestyle and struggle more fully.

It is clear to see through Odell’s extensive commentary regarding poverty and reference of texts such as Ehrenreich’s, that Odell has sympathy and compassion for low-wage workers. She even demotes nearly a full chapter talking about the hardships low-wage workers face. Odell’s discussion of poverty and the exposure of Ehrenreich is highly informative. The analysis of a lack of support that low-wage workers obtain is deeply striking. Her exposure to Ehreinch’s text even leads me to a very enhanced view of topics regarding the low-wage lifestyle that Odell often mentions. However, despite Odell’s concerned view on the low-wage lifestyle, a deeper and alternate view of Odell’s reference to Ehrenreich points to negligence and near hypocrisy. This disregard of the low-class roots from her earlier discussions of “doing nothing.” We ultimately learn from Odell’s reference that low-wage workers can not participate in the many tactics of “doing nothing” that she preaches so frequently. Thus, implying that a significant portion of Odell’s text excludes and disregards the low class as these tactics do not apply to them. Odell’s allusion to Nickel and Dimed appears to be a way for Odell to show further sympathy in light of the potential fault of her argument.