Ordinary language is all right.
One could divide humanity into two classes:
those who master a metaphor, and those who hold by a formula.
Those with a bent for both are too few, they do not comprise a class.
The workers call banging on things 'striking'.
Well before the slightly impatient desolation of end of shift at the grocery store, yet still getting on toward closing—the night stocker lugging boxes from pallet to aisle, just a handful of shoppers picking over produce and staring distractedly at labels, but the skeleton crew of cashiers not yet looking unlively, steadily ringing people up—a woman crosses my path to head to checkout.
At first, all I see is her skin. There's so much of it, so much more than you generally see in a place like this, upmarket.
And it stands out; her clothes are too young, her skin is too old. The contrast makes her conspicuous. Whatever it was that wore her down, her life has been too hard. Her look brings a handful of explanations to mind, none too certain, none too polite to entertain.
A full cart in the open lane causes a little line to form behind it, so a checker opens another lane for the woman, and then me. Whatever she's buying, it's $1.89. She pays with change, not enough, without making any kind of show of hunting for whatever's left. But with no finality, either. Instead, as the checker scoops the coins up one by one and tallies them aloud, it's as if the woman changes her mind as to how much she can let go of, adding one coin, then sliding another across to the checker, still not to round out the amount due but more as if to balance things. Closer to the total, the checker starts counting the rest out in pennies from the courtesy tray by the register. It takes a lot of them.
While the checker counts, the store rent-a-cop hovers into view, hands on his belt, making himself visibly watchful.
Normally, the checker is faultlessly courteous, even a little stagey, issuing every query and prompt needed to expedite checkout in a chipper bray that never quite seems like it can be her real voice: as if she's projecting her lines to the back of an empty theater. But she lets them go for the woman, doesn't make to extract any kind of excuse or extend any kind of opportunity for face saving. No 'don't worry about that', no remark about everyone coming up short now and then, no joke about raiding the change jar before payday, nothing. With nothing else to say, she counts out enough, thanks the woman, and sends her off with her purchase.
For me, almost as if to acknowledge what she's just been silent about, the checker allows the slightest break in her customary performance. 'How are you doing tonight?' is her greeting, the slight emphasis her unprecedented way of uttering a formality to mean something. Not at all conspiratorially, not a micro-collusion to resume involvement in the community of people who can afford $1.89 at the grocery store, I feel. More that the you that she saw and didn't say needed somewhere to go, to be let out, after she discharged its claim upon her.
'… men and women in organizations establish affinities with others in their cohorts based especially on shared occupational experiences. They work hard to attract their superiors' attention and to break into social circles anchored by bosses. With both peers and higher-ups, the task is to demonstrate that one grasps and shares frameworks of understanding about how the world works and "what has to be done." Only those men and women who allow peers and superiors to feel morally comfortable in the ambiguous muddles of the world of affairs have a chance to survive and flourish in the big organizations when power and authority shift due to changes in markets, internal power struggles, or the need to respond to external exigencies. The larger the organization, the more thorough are the shake-ups and the shorter the intervals between the upheavals that reshuffle hierarchies and determine personal fates.'
(Note ca. p. 23: 'Could it be that human beings are in human guise?', i.e., could it be that what we take to be human beings, might only be beings simulating humanity? In other words: by thinking this possibility named via the phrase 'human guise' through, might we leave 'epistemological agnosticism' behind and reach a 'metaphysical skepticism', 'a surmise that perhaps there are no human beings' [p. 13], just as we might surmise by reasoning about our experience that there is no world behind it, outside it, for it to be experience of? 'Could it be that human beings…?' sets out from an epistemological starting point, even if to try to leave it behind.)
Wake, peep, work, sweep, creep, sleep, repeat.
There's one worker, an obnoxious, artlessly profane, belligerent complainer, who I'll be glad to hear the last of. The wall is almost up, the summer of constant annoyances outside my window is almost over. But I could take maybe a little bit more: throwing a piece of metal into the house, and shouted back at from inside, the complainer, alone out in the yard with hardly anyone to behold him, ridiculously, taunts: 'What are you gonna do about it? What are you gonna do about it?' He keeps repeating himself. 'What are you gonna do about it?' Finally! Some action! I'm willing to let this play out.
But, no, no one else wants to play his game. Everyone goes back to banging on things and ignores him.