How An Obscure Job Helps with Self-Identification

or how being a geek in a house of non-geeks helped me consider myself a musician

You know what the great­est thing about hav­ing a job that doesn’t fit into any of the nor­mal cat­e­gories is? It makes it a lot eas­ier to not define your­self by your job.

I started work­ing at Mil­likin a lit­tle over a year ago. What I do is hard to define: it’s not IT, but it’s geeky. I work for the Alumni Office, as part of the Com­mu­ni­ca­tions and Ser­vices team. I over­see our sec­tion of the data­base, although, not directly–I’m respon­si­ble for busi­ness prac­tices and the staff that does day-to-day entry. Plus web com­mu­ni­ca­tion, social media, report­ing and being the department’s lia­son to IT.

Over­all, it’s a great job, but it’s not the kind of thing you can put in a stan­dard form: it’s not IT; it’s not com­mu­ni­ca­tions; it’s not fund-raising. It’s some­where in between all of those.

And as it turns out, this is a huge relief.

A few years ago, I was a cam­pus min­is­ter. That was the pri­mary def­i­n­i­tion of who I was: my job. After that, I worked in mar­ket­ing. And I never really felt at home there, because I never really con­sid­ered myself a “mar­keter” (or mar­ket­ing guru or mar­ket­ing exec or any other ridicu­lous title). Even thought that was my job, I never felt com­fort­able with it defin­ing my iden­tity, even though, most of the time, I felt like it did.

Now, my job doesn’t fit into any neat boxes. I’m not a “cam­pus min­is­ter” nor do I “work in marketing.”

I’m not even “in IT.”

And it’s really freeing–now, I can con­sider myself a father and a Chris­t­ian and a musi­cian and a poet. I might not be par­tic­u­larly good at any of those things, but they’re labels I relate to, regard­less of whether or not I’m mak­ing a liv­ing at them.

Which brings me to the most inter­est­ing ques­tion of this all: why DO we tend to define our­selves by our jobs? and define oth­ers the same way? Is this an Amer­i­can thing (I’ve picked up vague rum­blings online that it is; but I don’t have any way of quan­ti­fy­ing or show­ing that empir­i­cally). And more impor­tantly, how does this sort of mind­set, where we define our­selves pri­mar­ily by our jobs, inform our lives a Chris­tians and how (un?)healthy is it?

This entry was posted in christianity, life. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

One Comment

  1. Posted February 25, 2012 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think this is an Amer­i­can thing, but rather a human thing. We spend most of our wak­ing time at work, which means it is nat­ural that we iden­tify with that. And I think this could be a good thing :) A lot of peo­ple that really don’t iden­tify with their jobs are peo­ple that hate their jobs, and so spend most of their life engaged in some­thing they do not like. They see their work as some­how seper­ate from who they are–something that just pays the bills, for example–and there­fore will never invest all they could into their work. This could be because their job does not suit their per­son­al­ity, but it could also be due to lazi­ness, or because they desire to enjoy the fruits of their labour, but do not care about the labour itself.

    One of the cen­tral teach­ings of the Bhagavad-gita, a clas­si­cal Hindu text, is that our actions should flow nat­u­rally from our being: we should do what comes nat­ural to us, even if it is unpleas­ant, but do this with detach­ment, not crav­ing to enjoy the fruits of one’s work. Such an ethic makes you iden­tify to a cer­tain extent with your work, sees your work as part of your per­son­al­ity, but does not make you a worka­holic or some­one obsessed with per­sonal gain.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>