Unhappiness as A Risk

Introduction
In the following essay, the notion of happiness and unhappiness will be examined while explaining what the perception of happiness and unhappiness is, how these perceptions have been constructed and turned into a purpose and a duty in life and how unhappiness has become a risk in the contemporary world. The work is going to take form around the perspective of governmentality and the concept of Technologies of the Self. The use of antidepressants will be used as a technique of explaining while excluding the medical and psychological aspects. The work is focused on the self-government perspective.
Formalisation and the Construction of Happiness
"Become whole, become what you want, become yourself: the individual is to become, as it were, an entrepreneur of itself, seeking to maximize its own powers, its own happiness, its own quality of life, though enhancing its autonomy and then instrumentalizing its autonomous choices in the service of its lifestyle." (Rose, 1996: 158).
The notion of happiness in the contemporary world is constructed based on individuals. The individual continuously tries to be happy and the responsibility for being happy or unhappy belongs to individual him/herself. The construction of happiness is seen as "shaping of autonomous, agentive neoliberal subjectivities" (Binkley, 2011: 372). Thus, within this context being happy is under the responsibility of the individual and if the individual acts according to this environment, (s)he eventually starts regulating his/her life while taking the responsibility.
Since the individual endeavours to be happy in life with his/her own effort and takes the necessary responsibilities, we may say that the external conditions are seen as insignificant because the individual is thought to be able to overcome any problem with her/his analytical thinking. This idea emphasises the necessity of regulation of internal conditions of an individual rather than external ones. "…-forces that choke happiness itself by deading the impulse freedom that derives the entrepreneurial subject toward the maximization of his own emotional life, viewed as human capital." (Binkley, 2011: 383).
If we approach construction of happiness from another view, it is perceived as a reachable concrete step in life. This approach frames happiness as a tangible goal in the calculable future of the individual's reality. Accordingly, the individual is assumed to be able to calculate the best for him/herself and is also responsible for taking control over her/his happiness and calculating the steps required to achieve it. We can examine this better by looking at the popular "happiness formulas".
These formulas guide the individual along the routes to happiness through generalisation. They guide people who want to be happy and advise people to apply them in order to achieve happiness and feel whole. The expert view about happiness and the books written by people who call themselves happy, newspapers and so many other publications and notations, are followed by many people every day. For example, the book called "The Happiness Project" remained on the bestseller list of the New York Times for weeks1.
We can analyse how happiness has been constructed by viewing one of those formulas. A newspaper report has been chosen in the belief that it would reach a wider population compared to other publications. In the report, 12 'scientifically proved' ways of being happy are given as follows: "being helpful, giving thanks to God, trying new things, setting a target, being objective (there is something interesting about this clause that is the expert says "if people stop defending their opinions, they will save 99% of their energy and be happier"), being faithful, sleeping at least 6 hours in a day, making at least 10 good friends, living close to where you work, and eating healthily"2. It is claimed that people who apply these things in their lives will feel happy. It is possible to chance upon these kinds of statements in every kind of media in daily life. We see that these formalisations presuppose being happy as on the same path for anyone and the individual can be happy if (s)he follows these simple and applicable directives. In a sense, they reduce happiness to steps that can be done one by one while generalising the population.
This view of happiness (which is like a recipe), also means seeing happiness on certain limits. There is a framework of happiness and people who are in the frame are considered as happy. The idea of "good citizen" can be viewed in a similar light. At this point, the traits of good citizen coincide with the construction of happy citizen. Good citizen "as entrepreneurial actors in every sphere of life" (Joseph, 2013: 243) responds to happy citizen construction. To us, It is not a coincidence, there is a profound relationship between good citizen and happy citizen. This relation is important in terms of the continuity of contemporary policies. While the individual responds to the construction of happiness, s/he does so not in order to act according to aspirations of recent policies but to be happy. In other words, people don't act because they want to contribute to these policies but they act in respect of the policies to be happy.
Unhappiness As a Risk
In governmentality perspective risk "may be understood as a governmental strategy of regulatory power by which populations and individuals are monitored and managed through the goals of neoliberalism." (Lupton, 1999: 89). According to this perspective risk is socially constructed and we discuss risk as the constituted ways to make individuals regulate themselves. In this context the individual is an actor who regulates his/her life applying to various ways in order to avoid risks.
When we consider unhappiness as a risk, we build our arguments firstly on the fact that happiness has become a purpose in life. Individuals, who take being happy as a goal and a task in the context of happiness construction, regulate their lives in this direction. Individuals pay attention to the statements that argue that individuals need to be happy in order to be whole (feel fulfilled) and take action. When the happiness becomes an aim, the individual sees things, which might bring about unhappiness, as a risk. However, what is expected in society is to make individuals consider themselves as happy and individuals see being a happy citizen as the most important condition of social existence. "…individuals and groups are increasingly expected to engage in practices identified as ways of avoiding or minimizing the impact of risks to themselves." (Lupton, 1999: 101). Moreover, people are often exposed to popular happiness doctrines and being happy has became a big issue in daily life and accordingly unhappiness has become a risk.
Technologies of the Self
Neoliberal policies are mostly based on individuals and they make individuals responsible for their actions in social life. The individual regulates him/herself in order to achieve his/her goals and forms the necessary conditions. As Sam Binkley points out; "…disposes individuals to act strategically to develop themselves and their qualities as human capital within a field of competitive actors, seeking opportunities and advantage through the critical assessment of environmental opportunities." (2011: 383). Happiness has also become the individual's responsibility and the rational individual regulates him/herself through various means that can bring happiness. Michel Foucault describes these self-regulating means as:
"Which permit individuals to effect by their own means or with the help of others a number of operations on their own bodies and souls, thoughts, conduct and way of being, so as to transform themselves in order to attain a certain state of happiness, purity, wisdom, perfection or immortality." (1998: 18).
When we consider the means of self-regulating and the neoliberal era policies, we see some problematic for their functioning. Therefore we make an illustration of a dual-mechanism. It's a mechanism that on one side the individual is expected to choose his/her actions freely and take the responsibility of results of his/her action; on the other side, the means, which the individual makes use of, totalise individuals and advice to everyone to act in a certain way. In other words, individuals are the active actors and they attach themselves to those advised ways with their free will "in the space of regulated freedom" (Rose, 1996: 166). "…they exercise power upon themselves as normalized subjects who are in pursuit of their own best interests and freedom, who are interested in self-improvement, seeking happiness and healthiness." (Lupton, 1999: 90).
Antidepressants as a Self-governmental Technique
Before explaining the use of antidepressants, it is necessary to examine the cases of being healthy or ill that are constructed through mental disorders.
" … understanding of the world also forms our understanding of health and illness, making them inevitable social constructs that depend on a privileged form of knowledge, recognized expertise, and commonly accepted standards." (Manzenreiter, 2012: 62).
When we look at the commonly accepted standards, which Manzenreiter talks about, in accordance with the mental health and illness we can say that they are socially constructed cases. The definition of a mentally healthy person is also a definition of a proper person because; when we talk about mental health we also talk about certain phenomena that can be explained by a social view. For example, World Health Organization (WHO) defines depression as: "common mental disorder characterised by sadness, loss of interest or pleasure, feelings of guilt or self-worth, disturbed sleep or appetite, feelings of tiredness and poor concentration.".3 The symptoms of depression are not independent of social life and these symptoms can never be determined specifically. In addition, in order to determine feeling sad as a symptom there should be a defined ideal sadness. If we take being sad as a symptom then we can say that being happy is proper and being sad is "improper". The reason, why we argue this definition and the symptoms through being "proper/improper", is that these symptom definitions are made by certain actors and authorities such as WHO, psychiatrists and so on, and known as de-facto. In short, when the actors share the symptoms of mental disorders through media they also announce a proper person profile and they give advice in respect of being a proper healthy person. Here the individuals are expected to take the necessary steps. If the individual believes the reality of these created informations about mental health then s/he responds positively and starts regulating and controlling him/herself. Sam Binkley says; "The task, then, is to create conditions, or to teach the specific techniques, whereby circumstantial optimism and appreciative self-regard can be intentionally cultivated by individual themselves." (2011: 375).
The definitions of happiness are generally based on the feeling mentally healthy. Thus it is important to be happy and avoid pain. However, the struggle of the individual results with being unhappy because of experiencing frustration. This situation draws a paradox because the happiness is a future-oriented phenomenon and it never belongs to present. Consequently, the individual is doomed to fail in his/her continuous aim to be happy and then s/he tries to find out the causal external conditions for his/her failures. At this point, antidepressants show up as a means which the individual uses to regulate and/or correct his/her mentality.
Antidepressants are the drugs used for the treatment of major depressive disorder and other conditions, including dysthymia, anxiety disorders, and obsessive compulsive disorder. Antidepressants have been sold as prescription drugs since 1950s. The use of antidepressants has increased in recent years. According to research made in the USA; "from 1988-1994 through 2005-2008, the rate of antidepressant use in United States among all ages increased nearly 400%." (Ppratt,2011: 1).
The individual can easily reach the information of antidepressants and apply them in his/her life. Therefore, we are going to analyse two commercials in the belief that first; they can reach a wider population and second; they also present the economic aspect of this issue.
Today antidepressants are goods just like any other product. They have adverts on the television, and are subject to the same economic forces as any other product. The commercial's intent is to sell the product but because antidepressants are health-related, when the 'treatment' is on the market, the ill or the potentially ill become the consumer. Also, responsibilised individual takes a measure of himself about his/her mental health on his own. So the first diagnose of the mental health is made by the individual him/herself. Antidepressant commercials have a crucial role in this process. With these commercials, people get information about the symptoms of mental disorders such as social anxiety and depression and they think over if they exhibit the symptoms.
The big pharmaceutical company Pfizer released a commercial. The text follows as: "Do you feel alone? Do you feel like everyone is far away from you? You could be depressed.. Ask your doctor about the all new Effexor because feeling alone might not be normal. Effexor. The feel better solution."4 In this commercial being alone is represented as an abnormality so as a symptom of depression.
The other commercial released by the company GlaxoSmithKline. The text of the commercial follows as:
"Doctors define social anxiety disorder as an intense persistent fear and avoidance of social situations. Over ten millions Americans suffer. Do you? Is your anxiety around people so intense it can feel like a panic attack? Paxil offers you hope. Has your overwhelming anxiety significantly impaired your work or social life? Paxil offers you hope. Paxil. The only medication proven effective for social anxiety disorder. Paxil helps correct the chemical imbalance that may be associated with this disorder, so that with time and your doctor's help you can move toward a recovery. Paxil's not for everyone. Tell your doctor what medicines you're taking. People taking MAO inhibitors should not take Paxil. Side effects may include decreased appetite,dry mouth sweating nausea constipation sexual side effects,...,sleepiness. Will you ask your doctor for information on Paxil? Do it today. Your life is waiting."5
In this one, stating that over 10 million Americans suffer from this illness makes easier for people to adapt the idea of being mentally ill. Here the degree of anxiety is described as "intense".
These two commercials have some similarities. They both consider general conditions as symptoms. Anyone can have these so called symptoms so anyone can be under the 'risk' of depression. We come to some problematic that are the possibility of calculating loneliness and deciding the amount of intensity. The individual is responsible for deciding whether the feeling is intense enough to be ill or not. Then if the individual finds him/herself in an intense anxiety and feels abnormal; then s/he should start using these drugs. The cycle of antidepressant marketing includes the pharmaceutical companies, advertisement agencies, medical experts and so many other actors. These actors show antidepressants as the hope for being happy and if the individuals respond positively -start using antidepressants, they also take place in the cycle.
Conclusion
We've discussed risk through unhappiness. Risks, the risk of being unhappy, are socially constructed. This construction has made individuals responsibilised for avoiding and taking the control over risk. There are some expert views that set some formulas about how to be happy. We've already stated our view about those formulas but, in addition, it wouldn't be wrong to say that the formulas are only valid for certain type of group of people. In the given formulas, if we take living close to where you live for example, it's a luxury especially if you live in a big city, not everyone can afford it. So, avoiding risk of being unhappy is not possible for everyone through those formulas and within the context of them some people are doomed to be unhappy.
The use of antidepressants has been analysed through self-government technique. The individual cannot change the environment/ external conditions so s/he tries to regulate him/herself from inside. In other words, for example having anxiety about work life should be considered as normal knowing the contemporary work conditions. However the commercial says that this is not something normal so the individual should take care of this issue and go to a doctor. How we interpret this scene is that the individual cannot/ shouldn't change his/her work, it wouldn't be on the benefit of the economy and the system so (s)he should take antidepressants in order not to feel uncomfortable with the conditions. With the light of different ideas and situations that has been mentioned above, we come to a conclusion that the antidepressants are actually being used as a technique of self-government and governmentality of the system rather than being used as a medical treatment.




REFERENCES

Binkley, S. (2011). Happiness, Positive Psychology and The Program Of Neoliberal Governmentality. Subjectivity (Vol:4) (371-394). United Kingdom: Macmillan Publishers.

Martin, L., Gutman, H., Hutton, P. (Eds.). (1988). Technologies of the Self: A Seminar With Michel Foucault. United States of America: The University of Massachusetts Press.

Rose, N. (1998). Inventing Our Selves: Psychology, Power, And Personhood. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Joseph, M. (2013). Gender, Entrepreneurial Subjectivity, and Pathologies of Personal Finance. Social Politics (Vol:20) (242-273).

Lupton, D. (1999). Risk. Routledge. London.

Manzenreiter, W. (2012). Monitoring Health and the Body: Anthropometry, Lifestyle Risks, and the Japanese Obesity Crisis. Journal of Japanese Studies (Vol:38:1) (55-84).

Pratt, L., Brody D., Gu, Q. (2011). Antidepressant Use in Persons Aged 12 and Over: United States, 2005-2008. National Center for Health Statistics Data Brief. (No.76). United States of America.



Web Resources

¹ http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/paperback-advice/list.html?category=paperback-advice&pagewanted=print


2 http://www.sabah.com.tr/Saglik/2013/09/05/mutlu-olmanin-bilimsel-acidan-kanitlanmis-12-yolu/
3 http://www.who.int/mental_health/management/depression/en/index.html
4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gSD5bK1Zgo
5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8xHveYeG9s

Eda Güldağı - Ezgi Şentürk