1. Za Eng Mawi
ENGL 1102-10
Tuesday & Thursday
8:00am-9:15am
February 27, 2014
Audience: Peers
The Being of the Rich
Are you rich or poor? Of course, you are rich. You do not want to be included in the poor
even if you are not in the 1% of United States, which consists of only 14,000 families (Fessenden
and McLean). It is only natural that we do not like to be the poor. We are brought up by parents
who tell us to go to school so that we will not be poor when we grow up. We learn in school that,
if we can get a high degree, we can get a high-paying job, which somehow promises a good life.
At work, we are to work hard, so that we can get a raise and eventually climb higher in the career
field. Life is like a battlefield where the rich are the winners, and the poor are the losers. Most
definitely, no one wants to be the loser. As a result, we reject the poor. We push them away. We
are scared of becoming one of them. In this way, our culture has created a monster.
In this case, a monster means someone or something that we are afraid of. It can be
something that we fear such as the darkness when we turn off the electric light at night or a
shark. It can also be someone that we do not like to be such as a leper or a tyrant. We made them
into monsters because seeing them evoke disgust and horror inside of us. Let me explain a bit
further. When we see lepers, we are tormented by thoughts of pity and disgust because of their
unsightly flesh. At the same time, we know that, it could happen to anyone. If there is such a
being as lepers out there, who knows whether or not you will become one too? So the mere

2. Za Eng Mawi 2
existence of lepers terrifies us, which is why we forced them out of cities in ancient time. The
poor fall into this category of monster. They are the embodiment of a way of life which we do
not want.
When we have a monster, we also acquire the other side of it, the dominant identity. The
dominant identity is the one who determines who the monster is. The dominant identity has the
good quality that the monster lacks. Using my former example, the dominant identity for a leper
is a person who does not have leprosy, in other words, a person with healthy skin. In the same
way, by this definition, the dominant identity for the poor is the rich.
Although we come up with this divide of
the rich and the poor very easily (Fig. 1), when do
we feel that we are rich? We can say that we are
rich when we have no debt or when we do not
have to labor to make a living. We can also say
that we are rich when we can afford pleasure
without sacrificing anything. Actually, we are
really rich if we have enough resources to live
comfortably for the rest of our lives without
working. Still, all these ways of describing richness are vague; they depend on our value of the
material. For someone who values love and kindness, he or she is rich if he or she has loving
friends and family. For someone who is very content, he or she is rich if he or she has a place to
call home and a salary to get by. Considering this, we need a better way to confirm that we are
rich. In other words, we need proof for the being of the rich. Our solution is creating the
monstrous “Others” who are the poor. By proving the existence of the poor, we simultaneously
Fig. 1
This image shows thedivide of the rich and the poor. The
rich come out from on one side of the movie theater, and
they are happy. Thepoor, on the other side, are not happy.
Even though it is thesame movie, it is a comedy for the
rich but a tragedy for the poor.

3. Za Eng Mawi 3
prove the existence of the rich. Therefore, I argue that the poor define the rich by contrasting,
coexisting and conflicting. In this paper, I will explain how the poor contrast, coexist, and
conflict with the rich in order to give meaning to the rich.
The poor have to be different from the rich so that we can declare, “This is the poor and
we are not this, which is why we are the rich.” For this reason, we take the exact opposite of the
rich when we depict the poor. They are homeless in contrast to
the rich who own a house or two. They are jobless in contrast to
the rich who have jobs with good salaries. They cannot afford
almost anything from toothpaste to a hearty meal in contrast to the
rich who can eat at restaurants. Even more, we usually represent
the poor as people who are in the most undesirable state (Fig. 2).
As Cohen stated in his fourth thesis, “The monster is difference
made flesh, come to dwell among us;” (15) the poor live among
us but the difference scares us. However, it is also the difference
that supports the line between the rich and the poor.
Despite all the differences, the rich and the poor coexist just as the coin has two sides
(Fig. 3). I want to add that the rich particularly
need the poor as the monstrous Other. As an
illustration, a medieval hero would not be called a
hero unless he defeated a monster. In the same way
that a hero requires a monster to be a hero, the rich
require the poor in order to be the rich. As much as
the rich reject the poor, they are in dire need of
This picture shows thecommonly accepted
idea of what the poor are.
Fig. 2
This picture shows thecoexitance of therich and the
poor. The skycrapers and the rundown houses are
right next to each other.
Fig. 3

4. Za Eng Mawi 4
them because, if the being of the poor does not exist, the being of the rich might as well
disappear. Therefore, one’s existence depends on the other. Hence, the rich come to be as the
rich because there are the poor and vice versa.
Being the opposite of each other and yet essential for
one another, conflicts are inevitable between the rich and the
poor. The poor think of the rich as greedy and
unsympathetic people who are using them as tools (Fig. 4).
The poor point their fingers to the rich as the cause of their
misfortune. They feel used by the rich and that the rich are
dominating over them. Yen says that, according to the Pew
Report, the rich are commonly believed to be not
trustworthy and paying fewer taxes than they ought to.
Indeed, there is undeniable resentment of the poor toward the
rich.
On the other hand, the rich think of the poor as
undesirable people. They think that the poor covet their
wealth (Fig. 5) and which may be why they are barking at
them like the dog from Aesop’s fable. Moreover, they
believe that the reason why the poor cannot advance is their
own incompetence. Perhaps this conception has its roots in
Social Darwinism. In the light of Social Darwinism, the
people in the late nineteenth century believed that poverty
was a sign of unfitness (Roark et al. 489). This belief still
Fig. 4
This image shows how the poor as slaves who
carry therich on a comfortable seat. It also
implies the poor are like horses chasing a carrot
on a stick, an old trick to make the horse go where
the master wants.
This image shows how the rich view the poor.
It implies that thepoor are trying to get
something from the rich by depicting them as
zombies eating a rich man.
Fig. 5

5. Za Eng Mawi 5
subsists today even though it is not as strong and negative as before. Because the poor are seen
as “unfit,” the rich are seen as “fit.” Hence, the poor add context to the definition of the rich.
As I have discussed above, the poor make visible the attributes of the rich by taking on
different qualities. We can identify the rich because there are the poor contrasting with them.
Also, the poor are the vital proof of the existence of the rich. Without the existence of the poor,
the existence of the rich would be questionable. Furthermore, conflicting with the poor shows
how deeply the rich are involved with the poor, and it makes the bond between the rich and the
poor stronger. Being the unwanted “Other,” the poor make being rich is a “good” thing (or else
we might not even know being rich is good or bad). Given these points, the rich need the poor to
define themselves, prove their existence, and be who they are.

6. Za Eng Mawi 6
Works Cited
Cohen, Jeffery Jerome. “Monster Culture (Seven Theses).” Monsters. Ed. Brandy Ball Blake and
L. Andrew Cooper. Southlake, TX: Fountainhead Press, 2012.15. Print.
Fessenden, Ford, and McLean, Alan. “Where the 1 Percent Fit in the Hierarchy of Income.” The
New York Times. The New York Times Company, 28 Oct. 2011. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.
Fig. 1. Bennett, Clay. “A Tragic Comedy.” N.d. ClayBennett.com. ClayBennett.com. Web. 19
Mar. 2014. JPEG file.
Fig. 2. “Has America Become Insensitive To The Plight Of The Poor?” 12 Sept. 2012.
ThyBlackMan.com. ThyBlackMan.com. Web. 27 Feb. 2014. JPEG file.
Fig. 3. Maria, Diana Ana. “The Modern and Rich Versus the Old and the Poor.” 29 June 2013.
DeviantART. DeviantART. Web. 19 Mar. 2014. JEPG file.
Fig. 4. Bakdinger. “21 Ways Billionaires Think Differently Than Average People.” Kara
Khaotic. Valainaire.com. Web. 27 Feb. 2014. JPEG file.
Fig. 5. Francis, Danny. “Victorian Zombies.” Danny Francis Art. Danny Francis Art. Web. 27
Feb. 2014. JPEG file.
Roark, James L. et al. Understanding the American Promise: A Brief History Volume II. Boston:
Bedford/ St. Martin’s. 2011. 489. Print.
Yen, Hope. “Americans Say Rich Are Greedy, Dishonest, Don’t Pay Enough In Taxes: Pew
Report.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. 27 Aug. 2012. Web. 18
Mar. 2014.