I'm not sure if it's just Americans who exhibit this trait, but we certainly have a remarkable talent for making ourselves feel better about our situation. I think it says something about our country, that whenever we encounter someone who insists on complaining about his problems, our first reaction is to remind him that it could be worse than it is.

The fact that in our daily lives, we are not likely to run across someone whose situation couldn't possibly deteriorate any further than it already has might be an indication of how pampered the majority of us really are. Never mind the fact that, in spite of our optimism regarding the future, our stock response for comforting the lightly afflicted could also be interpreted as a threat; how depressing the statement becomes if we just add the word "tomorrow" to it. For example: Instead of simply saying, "Things could be worse," what if said, "Things could be worse, tomorrow." I doubt it would have the intended, soothing, affect.

There's a definite undercurrent of warning in reminding people that their position could be even weaker. This is probably due to our puritan heritage -- complaining is, in some ways, akin to taunting God. Whatever happens to us, there is an expectation that it's our duty to accept it with stoic resolve; why else do we treat complaints with contempt? There's more here than our discomfort with people who show an utter lack of machismo. We see other people's discontent as proof of their shocking misunderstanding of their place in this world. It's no wonder that we disassociate ourselves from the uppity. God has a nasty habit of wiping out a few innocent bystanders when making examples of the ungrateful.

The only thing that is more menacing than simply pointing out to someone that they still have something to lose, is a personification of the threat. It's usually phrased as, "Well, at least your not him." This is blatantly sadistic -- it implies that you should not feel bad about your own state, because someone else occupies a state that's worse. To put it another way: Don't feel bad because you're in trouble; feel good because someone else is in worse trouble. If you hear this sort of thing, you are not being comforted. You are being enjoined to feel pleasure from someone else's pain.

This seems to conflict with our common sense of right and wrong. If you are directly responsible for causing someone else's misfortune, you are a monster who has no right to feel good about anything ever again. But if you are not the prime cause of someone else's pain, you are encouraged to feel as much joy as you wish at the fact that you are not them.

Sure, it could be worse. Assuming you don't die this very second, the future holds the very real possibility that you'll sink even further. Conversely, tomorrow could be better, but such naivety strikes us as simple-minded pap, not soothing balm. If the world were fair, then positive thinking and hard work would be winning strategies, ultimately leading to a brighter future. But, as we are constantly reminded, the world is not fair. And so, positive thought does not materially improve one's chance at success, and hard work is often un-rewarded, its benefits meager compared to those that come from cheating and deceit. Perhaps it would be more honest if we, when confronted by other's tales of woe, were to respond with a distracted, "I don't really care." But then again, I suppose we don't want to hurt their feelings. It might make them feel worse.

-B. C. Silvia