In Geography of Bliss, author Eric Weiner proves that countries are happy for different reasons. In particular, he does this in his chapters on Bhutan, Iceland, and Great Britain. In Bhutan, happiness comes from attention to detail, and in Great Britain, it is a work in progress. The Icelandish people are happy because they are not afraid of failure and because they are united. By noting these cultural differences, Weiner shows that happiness is different for everyone. Weiner immediately notices That the Bhutanese give immense attention to everything and live in the moment. He states that “attentive people… are happy people” (54). They give special attention to preserving their culture by maintaining their isolation. In conjunction
…show more content…
Great Britain is far from one of the happiest countries in the world; In fact, Weiner has a “theory that British culture hinders happiness. The most obvious manifestation is the lack of hugging. [. . .] Hugging, [Richard] says, ‘really lifts your spirits’” (271). He also states that “Britain is a great place for grumps like [himself]. There are lots of fellow grumps to hang out with” (268). The government knows that it must improve the happiness of the country, as seen in David Cameron’s statement that “We should be thinking not just what’s good for putting money in people’s pockets but what is good for putting joy in people’s hearts” (250-251). Former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Strategy Unit “published an analytic paper suggesting—just suggesting, mind you—ways in which government might boost national happiness” (251). These two statements prove that the British government is trying to improve the happiness of the country. In conjunction, Weiner states that “happiness is not merely ‘the absence of suffering,’ as that uber-pessimistic Schopenhauer believed, but the presence of something. But what? And . . . does the place have to want to change first?” (274). In this statement, Weiner implies that people simply need to want to be happy in order to be happy. Weiner also puts forth a theory that if people “plant enough happiness seeds, . . . eventually the laws of exponential growth kick in. A tipping point is reached, and happiness, [he believes], will spread like a California brush wildfire” (274). Therefore, Weiner displays the unhappiness of Great Britain as something that could potentially change in the future with some
Great Britain is far from one of the happiest countries in the world; In fact, Weiner has a “theory that British culture hinders happiness. The most obvious manifestation is the lack of hugging. [. . .] Hugging, [Richard] says, ‘really lifts your spirits’” (271). He also states that “Britain is a great place for grumps like [himself]. There are lots of fellow grumps to hang out with” (268). The government knows that it must improve the happiness of the country, as seen in David Cameron’s statement that “We should be thinking not just what’s good for putting money in people’s pockets but what is good for putting joy in people’s hearts” (250-251). Former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Strategy Unit “published an analytic paper suggesting—just suggesting, mind you—ways in which government might boost national happiness” (251). These two statements prove that the British government is trying to improve the happiness of the country. In conjunction, Weiner states that “happiness is not merely ‘the absence of suffering,’ as that uber-pessimistic Schopenhauer believed, but the presence of something. But what? And . . . does the place have to want to change first?” (274). In this statement, Weiner implies that people simply need to want to be happy in order to be happy. Weiner also puts forth a theory that if people “plant enough happiness seeds, . . . eventually the laws of exponential growth kick in. A tipping point is reached, and happiness, [he believes], will spread like a California brush wildfire” (274). Therefore, Weiner displays the unhappiness of Great Britain as something that could potentially change in the future with some