For today's post, we're going to use the expanded hierarchy of needs. You may see versions with fewer layers on your travels, the basic version! You should read the blog post on the basic version before reading this post. The content here is not needed for your exam but is good to know if you are aiming high!
Remember that Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is imagined as a pyramid and, like a real-world pyramid, higher layers cannot possibly be built and sustained until the lower layers are in place and solidified.
The expanded hierarchy can be divided into two sections. The bottom four layers are the deficiency needs, physical needs or very simply needs. These are the things that are essential for forming a happy, healthy human being. Note the difference in attitude to the esteem and love and belonging needs in this version. They've become needs instead of wants.
The top four are sometimes called spiritual or growth needs, but equally you might hear me categorise them very simply as wants. Remember, these things are not essential for our survival and we can do without them if we have to, but life is much richer and more fulfilling if we pay attention to them. Note that we have three new wants to focus on beyond just self-actualization. For any of these wants to be met, the four bottom needs of the pyramid need to be fulfilled first.
The (Expanded) Wants
Cognitive: with our core needs sorted and all well in our community, we start to look in other places. Cognition is not just about understanding and learning about our wider world, but about looking at ourselves and learning from this process as well. You are fulfilling your cognitive needs using the media right now by reading this post via the Internet. Lots of the media you study in Component 1 is particularly good for meeting your cognitive needs, not least of all the newspaper front pages.
Aesthetics: once we know stuff, we can turn that knowledge into an expression of how great our lives are. 'Aesthetics' is all about 'nice stuff,' whether we use our knowledge to earn a lot of money and buy a flash car, big TV and comfier sofa or we express ourselves through media making a film, a TV show, a piece of art... The creators of any of the media products you're studying are gratifying this very need by creating media, not least of all the musicians in the music videos who are expressing themselves artistically.
Self-actualisation: go and revisit the basic post for a reminder if needed.
Transcendence: transcendental people have reached a point in their lives where their needs are so well catered for that they can look outwards and help other people on their journey up the hierarchy. Arguably, I'm doing this right now by writing this blog post for you, helping you meet your cognitive needs in your GCSE. The music stars in the videos have a variety of outreach projects, using their success and wealth to better fulfil the needs of others.
Schadenfreude and Sitcoms
Generally, we try to go through life using positive means to achieve ever-higher levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. That being said, psychologists discuss a human phenomenon known as schadenfreude (literally 'damage joy' in German) in which we take pleasure and gratification from the suffering, failure and misfortune of others. In simpler terms, we can see things and be glad that they're not happening to us. This sense of 'it could be worse' can be found in lots of places in modern life. This can be applied to Maslow. I've already alluded to this earlier, but seeing someone else's needs on Maslow's Hierarchy denigrated makes our own needs feel better fulfilled, even if they aren't. It's something that we not only see in the world of media but even in our own, real world. In the media, though, this is most notable in sitcoms, where the misfortunes of the characters make us feel better about ourselves. In the IT Crowd, Jen ultimately denigrates her basic needs in subjecting herself to the office workout, while Roy manages to utterly destroy any sense of love and belonging with Alistair and the window cleaner. Negative One's cognitive humilitation by Moss is similarly entertaining for both Moss and the audience. In Friends, Rachel isn't even able to gratify her safety needs (she has nowhere to live and no money) until imposing herself on Monica, while arguably all three of her, Ross and Monica suffer denigration to their self esteem and sense of love and belonging in our studied episode. We have to be very careful with this sense of schadenfreude. In small doses - and particularly with fictional characters - it can be harmless enough, but the more basic the needs that are targeted, the less it becomes funny and the more it becomes simply cruel and unpleasant.
TV comedy has to tread this line very carefully and context plays a huge part in whether or not a risky joke is funny or offensive.
Rachel's temporary 'homelessness' is played for laughs because Rachel is fictional, coupled with the fact it's temporary and we know that nobody would dream of leaving her without, but would be far less amusing if the joke were sustained and not at all funny if Rachel was real. Roy attacks Jen's self esteem and belonging, but only briefly. We've already discussed before how his behaviour would be deeply inappropriate in the real world, but even in the fictional world of The IT Crowd, had Roy sustained his verbal tirade at Jen it would have stopped being funny fairly quickly.
Time, of course, also plays its part as well. Consider the way that the senses of self esteem, love and belonging of the LGBTQ+ community are attacked in the first Friends episode. Seemingly entertaining in 1994, but uncomfortable 25 years later. The IT Crowd, and in particular the treatment of and responses to Moss and Jen's characters, is similarly showing its age after a decade.
Comments