Barbara Ehrenreich's memoir Nickel and Dimed commemorates her experiences as an “unskilled” worker trying to live on the low wages of its temporary lower class. As he works at various jobs in different geological locations across the United States, he describes his own economic, physical, mental, logistical, and social challenges, as well as those of his co-workers. He uses these experiences not only to demonstrate the difficulty of living on the minimum wage, but to criticize corporate institutions while simultaneously defending workers' individuality and solidarity. In constructing this argument he includes descriptions of several encounters with Christians, making specific reference frequently to Jesus, drawing implicit comparisons between religion and corporations, mixing capitalistic and religious diction. He clearly expresses his contempt for what he perceives as Christian hypocrisy through his sarcasm and ironic religious diction, and successfully attacks the romanticization of poverty perpetuated by Christian notions of sacrifice and suffering. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayThe religious aspect of Ehrenreich's argument emerges subtly as he establishes the distrust that Christians have for the working class and the similar distrust held by corporations. She mocks her own “bourgeois solipsism” when the “gross foresight” of many of her colleagues' living situations “strikes” her (26). The ambiguity of the word improvident gives this statement two clearly possible and almost opposite meanings; improvidence in the sense of wastefulness or frugality implies that her colleagues' plight is their fault, an idea she directly refutes when she notes a prohibitive "set of special costs" for the most thrifty decisions for the poor. Alternatively, the word must imply a lack of divine direction, and so Ehrenreich implicitly argues that God does not lead the poor, an argument that can be extended to a metaphor for modern Christians, who Ehrenreich believes have abandoned the lower class. Of her time as a waitress in Florida, she says the worst customers are "Visible Christians," noting that "people wearing crosses or 'WWJD?' the buttons look at [the workers] with disapproval, no matter what [they do]” (36). By making this generalization, she characterizes Christians (at least those she perceives as hypocrites) as universally distrustful of the working class. Once some Christians' distrust of the lower classes is established, Ehrenreich further criticizes modern Christianity and, more generally, religion, stating that he directly compares it to the corporations that control workers. Accompanying these references there is almost always a capitalist language, which connects and confuses religious morality with capitalist benefits. Note the Mexican-American man who summarizes “our debt” to Jesus and describes “the business of modern Christianity” (68-69), transforming the religious institution of Christianity into a corporate institution, which places monetary gains above individuals than to provide it with the power necessary for its existence. Similarly, noncorporeal “theoretical entities,” corporations, downplay the value of their employees as people and prioritize corporate profit over the well-being of individuals (17). At Wal-Mart employee orientation meeting, employees are discouraged from committing “time theft” and the “humiliations imposed on so many low-wage workers” create a debilitating sense of shamewhich perpetuates the cycle of cheap labor (115). The parallels that Ehrenreich draws between religious and corporate institutions regarding the attitudes and treatment of the poor working class provide a solid basis for his eventual Marxist rallying cry of the workers, despite his merely temporary membership in their class. If Christianity in its righteousness is comparable to the multinationals that Ehrenreich claims oppress their workers, then her comparison paints itself and, more generally, the entire suffering working class, as Jesus Christ. He describes two distinct versions of Jesus that he believes exist: the living Christ, “the living man, the wine-drinking wanderer, and the early socialist,” and “the crucified Christ” (68). This dichotomy of Christ presents a metaphor for both individual workers and the working class as perceived by corporations and, as Ehrenreich argues, by a certain sect of Christianity. Each worker, like the living Christ, is an individual who "is never mentioned, nor has anything to say" (68); rather, the crucified Christ is the only symbol worshiped, and his crucifixion is the very source of “our debt” to him (68). It is “the task of modern Christianity to crucify him again and again” just as she argues that it is the task of multinational corporations to metaphorically crucify workers – to subject them to physically demanding jobs with little pay and long hours. Likewise, modern Christianity's praise of Christ "as a corpse" and the perceived hypocrisy and sanctity of their righteousness are similar to corporate rhetoric intended to deceive potential employees into believing that the company has "respect for individual,” when in reality they are treated as little more than service drones (144). Ehrenreich's ultimate purpose in making the case for Christ and comparing modern Christianity to corporate manipulation is ironic; attempts to break down the traditionally Christian romantic notions of poverty that have grown predominantly in the United States. She implies that she herself is an atheist when she sees a church tent revival as "the perfect entertainment for an atheist living alone", thus distancing herself from any religious moral implications. With his atheism confirmed, the irony of his words regarding religion becomes clear. Ironically, he says he “doesn't work for a cleaning service; rather, [she has] joined a mystical order. . . grateful. . . for the possibility of earning grace through submission and effort" (62). The sarcasm and humor with which he pierces the idea of ​​suffering as a path to some kind of religious - and therefore capitalistic (through his previously established mixed religious and capitalistic diction) betterment is made more effective by the sincerity with the sincerity of the “people rich [who] pay to spend weekends. . . doing various menial jobs” (62). Likewise, he mixes his legitimate assessment that “Jesus. . . more or less [he was] favored by an inscrutable God” for the sole purpose of suffering with the more sarcastic application of considering a mortally wounded colleague equally favored. Ultimately, he actually takes advantage of his established Christ motif and employs it as a way to reveal the hypocrisies of both Christianity and corporate America by mixing sarcasm with legitimate Christian and corporate notions. By placing the two so close together, it forces scrutiny of both, highlighting its perceived unfairness of the status quo. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay Ehrenreich's omnipresent Christ motif interacts in almost perfect coordination with his.