Thursday, 13 November 2008

Is it better to give than receive?


I read a blog earlier where someone had recently raised a few £K for charity, great stuff, but it left me feeling the cringe factor big time, as the blogger was then praised to high heaven in comments and I dithered about as I wondered if should I write something too. The post was interesting and warm but I felt cold as the emphasis shifted. But all I wanted to ask was what her motivation was in the telling ... and is it about giving or receiving?

She obviously wanted to help the charity concerned and to raise awareness during the event itself. But to then 'boast' (my term) about her laudable behaviour and gaining much praise, seems to negate the generous act - in my opinion.

I've always considered that one who gives to or enables fundraising for charity- and one can do so in so many different ways be it charity/thrift stores, direct debit, volunteer work etc, do so for enjoyment, self-fulfillment and spiritual enhancement, but surely not for reward or even praise.
 

So I wonder, which is more rewarding - the helping, donating, fundraising, volunteering for a charitable cause and keeping mum about it or is it considered self serving in talking about it.

Am I completely off my trolley!?




11 comments:

  1. The best charitable work is the work that is done quietly and without fanfare.

    I don't think it's wrong to mention it, if the subject comes up, but I personally don't like shameless self-promotion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you're right, concerning what the motivations should be, but it does feel nice to be recognized, of course, so I don't begrudge anyone a bit of the brag.

    Personally, I try very hard to NOT publicize any sort of charitable undertaking of mine, unless I can raise more money or volunteers for the organization or people I've given to.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes EXACTLY suldog!! thanks for putting it so succinctly where l failed...thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm a little confused. Should I comment about charity giving, which is your main point or.....debate whether you're off your trolly (point 2?!)
    Sorry couldn't resist lol ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. like good old doctor phil says people do things because of the payoff they get. people do kind things for others but sometimes they like the thanks even better.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hmm. Not sure where I stand on this one. I can see your point but then I even find things like "Live Aid" a bit over the top. But then I'm just grumpy. I think the main thing is the benefit it does for others (the charity)...how they, the givers, go about it is up to them!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, the important thing is the money raised for a good cause...like the children in need bonanza that is coming up on Saturday. Now all those 'celebs'who particpate are acting the fool or singing or telling jokes and of course don't get paid [although I believe they get 'expenses']. Now they feel good about themselves and the charities feel good and we can sit at home feeling good 'cos we've donated even though we are a touch cynical about the whole thing...thinking why the hell do we have to do this when people are in need,hungry or sick etc. and should not have to be without a home, medicine, a parent, love,or a playground.

    Now if I had raised a great deal of money I would not tell a soul, but this person obviously felt the need to share her altruism, to have it recognised, underlined. Good question thogh, Saz.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I recognize your discomfort here as I, too, feel that giving should be quiet, tasteful, and without expectation of praise or glory. However, that said, perhaps it might prompt others to donate when they hear about the event and those who need the uplifting of a few dollars or assistance of other sort. One needs to look at the motivation behind the "bragging."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oh no, I'm with you on this one. I was just talking about charities with my dear hubby, the ones we like, the ones we skip, and so on. We are choosy where we put our money and our energy, but you know what? We don't broadcast what we do to help.

    There is nothing tackier than broadcasting what you give - amounts, etc. Now, if you raise money as a team, and you're fundraising, there's no harm in saying, "We raised $5000 last year, and we'd like to beat it this year!" But to post something like that to get a little self-love is...well, needy on so many levels.

    Ick.

    Peace - D

    ReplyDelete
  10. I agree with the concensus - charitable work should be done not for praise, but to support and help the charity. Having said that, doing something for another still gives the donor a feeling of 'having done something good' so that is a by-product of it. I'm getting a bit muddled here, but I think I mean: there is no such thing as a selfless act. Or is there?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I tend to beaver away for a little Ghanaian school without much fanfare. If you're really into your cause all your energy should be going into that and not your publicity. However, I can also see why big time celebrities "use their fame" to highlight a subject.
    What I really, really hate with a passion is a very common practise here in the States, where they list donors (and the amount they give) on the back of the brochures. Very tacky and I've also noticed it starting in England.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for stopping by!

Take the weight of your feet, draw up a chair and pour yourself a cuppa. Leave your troubles at the door and together we shall ride out the storms.
I will walk a while in your shoes...

Saz x