Reaction To "Who Moved My Cheese" By Spencer Johnson

To start this paper, I initially typed in every one of Haw's motivational wall writings. I then analyzed them as they related to Johnson's message, my life, and to each other. Now, after writing this paper, I can assert that this story appeals to its audience on a level much more personal than their career. The story assists one's self in diminishing a fear of change. It is this core purpose that has the potential to influence the many facets of a human's life, be it in the workplace, love, or another achievement. It is through this personal appeal that I will write my reaction to the text.

Spencer Johnson originally wrote his short story "Who Moved My Cheese" as personal encouragement to help himself through his own life. After realizing how well it applied to his situation, he published the book to a worldwide audience, which responded to it in high esteem. While I do recognize the value in this book and agree with Johnson on many of the issues it addresses, some ideas Johnson presents could prove fatal to the worldwide audience captivated by them.

Almost every human being, if asked the question "What makes you happy?" would respond in words such as success, money, comfort and true love. Johnson utilizes this anticipated response in his book by cleverly summarizing every possible answer into one word. Throughout the story, Johnson equates anything that makes us happy with Cheese. The two serve the same purpose and are interchangable. Any mention of Cheese is also a reference to the desire for happiness in the human mind. He declares this in his book via one of Haw's wall carvings: "Having Cheese makes you happy." (Johnson 30) With this knowledge, we can continue our analysis of the text.

Disregarding the story of the high school reunion, which did not stimulate my mind in any aspect, there were four characters. The two mice were Sniff and Scurry. It was these mice that adapted more quickly to change and reached the New Cheese first when compared to the other two characters, the little people Hem and Haw. Johnson therefore allowed his audience to reference the mice as role models. However, it is unhealthy for the audience to be led to such a belief. Although they react quickly to change, the two mice Sniff and Scurry depended on one another to find the Cheese. They were not self-sufficient. Johnson may have been trying to convey the importance of teamwork, but that concept was never mentioned in the story. Another fatal aspect of misleading the audience to aspire to encorporate the mice's work/life ethic into their lives is the reality that people are not mice. People can experience feelings such as joy, love, and most notably, comfort. I've already asserted that people find happiness in comfort. Comfort is the most applicable in this situation because comfort is, essentially, the absence of change and, in turn, freedom from stress. The mice lived an uncomfortable life. They did not trust comfort. Sniff and Scurry were consistently

and relentlessly seeking out change. Therefore, they were not capable of enjoying the Cheese and finding happiness in the Cheese. The extent to which the Cheese stimulated them was brief sedaition. Again, it is unhealthy for a person to live a life such as this.

It is my belief that human beings should not share the same actions as the mice. If one's ultimate goal is happiness, then one should find comfort in having the Cheese. Continuous change does not apply to people and as such, a person does not need to constatly seek out change. To qualify my previous statement, I will first outline the two distinct variations of change that are commonly referred

to and are underlying themes in Johnson's text. The first is continious. Continuous change is an ongoing process, a change that is constantly evolving. In opposition, an episodic change is discontinuous. (Grady) In reality, both changes might have their respective positions. However, humans don't exist in reality; they only exist in their own perception of reality. We are only capable of interpreting and understanding what we perceive

through our senses. Life is simply a progression of opportunities, many episodic changes varying in size. This is true because it is not possible for humans to continuously perceive and respond to every aspect of a changing reality. The significance in qualifying the absence of continuous