The block of text, below, is from philosopher Matthew B. Crawford's thoughtful book on the topic of 'work,' Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work. While the quote, here, concerns young people, I think that it can easily concern people more broadly, very much including homeless men seeking to rejoin the workforce in an occupation that will fully absorb their interest, turn them away from their addictions, and provide a sound basis for meaning in their lives [Emphases in the quote are mine.]:
Matthew B. Crawford is currently a fellow at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture at the University of Virginia.
The basic antagonism of economic life: work is toilsome and necessarily serves someone else’s interests. That’s why you get paid. Thus chastened, we may ask the proper question: what is it that we really want for a--------------------------------------------------------------------------------youngperson when we give them vocational advice? The only creditable answer, it seems to me, is one that avoids utopianism while keeping an eye on the human good: work that engages the human capacities as fully as possible. What I have tried to show is that this humane and commonsensical answer goes against the central imperative of capitalism, which assiduously partitions thinking from doing. What is to be done? I offer no program, only an observation that might be of interest to anyone called upon to give guidanceto the young.
Since manual work has been subject to routinization for over a century, the nonroutinized manual work that remains, outside the confines of the factory, would seem to be resistant to much further routinization. There still appear developments around the margins; for example, in the last twenty years pre-fabricated roof trusses have eliminated some of the more challenging elements from the jobs of framers who work for large tract developers, and pre-hung doors have done the same for finish carpenters generally. But still, the physical circumstances of the jobs performed by carpenters, plumbers, and auto mechanics vary too much for them to be executed by idiots; they require circumspection and adaptability. One feels like a man, not a cog in a machine. The trades are then a natural home for anyone who would live by his own powers, free not only of deadening abstraction, but also of the insidious hopes and rising insecurities that seem to be endemic in our current economic life. This is the stoic ideal.
So what advice should one give to ayoungperson? By all means, go to college. In fact, approach college in the spirit of craftsmanship, going deep into liberal arts and sciences. In the summers, learn a manual trade. You’re likely to be less damaged, and quite possibly better paid, as an independent tradesman than as a cubicle-dwelling tender of information systems. To heed such advice would require a certain contrarian streak, as it entails rejecting a life course mapped out by others as obligatory and inevitable.
Matthew B. Crawford is currently a fellow at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture at the University of Virginia.
Comments