My latest ed-op article for Gair Rhydd, which is in the current issue:
Work: a word to strike terror in the heart of any student. (Particularly into that of a humanities student like myself, since I supposedly only have around half an hour of lectures a month). But should we really have such an aversion to work?
We’re still reeling from all the changes from the Industrial Revolution, let alone the electronic revolution of recent years. Although the progress we have made over the last couple of centuries has brought massive benefits, we have adapted badly to the resulting changes in patterns of work. Both our culture and our practices of work are seriously flawed.
For many of us, work is nothing more than a necessary evil. We might talk about the “work/life balance”, but the phrase assumes that “work” and “life” are two separate areas. We often view work merely as the means to the end of our real purpose of leisure, rather than a part of life that is satisfying in itself.
In one Dilbert cartoon, he is informed that “Enjoying your work is tantamount to stealing from the company”. But finding our work satisfying and enjoyable, whether it be our academic studies or our careers, should not be seen as something geeky or weird, but the ideal for everyone everywhere, even though in practice it won’t always be possible.
How do we find purpose in our lives and in our work? There are a couple of basic possibilities. Firstly, we can see ourselves as determined to be, either by our categories, such as class, gender, or by our natures, where we have a fixed inherent destiny. But both these leave us not as real human persons, but just as pawns in a cosmic machine.
At the other extreme, we have existentialism, where we create our own identities by an effort of will. But even if we can muster the will to do this, we’re still left with the question of what do we want to do? All sorts of self-help books offer to help us invent ourselves by what hobbies we have, what we wear, what we eat, and so on, and rather than inventing ourselves, we all too easily become prey to the latest fad.
Is there another way, between determinism and existentialism? A number of writers and commentators, such as Os Guinness in the book “The Call”, have suggested that we need to recover the concepts of “calling” and “vocation”. The Protestant ethic that drove the last few hundred years of Western progress sees our work and activity not as something determined either by nature or nurture, nor as something we have to create by ourselves. Rather, we choose to put our gifts and abilities to use in the service of those around us and of the God who makes us and calls us.
Whatever you think of its religious origins and the nature of the one who calls us, there is much to appreciate in this model. We both have real choice and responsibility, but act within the context of support and relationships with those around us. Work is a fundamental part of what it means to be human, rather than a distraction from it.
Of course, work often isn’t enjoyable. There are many tasks in life that are just dull, unsatisfying or just plain unpleasant. It isn’t just our attitudes to work that needs to change, but work itself. We need to radically rethink and restructure our patterns of habits of work, both as individuals and as a society, to make work something constructive and positive.
One aspect of our culture that we perhaps need to rethink is our lemming-like rush towards a 24-hour society. While it may be convenient to be able to go to Tescos at 3am on a Sunday morning, couldn’t you just plan your time slightly better? With just a 9-to-5 job becoming ever more unusual, there is less and less of a shared time which most people have off work. When people are working every hour of every day, you don’t have a point in the week where you know you can get together, and most people will have the time free. Without shared patterns of work and leisure, creating a cohesive society becomes ever harder.
Rather than balancing “work” and “life”, we need to understand that work is part of life. Work is a worthwhile part of who we are in its own right, and so should be taken seriously. But it is only one part of who we are, and to be properly human means also giving a proper place to rest, to relationships, to community and leisure. But it isn’t just the amount we work that needs to change.
We need to take a stand against working practices that dehumanise and destroy the possibility of family and community. The Industrial Revolution made a sharp division between paid employment and the home the norm, and we have largely failed to prevent that disrupting our social fabrics. New technology like email should be used not to replace real human contact, but to free us up to deal with one another. Rather than impersonal cubicles and targets, we need a change in culture where the human and personal outcome of our practices is as important as the financial bottom line.
Far more is as stake than just job satisfaction. Many economists and commentators have long warned that without a right ethic, capitalism could collapse in on itself. One economist from the University of Singapore observed that “the decisive question for the West is its capacity to direct and discipline capitalism with an ethic strong enough to do so. I myself don’t believe the West can do it.”
Despite warnings of an “end of history” as Capitalism defeats all comers, it could still be a victim of its own success. Capitalism’s greatest nemesis is itself, as the prosperity and hedonism it produces destroys the very values of vocation, hard work, and saving up that made it a success in the first place.
We need to rediscover work as a satisfying part of life, but to put it in its place as only one part. We need to ride the wave of technological progress, turning it to the service of life and relationships rather than allowing change to overcome us in a dehumanising tide. Only then can we really know the joy of work.
