Workaholism, Leisure and Pleasure
Workaholism, Leisure and Pleasure
By:
Sam Vaknin,
Ph.D.
Malignant Self Love - Buy the Book -
Click HERE!!!
Relationships with Abusive Narcissists -
Buy the e-Books - Click
HERE!!!
The WebSam Vaknin
Sites
READ THIS: Scroll down to review a complete list of the
articles - Click on the blue-coloured
text!
Bookmark this Page - and SHARE IT with Others!
In his book, "A Farewell to Alms" (Princeton University Press,
2007), Gregory Clark, an economic historian at the University of California,
Davis, suggests that downward social mobility in England caused the Industrial
Revolution in the early years of the 19th century. As the offspring of peasants
died off of hunger and disease, the numerous and cosseted descendants of the
British upper middle classes took over their jobs.
These newcomers infused their work and family life with the
values that made their luckier forefathers wealthy and prominent. Above all,
they introduced into their new environment Max Weber's Protestant work ethic:
leisure is idleness, toil is good, workaholism is the best. As Clark put it:
“Thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work were becoming values for
communities that previously had been spendthrift, impulsive, violent and leisure
loving.”
Such religious veneration of hard labor resulted in a remarkable
increase in productivity that allowed Britain (and, later, its emulators the
world over) to escape the
Malthusian Trap. Production began to outstrip population growth.
But the pendulum seems to have swung back. Leisure is again both
fashionable and desirable.
The official working week in France has being reduced to 35
hours a week (though the French are now tinkering with it). In most countries in
the world, it is limited to 45 hours a week. The trend during the last century
seems to be unequivocal: less work, more play.
Yet, what may be true for blue collar workers
or state employees - is not necessarily so for white collar
members of the liberal professions. It is not rare for these
people - lawyers, accountants, consultants, managers,
academics - to put in 80 hour weeks.
The phenomenon is so
widespread and its social consequences so damaging that it
has acquired the unflattering nickname workaholism, a combination of
the words "work" and "alcoholism". Family
life is disrupted, intellectual horizons narrow, the consequences
to the workaholic's health are severe: fat, lack of exercise,
stress - all take their lethal toll. Classified as "alpha" types,
workaholics suffer three times as many heart attacks as their
peers.
But what are the social and economic roots of
this phenomenon?
Put succinctly, it is the outcome of the
blurring of boundaries between work and leisure. This distinction between time
dedicated to labour and time spent in the pursuit of one's
hobbies - was so clear for thousands of years that its
gradual disappearance is one of the most important and profound
social changes in human history.
A host of other shifts in the character of
work and domestic environments of humans converged to produce
this momentous change. Arguably the most important was the
increase in labour mobility and the fluid nature of the very concept of work and
the workplace.
The transitions from agriculture to industry, then to
services, and now to the knowledge society, increased the mobility of the
workforce. A farmer is the least mobile. His means of production are fixed, his
produce mostly consumed locally - especially in places which lack proper
refrigeration, food preservation, and transportation.
A marginal group of people became nomad-traders. This group
exploded in size with the advent of the industrial revolution. True, the bulk of
the workforce was still immobile and affixed to the production floor. But raw
materials and finished products travelled long distances to faraway markets.
Professional services were needed and the professional manager, the lawyer, the
accountant, the consultant, the trader, the broker - all emerged as both
parasites feeding off the production processes and the indispensable oil on its
cogs.
The protagonists of the services society were no longer
geographically dependent. They rendered their services to a host of
geographically distributed "employers" in a variety of ways. This trend
accelerated today, with the advent of the information and knowledge revolution.
Knowledge is not geography-dependent. It is easily
transferable across boundaries. It is cheaply reproduced. Its ephemeral quality
gives it non-temporal and non-spatial qualities. The locations of the
participants in the economic interactions of this new age are transparent and
immaterial.
These trends converged with increased
mobility of people, goods and data (voice, visual, textual and
other). The twin revolutions of transportation and telecommunications really
reduced the world to a global village. Phenomena like commuting to work and
multinationals were first made possible.
Facsimile messages, electronic mail, other forms of digital
data, the Internet - broke not only physical barriers but also temporal ones.
Today, virtual offices are not only spatially virtual - but also temporally so.
This means that workers can collaborate not only across continents but also
across time zones. They can leave their work for someone else to continue in an
electronic mailbox, for instance.
These technological advances precipitated
the transmutation of the very concepts of "work" and "workplace".
The three Aristotelian dramatic
unities no longer applied. Work could be performed in different places, not
simultaneously, by workers who worked part time whenever it
suited them best.
Flextime and work from home replaced commuting (much more so in the Anglo-Saxon countries,
but they have always been the harbingers of change). This fitted squarely into
the social fragmentation which characterizes today's world: the disintegration
of previously cohesive social structures, such as the nuclear (not to mention
the extended) family.
All this was neatly wrapped in the ideology of individualism,
presented as a private case of capitalism and liberalism. People were encouraged
to feel and behave as distinct, autonomous units. The perception of individuals
as islands replaced the former perception of humans as cells in an organism.
This trend was coupled with - and enhanced
by - unprecedented successive multi-annual rises in
productivity and increases in world trade. New management techniques, improved production
technologies, innovative inventory control methods, automatization,
robotization, plant modernization, telecommunications (which
facilitates more efficient transfers of information), even new
design concepts - all helped bring this about.
But productivity gains made humans redundant. No amount of
retraining could cope with the incredible rate of technological change. The more technologically advanced the country
- the higher its structural
unemployment (i.e., the level of unemployment attributable to changes in the
very structure of the market).
In Western Europe, it shot up from 5-6% of the
workforce to 9% in one decade. One way to manage this flood of
ejected humans was to cut the workweek. Another was to support a
large population of unemployed. The third, more tacit, way was to
legitimize leisure time. Whereas the Jewish and Protestant work
ethics condemned idleness in the past - the current ethos
encouraged people to contribute to the economy through "self realization",
to pursue their hobbies and
non-work related interests, and to express the entire range of their
personality and potential.
This served to blur the historical differences
between work and leisure. They are both commended now. Work, like leisure, became less and less structured and rigid.
It is often pursued from home. The territorial separation between "work-place"
and "home turf" was essentially eliminated.
The emotional leap was only a question of time. Historically,
people went to work because they had to. What they did after work was designated
as "pleasure". Now, both work and leisure were pleasurable - or torturous
- or
both. Some people began to enjoy their work so much that it fulfilled the
functions normally reserved to leisure time. They are the workaholics. Others
continued to hate work - but felt disorientated in the new, leisure-like
environment. They were not taught to deal with too much free time, a lack of
framework, no clear instructions what to do, when, with whom and to what end.
Socialization processes and socialization
agents (the State, parents, educators, employers) were not geared
- nor did they regard it as their responsibility
- to train the population to cope with free time and with the
baffling and dazzling variety of options on offer.
We can classify economies and markets using
the work-leisure axis.
Those that maintain the old distinction
between (hated) work and (liberating) leisure - are doomed
to perish or, at best, radically lag behind. This is because they
will not have developed a class of workaholics big enough to move
the economy ahead.
It takes workaholics to create, maintain and expand
capitalism. As opposed to common opinion, people, mostly, do not do business
because they are interested in money (the classic profit motive). They do what
they do because they like the Game of Business, its twists and turns, the
brainstorming, the battle of brains, subjugating markets, the ups and downs, the
excitement. All this has nothing to do with money. It has everything to do with
psychology. True, money serves to measure success - but it is an abstract meter,
akin to monopoly money. It is proof shrewdness, wit, foresight, stamina, and
insight.
Workaholics identify business with pleasure.
They are hedonistic and narcissistic. They are entrepreneurial. They are the managers
and the businessmen and the scientists and the journalists.
They are the movers, the shakers, the pushers, the energy.
Without workaholics, we would have ended up with "social" economies,
with strong disincentives to work. In these economies of
"collective ownership" people go to work because they
have to. Their main preoccupation is how to avoid it and to sabotage the workplace.
They
harbour negative feelings. Slowly, they wither and die (professionally)
- because no one can live long in hatred and deceit. Joy is
an essential ingredient of survival.
And this is the true meaning of
capitalism: the abolition of the artificial distinction between work and leisure and the pursuit of
both with the same zeal and satisfaction. Above all, the (increasing)
liberty to do it whenever, wherever, with whomever you choose.
Unless and until Homo East Europeansis changes his state of
mind - there will be no real transition. Because transition
happens in the human mind much before it takes form in reality.
It is no use to dictate, to legislate, to finance, to cajole, or to
bribe. It was Marx (a
devout non-capitalist) who noted the causative connexion between reality (being)
and consciousness. How right was he. Witness the prosperous USA and compare it
to the miserable failure that was communism.
From an Interview I Granted
Question: In your article, Workaholism, Leisure and
Pleasure, you describe how the line between leisure and work has blurred over
time. What has allowed this to happen? What effect does this blurring have on
the struggle to achieve a work-life balance?
Answer: The distinction between work and leisure times is a novelty. Even 70
years ago, people still worked 16 hours a day and, many of them, put in 7 days a
week. More than 80% of the world's population still live this way. To the
majority of people in the developing countries, work was and is life. They would
perceive the contrast between "work" and "life" to be both artificial and
perplexing. Sure, they dedicate time to their families and communities. But
there is little leisure left to read, nurture one's hobbies, introspect, or
attend classes.
Leisure time emerged as a social phenomenon in the twentieth century and mainly
in the industrialized, rich, countries.
Workaholism - the blurring of boundaries between leisure time and time dedicated
to work - is, therefore, simply harking back to the recent past. It is the
inevitable outcome of a confluence of a few developments:
(1) Labour mobility increased. A farmer is attached to his land. His means
of production are fixed. His markets are largely local. An industrial worker is
attached to his factory. His means of production are fixed. Workers in the
services or, more so, in the knowledge industries are attached only to their
laptops. They are much more itinerant. They render their services to a host of
geographically distributed "employers" in a variety of ways.
(2) The advent of the information and knowledge revolutions lessened the
worker's dependence on a "brick and mortar" workplace and a "flesh and blood"
employer. Cyberspace replaces real space and temporary or contractual work are
preferred to tenure and corporate "loyalty".
Knowledge is not geography-dependent. It is
portable and cheaply reproduced. The geographical locations of the participants
in the economic interactions of this new age are transparent and immaterial.
(3) The mobility of goods and data (voice, visual, textual and other)
increased exponentially. The twin revolutions of transportation and
telecommunications reduced the world to a global village. Phenomena like
commuting to work and globe-straddling multinationals were first made possible.
The car, the airplane, facsimile messages, electronic mail, other forms of
digital data, the Internet - demolished many physical and temporal barriers.
Workers today often collaborate in virtual offices across continents and time
zones. Flextime and work from home replaced commuting. The very concepts of
"workplace" and "work" were rendered fluid, if not obsolete.
(4) The dissolution of the classic workplace is part of a larger and
all-pervasive disintegration of other social structures, such as the nuclear
family. Thus, while the choice of work-related venues and pursuits increased -
the number of social alternatives to work declined.
The extended and nuclear family was denuded of
most of its traditional functions. Most communities are tenuous and in constant
flux. Work is the only refuge from an incoherent, fractious, and dysfunctional
world. Society is anomic and work has become a route of escapism.
(5) The ideology of individualism is increasingly presented as a private
case of capitalism and liberalism. People are encouraged to feel and behave as
distinct, autonomous units. The metaphor of individuals as islands substituted
for the perception of humans as cells in an organism. Malignant individualism
replaced communitarianism. Pathological
narcissism replaced self-love and empathy.
(6) The last few decades witnessed unprecedented successive rises in
productivity and an expansion of world trade. New management techniques,
improved production technologies, innovative inventory control methods,
automatization, robotization, plant modernization, telecommunications (which
facilitates more efficient transfers of information), even new design concepts -
all helped bring workaholism about by placing economic values in the forefront.
The Protestant work ethic ran amok. Instead of working in order to live - people
began living in order to work.
Workaholics are rewarded with faster promotion
and higher income. Workaholism is often - mistakenly - identified with
entrepreneurship, ambition, and efficiency. Yet, really it is merely an
addiction.
The absurd is that workaholism is a direct result of the culture of leisure.
As workers are made redundant by technology-driven productivity gains - they are
encouraged to engage in leisure activities. Leisure substitutes for work. The
historical demarcation between work and leisure is lost. Both are commended for
their contribution to the economy. Work, like leisure, is less and less
structured and rigid. Both work and leisure are often pursued from home and are
often experienced as pleasurable.
The territorial separation between "work-place"
and "home turf" is essentially eliminated.
Some people enjoy their work so much that it fulfils the functions normally
reserved to leisure time. They are the workaholics. Others continue to hate work
- but feel disorientated in the new leisure-rich environment. They are not
taught to deal with too much free and unstructured time, with a lack of clearly
delineated framework, without clear instructions as to what to do, when, with
whom, and to what end.
The state, parents, educators, employers - all
failed to train the population to cope with free time and with choice. Both
types - the workaholic and the "normal" person baffled by too much leisure - end
up sacrificing their leisure time to their work-related activities.
Alas, it takes workaholics to create, maintain and expand capitalism. People
don't work or conduct business only because they are after the money. They enjoy
their work or their business. They find pleasure in it. And this is the true
meaning of capitalism: the abolition of the artificial distinction between work
and leisure and the pursuit of both with the same zeal and satisfaction. Above
all, the (increasing) liberty to do so whenever, wherever, with whomever you
choose.
Also Read:
Entrepreneurship and Workaholism
Copyright Notice
This material is copyrighted.
Free, unrestricted use is allowed on a non
commercial basis.
The author's name and a link to this Website
must be incorporated in any
reproduction of the material for any use and by any means.
Go
Back to Home Page!
Internet:
A Medium or a Message?
Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited
Philosophical Musings
Write to me: palma@unet.com.mk
or
narcissisticabuse-owner@yahoogroups.com
|
|
