|
March 10, 2008
Pat Kane in the The power of play in Soundings argues that workers in post-industrial societies are moving away from the work ethic, towards more playful, but also potentially more caring, forms of activity.
The argument is based on Richard Layard's book Happiness, and Clive Hamilton's Affluenza, which both highlight how the prodigious post-war ascent in levels of GDP in the countries of the richer parts of the world has been accompanied by a steady flatlining of reported levels of happiness Beyond a certain level of income, relative to spending power, we don't get that much happier the richer we get. We may well have become more productive (both by using new technology and increasing our working hours). But the extra fruits of our labours - the consumerist model of house, car, holidays, malls, treats and toys (adult as well as childish) - do not seem to bring us greater happiness and meaning. If so, what's the point?
Tow other considerations explain the shift away from work. First, the inequalities of power and status that most of us might accept as the somewhat tedious price of working for a stable organisation are, literally, toxic and death-dealing. Secondly, thThe crisis of the work ethic is easily summed up in one sentence.Why believe in work, when it doesn't really believe in you?
All these elements add up to a general crisis of meaning and purpose, for countries whose leaders and establishments believe that the most stable social identity available comes through work.
|
This has been a theme in youth studies for a while now. People construct meaning out of the process of permanently renovating their individual indentities rather than work. The flexible work place, flexible work history and the flexible identity.
It echoes in the complaints from employers that young people expect to be the CEO after a week, and if not, they leave. Yet employers also want a casualised workforce. The one just reinforces the other. It's people who do have a 'good' work ethic who have trouble adjusting.