Work, Labor, and Play

yifei

Work, Labor, and Play

   So far as I know, Miss Hannah Arendt was the first person to define the essential difference between work and labor. To be happy, a man must feel, firstly, free and, secondly, important. He cannot be really happy if he is compelled by society to do what he does not enjoy doing, or if what he enjoys doing is ignored by society as of no value or importance. In a society where slavery in the strict sense has been abolished, the sign that what a man does is of social value is that he is paid money to do it, but a laborer today can rightly be called a wage slave. A man is a laborer if the job society offers him is of no interest to himself but he is compelled to take it by the necessity of earning a living and supporting his family.
   The antithesis to labor is play. When we play a game, we enjoy what we are doing, otherwise we should not play it, but it is a purely private activity; society could not care less whether we play it or not.
   Between labor and play stands work. A man is a worker if he is personally interested in the job which society pays him to do; what from the point of view of society is necessary labor is from his own point of view voluntary play. Whether a job is to be classified as labor or work depends, not on the job itself, but on the tastes of the individual who undertakes it. The difference does not, for example, coincide with the difference between a manual and a mental job; a gardener or a cobbler may be a worker, a bank clerk a laborer. Which a man is can be seen from his attitude toward leisure. To a worker, leisure means simply the hours he needs to relax and rest in order to work efficiently. He is therefore more likely to take too little leisure than too much; workers die of coronaries and forget their wives' birthdays. To the laborer, on the other hand, leisure means freedom from compulsion, so that it is natural for him to imagine that the fewer hours he has to spend laboring, and the more hours he is free to play, the better.
   What percentage of the population in a modern technological society are, like myself, in the fortunate position of being workers? At a guess I would say sixteen per cent, and I do not think that figure is likely to get bigger in the future.
   Technology and the division of labor have done two things: by eliminating in many fields the need for special strength or skill, they have made a very large number of paid occupations which formerly were enjoyable work into boring labor, and by increasing productivity they have reduced the number of necessary laboring hours. It is already possible to imagine a society in which the majority of the population, that is to say, its laborers, will have almost as much leisure as in ear5lier times was enjoyed by the aristocracy. When one recalls how aristocracies in the past actually behaved, the prospect is not cheerful. Indeed, the problem of dealing with boredom may be even more difficult for such a future mass society than it was for aristocracies. The latter, for example, ritualized their time; there was a season to shoot grouse, a season to spend in town, etc. The masses are more likely to replace an unchanging ritual by fashion which it will be in the economic interest of certain people to change as often as possible. Again, the masses cannot go in for hunting, for very soon there would be no animals left to hunt. For other aristocratic amusements like gambling, dueling, and warfare, it may be only too easy to find equivalents in dangerous driving, drug-taking, and senseless acts of violence. Workers seldom commit acts of violence, because they can put their aggression into their work, be it physical like the work of a smith, or mental like the work of a scientist or an artist. The role of aggression into their work, be it physical like the work of a smith, or mental like the work of a scientist or an artist. The role of aggression in mental work is aptly expressed by the phrase \"getting one's teeth into a problem.\"


工作，劳作和娱乐

   据我所知，汉纳·阿伦特小姐是第一个给予工作和劳作之间本质区别的人。一个人要高兴，首先要感到自由，其次是感到重要。如果他被社会强迫做他不愿做的事，或者他喜欢做的事被社会忽视，被认为无价值和不重要，他就不会真正高兴。在一个从严格意义上来说奴隶制已被废除的社会里，一个人所做的事情具有社会价值的樗是他的工作得到了报酬。但今天的劳动者可以恰当地称为薪金的奴隶。如果他对社会提供给他的工作不感兴趣，但出于谋生和养家而被迫接受，这个人就称为劳作者。
   与劳作相对的是玩，当玩耍时我们在享受，否则是不会去玩的，不过这纯粹是私人活动，社会对你玩或不玩是极不关心的。
   处于劳作和玩之间的是工作。如果一个人对社会付酬给他的工作感兴趣的话，他就是工作者；从社会的观点看，工作是必要的劳作也是个人心目中自愿的玩。例如：这个区别不同于体力劳动和脑力劳动之间的区别；一个园艺工人或一个补鞋匠可能是工作者，一个银行职员可能是劳作者。一个人属于哪一种可以从他对休闲的态度看出来。对于工作者来说，休闲只是他为了有效地工作而放松和休息的时间，所以他可能少休息而不是多休闲。工作者可能致于冠状动脉血栓症，忘记妻子的生日。反之，对于劳作者来说，休闲意味着从强迫中的摆脱，因此他们会很自然地想花在工作上的时间越少，自由自在玩的时间越多就越好。
   像我这样，幸运地成为工作者的人现代技术社会里占多大比例呢？我猜测为60%并且我认为这个数字将来不可能变大。
   技术和劳动分工已产生了两点影响：通过在许多领域里减少对特殊力量和技巧的需求，它们使大量曾经愉快的有偿劳动变成了使人厌烦的工作，通过提高提高生产率减少了一些必要的劳动时间。已经有可能去设想这样一个社会：大多数人，即劳作者，将拥有几乎与早期贵州所享有的一样多的休闲。当一个人回忆过去贵族的所作所为，前景就不会乐观了。的确对于这样一个未来群众社会，应付无聊的问题比起来贵族们可能更困难。例如：后者使他们的时间仪式化，有射猎松鸡的季节、有镇上度日的季节等。群众更可能用时尚取代千篇一律的程式，而尽可能经常地改变时尚也符合某些人的经济利益。同样，群众也不能都有打猎的爱好，因为很快就会没有动物可供射猎。对于其他贵族娱乐活动，像赌博、决斗和战争，可能很容易在危险驾驶、吸毒和愚蠢的暴力行为中找到等价物。工作者很少有暴力行为，因为他们能把进取心放在他们的工作上，不管是铁匠从事的体力劳动，还是科学家或艺术家从事的脑力劳动。\"把牙到某个问题中\"这条习语很贴切地表示出进取心在智力工作中的作用。