Matt Crawford on Working With Your Hands
Matt Crawford, a friend of TAS, has just published Shop Class as Soulcraft, a brilliant book that had its origins in the pages of The New Atlantis. This week’s Times Magazine has an essay that draws on the book, a mix of polemic and memoir that deftly draws together strands from intellectual history and the social sciences and a lot of other disciplines as well. Here is the concluding paragraph.
Ultimately it is enlightened self-interest, then, not a harangue about humility or public-spiritedness, that will compel us to take a fresh look at the trades. The good life comes in a variety of forms. This variety has become difficult to see; our field of aspiration has narrowed into certain channels. But the current perplexity in the economy seems to be softening our gaze. Our peripheral vision is perhaps recovering, allowing us to consider the full range of lives worth choosing. For anyone who feels ill suited by disposition to spend his days sitting in an office, the question of what a good job looks like is now wide open.
My dearest wish is that this book will be read by high schoolers and college students, who need it most. Jackson Lears and Richard Sennett, two of my favorite thinkers, have praised the book, as has the indispensable Rod Dreher. I also had the great pleasure of reviewing an advance copy of the book, and, to my delight, my blurb made it onto the hardcover:
“Shop Class as Soulcraft is easily the most compelling polemic since The Closing of the American Mind. Crawford offers a stunning indictment of the modern workplace, detailing the many ways it deadens our senses and saps our vitality. And he describes how our educational system has done violence to our true nature as ‘homo faber’. Better still, Crawford points in the direction of a richer, more fulfilling way of life. This is a book that will endure.”
And actually, I think I understated the case. Do yourself a favor and buy this book. One of my favorite passages from the excerpt is the following:
Everyone is rightly concerned about economic growth on the one hand or unemployment and wages on the other, but the character of work doesn’t figure much in political debate. Labor unions address important concerns like workplace safety and family leave, and management looks for greater efficiency, but on the nature of the job itself, the dominant political and economic paradigms are mute. Yet work forms us, and deforms us, with broad public consequences.
The visceral experience of failure seems to have been edited out of the career trajectories of gifted students. It stands to reason, then, that those who end up making big decisions that affect all of us don’t seem to have much sense of their own fallibility, and of how badly things can go wrong even with the best of intentions (like when I dropped that feeler gauge down into the Ninja). In the boardrooms of Wall Street and the corridors of Pennsylvania Avenue, I don’t think you’ll see a yellow sign that says “Think Safety!” as you do on job sites and in many repair shops, no doubt because those who sit on the swivel chairs tend to live remote from the consequences of the decisions they make. Why not encourage gifted students to learn a trade, if only in the summers, so that their fingers will be crushed once or twice before they go on to run the country?
There is good reason to suppose that responsibility has to be installed in the foundation of your mental equipment — at the level of perception and habit. There is an ethic of paying attention that develops in the trades through hard experience. It inflects your perception of the world and your habitual responses to it. This is due to the immediate feedback you get from material objects and to the fact that the work is typically situated in face-to-face interactions between tradesman and customer.
An economy that is more entrepreneurial, less managerial, would be less subject to the kind of distortions that occur when corporate managers’ compensation is tied to the short-term profit of distant shareholders. For most entrepreneurs, profit is at once a more capacious and a more concrete thing than this. It is a calculation in which the intrinsic satisfactions of work count — not least, the exercise of your own powers of reason.
That this idea is orthogonal to our political conversation suggests to me, at least, that our political conversation is bankrupt.
“Why not encourage gifted students to learn a trade, if only in the summers, so that their fingers will be crushed once or twice before they go on to run the country?”
Sigh. Colin Powell was a janitor at a soft drink bottling plant. Ben Bernanke worked in construction before leaving for college. Dick Cheney worked as a lineman in Wyoming. Being a laborer for a while doesn’t magically grant you some sort of blue-collar wisdom about how to run the world.
— Klug · May 25, 03:45 AM · #
Reihan, I notice you use your hands a lot when you talk.
— cw · May 25, 05:09 AM · #
I operate a lathe! A mind-lathe.
— Reihan · May 25, 06:44 PM · #
Manual labor? Feh. The real dividing ling is those who’ve lived out of their car and those who have not.
— Tony Comstock · May 25, 07:02 PM · #
I think this claim, that most people in authority are reckless, is way off base. Most corporate lawyers spend most of their time worrying about what can go wrong and how it might be prevented or provided for. And failure—bankruptcy, default, lawsuits—is a big part of our lives.
Which, admittedly, does not mean that the Hillary Clintons and Eric Holders of the world make wise or moral decisions when in power. But it’s not because their professional lives weren’t filled with caution.
— y81 · May 25, 11:38 PM · #
Look, Reihan, I feel a little small-minded making this point but: I built a bat house last weekend. I changed my oil this weekend and trued my bike wheels. I can, in fact, operate a lathe. Crawford’s ideas, I like. But the praises I’ve heard sung of this book so far are all by guys like you, who — I mean, no offense, Reihan, but do you own, say, a power drill?
— Sanjay · May 26, 12:12 AM · #
In leu of power tools, Reihan, you can substitute roasting your own coffee.
— Tony Comstock · May 26, 12:32 AM · #
I have to point out, that the ability of tradesmen to make high wages in this county has traditionally come from their ability to organize unions and bargain collectively. But conservatives have become, I am sorry to say, frankly rabid in their hatred of unions, and have been very successful in making it impossible for workers to organize to materially improve the conditions of their employment, and their lives.
— Freddie · May 26, 01:57 AM · #
Reihan, does the book tackle unions, licensing requirements, and service “Nickle and Dimed” work? The entry, though enjoyable, is strangely apolitical, as if the biggest issues facing the trades and service labor was a brain drain from DC consulting firms or graduate programs. Is the book that way too? I’m familiar with Sennett’s work on new capitalism and that too could use some hookup with labor law.
If Reihan owns a set of those angular tools that come with IKEA furniture, can that substitute for a power drill?
— Rortybomb · May 26, 02:45 AM · #
I loved the excerpt, and have pre-ordered the book. I’m as physically lazy and internet-addicted as any full-time blogger, but can’t dispute the powerful influence of growing up on manual jobs. I can’t imagine having gone through my teens without that priceless time to think and imagine.
— David Sessions · May 26, 05:38 AM · #
This morning brings the startling and sad news that over the weekend boat designer and philosopher (he wouldn’t call himself that, but it’s apt) Phil C. Bolger took his life. I’ve built several of his boats smaller boats, and consider his approach to boat design foundational to my divining how I could make the films I wanted to make, on the slender resources available for such excursions.
Consider your education incomplete if you have not read Instant Boats written by PCB’s longtime collaborator Harold Payson, and Boats with an Open Mind a collection of essays by the man himself. Conservatives should especially appreciate the breadth and depth of PCB’s historical knowledge and his adaptation of “traditional wisdom” to modern concerns and materials. This is one of my favorite passages, from chapter 70, Loose Moose II, a design for a 38 foot plywood square sectioned, live-aboard bluewater passage-maker:
“Staring with the two desks, some more ambitious suggestions crept in, such as a proposed voyage from the Moselle in France to a West Indian Island, via the Rhone, the Mediterranean, and the Canary Islands. We didn’t delude ourselves that a Bolger Box, even a long one, was the best possible vehicle for this enterprise; only that is was capable, that the modesty of the investment advance the plan, and that the box was ideal for the in-port living between passages. The shallow and compact boat could take choice berths not accessible to more conventional cruisers.”
“I don’t have much respect for the architecture of Le Corbusier, but his “machine for living” concept is stimulating if you study, more than he ever did, how people can, should, and do live. If you try to disguise a machine like this, say by raking the ends or breaking the sheer, you produce a box with unconvincing concessions to style that only emphasize that you’re ashamed of it.
“I’ve been thinking that one of these boats might make a surface for a mural painting — say, an arctic seascape on the starboard side and a tropical beach to port. Or a fleet of vessels, or a crowd of people. The long, horizontal shape fits subjects hard to adapt to the usual proportions of a picture frame. The frame itself, the boat’s profile, is suggestive. As a child I was fascinated by the carved and gilded Victorian frames on the painting in my grandfather’s parlor. It’s a healthy exercise to call up from memory the art objects that I enjoyed before I was taught by academic critics to despise them.”
After 9/11 I found myself reading Steven Pressfield’s “Gates of Fire”, and somehow in the combination of reading about hoplite battle tactics and my despair, I adjusted my view on suicide – from seeing it as a person choice to something more communally oriented. Provocative to the end, PCB has once again invited me to examine my assumptions. Through my grief, I am trying hard to see his last act as yet another of the many of his gifts he left us through his life and his work.
— Tony Comstock · May 26, 02:36 PM · #
Rortybomb, you’re right. The book is pretty apolitical in the public-policy sense. Reihan’s blurb comparing it to Bloom’s book is actually right on, both substantively and, I predict, how the book is likely to be misread. That is, it’s primarily a book about education – the conceptions of human thriving that are favored and those that are neglected by educators.
— Matt Feeney · May 26, 03:04 PM · #
The book is pretty apolitical in the public-policy sense.
Too bad. It would be a nice jumping off point for us to have a more expansive discussion about unions. While I’m obviously biased, I have just found the conservative reaction to unions to often be so one-note and uncompromising that discussion is impossible.
— Freddie · May 26, 03:07 PM · #
Actually, the best paragraph in the Times article this past weekend was the one about middle managers, the paragraph that begins “Contrast the experience of being a middle manager.” What caught me about it was the way it exactly describes my current (short) experience in a state civil service. It explains why very little of substance gets accomplished by government. It is soul-deadening.
That said, I like Crawford’s thought. A lot.
Can I say I “work with my hands” if I spend all day using my fingers to type on a computer keyboard?
— Kurt · May 27, 01:35 PM · #