FARM: Idle work
Last week I read an interview with Tom Hodgkinson, the author of How to Be Idle and the newly published The Freedom Manifesto. When asked about the debt-wage slavery that many Americans have fallen into, Hodgkinson answered, “The new aspiration will be towards a self-controlled, creative, pleasure-filled life where the home becomes productive and we don't buy rubbish that we don't need." I think this sentence nicely sums up much of the work of agrarian writers like Wendell Berry and Gene Logsdon. Their complaint against the industrial food system isn't only that it is bad for the environment, but that in its efficiency-obsessed way it destroys the pleasure of slow and careful work.
The ideal of the farmer has long been that of hard work. But if you spend time with farmers you will find that many take leisures that many office workers don't—long lunches, time chatting at the local breakfast spot, slow manual labor that frees the mind in a way computer work could not.
I must admit that I do not take leisure enough. I have some deep-set puritan work ethics that I have only recently sought to free myself from, in large part due to the work of people like Hodgkinson and Josef Pieper. But I am trying to work at being idle to take things more slowly and be more productive.
You see leisure and idleness are not the opposites of productivity—they are, in fact, its complements. We often fill our lives with too much work, with too many activities to have the time to be truly creative and productive. And this leads to Hodgkinson's point about the productive home. If we make our money outside of the home and spend it outside of the home rather than saving it, then we become slaves to our things and the debts we took on to pay for those things. Since the industrial revolution, there has been a march to make production something that happens in factories and the home to be merely the center of consumption.
But what if we turned things around and made the home productive? What if we worked less and therefore had the time to be productive? In Peter Singer and Jim Mason's book The Ethics of What we Eat, they interview a couple who try to eat as ethical omnivores. One quote struck me: "I work so much that I need that convenience,” says Mary Ann Masarech on why she chooses the foods she does. “If I had more time on my hands, I'd probably make better ethical choices, but I would have to go out of my way, which I can't do much of right now."
Why work so much that it compromises your ethics, settling for an ethical convenience rather than what is truly good? It’s a problem I face all too often, and yet when I see it on the page it seems so absurd. Why not slow down, take more time, live in proportion to time rather than pack time full?
This past weekend I took a step toward that goal. My girlfriend came over for the day and we cooked a great deal of food: scones from scratch, naan bread, lentil stew. And along with cooking the meals for a day, we made a wheel of cheddar that is drying on a rack in my kitchen as I write, and hauled rocks and compost from my farm to my house to begin work on a new herbal tea operation I am planning for the summer. It was a slow day, yet we made enough food for a week. But it didn't feel like work—it felt like idle pleasure. I used to cook and dig in the dirt for fun as a child, and I was having fun at those same things again.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.plentymag.com/blog-mt1/mt-tb.cgi/3989









Comments
I was directed to this article from another food blog.
What a pile of well-meaning steaming dung!! "The ideal of the farmer has long been that of hard work. But if you spend time with farmers you will find that many take leisures that many office workers don't—long lunches, time chatting at the local breakfast spot, slow manual labor that frees the mind in a way computer work could not."
Sitting at the local cafe whiling away the time is a holdover from EXACTLY the industrialized model you decry. As a successful producer of 30 acres of produce for the past 15 years, the one trait that defines myself, my partners, and ALL our peers, is a wide streak of work-aholism/over-achievement.
Until the economy of food drastically changes, life producing food does NOT afford the luxury of wasting hours in the cafe or "slow" manual labor that "frees the mind" for such lofty pursuits as poetry & art. It's a lovely picture, but terribly misleading!
Posted by:Oregonfarmer |January 31, 2008 10:57 AM
I've always been a little ambivalent about this issue. But I think part of the problem stems from the notion of "work." If you like what you're doing, is it work? Or is anything that you do for more than 40 hrs a week by definition "work?"
For me, the bigger issue is the sense of time. The last couple of years in software development have been a blur.
So does the lifestyle proposed by Hodgkinson, Logsdon and this offer extend your sense of time? Some of it probably is wishful thinking, and it is questionable how completely turning your back on the economies of scale and comparative advantage could produce an un-alloyed Good.
But "The Contrarian Farmer" made a deep impression on me. Enough so that I'm arranging my affairs so that I can take a crack at that experiment. What is the alternative? Two working parents shuttling kids to daycare and feeling out of control of most things in your life?
I find Logsdon's take, in "The Contrarian Farmer," more compelling than the finger-wagging of Oregonfarmer.
Posted by:mark |February 18, 2008 12:59 PM