After our group discussion regarding reading this piece of text, it is clear to see that this was written by somebody in a labouring job (blue collar) and not an office worker (white collar). The name of the book's title, 'The Case of Working with your Hands', along with the chapter we read, 'The Separation of Thinking from Doing' is clearly derived from the authors background. An opposite perspective to that of last week with Paul Mason.
Matthew Crawford makes a point about, as we get older as a human race, each generation becomes more and more stupid because we become increasingly narrow minded. This links back to the Facebook article a few weeks ago. As a generation, we are now stuck to our phones, wanting to feel connected, technology 'educates and informs' us with these personalised news feeds which was discussed in a previous blog, this then leads to us becoming very narrow minded as we as a 'technologically evolved generation' only read what we are interested in rather than the information we need to know about. Separating the thinking from the doing in the workplace degrades and simplifies jobs which are carried out by skilled craftsmen, they are now being 'dumbed' down by machinery put in place to replace the labourers which in turn, undermines the working class which will go on eventually to undermine the middle class meaning no job is safe from this 'process'. By saying we are getting more stupid with each generation, Crawford means that skilled crafts are being lost with each generation as technology takes over. Eventually, wood workers wont exist as machines will take over, the same goes for any trade in his eyes, bricklayers, locksmiths... soon all crafts will be taken over by 'cheaper' and processed machinery.
Crawford talks about the 'production line' and how mass machinery has changed the way we work. Technology has allowed for mass production to heavily speed up the finished product, he calls it a 'labour sausage'. Workers were getting frustrated at being a tiny cog in a much larger wheel of repetitive work on the line, these workers would then go on to leave and look for a more satisfying job. From this, Ford took a chance to increase the wages of its labourers, which turned out to be a great move by them because the production turnover doubled due to workers feeling appreciated which resulted in them working harder, meaning they could sell more cars. By having a better turnover meant more money for Ford and therefore more money to hire more staff and so on... The cycle would be endless.
This then destroyed Ford's competitors and made sure that there was no alternative way of working, so that staff couldn't leave as opposed to wouldn't leave. Competition companies couldn't match Ford's wage outlay so workers couldn't leave Ford to go elsewhere because they pay would automatically go down. These workers were now on higher wages and started to see these cars as realistic acquisitions due to their higher incomes after the wage increases. This would lead them to live above their means with this new salary. Ford would 'offer' a deal to their staff in which paid instalments would be the best way of workers buying their own car, racking up debts amongst staff in their own company. Owing debt, the workers would then 'need' to stay in that company rather than look elsewhere and Ford then had workers who where tied down and unable to look for better paid work elsewhere. Only one winner in this story!!! People don't like to admit it, but money is everything.
Linking this to architecture, if I'm honest, isn't easy. I think in the real world this would be the same process with developers taking out loans to help fund their proposals.
Matthew Crawford makes a point about, as we get older as a human race, each generation becomes more and more stupid because we become increasingly narrow minded. This links back to the Facebook article a few weeks ago. As a generation, we are now stuck to our phones, wanting to feel connected, technology 'educates and informs' us with these personalised news feeds which was discussed in a previous blog, this then leads to us becoming very narrow minded as we as a 'technologically evolved generation' only read what we are interested in rather than the information we need to know about. Separating the thinking from the doing in the workplace degrades and simplifies jobs which are carried out by skilled craftsmen, they are now being 'dumbed' down by machinery put in place to replace the labourers which in turn, undermines the working class which will go on eventually to undermine the middle class meaning no job is safe from this 'process'. By saying we are getting more stupid with each generation, Crawford means that skilled crafts are being lost with each generation as technology takes over. Eventually, wood workers wont exist as machines will take over, the same goes for any trade in his eyes, bricklayers, locksmiths... soon all crafts will be taken over by 'cheaper' and processed machinery.
Crawford talks about the 'production line' and how mass machinery has changed the way we work. Technology has allowed for mass production to heavily speed up the finished product, he calls it a 'labour sausage'. Workers were getting frustrated at being a tiny cog in a much larger wheel of repetitive work on the line, these workers would then go on to leave and look for a more satisfying job. From this, Ford took a chance to increase the wages of its labourers, which turned out to be a great move by them because the production turnover doubled due to workers feeling appreciated which resulted in them working harder, meaning they could sell more cars. By having a better turnover meant more money for Ford and therefore more money to hire more staff and so on... The cycle would be endless.
This then destroyed Ford's competitors and made sure that there was no alternative way of working, so that staff couldn't leave as opposed to wouldn't leave. Competition companies couldn't match Ford's wage outlay so workers couldn't leave Ford to go elsewhere because they pay would automatically go down. These workers were now on higher wages and started to see these cars as realistic acquisitions due to their higher incomes after the wage increases. This would lead them to live above their means with this new salary. Ford would 'offer' a deal to their staff in which paid instalments would be the best way of workers buying their own car, racking up debts amongst staff in their own company. Owing debt, the workers would then 'need' to stay in that company rather than look elsewhere and Ford then had workers who where tied down and unable to look for better paid work elsewhere. Only one winner in this story!!! People don't like to admit it, but money is everything.
Linking this to architecture, if I'm honest, isn't easy. I think in the real world this would be the same process with developers taking out loans to help fund their proposals.
Comments
Post a Comment