Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Theory of the Leisure Class

Posted on by

Author: Thorstein Veblen was an American sociologist and economist born in Wisconsin in the year 1857. He was raised in a prosperous Norwegian household by his two parents, and he thrived as from an early age they instilled solid life values and beliefs in him. He studied at multiple prestigious colleges around the country. He wrote his most famous work The Theory of the Leisure Class, when he was in his forties.

Context: This piece was published in 1899, during a period known as the Gilded Age. This was a time of great economic expansion in the United States, leading Veblen to write about how the profits were being spent.

Language: Veblen uses very critical language in this piece, as he is going directly after a singular group of people. His tone can be categorized as somewhat flippant towards the leisure class, although the piece is an excellent example of how prose can be put together. He knows exactly what he is trying to say and uses a specific tone and set of words to get his point across.

Audience: Veblen is writing to a the educated world as a whole. He is giving his thoughts to anyone who would like to read them, especially the people to whom he is writing about (leisure class). He wants his ideas to be seen, debated, and taken into account by the populace as a whole.

Intent: Veblen wanted to break down the society into the people who spend superfluously and those who are rational and understand how to be fiscally responsible. He wanted to show how those extravagant people were actually hurting their country and themselves more than they were helping (waste=bad).

Message: Veblen put the leisure class out on a line in this piece. He showed how their flamboyance was a detriment to themselves and the society around them as it started new negative trends that the rest of the populace would then adopt. His main point was that it was poor form to waste materials (even if you had the financial means to do so) because it doesn’t help anyone in the long run – it just makes you look like a fool.

Leisure Class

Posted on by

Author: Thorstein Veblen, born in 1857, was a respected American sociologist and economist. He was raised in Nerstrand, Minnesota by successful Norwegian parents who accentuated the values of hard work and education while contributing to his disdain for lavishness. He began his formal studies in economics at the age of seventeen and worked under the tutelage of many prominent economists.
Context: Veblen’s renowned economic treatise, The Theory of the Leisure Class, was published in the United States in 1899. The Gilded Age, a period of economic growth and increased immigration in the U.S., was just reaching its conclusion. Veblen accused the leisure class of squandering the advantages of the Gilded Age through their ostentation, or conspicuous consumption.
Language: The prose in The Theory of the Leisure Class is intelligent and complex. Using precise word choice and sophisticated sentence structure, Veblen was able to squeeze a substantial amount of insight into little space. The tone of the treatise is derisive and overflowing with contempt for the leisure class and their conspicuous consumption.
Audience: The language reveals that Veblen wrote his book for an educated audience with a prior understanding of economic and sociological theory.
Intent: In ridiculing the leisure class, Veblen elucidated his desire to reverse the prevailing sociological mindset of conveying economic reputability. Veblen sought to warn his contemporaries and the public of the wastefulness of conspicuous consumption and urged consumers to rely on prudence instead of propriety.
Message: The primary aim of The Theory of the Leisure Class was to denounce the leisure class’s use of conspicuous consumption as a vehicle to enhance their apparent economic or social stature. Veblen provided an appropriate example of conspicuous consumption in identifying society’s preoccupation with how people dress. He recognized attire as the most prevalent expenditure in any line of consumption because of its immediate observability and effectiveness in indicating one’s economic standing. Regrettably, the desire to be fashionable overwhelms the need for a practical and comfortable wardrobe. The growth of the economy during the Gilded Age led many people to purchase extravagant items in an effort to enhance their observable economic standing, which Veblen condemned as a squandering of potential advantages.

The Leisure Class

Posted on by

Author: Thorstein Veblen was an American economist and sociologist who is famous for his combination of Darwinian theories and institutional economics. He was born in 1857 in Wisconsin to Norwegian immigrants.

Context: The Theory of the Leisure Class was written in 1899 during a boom in industry called the Gilded Age.  It also brought a great many immigrants with a promise of abundant new jobs.

Language: He makes fun of the “leisure class” calling them rather useless to society.  They provide no stimulation to the economy and no betterment to the social aspect of the country.  They are distant and disconnected.

Audience: He wrote to an educated audience. He wrote for scholars that were intelligent enough to recognize his satiric writing and understand his slightly complex writing style.

Intent:  Veblen wanted to broadcast his views of the leisure class and their uselessness.  He also wanted to share his views on the new industrial boom.  It was good for the economy, stimulated growth and provided new jobs for immigrants coming from all over the world.

Message: He was trying to bring to light the divide between the newly emerged working class.  Those actually earn an honest living and those who oppress their workers to squeeze as much profit out of them as possible. Society was rapidly growing and becoming industry based.  With this industrial change came the mistreatment of workers and the exploitation of immigrants who came with the promise of good, honest work.

 

The Domostroi, Chapters 35-49

Posted on by

The Domostroi clearly sets out each person’s role in a household. It is very clear on how one should carry themselves and how to act in various situations. In chapter 35, the focus is on how servants should conduct themselves while running errands. They are supposed to be very conservative and follow every instruction given. They are told not to gossip at any point, and to give the utmost respect to whoever they are sent to. This includes not coughing, sneezing, or taking any interest in a household’s possessions.  For women, The Domostroi also lays out a very conservative lifestyle. They are not supposed to eat or drink at any point without their husband’s knowledge, have strangers in their household without the husband knowing, and cannot drink any type of alcohol other than light beer or kvass. This of course also means that no woman should ever drink alcohol to the point of drunkenness. The man’s role is primarily focused on maintaining the order of things and enforcing the rules set forth. It states that if a man does not structure his household in the way shown, “he will be destroyed now and forever. His house will also be destroyed.”

The Domostroi’s rules all follow the same religious trend. Everything that is said carries the force of God which could mean that it was either followed very closely or possibly very leniently. Some of the roles stated seem to be close to impossible to follow such as not being allowed to do normal bodily functions like coughing or sneezing in front of a master. Like many of the codes written before its content is very religiously skewed. If Christianity was widely accepted at the time then these texts may have been very valid. However, without a strong central authority that would strictly enforce these rules, I find it hard to believe that most people could follow such a strict and contextual code.

Chapters 37 and 38 discuss the proper ways in which to care for clothing and organize the house. Clothing should be kept neatly stored, and free from all stains. The author of The Domostroi takes careful consideration when outlining appropriate dress for a variety of occasions: work should be performed in old clothes, and the very best clothes should be worn to church and when going out in public. Chapter 38, entitled How to Keep {Dishes in Good Order and} Arrange the Domestic Utensils. {How to Keep Rooms} Neat and Clean. {How the Housewife should Punish Her Servants, How her Husband Should Supervise Her, Punish Her, and Save Her with Fear} outlines the proper ways to maintain the kitchen, prepare and save food and clean the house. The author places an emphasis on organization and clean hygiene practices (especially when handling/storing food), and says that entering an organized area “is like entering Paradise” (143).

Chapter 38 also touches upon the issue of enforcing organization and the maintenance of ‘Paradise.’ Wives should be punished with a beating, but should also be forgiven for their transgressions. Children and servants should be punished in a similar fashion, and no one should ever be struck out of anger or hatred. Chapter 39 says that a failure to correctly teach and enforce the mistress, servants and children would result in judgement from God. Alternatively, a master who could teach the other members of the household and maintains an organized house received mercy from God.

The Domostroi puts a strong emphasis on the importance of being clean and keeping an organized house. The author’s decision to use God’s judgement as punishment highlights the religiosity of the time period. Such punishment would have had no bearing on a society which wasn’t devout. The attention to cleanliness is also an indicator that people were not dirty and unhygienic, but rather that dressing nicely and keeping a clean, organized house was a matter of pride. The hierarchal nature of society can be seen especially well in the doling out of punishments: the master is responsible for teaching and discipling his wife, children and servants.

Chapters 40, 48, and 49 mainly talk about the role of the steward in the household. The steward runs the kitchens and all that encompasses, from planning meals to making sure thing are clean in the morning.. They are entrusted by the master with this task, so that the master can attend to other things. Part of the job is to check to make sure the house has enough foodstuffs and arrange for more to be bought if it is running low. There is advice included as to who should be trusted to buy from and how to attempt to even make some money with excess supplies. They should also walk through the kitchen every morning to make sure that everything is in it’s place and in good repair. After the husband and wife talk about the meals they want it is the stewards job to make sure they get what they want. He has buy and give  to the cooks and bakers the proper ingredients, then make sure the food is prepared properly. Afterwards he is in charge of dealing with leftovers and making sure everything is cleaned.

The position of steward is not too dissimilar to a position you might see in modern times in a large household. Now and assumably then it was the type of thing that a fairly rich family would have. To have your own bakers, cooks, and other serving people that you need someone to watch over them it would be a lot of people. The rules and instructions are quite strict for how they should act which makes sense due to the amount of money they would handle and opportunities for them to steal. It is interesting that a man must consult his wife before determining what the meals for the day will be but it makes sense. Food is stereotypically the women’s job and it keeps her from being unhappy with what she is eating. Overall these rules are very similar to the description of a modern job which is interesting for text over 500  years old.

The Domostroi, or “Household Order” in English arguably aligns itself very similarly to many seemingly basic ‘codes of conduct’ – especially when referring to property. For instance, people of fifteenth century Russia valued guarantees the same way present-day society does. With regards to servants and their handling of artifact property, the Domostroi places a target on said servant’s back, making sure the servant – if delivering goods – holds himself accountable every step of the way. The Domostroi also lays out codes for how people should conduct themselves as guests in others’ homes, codes that arguably everybody – regardless of a person’s culture – should follow. Some of these codes include not wandering about aimlessly and picking up objects without permission.

On a similar note, the Domostroi states that guests should always bring gifts to their respective hosts. Hosts are also required to make sure their stock (food, drink, utilities, etc.) is always full (The Domostroi explicitly states, a “sensible household should contain everything that will be used in the house during that year”)(152). One element of conduct in the Domostroi that is a debatable form of conduct (religion aside) is how women should behave. Chapters 35-49 of the Domostroi state that women shouldn’t drink – ever. It also places (arguably) too much responsibility on the husband with regards to what women can and cannot eat. The Domostroi states that wife’s must ask their husbands about what they can and cannot eat. The code also advocates for self-sufficiency, by teaching it’s readers how to cook, farm, and preserve stock for year-long consumption.

 

Weeding Rituals in ancient Russia

Posted on by

It is relatively easy to learn about how a long dead king ruled, or a battle was fought. A simple excavation of a battlefield, or the perusal of any angry politicians’ letters will tell us what we need to know. From The Domostroi we can learn a lot. For example The Domostroi can show us both the size and the structure of ancient households. We discovered that many powerful Russians lived in huge homes that could hold two hundred people. And that the people inside (especially the rich) lived very segregated lives. It appears that the women in Russian household were required to live almost entirely in groups of other women. It is fair to assume that after a certain age a women’s life would be completely influenced and directed by other women, specifically the match maker. In the last chapter of The Domostroi, marriage is discusses, that chapter brings this idea of grandeur and segregation to the extreme. The wedding ritual for noble families is three days long. The fact that the rituall is so large and complex would suggest that the Russian culture has been cultivating it for centuries unhindered by foreign interference. It is only through years of development that a society can incorporate enough material from other cultures to get that extensive.

PS. (this reminds me of the weeding ceremonies in Game of Thrones, the beeding ceremonies are the same)

The Domostroi (Chapters 50-67)

Posted on by

Food

In terms of food, large estates had a wide range in diet. The upper-class ate nearly every type of meat imaginable: chicken, pork, swan, chipmunk, elk, hare, duck, mutton, goose, etc. They also ate many different types of fish. Grains consisted of barley, kasha, bread, and even noodles. For fruits and vegetables, the upper-class ate cabbage, turnips, various types of melons, apples, and berries. They drank different variations of mead, made with honey, spices, or berries. Servants’ diets were more restricted. Staples included cabbage, various types of soups and porridges, and kasha. On Sundays and other holy days, servants were allowed turnovers, jellies and pancakes. Their beer was “second-grade,” although on Sundays servants could drink ale.

If the master of the house hosted a feast, the steward had to supervise the kitchen and bakery. The steward also had to assign other servants to different stations both to serve and supervise the guests to ensure that they did not become too drunk or steal any of the master’s belongings. After the feast, the steward was in charge of counting how much food and drink had been consumed, as well as counting up the silver and dishes to make sure none had been stolen. He then had to report these numbers to the master.

This background on food and feasts grants insight into the diets and values of sixteen-century Russians. The Domostroi specifies that the upper-class would eat not just meat, but kidneys, giblets, gizzards, tongue, necks, and joints, etc. People ate nearly every part of the animal. On one hand, this information suggests that their diets were sustainable because they left very little waste. On the other hand, it suggests that food may have been scarce at times; consequently, people had to eat every part of the animal in order to survive. Furthermore, the different diet listed for servants reveals that social classes determined what people ate. In general, the upper-class ate a protein-heavy diet, whereas the servant staples were grains and vegetables. Finally, the description of the feast indicates that theft was relatively common at gatherings. The fact that the servants had to patrol the guests and count the silver after the meal implies that guests often brought home goods from the hosts’ household, and the hosts tried to avoid such practices.

Servants

The Domostroi very clearly states the tasks that the servants are supposed to carry out and the proper manner of performing them. Chapters fifty-five to fifty-seven outline the ways that a servant would store equipment, treat the animals, and deal with excess food. Chapter fifty-five states how and where to store clothes, hunting gear, horse-riding gear, and used goods (such as building materials and tools) in the household barn. Fifty-six and seven detail the storage of hay in a barn, the proper treatment of animals, the storage of wood, and the disposal of food scraps. Some of the most interesting points in these chapters are the instructions to servants to record all stored items, to save food scraps and feed animals with them, and the instruction to the house master to check the progress of the servants every night.

Chapter fifty-nine details how a house master should reward a servant who does his job well and its inverse. The master should treat good servants well by giving them better food and drink, having them sit with you at meals, and verbal encouragements. If a servant is bad, the master should verbally reprimand him in front of all the other servants and he should physically beat him if he offends repeatedly or in a particularly bad manner. In addition, it states that the female maids are the responsibility of the mistress of the house. Chapter sixty states that the master of the house should audit servants who are buying for the house every week (or he should have his son do it). If the master finds the servant doing his job well and happily, he should reward him, but if he finds the servant working poorly, then he should rebuke him. If the servant cheats him, then he should fine the servant monetarily, and if the servant continues to do his tasks poorly, the master should send him away.

Chapter sixty-three details the proper preservation of food. It states that servants should clean food properly and they should check it often to ensure that it does not spoil. Drinks are to be stored in ice and refilled often. Clothing should also be checked often, and spoiled food must be disposed of. Food in danger of spoiling should be fed to animals or given to the poor.

These chapters of the Domostroi tell us how advanced the storage and maintenance abilities were at the time. Also, they give us insight into the running of the household.

Management of the Estate

The life of a master was not all luxury. Although they enjoyed many more indulgences than the common man, they had their share of duties as well. The master of the estate was responsible for giving orders to the steward to carry out. Everything, down to the drinks served and the items on the menu at feasts, was his choice. Following a feast, the master would follow up with the steward to check that everything was in order, and then punish or reward the servants according to the quality of their work. The mistress had responsibilities as well, such as checking all of the food that was to be served to the family. Every morning the master and the mistress would check the locks on all of the gates and doors around the estate, and check for theft if a lock was left undone or broken. Every night he himself would check all of the storage rooms, barns, and stables for quality of the inventory within.

Every night the master would also go around the estate and check that all fires had been properly extinguished. All stoves where expected to have a floor beneath them, and a non-flammable front to stop any sparks from flying out. Areas around the stove were supposed to be cleared of any clutter that could either kindle a fire, or get in the way of any people attempting to put one out. Additionally, the courtyard and garden should have had wells, and if they did not then they were expected to keep water handy. This demonstrates the fear that the people of the time had of fires, which were a reoccurring problem in Moscow at the time, as most of their building were made of wood.

Several aspects of religious life were present in this section as well. The estate observed many fast days, and had special meals assigned to both the upper and lower class for such occasions. The master was expected to care for his servants and the peasants under his care, giving them food, drink, and clothing, and always be aware of any injury or neediness amongst them. In doing this, they were supposedly pleasing God so that they might be given a place in heaven.

The estate was advised not to let their taxes build up. If they paid them gradually and ahead of time then their family would be happy, secure and well trusted. If the estate took too long to pay back taxes they would have to pay double, and if they took to long to pay back loans they would have to pay an additional fine.

Stewards and Manners

Posted on by

The Domostroi clearly sets out each person’s role in a household. It is very clear on how one should carry themselves and how to act in various situations. In chapter 35, the focus is on how servants should conduct themselves while running errands. They are supposed to be very conservative and follow every instruction given. They are told not to gossip at any point, and to give the utmost respect to whoever they are sent to. This includes not coughing, sneezing, or taking any interest in a household’s possessions.  For women, The Domostroi also lays out a very conservative lifestyle. They are not supposed to eat or drink at any point without their husband’s knowledge, have strangers in their household without the husband knowing, and cannot drink any type of alcohol other than light beer or kvass. This of course also means that no woman should ever drink alcohol to the point of drunkenness. The man’s role is primarily focused on maintaining the order of things and enforcing the rules set forth. It states that if a man does not structure his household in the way shown, “he will be destroyed now and forever. His house will also be destroyed.”

 

The Domostroi’s rules all follow the same religious trend. Everything that is said carries the force of God which could mean that it was either followed very closely or possibly very leniently. Some of the roles stated seem to be close to impossible to follow such as not being allowed to do normal bodily functions like coughing or sneezing in front of a master. Like many of the codes written before its content is very religiously skewed. If Christianity was widely accepted at the time then these texts may have been very valid. However, without a strong central authority that would strictly enforce these rules, I find it hard to believe that most people could follow such a strict and contextual code.

Chapters 37 and 38 discuss the proper ways in which to care for clothing and organize the house. Clothing should be kept neatly stored, and free from all stains. The author of The Domostroi takes careful consideration when outlining appropriate dress for a variety of occasions: work should be performed in old clothes, and the very best clothes should be worn to church and when going out in public. Chapter 38, entitled How to Keep {Dishes in Good Order and} Arrange the Domestic Utensils. {How to Keep Rooms} Neat and Clean. {How the Housewife should Punish Her Servants, How her Husband Should Supervise Her, Punish Her, and Save Her with Fear} outlines the proper ways to maintain the kitchen, prepare and save food and clean the house. The author places an emphasis on organization and clean hygiene practices (especially when handling/storing food), and says that entering an organized area “is like entering Paradise” (143).

 

Chapter 38 also touches upon the issue of enforcing organization and the maintenance of ‘Paradise.’ Wives should be punished with a beating, but should also be forgiven for their transgressions. Children and servants should be punished in a similar fashion, and no one should ever be struck out of anger or hatred. Chapter 39 says that a failure to correctly teach and enforce the mistress, servants and children would result in judgement from God. Alternatively, a master who could teach the other members of the household and maintains an organized house received mercy from God.

 

The Domostroi puts a strong emphasis on the importance of being clean and keeping an organized house. The author’s decision to use God’s judgement as punishment highlights the religiosity of the time period. Such punishment would have had no bearing on a society which wasn’t devout. The attention to cleanliness is also an indicator that people were not dirty and unhygienic, but rather that dressing nicely and keeping a clean, organized house was a matter of pride. The hierarchal nature of society can be seen especially well in the doling out of punishments: the master is responsible for teaching and discipling his wife, children and servants.

 

Chapters 40, 48, and 49 mainly talk about the role of the steward in the household. The steward runs the kitchens and all that encompasses, from planning meals to making sure thing are clean in the morning.. They are entrusted by the master with this task, so that the master can attend to other things. Part of the job is to check to make sure the house has enough foodstuffs and arrange for more to be bought if it is running low. There is advice included as to who should be trusted to buy from and how to attempt to even make some money with excess supplies. They should also walk through the kitchen every morning to make sure that everything is in it’s place and in good repair. After the husband and wife talk about the meals they want it is the stewards job to make sure they get what they want. He has buy and give  to the cooks and bakers the proper ingredients, then make sure the food is prepared properly. Afterwards he is in charge of dealing with leftovers and making sure everything is cleaned.

        The position of steward is not to dissimilar to a position you might see in modern times in a large household. Now and assumably then it was the type of thing that a fairly rich family would have. To have your own bakers, cooks, and other serving people that you need someone to watch over them it would be a lot of people. The rules and instructions are quite strict for how they should act which makes sense due to the amount of money they would handle and opportunities for them to steal. It is interesting that a man must consult his wife before determining what the meals for the day will be but it makes sense. Food is stereotypically the women’s job and it keeps her from being unhappy with what she is eating. Overall these rules are very similar to the description of a modern job which is interesting for text over 500  years old.

           The Domostroi, or “Household Order” in English arguably aligns itself very similarly to many seemingly basic ‘codes of conduct’ – especially when referring to property. For instance, people of fifteenth century Russia valued guarantees the same way present-day society does. With regards to servants and their handling of artifact property, the Domostroi places a target on said servant’s back, making sure the servant – if delivering goods – holds himself accountable every step of the way. The Domostroi also lays out codes for how people should conduct themselves as guests in others’ homes, codes that arguably everybody – regardless of a person’s culture – should follow. Some of these codes include not wandering about aimlessly and picking up objects without permission.

        On a similar note, the Domostroi states that guests should always bring gifts to their respective hosts. Hosts are also required to make sure their stock (food, drink, utilities, etc.) is always full (The Domostroi explicitly states, a “sensible household should contain everything that will be used in the house during that year”)[1]. One element of conduct in the Domostroi that is a debatable form of conduct (religion aside) is how women should behave. Chapters 35-49 of the Domostroi state that women shouldn’t drink – ever. It also places (arguably) too much responsibility on the husband with regards to what women can and cannot eat. The Domostroi states that wife’s must ask their husbands about what they can and cannot eat. The code also advocates for self-sufficiency, by teaching it’s readers how to cook, farm various crops, and preserve stock for year-long consumption by taking advantage of Russia’s climate.

 

 

[1] The Domostroi, pg. 152

 

Vicarious Consumption

Posted on by

Author: Thorstein Veblen was born in Cato, Wisconsin on July 30, 1857. He spent the majority of his childhood working on his family farm as part of a Norwegian immigrant farming community.  His parents stressed hard work and education, an emphasis that would factor into his disgust for conspicuous consumption. Veblen studied and worked at several universities including Johns Hopkins, Yale, and Cornell.  Veblen wrote The theory of the Leisure Class when he was in his early forties.

Context: The Theory of the Leisure Class was written in America in 1899.  America was amidst the Gilded Age, a period of immense economic growth and industrialization.

Language: Veblen’s tone is satirical. He saw the leisure class as a hindrance to the progress of society. Veblen stated, “no one finds difficulty in assenting to the common place that the greater part of the expenditure incurred by all classes for apparel is incurred for the sake of a respectable appearance rather than for the protection of the person.”  Veblen used dry humor to make his point.

Audience: Veblen wrote for the Academic world.  After Veblen graduated from Yale, he was unable to obtain an academic job due in part to prejudice against his Norwegian ancestry and because most universities considered him insufficiently educated in Christianity, so he returned to his family farm and began avidly reading.  He then left to study economics as a graduate student at Cornell University and obtained his first academic appointment at the new University of Chicago. There he published his best-known books, The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), and The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904). These books made him famous overnight.

Intent: Veblen felt that other leading economists’ views were too narrow. He wanted economists to more fully understand the social and cultural causes and effects of economic changes. Specifically, he thought the focus should be on the social and cultural causes that were responsible for shifts in industry such as hunting to farming, and the effects of such shifts.

Message: Veblen argued that there was a split between the working class. He saw two groups in this division of labor: one group making wealth via industry and the other via exploit, which he identifies as the leisure class. The leisure class became vicarious consumers of ostentatious products in dress, food, furniture, and housing. Class pecuniary standing was based on public display of wealth via dress. Veblen cited the leisure class as the root of social conformity. As a model for dress and livery, the leisure class set a social precedent, which compelled those in classes below them to match. Veblen believed the demonstration of wealth was done solely for social status and thus criticized the leisure class. He associated the leisure class with waste and he also viewed such waste as a hindrance to economic productivity.

The Theory of the Leisure Class

Posted on by

Author- Thorstein Veblen, American sociologist and economics, grew up with a lot of familial emphasis on education and caused resentment for “conspicuous consumption”
Context- 1899, takes place during the Gilded Age of America (economic boom that brought many immigrants from Europe)
Language- matter- of- fact language, extremely critical
Audience- became and instant success, highly praised, meant to be widely read
Intent- to shows the superficiality of the societal trend and to show the societal rift between those that can afford luxury items and those that produce the items (how that impacts class perception)
Message- criticism of how materialism of luxury goods became a symbol of wealth and of “conspicuous consumption” (displaying luxury items to maintain social status), uses dress as an example of display of goods to indicate one’s status

Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management

Posted on by

The main argument of Frederick Taylor’s “The Principles of Scientific Management” is that men are wasting their time in factories but there are ways to improve that.  The paper itself “was originally prepared for presentation to The American Society of Mechanical Engineers” so he was not writing for the uninformed.  This meant that his writing in the paper was not simple, it was not trying to address the everyman.  Taylor was aiming for people who had seen the issue of workers taking their time.  Written after the Industrial Revolution had been established, Taylor had seen the issues with the new factory system.  Taylor himself was a mechanical engineer so he had seen first hand the issues he was writing on.  His paper focused on the issue of “soldiering” and how it could be improved.  He referenced studies that proved that workers, when they got to work, would do everything slower than when they were walking to work or at home. Taylor was writing to expose this flaw in the factory system and gives ways to fix it.  He gave three distinct reasons about why the “soldiering” and explained each of them.  He proved that men do take it easy when they get to work and that it not only reflects the employee but also the employer.  Taylor’s complete message was that the factory system still is not perfect, that it has its flaws and they need to be recognized.  While the problem of laziness in the workplace exists, it is one that can be fixed.